I find it, and I'm sure thousands of others do to, disgusting how the length of animal cruelty charges differ in length of sentence with human cruelty. For example a young man attacked his dog to the point were its brain damage was at such a point that the only option was to put it down. He was sentenced to a 3 month imprisonment. Later he violently shook his young baby and got an 11 year imprisonment. This stark contrast in undeniable and completely obvious. It is not only the sheer danger these people pose to society that means they should serve longer in prison but also the fact that animal cruelty is often an early indicator for mental illnesses linked to murders and brutal attacks. These short sentences cannot be enforced in the future, as it is not only putting the lives of countless defenceless animals lives at risk but that of the people aswell. What right do we have to choose who is worth more? The answer? None at all