Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The rules of this agreement were honored, therefore no one has any grounds to point fingers at any of the participants whether they agree with the statistics cited on these signs or not. (The statistics were provided by the Humane Society, not Wikipedia!) The opinions stated on these signs, as long as they did not directly cite certain persons or establishments by name (which they didn't), were absolutely acceptable whether you agree with those opinions or not.
To be clear, I was responding to a poster who seems to believe that if you get information from "internet sites", that is a defense to defamation.
I am sure that everyone involved in this protest in El Paso did their homework. However, in reading the posting about "defamation law", I thought it might be helpful to try to clear up some misconceptions about what is, and is not, acceptable.
That is the ultimate goal of these so-called "rescues." First they get a complete ban on ALL sales, just like in El Paso. Then they get laws enacted that prohibit intact dogs in order to prevent families from having "accidental" litters, or face steep fines and have their family pet taken from them. From what I have seen just in this thread alone, these so-called "rescues" consider ALL breeders to be "puppy mills." Without exception.
Its been documented through papers provided from Petland that they HAVE ACQUIRED PUPPIES FROM PUPPY MILLS. If they want to try and sue me for this statement - well bring it on! I have a good lawyer and the paperwork. Second - no one is trying to put Petland out of business. The objective is only for them to stop selling puppies and kittens. Petsmart & Petco do just fine without selling the products of cruelty and Petland can too. However, am I trying to put out of business commercial breeding facilities that do not provide adequatee care and comfort to the animal they breed and sell?- Yup- you betcha and I'm proud of it!
Do I think there are excellent breeders out there? Yes, I do. I'm friends with quite a few people that breed Chesapeake Bay Retrievers. They breed them, they show them and they sell puppies. I have no problem with that. Why? - BECAUSE THEY ALSO CARE ABOUT THEM!
Now - on to your claims regarding rescues...sounds libelous and slanderous to me. Do you have documentation to back up your claims? No? I bet you feel that its your right to say these things and that they are not libel or slander and just an opinion. Don't you find that even slightly hypocritical to think that one is slander and libel while the other isn't?
To be clear, I was responding to a poster who seems to believe that if you get information from "internet sites", that is a defense to defamation.
I am sure that everyone involved in this protest in El Paso did their homework. However, in reading the posting about "defamation law", I thought it might be helpful to try to clear up some misconceptions about what is, and is not, acceptable.
Back to your regularly scheduled program....
Oh, I didn't take your statement in a bad way at all...and I thank you for your insight to law-related things as well! I just wanted to clear up the fact that the information cited was, in fact, provided from the Humane Society so others reading this thread will know and not jump to any conclusions about it being "slanderous", as people like Glitch would have everyone believe. He argued the percentage cited on the sign as well as the fact that "USDA" is the same as "puppymill" even though the USDA has admitted this publicly.
Its been documented through papers provided from Petland that they HAVE ACQUIRED PUPPIES FROM PUPPY MILLS. If they want to try and sue me for this statement - well bring it on! I have a good lawyer and the paperwork. Second - no one is trying to put Petland out of business. The objective is only for them to stop selling puppies and kittens. Petsmart & Petco do just fine without selling the products of cruelty and Petland can too. However, am I trying to put out of business commercial breeding facilities that do not provide adequatee care and comfort to the animal they breed and sell?- Yup- you betcha and I'm proud of it!
Exactly! It's sad because they absolutely had the power and ability to turn this whole thing around and start doing the right thing here...if they came clean and changed their ways I would happily spend money there on high quality pet supplies, believe me I don't enjoy driving an hour out of my way into New Mexico to get these things, but out of a matter of principle I have been doing so...I will not give one red cent to businesses who support puppymills! Luckily, the petsmart out here has started selling Wellness, so I only have to make the long trip once every month to get the raw stuff now .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Va-Cat
Do I think there are excellent breeders out there? Yes, I do. I'm friends with quite a few people that breed Chesapeake Bay Retrievers. They breed them, they show them and they sell puppies. I have no problem with that. Why? - BECAUSE THEY ALSO CARE ABOUT THEM!
I also have no problem with good breeders who take the time, money and energy needed to care for their animals properly. Good breeders don't overbreed, and they certainly don't sell their puppies through commercial venues...! They also don't usually make much of a profit because they spend so much money on things like excellent diet, genetic testing, vaccinations, etc...they do what they do out of love for the breed with the intent of the betterment of that breed, and without them I shudder to think what would happen to all the wonderful breeds out there...many of them would disappear or become plagued with health and temperament issues due to profit-mongers overbreeding, in-breeding, and neglecting sanitary and nutritional needs in order to keep the money flowing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Va-Cat
Now - on to your claims regarding rescues...sounds libelous and slanderous to me. Do you have documentation to back up your claims? No? I bet you feel that its your right to say these things and that they are not libel or slander and just an opinion. Don't you find that even slightly hypocritical to think that one is slander and libel while the other isn't?
I was thinking the same thing...that's the pot calling the kettle black as far as I can tell! LOL!
VA-Cat and Luvcat are right about the "true breeders". Those that breed for the betterment of the breed do it with love. Yes, I believe in "Adopt. Don't Shop", but I also believe that when someone goes to a "reuputable breeder", they have taken the time and energy to do their homework. "Reputable breeders" do not sell their puppies to anyone with cash in hand. They check the people out before selling, perform all required health exams and tests on the puppies and make available these results to the buyer, they require all "non-competition puppies", aka "companion pets" to be spayed or neutered by the age of 9 months and will hold all registration papers until proof is provided that this is done. The people buying will check out the breeder, go to the breeders home to see where the mommy lives and what condition the puppies are being raised in, ensure all tests are done on the puppy as well as genetic testing has been done on the parent dogs. So for anyone who does not want to adopt, they can still buy a very healthy, happy, socialized puppy. Please correct me VA-CAt if I am wrong, but out each litter, there is 1, maybe 2 puppies that are of "show quality" and are sold as such and the remaining puppies are very healthy, meet breed standards, and make wonderful family members and are sold as companion pets. And because of they way these puppies and parent dogs are taken care of, that is what makes the difference. They are born in clean places, fed quality food, given attention, are socialized and not ripped from their mommy too young. These are not commercial breeders that breed in mass quantity to make a profit. These are not the breeders that are breeding their female dogs every heat cycle. These are not the breeders SELLING to pet stores. A reputable breeder would never sell to pet stores, brokers, at auctions, on a street corner or from the back of a pick-up.
VA-Cat and Luvcat are right about the "true breeders". Those that breed for the betterment of the breed do it with love. Yes, I believe in "Adopt. Don't Shop", but I also believe that when someone goes to a "reuputable breeder", they have taken the time and energy to do their homework. "Reputable breeders" do not sell their puppies to anyone with cash in hand. They check the people out before selling, perform all required health exams and tests on the puppies and make available these results to the buyer, they require all "non-competition puppies", aka "companion pets" to be spayed or neutered by the age of 9 months and will hold all registration papers until proof is provided that this is done. The people buying will check out the breeder, go to the breeders home to see where the mommy lives and what condition the puppies are being raised in, ensure all tests are done on the puppy as well as genetic testing has been done on the parent dogs. So for anyone who does not want to adopt, they can still buy a very healthy, happy, socialized puppy. Please correct me VA-CAt if I am wrong, but out each litter, there is 1, maybe 2 puppies that are of "show quality" and are sold as such and the remaining puppies are very healthy, meet breed standards, and make wonderful family members and are sold as companion pets. And because of they way these puppies and parent dogs are taken care of, that is what makes the difference. They are born in clean places, fed quality food, given attention, are socialized and not ripped from their mommy too young. These are not commercial breeders that breed in mass quantity to make a profit. These are not the breeders that are breeding their female dogs every heat cycle. These are not the breeders SELLING to pet stores. A reputable breeder would never sell to pet stores, brokers, at auctions, on a street corner or from the back of a pick-up.
You are correct that most times only one pup or maybe two in a litter could be considered "Show Quality". That means that they have the conformation and temperment as required in the AKC standard for their breed. Pups that do not meet the standard are considered "companion quality" are required by the breeder to be spayed or neutered. Reputable breeders care about the quality of their pups and also will insist that their kennel name be part of the registered name of any show pup sold. All of the breeders I know will also take back any pup they sell. They would also never sell one of their pups to a retail establishment or a puppy broker!
As I've said here before, I've been to a puppy mill. I've seen the conditions and the suffering first hand. One of my dogs was a puppy mill stud dog. Bandit was rescued during a raid I was involded in on a particularly bad facility in PA. It took me years to even come close to overcoming the issues he suffered from because of the 6 years he spent in that facility. The dogs at these facilities are not cared for, socialized or treated with any more concern than a can of tomatoes. Call me an activist, call me a radical, call me anything you'd like to. Just make sure to call me when there is an opportunity to help shut these facilities down! The biggest customer of puppy mills are retail stores. Thats because no respectable breeder will sell to them. End the retail sales and you take away the profitability for the puppy mills. No profit and they will shut down.
and here are pictures of 55 of the parents of those cute little puppies sold at petland ...... show me one single one of these dogs that looks like it has been properly cared for in any way, shape or form.........
Missouri Puppy Mill Survivors needing homes (http://www.flickr.com/photos/49474644@N08/sets/72157625172388782/show/ - broken link)
these dogs were all recently rescued from mills here in missouri ..... 46 of them just last weekend....... the vet clinic in marshall, missouri always takes as many of these dogs as they can and then finds appropriate rescues for them..... they had asked for a volunteer to take pictures of the dogs as they are too busy with their regular vet duties and keeping these dogs fed and cared for to take pictures themselves...... i was going to go out there and do this yesterday, but another volunteer stepped up and took the pictures on friday.... gotta say, he did a heck of a lot better job than i probably would have..... but i am on the volunteer list now, so will probably be going out there at some point over the next few months.....
btw, even though prop b is 2 weeks away from being voted on.... and its passage is not certain..... a lot of the millers are starting to panic and dump their dogs........
To be clear, I was responding to a poster who seems to believe that if you get information from "internet sites", that is a defense to defamation.
I am sure that everyone involved in this protest in El Paso did their homework. However, in reading the posting about "defamation law", I thought it might be helpful to try to clear up some misconceptions about what is, and is not, acceptable.
Back to your regularly scheduled program....
Thank you for the clarification. In a true defamation suit, certain criterias need to be met by both sides. In a SLAPP suit, the burden is on the SLAPPer (in the case of El Paso, Petland has the burden of proving it's case). Petland blames these volunteers have forced them to close their doors. These volunteers have no control over a city council vote. None of these volunteers are active in the city's political arena and are just VOLUNTEERS at local rescue groups. They pick up poop, feed the dogs, foster dogs in their own homes, take dogs to the vet, etc. Because they chose to exercise their first amendment rights and speak before city council about puppy mills, hold signs about puppy mills, and participate in the mayor's taskforce they are sued. Many states have anti-SLAPP laws to protect it's citizens constitutional rights. Unfortunately, Texas is not one of them.
Petland has seen fit to "punish and attempt to silence" these individuals. And that is the whole motive behind a SLAPP suit. It's not meant to win but to "get back" and to shift the real issue at hand. The new ordinance that was passed in El Paso does not say that pet stores must refrain from selling puppies. Pet stores will have to follow new regulations just like the rescues (rescues must follow the same regulations). No one was targeted or singled out. Petland chose to "close their doors" when the new ordinance takes affect. It is not a ban on retail sales of puppies. The local Petland has shown it true colors by filing a SLAPP suit against regular, middle of the road americans that have done nothing wrong. Is it legal for Petland to do this? Yes. Is it morally or ethically right? No. But this is how Petland operates.
Its been documented through papers provided from Petland that they HAVE ACQUIRED PUPPIES FROM PUPPY MILLS.
You have no documentation from Petland in El Paso because they gave out none, and said so. Also, past action is not indicative of present action, so what they may or may not have done in the past cannot be construed to apply to the present. A rational thinking person would already know this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Va-Cat
If they want to try and sue me for this statement - well bring it on! I have a good lawyer and the paperwork.
You may have need of them both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Va-Cat
Second - no one is trying to put Petland out of business. The objective is only for them to stop selling puppies and kittens.
Yes, I am fully aware of the absolute monopoly these so-called "rescues" are striving for. No breeding of any kind or face massive fines, and no sales of any kind by anyone. When people label all breeders as "puppy mills" it is easy to spot them as delusion ally dangerous fanatics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Va-Cat
Now - on to your claims regarding rescues...sounds libelous and slanderous to me. Do you have documentation to back up your claims?
I do indeed. Including video and photographs of these "rescues" fanatics holding signs in their own handwriting making these unsubstantiated libelous claims. Then there are the laws that prohibit all breeding, like in Los Angeles, which underscores everything I've said about putting all competition out of business giving rescues a complete monopoly on determining who is "good enough" to own a pet. Naturally, no one ever qualifies.
You have no documentation from Petland in El Paso because they gave out none, and said so. Also, past action is not indicative of present action, so what they may or may not have done in the past cannot be construed to apply to the present. A rational thinking person would already know this.
There is documentation that Petland in El Paso gets their dogs from the Hunte Corp. aka biggest broker for puppy mills. There are currently over a dozen dogs in a local resuce that were purchased from the El Paso Petland earlier this year. By tracing their microchips, they originated from the Hunte Corp. By tracing this they have been able to find out the actual breeders. Guess what...........all known and documented puppy mills. Follow the paperwork. It's all there.
You may have need of them both.
Yes, I am fully aware of the absolute monopoly these so-called "rescues" are striving for. No breeding of any kind or face massive fines, and no sales of any kind by anyone. When people label all breeders as "puppy mills" it is easy to spot them as delusion ally dangerous fanatics.
No one in El Paso has labeled "all breeders as puppy mills". There are true "reputable breeders" and rescues do support their efforts in maintaining the breed of their dogs. Reputable breeders do not sell their puppies to pet stores. That is a fact! Puppy mills do! That is one of the ways to tell the difference.
I do indeed. Including video and photographs of these "rescues" fanatics holding signs in their own handwriting making these unsubstantiated libelous claims. Then there are the laws that prohibit all breeding, like in Los Angeles, which underscores everything I've said about putting all competition out of business giving rescues a complete monopoly on determining who is "good enough" to own a pet. Naturally, no one ever qualifies.
And what "unsubstantiated libelous claims" photos and videos from the El Paso demonstration held over the last 3 months do you have? None. The signs at that demonstration are all substantiated.
As far as your statement about rescues determining good homes, the reasons these dogs are in rescue in the first place is because those who got them decided for some reason or another that they no longer wanted these dogs. The dogs in rescue don't just magically show up one day. Today's impulse buy will likely be tomorrows throw away. Thank goodness there are rescues to take these dogs in. Otherwise, they would be executed. And as far as your fact that "no one ever qualifies", how do you substantiate this statement? Every day dogs and cats are adopted out to good homes, making room for the next dog or cat in need. That is how rescue works. As soon as one is adopted, another takes that vacant spot. So if by your reasoning "no one ever qualifies", then how are dogs and cats going out and more coming in? Your statement doesn't make any sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
