Do Animal Abusers Deserve Tougher Sentences?

Crime, Rights

In Brownsville, Texas a 19-year-old teen was just sentenced to 18 months in state jail after he pled guilty to killing a puppy. The exact charge was “cruelty to non-livestock animals.”

After this ruling was announced, the reaction of the public was interesting to see. There seems to be a majority sentiment that the teen’s demented actions deserve a much tougher sentence. Proponents of lengthier sentences for animal abuse often point to studies showing animal abusers are much likelier to start abusing humans in the future.

Here are some interesting statistics that support this argument:

  • 68% of battered women reported violence towards their animals
  • 13% of intentional animal abuse cases involve domestic violence
  • Between 25% and 40% of battered women are unable to escape abusive situations because they worry about what will happen to their pets or livestock should they leave
  • In one study, 70% of animal abusers also had records for other crimes
  • Of the nine school shootings between 1996 and 1999, half of the shooters had histories of animal cruelty
  • 36 percent of profiled serial killers admitted to committing animal cruelty as children

Infamous killers who were also animal abusers

The FBI has known for a few decades that animal abuse has a strong link to violence against other humans. Consider these examples of this association:

  • Patrick Sherrill—Killed 14 co-workers before shooting himself. Had a deep history of dog fighting.
  • Jeffrey Dahmer—A serial killer who also impaled dogs, cats, and other animals
  • Carroll Edward Cole—Accused of committing 35 murders. Said his first acts of violence was strangling a puppy when he was a kid.

The list could go on and on, but you get the point. Animal abuse is one of the most common precursors to much harsher violence against people.

The idea of giving animal abusers a tougher sentence isn’t so much about protecting the animals as it is about protecting human life and preventing domestic violence. It’s an issue of trying to rehabilitate animal abusers to keep them from committing similar or worse crimes down the road.

A look at animal cruelty laws across the country

All 50 states in the U.S. have laws prohibiting cruelty to animals. By imposing penalties for animal cruelty, lawmakers hope that these laws can curb all sorts of violent acts, especially those toward humans.

But the question still remains: How much does an animal abuser deserve to be punished? And how much punishment is enough to deter abusers from committing worse acts in the future?

As it stands right now, 41 states and the District of Columbia have felony provisions for animal cruelty cases. The nine states that don’t have a felony provision are as follows: Alaska, Arkansas, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Utah.

A glance at some of the more interesting animal abuse laws

  • In Alabama, the maximum sentence for intentional torture is a fine up to $5000 and imprisonment up to 10 years.
  • In Arizona, intentional cruel neglect or mistreatment could lead to up to 18 months in jail.
  • In California, first-time animal cruelty charges have a maximum fine of $20,000 and imprisonment up to one year.
  • In Washington DC, intentional cruelty has a minimum fine of $2,500 along with psychological treatment.
  • In Illinois, animal torture can be punished with fines up to $25,000, up to five years imprisonment, and one year of probation.
  • In Texas, killing or even fighting an animal can lead to a two year jail sentence along with a $10,000 fine.

Videos of animal cruelty protected as free speech

In April, the Supreme Court rejected a law making it a crime to sell videos of animal cruelty. By an 8-1 vote, the Supreme Court said the law was too broad, leaving the door open for acts like videos of legal hunting to be considered a crime.

The same law was used to prosecute Robert J. Stevens, a Virginia man who advertised videos of dog fights. Stevens claimed his videos were meant to provide education videos about the pit bull breed, not to promote illegal dog fighting. The Supreme Court’s actions sided with Stevens’ claim that his video was protected as free speech.

What do you think?

Based on the statistics and current laws across the country, do you think animal abusers should be given lengthier sentences? Share your thoughts by leaving a comment.