Maxine Berry Justice for Chunky Campaign Animal Abuse Register

maxine and chunky

Introduction:

My beliefs and Why this Page

Maxine falls park
Maxine taking a momentary break for a chat at the falls

I believe the best way of providing a brighter tomorrow for everyone, in the UK, is by implementing an animal abuse register to help end animal cruelty. Furthermore, I believe to get the best result for the animal abuse register in the United Kingdom is by reaching out to those who are interested in the register and reach a common vision. My husband and I are quite accessible. Either of us are willing to speak to anyone at anytime regarding our vision for the register and how the campaign can help them.

Sadly, very recently I have become aware of  third-parties, not affiliated with the Justice for Chunky Campaign, providing false information about the campaign’s position on the animal abuse register. At the moment I am mortified that this has happened and I am addressing the issue with those who hold the wrong data. At a minimum, I believe giving out wrong information about the Justice for Chunky position without authorisation and without contacting us for clarification, is negligent. By negligently giving out wrong information I believe, it also amounts to a breach of the Data Protection Act and at worst amounts to defamation.  In order to combat the spread of wrong information about the campaign, I am putting together this page to clarify the campaign’s position and it will be periodically updated.

Underpinning of My Vision

I believe, government has a contract with the people it represents. As a part of that contract, people give up certain rights in order to have protection, security, property rights; and safety. This means, I believe, the role of government is limited. It means government can better provide rights instead of having a feudal system whereby each individual tries asserting their rights and fighting, if necessary to the death, to protect them.

As a nation, Britain has moved beyond a feudal system, whereby individuals assert their rights through force, to a parliamentary democracy. In order for a government, I believe, for a government to define its relationship with those who have elected them, a government pass laws to fulfill its duty to the people. Elections are, I believe, away of either reaffirming the relationship by keeping the status quo or by seeking a redefinition of the relationship by electing a new government. Therefore, I believe, laws are the reflection of what society values and much can be learned about a society by its laws.

As a part of the British government to fulfill its duty of providing protection and security, I believe it is necessary to have an animal abuse register. Over the last few years there has been a lot of focus on animal cruelty in the media resulting in several animal rights campaigns starting and mine is one of them. I believe, the Animal Welfare Act 2006 is outdated and needs revising. Based on my contacts, research, and discussions I believe the following:

  1. Animal cruelty does not only harm the animal and the owner of the animal, it harms society.
  2. Animal cruelty for some, not all, is a gateway to more violent crime against people.
  3. I believe, all animals need protecting. Nonetheless, we do not live in an ideal world. We live in a world with limited resources and where society places different values on very similar events. Therefore, I believe definition of animal under the Animal Welfare Act needs modifying by classifying animals. Such a change will improve limited resources for enforcement and better protect the public.
  4. Longer sentencing is needed in order to provide an effective deterrence against animal cruelty.
  5. Rehabilitation should be considered if there is a suitable program that meets the individual’s needs. However putting someone in rehabilitation for animal cruelty for the sake of putting them in rehabilitation or repeatedly putting them in rehabilitation when previous attempts have failed is a waste of taxpayers’ money.
  6. A register is a good way to report on the crime, track those, and put programs in place to help them.
  7. A register may cut vigilantism against those who commit animal cruelty
  8. Register, if done correctly, can be self-funding. However, I have serious reservations regarding a license fee model.
  9. How the register operates, checks required, and how it is administered is up to the government.
  10. The register should work within the law to strengthen our laws. A register can be a quite a powerful tool and it needs to used ethically. I believe the register should not promote a political ideology, it should not promote a life-style ideology, and it should not promote any social justice cause. An animal abuse register
  11. I oppose using the register to promote a ban on religious slaughter or using the register to limit religious slaughter.
  12. Whilst I know many vegans and vegetarians, I do not believe the animal abuse register is a good way to ban eating meat and I do not believe banning meat is a viable option.
  13. I believe sufficient checks need to be in place to protect information, ensure the solution works for the United Kingdom, and where appropriate laws are changed to ensure information stored in the register is protected.
  14. Finally I do not believe “reinventing the wheel,” when a solution that can be adapted for the United Kingdom already exists.

In the rest of this document, I will address my position and in particular address the false information that is circulating.

Why is the Tennessee model the best model for the UK Animal Abuse Register

remembering dogs that serve
dream
we all have a dream and ours is bringing an animal abuse register

Why the Tennessee Model is the best model for an animal abuse register?

The answer is simple. The Tennessee model for the animal abuse register offers an “out-of-box” solution thereby being able save government money by providing a proven structure.  Furthermore the success of the Tennessee Model makes it the best model for the UK to use for its register.

Out of Box Solution

Inspiring other states to legislate the register

So what is meant by an out-of-box solution? To begin with, the Tennessee register as been operation since January 2016 and it is inspiring other states to legislate similar type of registers. Other states deciding to follow Tennessee is a testament to the success of the Tennessee model.

Whilst the House of Commons, Committee on Environmental, Food, and Rural Affairs, Animal Welfare in England: domestic pets on page 33 believes in the merits of the register but fears it may lead to vigilantism. This author believes the Public Order Act 1986 and other legislation is can address any issue of vigilantism. Plus if Parliament does feel the need, it can increase civil and criminal penalties for anyone who acts as a vigilante based on information contained in the register.

Correct statutory definition of animal

Second reason, why this author believe the Tennessee model is the right model, the legislation defines the term animal. Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 the term animal is very broad. Hypothetically, the term animal as defined by the Animal Welfare Act 2006, section 1(3) – section 1(4), can imply the act could be applied to ants, snails, and in a very extreme case to even bacteria.  This author is not saying ants, spiders, and microbes will every be protected under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Instead this author is saying the Act, as it currently is written, could, with enough political pressure, be applied to cover invertebrates.

Whilst this author does not disagree all animals should be protected from animal cruelty, nonetheless this author believes the Tennessee definition is correct.

Only applying the register to companion animals raises a very important debate, what should the register cover? The problem arise when cost and enforcement are considered. How can you effectively enforce animal protection in a very rural area, especially for livestock? How do you carry out enforcement with a limited budget and a limited staff? What takes priority protecting a badger, a fox, or a dog? Where does the priority lie?

Granted all animals are important; however there is not enough budget or resources to equally enforce the register for all animals. This means something will take priority and others become a lesser priority. Assume for a moment, if the register covered companion animals, livestock, and wild animals kept in captivity. Where do you start? Do you protect the seeing eye dog that allows a blind person the ability to work and become a productive member of society and carry out enforcement of a pet-shop? Alternatively do you look for fox hunting events, check on zoos, check farms to ensure animal welfare is being protected; or check the woods to ensure trapping is not occurring?

The point this author is making, a broad definition makes it harder to enforce especially when all animals are treated the same. Furthermore this author believes animals that require guardianship, companion animals, should receive additional protection through longer sentencing. Reason for this belief, is based on this author’s support for the legislation and belief companion animals improve lives of individual thereby are worthy of additional protection. Finally this author is also trying to demonstrate complexity imposed by the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and the need for an update.

UK sunrise

Longer Sentencing

Third point as to why the Tennessee model is a good out of the box solution, it provides for longer sentences. Is rehabilitation a better solution than increasing sentencing? This author believes, those who might benefit from rehabilitation need to be correctly identified and correctly matched to the correct rehabilitation program. Requiring everyone convicted of animal cruelty to go through a rehabilitation program, according to Civitis report on rehabilitation by Iain Murray, see for example sections 3 – 4, a generic program will not work for everyone. This author believes, we all make choices and we assess our choice on a variety of factors such as: risk, like, urgency, priority, and how it will improve our situation. In order to dissuade some from committing animal cruelty and dissuade others from re-offending, this author believes longer sentences is necessary.

Returning to the previous discussion in the preceding section, this author mentions the definition of animal and discusses the issues with the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Tennessee model provides longer sentences for those who abuse companion animals. Companion animals are animals that are kept as our companions like dogs and cats. Whilst this author fully understands, appreciates, and does not necessarily disagrees that all animals should be treated equal. This author believes companion animals improve our lives by:

  • Alleviating stress
  • Keeping us healthy by keeping us active
  • Protecting us
    • Working for the police
    • Guarding us
    • Working at ports to smell out illegal drugs, bombs, or illegal imports (e.g. foods)
  • Helping us be productive members of society (e.g. seeing eye dog)
  • Being a part of our family

At least for this author, the starting point must be companion animals because companion animals are the group of animals in most need of guardianship and protection.

Fourth reason, the Tennessee model provides a model for the animal abuse register. Under the Tennessee model the register is public; showing the photograph of the person along with identifiable information and the person remains on the register for the period of time stated on the register.

Will the Animal Abuse Register Lead to Vigilantism?

Tennessee model has raised concerns in the United Kingdom, such a public record will lead to vigilantism.  It is worth noting, it is easy to search online in the UK, find a local paper, and the local paper publishes the photograph along with the name of the individual convicted (see – this example). As previously stated in this article, from my research I cannot find any indication vigilantism has occurred against those on the Tennessee register. Since the UK animal abuse register will mirror the sex offenders register, there is no media reports this author can find no stories of physical attacks against those on the sex offenders register.  Nonetheless, there is one story about individual over 7 years ago, in 2010 posting photos of pedophiles on Facebook and a few media investigations into various aspects of the sex offender register.

In regards to the individual who posted photos of pedophiles on Facebook, the question must be asked if the register was public similar to the Tennessee model would they have posted the photos? In this author’s opinion the posting of photos on Facebook, is at best using a very liberal definition of vigilantism, a very harmless form of vigilantism. Harmless in this context means, based on the article there were no terrorist threats, the physical violence, no threats of physical violence, no group took action; and based on the article, it does not appear the police were called. Based on the article, this author argues the action is more likely fits the definition of defamation that can be easily managed by Facebook suspending the account. Since the incident in 2010 did not require police to use their powers under the Public Order Act 2006, Misuse of Computers Act 1996, Offences Against the Persons Act 1861; or similar legislation, it can be argued a register will not lead to vigilantism.

Liverpool Albert Docks Sunrise
Liverpool Albert Docks at sunrise

UK Animal Abuse Register

Without spending a lot of time writing about my proposal for the animal abuse register in the UK, I am attaching it that can accessed from this link. This vision also includes a section on cost and benefit analysis of the different funding models.

Conclusion

The Tennessee model is quickly gaining a lot of fanfare by inspiring others to implement their own animal abuse register. Sadly, the United Kingdom is lagging behind other developed nations in protecting animals and implementing an animal abuse register. Whilst the Tennessee animal abuse register model may have a few undesirable aspects, nonetheless it provides a strong working solution for the United Kingdom that can be easily adapted to meet the UK needs. I strong believe the register must be adaptable and provide a deterrence against animal abuse. However for those who commit the offense then they should face the consequences of their decision and should they decide to repeat their crime then I believe a long sentence is warranted.

Visit and Contact US

Further information please visit our Facebook page. Any further questions about the animal abuse register please contact us:

Other Related Articles

How to Make a Brighter Tomorrow for Your Dog

30 Things You Can Do Today to Show Your Support for the Animal Abuse Register

10 Things You Do Not Know About the Animal Abuse Register

General Election 2017: What the Political Parties Do Not Want You to Know about Their Support for

Donate

If you wish to give to the political campaign, please click doneate button and give what you can afford.


Company Number: 10721118

Get new posts by email