First, your opinion and therefore, not fact, in re the use of language. That you have no issue with poor wording is your problem. Exactly your problem. I bet you’re the kind of person who calls a mole a beauty mark.

Second, I know exactly what ex post facto means. I also know that retroactive application is only one component. A law targeting a specific person is also a component. That the MORONS in Massachusetts wrote a vague law open to a challenge of being ex post facto is not my doing. Take it up with them.

Third, I call people who act like morons, duh, morons. You don’t like it? Don’t read my posts. I promise, it won’t hurt my feelings. You from Massachusetts? Too bad. Elect better lawmakers. I live in Kansas and the morons here keep electing that Neocon tool Pat Roberts to the Senate (although he is thankfully stepping down after this term). Feel free to insult Kansans all you like. Unlike you, I’ll pick something better to be offended by. The morons in Florida let Bush and his brother steal an election but I have friends, friends who post here whose opinions I both value and seek, who live in Florida. That doesn’t mean the rest of the state isn’t populated with morons or that they take it personally when I call out their fellow statesmen for moronic behavior. Indeed, they are often right beside me decrying said behavior. Act stupid, get treated stupid. You got a problem with that? Get smart. Unless you are personally responsible for drafting a poorly worded statute then all your outrage is just lip flapping, isn’t it? So drop the fake outrage. Massachusetts collectively is just as stupid as every other state, but each are stupid in their own particular ways. Too bad you didn’t get the memo that you don’t have to be smart to run for public office and, in fact, that the existing campaign finance system encourages the stupid and easily manipulated to run as that is what the corporations are willing to foot the bill for.

Where, oh where, to begin.

First, your claims about this being a “retardation of law by bad and/or euphemistic language” is flat wrong. The charge is titled “unjustifiable” harm to an animal because there may be circumstances where an animal was harmed by a particular human action, but where such action was not meant to be harmful and the harm is thus “justifiable.” For instance, assume a farmer yolks his cattle to pull a stump (a practice still widely used in upstate farm country), and one of the cattle breaks a leg. As long as the animal was not being overburdened, overloaded, or overdriven, this would be — as unfortunate for the animal as it may be — a justifiable harm to the animal.

Second, before you go calling the residents of Massachusetts morons, you should know what the Ex Post Facto clause is. A law generally does not violate the Ex Post Facto clause unless it aims to have retroactive effect, and tries to render conduct illegal that was legal when it was actually committed. Passing a law in response to a particular situation does not violate the Ex Post Facto clause; indeed, nearly all laws are passed in response to a particular unfortunate situation (e.g., Meghan’s Law). So long as the the law is forward looking — in the case of the cat lady, so long as the law only regulates her conduct from the point of passage forward, and does not seek to criminalize her conduct engaged in before the law was passed — then the law is fine.

What exactly is it that Americans have against cats?

The story linked is about a Mass. town that enacted a law saying if you own more than 4 cats you need a kennel license. This law was enacted in response to a feud with a specific citizen. Can you Massachusetts morons spell “ex post facto”? I hope she has the money to take this to the top because it WILL NOT withstand constitutional scrutiny.

Statistics show he is headed for a future of cruelty that will eventually transfer to fellow humans.

“Sentence” him to therapy or society will be sentenced to his future morph into cruelty of the human torture type.

Then I guess I’d be justified in just kicking the crap out this inhuman POS, wouldn’t I? I’m still not up to speed, but I’d get out of bed to smack this clown around.

What a ridiculous charge. The only thing worse than absence of law is the retardation of law by bad and/or euphemistic language. This is a perfect example. Cruelty, by its very nature, is never justified under any reasonable belief system let alone against a defenseless animal.