Dad ordered to give up soldier’s dogs

oceanbreeze · #31 (**permalink**) 04-22-2008, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForReal

Yes, one would think the military would have some avenue of recourse for our fighting troops, maybe even the local humane society could "foster care" his dogs. Then again, maybe the soldier could resolve his own problem by allowing someone else to care for his dogs. Is it really "our" problem?

Interesting point.
It was during the first Gulf War that the military discovered that the dual service member needed to have a family plan in action. In case both parents were deployed, someone had to take the kids.

It only makes sense that single soldiers have a plan of action for their pets. I know the community would foster the pets.

I think to have a kennel license in NC is only $50.

Uncensored2008 · #32 (**permalink**) 04-23-2008, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakuanSoho

I am sure that running a kennel involves some sort of course and test, as well as having certain items at the house to ensure the humane treatment of the animals (probably cages, ect ect).

Not even out here in wacky California. The license is just another way to gouge money from the citizenry at large.

More than 3 dogs requires a kennel license. In Los Angeles county it runs $250 a year.

Carson · #33 (**permalink**) 04-24-2008, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45

I am sorry but rules are rules. This may sound like a petty deal but somewhere along the line this was an issue with people having a pack of dogs and letting them run free. Yeah the system is archaic but you don't just accept it and fuck this poor guy, you change it While it seems that we should allow some leeway the problem then becomes, what about Micheal Vicks dogs, should someone be allowed to take care of them while he is in the slammer? yeah obviously somebody should be allowed to take care of them Where do you draw the line. Unless the animals are a danger to people there should be no line.

A few years ago a woman had several pet goats in a residential neighborhood. The city law was that you could not have "farm" animals in a residential neighborhood. Some neighbors wanted her to be able to keep them until one neighbor said, if she is allowed to keep her goats then I am going to get pigs or maybe even a cow or chickens.

No, if the law says 4 or less, maybe the father should get rid of one of his dogs rather than try to make the city look like the bad guy here.

The city is the bad guy here, it is a temporary situation. But I guess you can't expect city employees to understand words like temporary

Carson · #34 (**permalink**) 04-24-2008, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dab11999

I don't think military members are above the law. I, personally, don't have much love for dogs. But, if they mean that much to him, why not spend the money and put them in a real kennel?

If you don't like dogs you gotta be a horrible person, straight up