Is Massachusetts’ New Animal Bill Really Necessary?

I am all for protecting animals, but is the new bill passed by Massachusetts lawmakers really necessary?

Sometimes I just wonder where people's priorities are. I mean, yes animals are important and so is protecting them. But with so many bigger-picture issues plaguing Massachusetts right now, was this the bill to focus on?

Massachusetts lawmakers want to officially make it illegal to drown an animal or have sexual contact with an animal, because apparently people needed an actual law for this.

Are animal drownings or liaisons really happening that often? As often as, say, heroin overdoses or fatal car accidents?

And yet the new bill will make these actions illegal, as well as remove the requirement to euthanize animals involved in animal fighting and increase the penalty for hit-and-run accidents involving dogs and cats.

It also requires property owners to search vacated properties for abandoned animals.

All of these are good things, but I am just surprised this was the bill of importance at this moment in time for the state of Massachusetts.

Governor Baker does still have 10 days to act on the bill one way or the other, and then it probably wouldn't go into effect until the new year.

Again, I am all for protecting animals from abuse (which does seem to occur too often), but I am also surprised we even need a law to tell people not to drown or have sexual contact with animals.

However, my co-workers tell me I am crazy and that, yes, we need this law because people are drowning raccoons, gophers and more in their backyards in mass amounts.

So how do you feel.--good new law, or other matters should be the bigger priority?