CNN: Legislation would require pet to be included in evacuations

[jpillian]

Predicto -- I honestly don't believe that the Federal government, at any level, should be responsible for peoples' irrational behavior.

If they won't leave because of their pets either: 1) forcibly remove them; or 2) leave them with their pets

Making rescue workers responsible to ensure that pets are transported with evacuees is idiotic at best.

[Destino]

Anyone who would risk their life over a pet is a complete idiot. Pets can be replaced. That is such weak minded thinking that I just can't fathom it. I've shed tears over pets before. They are part of the family. But when push comes to shove, it's me and my family over them every time.

Personally I think getting a pet means that you agree to look after it and if you can't even do that right you have no integrity and can't be trusted to do anything but bumble around breed and die because you have no higher sense of right and wrong. But instead of trying to place our personal beliefs on the subject on others, let's respect there wishes and hope government does whats best. Considering that this law could easily be crafted to read "you can take you pet if you can carry it and feed it" the cost are minimal and the benefits great.

[Destino]

The pets can take care of themselves better than most people.

When it comes to wasting resources needed for people you have to give people priority.

No they can't. Dogs can absolutely not survive for long in extreme conditions and will die of exposure. Cats can do better. Also this doesn't waste resources, it expands them.

[twa]

Destino, part of looking after a pet is having the ability to provide for it.

Which includes evacuating it...not the goverments role.imo

[Larry]

Destino, part of looking after a pet is having the ability to provide for it.

Which includes evacuating it...not the goverments role.imo

The same argument can be made (correctly) about the responsibility for a child.

However, when it's time to evacuate people, the government doesn't force people to either leave their screaming baby behind, or stay in the path of a hurricane, because well, if you couldn't evacuate your kid on your own than you shouldn't have had one.

-----

To me, this is yet another one of those arguments where I can at least see both sides.

On the one hand, are we really going to spend federal tax dollars (or, if we don't fund it, then impose another unfunded mandate onto the state's disaster preparedness agencies) to save cats? (Dogs I can understand, because they're people, but cats?!?! )

OTOH, if your mission is to get people on the bus, and allowing them to bring their dog helps that mission, . . .

[jpillian]

Wait a sec, Larry -- you are actually equating pets as being equal to children?

The difference between leaving behind a CHILD and a PET is infinite.

I hope I'm misinterpreting what you're posting here.

People should be provided for in an evacuation (and yes, children are people too). Pets should not.

[Larry]

No, what I'm doing is pointing out that both owning a pet and having a child are things that (should) require responsibility from the owner/parent. (A responsibility which some don't live up to.)

But that simply saying that "anybody who doesn't own an SUV that's big enough so that he can evacuate his own dogs shouldn't be allowed to have dogs", has some parallels to claiming that "anybody who can't evacuate their own kids shouldn't have kids". It's a nice theory, that all pet owners (parents) be self-suffecient, but it isn't reality.

[redman]

FANTASTIC! I support this law 100%. I seriously do. The government for the people by the people....and at least this voter would really friggin hate it if I was forced to leave my dog behind to die alone. I'm willing to wager there are millions of people that agree with me. Pets are like family to many of us.

This law is idiotic, and I'm a dog lover who would be equally devastated if I lost my girl.

Here's why. You have a rescue helicopter, there's space for one more passenger, and on the one hand you have a dog that can be put on board to travel with its owner, and on the other you have another person. If this law is in place the rescue personnel will have no choice in the matter and will be forced to take the dog right then and there.

If you love your dog, make arrangements in advance. Don't write a freaking law to do what you didn't or wouldn't do to protect your pet.

[redman]

Millions of dollars WASTED on americans in need. How dare the government waste money on americans in need. When so many nations foriegn governments need to be given money. Also how are we going to continue to provide the much needed secret service detail to the Saudi Arabian embassy (a treatment no other receives) if we have to spend money on americans? These damn american should know better then to have tax money, much of it their own, go to help them and their situation. Idiots. Hopefully next time we won't have to waste our efforts and money on americans and use it to rightfully aid the rest of the world or large corporations that can no longer compete in the free market and need the government to help them unfairly operate in the red and supress possible competition.

Destino, you're so hard wired to be dependent upon the government it's ridiculous. Don't call it the government anymore. Call it "Mommy" and be done with it.

[redman]

My dogs are my family. If someone wants to take me somewhere, there's better be room on the bus or boat for them too.

Cskin, the legislature could be doing a lot worse things than this, so give it a rest.

What this means is if you love your family, YOU do what's necessary to protect them. Don't change the law.

If you tried to put your dog on the last seat on that bus as opposed to me or my family member, you and I'd have a serious problem.

[redman]

Why the hell shouldn't I be allowed to carry my dog on my lap?

That is the exact situation that sparked this legislation. People weren't even allowed to carry small pets out. That's crap in my opinion. It doesn't cost anyone anything to let me carry my dog on my lap....but I bet it hurts like hell to leave your pet to die by himself.

EVERYTHING has a cost associated with it. In this instance, the cost would be space.

This legislation necessarily means that public officials and rescue workers will HAVE to choose an animal over a person somewhere. Can't you acknowledge that. If you can't why are you ducking that acknowledgement. Is that a tacit admission that it's wrong?

[ntotoro]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'd give up my seat on a bus out-of-town for someone else just so I could make sure to stay and take care of my dog and my cats. I'd never leave them. I'm all they have in this world. I'd never take any source of transportation out unless I could make sure they came with me.

[Destino]

Destino, you're so hard wired to be dependent upon the government it's ridiculous. Don't call it the government anymore. Call it "Mommy" and be done with it.

I'll cal the government mommy when you start calling me daddy, how about that?

[codeorama]

If you tried to put your dog on the last seat on that bus as opposed to me or my family member, you and I'd have a serious problem.

I don't think it's an issue of a dog taking up a person's seat. If I can hold my dog in my lap, what's the problem. Another person is NOT going to sit in my lap.

But again, I'm not going to rely on the government to evacuate my family. I'll take care of that myself. I don't the law should be necessary, if a person is trying to board a bus to evacuate and they can carry their dog and put them in their lap, then let them. It's that simple. But again, people have to be responsible for themselves and their family and in this day and time, there are fewer and fewer people who are. I truly think it's sad that people view pets as disposable items. That is just sick IMO.

One last thing, Stevenaa, don't buy any pets. People like you should not own pets.

[codeorama]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'd give up my seat on a bus out-of-town for someone else just so I could make sure to stay and take care of my dog and my cats. I'd never leave them. I'm all they have in this world. I'd never take any source of transportation out unless I could make sure they came with me.

:applause: :applause:

[Destino]

EVERYTHING has a cost associated with it. In this instance, the cost would be space.

This legislation necessarily means that public officials and rescue workers will HAVE to choose an animal over a person somewhere. Can't you acknowledge that. If you can't why are you ducking that acknowledgement. Is that a tacit admission that it's wrong?

Everything does have a cost, you are correct. Which is why you plan in advance. So no, there would be no choice between a dog or a person, that's just nonsense you pulled out of a hat. If a person is told to pick up 6 people he doesn't show up in a two seater. If you know in advance you will be picking up pets, you place the humans as a higher priority but come ready (cages) to bring the pets at some points as well.

[Destino]

Destino, part of looking after a pet is having the ability to provide for it.

Which includes evacuating it...not the goverments role.imo

Right, which is why people choose to stay behind if they can't take their pets. So then the government, being for the people, adjust accordingly.

[stevenaa]

"The same argument can be made (correctly) about the responsibility for a child."

Dumbest statement ever. I can't even believe anyone could equate the life of a pet with the life of a child. Unbelievable.

"No, what I'm doing is pointing out that both owning a pet and having a child are things that (should) require responsibility from the owner/parent. (A responsibility which some don't live up to.) "

Having responsibility for a pet is making sure it is fed and healthy and enjoying life. It does not extend to sacrificing human life. I would die for my children in a second to keep them safe. I'm not going to endanger my life over a cat or dog. They can be replaced.

This is what is wrong with this country. People willing to make life altering decisions for emotional/sentimental reasons instead of excersing common sense.

[CrazyZeb]

I don't think it's an issue of a dog taking up a person's seat. If I can hold my dog in my lap, what's the problem. Another person is NOT going to sit in my lap.

But again, I'm not going to rely on the government to evacuate my family. I'll take care of that myself. I don't the law should be necessary, if a person is trying to board a bus to evacuate and they can carry their dog and put them in their lap, then let them. It's that simple. But again, people have to be responsible for themselves and their family and in this day and time, there are fewer and fewer people who are. I truly think it's sad that people view pets as disposable items. That is just sick IMO.

One last thing, Stevenaa, don't buy any pets. People like you should not own pets.

I wouldn't want to be evacuated with a bunch of 68 lb. scared to death dogs. That's unsafe. I love my pets, but people will always be more important.

[twa]

I wouldn't want to be evacuated with a bunch of 68 lb. scared to death dogs. That's unsafe. I love my pets, but people will always be more important.

Some of the buses coming out of here took 20 hrs or more.

That is a loooong trip with a 68lb dog in your lap. or sitting in a bus with allergies.

There have been efforts to get people to drop the pets off at shelters where they can be evacuated seperately and reunited later.

[Larry]

"The same argument can be made (correctly) about the responsibility for a child."

Dumbest statement ever. I can't even believe anyone could equate the life of a pet with the life of a child. Unbelievable.

"No, what I'm doing is pointing out that both owning a pet and having a child are things that (should) require responsibility from the owner/parent. (A responsibility which some don't live up to.) "

Having responsibility for a pet is making sure it is fed and healthy and enjoying life. It does not extend to sacrificing human life. I would die for my children in a second to keep them safe. I'm not going to endanger my life over a cat or dog. They can be replaced.

This is what is wrong with this country. People willing to make life altering decisions for emotional/sentimental reasons instead of excersing common sense.

But despite your efforts to first, (intentionally) mis-label my position again, and second, blame people who care for their pets as being responsible for all of the evils of society, (See, I can exagerate other people's positions, too.)

It remains a fact that there exist people who will chose to remain in a flooded city rather than leave their pets.

You can insult them. You can wish that they didn't exist. But they do.

So the question is, if you're in charge of evacuating, say, New Orleans, what do you do about it?

I can see a case made that it's the government's duty to provide a bus, and if the citizen choses not to get on it, then it's his fault. (One argument I'd consider compelling is: I'd bet a lot of folks stayed in NO because they were worried about their TVs, too. Should the government provide transportation and shelter for TVs?) (And no, I'm not talking about J. Edgar Hoover, either.)

OTOH, I can also see a case that, if allowing people to bring pets results in less people getting pulled off of rooftops, then it might be a cheap price to pay.

(I think my personal decision, after thinking about it for a few days and reading the posts here, is "I think that's an excellant example of a decision that should be made at the local level, by people who're balancing local resources vs. needs, and the Feds should stay the heck out of it." But that's just an opinion.)

[jpillian]

(I think my personal decision, after thinking about it for a few days and reading the posts here, is "I think that's an excellant example of a decision that should be made at the local level, by people who're balancing local resources vs. needs, and the Feds should stay the heck out of it." But that's just an opinion.)

I think I would definitely agree with that.

[twa]

Well I am now part of the animal rescue effort.

Got a call from a nieghbor thier pet escaped while evacuating,so we went and found it and brought it home with us.

Just what I wanted to go with my dogs and rabbit ...A @@##$ CAT :laugh:

Wing gusts about 50...and so it begins,gonna be a long night.

[Larry]

Got Generator?

Seriously, my hurricane experience in inland Florida is that while the TV crews like to show you pictures of collapsed houses, for every one of them there's about 1,000 houses who're gonna be without power for three days.

A Generator, lots of gas cans, and a lot of water can really help.

[Larry]

Good News: You don't have to worry about missing a Skins game this weekend.