General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis Oregon court cast just majorly changed the rights of pets — yes, pets
There are plenty of pet owners out there who love their furry friends more than they love most (if not all) humans. However, pets have always been considered mere property in the eyes of the law. . . until recently, that is.
Last week, the Oregon Supreme Court issued a groundbreaking ruling that viewed an emaciated dog named Juno as a living being, rather than just a thing. Of course, any human with a heart knows that dogs are more than just things, but under the law, they were considered to be property just as much as a bookcase or a car. Oregon law cared more about who *owned* an animal rather than the animals rights. However, in the case last week, the court unanimously ruled that Junos negligent and abusive owner is guilty, despite a vets gathering evidence via medical exams and treatments without a warrant.
The case began six years ago, when the Oregon Humane Society found that a Portland resident, Amanda Newcomb, was beating and starving Juno. Juno had no fat on his body and was kind of eating at random things in the yard, and trying to vomit, according to Oregon Live.
When Juno was brought to the Humane Society, he was given a body condition score of 1.5 on a scale of 1 (emaciated) to 9 (overweight). The Humane Society vet also drew blood from Juno to make sure he didnt have a condition that would have caused a low body weight. Finding nothing, Newcomb was charged with second-degree animal neglect.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/oregon-court-cast-just-majorly-200050228.html
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)JudyM
(29,225 posts)Only then will we have any right to call ourselves a civil society.
Thanks for posting!!
Orrex
(63,191 posts)Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)ciaobaby
(1,000 posts)Orrex
(63,191 posts)It's also a common practice to imprison large dogs in crates for hours each day.
We're more than willing to pretend that we give them rights as long as those rights aren't inconvenient for humans.
niyad
(113,213 posts)property (which is what pets are considered to be in most jurisdictions), I came across this very interesting (and lengthy!!) article:
https://www.animallaw.info/article/fido-seeks-full-membership-family-dismantling-property-classification-companion-animals