You can justify it all you want it’s just plainly being irresponsible, being a pet owner comes with responsibilities, like keeping them safe in worst case scenarios. It can be the same as being an abuser, you just don’t realize it until it’s too late and happened, but guess what. It’s preventable, don’t be that one. It would be abuse to not collar your dog and thatswhy it was lost or hurt. But defend this I guess.
Also your dogs not uncomfortable with it on, that’s pure BS, if it is, get a better one. Yeesh, of course something worn infrequently isn’t comfortable, same for humans. Wear a shirt too small, you’re gonna want it off too.
It’s also in case you dog gets out and hurts someone, so they can hold you accountable too, so yeah, your also not doing your public duty to protect them either.
You have no idea where OP lives, and what the requirements or relevant legislation are there.
You’re making a huge issue out of something that really isn’t one, and accusing OP of being irresponsible because they don’t do things exactly the way you do. This is bad faith and projection on your part.
You’ve invented hypothetical scenarios so you can accuse the OP of being irresponsible without having access to all facts.
OP has stated dogs are always collared when they’re taken out.
OP has stated dogs are secured at home.
You don’t know what area OP is in or if it requires microchipping.
If, in your invented scenario that OP’s dog escapes and causes damage, the dog isn’t caught, then what practical difference does it make whether the dog has a collar or not?
In the case of a microchipped dog without a collar, you just take it to any veterinarian or whatever your local equivalent of an animal control office is.
No, it’s about being prepared for the possibility.
Leaving your dog home uncollored because ABCDE, is the same justification. I don’t need an extinguisher, I have water, my dog doesn’t need a collar, I have a fence. Same things
It’s all about preventative measures and responsibility. If something happens, and your dog DOES get out, you’re now not being responsible, I think we can agree on this. So if the chance can happen, prevent it. Like having an extinguisher.
You only think that, because you don’t want to believe it’s irresponsible to have animals at large without visual identification.
Bad faith is saying all of my very real and things that have happened, are hypothetical. Yes I agree the chances are low, that doesn’t mean you can neglect it at your whim. Just like my house catching fire, it can hypothetically happen, so I have an extinguisher, and so should you!
You can justify it all you want it’s just plainly being irresponsible, being a pet owner comes with responsibilities, like keeping them safe in worst case scenarios. It can be the same as being an abuser, you just don’t realize it until it’s too late and happened, but guess what. It’s preventable, don’t be that one. It would be abuse to not collar your dog and thatswhy it was lost or hurt. But defend this I guess.
Also your dogs not uncomfortable with it on, that’s pure BS, if it is, get a better one. Yeesh, of course something worn infrequently isn’t comfortable, same for humans. Wear a shirt too small, you’re gonna want it off too.
It’s also in case you dog gets out and hurts someone, so they can hold you accountable too, so yeah, your also not doing your public duty to protect them either.
Dogs are almost always microchipped.
Anyone can scan a dog and see who its owner is.
You have to catch a dog to read the collar anyway.
You folks are being way too hyper critical.
Not mandatory.
Need a device, so no.
Yeah and?
No, it’s basic pet responsibility.
You have no idea where OP lives, and what the requirements or relevant legislation are there.
You’re making a huge issue out of something that really isn’t one, and accusing OP of being irresponsible because they don’t do things exactly the way you do. This is bad faith and projection on your part.
Please stop.
You don’t need to know where someone lives to know doing certain things are responsible or irresponsible.
Doesn’t matter what the legislation is, you should have visible identification on any animal that can get outside.
It’s your public responsibility incase it causes damage for one thing.
But thanks for coming in with the ad hominem.
You’ve invented hypothetical scenarios so you can accuse the OP of being irresponsible without having access to all facts.
OP has stated dogs are always collared when they’re taken out.
OP has stated dogs are secured at home.
You don’t know what area OP is in or if it requires microchipping.
If, in your invented scenario that OP’s dog escapes and causes damage, the dog isn’t caught, then what practical difference does it make whether the dog has a collar or not?
In the case of a microchipped dog without a collar, you just take it to any veterinarian or whatever your local equivalent of an animal control office is.
This is obviously (I hope) a very irresponsible and negligent reasoning, no?
People always justify their negligence, tale as old as time.
Stuff can just be responsible or irresponsible without any additional context, sorry.
That’s a false equivalence and a bad faith argument.
No, it’s about being prepared for the possibility.
Leaving your dog home uncollored because ABCDE, is the same justification. I don’t need an extinguisher, I have water, my dog doesn’t need a collar, I have a fence. Same things
It’s all about preventative measures and responsibility. If something happens, and your dog DOES get out, you’re now not being responsible, I think we can agree on this. So if the chance can happen, prevent it. Like having an extinguisher.
You only think that, because you don’t want to believe it’s irresponsible to have animals at large without visual identification.
Bad faith is saying all of my very real and things that have happened, are hypothetical. Yes I agree the chances are low, that doesn’t mean you can neglect it at your whim. Just like my house catching fire, it can hypothetically happen, so I have an extinguisher, and so should you!