Crosswords1 min ago
R S P C A - Wants Power Of Entry
60 Answers
Very few things make me as angry as cruelty and/or neglect of animals, but the concept that a 'charity' as deeply flawed/useless/prejudiced (choose your own epithet) as the RSPCA should have the power to enter my home without due process of law is beyond ridiculous :
http://
In normal times I can't believe that any Government would allow this, but we live in far from normal times ...
http://
In normal times I can't believe that any Government would allow this, but we live in far from normal times ...
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sunny-dave. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I have no particular interest in this topic, but what exactly would people like to see happening if somebody knows of a mistreated animal? If the RSPCA are unable to intervene, who else would take on the job? As the police scarcely bother to turn up for burglaries these days, I imagine they don't have much time to attend to animals.
You start by saying you dislike cruelty to animals, then proceed to slate the RSPCA. I guess you are one of the bloodsports enthusiasts who didn't like it when they prosecuted David Cameron's Hunt. There has been smear campaigns against the RSPCA by the propagandist media ever since. They're welcome to come to my outbuildings if there's an animal in distress.
I'll put up with many things, but being called a 'bloodsports enthusiast' is so far from the truth as to be laughable as well as objectionable.
If you had bothered to actually read some of my previous replies, you'd see that my objections to the RSPCA are related to their ineffectiveness in actually protecting animals and their avaricious, grasping chasing of donations.
We do need a strong and effective champion for animal welfare - but the RSPCA is manifestly failing in this job - not just in my opinion, but in that of many animal rights campaigners.
If you had bothered to actually read some of my previous replies, you'd see that my objections to the RSPCA are related to their ineffectiveness in actually protecting animals and their avaricious, grasping chasing of donations.
We do need a strong and effective champion for animal welfare - but the RSPCA is manifestly failing in this job - not just in my opinion, but in that of many animal rights campaigners.
There is no doubt that animal welfare is important but I do not and will not contribute a single penny to the RSPCA.
They are politically motivated and has become too big for their boots as far as I am concerned.
They are a charity and should not be given powers of entry into or onto private property. They are not the police or officials of any type.
They, like everyone else, should not be allowed to break into property without legitimate law enforcement being present to supervise.
Vigilantism is illegal in this country and to legitimise and illegal act for a politically motivated organisation is the start of a very slippery slope.
To spend vast sums of money on vanity project to prosecuting people the law wouldn't is disgraceful.
They are politically motivated and has become too big for their boots as far as I am concerned.
They are a charity and should not be given powers of entry into or onto private property. They are not the police or officials of any type.
They, like everyone else, should not be allowed to break into property without legitimate law enforcement being present to supervise.
Vigilantism is illegal in this country and to legitimise and illegal act for a politically motivated organisation is the start of a very slippery slope.
To spend vast sums of money on vanity project to prosecuting people the law wouldn't is disgraceful.
Years ago we lived next door but one to a family whose little girl had been given a Yorkshire terrier for Christmas by the grandparent(!) The father detested the poor little dog and constantly shouted at it, it ran off up the road one day and he called out to a chap "give it a kicking if you catch it, save me doing it" I use to see him at night shut it in the shed and then hear it screaming where he belted it. My calls to the RSPCA met with "yes, you say you hear all this but have you actually witnessed him hit or strike the dog, unless you have we cannot attend on your hearsay" well he was too clever to be seen wasn't he. Dog disappeared after a while and they said it went to another family.
I think this is a difficult one. Whilst the RSPCA is a charity, it does have delegated powers to bring prosecutions so it is unlike any other charity. If it were stopped prosecuting who would do it? Although I do have the concern that the RSPCA are both the investigators and prosecutors and so there is no "chinese wall" between the two arms.
They are not seeking the power to enter homes, but the curtilage of the property - ie outbuildings and fields etc. In an emergency I think it should be allowed - however, this must be subject to some extremely tight regulation (absolute power corrupts absolutely) and only if they clean up their act.
I do take the point about agressive fundraising but I did ought to redress the balance in so far as legacies are concerned. A legacy is a legal entitlement. It is not a gratuitous bounty. The beneficiary is entitled to certain information. The Charity Trustees have a personal duty to ensure that each charity receives its correct entitlement - unfortunately, I see many cases where estates have been administered incorrectly, and estate monies given away to those the executors felt "deserved it" or charity tax concessions incorrectly applied. I also know that the general perception of a lot of personal executors is that they are greedy/grasping etc when actually they are enforcing a legal right. Having said that (and this doesnt just apply to the RSPCA) if some charities took a more measured approach to grieving relatives a lot of the PR issues would be avoided.
They are not seeking the power to enter homes, but the curtilage of the property - ie outbuildings and fields etc. In an emergency I think it should be allowed - however, this must be subject to some extremely tight regulation (absolute power corrupts absolutely) and only if they clean up their act.
I do take the point about agressive fundraising but I did ought to redress the balance in so far as legacies are concerned. A legacy is a legal entitlement. It is not a gratuitous bounty. The beneficiary is entitled to certain information. The Charity Trustees have a personal duty to ensure that each charity receives its correct entitlement - unfortunately, I see many cases where estates have been administered incorrectly, and estate monies given away to those the executors felt "deserved it" or charity tax concessions incorrectly applied. I also know that the general perception of a lot of personal executors is that they are greedy/grasping etc when actually they are enforcing a legal right. Having said that (and this doesnt just apply to the RSPCA) if some charities took a more measured approach to grieving relatives a lot of the PR issues would be avoided.
The CPS should be doing it BM - with the RSPCA fulfilling the role of investigator only - the absence of the 'chinese wall' was addressed long ago in most other spheres of prosecution - why is this different?
I think (with random figures to avoid breaching any confidence) I can sum up the attitude of the RSPCA in the case I referred to earlier as "Sell the house for £250,000 and give us our £50,000 right now", when the family were (rightly as it turned out) convinced that the house would make well over £350,000 if marketed carefully after some bits of work were done. The delay was about 6 months - probate still granted less than 12 months after death - with the RSPCA hounding the (lay) executors like criminals for most of that time.
For the benefit of others, who seem to be assuming that in wishing to clip the wings of the RSPCA I am in some way complicit in animal maltreatment, I would just say that we do desperately need an effective, honest, caring charity working tirelessly for the good of animals - and perhaps a reformed RSPCA could do that job - but it's been given a lot of chances over the years and seems incapable of changing.
I think (with random figures to avoid breaching any confidence) I can sum up the attitude of the RSPCA in the case I referred to earlier as "Sell the house for £250,000 and give us our £50,000 right now", when the family were (rightly as it turned out) convinced that the house would make well over £350,000 if marketed carefully after some bits of work were done. The delay was about 6 months - probate still granted less than 12 months after death - with the RSPCA hounding the (lay) executors like criminals for most of that time.
For the benefit of others, who seem to be assuming that in wishing to clip the wings of the RSPCA I am in some way complicit in animal maltreatment, I would just say that we do desperately need an effective, honest, caring charity working tirelessly for the good of animals - and perhaps a reformed RSPCA could do that job - but it's been given a lot of chances over the years and seems incapable of changing.
It is utterly and totally overwhelmed. It is a charity not a public service paid by the tax payer. I am talking about the people on the ground, not the people in their ivory towers. As I have said before I know people who work for them, and they have to make the most heartbreaking decisions day after day on which poor suffering animal needs help the most and first, which will have to wait, and which one will have to be PTS because there is no hope and which ones probably won't get seen that day if at all. It takes a very special person to go out day after day and face some real disgusting pieces of work who get a kick out of their abuse and see what suffering they are causing their animals and having to face the same thing day after day. I have fostered dogs for the RSPCA many times over the years and I truly believe that our animals would suffer even more without the RSPCA, warts and all. They can come to my home anytime and have a look at my animals. Why would I not want to let them in if I have nothing to hide? Why would anybody?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.