quote:

Originally posted by myakkacity:
Now I amy not be understanding this bill correctly, but from what I am reading I would think that this bill would be welcome by the responsible breeders and the only ones complaining about it would be those breeders that just simply don't want to do what it would take to be lienced to continue breeding.

I for one believe that there should be laws against anyone breeding there animals in the ways that are done today. I believe all pets should be spayed and neutered.

I do also think that getting the animals fixed should be a more reasonable price but then again in many cases it is not the cost that stops people from having their animals fixed.

But as far as this bill is concerned, if you are a breeder or you show animals from what i read you can still do so as long as you get the permits to do so. So what is the actual problem with that?

To be honest I would prefer to hear from some of the more knowledgeable breeders on this. I think they would give me a clearer understanding of the bill, both pros and cons of it. Not to put anyone down but a certain few of you on this thread sound like your more mad about having to take it a step futher and just get the permits and that would cause me to question your breeding ethics in general.

quote:

Originally posted by Dj's Doxies:
I am looking at the bigger picture, I can see how this bill can have both a positive and negative impact on breeders everywhere. But like I said before, something has to be done. And this bill could be the start to finally organize just how breeding should be done.

quote:

Originally posted by Dj's Doxies:
If this bill hit my state, it would not affect me in the least. And if this bill is just a drop in the bucket for a bigger issue, then so be it....lets deal with that when it comes.

You may not think it affects you (which by the way is not the only consideration associated with this type of legislation) ... if this anti-breeder legislation goes nationwide (which is the goal fo millers looking to increaes profits and ultimately PETA as it is their foot in the door) it will become increasingly difficult and next to impossible for people to find a quality purebred companion from a caring responsible breeder dedicated to the BREED (and those that are available will cost a lot more due to the increased costs associated with complying with all this nonsensical legislation), and unless or until PETA get its way and there is ZERO breeding of purebred companion animals in this country, the millers and pet shops will be THE main source for purebred dogs in this country (Hunte Corp. is sinking big dollars (with the aid of our government) into his multi-million dollar commercial mill, complete with its own crematorium for all the poor animals that die while housed in this terrible facility) and has announced that it will be THE breeder of the future and where everyone will be getting their AKC purebred dogs from - never mind that these poor dogs live their lives caged and void of human love and companionship and are nothing more than puppy producing machines, puppies that are also void of human companionship as they grow and develop, while they are shipped all over the country, some sick, some dying, others genetic nightmares, as they wait in a cage in a pet shop for someone to come along and "rescue" them (paying much more than shey should), thus fueling this cycle of misery) - and the breeds suffer for it and so do the dogs, the number of which are being kept and abused and neglected by millers increase.

I prefer to deal with these issues NOW and not wait until our civil liberties are stripped away and the breeds we love are gone or ar the very least unrecognizable in type and riddled with health problems because replacement puppies for sick, dying, unhealthy, genetically flawed puppies are just an "operating expense" to a pet store/miller - there is no thought given to the suffereing of the animal let alone the preservation of a breed standard.

quote:

Okay, so the government could care less if a dachshund should be low to the ground rather than three feet up in the air, and maybe this bill won't kill commercial breeding and mills, but it will at least prevent the every day amercan like the woman who is getting rid of the father of her puppies simply because her kid wants to keep one from breeding her dog again.

NO IT WILL NOT. It will simply be done "in secret." I mean, really, are our priorities as country really so mixed up that we are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars or more to create a huge network of officers to go door to door to see if anybody has an intact dog when there are unsolved murders, drugs being dealt to children at schools, children missing, abducted, abused, large numbers of people homeless, living and dying on the streets, etc. In light of these horrors, is it really more important that we spend our resources making sure that little Mitzi who lives down the street and is kept confined and never bred gets spayed? I don't think so!

There are already "black market" puppies smuggled in from Mexico -- this type of legislation ensures there will simply be more of them and also more people in this country selling unregistered puppies on the black market to turn a quick profit once they realize the supply has gone down and they can fill the void!

This is the same flawed logic as is behind gun control and idiots who think we should not be allowed to own firearms ... AS IF a person who wants to kill someone thinks to themselves, gee, I was going to go down to gun store, buy a gun and kill so and so but since it's illegal to buy a gun I won't do it! NO, they buy a gun on the black market and continue out their nefarious plans. But in the meantime the civil liberties of those who are owning guns (or in this case breeding dogs) responsibly are taken away.


My GOD sometimes I just can't believe how easily the general public can be duped and distracted from the ISSUE AT HAND by knee-jerk reactions and smoke and mirrors.

And THIS is why this country is in the state it is now ... HELL in a handbasket people.


P.S. I HAVE LEARNED THAT PETA IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE UNITED WAY ... THEREFORE ANYBODY THAT GIVES TO THE UNITED WAY BE CERTAIN TO INDICATE IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT YOU WANT NONE OF YOUR CONTRIBUTION TO GO TO PETA ... it's the same with the Humane Society as they also support of all this anti-breeder legislation. I have stopped supporting the Human Society (no matter how upset those stories on Animal Planet make me!) and now I support individual rescues instead as I know the money is going to help the animals and not contributing to efforts to take away my civil liberties and destroy the thing I am most passionate about - my BREED.

quote:

Originally posted by Pitter:
I agree with GP it is a very scary bill.

quote:

Originally posted by Norma:

quote:

Originally posted by Pitter:
I agree with GP it is a very scary bill.

This is only scary because there are a lot of unknowns that need to be clarified. I am not worry about it because I have been through it before with an even worse bill that passed in la county. when it first was brought up, like many here, I freaked and over reacted. mostly because of the wrong and misleading interpretations of others, including the AKC's. They all made it up to be much worse then it was and they all predicted the end of breeding as we know it. very much like what is happening with this one.

well, after it passed and the dust settled, it turned out that it was not that bad. it did not put most breeders out of business, and it did not stop breeders from breeding. those who had the will, found a way to comply one way or another. this bill is no different which is why I am not worry one bit and neither should most responsible breeders.

quote:

Mya wrote:
To be honest I would prefer to hear from some of the more knowledgeable breeders on this. I think they would give me a clearer understanding of the bill, both pros and cons of it. Not to put anyone down but a certain few of you on this thread sound like your more mad about having to take it a step futher and just get the permits and that would cause me to question your breeding ethics in general.

[quote] Pitter wrote:
Very nice Mya think since GP has the exact same thread on her forum that she posted you would respond there as Norma did.
I agree with GP it is a very scary bill.
So you are questioning anyones breeding ethic's that oppose this bill.
We all are losing more rights every day so this is alright with you? Its not alright with me.

quote:

Originally posted by myakkacity:
The laws are made for the lawless! Those that uphold the laws of the land by common sense are never truly effected by the laws as they never break them. In other words, "If you are doing nothing wrong, why worry about it"

quote:

Originally posted by Ratlady:

quote:

Originally posted by myakkacity:
The laws are made for the lawless! Those that uphold the laws of the land by common sense are never truly effected by the laws as they never break them. In other words, "If you are doing nothing wrong, why worry about it"

WOW, just when I think I have heard all the ignorance I could for one day ... there is yet more to come!

LEGAL and MORAL are NOT the same thing.

ILLEGAL and WRONG are NOT the same thing.

Case in point: Under this senario, Jane Doe has a perfectly LEGAL right to take a human life, rip a baby limb from limb, and have an abortion for no reason other than because that baby is an inconvenience. And yet this same Jane Doe is told she MUST spay/neuter a dog she OWNS and does not have the legal right to make alteration and/or breeding choices about her own dog!

Some thing are LEGAL and still WRONG and some things are ILLEGAL and perfectly RIGHT.


DUH, laws do NOT target the lawless - by their very nature and definition they do NOT obey the laws and therefore they continue to do what they want whether it is legal or not and it is only the civil liberties of the law abiding citizen that are trampled upon!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Pitter:
Not true Mya note I was pulled over for speeding I was not. I was also written up for not wearing a seatbelt. I handed the officer a doctors note but he wrote me up anyway.
See most places police have to fill there quota. And it generates funds for the local municipalities all depending on the area.
I took that to court and won also needless to say the police lied in court the judge believed me. It was interesting to see the police throw a fit in the court room. It has everything to do with how laws are misused every day.
Should I have had to spend money on a lawyer both times.
But I did because I was forced to do you think I get any compinsation? Is this fair? When I did nothing wrong in both cases.

quote:

Originally posted by Pitter:
So you are still going to breed or are you going to retire?

quote:

This was a case of a cop abusing power. That is were the courts come into play. With the seatbelt part, the law was on your side as you had a doctors note at the time of the stop. You didn't need a lawyer in that case, all you had to do was go to the court appearence hand the Judge the note and tell them you showed it to the officer. It would be dropped right then.