Support for the Animal Abuser Registry
by Anthony Stasi
Jun 12, 2013 | 11862 views | 0 0 comments | 734 734 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Councilman Peter Vallone, Jr. is calling for a registry of animal abusers and offenders. Vallone says there is a high recidivism rate when it comes to offenders and that the registry would put a name to the deed when animals are intentionally harmed.

Although animal rights, as an issue, are not at the top of most agendas, it is also a slam dunk as far as support. What opposition would there really be to this? (Insert Michael Vick joke here.)

The common knee jerk reaction to legislation like this is to compare it to almost anything else. For instance, “do we want to spend time chasing bad pet owners when there are drug dealers we need to apprehend?” Or ‘do we really want to fill a jail cell for a guy that harms dogs instead of a person that hurts people?”

The answer is yes, and the reason is that those who commit these crimes to animals are usually just as dangerous to the rest of us. Remember when Rudy Giuliani said that certain small crimes (like panhandling) were related to larger crimes? This works the same way. The people who commit heinous acts against dogs and other animals are usually degenerates who we are going to commit other violent acts.

Vallone and PBA President Patrick Lynch are right to push for a registry. It should fly through the City Council and get no opposition from City Hall.

As I have mentioned in columns before, there is something to be said for politicians who jump into issues that attract only a few votes. We may all agree that the animal abuse registry is a good idea, but it is not a vote getter. We want politicians to take on issues that do not always carry with them political capital, and good for Peter Vallone for doing just that.

A Word About Ian Clarkin (Who?)

As the 2013 Major League Baseball draft saw its first round come to an end, the Yankees closed it out with two supplemental picks (they had three first rounders in total).

This was payback for losing Rafael Soriano and Nick Swisher to free agency. The Yankees first took Notre Dame third baseman Eric Jagielo. Then they grabbed gigantic 6’7” outfielder Aaron Judge.

Their final pick was left-handed high school pitcher, Ian Clarkin. Clarkin made remarks before the draft that he could not stand the Yankees. He then apologized for his comments when the Yankees drafted him.

I have friends who take what athletes say too seriously. One friend is still mad at Darryl Strawberry for saying that he might seek free agency while he was still a Met. Undoubtedly, there are going to be fans that are mad at Clarkin, but they shouldn't be. In fact, Yankee fans should welcome this.

First of all, Clarkin is an 18-year-old kid, so take most of what he says in context. After that, Clarkin not liking the Yankees means that he has an opinion.

Remember Jeff Kent? He was the great hitter who played for the Blue Jays, Mets, and Giants. The thing about Kent, however, was that he did not love the game. He openly stated that he did not follow baseball except as his job. I would rather have a kid that has passion for this game than a guy that does not.

Teammates did not like playing with Kent, but they might like playing with Clarkin. Clarkin probably dislikes the Yankees for the same reason other people usually do: his parents probably dislike them. He comes from a baseball house...good enough.

People who love this game have a passion for it. The fans who say they root for both New York teams are not the ones you want on your side. Those who love all of the changes to the playoff system and inter-league play are not those who love the game.

Clarkin having an opinion about baseball does not offend me in the least. What worries me is his herky-jerky pitching motion that makes me think he will get through a lineup once before he gets rocked.

That worries me; his love for the game is what I welcome as a fan.

Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet