LIHU‘E — The state Senate and the House are working together in crafting legislation that would prohibit those convicted of animal cruelty from owning a pet — and even living in a house where there is a pet — for
LIHU‘E — The state Senate and the House are working together in crafting legislation that would prohibit those convicted of animal cruelty from owning a pet — and even living in a house where there is a pet — for a period of one to five years, depending on the severity of the conviction.
House Bill 1186 and Senate Bill 9 add to the law a provision that prohibits any person convicted of animal cruelty in the first degree (a class C felony) from possessing, owning or residing with any pet animal for a minimum of five years from the date of conviction.
Both proposals are softer on those convicted of animal cruelty on second degree (a misdemeanor). A similar prohibition would apply for the convicted person, but the period of prohibition would be one year from the date of conviction.
In essence, those who abuse any pet, be it a cat, a dog, mouse, horse or a bird, would get a temporary restraining order against pets in general. And if the animal is staying in the house, the owner has to move out.
If the proposal seems a little harsh against humans, it actually would add protection to humans — just not to the offender.
The first paragraph of the proposal states, “The legislature finds that persons who are cruel to animals are more likely to commit other crimes of violence against people, based on extensive research in fields of criminology and psychology.”
Rep. Dee Morikawa, 16th District, who co-introduced HB 1186, said the bill basically adds more conditions to the law to prevent further animal abuse.
The House Consumer Protection and Commerce Committee recommended passage of the bill Wednesday, with 10 votes in favor and none against it. Five committee members were excused from the vote.
Rep. Derek Kawakami, 14th District, the vice-chair of the CPC Committee, voted for the bill.
The next step for the HB 1186 is to be heard by the House Judiciary Committee. Morikawa said the House is busy this week going through bills with triple referrals.
Despite that the JUD Committee doesn’t have a set date for a hearing yet, the bill will likely be heard, she said, especially because of the large number of favorable testimony submitted by individuals and organizations, including the Honolulu Police Department, the Hawaiian Humane Society, the West Hawai‘i Humane Society, Animal Rights Hawai‘i, Equine 808 Horse Rescue and the Humane Society of the United States.
On the Senate side, the Judiciary and Labor Committee on Jan. 30. unanimously recommended that SB 9 be passed.
The JDL Committee was the only Senate referral.
The state Office of the Public Defender sent testimony to the Senate asking to replace “shall” with “may.”
Their reasoning was to give the court discretion during sentencing, as a family may be forced to choose between a pet and a defendant.
“This pet may belong to a young girl or boy, or a relative in the case of extended families living under a single roof,” the OPD testimony states.
Visit www.capitol.hawaii.gov for more information and to send testimony through email.
