I believe people will respond to this question by saying they are more outraged by child abuse than animal abuse. However, I haven’t seen people being as vocal about their concern for children as they did for animals in the Michael Vick animal abuse case. This animal abuse case cause a national uproar and greatly increased contributions to animal rights groups.
What do you think needs to be done to get more national attention and contributions to children's organizations and to put pressure on judges to give harsh prison sentences to child abusers?
Side note: I love animals and completely support the need to prevent animal abuse.
2007-09-04 11:50:50 · 5 answers · asked by ALR 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Response to KPG: In your haste to rudely criticize my question, you failed to read the details where I expressed my opinion that the majority of people will response that that they care more about child abuse then animal abuse. While you mention the media coverage of a one child who was murder, thousand of children are neglected, abused and molested and there is no media coverage. Also, many judges give these offenders light prison sentences and in some cases only probation. You also failed to answer the second part of my question: What do you think needs to be done to get more national attention and contributions to children's organizations and to put pressure on judges to give harsh prison sentences to child abusers? We have states that have not passed Jessica’s Law. That fact alone shows that we are not doing enough for children and yet laws for convicted animal abusers are widely being promoted.
2007-09-04 21:52:54 · update #1
Sadly, yes. I also am rather shocked at the lack of outrage when the abuse is committed against poor children and those in foster care. There have been a number of cases of children who were abused in foster care, the most recent I can recall was a woman in Florida who bilked the system for more than a million dollars. She did it by taking in special needs children and collecting benefits intended for them. She abused the children yet lived in expensive houses. I can't recall much real outrage over that. It was as if nobody really cared.
2007-09-04 11:59:30 · answer #1 · answered by RoVale 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Vigilantism is totally wrong as is the abuse of the vulnerable - or anyone for that matter. What a lot of people forget when calling for vigilante action are the irresponsible journalists of the gutter press who love nothing more than to stir the pot. Often with the results that the innocent are wrongly targetted, and the sales of such papers increases. Also what about the abuse of children BY children (as in school bullying), that's often ignored or dismissed as 'horseplay', can be just as damaging. We do ned an overhaul of social services and more cash going to children's AND elderly services. The rule of law must prevail
2016-05-21 05:56:24 · answer #2 · answered by agnes 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's one of the most phenominally idiotic questions I've ever read...OF COURSE the people care more about the babies than the animals. What kind of stupid question is that? You apparently weren't around when the Jon Benet thing was going on....or the Jane Cordova Doe thing happened here in Vegas...were ya...how old are you anyway, are you old enough to even ask such a stupid question...How offensive!!!!!!!!!
2007-09-04 11:56:04 · answer #3 · answered by KPG 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
It's easier to show self-righteous indignation over what others do, than face up to what we do ourselves!
2007-09-04 11:56:31 · answer #4 · answered by GOLGOTHA 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i would unfortunatley say yes.
2007-09-04 11:55:11 · answer #5 · answered by Quailman 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋