I suppose the SPCA couldn't lay charges, since fortunately, Sniffy was saved, but if the SPCA spokesperson is correctly quoted as saying, "Although the perception is that it's totally inhuman, the reality is that it's (crushing) probably a humane way of killing a rat," the implication is that the SPCA would not have charged Gibson if he had crushed Sniffy.

Were they aware of this heinous stunt beforehand? Were they in attendance for the planned killing?

If so, did they do anything to prevent Sniffy from being crushed to death?

If killing animals is not illegal as long as the animal doesn't suffer unduly mean that if I got my hands on some Euthanyl, and started jabbing needles full of it into every stray or feral animal that I encounter, that I shouldn't be stopped because it is a "humane" killing?

Or if I were to take marksmanship lessons, become a crack shot, and start killing them with one shot? Is that OK?

I say that killing any sentient being who is not in legally defined "critical distress" is not a humane act, and therefore should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

And if we have, as in Sniffy's case, neglected to offer legal protection to some of our more vulnerable kin, then it is time to update our laws.