Orwellian New Jersey’s going to the dogs,
according to Paul Mulshine:
In New Jersey, even the animals would be watched by Big Brother. They’d have microchips implanted in them. Big Brother would be able to put Spot under a scanner and determine instantly whether he’s been barking up the wrong tree.
I don’t know about dogs, but here in The Principality deer are tagged, earringed (is that a word?), and carry antennae because of the birth-control program monitors. Said birth control, by the way, doesn’t work. Just this spring TWO, not one, two, baby deer started feasting in my yard, with parental units in tow, but I digress. Paul continues,
The most brilliant stroke, however, is the call for the state criminal code to be altered to “incorporate standard terminology used in other criminal offenses” in the prosecution of alleged offenses against animals. The definitions of aggravated assault and criminal homicide are cited in this regard. The report states that these definitions should apply equally to crimes against animals.
. . . To that end, the task force suggests that the state should prohibit any municipality from setting restrictions on the number of animals a person may own. Towns and insurance companies would also be prohibited by state statute from discriminating against those breeds of dogs most likely to attack humans. Landlords would be precluded from banning pets from their premises.
While I ponder the Animal Welfare Task Force report, allow me to point out that those Invisible Fences people have DO NOT WORK.