SENATE BILL: Canine Protection Act (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: bgwah

[Napoleon]

This should be considered non-controversial, no?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Do people eat dogs in Atlasia? Is this just a formality or is it bgwah simply proving to us he's still an animal lover, as if we have all forgotten?

[tmthforu94]

I always found cutting off an animal's tail weird and wrong. Great bill, Bgwah.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I don't support either of these practices, but the penalties are excessive.

[bgwah]

I don't support either of these practices, but the penalties are excessive.

They're meant to be discouraging.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I support this bill.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I put forward this amendment to remove the mandatory minimums from this bill.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[CatoMinor]

I think the $1,000,000 fine is a bit steep, but if lowered to something more reasonable I would support it. Most of the restaurants I could imagine selling canine meat would be wiped out by such a large fine. At least give them a chance to change their ways.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Places selling canine meat? I would think the taboo alone in doing that would ward off anyone actually doing it.

[Napoleon]

Places selling canine meat? I would think the taboo alone in doing that would ward off anyone actually doing it.

It isn't necessarily served as dog meat.

As for being taboo, it isn't taboo in many cultutes, especially Chinese and Vietnamese. We do have many immigrants.

[bgwah]

I put forward this amendment to remove the mandatory minimums from this bill.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why so vague?

[Junkie]

I put forward this amendment to remove the mandatory minimums from this bill.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why so vague?

Not really vague, but more allowing a range of punishment.  I for one do not believe in mandatory minimums which is what this would be without the amendment.  I hope the Senate adopts the amendment.

Also, 1) seems constitutional (kind of), but under what power would the Senate be authorized to legislate the second one.

[bgwah]

I put forward this amendment to remove the mandatory minimums from this bill.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why so vague?

Not really vague, but more allowing a range of punishment.  I for one do not believe in mandatory minimums which is what this would be without the amendment.  I hope the Senate adopts the amendment.

Also, 1) seems constitutional (kind of), but under what power would the Senate be authorized to legislate the second one.

A range that would include no punishment at all.

[Junkie]

I put forward this amendment to remove the mandatory minimums from this bill.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why so vague?

Not really vague, but more allowing a range of punishment.  I for one do not believe in mandatory minimums which is what this would be without the amendment.  I hope the Senate adopts the amendment.

Also, 1) seems constitutional (kind of), but under what power would the Senate be authorized to legislate the second one.

A range that would include no punishment at all.

Yes.  That is a possibility, but rather remote.  Do not get me wrong, being in this field of work, it drives me mad when a Judge imposes a fine or probation with no incarceration on serious offenses.  However, we have judges to use their discretion.  Establishing mandatory minimums takes away that power from the judiciary.

One thing to consider.  If you have mandatory min, prosecutors then know every charge will result in a specfic sentence.  There may cases where they do not think it is appropriate, that the specific circumstances of that case do not require what is required by the statute.  They then might not issue charges.  It happens.

No case is a like.  No defendant is a like.  Therefore, we should not set up a system that treats everyone the same.  To do so, in my opinion, is not justice.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Pending

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ah, Senator bgwah, your feedback on the amendment is?

[bgwah]

not accepted

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A vote is now open on Amendment 44:18, please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Aye

[bgwah]

nay

[Ban my account ffs!]

Nay. 

I agree there should be a range of punishments... but not the option of no punishment.

At the same time, I am beginning to question the point of this bill.  What is the difference between slaughtering and selling dog meat and doing the same to pigs, cows, and chickens?  Because doggies are cute and we keep them as pets?  That's a ridiculous premise.

If there was a concrete reason to ban selling dog meat.. like it being universally unsanitary or it could potentially harm the people who eat it.. I could understand banning it.

I think instead it might be prudent to require that restaurants clearly make known that what you are eating is dog meat.  I'd support strict penalties for failing to do so.

[CatoMinor]

Aye

And Snowguy brings up a good point. Unless there is any evidence of a health risk to people from consumption of canine meat, I do not see a need to ban it. It's not like there are giant dog farms in Atlasia raising Dogs for their meat, it is very uncommon to see dogs used for food in Atlasia.

[bgwah]

This bill does not "ban" canine meat.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Nay. 

I agree there should be a range of punishments... but not the option of no punishment.

At the same time, I am beginning to question the point of this bill.  What is the difference between slaughtering and selling dog meat and doing the same to pigs, cows, and chickens?  Because doggies are cute and we keep them as pets?  That's a ridiculous premise.

If there was a concrete reason to ban selling dog meat.. like it being universally unsanitary or it could potentially harm the people who eat it.. I could understand banning it.

I think instead it might be prudent to require that restaurants clearly make known that what you are eating is dog meat.  I'd support strict penalties for failing to do so.

It is pretty much the reason why cats and dogs have the largest range of legal protections.

I'm kind of concerned about the direction of this Bill - I understand Senator Snowguy's points - I think we need to make the production and consumption of dog meat as great a financial and commercial risk as possible.