Memorandum

To: John Kuminecz, Instructor, Eng 107

From: Brian Selvester, Student, Eng 107
Date: September 11, 2019
Subject: Animal Cruelty a Solution

The topic of animal cruelty has recently been brought up to the public’s attention. There

has been an uproar of angry people from a video uploaded online of a man violently kicking a

stray cat. People are taking a strong stance against animal cruelty. In all 50 states, animal cruelty

can be charged as a felony. Since the acts of cruelty are getting worse, stricter penalties are being

imposed. The main argument being made regarding this issue is what factors should lead to

stronger prosecution of animal abusers and how extensive should animals’ legal rights be?

Although some may believe that animals have rights equal to humans and they should be treated

fairly. The focus shouldn’t be on the rights of the animals, but rather focus on the responsibility

humans have as an animal owner.

The issue of animal cruelty is a problem that really hits home, the feeling of love and

responsibility that comes with owning an animal is something many experience. An argument

being made from the video of a man kicking a stray cat seems to show the passion people have

toward animals’ rights. People are focusing on the rights animal should have, and David Grimm,

the author of Citizen Canine would agree with those people. Grimm insists that our pets have

evolved from legally worthless beings into the most protected animals in the country. In his

argument, he states more than 90 percent of families believe their pet is more like a family

member than an animal. What Grimm is trying to explain with the statistic is that more and more

people are accepting animals into their lives. Family pets are protected more than any other
creature in the country. In another response to the argument, Temple Grandin, a professor of

animal science at Colorado State University, made a statement that, “maybe he does not

understand that animals feel pain and fear.” Many people assume that animal cruelty is taken

lightly, when in reality there are many rules and regulations to protect animals.

Although David Grimm and Temple Grandin bring up good points to support their

arguments, they miss the concept of who should be liable for animals’ rights. Richard L. Cupp

doesn’t say so directly, but he implies, and it is true that animals don’t have a say in where they

live or who their owners may be. Instead of people worrying about animals being treated fairly,

they should put more energy into teaching people, who are supposedly responsible for an animal,

how to take on the duties of properly caring for the animal. Richard L. Cupp, a professor of law

at Pepperdine University School of Law takes on this issue through this stance. He states,

“Vigorous prosecution of animal cruelty is appropriate, but not based on animal rights. Rather

than focusing on rights for cats and dogs, we should focus on human moral responsibility.” Cupp

is not arguing that animal cruelty should be taken lightly, he still believes that abusers should be

prosecuted undoubtedly, but he thinks of it as more that the focus needs to be on human behavior

and morality. He isn’t going against Grimm’s argument completely, but also demonstrates that,

“arguing that animals should be considered legal persons because nonhuman corporations are

legal persons does not work.” In a separate article on this issue, Frankie Trull is going down a

separate path but both authors agree that animals should not be seen as legal citizens. Trull states

in her article that...“some animal rights groups are calling for fundamental changes to the legal

status of animals, including giving them standing in court, a prospect that could have severe

consequences for science and medicine.” Cupp and Trull are trying to say is that just because
people who are not considered to be a part of society are still considered to be a legal person

doesn’t mean that animals should be considered the same way, and that by doing so it could have

more of an effect on our science and research than people may realize.

In general, many can agree that animals need to be treated with love and kindness. Love

for animals is countless along with many animal owners. Being able to relate to this topic makes

it easier to take a stance on the topic. Although both David Grimm, and Temple Grandin bring

up valid points in their arguments the general public tends to agree more on what Cupp and Trull

have to say. Their point of focusing on animal rights won’t get very far in wanting to help the

problem of animal cruelty and changing the legal status of animals won’t help much with animal

cruelty. The fact is that human beings should be held accountable for their actions, which is the

value that most generally follow, meaning it animal cruelty is solely brought back to the person

who committed the offence. Adding more animal rights or making them legal citizens, isn’t

going to fix the issue. Just because they have more rights doesn’t mean that people are going to

respect them and changing the legal status could result in further problems. Spending more time

on teaching people how to offer care for their animal is more important. Before purchasing an

animal, people should be required to go through extensive training. As pet owners, they should

take on a great responsibility the day on signs up and says that they are willing to take care of

that animal. Although not figuratively, animals can be compared to babies due to the fact that

they require much attention, and fully depend on you to provide their food, shelter, and many

other accommodations. Seeing it as nothing less than taking care of a human being you should

offer the same love and care.

 Given these points, David Grimm and Richard Cupp took on two different sides to the

same argument. They both brought up many great key points and looking at both of their ideas

everyone should able to take bits and pieces away from each one. Animal Cruelty is cruel and

needs to come to an end. Animals don’t deserve to be treated poorly. Although some may believe

that animals have rights as equal to that of humans and should be treated fairly, the focus

shouldn’t be on the rights of the animals rather it should focus on the responsibility of the owner

that they partake in by caring for animals.