My big problem with this story is how the local authorities reacted to it.
In most cities, towns, etc you need a license to own a dog. Usually part of this involves showing the local government proof that the animal is up to date on its shots.
If someone has a dog illegally, by not registering it and/or not getting its shots on time this is a big no-no. BUT when this happens usually what the local authorities do is:
(1) fine the owner for breaking the law and
(2) allow the owner to keep the animal if they pay the fines, get a license, and get those shots done in a timely & respectful manner.
Usually the only time a local government steps in and immediately confiscates the animal is if it's a neglect situation or a hoarding situation or something to that effect. It's pretty rare for dog owners to immediately have their dogs taken away simply by failing to file the right paperwork.
There's simply no reason why this story couldn't have been handled more respectfully. Give the owner a fine, give the owner a window to comply with the law and then take off the kiddie gloves if the owner refuses to take appropriate action.
Yes people need to follow laws as best as they can, but the government should care more about compliance than reacting harshly because of being offended that some citizen dared to break a local regulation. Case in point I know of a story where a woman bought a home in a historical district in some small town and went out of her way to track down some expensive antique light fixtures for her porch that would have been a perfect match to what was originally used based on antique photographs of the property. The owner did not realize that all modifications in the historic district required approval by a board of local officials. When the official(s) spotted the lights on their way in to work one day they responded by (1) fining her, (2) forcing her to take them down, (3) refused to ever grant her approval for putting them back on. Such over-reactions are counter productive, mean-spirited, and boarder on paternalism tyranny. The purpose of the historic district was to do exactly what this lady did, and they should have worked with her since that would have benefited the entire community.
TL;DR People need to try working with each other first.
Reply With Quote