Keeps suprising me with his nut job way of thinking.  His way of thinking is no longer appropriate in Virginia (especially Northern Virginia), sheesh.

First, thanks for spotting this.

Here's an LTE I just sent to the Connection Newspapers.

To the editor:

  Could Sen. Cuccinelli explain to his constituents what he was thinking when he voted against toughening penalties for those who take part in illegal cockfighting?  [http://leg1.state.va...]  As the Roanoke Times noted: "When Mecklenburg County authorities raided a cockfight earlier this month, they found 140 fighting birds, boxes of knives and razor-sharp spurs, seven suspected gang members, 22 illegal immigrants and an average of nearly $1,000 in cash on each spectator.  But most of the 122 people charged walked away with only a ticket, and the person who sponsored the cockfight couldn't be charged with anything more than a misdemeanor." http://www.roanoke.c...

The Bill the Senator voted against would have raised the penalty to include the potential of jail time.  With so much money floating around at such events, a $500 fine is not much of a threat.  A spokesman for the Humane Society said: "They can win $10,000 or $15,000 at these derbies.  When you can win that much money, a misdemeanor fine is just seen as the cost of doing business."

In case you didn't know, cock fights involve more than just birds flailing away at one another.  Sponsors attach curved knives to a spur on each bird's foot to ensure the fight causes serious injuries.  Birds fight to the death; I guess the sight of birds ripping one another's throats open (a common cause of death) is amusing to some.  The Mecklenburg County prosecuting attorney said that in the raid six birds had died and four more had to be euthanized from horrific wounds - their windpipes ripped open or their entrails exposed through gashed thoraxes. 
http://www.nola.com/...

The same Panel on which the Senator sits also voted down by voice vote a bill to require veterinarians to report to state authorities dogs with injuries consistent with illegal dogfighting rings.

Senator Cuccinelli, please explain your position.

Thanks for writing about this Lowell.  I had a similar post on my blog when this bill was introduced a few weeks ago:

http://twincountycom...

I suggest everyone head over to Richmond Sunlight right now and look at the comments section of this bill. It seems as though cockfighting lobyists have bombarded this site with their ignorance.  Its very sad to think that these people actually represent the human race:

http://www.richmonds...

Of course as Waldo points out, most of these people who have commented are out of staters who enjoy coming to Virginia and exploiting our lax cockfighting laws.

Lets make sure this bill gets signed by the Governor!

It's embarrassing living in Virginia.

It is embarrassing that republicans are in charge of the General Assembly!

Big difference......

Virginians elected these bozos. Virginians are mostly Republicans. Virginia is embarrassing.

(Actually, "embarrassing" is the least of it.)

This is reported to be going on in the SOUTHERN part of the state--a hot-bed of far right wing Republicans.  Cockfighting is a total abuse of living creatures.  Some famous person, whose name escapes me, said that a nation can be judged by the way it treats its animals. 
  THIS OUTRAGEOUS ACTIVITY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A FELONY WITH THE HARSHEST POSSIBLE PUNISHMENT.  I can't believe that politicians (good ole boys)would thumb their noses at those of us who are sickened by this "sport."

It's extremely unhelpful to take snapshots of the Assembly's decisions and draw conclusions about them in a vacuum.

Every time a bill is proposed that increases a penalty, including prison time, the Criminal Sentencing Commission drafts an impact statement.  This impact statement gives a rough estimate of how much the bill costs.  Every instance of imprisonment requires another prison bed, which can cost about $30k per year, per person.  Because of the focus on transportation this Session, there is only a limited amount of money available for increased penalties, or in terms of the fiscal impact, more prison bed space.

So you see, it's not that the senators who voted against SB1190 approve of cockfighting, it's just that they would prefer to spend limited resources on increasing penalties for more heinous crimes. I know we're all progressive here, but I don't think we're so daffy as to equate a rooster's life for a childs, etc.  For instance, in Senate Finance today some of these same senators you are decrying voted FOR increased penalties for child abusers, pornographers, and violent violators of protective orders.

...to get people like this behind bars:

"I have never read of a cockfighting arrest that did not involve a host of collateral crimes: gambling, drugs, alcohol, firearms, child endangerment, assaults, up to and including homicides," Strouse said.

Do you have any statements to indicate that these guys voted against SB1190 because of concerns over limited resources?  I haven't seen that reported anywhere if they have.

...from the Martinsville Bulletin.

Sen. John Watkins said Reynolds' bill would criminalize the sort of frolic he pursued as a child growing up on a farm.

"Every now and then I would throw two anxious roosters in the same vicinity, particularly when there were a bunch of hens around, just to see what would happen and nine times out of 10, they would fight," said Watkins, R-Powhatan. "Would I not be, at that point, in the commission of a felony?"

Sen. John H. Chichester questioned how authorities could discern fighting fowl from other roosters.

"How do you know that the game chicken wandering around my house there, whether I'm training it or not training it is there as an ornament or it's just chasing people up and down the sidewalk," said Chichester, R-Stafford.

Nothing here about the expense of locking up criminals.

From the Roanoke article quoted in the entry:

Currently, cockfighting in Virginia is only illegal if money is involved. If there's no admission fee, no prize and no gambling, there's no crime.

Reynolds' bill had initially changed that to make cockfighting illegal under any conditions, but committee members argued against that.

Silly me, I thought that the whole point of a cockfight was to  gamble.

So as long as the people present manage to hide the gambling that goes on at these events, there is no crime.

I would have liked to see a ban on the practice, but I am glad that the bill will be presented for a vote in the Senate.

What are the chances of this bill of becoming a law?

I wish all of this progressive fervor could be mustered for the protection of the unborn. Am I the only one who finds it ironic that those who call themselves progressive rally to protect a murdered chicken but say nothing about abortion? Where are our modern day abolitionists?