=> Pet groomer charged with piercing kittens <= the hypocrisy of Animal "Cruelty" laws

[_ Prof. Jonez _]

Pet groomer charged with piercing kittens

Associated Press
Originally published 06:54 a.m., January 23, 2009

ALLENTOWN, Pennsylvania (AP) — A woman who marketed "gothic kittens" with ear,
neck and tail piercings over the Internet has been charged with animal cruelty
and conspiracy.

Dog groomer Holly Crawford, 34, was charged Tuesday by humane officers. Her home
outside Wilkes-Barre was raided Dec. 17 after the authorities received a tip
from the group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that she was
marketing the animals online for hundreds of dollars.
Crawford has said she will plead not guilty.

Crawford told The Associated Press on Thursday that she didn't see any
difference between piercing a cat and piercing a human. She said she used
sterile needles and surgical soap and that she checked the kittens several times
a day to make sure they were healing properly.

"When I did it, it wasn't with any cruel intentions," said Crawford. "They were
definitely loved, well-fed, no fleas, clipped nails. And they were happy."

Daphna Nachminovitch, a vice president for People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals, called the piercings "barbaric."

"There's no excuse for inflicting such pain on an animal that's the size of your
palm," she said.
Crawford, who sports her own body piercings, said she decided on a whim to
pierce the ears and neck of a stray kitten she took in last fall and named
Snarley Monster. She said she docked the cat's tail because it was badly damaged
and that the animal was not intended for sale.

Morrison charged Crawford and William Blansett, 37, of Sweet Valley, each with
three misdemeanor counts of animal cruelty, three summary counts of cruelty and
three counts of conspiracy.

Crawford said Blansett helped take calls about the kittens but that he had
nothing to do with the piercings.

A number for Blansett could not be located.

Crawford said her dog-grooming business, Pawside Parlor, has plummeted since the
raid and that she has received dozens of nasty phone calls.

"My name's ruined, my reputation's ruined, my business is ruined," she said.

==========

So dog owners/shops who crop ears and tails are guilty of animal cruelty too?

Or bird owners/shops who have the animal's tongue split so they can mimic
human sounds ?

[smr]

Post by _ Prof. Jonez _
Pet groomer charged with piercing kittens
Crawford said her dog-grooming business, Pawside Parlor, has plummeted since the
raid and that she has received dozens of nasty phone calls.
"My name's ruined, my reputation's ruined, my business is ruined," she said.
==========
So dog owners/shops who crop ears and tails are guilty of animal cruelty too?
Or bird owners/shops who have the animal's tongue split so they can mimic
human sounds ?

Very, very much so. There's an issue of enforcement of course but you
surely can't say that the people who do that to animals (splitting
tongues stand out particularly badly) are being very /nice/.

Whether or not that is a criminal level of cruelty is a question that
can only be answered by a court but I would be completely happy to
state for the record that yes, it's cruel to the animal. There's an
issue if using anaesthetic makes it less cruel (the majority of these
procedures are just done by holding the animal down, it's not nice at
all) but I'm comfortable on this occasion to make a blanket statement
on me finding it cruel.

I believe you'll find that tail docking is already considered
cruelty. I thought that should give you an indication how the law
thinks. I think you'd have to be a very hard hearted individual to
find the splitting of an animal's tongue (I honestly can't get past
how brutal that is) anything else.

[Susan Stewart]

On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:12:18 -0800, smr wrote:
<snip>

I believe you'll find that tail docking is already considered cruelty.

<snip>

By whom? I've had Doberman Pinschers for years, and all of their tails
have been docked, and most of their ears cropped. While many people who
love dobes differ on the issue of ears, the feeling on docking tails
seems pretty unanimous -- it is a necessary step to ensure the animal's
quality of life.

When I was a preteen, we got a dobe from a rescue who was a bit on the
old side for tail docking. He had been abused, beaten and left in the
wild by his previous owner, and until his rescue lacked any proper vet
care as far as we could tell.

We hemmed and hawed a bit, and finally asked our vet whether it was
better to have the tail docked or not at this age. She said it was a bit
harder on the dog than having it done shortly after birth, but still
recommended.

We hemmed and hawed a little more, but within days of our taking in this
wonderful pooch, I learned the hard way why dobes' tails are docked. My
Doberman's tail was so strong, that if he wagged it standing too close to
me, he whipped my legs so hard he drew blood *through jeans*. About 15
years later, I still have scars on the backs of my knees.

When my parents saw this, they of course had his tail docked. He was
anesthetized by our vet and the tail skillfully removed. He had to wear
a cone for a while to keep him from licking or nibbling his stitches, but
once that came off he was much happier because he could play with my
brother and I without anyone being hurt.

I am 100% in favor of docking dobe's tails.

--Susan