Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (4483)	2/24/2006 11:47:12 AM
From: haqihana	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Peter, I think the first things that should be tried, are education, and incentives of some sort, but don't think we should reward people to highly for something they should be doing anyway. Big brother has become a nasty word, and if it used as a description like that in "1984" or "Brave New World" then I would not accept that myself, not to mention how the poachers would feel. Accidents, and loss of habitat, that kills animals can't be punished in an effective way. But, if some one purposely kills an animal for profit, or just for the hell of it, he should be punished as much as the law allows. Those that abuse domestic animals should also be punished farther than just taking the animals away from them, but don't know what the proper punishment would be. Perhaps, they should be made to pay the cost of the animal police, vehicles, and veterinary services, to relieve that cost from being on the tax payers. "Tis a puzzlement"!