HOUSE BILL REPORT
SB 6568
As Passed House - Amended:
March 2, 2006
Title: An act relating to animal fighting.
Brief Description: Modifying animal fighting provisions.
Sponsors: By Senators Regala, Carrell and Oke.
Brief History:
Judiciary: 2/22/06 [DPA].
Floor Activity:
Passed House - Amended: 3/2/06, 98-0.
Brief Summary of Bill (As Amended by House) |
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Majority Report: Do pass as amended. Signed by 9 members: Representatives Lantz, Chair; Flannigan, Vice Chair; Williams, Vice Chair; Priest, Ranking Minority Member; Rodne, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Kirby, Serben, Springer and Wood.
Staff: Edie Adams (786-7180).
Background:
Animal fighting is an unranked class C felony offense under the state's animal cruelty laws.
A person commits the crime of animal fighting if the person does any of the following:
Last session the crime of animal fighting was substantially revised. The crime was increased from a gross misdemeanor to a class C felony and the types of activities that constitute animal fighting were expanded. However, the provision making it a crime to be a spectator at an animal fight was removed.
Summary of Amended Bill:
The crime of animal fighting is amended to require that the person act knowingly with
respect to promoting, organizing, conducting, participating in, advertising, performing a
service for, transporting spectators to, or serving as a stakeholder for, an animal fight. In
addition, the crime is amended to include a person who knowingly is a spectator of or
prepares an animal fight. The element of serving as a stakeholder for money wagering is
amended to provide that it applies to wagering at any place or building.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Not requested.
Effective Date of Amended Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Testimony For: When the law was amended last session, being a spectator of an animal fight was left out because it was thought that "participating" in an animal fight would cover being a spectator. However, from conversations with prosecutors, it appears that needs to be specifically included in the language. Also, it is important to include a "knowingly" requirement so that someone who inadvertently ends up at an animal fight can't be prosecuted.
Testimony Against: None.
Persons Testifying: Carey Morris, Humane Society of the United States.