Tuesday, August 4, 2009

News Reel - Ontario Dog Owner Fined

Ok - check this crap out ...


Ont. dog owner fined $14,000 for online breeder bashing


Tell me how much that sucks! So this person buys a puppy from a breeder, then has to euthanize it because of the extreme case of hip dysplasia so they got a 'replacement puppy' from the breeder. The replacement puppy was diagnosed with epilepsy! The owner then posted on a website forum to watch out for this breeder ... then the breeder was somehow able to have them charged?!


WTF?!

11 comments:

GoLightly said...

Did you read the comments?

wow.
What a fluster-cuck.

The dog owner was fined for complaining?
Not the breeder of unsound puppies?

Something very wrong in this country..
I do have to say, (and I will duck as I say this) Quebec seems to have a higher proportion of puppy mills.
Can't remember where I read that.

Why would an Ontario person have to go to Quebec for a lab puppy anyway?
Poor puppies. Way too many of them. No homes for the grown-up dogs.
Sad state of affairs.

shane rocket said...

HOW THE LIVING HELL DOES THIS HAPPEN??? AARRRRGGGHHH i hate people.

sadermaxx said...

In my mind, the person who bought the puppy was doing a service. That breeder apparently is a bad breeder and doesn't care if they are breeding good healthy dogs.

giantspeckledchihuahua said...

This is soooooo wrong on so many levels. from the judges ignorant decision to the peoples choice to buy a dog from a commercial enterprise, despite all the bad press pet stores, puppy mills and commercial kennels receive.

mytwh said...

This is crazy. We should be able to say what we want when we want. Sounds like she was just stating the facts-both dogs got sick!

I wonder if the outcome would have been different in the US? I have no idea as I have no clue about law in either country, but it makes one wonder...

Poor lady, I hope this gets overturned.

Gus, Louie and Callie said...

Now that really is not right... What is this world coming too....


Big Sloppy Kisses
Gus, Louie and Callie

Kristen said...

I would comment with something witty...but I don't want to get sued.

DogsDeserveFreedom said...

GoLightly ...

I only read some of the comments. I haven't many nice things to say about that.

Here's the thing ... and I hate to look at it this way, but I have to. The law states that dogs are property, right? A dishwasher is property too ... so if this woman has been fined for writing a bad review about this place, what is to stop the dishwasher company from suing the next person who writes a crummy review about their product??

shane rocket ...

Crazy, no?

sadermaxx, giantspeckledchihuahua, Gus, Louie and Callie ...

I agree wholeheartedly with you.

mytwh ...

I don't know if it would have been different or not. Possibly. I don't know what that judge was thinking with this ruling.

Kristen ...

Very nice

GoLightly said...

"The law states that dogs are property, right? A dishwasher is property too ... so if this woman has been fined for writing a bad review about this place, what is to stop the dishwasher company from suing the next person who writes a crummy review about their product??"

Exactly right. That's why that ruling is so wrong..

Viatecio said...

I don't think it was the review itself that prompted the action as it was the ad hominem to the breeder.

So because the product is defective, the logic of most people jumps to the conclusion the company (and whoever runs it) is obviously inept and idiots to boot.

I can see both sides of this, where the owner is indeed an idiot and just breeding for profit...and I can see how the owner feels that he is doing a service by providing puppies to dog lovers, and the buyer just got dealt two bad hands. This is an issue that should have been kept between the breeder, the buyer and the courts. I would have encouraged some announcements or whatever that an inordinant amount of sick puppies come this kennel, but outright bashing them is, I think, the wrong way to go about fixing the issue. It's in the same church (different pew though) as blowing up an animal lab to 'save the animals' within. It is one-sided and allows no room for resolution because obviously, there's only one right answer, and that comes from the one with the moral ineptitude to do such a thing.

If that sounds like I'm sticking up for puppy mills, I'm not. I just try to see from every angle possible before I go passing judgement.

DogsDeserveFreedom said...

Viatecio ...

I disagree.

Breeders should be promoting healthy breeding stock and spaying/neutering anything and everything else.

Both hip dysplasia and epilepsy are hereditary.

Good breeders check the health of their dogs before breeding them. If this breeder is not doing so, then the public should be made aware of the lack of care taken.