• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Californian law change means pet shops can sell only rescued animals

Yeah but what's the problem with that? They could've passed a law requiring best standards and practices for breeders. Instead they are telling stores they have to source dogs their customers don't want. Because if everyone wanted a rescue dog they'd go to a rescue or pet stores would stock rescue animals with no government force necessary.

Again...not an expert here. But the law, so far as I can tell, kills three birds with one stone. It discourages the existence of pet mills, de-emphasizes selection of purebreds, and moves potential pet owners toward animals that need a home now and will likely be healthier as a result not necessarily being purebreds.

As another poster already said, the law is well-intended though we'll most likely see flaws in the execution.
 
Yeah but what's the problem with that? They could've passed a law requiring best standards and practices for breeders. Instead they are telling stores they have to source dogs their customers don't want. Because if everyone wanted a rescue dog they'd go to a rescue or pet stores would stock rescue animals with no government force necessary.

Personally, I couldn’t care less about the property rights of people who run puppy mills or their customers or apologists.
 
Well, thankfully you won't have to worry about it in Grapeview.
I wonder if Grapeview got so tired of you being such a malcontent that they told you to go take a hike.
Is that why you're constantly trying to tell Californians how to live?

I have a great idea! Why not tell a bunch of Texans how to take care of their lives.

I mean if California wasn't in the same country as me and we could control the movement of californians with visas and immigration restrictions I wouldn't care at all. The problem is they are so extreme and they freely move and start voting wherever they move. So therefore I reserve every right to criticize them.

What do you want me to criticize about Texas, post a thread of Texas laws and if I don't like it I'll criticize them.
 
Again...not an expert here. But the law, so far as I can tell, kills three birds with one stone. It discourages the existence of pet mills, de-emphasizes selection of purebreds, and moves potential pet owners toward animals that need a home now and will likely be healthier as a result not necessarily being purebreds.

As another poster already said, the law is well-intended though we'll most likely see flaws in the execution.

What's wrong with selecting purebreds? The fact some dogs have health issues is hardly something to make legislation over. Purebreds are also usually far more skilled at some actions then mixed breeds.
 
"Your betters tell you that you should want a rescue pet" is what this is all about as they teach people that they cant get what they want in the stores, as they drive transactions toward the already huge California underground/black market economy.

At some point citizens will tire of being trained for Utopia by a state that cant manage the basics of governing, which they can plainly see as soon as they leave their homes, driving through block after block of decay.
 
About "puppy mills":

The ASPCA states that some puppy mills can have up to 1,000 dogs under one roof. Because of the high volume of animals, the mill runner will often resort to housing them in wire cages. This results in the animals having poor locomotion.[14] Keeping dogs in wire kennels can lead to injury and damage to the dogs' paws and legs. It's also fairly common for these kennels to be stacked on top of each other in columns.[12] The conditions in these mills are so unsanitary that the animals are often coated in their own urine and feces, causing mats in their fur. Due to unsanitary conditions, puppies from mills will often have internal parasites, affecting their health.[15] Puppy mills are often unheated and this increases the number of deaths due to cold among the dogs used for breeding.[14] Conversely, the mills can also be too hot in warmer weather leading to hyperthermia.[16]

Other common conditions in mills include malnutrition and untreated injuries.[16]

Due to the frequently poor breeding conditions in puppy mills [17], puppies bred there often suffer from health and/or social problems. Puppies raised in a cramped environment shared by many other dogs become poorly socialized to other dogs and to humans. Dogs are then transported over long distances in poor conditions, sometimes resulting in animal stress and death. As the surviving mill dogs grow older, they are more prone to developing respiratory ailments and pneumonia, as well as hereditary defects such as hip dysplasia.[10] In addition, mill dogs are more prone to having problems with their temperament due to lack of socialization, enrichment, and positive human contact. Puppies from mills are usually sold as purebred dogs in an attempt to attract the higher prices associated with purebreds. However, due to the indiscriminate breeding practices of puppy mills, the dog may not actually be a purebred puppy.[18] A high population of puppies from mills are inbred due to uncontrolled breeding.[19] The vast majority of puppy mill animals are sold to pet stores by "dealers" or "brokers". Some puppies are sold by dealers masquerading as authentic breeders.

Puppy mills in the US often start with hundreds of female dogs which serve their entire lives in the establishment. The females are bred until they can no longer conceive puppies, and are often euthanized after that.[20] The conditions in puppy mills are considered inhumane because all of the dogs are in a small, dirty area which is confined with disease and bacteria. Because of the poor living conditions, dogs are often sick and malnourished. Food is often found crawling with bugs and feces is almost everywhere. Health issues that are prevalent in puppy mills consist of giardia, mange, heartworm, respiratory infections, and much more.[21]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppy_mill#Common_problems

If California's law helps to put puppy mills out of business, you'll get no tears from me.
 
What's wrong with selecting purebreds? The fact some dogs have health issues is hardly something to make legislation over. Purebreds are also usually far more skilled at some actions then mixed breeds.

As I already posted, purebreds have a higher incidence of health problems. Breeding animals that will statistically be less healthy and less psychologically stable is cruel.
 
As I already posted, purebreds have a higher incidence of health problems. Breeding animals that will statistically be less healthy and less psychologically stable is cruel.

As an owner of a purebred Newfoundland piss on that.

Utopia is going to be a real drag man.......
 
Again...not an expert here. But the law, so far as I can tell, kills three birds with one stone. It discourages the existence of pet mills, de-emphasizes selection of purebreds, and moves potential pet owners toward animals that need a home now and will likely be healthier as a result not necessarily being purebreds.

As another poster already said, the law is well-intended though we'll most likely see flaws in the execution.

I don't like it. I think you have to persuade people not to buy purebred dogs and to buy more rescure animals. I don't like forcing citizens to make "moral" choices by creating laws.

It feels like Big Brother knows best. People should have the freedom to make poor choices.
 
As an owner of a purebred Newfoundland piss on that.

Utopia is going to be a real drag man.......

Would you love your purebred Newfoundland less if he were a mutt?
 
The issue isn't purebreds vs. mixed breeds, it's a supply and demand issue. There are purebreds that end up at shelters - they usually get adopted the quickest because people find them more aesthetically pleasing.

There's an overabundance of cats and dogs in the system, creating huge costs and also major ethical issues. When shelters reach capacity, the least adopted animals get put down. That will still be the case, even with this law.

There is one major positive to this law. Pet stores have no screening procedures for new pet owners. If you want a pet, you just buy it. Shelters are different. Not just anyone can adopt an animal. So if you want a dog or cat, you'll have to find a private breeder, or prove to a shelter that you're not a dingbat wanting to adopt a dog that you'll abandon in 6 month's time when you figure out you actually don't like dogs.

The law artificially shifts the demand to shelters, as it should. Puppy mills and pet stores are mass producers with no qualms about where their animals end up. There have been recorded psychopaths who bought animals just to torture them. Shelters actually follow up on adoptions to see how the animals are doing. Animals are not just objects, they are conscious beings.

Maybe pet stores can now invent new programs that team up with animal shelters to move more abandoned animals through the system.

Yes, some animals in shelters are "problem animals" with major behavioral problems. The majority though were just abandoned due to circumstance or stupid owners.
 
I don't like it. I think you have to persuade people not to buy purebred dogs and to buy more rescure animals. I don't like forcing citizens to make "moral" choices by creating laws.

It feels like Big Brother knows best. People should have the freedom to make poor choices.

If people have that much of a hard-on for purebreds then they can still go to private breeder. What this law will do is move people who have no particular opinion about purebreds toward rescue animals. That ain't 1984.
 
As an owner of a purebred Newfoundland piss on that.

Utopia is going to be a real drag man.......

I have a purebred Maltese. A girlfriend I had years ago begged me to buy him. At the time I knew nothing about dog breeding and overbreeding.

She was one of those girls who thought of a dog as an accessory and she couldn't handle it when he pooped all over her apartment and other issues. She couldn't handle him so I took over ownership.

Later one he went blind due to some genetic problem which I suspect was a result of overbreeding. I would favor laws banning overbreeding (maybe they exist already?).

But generally, I'm against government acting as Big Brother and making decisions for people.
 
The issue isn't purebreds vs. mixed breeds, it's a supply and demand issue. There are purebreds that end up at shelters - they usually get adopted the quickest because people find them more aesthetically pleasing.

There's an overabundance of cats and dogs in the system, creating huge costs and also major ethical issues. When shelters reach capacity, the least adopted animals get put down. That will still be the case, even with this law.

There is one major positive to this law. Pet stores have no screening procedures for new pet owners. If you want a pet, you just buy it. Shelters are different. Not just anyone can adopt an animal. So if you want a dog or cat, you'll have to find a private breeder, or prove to a shelter that you're not a dingbat wanting to adopt a dog that you'll abandon in 6 month's time when you figure out you actually don't like dogs.

The law artificially shifts the demand to shelters, as it should. Puppy mills and pet stores are mass producers with no qualms about where their animals end up. There have been recorded psychopaths who bought animals just to torture them. Shelters actually follow up on adoptions to see how the animals are doing. Animals are not just objects, they are conscious beings.

Maybe pet stores can now invent new programs that team up with animal shelters to move more abandoned animals through the system.

Yes, some animals in shelters are "problem animals" with major behavioral problems. The majority though were just abandoned due to circumstance or stupid owners.

I'm pretty sure I had to fill out more paperwork for adopting my pet from a shelter than I did for applying for a loan to buy a house.

There's a two part benefit to all that paperwork, actually. Sure, it's about screening out bad pet owners, but the practice is also self-screening. Answering all those penetrating questions about your willingness to take care of a pet forces you to ask whether you're actually up to the task of taking care of a pet.

A lot of people go into adopting a pet like they're trying out new curtains. They don't really consider that these living things are going to be their friends.
 
As an owner of a purebred Newfoundland piss on that.

Utopia is going to be a real drag man.......

As an owner of a mixed breed terrier from the local shelter, piss on anyone who thinks they’re not worthy or deserving of a good home.
 
What is a "pet shop" under this law? If one places a "critters for sale" ad online or in the newspaper are they exempt? I assume that "breeders" are not "pet shops" so they could still sell their animals directly. It seems to harm "pet shops" much more than "breeders".

Maybe you should, you know, read the article

Just a suggestion
 
I have a purebred Maltese. A girlfriend I had years ago begged me to buy him. At the time I knew nothing about dog breeding and overbreeding.

She was one of those girls who thought of a dog as an accessory and she couldn't handle it when he pooped all over her apartment and other issues. She couldn't handle him so I took over ownership.

Later one he went blind due to some genetic problem which I suspect was a result of overbreeding. I would favor laws banning overbreeding (maybe they exist already?).

But generally, I'm against government acting as Big Brother and making decisions for people.

Government steadily removing our freedom as it forced marches us to a Utopia that looks much like the Stalinist Soviet Union and Maoist China was not how America was supposed to roll.
 
If people have that much of a hard-on for purebreds then they can still go to private breeder. What this law will do is move people who have no particular opinion about purebreds toward rescue animals. That ain't 1984.

Then what's the point? People will just go to breeders to buy puppies. Pet stores will go out of business. It feels like government is getting too involved.

I have the same philosophy about drug laws and many other laws. I favor government spending money on ad campaigns to persuade people rather than using laws and coercing people. Laws are just never perfect. There are always instances where they lead to injustice. We have too many laws in this country. That's why we have so many people in prison.
 
Government steadily removing our freedom as it drives to a Utopia that looks much like Stalinist Soviet Union and Maoist China was not how America was supposed to roll.

Yup. It starts with moving people to adopt rescue animals and it ends with Soylent Green.
 
Some do, some don't. The same is true of rescue dogs.

I'm not convinced that rescue dogs are overall healthier or less nuts. Many of which are there for a reason.

Most are there because of idiot owners that look at their pets like property or a piece of clothing to be discarded when it is no longer “in style” or becomes older than the “cute” kitten or puppy they original received. I know of one owner who wanted to go on a 2 week cruise and couldn’t get someone to watch their animal and instead of boarding it, took it down to the shelter for good. Humans like that are worse than garbage.
 
Then what's the point? People will just go to breeders to buy puppies. Pet stores will go out of business. It feels like government is getting too involved.

I have the same philosophy about drug laws and many other laws. I favor government spending money on ad campaigns to persuade people rather than using laws and coercing people. Laws are just never perfect. There are always instances where they lead to injustice. We have too many laws in this country. That's why we have so many people in prison.

The point is that there are a lot of people who really don't care all that much about whether an animal is a purebred or a mutt, so there's zero point in them adopting a purebred. It lessens the emphasis on purebreds and their higher incidence of health problems. And of course it'll probably put a lot of puppy mills out of business. And puppy mills ****ing suck.
 
As an owner of a mixed breed terrier from the local shelter, piss on anyone who thinks they’re not worthy or deserving of a good home.

The default in a free land full of free people is that people can have what they want.

THere is less and less of that in America all of the time.
 
Maybe you should, you know, read the article

Just a suggestion

I did, but still have questions. Why don't you quote the answers so clearly present in the article?
 
The default in a free land full of free people is that people can have what they want.

THere is less and less of that in America all of the time.

Okay, I want your money and your house.
 
Back
Top Bottom