Letter: Unintended consequences

July 10, 2014 

Instead of buying surveillance equipment, animal shelters should spend the money on taking care of the animals that get left at the shelter.

Careless and ignorant pet owners will not be held accountable with the installation of cameras because they will only find another place to dump their animals, and the animals will be the ones to endure more suffering because they will likely be left in places with no one around to intervene.

I am reluctant to attribute the condition of an abused animal to malicious intent from the abandoner. Who is to say that this is the person who actually abused or neglected the animal? I will admit that it is unlikely the person dropping off the animal is an innocent Good Samaritan; however, it is a possibility.

We would not want to discourage any future Good Samaritans from helping a suffering animal. Use the money for the animals; the unintended consequences of installing cameras would be greater than any benefit from catching and (theoretically) holding accountable any animal abandoner.

CASEY DAVIS, Benton City

Tri-City Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service