I agree that there will always be unethical people who attempt to get around every new law and thus manage to spread enforcement resources thin and frustrate the good intentions of authorities. But I don't think this necessarily means that new legislation--even legislation that appears to almost duplicate existing laws--is just a pointless exercise in futility. I believe that the more legislation that gets passed, at both the federal and state levels, serves a useful purpose: it puts issues that would otherwise be ignored onto the public's "radar screen" and serves to raise consciousness in very concrete ways.

As an example, consider the issue of domestic violence. For decades (centuries, even?) this country's legislators claimed that spousal abuse was covered under various general criminal codes that prohibited assault, yet the police called to a domestic incident did nothing but calm the abuser down and send him back into the home. But in the 1980s there was an increase in legislation passed at the state level that specified exactly what was illegal in the home, and what penalties could follow. Gradually, abuse victims learned (from women's shelters, the media, etc.) that laws were in place to protect them, even if the police refused to do anything. But when police refused to take action victims knew they could press charges and the courts would uphold their safety. Slowly, the police learned that they must enforce what had been made law, and there are more police officers to do it. Certainly there are abusers and stalkers who slip through the legal system and never get arrested or dealt with severely, but in general the evolution of these laws has had a real effect.

I hope the same thing will eventually happen with animal abuse issues. Already, the few animal rights laws we do have have served notice on those people who mistreat pets (watch an episode of "Animal Precinct" and see those people actually get cuffed and arrested--unheard of a few decades ago!). And those laws have educated the non-abusing public about what is not acceptable and whom to call to report abuses. I think breeding laws will, in time, do the same thing.

The ethical breeders like Candy and the show/performance hobbyists with many dogs should have nothing to fear; their animals' living conditions should never warrant prosecution. But we have to start somewhere in expressing our outrage at horrible things that occur in society. I think the benefits of enacting more legislation outweighs the risks. Saying there's not enough funding to enforce laws, inspect facilities, and follow-up on violations should simply spur people to be creative and find ways to make reality catch up with the government's attempts to solve problems.