The Animal Welfare Act (AWA)

For many years there has been an ongoing debate on whether or not animals should be given rights, even there own bill of rights. Some who are against the animal bill of rights argue that testing products on animals is important to the safety of humans. Others who want the new bill of rights claim that animals have feelings and that science is treating them inhumanely. Animal activists also add that animals are intelligent beings and are aware of how they are treated. Based on science proving animal activists correct on many of their points, this calls for a new bill of rights, in the United States, especially written for the protection and care of wild and domestic animals.

The Animal Protection Movement also underwent the Bureaucratic stage, which is the third stage of development of social movements in sociology. The bureaucratization stage of social movements is the formalization stage that is characterized by high level of organization as swell as coalitions. As such, this makes the social movement a powerful political force. As explained in the book, Thinking Sociology, this is the stage that is symbolized by a myriad of social movements dedicated to animal rights show that this particular concern will not go away (Carl, et al., 2011). In this stage of the Animal Protection Movement, there was significant media visibility, especially in the 1980s. In addition to that vigorous competition among the organizations in this juncture symbolize high level of efficiency in the movement. Strategic thinking by animal advocates was also adopted as an approach to enable justice-based movements that influenced drastic victories for the movement in that decade. Nevertheless, this stage of the Animal Welfare Movements was marked by extensive changes in organizations and the growth of active supporter base for the movement.

The Animal Bill of Rights is meant to protect animals that don’t have legal protection. There are laws that protect some of the animals, but are often insufficient and full of loopholes. In this society we have many people who think the total opposite of defending the animals. It may be because of selfish thinking. Sometimes one might think, it is needed for them to survive or because they want to be able to show their children the animals in person at zoos. Now, the question is, if animals need a Bill of Rights? I strongly believe that they do need a Bill of Rights because there are animals on the day-to-day basis that are being mistreated and abused by humans that don’t care for them. We need the Bill of Rights because it will give a better voice to the animals being treated as if they were nothing in this world. I agree with what the source indicated “ Animals in the U.S. are considered just “property” by law, even though they are living, feeling beings”. If they were not considered “property” humans wouldn’t be harming these animals and would rather be caring or not giving them much attention if they aren’t an animal enthusiast.

According to Gallup.com a third of Americans want animals to have the same rights as people. The Animal Bill of Right implies that animals have the right to be free from exploitation and cruelty, It also prohibits laboratory animals to be used for research. Animals will also have healthy diets and medical care. It will also provide them with an environment that satisfies their needs. I do not believe we need a Bill of Rights for animals. This would not only be extreme but it will affect human culture, medical research, and cost of food

Every life has a choice. Every choice has a reason. Every reason has a purpose. All answers come into place. Why? Now that is the question people ask themselves on a daily basis when trying to find human cures or treatments. Why are the experiments having this sort of effect? Why have the experiment subject’s internal organs disintegrated? Nevertheless, people assume test subjects to be volunteering humans, the homeless, or desperate aliens who are willing to do anything to cross the border or country. In reality, animals [mainly cats, dogs, and mice] are the ones that endure experimentation for the future of mankind. Even though animal testing helped discover treatments for aggressive diseases and safely determined the outcome of mankind, it still sidesteps the fact that animals are their own being, it violates the Animal Welfare Act of 1970, the discovery of humane methods shows it to be beneficial, and the test results will soon become void for the benefit of mankind.

(Subpoint) The federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA), passed in 1966, makes it legal to have puppy mills through its vague standards. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is the agency responsible for overseeing the commercial dog breeding industry and enforcing the AWA.

There should not be an amendment to the constitution granting animals rights. The reason I feel there should not be any amendment is because they provide us with food, give us resources that we use daily and we also get long lasting clothes from using their fur or flesh. But I do believe there should be laws on how to properly kill animals we consume or use for their fur, flesh or meat.

The court will likely find that Rocco biting Jeff on Ava’s property does not make Ava the owner of Rocco under the Illinois Animal Control Act. In the Illinois Animal Control Act, a dog owner can be held liable for injuries if the dog attacks when not provoked and the injured was peacefully and lawfully on the premises. 510 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/16 (LexisNexis, Lexis Advance through Pub. Act. 99-622, except for portions of Pub. Act. 99-576, Pub. Act. 99-585, Pub. Act. 99-604, and Pub. Act. 99-609 of the 2016 Reg. Legis. Sess.). According to the statue, “owner means any person having a right of property in an animal, or keeps or harbors an animal, or who has it in his care, or acts as its custodian, or knowingly permits a dog to remain on any premises occupied by him or her”. 510 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2.16 (LexisNexis, Lexis Advance through Pub. Act. 99-904, except for portions of Pub. Act. 99-576, 585, 604, 622, 642, 648, 669, 674, 703, 711, 719, 720, 732, 744, 757, 758, 763, 773, 775, 788, 796, 801, 802, 817, 822, 841, 848, 860, 864, 874, 876, 881, 889, 892, 893, 894, and 901 of the 2016 Reg. Legis. Sess.). To be determined to be the owner by the jury, the person needs to provide some degree of care or custody or voluntarily assume care or control or have property interest in the animal. VanPlew v. Riccio, 739 N.E.2d 1023, 1026 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000); Docherty v. Sadler, 689 N.E.2d 332, 334 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997); Goennenwein by Goennenwein v. Rasof, 695 N.E.2d 541,

imal abuse has been an issue since the 12th century when dogs and cats were commonly found roaming the streets. Today it has become an ever growing issue which ranges from household pets to farm animals such as cows, chickens, horses. Animal abuse also is not just in America, such as bullfighting in Spain which began many centuries ago as a sacrifice to the gods. Is still practiced today as a form of entertainment. This kind of behavior does not seem right in our everyday life and just seems wrong because animals should be treated with kindness and not hatred.

§2143(a) (b) and §2149(b), which are part of the Animal Welfare Act, were enacted so that standards of humane treatment can be given to animals used by research facilities, dealers, and exhibitors. The Animal Welfare Act was passed in 1966 because of the increasing concern about the stealing of dogs and cats for use in research facilities (National Anti-Vivisection Society, 2015).

Animals are found throughout lives of humans. As companions, entertainment, test subjects and food, animals serve vital roles throughout our lives.The Animal Bill of Rights, through the Animal Legal Defense Fund, attempts to defend the basic legal rights of all animals. However, to weigh the need for such an act, one must compare the suffering of animals to the benefits such suffering gives to humankind. It’s much more important to highlight the crucial medical advances that lab animals have provided over the injustices they may suffer, but this suffering can not and should not be ignored. It is with measure that we do not enact a bill of rights for animals, however we bring new awareness of animal research and the ethical treatment of all

Introduction, animals that are being tested safety of their products that’s been a subject of an intense debate for over 10 years. While, a lot of people that alleged animals, the remained animals are being subjugated by the research cosmetics companies all over the country/all over the world. Even though, the scientists frequently profit from animal research, I don’t think all the suffering, the pain, and the animals dying are worth just trying find out the human benefits from the products.

The study of good and bad, right and wrong, moral principles or value held by a person or society, promoting human welfare, maximizing freedom minimizing pain and suffering is called ethics. The discipline that studies the moral relationship of human beings and also the value and moral status of the environment and its non-human contents is called environmental ethics. It considers the ethical relationship between the humans and the environment. Animal and animal rights are the highlighted topic in the environmental ethics.

For many years now the world has seen controversy over the rights of animals and if they think and feel like humans do. Many people see animals as mindless creatures or as food, while others think they have emotions and can feel pain. In other countries animal protection laws are in place that are strictly enforced and seem to work well with the system. In the United States however; some of the animal rights laws are considered to be useless and under-enforced (Animal Legal & Historical Center). More people today are beginning to see that animals should have rights and should be protected by laws and regulations (Animal Legal & Historical Center). Sadly there are many people residing in the United States who don’t take animal rights or protection laws seriously. These people abuse animals in many ways, including food industries that disobey the regulations set in place for the slaughter of animals used for consumption. Luckily for the animals there are people who fight for their rights and the enforcement of laws called animal rights activists.

As of 2018, each family has to produce one child to scientific research with all rights given up for researchers to imprison the child for the duration of its life until death, to improve Maybelline’s foundation line. This theoretical idea would be appalling, unethical and horrific. The thought of torturing a human for its entire life to test cosmetic products is unthinkable and most would laugh at this unrealistic idea. I do not understand how researchers advocate that animals are like us and therefore this enables brands to ensure safety of product before human use from testing them first on animals. However when asked why animals are treated in such cruel ways with no consideration to the excruciating pain caused the answer is because animals are not like us. So which is it? Animals are like us or are they not. Saying animals do not have feelings like humans is the greatest statement of ignorance shown by many individuals ignoring this cruelty. The love that animals show humans is like no other and we should respect these beautiful creatures.