Skip to main content

Supporters of ND Measure 5 Strike Back

October 15, 2012

Supporters of Measure 5 released a list of crimes against animals in the state in response to critics of the measure that would strengthen the legal penalties in cases of animal cruelty.

“Across the country—everywhere but North Dakota and South Dakota—the worst acts of cruelty to dogs, cats and horses are considered felonies, yet these vicious crimes happen here, too,” said Karen Thunshelle, campaign manager for North Dakotans to Stop Animal Cruelty.

NDSAC points to four cases of animal cruelty in the state that received media attention after critics said the measure was ambiguously worded and such severe crimes are rare in the state.

The first case happened on April 30, when three men robbed a Grand Forks couple’s home and beat a Chihuahua to death.

A 27-year-old Fargo woman brought her dog, a Lhasa apso, to a bar in the early hours of March 15 and swung the dog by a leash, held it by the neck, pulled its hair out and threatened to kill it.

After his cousin asked him to leave his mobile home in Bismarck, a 25-year-old man slammed his cousin’s girlfriend’s puppy onto a counter and stepped on its head in 2007.

In 2004, a 36-year-old Fargo man held a cat down and cut its throat with a box cutter. The cat escaped but had to be put down by officers.
“North Dakota’s population is booming, and with that will come people who might not hold North Dakota values toward animals,” Thuneshelle said.

Nukhet Hendricks at the Fargo-Moorhead Humane Society told Fargo TV that Measure 5 is too narrow in scope because it only protects dogs, cats and horses and no other species. Thunshelle told the Times-Record that those animals were chosen because they were the most common companion animals in the state.

The North Dakotans for Responsible Animal Care (NDRAC) opposes to the wording of Measure 5 and is proposing legislation to be introduced in the next legislative session if the measure is voted down. The legislation is similar to Measure 5 in that it makes animal cruelty a class C felony, but NDRAC says it provides more clarity and guidance to law enforcement.


Supporters of Measure 5 are RIGHT!

October 15, 2012 by sdianas (not verified), 2 years 37 weeks ago
Comment: 13607

I noticed that both comments against Measure 5 are by the same person, and that person has commented here 13,596 times. That is hardly a cross-section of public opinion.

The crimes prohibited by Measure 5 are pretty horrendous, and they DO happen in North Dakota. I remember a story in the Forum about a man who tied a rope around a cat's neck and dragged it back and forth in front of a video store until it was dead. The reason: it had wandered into his yard, and he didn't like cats! I was sickened by the story and shocked that he had only gotten a slap on the wrist - and his act would have been covered by Measure 5.

Measure 5 covers only the worst acts, they do occur, and laws against those acts are desperately needed. There is nothing in the measure that would prevent the legislature from enacting laws against other acts or a more sweeping law. However, I suspect that the objections are just an excuse for the legislature to do what it has done since North Dakota became a state in 1889: Nothing.

Supporters are lying

October 15, 2012 by Spectator (not verified), 2 years 37 weeks ago
Comment: 13596

I'd ask the Valley City Times-Record to check the facts before running any more of the supporters propaganda. Do you see anything in the following list that pertains to "swinging a dog by its leash" or "pulling its hair?" How about "stepped on its head?"

This is the list of items included in Measure 5: burns, poisons, crushes, suffocates, impales, drowns, blinds, skins, beats to death, drags to death, exsanguinates, disembowels, or dismembers any living dog, cat, or horse is guilty of a class C felony.

Clearly, "swinging a dog by its leash" "pulling its hair" and "stepping on its head" are acts that ARE NOT addressed by Measure 5.

Supporters should discontinue using those examples and misleading the public about what this measure would and would not do. It would not, for example protect those dogs, cats and horses that are severely and repeatedly beaten to within an inch of their lives. No. Those animals must DIE first before Measure 5 would do anything.

Vote NO.

Supporters continue to mislead the public

October 15, 2012 by Spectator (not verified), 2 years 37 weeks ago
Comment: 13595

I don't see anything in Measure 5 that would deal with the woman who swung her puppy around by its leash. Strangulation is not included in the list. Neither is "pulling its hair." That's why I'm voting NO on Measure 5. Supporters continue to try to sway public opinion through misleading emotional tactics and blurring the facts about what their measure would supposedly do.

Eliab Aufenkamp cools off at the Valley City Municipal Pool.
The Quality Alignment and Brake Center/NuBar softball team won their division at the McQuade...
Youth summer sports continue in the community through the month of July. See the T-R for regular...


Classified Ads

Premium Drupal Themes by Adaptivethemes