Soft on cruelty?

Ok, I've tried 3 times to come up with a way to start this post off, but nothing I've come up with has adequately expressed the dismay at this story in the Daily Mail.

If it's true, and I realize that is an "if" (but then just about any story posing as "journalism" these days must be prefaced with an "if"), it is a terrible lesson that people here will learn, but likely not learn from.

Several years ago in my days of beating my head against brick walls in "discussion" forums, I encountered the fuzzy logic that held private property rights to be a "slippery slope" to a society where Animal Planets' Puppy Bowl ratings would skyrocket with the addition of a Burmese Python to the fun.

In vain did I plead that turning property rights over to the government would result in humans being thrown to the pythons.

Now, some dog breeders in Britain are pleading my case.

The story is not easy to read, especially if you have kids (yes, I know sensationalism in writing is a hallmark of the Daily Mail). The facts as presented are this - a dog breeder is raided, protests the raid, takes every step they can think of to fight back, including taping interview with the authorities, only to have their own daughter seized by the government. That was two years ago. They still have not gotten their daughter back, DESPITE having no charges filed against them.

They were just a normal, happy family, it seems, until the RSPCA, backed up by 18 police officers, arrived at their house early one April morning in 2007, following a tip-off that dogs were being mistreated, and that there might be guns in the house.
No guns were ever found. No criminal charges were brought, nor does Richard have a criminal record.

And here is what makes this case so unbelievable, yet so portent.

He was later, however, convicted of docking the tails of his puppies.

Support Your Local Puppymill.