It bothers me that some people think that just because a person refers to their dog as "property" it means that owner is irresponsible or uncaring. I love my dogs and have gone to great lengths to make sure they are well cared for and are trained to be socially acceptable.
If the animal rights' activists have their way (AND IF WE DON'T WAKE UP, THEY WILL), and animals are no longer deemed as PROPERTY under the law, WHO or WHAT ENTITY will be responsible for them? Who or What entity will make decisions regarding their care?
We are NOT "guardians".....WE are OWNERS.
2007-12-20 05:47:56 · 11 answers · asked by zappataz ♠ Since 1999 4 in Pets ➔ Dogs
Your_unc: Am I understanding you correctly that you believe dogs should be allowed to roam free without human interferance?
Where do you get the notion that I personally can't let my dogs out the door without something bad happening? As you seem to be assuming....
2007-12-20 06:10:08 · update #1
It is in an animal's best interest to be property instead of an independent entity (under the law) that a human merely has guardianship of.
The American Veterinary Medical Association sees this "guardian movement" as a bad idea for the following reasons:
* Animal rights organizations or meddling neighbors could petition courts for custody of your pet if they don't approve of the way you care for your pet
* The treatment options you and your veterinarian decide on could be challenged by the local animal rights organization or other self-appointed experts.
* It could be illegal to spay or neuter a pet because it deprives them of their "reproductive rights."
* Veterinarians and pet guardians could be sued for providing what another individual might regard as inadequate care.
2007-12-20 06:01:30 · answer #1 · answered by Cleoppa 5 · 9⤊ 1⤋
Pets are considered personal property, but laws are in place to take action against people who harm animals. No, you do not have the right to kill someone who you feel may hurt your pet. However, you have the right to self defense if you feel immediately threated. For example, if you walk down the street and someone hits your dog, or attempts to steal your dog, you could argue self defense because you felt that he was an immediate threat to your safety. However, you cannot shoot your neighbor because he's been complaining about your dog.
2016-04-10 09:52:17 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, this sums it up for me, too...
My dogs are my property. This is why I get to decide if I will get them fixed or breed them. This is why I get to decide if I need to put one down because of its temperament. This is why I get to decide if a puppy should be culled or not.
I can't agree more with that post. I would like to add that if I want to take my dogs on a vacation with me, let them sleep in my house or in a crate, show them, train them in a way that I want to, it is MY business because I am their OWNER, not a babysitter guardian.
People really need to mind their own business and get a life. Or better yet, concentrate on helping PEOPLE first then animals...can't tell you how many dogs are treated better than kids in our country that I have personally seen.
2007-12-20 12:24:42 · answer #3 · answered by Kiki B 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
your_unc,
When I open my front door, all 4 of my dogs run outside and have a good sniff of the yard, do their business and come back in when I call them. They never leave the yard. They have all been obedience trained. They are my pets, companions and my PROPERTY. I own them. In the state I live in, dogs/pets are considered property. Come take one without my permission and see what happens. Can you say, Go directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.
2007-12-20 14:24:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
If we are "guardians" rather than "owners", the state will have the ability to take them if we are not treating them as the state deems fit. Like they do with children.
While this might SOUND like a good idea, I've heard enough Children's Aid horror stories to not want that to happen. For example, if I decide to allow my dog with incurable cancer to live out the rest of her days in peace, and to euthanize her when her life is no longer enjoyable, I don't want the state to come along and insist that I subject her to surgeries and chemotherapy which will only prolong her discomfort and pain.
The main problem is that the ARs want us to be "guardians" rather than "owners" so that they have more legal grounds on which to harass us and achieve their ultimate goal of eliminating pets altogether.
EDIT: to the poster below me (not that I'm sure what your statement has to do with the question), if *I* open my front door my dogs follow where I go and want to come back in when I do.
2007-12-20 06:03:38 · answer #5 · answered by DaBasset - BYBs kill dogs 7 · 8⤊ 1⤋
Any theft, mutilation, or otherwise abuse of your dog will go unpunished, anybody that hurts or steals your dog won't be held accountable for it. If someone's dog bites you, that person won't be held accountable, like they should. It will not only punish responsible dog/pet owners, it will give free reign to all those that do not care. Because they also will not be accountable for their actions. It will automatically repeal any and all animal welfare laws and protections for our animals and family members.
If someone shoots or steals your dog out of your backyard, you would want them to be held responsible don't you? Well goodbye to that!
FINALLY Zappata! an AR person chose to answer, guess it's all in the wording huh? If I opened the door and SHOVED my dogs out they would sit at the front door and beg to be let back in.... I could prove it if you care to come to Tx. Hell my backyard is FAR from secure if my dogs had ANY intention they're free to leave. They don't, they stay in their yard and protect it. It's their territory and I feed them and give them shelter (on my bed) so they have no desire to leave whatsoever. If your dog runs away when you open the front door, your doing something wrong....
It's almost entertaining when it rains here, my dogs stand on two legs (on one side of their body) to fit under the eaves of my back stoop till I let them in. God FORBID they have to potty outside in the rain!
2007-12-20 06:14:48 · answer #6 · answered by Jordie0587 *Diesel's Momma* 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Well there is not much I can add to the first two good posts.
Uncle - So what, they should be left free out in the woods to fend for themselves? Mine don't look too miserable sprawled all over my couch. If I opened the door mine would be thinking "Um...it is all cold and wet, I don't think I wanna go out".
Been spoon fed some propaganda lately?
2007-12-20 06:16:54 · answer #7 · answered by whpptwmn 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋
I hope that if I ever do become my dogs' legal guardian, that I can claim them as dependants on my income tax returns (-;
2007-12-20 12:53:55 · answer #8 · answered by Ginbail © 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
My dogs are my property. This is why I get to decide if I will get them fixed or breed them. This is why I get to decide if I need to put one down because of its temperament. This is why I get to decide if a puppy should be culled or not.
My dogs. My choices. My property.
2007-12-20 06:14:06 · answer #9 · answered by Katslookup - a Fostering Fool! 6 · 7⤊ 0⤋
your_uncle_dodge
Like everyone else you are entitled to your own opinions, but this is what my dogs do when I open the door .
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2130/2052290549_83215136f1_m.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2270/2052290565_dc7ab81987_m.jpg
Oh, and I OWN my dogs, when it is your money that buys them then you can call it what you want.
2007-12-20 06:41:40 · answer #10 · answered by tom l 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋