By: Lis

Oh, my! This is almost funny!

By Legal definition there is no such thing as a Puppy Mill. Why? Because there is no legal definition. So basically there is no such thing as a Puppy Mill being that the definition is left to the individual.

I live next door to a bodega. There is, as far as I know, no legal definition of "bodega." And yet, somehow, no one seems to be confused about whether or not I live next to one, or perhaps might live next to a greengrocer's, or a butcher shop, or a supermarket, or a deli. Even without a legal definition, everyone seems to be able to agree that it's a bodega.

One must ask how legislation is being made against a term with no legal definition?,/i>

Shockingly enough, legal definitions do not need to be handed down from On High during the Dawn Times. They can be, and typically are, written into the legislation that uses them. This is done even when the term and its definition are already in common use, even in other pieces of legislation, to prevent confusion as language and usage evolve.

And also ask what types of people commit themselves to groups who are against a term with no legal definition?

People who are concerned abou the issue, and don't suffer from the confused belief that a definition has to be pre-existing in the law before they're allowed to be concerned about it.

Definitions of things get into the law because people are concerned about them.

One also must ask the professionalism and education of those who freely use a term that has no definition. A civil rights movement was made against similar hate terms.

Once upon a time, not very long ago, "spousal abuse" and "child abuse" and, yes, "cruelty to animals" were terms without legal definition. They acquired legal definitions because concerned citizens worked to give them legal definitions, and make them illegal.

"Cruelty to animals" came first, by the way. Legislation to regulate the care and living conditions of domestic animals is relatively venerable now, compared to the more recent origins of laws regulating how you can treat your children or your spouse.

The Term Puppy Mill is used to bring on emotion.

It's being used to describe the factory production of dogs as if they were mass market consumer goods, rather than living beings.

Animals, especially our dogs can be almost like children to us.

You've come to the wrong place, if you expect anyone reading the Pet Connection to be either embarrassed or appalled by such a statement.

The thought of intentionally harming a child or defenseless animal brings on a knee jerk reaction of pure hatred in most humans.

Your use of the pejorative "knee jerk reaction" is, um, interesting in this context.

Unlike other terms used to divide, hate and caused dangerous finger pointing.

Was there supposed to be more to this sentence?

The Term Puppy Mill can bring on almost dangerous responses, causing regular citizens to join in a battle against something they have never seen or witnessed first hand.

Lots of people have seen it first-hand, and more have seen many, many videos from diverse sources.

But be that as it may, I didn't personally witness the genocide in Rwanda, or the ethnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia, or for that matter the Battle of the Bulge. That doesn't mean I don't have ample evidence that these things happened.

Like the Term Teacup when used to describe a smaller dog. The Term Puppy Mill is a marketing Term. Non profit rescues have learned that placing the term Puppy Mill next to their inventory, will cause it to be sold very rapidly.

Um. "Sold" implies at least a remote chance of making a profit, rather than a remote chance of breaking even. There is a real, practical difference between sale and adoption.

In all Honestly if the thousands of groups wanted to end the ideal of the term Puppy Mill to the supposed 10,000 of them residing in the USA. All the groups had to do with their hundreds of millions if not billions of un-taxable donations

Oh, my. Such lovely delusions! To get those numbers, you're counting the donations to PETA and other Animal Rights extremist organizations, which have no interest in fighting puppy mills, or educationg anyone on how to produce healthy, happy pet puppies.

was to use the money to educate kennels and use the money in research to bring the living conditions to that of what they deem Humane.

You can't achieve those conditions in any facility organized around the mass production of puppies as consumer goods. Healthy, happy, well-adjusted puppies, suitable to be family pets, need to be raised in conditions that allow them to be socialized in those conditions--which means small-scale, responsible, hobby breeders, and the higher-end, more responsible kind of backyard breeder. Puppy mills can't do it; most BYBs have no interest in working that hard.

That said they should start firstly with their own facilities.

Many kill shelters euthanize puppies and dogs for a simple common cold many times labeled a Upper respiratory infection (URI) , or Kennel Cough.

This is all too true, and has no bearing on how puppy mills operate, or whether they're good or bad.

Instead of killing these animals for an infection that can be self eliminating a needed study could have been done to end it. As with leukemia in cats that helped discover a cure for leukemia in children. that study may have found and end to the common cold. Yet these organizations are against animal study even if it means saving animals themselves.

You are conflating Animal Rights and Animal Welfare organizations--perhaps intentionally, perhaps from ignorance. Animal Rights groups oppose any use of animals in research, even to help animals. Animal Welfare groups do not. Animal Welfare organizations do want animals used in research to be treated humanely, but with that proviso are generally okay with animal research even if the "only" goal is helping humans.

You have contradicted yourself; you've noticed that research was conducted on cats, on feline leukemia, to help humans with leukemia--and yet claim research is not being conducted on kennel cough and the common cold because animal welfare groups are hypocrites. No, sorry, animal welfare groups don't have the resources to conduct advanced medical research. It needs to be funded and conducted by other organizations, that have the resources and the knowledge--and those concentrate most of their resources on things that kill humans. Feline Leukemia and Feline Immunodeficiency Syndrome are interesting to researchers because they are related to things that kill humans. Kennel cough "only" resembles the common cold. The common cold, at least by itself does not kill humans. No one who could do so is interested in researching the common cold.

To say ALL pet stores buy from Puppy Mills.

They do, or from the worst kind of BYBs. Responsible breeders and even the best BYBs won't sell to pet stores, because they care what happens to the puppies, and don't want the sold to whoever walks in with enough space on their credit cards.

And that ALL licensed and inspected USDA commercial kennels are dirty Puppy Mills.

Oh, no, I freely concede that some of them are clean puppy mills. They're still puppy mills, designed for the mass production of puppies as mass market consumer goods.

Comes from a thought process that many Americans hoped would have been outgrown in today�s America. By Supporting your local Pet Store which sells Puppies and Kittens you are helping to eliminate the need for the Term Puppy Mill.

How? That's a serious question. I'd be genuinely fascinated to read your reasoning on that, in the unlikely event that you've actually stuck around and are reading this.

But first Pet Stores need the billions of lost taxable income back into their hands so they can do the right thing . To once and for all end the 60 year battle against a term that has matured into a pure marking tool, to take jobs and taxable income away from hard working Americans.

Nothing is stopping Pet Stores from doing the right thing--ceasing to sell live animals, selling supplies and services only, supporting adoption, and perhaps providing some guidance on how to find responsible breeders. Many pet stores, in fact, have made this switch--and not just the two Big Name Chains that have done it, really, only for dogs and cats. Independent stores have done it, too, some of them more completely than the PetSomethings.

It's not a term we're battling; it's the reality of conditions in puppy mills.

(I realize that, in terms of reaching "concerned", this is a complete waste of our precious phosphor resources. However, I have typed it anyway, in the hope that it may reach someone else.)

Read More...

[Source: Comments on: Will Oprah exposure slow down cruel puppy mills?]