Lawsuit filed to show dogs have souls

lange · 01-12-2012

Lawsuit filed to show dogs have souls: National animal advocacy | Examiner.com

Lunareclipse · 01-12-2012

I hope these people aren't asking for money...

cigwyllt · 01-12-2012

If the plaintiff is so concerned about animals why did she buy from a pet store and not from a legitimate breeder?

At a basic level treating the dog as property the seller has a responsibility to make sure that it is fit for purpose and surely should contribute/cover the vet bills to ensure it is. There is no need for a change in the law for that is there?

I would have thought the owner's energies would be better employed in educating people to refuse to buy from pet stores rather than seeking publicity by changing the law.

lange · 01-13-2012

I assumed she bought the puppy in ignorance but I'm only guessing. I think the point of the law suit (at least what I got from it) is that animals should not be seen as property in the eyes of the law but as beings with feelings and emotions with the intention of granting them the right to be protected as am individual life that should be compensated much like a human's would verses basic property.

Luna, she says she plans on giving the funds to an animal rights group or some sort of org. I Don't remember the exact one tho.

Adding; Cig, as for the law, there have been times when a pet owner would get no more than the dogs/property's actual worth, in court. For instance, if someone where to crash into my car and my cars repair cost is worth $5,000, while the cars value is only $3,000; I would only receive the full value of the car (3 grand) not the cost of repair. With dogs being property it can fall within those guide lines.

Lunareclipse · 01-13-2012

Just because she SAYS she's giving the money to an animal rights group or whatever doesn't mean she will. I am extremely leery of anyone asking for money from someone. Surely she isn't doing it just to benefit animals. If she truly felt that way about animals, she wouldn't OWN one as a pet and wouldn't want anyone else to own one also.

cigwyllt · 01-13-2012

In UK law animals are property but there are welfare rules in place for their protection. To me the problem is not with the law but its interpretation and enforcement. A lot of rescue dogs are from licensed breeding establishments - the animal welfare rules have been interpreted in a way that allows them to be bred in what we as dog lovers would consider inhumane. At the opposite end of the scale people have been punished severely for causing suffering to their pets.

There were two cases in the UK media recently: firstly a young girl with learning difficulties who called on an animal welfare organisation to help her when her dog became sick and she had no money for veterinary treatment. They confiscated the dog, had it PTS (not an unreasonable thing to do) and then prosecuted the owner who received a life long ban from owning dogs. I know this girl personally. This story has not been exaggerated by the press.

The second case involved an elderly lady whose dog was old and sick. She knew that the dog needed to be PTS sooner rather than later but chose to wait a few days until she felt strong enough to take her to the vet. Whilst she was out of the house the neighbours called the same welfare organisation as above who broke into the house, confiscated the dog, had her PTS and sued the owner. Again she was banned from keeping animals even though her son's dog was staying with her at the time and was in perfect health.

These cases are interpretations of the same law that regards animals as property and allows dogs to be bred in dirty conditions with no stimulation, socialisation or proper care in licensed premises.

Before changing the law I think there should be consistency in enforcing what we have.

lange · 01-13-2012

Enforcement and interpretation of laws will always be up in the air no matter how specific a law is and will be guided by individual judges and area law enforcement. I don't know about other countries or local US areas but my own isn't as up to par in enforcing it's laws in regard to pets. I personally feel the problem lies in their lack of funds & man power which causes their energies to be better placed on more "serious" violations. On the other side of the coin, you can go to a wealthier, less populated community that will enforce the law to a better degree. It is the nature of legal beast & funds that will always be in conflict no matter how specific legislatures get. Although, the more specific the better in any case.

It's too bad those judges left their common sense at home those days. Are they currently trying to overturn the rulings? Obviously the dogs who were pts will never be given a life again but I would think overturning those rulings would be the first step in helping on future comparisons.

Luna, who knows if the lady will give them the funds away. Only time will tell, although I'd put my money on her losing her case anyway. I simply like the fact that people chose to stir the water when it comes to puppymills and the stores helping them sell.

cigwyllt · 01-13-2012

Our part of Wales is notorious for its puppy mills but still banned the young girl from owning dogs. On both occasions PTS was the course the owners were going to take anyway. What is upsetting is the punitive action taken against them as individuals whereas commercial owners seem to get away with anything.

lange · 01-13-2012

It is surprising that 2 judges would come to such a goof ball ruling. It's good that there sounds to be coverage on the unfairness (or am I misinterpreting that?). It's mind boggling that 1st world countries have puppymills when the public eye is presently tuned in & outrage. But then there's people who still buy, who must not know the problem exists,...It's all confusing... But then I'm still mind boggled that Michael Vick can own a dog when the 2 people you mention get slapped with life long bans. We should have become lawyers.

Then we could take out our frustrations on idiots.

cigwyllt · 01-13-2012

Lol - I was about to start training as a legal executive when I found myself pregnant with son 1!

When it comes to puppy mills - there is such a burning need for education. Surely no one would choose to buy from that sort of seller if they were aware of the problems and cruelty involved?

lange · 01-14-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by cigwyllt

Lol - I was about to start training as a legal executive when I found myself pregnant with son 1!

When it comes to puppy mills - there is such a burning need for education. Surely no one would choose to buy from that sort of seller if they were aware of the problems and cruelty involved?

I hope you hold that over your sons head! LOL I am kidding of course.

That seems to be the question...do they not know or do they choose to ignore it? I hope it's ignorance.

cigwyllt · 01-14-2012

Friends of ours have just bought a pup from a very dodgy situation. As she was telling us about visiting and choosing the puppy I was saying NO!!!!! Lots of different breeds running lose around the farm, didn't go in the house, didn't like the people, didn't see the dam, the price for the pup was not the same as the price in the ad - the whole lot. But they still went ahead and bought the puppy.

So far all seems well although she is a stubborn little madam and only respects the husband.

But I was shocked that they would have bought a pup from a place like that. Guess I spend too much time with doggy people who are aware of the pitfalls.