news-record.com

NEWS

Susie’s Law passes

Article
Comments (18)

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

(Updated 7:30 pm)

By
Associated Press

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — North Carolina legislators decided Wednesday that anyone so violent that they would torture, starve, or kill an animal should face possible jail time.

The state Senate voted 47-0 to give final approval to raising penalties for some of the worst cases of animal abuse. Gov. Beverly Perdue must decide whether to sign the legislation into law.

The punishment could be up to eight months behind bars, but a judge could agree to community service instead.

The bill was introduced after a Greensboro man received probation after burning, beating and leaving his 8-week-old puppy to die. The female pit-bull mix was later adopted and named Susie.

The year-old dog, her scars visible and floppy ears burned off, was brought to several legislative committees considering the bill.

"Susie in her little life has created an awareness that those that torture animals ought to receive jail time," said Sen. Don Vaughn, D-Guilford, who pushed the measure. "I believe there's an important lesson in this law — that North Carolina is serious about animal abuse and anyone who tortures an animal can go to jail."

The stiffer penalties were justified because people who abuse animals often also turn their brutality on family members, Vaughn said.

Accompanying Photos

Jerry Wolford (News & Record)

Photo Caption: Susie was brought into a Guilford County courtroom March 1 during Lashawn Whitehead's hearing.

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

d_random

June 16, 2010 - 4:59 pm EDT

Thanks to everyone that emailed, called their representatives and volunteered!
WE DID IT!

luvdowntowngso

June 16, 2010 - 5:14 pm EDT

This is wonderful news! A classic example of how something good can result from a terrible tragedy! Many thanks to Susie, her owner, Senator Don Vaughan, and the many others who worked so very hard to get this bill passed!

richardcarterjr

June 16, 2010 - 7:24 pm EDT

Amazing. If you rip a dog apart with a vacum you go to jail. If you rip a baby apart with a vacum Kay Hagan and Emily's List shout your name from the rooftop. This shows you that the North Carolina Senate would rather see babies die by the thousands and save the mangiest of mutts in their place. Moral decay at its finest. God have mercy on the blind and dumb.

luvdowntowngso

June 16, 2010 - 7:50 pm EDT

richardcarter, God does have mercy on the blind and dumb. He also has mercy on idiots like yourself. So, consider yourself blessed! If you feel so strongly about the efforts to save babies, why don't you get off your lazy *** and start a movement to change the laws!

purplevoter

June 18, 2010 - 9:17 am EDT

So, if I understand your position here, unless all American women lose the right to make their own medical decisions regarding reproduction, you won't and don't support a state law criminalizing horrific animal abuse. I'm assuming there's a thread of logic in there somewhere, but d---ed if I can find it. Apples and oranges.

In any case, I'M VERY happy that Susie's Law passed. I only wish, given the final vote, that it had been even tougher.

richardcarterjr

June 19, 2010 - 9:07 am EDT

Absolutely right. My thread of logic? A baby's life is more valuable than a dog's. Are you actually going to argue differently? Also, I find it interesting that you talk about a woman losing the right to make decisions about reproduction. They chose to have sex in the first place knowing that a life could be conceived. And if you would like to insert at this point the question of rape please remember that less than 1% of all abortions are rape abortions. Let me repeat that... less than 1% of all abortions are rape abortions. And 6% occur because of potential life threatening issues to the mother. Which means that 93% are birth control abortions. That's logical in your world? Wow. I believe the correct argument for you would be that I am arguing against women using abortion as birth control whereas they can have sex whenever they want and not have to worry about pesky little babies getting in the way of time with their dog... cat... school... job... etc. And yes, I am arguing against that. I ask also, what about the father, it is his child too, doesn't he have a say in the life of his unborn son or daughter? And oh yeah, what about the little baby, don't they have a right to choose to live or die? And why do you say "reproduction"? Why not say what you really mean. You want women to continue to have the right to have their unborn baby ripped limb from limb, or have chemicals burn them alive, or have them delivered just enough so that they are mere inches from life only to have a metal suction catheter suck their brains out so their little skull colapses and their lifeless body can be thrown away with the trash. I guess you would also support President Barack Obama and his argument from the Illinois Senate floor when he defended the practice of taking little babies that survive an abortion to another room so that they can still die. I mean, as he said, they are nothing but little "punishments" any way, right?

From your argument, and all others that commented on my posts, what is important here for all of you is that Susie's law passed and mothers still have the right to have their unborn babies violently killed without restraint. From most of the posts on here the only thing better would have been the death penalty for animal cruelty.

You know, as progressives, I can see where you would not find any logic in my posts. Anyone who would support laws against animal cruelty but in favor of killing babies wouldn't.

But I have one last question and I encourage anyone to answer... how do you know if these animals are choosing to be abused???

GsoFan

June 16, 2010 - 8:32 pm EDT

Richard FYI - this bill was passed by the NC State Senate. They have NO control over abortion laws - that's the US Senate. But why argue with facts?! Congratulations to Don Vaughan for getting this bill through - even when they said it couldn't be done in the short session. May no dog - even the "mangiest of mutts" suffer like Susie did.

richardcarterjr

June 16, 2010 - 10:07 pm EDT

To both "gso" folks. First, abortion and pets are emotional subjects. But calling people names, using profanity, and calling into question someone's intelligence really are just tools that progressives use to accomplish radical societal goals. They are not effective tools against facts. First, I am a sinner saved by God's grace and the blood of His only Son Jesus. I am very blessed. Second, if placing the life of a human child above that of a dog is being an idiot then I am an idiot. Third, I am doing something about abortion. I am an active supporter and contributor to the Susan B Anthony list. I correspond weekly with Senator Burr and Representative Foxx, my United States Congress representation. I communicate often with Pete Brunstetter, my state Senator. My wife and I are working to use a rental property to house mothers that choose life over abortion. But most importantly I chose life four times. And my kids are learning to value the life of a baby over any pet. And finally, North Carolina is a sovereign state that can pass laws to curtail abortion. Matter-of-factly, North Carolina's general assembly could outlaw abortion in our state and there would be nothing that the Federal Government could do about it. Why argue with the facts, you ask? Because your facts are not facts. They are inaccuracies. They are wrong. Just like cheering for Susie the dog to live while Susie the baby dies.

Kit9

June 17, 2010 - 6:16 am EDT

Frankly Richard the Baby Saver, You have nothing to say about what a woman does with her body. Until that baby is born or aborted it belongs to her, not you! In America we are stopping the pandering to Talibangelicals. The folks who use their religious beliefs to determine American Sharia law. By using and abusing this site and page against animal cruelty you merely show your own stupidity. Make your own choices. You have no right to choose for someone else!

scoobyrulz1968

June 24, 2010 - 6:44 pm EDT

I'm sorry was going to keep my "opinion" to myself but can't..
I'm a 42 yr old woman that due to health issues lost my RIGHT to have children at 28 yr old.. I see / hear where people mistreat (again in MY opionion) children on a somewhat daily basis.. but let me ask you (Richard) this.. didn't GOD make both ?? if you cut either don't BOTH bleed?? if you burn either don't they BOTH carry the scars both physically and mentally??
There are ALOT of ways that the judicial system has let BOTH DOWN.. I think that this happen to be a step in the RIGHT direction for Suzie and dogs like her.. I hope that there will be a solution for the plight of babies in the near future as they are in the same amount of NEED for help.... I personally wish that they would manditorily put birth control into both (male / female) that will last until age 20 if not longer but then there would be the argument of their civil rights so until such time the people making the laws LISTEN there will be problems..

wfu2clt

June 16, 2010 - 10:37 pm EDT

I'm sure there's a pro-life story that is missing valuable commentary and I'm sure the sentiment will be more appreciated over there than here, where the audience is mainly comprised of those favoriting animal rights. It is our right to champion our cause, just like you, sir, can champion yours. Although I may not agree, I respect that you're allowed to voice your opinion--just not sure why/how it's relevent in this forum. This is an apple forum and you're bringing in the barrel of oranges.

Back on topic, I'm THRILLED about this. I've worked with abused dogs in shelters, puppymill rescues and I have a former breeding dog from a rescue. What's even more thrilling is the unanimous support that Susie's Law got. Add in that I'm a fan of pit/pit mixes (and all bullie breeds...having one makes me partial) and this has made my night. Very proud of my state legislators tonight and send them a huge THANK YOU on behalf of anyone that's ever loved an abused animal.

jorrell245

June 16, 2010 - 11:17 pm EDT

I believe that this law is far too late, I hate to think about the abuse animals have suffered over decades while the perpetrators walk away with a smile. The really sad part is that the new law is irrelevant in North Carolina as the judicial system is completely broken and dysfunctional!

If you need proof, a 19 year old opens fire on police officers with 20+ rounds and gets off with time served and four years of probation. It's time for NC residents to stand up and vote for TOUGH judges that will do their best to prevent the current backslide of our society towards anarchy. If I take this particular example and extrapolate it to the new animal abuse law, violators will get a pat on the back from the judge!

k2ksb

June 17, 2010 - 2:58 pm EDT

I am glad Susie's Law passed. But I don't think "up to 8 months" in prison is enough for the type of person who commits these types of crimes. They are eventually going to hurt a human if they can do these things to a helpless puppy... They should get at least a year behind bars... More if the crime is worse...

purplevoter

June 18, 2010 - 9:24 am EDT

Well said. There is plenty of evidence that animal abuse is often a "practice" crime leading to acts perpetrated against people. In my opinion, it's already bad enough when the acts are committed against animals, and the punishment has to be harsh enough to serve as a wake-up call to the perp and to the public.

scoobyrulz1968

June 24, 2010 - 6:18 pm EDT

I personally wish that the abuser had to endure that same treatment that he / she inflicted on the animal like biblical days EYE for an EYE.. but this is a start. I do agree that up to 8 month's is NOT enough time for any type of abuse crime and to let them out on "community service " is a COP-OUT.. like i would want anyone capable of doing this to a 8 wk old puppy out in the community. it should be a 1 yr manaditory sentence NO PAROL and another yr of mental evaluation and treatment cause people like this is SICK!!!!

purplevoter

June 18, 2010 - 9:25 am EDT

BTW, is that photo of Susie the best, or what?!!

soatbs

June 18, 2010 - 11:42 am EDT

It is a great photo! It's amazing to me that this dog who was so abused can still show love to humans after all she's been through.

And I'm thrilled this law has passed. I too wish the penalties were stiffer but it's a start!

scoobyrulz1968

June 24, 2010 - 6:09 pm EDT

THANK GOD!! Finally JUSTICE for this little girl.. I wish the "human" that did this to her had gotten more than he did but this is a step in the RIGHT direction!!

CONGRATS on your WIN for animal rights Suzie.. We as animal lovers LOVE you and know that you now have a long wonderful life ahead of you..