• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

LA bans store pet sales from commercial breeders

Cephus said:
Written in 1952 by Bob Merrill and recorded by Patti Page.
Click to expand...

We have a winner lol

Thanks

I thought it may be her, but I went all fuzzy in the brain
 
sangha said:
It's called "regulating commerce" and it's in the constitution
Click to expand...

The Constitution grants Congress power to regulate interstate commerce. Congress is not involved when a city adopts an ordinance. L.A. was just acting under the power California grants it to make laws regulating the public health, safety, and welfare. If this ordinance reduces the number of animals the city shelters have to euthanize, it will save the residents of L.A. money.
 
I don't live in LA, nor would I ever... so I don't care what city statutes they pass.

of fall the places to live in SoCal, LA is among the worst.... some of the surrounding cities are ok, but LA flat out sucks.
beyond a few cool tourist attractions, it has no redeeming qualities.
 
Thrilla said:
I don't live in LA, nor would I ever... so I don't care what city statutes they pass.

of fall the places to live in SoCal, LA is among the worst.... some of the surrounding cities are ok, but LA flat out sucks.
beyond a few cool tourist attractions, it has no redeeming qualities.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's pretty much the case. I hate even driving through LA. It's a complete cesspool.
 
sangha said:
True but states have the power to delegate that to local govts.
Click to expand...

Of course they have the power but that does not make it a good idea. If a person opened a business to sell dogs/cats then they are now screwed and will likely have difficulty paying their lease and employees. Folks in LA wishing to buy a (non-shelter) dog/cat can simply go outside the city to a still legal pet shop.
 
ludin said:
umm that is a terrible idea.

those dogs in rescues and such are almost like special needs animals at times.
I know we tried getting a dog from a rescue. we gave up as every time we found
a dog that we liked they had things like no kids or not good with this or that.

it was basically impossible.

they have rules in place for rescue dogs to ensure that the family that gets them
are able to take care of them.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. I wonder if special needs animals would stay at shelters and the more easy ones would go to pet stores? That'd be kind of sad too though... no one would visit the shelters anymore because they know all the messed up ones are there.

I bet you they'd only give the young ones (under 6 months) to pet stores, not adults.
 
Northern Light said:
That's a good point. I wonder if special needs animals would stay at shelters and the more easy ones would go to pet stores? That'd be kind of sad too though... no one would visit the shelters anymore because they know all the messed up ones are there.

I bet you they'd only give the young ones (under 6 months) to pet stores, not adults.
Click to expand...

The additional is that some of those dogs can have medical issues. you don't really know what you are getting.
 
Southern Dad said:
Give it some time.
Click to expand...

I'll put that in the same category as all the other right wing predictions such as "Romney will win the election", "Obamacare will destroy millions of jobs", "doctors offices will be swamped with new patients", "hyper-inflation", and "a tidal wave of illegal immigrants" -none of which ever came true
 
With all the bad stuff we hear and read about LA, they finally did right. This law should be adopted nationwide. We have too many idiots about who rather have a pet bred specially for them, in a puppy mill or by being to doggone stupid to have them neutered.

BRAVO LA. SPOT ON.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Of course they have the power but that does not make it a good idea.
Click to expand...

In a democracy, people have the right to pass stupid laws.

If a person opened a business to sell dogs/cats then they are now screwed and will likely have difficulty paying their lease and employees. Folks in LA wishing to buy a (non-shelter) dog/cat can simply go outside the city to a still legal pet shop.
Click to expand...

I mourn for all the con men who were put out of business by the laws which prohibit fraud. I weep for the former slave-traders and their employees and sweat shop owners and the children they employed
 
jonny5 said:
Seems pretty standard for liberal policy making. Treat the symptom, not the cause.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with LA's way of doing things. The City Council is elected in by the people and only serve 4 year terms.
Because LA's populous is likely liberal then it stands to reason that the Council is also liberal (with 14 Democrats and 1 Republican this is likely).
The people's will should matter.

I agree that there should be more laws directed at governing breeding and it would help if so many of the wealthy didn't see pets as a fashion accessory too (this spans conservatives and liberals really).
Caveat though. I am not going to cry over laws passed that even close up one place relying on puppy mills and breeding assembly lines.
 
jonny5 said:
Seems pretty standard for liberal policy making. Treat the symptom, not the cause.
Click to expand...

How do you propose we treat the cause? Arrest those who fail to take care, house and neuter their animals properly, so we won't have millions of unwanted pets euthanized in shelters?
 
Lovebug said:
How do you propose we treat the cause? Arrest those who fail to take care, house and neuter their animals properly, so we won't have millions of unwanted pets euthanized in shelters?
Click to expand...

Not arrest, its a non violent crime. Prevent ownership in the first place of uneutered pets. No breeding without a licence. No selling animals that havent been neutered. Much like owning a car, if you cant do it without harming others, there should be consequences.
 
jonny5 said:
Not arrest, its a non violent crime. Prevent ownership in the first place of uneutered pets. No breeding without a licence. No selling animals that havent been neutered. Much like owning a car, if you cant do it without harming others, there should be consequences.
Click to expand...

Exactly how do you expect to do that? Backyard breeders don't get licenses and they sell to other people who don't care about licenses. Cars operate on public highways. Individual homes are private property. Pets are private property. You cannot stop them from breeding if they want to.
 
Deuce said:
Animal cruelty is not a property right.
Click to expand...

What does this law have to do with animal cruelty? From what I can tell it bars retails shops from selling animals from breeders.
 
Mason66 said:
You can't put anything past fanatics though.
Click to expand...

You think people wanting to prevent animal cruelty would deliberately write a law requiring a group of animals be put down for no reason?
 
Henrin said:
What does this law have to do with animal cruelty? From what I can tell it bars retails shops from selling animals from breeders.
Click to expand...

Ahh, I see you were commenting on laws whose background you're unaware of.

Fix that, you'll find the connection.
 
Deuce said:
Ahh, I see you were commenting on laws whose background you're unaware of.

Fix that, you'll find the connection.
Click to expand...

Why don't you inform me since I really don't care to look into it further. If the article is correct it doesn't take into account what the breeders were up to, but only that they are breeders.
 
Henrin said:
Why don't you inform me since I really don't care to look into it further. If the article is correct it doesn't take into account what the breeders were up to, but only that they are breeders.
Click to expand...

The "commercial breeders" being targeted by the law are also commonly known as "puppy mills" and their conditions are abhorrent.
 
Deuce said:
The "commercial breeders" being targeted by the law are also commonly known as "puppy mills" and their conditions are abhorrent.
Click to expand...

It appears to speak towards all breeders. :shrug:

Regardless, the law isn't even directed at breeders, but retail shops.
 
Henrin said:
It appears to speak towards all breeders. :shrug:

Regardless, the law isn't even directed at breeders, but retail shops.
Click to expand...

Yes, it goes after retail shops because it's a city ordinance and they only have so much jurisdiction and authority.
 
Here's the funny part. The city is thinking that passing this law will do anything to fix the problem they see. Really it won't. People who can afford to buy these purebred puppies can afford cars. They can shop elsewhere for them. Does the city think that because the local pet stores no longer have puppies from puppy mills the rich are suddenly going to say to their driver, "Take me to the pound so I can adopt a mutt." Oh hell no.
 
Southern Dad said:
Here's the funny part. The city is thinking that passing this law will do anything to fix the problem they see. Really it won't. People who can afford to buy these purebred puppies can afford cars. They can shop elsewhere for them. Does the city think that because the local pet stores no longer have puppies from puppy mills the rich are suddenly going to say to their driver, "Take me to the pound so I can adopt a mutt." Oh hell no.
Click to expand...

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
 
sangha said:
Umm, they cut taxes and ran their economies according to right wing economic theory
And their economies suck
Click to expand...

California has Republicans and "right wingers". Lots of them. People seem to forget that small "annoying" fact.
Could be why California has not taken a complete economic slide into the Pacific......yet.
Not to worry, so many of them are leaving (and taking their productivity with them) that California will soon enough be home to the next Detroits etc.

There is a long list of California cities in deep trouble financially.

Will California become America's first failed state? | US news | The Guardian
These California cities could be next in bankruptcy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom