Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Cruelty And Ownership Bans topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rep. Krasnow introduces bill to bar animal abusers from future ownership after recent cruelty cases
Summary
Rep. Emily Krasnow introduced H.492 May 20 to increase accountability for animal cruelty, including a proposed ban on future animal ownership for convicted abusers. The Judiciary Committee discussed the bill and signaled interest in working with domestic-violence advocates and animal-welfare groups on a long-form measure.
Representative Emily Krasnow told the House Judiciary Committee on May 20 that she is introducing H.492 to strengthen penalties and post-conviction restrictions for animal cruelty, including a proposed prohibition on future animal ownership for convicted abusers.
Krasnow pointed to recent cases in which farm animals suffered serious neglect and a high-profile episode in which a dog returned to its owner attracted public attention and a subsequent GoFundMe campaign. "We must be a voice for animals. They cannot advocate for themselves," Krasnow told committee members, describing animals as "deserving of safety, love, and care."
Krasnow said a short-form bill was submitted to give the committee a starting point and that she is open to expanding the measure into a long-form bill with stakeholder input during the off session. The short form proposes, among other things, stronger penalties for convicted abusers and an order preventing future animal ownership for those individuals.
The lawmaker cited a recent local prosecution in which pigs were found emaciated and suffering from cold exposure; a veterinarian described the pigs' condition as resulting from prolonged starvation, Krasnow said. The animals were placed with the Merrimack Farm Sanctuary in Charlotte for rehabilitative care, she said.
Committee members asked technical and policy questions, including whether the bill should include a pathway for restorative options in limited cases and how a lifetime ownership ban would be applied. Members also suggested consulting domestic-violence advocates to explore the intersection between animal cruelty and coercive control in households; the committee referenced last year's Act 103 (H.27) as precedent for including coercive-control language in related statutes.
Krasnow said she supports further development of the bill outside the session and welcomed committee collaborators. "If the committee wants to add elements or change language, I'm more than willing to work with you," she said. Several members signaled interest in returning with a fuller, long-form proposal in the next legislative session.
No committee vote was taken on H.492 on May 20. Members and witnesses recommended outreach to domestic-violence networks and animal-welfare organizations as the bill is developed and flagged potential implementation questions such as whether an ownership ban should apply to all animals or be tailored to types of animals and offenses.
