For those who fear that law is a diminishing profession, fear not. There are still ample numbers of moronic individuals who seem driven to have accidents. This guy is one such person. I am less concerned about his decision to forego a helmet than I am the safety of this dog. What I see is a guy with matching shorts and motorbike and a dog that seem more like an accessory to the outfit than a companion to the biker. I see a very loving dog and an owner who seems to care less about the dog’s welfare.
There is little protecting this animal from a sudden stop or swerve. When such accidents occur, the owners often express shock as if this was not a clearly foreseeable accident waiting to happen. While we have child endangerment, we do not have similarly enforced law for animal endangerment.
Consider a standard animal cruelty provision from California:
§597. Cruelty to animals.
(a) Except as provided in subdivision (c) of this section or Section 599c, every person who maliciously and intentionally maims, mutilates, tortures or wounds a living animal or maliciously and intentionally kills an animal, is guilty of an offence punishable by imprisonment in the state prison or by a fine of not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment, or, alternatively, by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (a) or (c), every person who overdrives, overloads, drives when overloaded, overworks, tortures, torments, deprives of necessary sustenance, drink, or shelter, cruelly beats, mutilates, or cruelly kills any animal, or causes or procures any animal to be so overdriven, overloaded, driven when overloaded, overworked, tortured, tormented, deprived of necessary sustenance, drink, or shelter, or to be cruelly beaten, mutilated, or cruelly killed; and whoever, having the charge or custody of any animal, either as owner or otherwise, subjects any animal to needless suffering, or inflicts unnecessary cruelty upon the animal, or in any manner abuses any animal, or fails to provide the animal with proper food, drink, or shelter or protection from the weather, or who drives, rides, or otherwise uses the animal when unfit for labor, is for every such offence, guilty of a crime punishable as a misdemeanoror as a felony or alternatively punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony and by a fine of not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000).
(c) Every person who maliciously and intentionally maims, mutilates or tortures any mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, or fish as described in subdivision (d), is guilty of an offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison, or by a fine of not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), or by both the fine and the imprisonment, or, alternatively, by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment.
Most of the provisions deal with intentional harm or over-working an animal or not affording shelter or food. While I do not believe that it is necessary to criminalize the lack of restraints in cars, I found this picture more shocking than charming. I see a dog who trusts his owner and an owner who cares little over protecting the dog. Should this a crime?
This sort of thing just infuriates me to no end. (I get the same way when I see dogs or children riding unsecured in the back of pick up trucks.) Acting stupidly and having no regard for one’s own self is one thing…to selfishly and recklessly place that dog in such potentially disastrous circumstances is simply unconscionable.
Sorry Carlyle, looks to me like he’s riding with one hand controlling the bike.
That dog looks like it’s in a stress position. How long before it has to shift its front paws, and what happens then?
I think this should be a crime, but then again, I’m not a true libertarian.
I would like to talk to the dog to get his opinion.
most states i’ve rode in tend to frown on the flip-flops.
While I do not think it is criminal for this mental giant to ride his bike without a helmet or reasonable clothing, but I do think it is criminal for him to endanger his dog.
It should be criminal, not only for the lack of regard for the dog’s safety, but for the fact that in a sudden maneuver, the dog’s body can act like a projectile creating unsafe conditions for other drivers.