Page 3 of 3

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:14 pm
by Redith
Sukurachi wrote:
GormanGhaste wrote:
Nanotrev wrote:Something to be aware of is that the Humane Society of the United States actually wants to ban your dogs and cats.
Something to be aware of is that if you have a point you're trying to make, this sort of absurd statement is not actually helping your cause.
the point, I believe, is that there are serious allegations regarding the Humane Society of the United States.

http://www.animalscam.com/

I don't know whether to take any or all of it with a grain of salt, but I am VERY leery of anything that is in any way, shape or form associated with PETA. I am NOT a supporter of PETA.
The only charities I give to is Petsmart's. Not because of any company loyalty but I KNOW where the crap is going and I have seen first hand what the group does

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:03 pm
by Sukurachi
If anyone wants to give money to help pet shelters, then give directly TO a pet shelter. Never mind the middleman.

Better yet, find out what your pet shelter could use, and provide THAT for them.

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2012 5:25 pm
by Wain
Sukurachi wrote: the point, I believe, is that there are serious allegations regarding the Humane Society of the United States.
http://www.animalscam.com/
Perhaps the allegations are true. But that site you linked reads like it was written by a partisan political/business lobby group. Their "About Us" page even more so.

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2012 1:24 am
by Sukurachi
Wain wrote:
Sukurachi wrote: the point, I believe, is that there are serious allegations regarding the Humane Society of the United States.
http://www.animalscam.com/
Perhaps the allegations are true. But that site you linked reads like it was written by a partisan political/business lobby group. Their "About Us" page even more so.
I just picked the very first one in the list.

You can (and should) do a bit of research regarding the American Human Society. I have come across countless well-prepared documents that expose the issues with the organization.

I've been reading about problems/issues with the Humane Society for years now. I've also seen a number of news reports on its questionable policies and finances.

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2012 1:53 am
by GormanGhaste
Sukurachi wrote:there are serious allegations regarding the Humane Society of the United States.

You can (and should) do a bit of research regarding the American Human Society. I have come across countless well-prepared documents that expose the issues with the organization.

I've been reading about problems/issues with the Humane Society for years now. I've also seen a number of news reports on its questionable policies and finances.
Most of the criticism against HSUS is generated by the Center for Consumer Freedom, a lobby group for the agribusiness industry and a much shadier organization than HSUS.

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2012 5:41 am
by Nanotrev
Something to be aware of is that if you have a point you're trying to make, this sort of absurd statement is not actually helping your cause.
I've actually done a lot of research on the topic. They have the same goals as PETA but are taking care of things in a much more subliminal manner. They aren't affiliated with your local animal shelters except for the dimes and pennies they might give them every year. It is not an "absurd statement." Now, as for their promotional videos on youtube about meatless Mondays? Sure, I'd be all for that. Yet, I can't donate to them knowing that they lobby to ban the animals I keep as pets.

I believe this is the actual number crunching.

http://www.humanewatch.org/index.php/si ... e_percent/

Also, here's something to think about as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dal-qmJqoeA&feature=plcp

The video explains itself. Yes, people do own snakes that big and it was only a South-Florida problem if someone goes on the whole "Burmese pythons will invade the Southern US" rant. They can't even survive winters in northern Florida. Just thought they ought to help a little being that they lobbied for the interstate transport ban and putting burms into the Lacey Act.

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2012 10:30 am
by Loki
Dewclaw wrote:Another forum I frequent, one of the members recently had to surrender his great dane to authorities for euthanasia because it bit someone. To go with the poster that mentioned all dogs have the capacity to bite, a lab almost bit my dad recently (he jumped back in time). The dog ran from the yard where it was and to the sidewalk where my dad was walking by. It lunged at him and almost got him.
It must be awesome to have a time-travelling dad :lol:

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2012 3:06 pm
by Nanotrev
It must be awesome to have a time-travelling dad
Ha! I'd have not thought of that. :P I like a play on words, if I'm using the right terminology.

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2012 4:34 pm
by Acherontia
I hate politics. Unless you yourself work for the organizations involved and help set their policies, all you know is what their counter-groups try to tell you. Propaganda. For example, the statistics that showed that PETA was euthanizing 90% of the animals in its shelters... were accurate. Because, as those same papers did *not* show (but others did), only the "unhomeable" animals, which were a very small percentage, actually wound up there in the first place. The rest were supported, trained, vaccinated etc in satellite shelters across the countries, by PETA. But statistics--while they don't lie--can be so misleading.

I think the majority of cases are insurance companies who are trying to use random numbers to get out of paying for shit. They don't actually care about the dogs, or what kind you have. For example, if those dogs represent 20% of all dogs owned by their insured clients, they've wriggled out of paying 20% of their claims.

Which region are you referring to, anyway? Where is this, and which insurance company/groups? I ask because obviously it's not "everywhere," but these issues are constantly cropping up and going into law/policy and being refuted all over the place, and I'm curious.

Re: Insurance wont cover you if you have one of these dogs

Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:41 am
by Nanotrev
For me, I live in Nebraska, and just two nights ago HSUS was all over a news story here. They were the go-to people for the Channel 6 news station here in town when a guy was busted for owning venomous snakes. While it was right to bust the man for not having the permits and such it was wrong for them to go to a source known for its negative stance on the reptile hobby. Nothing positive was said in the news report. I do not doubt that they will attempt to lobby in another bill that limits reptile ownership here in my state.
Because, as those same papers did *not* show (but others did), only the "unhomeable" animals, which were a very small percentage, actually wound up there in the first place. The rest were supported, trained, vaccinated etc in satellite shelters across the countries, by PETA. But statistics--while they don't lie--can be so misleading.
I agree with you here, that things can be misleading, but if that's the case are 90% unable to be adopted out? It's a little confusing with the way you word it is all.

I will say this though, to put a positive spin on this thread. We can do more, all by ourselves to benefit animals. HSUS uses most of its funds for lobbying, but there's a very easy way around that. Donating to who you think your money should go to. Plenty of rescues are strewn throughout the city in need and it's easy to find and donate to them. Honestly, I'd make it a very small tax if I were able to, so that the pets people so often abandoned are still taken care of. How that would be implemented is a hairy mess but you get my point.

Also, I go around with the reptiles I own and try and put a positive spin on things. Pitbulls have a bad rap but just the other day I met a very responsible owner who had a -very- obedient dog. He was told to lay down, and he sat there, calm and content until an associate at the pet store we were at whipped out a treat for him, and with permission he got up and did a trick in order to earn his reward. (Bang, love that trick) When I take my ball pythons with me I often take Faye, my bumblebee ball python. People are often stunned how gentle she is and how incredibly patterned a snake can be. As a budding breeder I hope to lower prices on these animals to a rate where they're not a dime a dozen yet to the point where responsible people can afford them all while educating the public. I think the largest impact I've had was on a young boy at Petco. When he held Faye he was previously convinced that all snakes were evil, yet she curled up into a ball in his hands and poked her nose out of her coils to take a peek at him. After a minute or two both child and snake were enjoying one another's company and Faye was out of her coils and moving about through his gentle grasp.

I want to make it clear though that I'm not screaming "all you people never donate!" I'm sure there are many people here who do donate their money. It's just a point I'm making. We're obviously all animal lovers here or else we wouldn't mess with our in-game pets with such passion. Nobody here is pointing fingers or calling names. What I see however, is a struggle over how we can best contribute to people and organizations who will help the animals we love that are in need. I also see people lamenting over the misinformation out there and the prejudice people have against certain species and breeds.