View Full Version : Thumbs up or thumbs down on house-pet limits?
May 30th, 2009, 07:18 PM
I'm doing a school project and need to know what people think about house-pet limit laws.
So, thumbs up (like them), or thumbs down (hate them)?
May 30th, 2009, 08:08 PM
People should be able to keep as many pets as they want as long as they keep them under control and care for them properly.
Thumbs point in the downward direction.
May 30th, 2009, 08:29 PM
My thoughts exactly.
May 30th, 2009, 08:42 PM
Why does the government tell us what we CAN own and what we CAN'T own? I can't raise a dog anymore because they told us we can't (don't ask why). :(
I'm leaning towards the down direction, BUT then again, there are some reasons why those rules are there. But I still don't like them.
May 30th, 2009, 09:59 PM
Yeah, I don't think they should tell us how many should be owned. If they're not suffering, it shouldn't matter. I also dislike how they're trying to limit what kinds of pets we can own. I understand that not allowing dangerous species to be kept as pets, maybe except with a permit, is a good thing, but they're also trying to limit reptiles and other exotics. Even hamsters, which aren't exotic at all. O_o
May 30th, 2009, 10:13 PM
Hamsters, are you serious?! They aren't exotic, they can't even hurt you! Well they bite, but still!
May 30th, 2009, 10:28 PM
Restricting the species that can be kept as pets is fine with me, to a degree. I don't want a lion in my neighborhood or anything.
But such laws should be kept to an absolute minimum. Restricting hamsters goes way beyond that.
May 31st, 2009, 06:47 AM
Hmm it varies on the situation, yeah i wouldn't mind the laws, and i would definatly DON"T wanna see someone walking their Lion. xD
But the Hamsters? I'm gonna go Hulk on them.
May 31st, 2009, 11:36 PM
If the reason for limiting the number of pets is to prevent animal abuse and neglect, than the limits are redundant, as existing abuse and neglect laws should already cover that.
Jun 2nd, 2009, 08:35 AM
I'm for some limits but the people who were going to abuse the system (and neglect their animals) any way aren't going to follow the laws. I think the only people you will see punished is someone who is trying to do a good thing by taking in a few extra strays and then gets in trouble. I think on something like this you have to judge it case by case.
Jun 2nd, 2009, 01:19 PM
Well, when you've got the creepy cat lady living down the street that's when you know it's getting out of control. No more than 10 pets per household, I think. The fact is, if someone with over that amount loses a job and then can hardly afford to feed himself or his family, the pets become second to any sort of food, which then becomes animal abuse when they are not taken care of properly. Thumbs up for the law, because otherwise there would be too much abuse, and that I can't stand.
Jun 4th, 2009, 04:49 PM
there should be a nether because you should only have pets you can keep alive and don't destroy stuff it's about how many 1 person can handle
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.2 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.