Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California advances bill to sterilize pets
CNN.com/Reuters ^

Posted on 06/09/2007 6:57:50 AM PDT by ReignOfError

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: ReignOfError
While I believe that all pets should be spayed or neutered, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ STAY AWAY FROM "MY" DAWG !! HE"S ANGRY NOW !! Image and video hosting by TinyPic
41 posted on 06/09/2007 11:13:54 AM PDT by 1COUNTER-MORTER-68 (THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar

Nah, they’d rather support mandatory, taxpayer-funded abortions for children (sterilization is too inhuman). /sarcasm


42 posted on 06/09/2007 2:04:13 PM PDT by RatSlayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: WackySam

You all can just pack your bags and move to beverly, pardner. - jest don’t come back now, heah?


43 posted on 06/09/2007 2:17:04 PM PDT by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: joshhiggins

One afternoon a couple years back, there was a knock on door. Opened it there this person sent from King County to see if my dog was licensed. She was. Talk about a waste of resources and tax payer money. Really ticked me off.


44 posted on 06/09/2007 2:20:55 PM PDT by ShandaLear (Extremists always meet each other full circle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Paperdoll
What’s next in California? Spaying and neutering our children?

While that has always been a goal of the radical left (nazis and communists), currently they rely on abortion on demand in Kalifornia to accomplish these ends.

On the bright side, perhaps we can have this applied to hippies, as they ARE pets in CA.

45 posted on 06/09/2007 2:23:26 PM PDT by Navy Patriot (Zimbabwe, leftist success story, the envy of Venezuela)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady

Yes, and I think the LA suburbs aren’t much better. As unfriendly, and you’re right, sexless, as you can imagine.


46 posted on 06/09/2007 4:48:24 PM PDT by California Patriot ("That's not Charley the Tuna out there. It's Jaws." -- Richard Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

I, too, strongly believe in fixing animals to keep shelter populations down.

But mandatory fixing is wrong. These animals are our property. There are a lot of benefits to kids seeing pets have kittens and puppies. The extremists hate this side of life. They will do anything to stop it.


47 posted on 06/09/2007 4:51:08 PM PDT by Silly (http://www.paulklenk.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

I, too, strongly believe in fixing animals to keep shelter populations down.

But mandatory fixing is wrong. These animals are our property. There are a lot of benefits to kids seeing pets have kittens and puppies. The extremists hate this side of life. They will do anything to stop it.


48 posted on 06/09/2007 4:51:09 PM PDT by Silly (http://www.paulklenk.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError
...enforcement of the bill in theory could wipe out California's dog population.

Then what would the Mexican illegals eat? Corn is getting too expensive for them. Once you get rid of dog meat, the only thing left in their diet will be flour and beans. Do we really want that? < /sarc >

49 posted on 06/09/2007 4:56:04 PM PDT by Tall_Texan (Fred, are you in or out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paperdoll
What’s next in California? Spaying and neutering our children?

Only the heterosexual ones. Gotta control overpopulation, y'know. /sarc

50 posted on 06/09/2007 4:56:45 PM PDT by Kieri (Midwest Snark Claw & Feather Club Founder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Our California Values Update Theme Song
(played to the tune of Theme From 'Beverly Hillbillies')

Gonna tell y'all a story 'bout a man named Jed
A poor mountaineer til he kilt his family dead
And then when he collected the insurance fee
Wrote himself a book and wound up on tv

"Oprah", that is. "Doctor Phil". "Geraldo".

Well, the first thing ya know, ol' Jed's a millionaire
The kin folk said - 'HEH! Move away from here!'
They said 'Californy is the place you ought to be!'
So they loaded up his truck and he moved to Berk-el-ey

Californy, that is. Long-haired pot-smoking hippie types.

(Announcer:) The BER-ZERKLEYS!"

(bridge banjo solo)

Well, now it's time to say goodbye to Jed and his new family
They would like to thank you for your hospitality
You're all invited back next week to this locality
As long as we're not busted by the authorities

Roll a joint.
Take your clothes off.
Y'all come back now, y'hear?

51 posted on 06/09/2007 5:28:12 PM PDT by Tall_Texan (Fred, are you in or out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: WackySam

“Excellent idea, I wish Florida would enact the same law.”

Yes, great idea! I just love the government telling me what I can do with my own dogs, that I do breed and show.

Little by little they will take away every right we have. It may not effect you this time, because you are not a dog breeder.

How about the next time, when they go after you?


52 posted on 06/09/2007 5:28:29 PM PDT by kara37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: kara37
Yes, great idea! I just love the government telling me what I can do with my own dogs, that I do breed and show.

If the law also included breeders I would be 100% against it, for everyone else I'd be all for it.

For what reason would you want to keep a pet intact if not for breeding?
53 posted on 06/09/2007 5:45:51 PM PDT by WackySam (Just say no to Rudy McRomney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

Because pets are way too germy.


54 posted on 06/09/2007 5:46:39 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LantzALot
Right. I wasn't complaining or feeling "singled out." Merely stating that there are ways other than universal, highly punitive methods.

In fact, it cost me "only" $90 to have my dog spayed, which means that in that one year, the total cost was the same, and I saved the differential every year thereafter.

Agreed. Incentives like that, combined with subsidies to reduce the cost of the procedure, would probably be more cost-effective than enforcement of this proposal.

The one hitch I can see is that if large parts of California don't have dog or cat licensing at all, introducing it statewide could be even more invasive and costly than mandatory sterilization.

What would make more sense would be to require that retail pet shops sell only spayed and neutered pets, and that breeders pay a surcharge for every intact pet they sell. That surcharge would naturally be passed on to the buyer, so each buyer would have an incentive to buy a sterilized pet unless they have their own breeding plans.

That wouldn't have any short-term effect on informal sales or "free to good home" adoptions, but in the long term it'll thin the numbers.

55 posted on 06/09/2007 6:15:31 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
They sound like a rogue terror cell to me.

Hysterical much?

The SPCA does not have a hierarchal structure, no chain of command. The state chapters don't report to the national organization, nor the local chapters to the state.

New Jersey, based on your summary that report, made the dumbassed move of contracting out law enforcement to a private organization without proper standards, supervision or oversight. Probably as a means to put animal welfare off-budget -- hiring animal control officers would require paying them. I don't see how that bears on anything relevant to this discussion.

56 posted on 06/09/2007 6:26:24 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
They sound like a rogue terror cell to me.

Hysterical much?

The SPCA does not have a hierarchal structure, no chain of command. The state chapters don't report to the national organization, nor the local chapters to the state.

New Jersey, based on your summary that report, made the dumbassed move of contracting out law enforcement to a private organization without proper standards, supervision or oversight. Probably as a means to put animal welfare off-budget -- hiring animal control officers would require paying them. I don't see how that bears on anything relevant to this discussion.

57 posted on 06/09/2007 6:26:30 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError
What would make more sense would be to require that retail pet shops sell only spayed and neutered pets, and that breeders pay a surcharge for every intact pet they sell. That surcharge would naturally be passed on to the buyer, so each buyer would have an incentive to buy a sterilized pet unless they have their own breeding plans.

I like the idea.

58 posted on 06/09/2007 6:33:13 PM PDT by LantzALot (Yes, it’s my opinion. No, it’s not humble.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

Does that mean all the dog breeders have to leave the state...


59 posted on 06/09/2007 6:37:27 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (Taz Struck By Lightning Faces Battery Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
1,200 words, and I don't see the relevance.

Faced with fewer small dogs and puppies to offer the public, a handful of shelters and organizations have swapped their traditional mission for a new bottom line strategy aimed at filling consumer demands. Simply stated, they have become pet stores. Some are importing stray dogs across state lines and from foreign countries to maintain an inventory of adoptable dogs.

Understandable. Especially at no-kill shelters, the priority is to make pets available for adoption. Many animals that make their way to shelters are simply unadoptable -- ill-temperes, abused or diseased. Feral cats are a particularly large and problematic population among those.

The fact remains that millions of animals are euthanized every year. That is not something PETA made up. If the shelters in one area have more adoptable pets than the shelters in another, I don't see any problem with moving the supply to where the demand is -- or put more starkly, to move the adoptable pets to the empty cages instead of the incinerator.

According to their own records, one foundation, the Save a Sato 2 program championed by PeTA, has already sent 14,000 dogs to the US. Satos (a slang term for mixed-breed street dogs in Puerto Rico) arrive in US cities practically every day. Dozens of shelters are involved. Some of the shelters NAIA is tracking bring in 100-200 dogs each month and are placing them for $200-$250 each.

If dozens (of the thousands in existence) of shelters are engaged in profiteering, go after them. But your article here does not make the case that you claim -- to with, that the excess pet population is an imagined problem.

60 posted on 06/09/2007 6:51:36 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson