On the beaten path

Recent cases floating through the local justice system were ripe with that type of horrendous, inexcusable and heart-breaking abuse. Except these particular cases didn’t involve human victims but rather an array of helpless four-legged pets.

But what surprised me more than the horrific acts of torture and abuse is what ultimately happened to the cases.

Far too often, the deranged perpetrators were excused from any real justice by paying a small fine and having their animals taken away. No jail time or even restitution. No court order banning them from owning future animals.

If the almost unimaginable abuse had been inflicted on, let’s say, a child or an adult, would these individuals still be walking out of court with a fine? A slap on the hand and a scolding by the judge?

I think not. I would imagine there would be widespread public outrage, followed by a maximum sentence of years in prison, costly restitution payments and possibly, hopefully, counseling.

Many readers, at this point, may be upset by the comparison and rationalizing the differences, saying, “They’re just animals.”

Now don’t get me wrong, I understand the obvious differences betweeen the two, but I also recognize the obvious similarities.

And do critics honestly believe that the animals cannot feel a knife slicing through their flesh and chipping their bones, as a human would?

Do they not feel when their stomachs ache and cramp for days at a time when there’s not a scrap of food in sight, as a human would?

Do they not feel the penetrating pain of repeated and open burns, as a human would?

Violence and abuse are criminal acts, regardless of who is victimized.

Though I can understand the legal differences between human and animal abuse cases, I seriously question whether the current laws and punishments are really curbing this alarming local problem.

Honestly, can a “firm warning” or a $200 fine really discourage a repeat offender?

In one Plattsburgh City Court case, a dog was taken away from his local owner, who had repeatedly stabbed it in the head, trying to kill it.

The local animal-abuse officer who rescued the poor, skittish thing shelled out a couple thousand dollars of privately donated shelter money so the dog's gaping head wounds could be adequately treated.

The man never paid any “restitution” to cover the expenses he ultimately inflicted on a private organization that is already overburdened with a constant flow of animals and low finances.

There was no mention of never owning pets again (and he has since gotten new dogs).

There was no mention of a need for mental counseling (though, may I point out, research consistently supports the idea that animal abuse is often an early sign of escalating violence and criminal tendencies.)

Far too often, there’s no mention of community service, though one of the most logical punishments would be to volunteer for the very agencies that are assisting the many mangled and dispirited local pets.

So after only a few months of observing the continued injustices, I’m convinced that not only do the animal-abuse laws need to change, but the current local punishments certainly and desperately do.

Judges and prosecutors need to impose the harshest possible sentence in each and every possible case to discourage the distinct possibility of future abuse.

Disheartened pet owners and local residents, like myself, need to urge our elected officials to find justice for not only the human victims of violent crimes but for the many neglected and forgotten four-legged victims that constantly float through the system.

How many more helpless animals have to suffer the wrath of abuse at the hands of not only their owners but of the criminal justice system, as well?