Many won't go without pets if US evacuation called

[rickn]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: Lazy8s
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.


EDIT: What I find hilarious is how people are arguing about whether we should evacuate them based on taxes etc. Watching you guys argue is worth the time on this forum because none of the arguments make sense. Especially rickn. You realize your argment has NOTHING to do with what he posted, right? this is why people laugh at P&N

Zendari was the one that brought up the fact that dogs do not pay taxes. Neither to 10yr old kids, I guess parents can leave them behind too, right?

This makes no sense. It is the government's job to give PEOPLE a place to evacuate in case of life-threatening emergencies

List of things that aren't people:

Cats
Dogs
Birds
Fish
Iguanas
Potted plants
Ferrets
Snakes

The government should absolutely not waste precious emergency management dollars evacuating Billy Bob's rotweiller just because Billy Bob is to stupid to leave his double-wide when a Cat 5 hurricane is getting ready to atomize it.

the government doesn't evacuate anyone. I am a floridian, I know the drill. Mandatory evacuations get issued, peoples in those areas get their things together and head to shelters, but nobody forces them too. It's not all that hard to allow people to bring their dogs and cats if they are secured and they have proper papers/tags. I have pet carriers. During Charlie we were under mandatory evacs, nobody in my neighborhood left, and we all have dogs. How many evacuations of you been thru? A school gymnasium is not the Taj Mahal, a few animals won't hurt anyone. You won't be getting any sleep anyway.

and anyone who doesn't leave a mobile home is just a fool, they'd be better off just taking their animals and camping out in their car somewhere inland

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: Lazy8s
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.


EDIT: What I find hilarious is how people are arguing about whether we should evacuate them based on taxes etc. Watching you guys argue is worth the time on this forum because none of the arguments make sense. Especially rickn. You realize your argment has NOTHING to do with what he posted, right? this is why people laugh at P&N

Zendari was the one that brought up the fact that dogs do not pay taxes. Neither to 10yr old kids, I guess parents can leave them behind too, right?

Firstly (in case you missed it in school) pets are not ACTUALLY people. You may think of them as a person but that doesn't make them a person. I might love my computer more than my girlfriend but that doesn't mean my computer is human and she isn't.

your reply

I pay tax dollars into public school system, yet I don't have any kids. So your arguement really it not all that valid. We pay taxes into all sorts of useless things, just look at your cellphone bill sometime

is the exact OPPOSITE argument zendari is making. He said dogs DON'T pay taxes so they can't go. you are saying you DO pay taxes on your kids so they shouldn't go either? Oh wait that means they SHOULD be able to go. Also, who cares if you don't have any kids, did you ever go to public school? Do you want to have a doctor do surgery on you when you have a heart attack? Do you want him to be educated or should he just have played alot of Operation when he was a kid?


to sum up incase you missed it
doesn't pay taxes = doesn't go (ie. dogs and cats)
does pay taxes = does go (ie. people and kids since their parents pay their taxes)

notice how your argument had nothing to do with what the person you were arguing with said?

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: Lazy8s
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.


EDIT: What I find hilarious is how people are arguing about whether we should evacuate them based on taxes etc. Watching you guys argue is worth the time on this forum because none of the arguments make sense. Especially rickn. You realize your argment has NOTHING to do with what he posted, right? this is why people laugh at P&N

Zendari was the one that brought up the fact that dogs do not pay taxes. Neither to 10yr old kids, I guess parents can leave them behind too, right?

This makes no sense. It is the government's job to give PEOPLE a place to evacuate in case of life-threatening emergencies

List of things that aren't people:

Cats
Dogs
Birds
Fish
Iguanas
Potted plants
Ferrets
Snakes

The government should absolutely not waste precious emergency management dollars evacuating Billy Bob's rotweiller just because Billy Bob is to stupid to leave his double-wide when a Cat 5 hurricane is getting ready to atomize it.

the government doesn't evacuate anyone. I am a floridian, I know the drill. Mandatory evacuations get issued, peoples in those areas get their things together and head to shelters, but nobody forces them too. It's not all that hard to allow people to bring their dogs and cats if they are secured and they have proper papers/tags. I have pet carriers. During Charlie we were under mandatory evacs, nobody in my neighborhood left, and we all have dogs. How many evacuations of you been thru? A school gymnasium is not the Taj Mahal, a few animals won't hurt anyone. You won't be getting any sleep anyway.

and anyone who doesn't leave a mobile home is just a fool, they'd be better off just taking their animals and camping out in their car somewhere inland

I live 18mi north of Fl so I have evacuated many times. My pets came, I put them in the back seat and gtfo of town. I do think a few dogs will cause a ton of problems. In fact my mother is so allergic 20min or so in there would kill her. Is that a problem or should she find somewhere else to go so other people can bring their dogs?

Laws are clear pets are not people, if your dog kills someone you are charged with murder. there are way too many considerations to be made when you take pets places. If you want a dog in florida you need to know that means it's YOUR responsability to get them out. If you can't handle that then don't have a dog.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: Lazy8s
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.


EDIT: What I find hilarious is how people are arguing about whether we should evacuate them based on taxes etc. Watching you guys argue is worth the time on this forum because none of the arguments make sense. Especially rickn. You realize your argment has NOTHING to do with what he posted, right? this is why people laugh at P&N

Zendari was the one that brought up the fact that dogs do not pay taxes. Neither to 10yr old kids, I guess parents can leave them behind too, right?

Firstly (in case you missed it in school) pets are not ACTUALLY people. You may think of them as a person but that doesn't make them a person. I might love my computer more than my girlfriend but that doesn't mean my computer is human and she isn't.

your reply

I pay tax dollars into public school system, yet I don't have any kids. So your arguement really it not all that valid. We pay taxes into all sorts of useless things, just look at your cellphone bill sometime

is the exact OPPOSITE argument zendari is making. He said dogs DON'T pay taxes so they can't go. you are saying you DO pay taxes on your kids so they shouldn't go either? Oh wait that means they SHOULD be able to go. Also, who cares if you don't have any kids, did you ever go to public school? Do you want to have a doctor do surgery on you when you have a heart attack? Do you want him to be educated or should he just have played alot of Operation when he was a kid?


to sum up incase you missed it
doesn't pay taxes = doesn't go (ie. dogs and cats)
does pay taxes = does go (ie. people and kids since their parents pay their taxes)

notice how your argument had nothing to do with what the person you were arguing with said?

my parents paid taxes so I could attend school, their job is done when I graduated. They continue to pay, and over $500 a year come out of my property taxes to pay for public schools, of which I have no children so I am paying for someone elses brat. Yet when I am told to evacuate to said public schools, I am told I can't take my dogs, which are members of my family. Maybe us single, pet owners can put our public school tax money into a doggy evacuation fund, so our animals have a place to go.


oh yea, and yes, I think everyone knows that animals are not people. But let me tell you, I've been around these forums for many years, and my two dogs could sniff and find their own a@#holes alot faster than some folks around here.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Speaking strictly for myself... If I have to evacuate for any reason, I'm taking my dog with me. End of story.

That said... We don't see many hurricaines up here. Just the occasional 7 pointer.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: OrByte
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.

A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.

They can stay behind for all I care. Then the Democrats can cry about the failures of the Bush admin and the NAACP can cry racism.

How did we go from the discussion of how people love their pets so much they'd die for them, to Democrats and the NAACP? Oh, I forgot, it's a Zentroll post - EVERYTHING is blamed on the democrats, the NAACP, liberals, and generally everyone who doesn't agree with him. The world could quite possibly be better if they all just disappeared one day, so that the rich religious conservatives would find themselves without scientists, doctors, artists, engineers, teachers... not to mention restaurant owners, workers, farmers, etc... in short - almost anyone who does more than shuffle monopoly money from one pocket into the other, or preach for a living. To be honest, I would love for Zendari to one day find himself in a world (different from mine hopefully) where everyone he hates and despises is gone. I don't think he'd survive for long.

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: rickn
my parents paid taxes so I could attend school, their job is done when I graduated. They continue to pay, and over $500 a year come out of my property taxes to pay for public schools, of which I have no children so I am paying for someone elses brat. Yet when I am told to evacuate to said public schools, I am told I can't take my dogs, which are members of my family. Maybe us single, pet owners can put our public school tax money into a doggy evacuation fund, so our animals have a place to go.


oh yea, and yes, I think everyone knows that animals are not people. But let me tell you, I've been around these forums for many years, and my two dogs could sniff and find their a@#holes alot faster than some folks around here.

I'm glad your dogs can find their butt so easily.

Anyways, I think you may have missed the idea of taxes. You parents paid so that their could be public schools not so that you could go. The idea is smarter people benefit the entire society. Why should people (like you) that have no kids get all the economic benefits that public education gives us but not have to pay for it? I don't drive on the highway can I stop paying for them? I don't break any laws can I stop paying for jails? I have medical insurance, can I stop taking care or people that don't? I live in georgia, I'd rather not pay to rebuild New Orleans.

See where that argument leads to? Despite how you feel (again your issue is you're taking your opinion and making it fact) your dog is not a member of your family. your dog is property owned by your family. Otherwise you could drive your car right in one of the classrooms to keep it safe. If you want to protect your property go ahead. Put your car on a 16-wheeler and drive it right on out of town, but don't ask the rest of us to pay for it.

 

[Codewiz]

I hate to break it to people but when I adopted my pets, I took on that responsibility. They are my responsibility to take care of. I take that very seriously and my dogs will be leaving with me if I evacuate.

I don't see what the big deal is if you make people evacuate before the last second. If I see a hurricane coming at Charleston, SC then I will leave iwth my dogs. End of Story.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: rickn
my parents paid taxes so I could attend school, their job is done when I graduated. They continue to pay, and over $500 a year come out of my property taxes to pay for public schools, of which I have no children so I am paying for someone elses brat. Yet when I am told to evacuate to said public schools, I am told I can't take my dogs, which are members of my family. Maybe us single, pet owners can put our public school tax money into a doggy evacuation fund, so our animals have a place to go.


oh yea, and yes, I think everyone knows that animals are not people. But let me tell you, I've been around these forums for many years, and my two dogs could sniff and find their a@#holes alot faster than some folks around here.

I'm glad your dogs can find their butt so easily.

Anyways, I think you may have missed the idea of taxes. You parents paid so that their could be public schools not so that you could go. The idea is smarter people benefit the entire society. Why should people (like you) that have no kids get all the economic benefits that public education gives us but not have to pay for it? I don't drive on the highway can I stop paying for them? I don't break any laws can I stop paying for jails? I have medical insurance, can I stop taking care or people that don't? I live in georgia, I'd rather not pay to rebuild New Orleans.

See where that argument leads to? Despite how you feel (again your issue is you're taking your opinion and making it fact) your dog is not a member of your family. your dog is property owned by your family. Otherwise you could drive your car right in one of the classrooms to keep it safe. If you want to protect your property go ahead. Put your car on a 16-wheeler and drive it right on out of town, but don't ask the rest of us to pay for it.

and the reversal could be said about Zendari, and his idea that pets don't pay taxes and they have no rights. It's the owners right to make sure their pets are taken care of, some of us wish to pioneer for the safety of our pets, Zendari chooses to pioneer for the safety of unborn fetus's. Someone has to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves.

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: rickn
my parents paid taxes so I could attend school, their job is done when I graduated. They continue to pay, and over $500 a year come out of my property taxes to pay for public schools, of which I have no children so I am paying for someone elses brat. Yet when I am told to evacuate to said public schools, I am told I can't take my dogs, which are members of my family. Maybe us single, pet owners can put our public school tax money into a doggy evacuation fund, so our animals have a place to go.


oh yea, and yes, I think everyone knows that animals are not people. But let me tell you, I've been around these forums for many years, and my two dogs could sniff and find their a@#holes alot faster than some folks around here.

I'm glad your dogs can find their butt so easily.

Anyways, I think you may have missed the idea of taxes. You parents paid so that their could be public schools not so that you could go. The idea is smarter people benefit the entire society. Why should people (like you) that have no kids get all the economic benefits that public education gives us but not have to pay for it? I don't drive on the highway can I stop paying for them? I don't break any laws can I stop paying for jails? I have medical insurance, can I stop taking care or people that don't? I live in georgia, I'd rather not pay to rebuild New Orleans.

See where that argument leads to? Despite how you feel (again your issue is you're taking your opinion and making it fact) your dog is not a member of your family. your dog is property owned by your family. Otherwise you could drive your car right in one of the classrooms to keep it safe. If you want to protect your property go ahead. Put your car on a 16-wheeler and drive it right on out of town, but don't ask the rest of us to pay for it.

and the reversal could be said about Zendari, and his idea that pets don't pay taxes and they have no rights. It's the owners right to make sure their pets are taken care of, some of us wish to pioneer for the safety of our pets, Zendari chooses to pioneer for the safety of unborn fetus's. Someone has to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves.

Exactly, so when a storm's coming evacuate before the last second and take your pets with you.

 

[NTB]

Originally posted by: Codewiz
I hate to break it to people but when I adopted my pets, I took on that responsibility. They are my responsibility to take care of. I take that very seriously and my dogs will be leaving with me if I evacuate.

I don't see what the big deal is if you make people evacuate before the last second. If I see a hurricane coming at Charleston, SC then I will leave iwth my dogs. End of Story.

And that is as it should be. I would certainly take my dog with me. I just think that people who won't get out of the way of an oncoming train simply because nothing is being done for their pets have a few screws loose

Nate

 

[Aisengard]

I hope the government response to this isn't at all like most of the responses here.

Most people wouldn't leave without their pets. I'm assuming most people own pets. So in this case, you have to address the problem, and can't just say "you people are too stupid" and move on.

It's a legitimate concern, and so the government should contract services specially designed to get pets to a safe location, and reunite them with their owners after the catastrophe.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
I hope the government response to this isn't at all like most of the responses here.

Most people wouldn't leave without their pets. I'm assuming most people own pets. So in this case, you have to address the problem, and can't just say "you people are too stupid" and move on.

It's a legitimate concern, and so the government should contract services specially designed to get pets to a safe location, and reunite them with their owners after the catastrophe.

Someone's very generous with government contracting and taxpayer dollars.

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Aisengard
I hope the government response to this isn't at all like most of the responses here.

Most people wouldn't leave without their pets. I'm assuming most people own pets. So in this case, you have to address the problem, and can't just say "you people are too stupid" and move on.

It's a legitimate concern, and so the government should contract services specially designed to get pets to a safe location, and reunite them with their owners after the catastrophe.

Someone's very generous with government contracting and taxpayer dollars.

Heh, not as generous as Bush. At least my idea puts tax dollars towards those who need it.

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Aisengard
I hope the government response to this isn't at all like most of the responses here.

Most people wouldn't leave without their pets. I'm assuming most people own pets. So in this case, you have to address the problem, and can't just say "you people are too stupid" and move on.

It's a legitimate concern, and so the government should contract services specially designed to get pets to a safe location, and reunite them with their owners after the catastrophe.

Someone's very generous with government contracting and taxpayer dollars.

Exactly. If they won't leave without their pets then DON'T! Take them with you! I don't understand how having a pet means that you can't get out of town without government money. I have done it just fine for years.

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Aisengard
I hope the government response to this isn't at all like most of the responses here.

Most people wouldn't leave without their pets. I'm assuming most people own pets. So in this case, you have to address the problem, and can't just say "you people are too stupid" and move on.

It's a legitimate concern, and so the government should contract services specially designed to get pets to a safe location, and reunite them with their owners after the catastrophe.

Someone's very generous with government contracting and taxpayer dollars.

Exactly. If they won't leave without their pets then DON'T! Take them with you! I don't understand how having a pet means that you can't get out of town without government money. I have done it just fine for years.

There's also the concern of all the pets that have to be left behind. What happens to those? Animal pounds and volunteer services can't deal with them all. It's a legitimate problem, and the government should contract these services.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Aisengard
I hope the government response to this isn't at all like most of the responses here.

Most people wouldn't leave without their pets. I'm assuming most people own pets. So in this case, you have to address the problem, and can't just say "you people are too stupid" and move on.

It's a legitimate concern, and so the government should contract services specially designed to get pets to a safe location, and reunite them with their owners after the catastrophe.

Someone's very generous with government contracting and taxpayer dollars.

Exactly. If they won't leave without their pets then DON'T! Take them with you! I don't understand how having a pet means that you can't get out of town without government money. I have done it just fine for years.

There's also the concern of all the pets that have to be left behind. What happens to those? Animal pounds and volunteer services can't deal with them all. It's a legitimate problem, and the government should contract these services.

quite true. after the storm you have a whole lotta rabid animal running lose, which causes concern for public safety, which is a goverment priority. so in the end, all you do is negate the inevitable. you can either attempt to deal with pets before the storm, or after it. either way you're gonna have to deal with them. Katrina showed us that.

 

[Aisengard]

And I think that most of the US population would support funding the saving of animals. Plus it would look good on your record if you proposed and/or voted for the "save the animals" bill.

I wonder if this study will make that kind of thing come about.

 

[keird]

I deployed to New Orleans for Hurricane Katrina. Our Task Force conducted Security, as well as Search & Rescue operations in the deepest parts of the flooded city. Our first priority was to get evacuees to an airport (not the Superdome) for transit to relief centers around the country. One of those places was Camp Edwards, Massachusetts. They were flown from our Aid Station via helicopter - no pets allowed. From the airport they went to any number of places where shelter (3 story barracks that I've stayed in comfortably) as well as support services were rapidly emplaced for evacuees. Anecdotally, I learned that despite the hundreds of beds in 2-4 man rooms that awaited them on Cape Cod, running water with showers and latrines that have served me more than adequately in the past, and numerous soldiers and civilians mobilized to meet as much of the evacuees needs as possible - many declined for whatever reason. Despite tens of thousands of evacuees, hundreds of beds went unused in just one location that I know of.

That being said, pets were never permitted. This isn?t because Soldiers are cruel. Quite the opposite. We created our own pounds to hold animals, we unofficially collaborated with civilian animal rescue volunteers to have them care for the animals and evacuate them to shelters, when rescuing an animal from a home we wrote down the address so that the animal could once again be re-united with their owners. Soldiers took whatever time they had available to care for, walk, feed and water these animals.

I?m not going to guess why these animals were left behind. There are probably many reasons. One gentleman was rescued with his dog that was clearly more cared for and loved than the man treated himself. I was moments away from calling in a helicopter for evacuation and telling this man that his beloved pet wouldn?t be able to go with him. Fortunately his son was asking for him at another unit and we ascertained that his son could take both him and his dog. Small victories.

One puppy was befriended by one of my medics and I leashed him in the back of a pick-up truck. The puppy leaped out and nearly strangled itself. That medic got in the back of the truck and held him while we transported him to one of our decon stations and then our unofficial dog pound.

The thing that I took away from all of this is perhaps a civilian-run humane society is the best answer to the pets and that they?ll need donations, volunteers, coordination and a disaster plan to mobilize for massive disasters. Oh, and take your pets with you when you receive a mandatory evacuation order ? with food, water, documentation and an animal carrying cage

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: OrByte
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.

A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.

They can stay behind for all I care. Then the Democrats can cry about the failures of the Bush admin and the NAACP can cry racism.

Neither do you. You are sucking off of government school loans and living in your parents shack trying to act like you're Donald Trump on a freaking message board. Poor Zentroll trying to be something that he isn't.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
I hope the government response to this isn't at all like most of the responses here.

Most people wouldn't leave without their pets. I'm assuming most people own pets. So in this case, you have to address the problem, and can't just say "you people are too stupid" and move on.

If the shoe fits...

I went through the Grand Forks, ND flood of '97. When the dikes broke, my wife and I left, and the cats stayed. I filled up the bathtub, ripped open their food bag, and left. Was I supposed to wade a half mile through water up to my stomach with three cats perched on my head?

Somebody went in a week later by boat and got them out. They were all fine.

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: Lazy8s
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.

schools are evacuation centers, and they do not allow pets in during evacuations. my dogs are like my kids, we should be allowed to bring them. course it is the owners responsibility to care for them and to make sure the animal is properly secured and have the proper paperwork (pet carriers, providing up-to-date vaccinations tags etc). But things like snakes and ******, forget it.

why is your dog better than anothers snake?

i love my dogs, but if it comes down to risking my familys safety over an animal, ill choose my family every time. anyone that puts a pet on the same level as a child or parent or spouse when it comes to riding out a natural disaster is just a...well lets just say i question their priorities, and probably their sanity.

besides, you dont have to go to a shelter. if it comes down to risking my life or taking my pet, ill sleep in a walmart parking lot with my dog for a few days rather than stay and die. what good does that do the pet, not to mention your family?

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: NTB

Originally posted by: waggy
let them ignore it. they get NOTHING from the goverment though.

Technically I agree with you, but if any politician values their political well-being, you can bet it won't happen.Nate

I agree with waggy.
Which is why I wouldnt last 1 week in public office.

 

[halik]

if you're dumb enough to do that, it's better for the gene pool if you stay

 

[palehorse]

i consider my pets to be much-loved members of my immediate family.. i actually love them more than I do some of my human family members. I'd never leave them behind... i'd go down with the ship if I had to.

but hey, to each their own.