An ordinance passed in July by the Hampton City Council
prohibiting the tethering or chaining of pets outside finally went into effect
on Tuesday after a period of “public education.”[1]
Tethering is the practice of chaining a pet to a stationary
object as a means of keeping the pet under control.[2]
Oftentimes, inhumane treatment of the pet will follow from extended emotional,
social, and/or dietary neglect.
What this story also illustrates is the proper role of
government in the lives of individuals (and pets). In the case of tethered
pets, an individual does not have the right to treat their pet in an inhumane
way. Government has the responsibility of passing and enforcing laws that
protect pets from this kind of treatment as well as educating their owners.
Thus, if we take libertarianism to its logical conclusion,
the government has no right to intervene to amend the inhumane treatment of a
pet. Government is only necessary to ward off foreign invaders and protect
personal property.
Of course, not every libertarian subscribes to the most
radical versions of this philosophy, but
it is this type of “hands off” thinking that has led our country to a congressional gridlock that is
terrifying in its consequences.
I do not particularly disagree with the saying that the
government that governs best, governs the least. But there are some essential
functions that government has to play outside of protecting personal property
and fighting foreign enemies. Educating citizens on the inhumanity of chaining
pets outside is certainly one of those functions that government should have a
hand in playing.
No comments:
Post a Comment