VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:05:16 10/20/06 Fri
Author: sci guy
Subject: So where do you draw the line?
In reply to: 's message, "Your "simple solution" is actually the law in some states and it is very flawed.c/i" on 08:43:16 10/20/06 Fri

Should people be allowed to keep lions and tigers in the same sort of conditions that they keep Pit Bulls? Free to roam around yards and streets? Maybe you're ok with people being able to keep wolves....

if you concede that wolves tigers and lions have to be regulated, then it's only a slight step to say that dogs that have a propensity to bite suddenly and without warning are to be dealt with in a different fashion than dogs that are more predictable.


>In many states that is the law,in fact in some states
>dogs that may be dangerous have to wear an orange
>color to warn people.This solution is very flawed and
>many good animals are put down because of stupid human
>accessments.If a dog bites or any other animal that
>does not make it vicious or a danger.If it bites more
>than once that doesn't make it vicious or a
>danger.They need to revise the laws so that the
>judgement is based on damage and circumstances
>EVERYTIME.If it happens again it should be judged
>again as if it was the first time.And who should
>judge?How do you pick?A vet?ha,no way.Most vets only
>have expierence with animals through school.Very
>little.I once saw a vet deem a dog aggressive because
>it growled at him when he gave it a shot.First of all
>it growled,2nd he was hurting it what did you expect
>it to do?So see your solution is not simple.The poor
>animal is the one that will always get screwed.We need
>to pass a law to put down humans when they harm
>another for a second time.They know what they're
>doing.But by God you'll put an animal down in a
>second.And I'm really tired of the "there's a diff.
>between people and animals".That's just a lame excuse
>to do something wrong and get away with it.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.