Rat in the Hat
Gold Member
- Mar 31, 2010
- 21,949
- 6,020
- 198
The government will take away your children for less, but forget we value pets above people.
You didn't answer my question.
In addition, dogs can survive outside on their own for far longer than a human child. And a dog living with a homeless person is far better off than a dog living on their own.
I clearly stated that the person needed to be able to take care of themselves first, before considering the care of an animal. If they can't care for themsleves, then by definition they are not going to be able to care for the animal. I also made mention of standards for care. Can the person keep the laws regarding pet ownership? Is the dog on a leash at all times he is in public (all the time)? If he needs assistance with the care or feeding of the pet from the state, he probably falls under additional rules and restrictions.
So if a homeless person is capable of taking adequate care of themselves and a pet, and keeps their pet on a leash (tied to a pole in the OP article) then they should be free from some outsider offering a friend money for the dog.
That is what you're saying, right?