Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 595

1 members and 594 guests
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,916
Threads: 249,118
Posts: 2,572,200
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, Wilson1885
  • 07-08-2010, 04:49 PM
    jfreels
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ham View Post
    Thats debatable, you dont see many dogs in pet stores and people still buy and abuse alot of them. (but I do see your point)\

    Not only that, you are ruining the livliehood of a large number of families, and shutting down buisinesses that help the local economy!

    People need to step in and take personal responsibility for the pets they buy, it is not the governments job to run every nuance of our lives. If people abuse these animals than they should be punished, there should not be some arbitrary law that unjustly punishes everyone for the idiocy of others...

    These blanket bans will do less to protect these exploited animals than they think...

    Agreed.
  • 07-08-2010, 05:01 PM
    Ham
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    These laws they are enacting to blanket ban animals are so illogical to me, they are not addressing the root of the problem which is the animal abuse itself (this is supposed to be their reasoning for the laws in the first place)
    If the laws that are already in place were enforced more vigorously, than I believe that it would do more to protect pets. Animal Abusers should be rooted out and viciously punished beyond what standard sentencing is today.
    In singapore even grafitti is punishable by public caning, this seems more suitable to me than a piddling fine and a few hours community service (which is what most convicted animal abusers receive). Let the punishment fit the crime, if you cause pain and suffering for the creatures under your care than you should suffer the same fate. Thats the way I feel anyway...
  • 07-08-2010, 10:42 PM
    nixer
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    just so everyone knows this also includes corals!
  • 07-08-2010, 11:34 PM
    wolfy-hound
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    San Fran was always one of the most pet friendly cities ever, I guess they're changing that.

    People buying pets in other towns isn't a good answer! If people stop buying the companion animals, then they get used to a "non pet home" and that means when HSUS goes for national bans on all pets, they don't CARE. Plus, "Oh it's just San Fran, people can go buy pets elsewhere"? Oh no.. San Fran will be city #1, not the last city this happens in.

    My prediction for the last 6 months has been that in ten years, the US won't have pets at all, unless you are super rich and import your dogs or cats from out of country. No matter how hard we seem to try to fight it, they just have more money and more ignorant people and fanatics on their side. Some days I don't feel like anything I can do makes any difference.
  • 07-09-2010, 07:15 AM
    nixer
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wolfy-hound View Post
    San Fran was always one of the most pet friendly cities ever, I guess they're changing that.

    People buying pets in other towns isn't a good answer! If people stop buying the companion animals, then they get used to a "non pet home" and that means when HSUS goes for national bans on all pets, they don't CARE. Plus, "Oh it's just San Fran, people can go buy pets elsewhere"? Oh no.. San Fran will be city #1, not the last city this happens in.

    My prediction for the last 6 months has been that in ten years, the US won't have pets at all, unless you are super rich and import your dogs or cats from out of country. No matter how hard we seem to try to fight it, they just have more money and more ignorant people and fanatics on their side. Some days I don't feel like anything I can do makes any difference.

    wolfy keep your hopes up.
    in the end all governments eventually fail
  • 07-09-2010, 07:46 AM
    nixer
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    is there any updates on this?

    i found a new article posted today

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/...entry_id=67477

    must read it clearly says they want to ban all pets

    there is also another one on banning of all cats in S.F.
  • 07-09-2010, 08:12 AM
    Lolo76
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nixer View Post
    is there any updates on this?

    i found a new article posted today

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/...entry_id=67477

    must read it clearly says they want to ban all pets

    there is also another one on banning of all cats in S.F.

    They don't want to ban owning pets, just selling them in pet shops... I live in San Francisco, so I'd know if that was happening!! We already have so many restrictions here in terms of sales, it's really not going to change much. Only a few pet shops still sell live animals, and we're talking guinea pigs, parakeets and hamsters. There is one shop in the business of selling reptiles (colubrids only), so they will be affected quite badly. No biggie for me, since Daly City & SSF are only 5-10 minutes away - and already where I go for my pet needs & feeders. :P
  • 07-09-2010, 08:18 AM
    Lolo76
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ham View Post
    Drugs are illegal in San Francisco, doesnt seem to stop anyone from doing them though...

    P.S. Marijuana is basically legal in San Francisco (all you need is a "prescription," which anyone & their mother can get for $90), so that might not be the best example. :rofl: I get your point though, LOL.
  • 07-09-2010, 08:23 AM
    AaronP
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    SF is freaking crazy...
  • 07-09-2010, 08:32 AM
    Lolo76
    Re: S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jfreels View Post
    On another note though, it just bans the sale in the city limits and from my understanding, you could still breed within the city with no fault. You just can't have a storefront.

    That's basically how I understand it... animal control generally doesn't care what you keep in your home, they only care about what's sold in stores. And like I said above, they already have many restrictions on that - you can't sell pythons, boas, gerbils, hedgehogs, ferrets, ASFs, and probably more that I don't even know about.

    Quote:

    I'm against the goverment regulating if I can purchase a "companion animal", but at the same time, I am tired of animals going to bad homes. A parent will be less inclined to drive to another city just to get an $8 hamster.
    That's not so true around here, since we're the type of metro where everyone drives from town to town... most people live & work in different places, usually commuting from the Peninsula to the city (I did the opposite for years). So for us, it's really commonplace to live in San Francisco and shop in Daly City or Colma/SSF - they have all the good shopping anyway, since SF is very anti-big-box store. :colbert: There are only three Petcos and one Petsmart in SF city limits, and they rarely even have mice for sale.

    Quote:

    And if SF is anything like Atlanta, there are very few places to actually get those animals within the city limits. Unfortunately, the good independant stores have all closed down.
    Yup. And you'd be really hard-pressed to find dogs & cats in a pet shop, since that's been passe for YEARS... only one left is Serramonte Pet Shop, and they deal with protests and complaints on a regular basis. For good reason too, since their dogs are total puppy-mill products. :( It's sad that independent shops are scarce, but I'm not sad about the lack of live animal sales.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1