To, All Members, Senate Public Safety Committee
Re:Opposition to SB 156 (Soto)
Dear Senators,
I strongly oppose SB 156.
As a taxpayer and a proponent of our "3-strikes" law,
creating a whole new class of felons is a serious
public policy decision. Hopefully you will consider the
following:
1) California is in the midst of financial turmoil unlike
any financial crisis we have ever experienced. The
cost of creating a new felony is astronomical to all
taxpayers and, as a practical matter, unaffordable for
the local Public Defenders Office. This is why we join
with the CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION to OPPOSE SB 156. Your constituents
will be better served by using this time, money and
focus in areas of greater concern to the common
good health care, affordable housing, education etc.
2) Arrests for any violations whatsoever of PC
597 ("animal fighting exhibitions") are historically
insignificant. The author has presented no evidence
indicating any serious encroachment into mainstream
cultural standards, no data to substantiate claims of
imminent social decay, no provable indicators that
anybody's chosen "quality of life" is being threatened,
and no egregious public concern or outcry and
therefore:
THERE ARE NO COMPELLING PUBLIC POLICY
REASONINGS TO JUSTIFY THE NEED TO CREATE A
NEW CLASS OF FELONY.
3) Poultry scientists at UC Davis are in
agreement that SB 156 (Soto) will only serve to drive
certain poultry (gamecock) owners underground and
they will, fearing criminal/felony prosecution, not be
forthcoming with their sick birds. This lack of
timely "front line" information will cause delays in
identifying poultry diseases and any delay could
prove to be devastating to the poultry industry.
Accordingly, Dr. Francine Bradley (UC Davis/Poultry
Specialist) is on record with her professional
statement that "SB 156 HAS THE POTENTIAL TO
MAKE THOSE OF US WHO BATTLE POULTRY
DISEASES IN CALIFORNIA INEFFECTUAL".
4) For many years prosecutors have used PC 597(b),
which is a "wobbler", to obtain felony convictions.
Therefore, SB 156 is duplicity as well as moot and
only serves to further confuse and dilute PC 597.
AGAIN, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NEED FOR SB 156.
