Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner
41 - 60 of 67 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
335 Posts
That's a good idea, Zim, but if the owner were to go and request the dog back, assuming that there was no particular length of time agreed to in terms of care-taking, then I would assume that such a law would no longer apply. In no way does that law absolve the caretaker of the responsibility for returning the dog to the owner based on the condition of the dog at the time it was received.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,710 Posts
That's a good idea, Zim, but if the owner were to go and request the dog back, assuming that there was no particular length of time agreed to in terms of care-taking, then I would assume that such a law would no longer apply. In no way does that law absolve the caretaker of the responsibility for returning the dog to the owner based on the condition of the dog at the time it was received.
depends on the laws of the area and on the situation itself....it can't hurt to take a look.

OP where do you live?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,997 Posts
I know I will be thoroughly bashed for this so I'm armoring up ahead of time. I really do think you should do nothing more than report it to AC. If AC does nothing, then that's on them. You've done your part. I'm coming to the conclusion that I can't fix the world no matter what I do. There are sadly a lot of abused animals out there and there are probably some in my neighborhood. So what. I can't fix the world no matter what I do. I do what I can and am learning to be content with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,773 Posts
I'm confused. So if I think my neighbors are abusing their dogs because they had one or more pets die before, then it's okay for me to steal their current dogs because I feel as if AC won't help? AC can't take a dog on hearsay; however, people calling AC in dicey situations is how case folders get started and investigations get launched. Of course they are not going to come out and just seize the puppy based on someone's say so, but if they have no opportunity to investigate the neighbors then nothing will ever get done.

Filing a complaint sets precedent. One than more neighbor calling sets an investigation into motion. Whether or not this puppy is truly helped by a report to AC, a file, an investigation, and a precedent will allow AC to take action on suspicions that develop in the future. All that stealing the puppy will do is set up a potentially dangerous situation for the OP and will encourage the neighbor to look for another pet to replace the one that went missing.

Stealing the puppy resolves nothing. Making a report puts into motion actions that might fix things, protects the OP, and possibly protects this puppy and other animals in the future.

So no, people shouldn't just stand by and watch animal abuse occur; however, reasonable people don't simply break the law to suit themselves and satisfy their own impulses. No one is suggesting inaction. All I am saying is that the action taken must be reasonable and legal to help everyone involved.
So when that evidence is lacking, you steal instead? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

There's a reason laws/police/AC/etc. can't act on hearsay - because you cannot punish someone for an action you perceive in the future or for something that cannot be proven. Those laws are there to PROTECT people from things like this. And while it sucks, you cannot deny someone their rights because you feel you are justified, even in this instance. That's why we have trials, laws, and everything in between.

If abuse occurs, contact AC. If not, then you aren't justified. I get that there is a past with this family but agian, you don't get to assume the future and take personal private action based on those assumptions.
I have to agree with both posts 100%

Let me ask this.....so you take this puppy...do you think that is going to stop them from owning other animals?....what is going to happen when they turn right around and get another one?(and we all know they will)....what is going to happen then?..are you just going to keep stealing their animals?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Stealing is wrong. Nothing in the world can make me say that it is right. I do not play the moral relativity game. If laws exist, then there a law enforcement officers to enforce them. Find them.
Find them and do what? Seriously, what would you have the OP say to these law enforcement agents?

I don't support moral relativism either. The thing is, the concepts of property and theft in the eyes of the law are more fluid than you'd think. There was a time when supporters of the Underground Railroad could be charged with stealing other people's slaves. By your views, these people would have committed property theft and would be absolutely in the wrong. Up until the day that slavery became illegal, after which it would have been okay. So isn't that moral relativism? To say that the law is the only thing that defines something as right or wrong? Because law is changeable.

PLEASE, don't misconstrue this post and think that I am comparing slavery to pet owning, or animal abuse, or anything else. I'm not! I'm just trying to demonstrate that the concepts of theft, property, and moral relativism aren't as black and white as LoupGarou thinks.

Personally, I don't think anyone can ever really own another sentient being. But even if I were to suppose that that ownership were valid, I think the animal's right not to be abused supersedes the property rights of the abuser. I guess it all comes down to whose rights are more important to you: the person's property rights, or the animal's right to life.

I think a good case could be made that the puppy in question doesn't really belong to anyone at the moment. I'm not sure, but I think that animal ownership is legally defined in part as caretaking. So if the supposed "owners" have never even fed, housed, or provided medical care for the puppy, why is it even theirs? Because they say so?

Anyway, Zim's suggestion is a really great one. I hope the OP comes back again and pursues that course.

AC can't take a dog on hearsay; however, people calling AC in dicey situations is how case folders get started and investigations get launched. Of course they are not going to come out and just seize the puppy based on someone's say so, but if they have no opportunity to investigate the neighbors then nothing will ever get done.

Filing a complaint sets precedent. One than more neighbor calling sets an investigation into motion. Whether or not this puppy is truly helped by a report to AC, a file, an investigation, and a precedent will allow AC to take action on suspicions that develop in the future.
I think you are truly an optimist. Animal Control doesn't "start a case folder" or "launch an investigation" every time someone calls them. In fact, they often don't do anything at all when someone calls them, unless they receive multiple reports that an animal is currently in imminent danger. Exactly how much money and man-power do you think they have?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,284 Posts
I think another thing to point out is that the said "abuse" doesn't seem to have happened yet. It may never happen. This puppy might wind up staying with this other individual. Who the heck knows.

I wonder how old the OP is, too. But I don't think he/she is coming back in this thread, from the looks of it.

I know I will be thoroughly bashed for this so I'm armoring up ahead of time. I really do think you should do nothing more than report it to AC. If AC does nothing, then that's on them. You've done your part. I'm coming to the conclusion that I can't fix the world no matter what I do. There are sadly a lot of abused animals out there and there are probably some in my neighborhood. So what. I can't fix the world no matter what I do. I do what I can and am learning to be content with that.
hulk, I don't think anyone should bash you for that. If some people want to take further action, whatever that may be, that's their prerogative. But if you've called AC, whether AC does something or not, you've done your part.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,837 Posts
I think you are truly an optimist. Animal Control doesn't "start a case folder" or "launch an investigation" every time someone calls them. In fact, they often don't do anything at all when someone calls them, unless they receive multiple reports that an animal is currently in imminent danger. Exactly how much money and man-power do you think they have?
Well, while we're making left field comparisons in here, cops don't always catch criminals. And prosecutors don't always convict them. Doesn't mean we should have some sort of vigilante justice system of our own, or not bother to report things when they've happened.

I think there are far too many assumptions going on in this thread. Like MissMutt said, we have no idea what is going on with the puppy, or what is going to happen to it. I will give it to the OP that animal control can't just take your word for it and don't accept when you say "But these animals have died, I know this one will." even if you're right, and while I know how much that sucks, if they did they would have seized my Elkhound when our neighbors called to complain we had a wolf/wolf hybrid, or because my relatives think it's cruel Jack goes to agility training. The problem is much larger than single cases, and if we'd like the rules to change we have to set out to higher powers and demand a change.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
335 Posts
Find them and do what? Seriously, what would you have the OP say to these law enforcement agents?
I don't know the situation--what agency would be taking the report and what abuse has occurred? If the OP has no clear idea of what to say, then I suggest that he or she has no right to remove the dog from the owner's care, such as it is.

The thing is, the concepts of property and theft in the eyes of the law are more fluid than you'd think. There was a time when supporters of the Underground Railroad could be charged with stealing other people's slaves. By your views, these people would have committed property theft and would be absolutely in the wrong.
Regardless of how we feel about slavery today, that's correct.


Up until the day that slavery became illegal, after which it would have been okay. So isn't that moral relativism? To say that the law is the only thing that defines something as right or wrong? Because law is changeable.
That's not moral relativism. There is a difference between moral relativism and the enforcement of a bad law.

PLEASE, don't misconstrue this post and think that I am comparing slavery to pet owning, or animal abuse, or anything else. I'm not!
That's precisely what you're doing. It's a straw man argument at best and appeal to emotion fallacy at worst.

Personally, I don't think anyone can ever really own another sentient being. But even if I were to suppose that that ownership were valid, I think the animal's right not to be abused supersedes the property rights of the abuser. I guess it all comes down to whose rights are more important to you: the person's property rights, or the animal's right to life.
Another appeal to emotion. In any case, I don't believe in animal rights; I believe in animal welfare. The animal should be able to have a good life, but the owner has rights that the animal does not.

I think a good case could be made that the puppy in question doesn't really belong to anyone at the moment. I'm not sure, but I think that animal ownership is legally defined in part as caretaking. So if the supposed "owners" have never even fed, housed, or provided medical care for the puppy, why is it even theirs? Because they say so?
We have no evidence that any of those things have occurred. If they have occurred, then AC is best equipped to handle all complaints.

I think you are truly an optimist. Animal Control doesn't "start a case folder" or "launch an investigation" every time someone calls them. In fact, they often don't do anything at all when someone calls them, unless they receive multiple reports that an animal is currently in imminent danger. Exactly how much money and man-power do you think they have?
So how much action can AC take if *no* reports are made?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
I don't really feel a need to respond to any of your points because I don't think they successfully address or challenge mine.

I hope anyone reading this takes the time to go back and read my post in entirety instead of just reading the clips that you've posted.

I don't have anything else to say... except that I hope this conversation stays calm. I think that we all mean well, even though we disagree completely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,765 Posts
So, LoupGarouTFTs, if something is illegal, it's absolutely wrong, in your opinion? Regardless of the moral implications, the law is correct no matter what? I guess I just can't agree with that at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
The puppy is a brindle shepherd cross. Looks just like a dutch shepherd, absolutely beautiful. She's older than the picture we got, more around 11 weeks.
When they got to my mum's friend's house they dragged her in by the scruff of the neck because she 'wouldn't walk'. We're talking about a puppy whose maybe 20lbs and a man well over that. They hadn't fed her or given her water in the three or four hours they had her.
So yes, I do still feel the best thing for this dog is to take her away from them.

I did want to reply to this:
then we are going to read an "I went to jail and it was all the puppy abusers' fault!" thread in the future.
Throughout my life I have been taught to question the people that lead me. I have been taught that the best thing isn't always the right thing. I was taught that animals deserve better than a lot of people do. But I was also taught that responsibility for our actions is important.
If legal action is taken against me, I will accept that. It will be no ones fault but my own. My family has never been one to complain when they get caught and that's one positive thing that I have taken from them.

After seeing this puppy and speaking to my mum's friend myself, I know that she is not in any way going back to those people. He said he's going to keep her, if not I may have another home lined up who knows the story and is very close to me. This puppy is eleven weeks old and is already terrified to go to the bathroom, terrified of leashes and terrified of men. Granted, that's from her previous home (except the leash, I'm fairly certain that's due to Jamie's kid). She deserves better than this. When we were there she kept looking at me for reassurance. I can't just turn my back on that. I can't turn my back on the trust she showed today.
I understand that she isn't my dog. I understand that to many it may not seem right. But to me, preventing what will - no, not what might, because my ill feelings toward this man are justified in broken ribs and dead kittens - happen means more than anything right now. It's not my dog. She's not my responsibility. But if I don't make her my problem, who will?
Not AC. Sure, I could report it. But there's no evidence.
Sure, they could get another dog. But chances of them finding another free one around here is slim. And they can't afford anything more than that.



I'm not going to let her live like this. I can't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
We actually have a dog that we acquired through not-so-legal means. My brother was a friend of one of the workers at the local humane society(it's all our town has), who showed him the neighbor's dog...Coyote/Collie mix that the owner, who was apparently a "recovering" crackhead, barely acknowledged was there. They'd feed him maybe once a week -the rest of his food came from the friend- and the only real interaction from them was when they put him in the basement so a a friend of their could take a child out back to play. He's not even remotely agressive. :confused:

Anyway...the shelter worker guy told my bro that either he takes the dog, or they call animal control to come get him. So after sweet-talking my dad a bit, he reached over the poorly-made pen and carried him off. Here's the kicker: Like all the other time's he'd gotten out, it took the owner three days to even notice he was gone. They actually did go looking for him at the animal shelter, but of course out friend had no idea where the dog was. He's now happily licking my elbow as I type this. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
that puppy looks to be in ok condition...I had a completely different vision....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
335 Posts
that puppy looks to be in ok condition...I had a completely different vision....
Agreed. It is for this kind of example, as well as others, that it is so important to keep dog laws the way that they are and not have them changed to make seizing them easier. Based entirely on what the OP was saying, the dog was an inch from death, which would have prompted any reasonable person to opt to call AC or to take other action. In truth, the puppy looks fine and the OP has based his or her opinion based on what has happened in the past.

People just don't need to involve themselves in other people's affairs just because they feel like they know better than the other pet owner or because they want that person's dog or whatever. People who read other people's stories about a third party need to stop being so reactionary and think things through, instead of jumping on the "steal the dog" bandwagon. I wonder what law enforcement officers would have said, if they had caught the OP in possession of this "abused" puppy--and, oh yeah, a brindle dog has pretty distinctive markings. The whole "say the dog ran away" and keep it for yourself routine might backfire in this situation.

I stand by everything I have said in this thread and this picture confirms that I am correct in my belief that the situation is one for animal control to investigate, since there appears to be some confusion as to what constitutes abuse. For the record: a lot of eleven-week-old dogs are afraid of leashes and afraid of men. Not all puppies are introduced to a leash early in life--look at many of the dogs in basic obedience classes!--and they are not abused. Nor are all dogs that are afraid of men abused, either. Dogs that are raised in homes by only one sex or the other will have fears of the opposite sex, particularly during the fear period (which this puppy is entering). For the record, puppies that are afraid of hoses (which resemble snakes), people who are wearing hats (which alter people's appearance), and people of races different than that of their owners are not abused either. They simply need socialization--which even the lack of which is not abuse, either; rather, it's just poor puppy raising that even many well-meaning owners seem to engage in on occasion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
From a legal point of view, it's very illegal (law graduate here). Just because it's not registered to them doesn't mean they're not the legal owner.

But...If I could get away with it, and I was able to feed it, house it, ect, I'd do it. But that's just me :)

HOWEVER, since they got that pup for free, they would not see it as a huge loss and they could probably get another one for free again? I'm pretty sure you can't be stealing all their puppies now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
Agreed. It is for this kind of example, as well as others, that it is so important to keep dog laws the way that they are and not have them changed to make seizing them easier. Based entirely on what the OP was saying, the dog was an inch from death, which would have prompted any reasonable person to opt to call AC or to take other action. In truth, the puppy looks fine and the OP has based his or her opinion based on what has happened in the past.

People just don't need to involve themselves in other people's affairs just because they feel like they know better than the other pet owner or because they want that person's dog or whatever. People who read other people's stories about a third party need to stop being so reactionary and think things through, instead of jumping on the "steal the dog" bandwagon. I wonder what law enforcement officers would have said, if they had caught the OP in possession of this "abused" puppy--and, oh yeah, a brindle dog has pretty distinctive markings. The whole "say the dog ran away" and keep it for yourself routine might backfire in this situation.

I stand by everything I have said in this thread and this picture confirms that I am correct in my belief that the situation is one for animal control to investigate, since there appears to be some confusion as to what constitutes abuse. For the record: a lot of eleven-week-old dogs are afraid of leashes and afraid of men. Not all puppies are introduced to a leash early in life--look at many of the dogs in basic obedience classes!--and they are not abused. Nor are all dogs that are afraid of men abused, either. Dogs that are raised in homes by only one sex or the other will have fears of the opposite sex, particularly during the fear period (which this puppy is entering). For the record, puppies that are afraid of hoses (which resemble snakes), people who are wearing hats (which alter people's appearance), and people of races different than that of their owners are not abused either. They simply need socialization--which even the lack of which is not abuse, either; rather, it's just poor puppy raising that even many well-meaning owners seem to engage in on occasion.
I got given a 2 year old cocker spaniel that never saw a man or a leash, within a week she was just fine. This puppy seems fine to me...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,942 Posts
the puppy is quite thin. Look toward his back and you can see the rib cage sticking out and I think i see ribs, tho the brindling hides it. He also looks scared and is showing a very submissive stance. There can be many reasons for this. A single photo from this position is difficult to judge.

Honestly, when I read about anyone killing a kitten by tossing throwing it and then letting it die in its own waste, I see red. I have NO USE for humans who abuse children and animals. NONE. We are their caretakers.. it is our task to be their protectors in that roll.

I also know that people will get animals who have NO FINANCIAL ability to take care of them.. they also have children under similar circumstances (but they can get WIC and social services help to feed children). I

In this case, it is likely these folks will get another animal even if this one is taken. It is infuriating. I wish I had a suggestion but I do not.

I hate to let something like this go. I do. But I also know that Hulk is right. We cannot save the world. We can do what we can do and we have to know when to cut it off.

I have no suggestions. If you knew where the scumbags who killed the kitten(s) lived, you would have recourse. Maybe.

Meanwhile, considering all the people involved here that are really not so nice, I would choose to keep better company. You cannot save the world. I wish it were not like this.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
335 Posts
Elana, I don't see the thin-ness that you are talking about and I really see nothing in the stance that would suggest submission. I've seen dogs that have been abused by starvation and a slightly thin dog is not an abused dog--starved dogs have ribs that stick out (sometimes you can put your fingers between them!) and far more than a small concave area in the loins. In fact, so many of us are used to seeing fat dogs that those of normal weight seem thin to us. Regardless, a dog that has not been fed in the "three or four hours that they've had her" does not strike me as being abused either. Some dogs are only fed once a day, so are they abused by their owners?

I agree that not every animal is savable, which is sad but true. This particular puppy does not seem to be in need of saving, however, except in the fears of the OP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,615 Posts
I really see nothing in the stance that would suggest submission.

Loup I have to disagree with this assessment. Her ears are back and flat, her legs in a semi crouch and her eyes are pretty darn close to showing "whale eye", including pupil dilation...submissive fear postures all...that being said...she's in a place she's never been, was dragged through the door and could simply be a shy unsocialized pup. The photo is not necessarily a photo of an abuse victim but certainly is of a pup that is very unsure.

This whole discussion has been an interesting read.

How illegal would it be? Very.

Does that mean it's wrong (morally and ethically)? Maybe.

What should the OP do? Weigh the pros and cons, get the FACTS and make a decision based on an understanding that there are consequences to any decision you make. If you choose to do the act, you choose to accept the consequences of said act and there is no going back.

Both Loupgaroux and Canteloupe have made some valid points..but morals and ethics discussions are well, as clear as mud.
 
41 - 60 of 67 Posts
Top