Idk why you think I’m upset. I’m more shocked than anything.
I would think most people tend to support conservation of different animals and whatnot, except for maybe mosquitoes (and even then I’d be hesitant). It’s also blowing my mind that you’re heavily upvoted. I had no idea some of y’all thought this way.
That said, I’m just going to assume I don’t fully understand what you’re saying since it seems so batshit crazy to me. It’s clear this isn’t really an honest, open dialogue anyway, and that’s totally fine
Not the OP, but let me step in. Dog breeds are something we have created as humans, they’re not wild species that need to be preserved and don’t have any effect on ecosystems.
Dog breeding is largely negative at this point as most breeds have outlived their original use and are now seen as designer pets. We continue to breed them as there is continued demand, but quite often these breeds are so inbred that they have genetic health issues. We also oversupply and don’t fix/neuter enough, meaning there are always unwanted dogs without homes.
I love dogs, but all of mine have been rescues and I would have no problem with the vast majority of breeds being phased out. There are still some niche cases where dogs are actually used for their breed’s purpose (dog sled, search/rescue, hunting, etc) but no, I don’t think a chihuahua or a pug should exist and would not be sad if breeders stopped producing more.
Thanks for sharing your POV. It’s definitely the first time I’ve heard something that radical about dogs, which are basically the most beloved living thing in the US, but I can somewhat understand where you’re coming from.
I’d definitely support making it more difficult to own a dog, but mostly because many of the dog owners I’ve met are borderline abusive to their pets (I’m mainly thinking of neglect here). I don’t think I could ever support a ban on entire breeds. That’s where it starts to seem crazy to me. Make it a felony to own a dog that bites someone or something but don’t make it a felony to simply own the dog. We don’t even have such laws for people that own guns or swords and surely those lead to more deaths/injuries than dogs.
I feel I should clarify that I don’t hold this position because dogs are dangerous or think it should be harder to have a dog. I hold it because I think our breeding programs are creating a lot of animal suffering.
From puppy mills where dogs are kept in horrible conditions, to overproduction of animals so that there aren’t enough homes, to propagating breeds that can barely breath so that they have an “adorable” face. Dog breeding is exploitative and re-enforces that dogs are simply a commodity.
I’m not sure a law making it more difficult to own a dog would have the effect you intend, as there are already too many dogs in need of homes. I think a more palatable middle ground to elimination would be regulation of breeders to ensure that they are not producing more dogs than can be homed.
Idk why you think I’m upset. I’m more shocked than anything.
I would think most people tend to support conservation of different animals and whatnot, except for maybe mosquitoes (and even then I’d be hesitant). It’s also blowing my mind that you’re heavily upvoted. I had no idea some of y’all thought this way.
That said, I’m just going to assume I don’t fully understand what you’re saying since it seems so batshit crazy to me. It’s clear this isn’t really an honest, open dialogue anyway, and that’s totally fine
Not the OP, but let me step in. Dog breeds are something we have created as humans, they’re not wild species that need to be preserved and don’t have any effect on ecosystems.
Dog breeding is largely negative at this point as most breeds have outlived their original use and are now seen as designer pets. We continue to breed them as there is continued demand, but quite often these breeds are so inbred that they have genetic health issues. We also oversupply and don’t fix/neuter enough, meaning there are always unwanted dogs without homes.
I love dogs, but all of mine have been rescues and I would have no problem with the vast majority of breeds being phased out. There are still some niche cases where dogs are actually used for their breed’s purpose (dog sled, search/rescue, hunting, etc) but no, I don’t think a chihuahua or a pug should exist and would not be sad if breeders stopped producing more.
Thanks for sharing your POV. It’s definitely the first time I’ve heard something that radical about dogs, which are basically the most beloved living thing in the US, but I can somewhat understand where you’re coming from.
I’d definitely support making it more difficult to own a dog, but mostly because many of the dog owners I’ve met are borderline abusive to their pets (I’m mainly thinking of neglect here). I don’t think I could ever support a ban on entire breeds. That’s where it starts to seem crazy to me. Make it a felony to own a dog that bites someone or something but don’t make it a felony to simply own the dog. We don’t even have such laws for people that own guns or swords and surely those lead to more deaths/injuries than dogs.
I feel I should clarify that I don’t hold this position because dogs are dangerous or think it should be harder to have a dog. I hold it because I think our breeding programs are creating a lot of animal suffering.
From puppy mills where dogs are kept in horrible conditions, to overproduction of animals so that there aren’t enough homes, to propagating breeds that can barely breath so that they have an “adorable” face. Dog breeding is exploitative and re-enforces that dogs are simply a commodity.
I’m not sure a law making it more difficult to own a dog would have the effect you intend, as there are already too many dogs in need of homes. I think a more palatable middle ground to elimination would be regulation of breeders to ensure that they are not producing more dogs than can be homed.