GO!

Owning a Dog should require a license.

This is a forum to discuss legislation and legal matters pertaining to the rights and welfare of dogs. Please remember to counter ideas and opinions with which you don't agree with friendly and helpful advice and responses.

  
(Page 2 of 2: Viewing entries 11 to 20)  
1  2  
Twister

Love me.
 
 
Barked: Thu Jul 12, '12 11:00am PST 
I agree with Ace, it is always far better to educate then to legislate. You will find people more willing to listen and even change how they do things (while some people are jerks who don't care, there are others who simply do not understand). Forcing someone to change almost never works (that is why you see all these hoarder-type shows popping up, and they always make a point to have the hoarder make the choices, not just do it for them without giving them any choices about it). If you do not give them the education and the choice to do better, there is just resentment and the tendency to go right back to what they were doing wrong, many times to a higher degree. While this is not about hoarding, I think the same principle can apply to bad pet owners. As others have said, legislating will only cause the good pet owners more grief and work, while the bad one's ignore it.
[notify]
y

dog-sitter in- charge.
 
 
Barked: Thu Jul 12, '12 11:08am PST 
Yes, just like there are minimums you need to drive a car, practice medicine, care for others' children, etc.
[notify]
Keira

Mommy's Girl
 
 
Barked: Sat Aug 4, '12 3:14am PST 
I think that it could have disastrous effects. First they say... for example... someone who has had a past of say, drunk driving, is a danger to society, and shouldn't have a pet.
Okay, in theory, anyone who has made bad choices in life could be subject to those "rules", regardless of if they had made changes to their lives.

Then will come the limit of what breeds can be owned, then how many dogs can be owned.
Not all breeds work for everyone. And sometimes there is one dog of a certain breed that wouldn't normally fit with a certain lifestyle... but that one dog DOES... what would happen then? Still denied because they aren't "suited" for that type of dog?
I think education should be be required prior to dog ownership, definitely. I think people should be required to take a class upon reaching adulthood or emancipation before owning their first dog-- even if it's just dog care basics. However, I see that unlikely to happen (since classes cost, and no way to enforce it) so dog lovers of the world should advocate for responsible ownership!
[notify]

Calamity- Jane

1139619
 
 
Barked: Sat Aug 4, '12 7:22am PST 
I'm with Ace and Twister; education does more than legislation. Adding another law that is difficult, if not impossible, to enforce won't accomplish anything, and will only put more of a burden on those of us who are responsible pet owners.
[notify]
Shiver Me- Timbers- "Charlie"

My Little Dog, a- heartbeat at my- feet.<3
 
 
Barked: Sat Aug 4, '12 4:18pm PST 
It's already been proven how much breed specific legislation can hurt more than do good. A legislation like this would eventually lead to breed specific legislation and only hurt the owners that ARE responsible.

It's already expensive to own a dog, it would be more expensive to require licenses to own them. It won't stop people illegal getting dogs. Enforcing the laws already out there is what needs to be done.

Quite frankly, if you were required to get a license to own a dog, what would this license entail to get it?! It's already hard to get a rescue dog through a rescue because of many of the strict guidelines(own a home, fenced in yard, etc), so just how far would this go too? I've had my dog for just over four years. I have only had a yard ONCE for a year and a half while owning him, and have otherwise had yardless homes. I'm also a renter. Forget the fact that my dog gets exercise, is never tethered unsupervised or for long periods of time, and gets proper training even though it's just me providing that training... A rescue was say forget it.
[notify]
Wesley

Tail on the- trail
 
 
Barked: Sat Aug 4, '12 6:41pm PST 
I agree,enforce as much as possible the existing laws. Rules for obtaining a dog license may well penalize otherwise good pet parents. The shelter that my Dad adopted me from initially wouldn`t approve the application because he worked all day and I would be left alone for 10 hrs per day.He had to lie and say that he had a neighbor stopping over to walk me. Yet I have had a wonderful home and get to travel with my dad a lot.
[notify]
Happy

The Boy Wonder
 
 
Barked: Sat Aug 4, '12 8:19pm PST 
Wouldn't work... because only responsible people would get the license.. if they could even afford it.. if they couldn't then you're removing one more potentially good home for pets.

Not to mention that I on a purely personal level dislike the idea that someone else could dictate what They feel is responsible... a lot of people have a lot of different opinions on this... and many of them aren't wrong.

One big thing would be 'tether' laws... many working dogs Are tethered.. but their lives are no less awful (one could argue that they're better) than many pet dogs... there's no one true way.
[notify]
MIKA&KAI

Akita Pals- Always.
 
 
Barked: Sat Aug 4, '12 8:29pm PST 
Chico please stop by our page and read our diary entry for July 19. I would very much appreciate hearing your comments. Thanks.
[notify]
Milton

Im just a little- guy
 
 
Barked: Wed Aug 8, '12 3:00pm PST 
Countless of dogs being euthanized because the owner thought a leash was optional
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

On many trails where I live, leashes are optional. My dog is mostly off-leash and has not been euthanized. So there.

Where I live dogs are suppose to by law have a license. I don't have one for my dog. They don't go door to door or inspect dogs to check for them. The licenses are enforced on people who's dogs have been picked up by animal control. I don't know many people who actually have paid for these licenses. I know of people who had to get them because their dog was impounded. Really all they do is to provide proof of rabies vaccinations.
[notify]
MIKA&KAI

Akita Pals- Always.
 
 
Barked: Wed Aug 8, '12 6:45pm PST 
Milton that is not the case at all in my area. We have a license issued by the county which must be renewed each year and a separate Rabies tag we get from the vet when we get the vaccine. Animal control does do random checks of different areas each year and the fine for not having a current county tag is $300/day for not having a rabies tag the fine is $500/day. We have had occurances of rabies within a five mile radius of our home each of the last 3 summers. Not only must we have the tags but the documentation that goes with them as well. Copy of county application and payment of fee,speuter certificate if that is what you stated your dog was on the application,and rabies vaccine certificate with date,clinic name,type given 1or 3 year,and lot # of the vial used and pharmaceutical company. AC and the shelters can use county tags to help find owners if the dog is lost and see that it gets returned and rabies tag is proof of vaccine but also includes vet clinic which can help them find medical info in an emergency and help find owners as well,so for me it is a small price to pay and the fines are not woth the risks to me or my dogs. The money from the county tags is to help provide shelters,dog parks,and AC staff and equipment so it is well worth it to me to be responsible and pay the fee REQUIRED BY LAW.
[notify]
  (Page 2 of 2: Viewing entries 11 to 20)  
1  2