Several years ago we moved to the United Kingdom from the mid-west in the United States finally settling in the north of England. When we arrived, we did not know any Americans and it was only a few years later did we start to meet Americans. The below advice is broad sweeping general advice for anyone planning to move to the United Kingdom. It can be read as a whole or by sections.
Ask Yourself, Why?
It is not possible to show up in the United Kingdom and start legally living here. Living in the United Kingdom takes planning and preparation. Your starting point is asking why do I want to move?
Wanting to live where Shakespeare or Churchill came from and experience another culture that goes back 1,000 years is not good enough. You will be moving away from family, friends, and making a life for yourself in another country. In the UK you will need to find a job, housing, and if you have children a good school. If you have very conservative political leaning, British culture may be overwhelming. Regardless, it is a massively big change and it is a major life stressor. Moving to the United Kingdom is something that will disrupt your life and possibly create division in your family. If you cannot understand your reason then no one else will.
One common reason, I find people move to the United Kingdom they marry someone from here. Their story follows a very typical pattern. Romance blooms and they marry. What is more romantic and beautiful?
I have met a few Americans who meet someone online. They exchange pleasantries, and typically the American will fly over for a visit. They will then fly a few more times to the United Kingdom to meet the person they met online. After a few, jet setting visits they become engaged and apply for a spousal visa. The visa gets approved and soon they are in the United Kingdom. It sounds quite like a fairytale romance set in modern times. What can be purer than meeting the person of your dreams and having technology unite you?
From my experience, those who meet the spouse online and once the excitement of settling in the United Kingdom wears off, many tend to become depressed and angry. I am not saying this is true for all online romances and I am not necessarily saying this true for most online romance. However, from those that I have spoken with a reason for this I believe relates to them becoming isolated from family in the United States because they do not have the money to fly back for periodic visits.
Flying to the United States
Flying to the United States is not cheap. A ticket from a major airport in the United Kingdom to the United States varies greatly. The cheapest for me was £350 per/person during the banking collapse. Average, for me, run around £425 – £525 per person. Highest I have seen is around the holidays and it can run between £650 – £1,200 per person for economy purchased 8 – 12 weeks in advance. Unless you are making at least £25,000 – £30,000 outside of London and outside of the Home Counties you may find expenses keep you from flying back on a regular basis.
Recently I have been asked to support a petition calling for the banning for Kosher and Halal slaughter in the UK that is found on a petition site. Since I do not want to give the individual free publicity for the petition, I am not listing here and I believe, such a petition very disturbing.
For those who support a ban, I believe, do so with malice in their hearts. I further believe a calling for a such a ban is both anti-Semitic and is Islamaphobic. Such a ban, I believe, it violates: Article 8 and 9 of the Human Rights Act, United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights Articles: 12 and 18 and Equality Act.
Banning Ritual Slaughter Equates to Anti-Semitism
So why do I believe banning Kosher and Hala slaughter is wrong? I will state I am more familiar with Kosher slaughter and Judaism than Islam. So, my statement will be from a Jewish perspective. However, my statement can be equally applied to Halah slaughter and Islam. Next, for this statement, I am not going to digress about the differences between Kosher and Halal slaughter. Plus I am not going into defining anti-Semitism and then going into a fully explanation as to why banning Kosher slaughter is anti-Semitism. Instead, I will state, denying a group of people to practice their religion that is acceptable in other parts of the world is wrong and amounts to anti-Semitism. Furthermore, by calling for such a ban demonstrates ignorance, it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding and it demonstrates hate.
I believe banning Hala and Kosher slaughter at is denying non-Christians their right to practice their religion without interference from the government and it is forcing a religion, Christianity, upon them. This raises another question for me? How come those seeking to ban Kosher and Hala slaughter do not also seek to ban Bali and Jhatka religious slaughter too? To be fully compliant with the Equality Act, I believe, the petition should call for the ban of all religious slaughter. The answer is simple, it is not about banning all religious slaughter but something much more troubling. Any special interest or political party that pushes for a ban, I believe, does so from an anti-Semitic perspective. Why do I believe this?
If There is No Anti-Semitism Then How Come the Petition Does Not Call for a Ban on All Animal Slaughter?
Let me ask the question if there is no anti-Semitism then why push for banning Kosher instead of pushing for an outright ban on slaughtering of all animals? Especially when Kosher slaughter has very strict rules for the slaughter that protects the animal for it to be considered Kosher and Kosher slaughter is more humane than non-Kosher slaughter? If the petition is about really about animal rights and protecting the animal then why single out Jews and Muslims?
I do not believe any petition calling for the banning of Kosher of Hala slaughter is about animal welfare. Instead, pushing for such a ban is very reminiscent of 1290 Britain under the Edict of Expulsion from Edward 1, reminiscent of America under Jim Crow laws, and the Holocaust under Nazi Germany.
Ban Denies Basic Human Rights by Creating a “Separate But Equal” Society
Simply put, pushing for a ban denies a group of people their human rights and creates a “separate but equal,” segregated society. Denying a group of people their right to religious slaughter meat when other Western nations still protect their right is regressive. It creates a segregated society where some can practice their religion while others are denied their right to freely practice their religion. Furthermore, it promotes state sponsored Christianity at the cost of religious freedom for all and takes away some freedom.
AAR Campaign is about Uniting Not Dividing
My campaign, AAR – Justice for Chunky, is about making Britain safer and it is about uniting this country. It is not dividing the country along geographical, religious, or political ideological lines. Instead, I seek to unite people, respect their rights, and bring about a solution that works for all. I believe banning Kosher slaughter is anti-Semitc and denies a group of people their right to freely practice their relition in the country when other countries allow Kosher religious slaughter.
Finally, I want to remind the Green Party that a part of my condition for working with them was the animal abuse register will not be used to ban religious slaughter. It is my hope the Green Party continues to respect my wish and it is not behind any of the petitions I am seeing.
Brighter Tomorrow’s Statement on the General Election
Today this country faces a tough decision in the General Election regarding the direction this country will take. At the start Brexit was the reason . However a few weeks ago other events began changing the focus from Brexit to terrorism. This means today many of us will be asking: what is the best way forward to protect Britain from terrorism?
Regardless of who wins, terrorism will not end because one party wins. It means it will take time to solve and address. Furthermore it means there is no easy answer to the question.
Nonetheless we cannot ignore asking other questions, such as: what party will deliver an animal abuse register that will provide longer sentences and protect this country? Our lives must go on and we need to feel secure in our daily lives. Without feeling secure in our daily lives we cannot feel secure from larger issues, like terrorism.
I therefore believe animal abuse register is relevant today and probably more so. When voting think about those who do not have a voice and how the animal abuse register can give them a voice. Only by giving animals a voice, as a nation we can be secure.
So, when you vote remember to consider what party will deliver an animal abuse register for all of us. What party will make us feel the most secure but most importantly vote!
Open Letter to MPs: Animal Abuse Register Can Make Us All Feel Less Vulnerable
The recent ransomware attack on many United Kingdom and world businesses reminded each of us how vulnerable we are. The attack hits us at our core. Reminding us we vulnerable and a lot must be done to make us safer. In the coming days after the general election I am sure MP will begin drafting legislation to address specific vulnerabilities.
Whilst the recent ransomware attack made all of feel vulnerable, it is important no to remember there are many in the United Kingdom who feel the need for justice. The need for justice does not just lie in the recent attack but also in the need for animal abuse register. Animal abuse makes us feel helpless and it shows the worst society has to offer. Many people wrongly believe those who abuse animals do not have an impact on them. They are wrong. Some who abuse animals will go on to harm people. Looking at recent information:
Recent Telegraph article suggests violent crime costs the UK economy £124 billion
According to the ONS in the year ending December 2016 there were 358,786 recorded crimes crimes against person in England and Wales that were domestic abuse related in 2016
By addressing animal abuse you are also addressing another issue and that issue is senseless violence. It is violence that occurs because there is no animal abuse register. Based on statistics from 2016, it appears violent crimes cost the economy a staggering £124 billion to the economy and statistics show the problem is not getting better.
So where does the solution lie? The solution already exists. Having an animal abuse register means individuals who are convicted of violence against an animal are put on a register. This is will help to provide, where appropriate, help for them and in cases of juveniles help for their family. It will also mean savings for the economy because a segment of the criminal population will be on a register. This could provide information to the police to help solve further crimes.
During this time it is easy to lose sight of what matters to voters and focus on the story that grabs the most attention in the media. The Justice for Chunky campaign has nearly 600,000 with the vast majority of signatures coming from the United Kingdom. From what we can analyse, from various sources, it appears most of our supporters
are in the 35 – 65 age range, with most in the 45 – 55 age range. However we do have some support from the 18-25 age group.
comes from middle-class to upper-middle class background
primarily women (65% women – 35% men), though varies
come from all political parties but appear to favour more moderate political ideology that also favours longer sentences
primarily not vegan and primarily not vegetarian
Since 12 May
After publication of this article both London and Manchester have experienced terrorist attacks. Public safety and national security need to be at the forefront of any government policy. Nonetheless, everyday issues such as the need for an animal abuse register cannot be forgotten. Having an animal abuse register is one way we all can feel a bit more secure. An animal abuse register may provide another route for identifying potential terrorist and potentially identify those who can do us harm. Whilst the animal abuse register may not be a priority, at this moment, it is still a way we (as a nation) can make Britain safer.
Therefore, while the ransomware attack demonstrates the need for security. Nonetheless, we cannot lose sight of something more personal the need for each one of us to feel safe. One way all of us can feel more secure is knowing there is animal abuse register that provides longer sentences for those who abuse animals. It can provide a way to address the rising cost of crime and be self-sustaining. As the general election gets closer it is important to remember our supporters are in the groups that vote and it is important to remember what matters most is an animal abuse register that provides longer sentences for those who abuse animals.
Endless Possibilities: The start Maxine Berry’s Journey
We are living in a truly exciting time, in the United Kingdom. Brexit and the upcoming general election provide endless possibilities. The most exciting possibility began about 8 months before the vote to leave the European Union, in November 2016. It is the Animal Abuse Register, Justice for Chunky, petition started by Maxine Berry.
Tennessee Based Register Modified for United Kingdom Standards
Her vision is having a register, similar to the state of Tennessee, whereby family pets are protected and those who abuse animals face longer sentences. The amazing thing about Maxine’s vision, the register not only protects pets but people too. At this point, you may be gobsmacked believing the register will only protect pets? Reality, there is a link between those who abuse animals and the increased likelihood they will harm people. No link is 100% and there are other factors that influence the decision, like longer sentences.
Now, imagine the UK having Maxine’s vision what type of country will we have? This author believes it is a safer country. Whereby animal cruelty, especially against family pets decrease, domestic violence decrease, and where appropriate support is given to help those overcome their violent ways. In essence creating a brighter tomorrow for many people living in the United Kingdom.
Is Anti-Americanism a Roadblock?
Next, if the register will protect people. Then how come the United Kingdom does not have the register? No path to change is simple and because animal cruelty is an emotive issue, there will be roadblocks along the way. When Maxine started her journey, she was realistic and knew it was not going to be easy. Her belief in making pets safe from harm and keeping people safe is her driving motivation. Currently, one roadblock Maxine is facing is the collective feeling inferior to America along with a bit of anti-Americanism. She will not let anti-Americanism or a feeling from other of feeling inferior to America.
UK Papers Can Publish Names and Photographs of Those Convicted of a Crime but the Animal Abuse Register Cannot?
So where does this roadblock originate from? The state of Tennessee since January 2016 implemented an animal abuse register for the whole state and 10 other states are currently legislating some form of animal abuse register. The argument that Maxine Berry is facing lies in the public exposure of those on the register. In the United Kingdom it is easy to search a local paper; find someone convicted of a crime with their photograph published and name published.
Publishing Names Leads to Vigilantism: Fact or Fiction?
Moving on, a part of the roadblock lies in the belief public exposure will lead to vigilantism. So what evidence exists Tennessee model will lead to vigilantism? This author has spent time searching for records indicating vigilantism after implementing the animal abuse register in Tennessee. At the time of writing this article, this author cannot find any reported cases of vigilantism in the state of Tennessee against those on the register.
This brings up the next question what about the UK? This author can find sporadic reports of vigilantism against sex offenders. Nonetheless shortly after the UK introduced the sex offenders; register vigilantism appeared to have decreased. This article seems to suggest the link between the media and fueling vigilantism.
Another issue this raises, there is a difference between those who commit animal cruelty and those who commit sex offences?
Why Design an Original Register When a Model Already Exists?
Many people fear Maxine is advocating a “naming and shaming” of those convicted of animal cruelty. In response to the misinformation, Maxine explicitly advocates it is not the public naming of individuals that makes the Tennessee model ‘an out-of-the-box solution.’ Instead Maxine continuously states it is the legislation. In particular, it is the longer sentences for those who abuse animals and the definition of animal that makes the Tennessee model that can be easily modified to fit the needs of the UK. If MPs review the cost and benefit analysis done by Maxine’s husband Brian they will see it is more cost effective to focus limiting the definition of animal to companion animals than the wide encompassing definition of animal as provided under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and MPs will see over time the animal abuse register can be self-sustaining.
Tennessee Model Works
All things considered, how come United Kingdom has not implemented an animal abuse register based on the Tennessee model? What is the reason the animal abuse register, based on the Tennessee model, has not become law in the UK? Is it beliefs rooted in British inferiority to America, is it anti-Americanism, or a combination of? Such a question may seem harsh and maybe unfair. Nonetheless the question needs to be asked. It is important to remember, Maxine advocates it is the legislation not the public naming that makes the Tennessee model viable.
Furthermore evidence suggests the register might decrease vigilantism and the evidence suggests there is no link between the two, regardless of the model used. Moreover, the Tennessee model is a working model that has been around since January 2016 and has a history. Finally there is some evidence to suggest a UK animal abuse register (point of sale and employer checks) based on the Tennessee model is cheaper and may be self-sufficient without the need for strict enforcement or violating civil liberties.
Regardless of anti-Americanism and regardless of some feeling inferior to American exceptionalism in the field of animal rights, Maxine Berry will continue to fight for animal rights. She will continue for fight for the Tennessee model because it is the most cost-effective and the easiest to implement. Plus the Tennessee model provides an excellent model for legislation in defining animals and sentencing. It is time for us to unite to protect our pets and protect those who do not have a voice. By implementing an animal abuse register based on the Tennessee model we can make millions of lives better in a very short time.
Comments / Contact Us
If you have questions about the work Maxine Berry is doing or want more information, please use the below form.
What Tikkun olam Can Teach Us about Uniting Britain Through the Animal Abuse Register
Brexit Offers Unlimited Possibilities
We are living in an exciting time, in Britain. Brexit offers the chance to take control of our destiny and achieve the impossible. The only limit is our imagination. Jesse Jackson said,
No one should negotiate their dreams. Dreams must be free to fly high. No government, no legislature, has a right to limit your dreams. You should never agree to surrender your dreams.
My dream is making the animal abuse register similar to the Tennessee model law for the entire UK. Nonetheless, I am a pragmatist and realist. who understands not everyone shares my vision. Granted there are some who believe the Animal Welfare Act 2006 does not need reforming and others who believe longer sentences for those who abuse animals is ludicrous. For those who believe in the status quo and believe the route to ending animal cruelty is by making minor adjustments to the law, I believe they are living in denial. Animal Welfare Act is broken and it is in desperate need of repair. The way to fix is by adopting an animal abuse register that provides longer sentences.
I ask you to imagine a Britain with a strong animal abuse register. Whereby animal cruelty is not just a fine with minimal or no jail time. Instead I ask you to imagine a Britain that say “no” to animal cruelty and creates a society whereby animal cruelty is no longer an issue. This is the type of Britain I want to create with the animal abuse register.
Uniting Britain Through the Animal Abuse Register
So how do we create a society where animal cruelty is no longer an issue and unite? When I read the papers or watch the news, I am reminded great divisions in this country exists. Granted the vote on 23 June 2016 to leave the European Union split the country along remain versus leave. Luckily “time heals all wound,” and the country is slowly forgetting the results. Great Britain is beginning the process of leaving the EU and as a country, we are beginning to establish our identity as a nation free of the EU. The future is creating a lot of anxiety and uncertainty. Nonetheless, there is also a great wealth of opportunity.
As Britain leaves the EU it provides an unique opportunity to heal, lead, and unite. Nonetheless there are still some who cannot forget that fateful day on 23 June 2016 and are unwilling move past the election to allow healing to begin. Luckily, their negative voices are the minority that are going quiet as this unites. This leads me to ask is there a way to unite this country?
Bringing Britain Together by Making Us Safer
I believe there is a way to unite this country. Please allow me a moment to digress, when I started writing this article, my initial topic was examining the question why are men not a part of the animal rights movement? So, I started looking into the question and I began pondering the question. Struggling with question and wondering why I was not able to cohesively write about it. I began realising my focus is wrong. The focus is not why men are not a part of animal rights movement. Instead it should be about how the animal abuse register will help make Britain a better place.
This meant, I had to, once again, return to the vision for the animal abuse register. As I examined the vision, stripping away, layer after layer, of what is the animal abuse register trying to accomplish. I realise, the animal abuse register is not just about protecting animals and it is not just about ensuring animals are homed with the right guardians. It is much more, it about protecting all of us and making a great society even better. It is tikkun olam or simply put, making the world a better place.
As we are all aware, 8 June 2017 is the general election in the United Kingdom, which left the UK with a minority led Conservative government. For the Conservative government to be able govern they have entered into a Confidence and Supply agreement with the DUP. The DUP is, from our understanding, supporters of the animal abuse register in Northern Ireland.
So what is the the Animal Abuse Register? In its most simplest terms, it is an opportunity to stop animal cruelty by providing longer sentences and it is an opportunity to stop animal cruelty by tracking those who abuse animal through the register. It is a way of making animal cruelty more costly and riskier for those who chose to abuse animals. Form another perspective, it is a way of protecting society by removing those from society who abuse animals and ensuring they are not able to work with those who are the least likely to report abuse. It is a way of saying no to bullying and abuse.
Attached to this link is a brief guide about the animal abuse register. It briefly explains what the register is and briefly explains why it is needed. Other articles on this site provides a more detailed discussion and links to more in-depth information, including cost / benefit analysis about the register and political parties supporting the register. It is a great time to get our voices heard regarding the need for the animal abuse register and it is a great time to make the political parties aware of the need for one.
Can We Really Trust License Fee to Fully Fund the Animal Abuse Register
Rarely a day goes by without print media writing about another case of animal cruelty. The stories are heart-breaking leaving you feeling upset, helpless, enraged; and wanting to do something. Worst yet, under current sentencing guidelines a pet is considered mere property and there is no concept of guardianship. This means under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, the longest sentence can be given is six months in jail. A very short-time for someone who has hurt a member of the family that cannot speak for themself and relies on us for protection.
What can be done to help stop the horrific cruelty to family pets? There must be a solution? Yes, there is proven solution and it very simple. The proven solution is implementing Animal Abuse Register, similar to the state of Tennessee, in the UK is an option. The Tennessee model is proven because it has been around since January 2016 and as this author understands it, there has been no issues.
So why not implement the Tennessee model? There are two reasons: reluctance and funding. Anything new always is met with preposterous objections. In regards to implementing the animal abuse register based on the Tennessee model this author believes objections to the Tennessee model is based more on anti-Americanism, personal agenda, and dumb belief by some the major drawback to the Tennessee model (the public naming of individuals) that may lead to vigilantism. At the time of writing this article, this author is not aware of any widespread cases of vigilantism against those named in Tennessee and without further evidence this author does not accept public naming of individuals will lead to vigilantism. Nonetheless, this author does not believe the strength of the Tennessee model solely lies in the public naming of those convicted of abusing animals but believes the strength of Tennessee model lies legislation. The legislation strength lies in the sentencing and defining of the term animal.
What are the three types of funding models for an animal abuse register?
Implementing a register may sound like a quick solution. However, the issue lies in funding it. Currently, as this author understands it, enforcing the Animal Welfare Act 2006 is costly and there is not enough funding available. This author believes the reason why the Animal Welfare Act 2006 is failing pet owners is because it is all encompassing thereby making enforcement difficult and costly. For a register to work, it must be able to fund itself. Currently there are three possible options: Green Party policy regarding license fee, a point of sale check that can include a check being done by an employer or doing nothing.
Is a very good policy that will quickly generate revenue for the government and depending on the level of voluntary compliance, the amount of revenue generated can be massive. The massive generation can sustain the policy for a while. However, the policy as I understand it, does not include renewal and it does not include a mechanism to ensure someone who is issued a license is regularly checked to ensure they are not on the register. Another issue lies that it is all encompassing, covering all animals thereby running into similar issues regarding enforcement. In order to ensure someone who has a license is not on the register it will mean the license will have to be read, like a chip and pin, to ensure the individual has not been added to the register. Furthermore the license fee policy is silent on how enforcement will be conducted. This issue of license checks and enforcement leaves many questions. In particular the concern the license fee for this author raises is the violation of civil liberties, such as stop and search, to ensure everyone who has a pet has a license or enforcement vans driving through neighbourhoods.
Point of Sale and Employer Checks
Point of Sale and Employer Checks is relative an exciting approach since it is a self-sustaining providing several millions for the government because enforcement will be done at the Council level instead of the national level. This means Councils can charge an additional fee to defray the cost of enforcement for pet shops. Plus this promising model is focuses on the Tennessee model, whereby the Animal Welfare Act is updated to provide longer sentences for those who foolishly attack the family pet.
Cost of doing nothing may appear free but it is not. The cost of doing nothing extracts a high price on families. and society There is a link between those who abuse animals and those who have the potential to hurt others. This author is not saying everyone who abuses an animal will abuse a person. Instead this author is saying there is a link that cannot be ignored that is cost the government millions of pounds each year in prosecutions, police time, jail space; and the harm done to families.
My analysis shows over time, the cost of the Green Party Policy without increasing the license fee, without limiting exemptions, or without further defining what enforcement will include will risk the policy not being self-sufficient. It will mean increasing the license fee, increasing enforcement activities and / or for example, deny productive members of society access to seeing eye dogs because they cannot afford the license fee because their exemption was rehttp://Cost and benefit analysis of the animal abuse register for the United Kingdom as completed by Brian Berry, Co-Founder of the AAR – Animal Abuse Register / Justice for Chunky and Co-Owner Brighter Tomorrow.moved.
Whereas the point of sale with employer check is a self-sustaining approach with the potential to provide a windfall and doing nothing hurts society.
It is therefore, based on the analysis provided, point of sale with employer checks be the way forward to fund an animal abuse register.