Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: kingu

It’s not some hunk of inanimate property, but an animal we are talking about. The animal’s welfare in such a situation does—and should—come into play.


50 posted on 08/17/2012 1:15:29 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: 9YearLurker
It’s not some hunk of inanimate property, but an animal we are talking about. The animal’s welfare in such a situation does—and should—come into play.

Then animals are no longer private property, they are community property, and thus every pet owner is now immune to any lawsuits involving dog bites.. Legally, it is property. It is private property. Animal or not, this does not change.

And from what I can tell, with the scant information provided, is that the only dumb action by the owner is taking the dog on such a hike in the first place. Everything else seems very much like the actions of a concerned pet owner, including the desire to get his pet back.

Now, if there's any evidence of direct intentional abuse, that's another matter. But until such evidence is provided, I gotta say: The guy's gotta pay for his dog's rescue. He also should get his dog back.

56 posted on 08/17/2012 1:40:32 PM PDT by kingu (Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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