An Article about PETA that should be read and shared

[Trematode]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Went off on a tangent. Probably not relevant :/

 

[HowIMetYourPet]

PETA requested dogs from both animal shelters and veterinarians specifically stating that they would find homes for these healthy animals all the time knowing those dogs would literally never leave the PETA truck alive and would be euthanized within hours and you have no problem with that?

THIS

If they don't obey the laws already on the books, why on earth would they magically begin to obey any new legislation?

Exactly. This is the case in many areas covered by legislation, more often than not, the only thing these laws do is punish those who follow the law and are ethical and responsible already.

 

[ducktoller]

THIS



Exactly. This is the case in many areas covered by legislation, more often than not, the only thing these laws do is punish those who follow the law and are ethical and responsible already.

It just does not make sense to me that any organization would "poison the dogs via pentobarbital" willingly over adoption. I mean consider the cost of cremating+ the euthanyl, vs. the cost of adoption (ie ZERO. the owners pay you an adoption fee). It wouldn't make sense economically for PETA to simply go with the euthanasia. There must be some reason behind this and it'd be nice to find out why.

My take on legislation is that if owners are forced by law to be responsible to their pets, there won't be as many strays. in canada, it is a criminal offence if you neglect your animal (eg. release it into the wild) but it's not regulated that well. I don't see how fixing how laws are regulated wouldn't be able to fix a chunk of the problem. It would certainly make owners think a second time before they consider purchasing an animal "for fun" if the city can track down the owners of stray animals (mandatory microchipping/tattoo anyone??) to find out who's responsible.

Thanks for the input though and I do agree with many things said here.
edit: I did not know PETA requested animals from shelters and vets. WHAT! is this the entire organization or just one shelter under the umbrella organization?

 

[DVMDream]

It just does not make sense to me that any organization would "poison the dogs via pentobarbital" willingly over adoption. I mean consider the cost of cremating+ the euthanyl, vs. the cost of adoption (ie ZERO. the owners pay you an adoption fee). It wouldn't make sense economically for PETA to simply go with the euthanasia. There must be some reason behind this and it'd be nice to find out why.

My take on legislation is that if owners are forced by law to be responsible to their pets, there won't be as many strays. in canada, it is a criminal offence if you neglect your animal (eg. release it into the wild) but it’s not regulated that well. I don't see how fixing how laws are regulated wouldn't be able to fix a chunk of the problem. It would certainly make owners think a second time before they consider purchasing an animal "for fun" if the city can track down the owners of stray animals (mandatory microchipping/tattoo anyone??) to find out who's responsible.

Thanks for the input though and I do agree with many things said here.
edit: I did not know PETA requested animals from shelters and vets. WHAT! is this the entire organization or just one shelter under the umbrella organization?

I can guarantee you that the cost of housing, feeding and caring for an animal is going to be much more than the adoption fee (relative of course to how long the animal is at the shelter).

Also, mandatory microchipping will only work if you force the owner to register those microchips and to register them with correct information. People will get the microchip, but that does not mean they will register that microchip.

 

[wildcatj]

It just does not make sense to me that any organization would "poison the dogs via pentobarbital" willingly over adoption. I mean consider the cost of cremating+ the euthanyl, vs. the cost of adoption (ie ZERO. the owners pay you an adoption fee). It wouldn't make sense economically for PETA to simply go with the euthanasia. There must be some reason behind this and it'd be nice to find out why.

My take on legislation is that if owners are forced by law to be responsible to their pets, there won't be as many strays. in canada, it is a criminal offence if you neglect your animal (eg. release it into the wild) but it’s not regulated that well. I don't see how fixing how laws are regulated wouldn't be able to fix a chunk of the problem. It would certainly make owners think a second time before they consider purchasing an animal "for fun" if the city can track down the owners of stray animals (mandatory microchipping/tattoo anyone??) to find out who's responsible.

Thanks for the input though and I do agree with many things said here.
edit: I did not know PETA requested animals from shelters and vets. WHAT! is this the entire organization or just one shelter under the umbrella organization?

Agree with DVM below, there are huge costs associated with housing animals for adoptions.

To answer your other question though, I believe why PETA is going around euthanizing all these animals is because they believe that all animals are better off dead than living as pets.

 

[dyachei]

Agree with DVM below, there are huge costs associated with housing animals for adoptions.

To answer your other question though, I believe why PETA is going around euthanizing all these animals is because they believe that all animals are better off dead than living as pets.

👍being a pet is considered somewhat akin to slavery but some animal rights groups

 

[ducktoller]

I can guarantee you that the cost of housing, feeding and caring for an animal is going to be much more than the adoption fee (relative of course to how long the animal is at the shelter).

Also, mandatory microchipping will only work if you force the owner to register those microchips and to register them with correct information. People will get the microchip, but that does not mean they will register that microchip.

true point DVMdream, thanks i missed that.
the entire article is just frustrating in so many ways.