Lawsuit for Lucky

[RPCrazy]

I saw this on ABC News (Good Morning America) today. I thought it was very, [I]very[/I] interesting...

---
Lawsuit for Lucky
Can A Vet Be Sued for Emotional Injuries?

Aug. 22? When your pet dies under questionable circumstances, can you sue the vet for emotional devastation? A groundbreaking case in Florida may answer that question once and for all.

Adam Riff lost Lucky, the dog he called his best friend, after a trip to the veterinarian in July 2001 went terribly wrong. Lucky, an 8-year-old Shetland sheepdog, visited the Welleby Veterinary Medical Center in Sunrise, Fla., to have two bad teeth removed.

Adam's mom, Ellen Riff, dropped the dog off at around 8 a.m. on June 12, and was told he would be ready by noon. But when she called, the vet's office said they were backed up and to call again at 2 p.m. When she called again, she learned that he still wasn't ready yet.

"She called at that time, and was told again that they were delayed," Adam Riff said. "My mother was nervous, so she went to the vet's office. When she got there, she was shocked. She saw Lucky in an oxygen tent, and he looked catatonic."

Rushed to the Hospital

Dr. John Willie told her that Lucky's appearance was normal because the dog was still under anesthesia, according to Adam Riff, who also went to the vet's office. Willie told the Riffs that Lucky needed to be taken to an animal hospital emergency room facility because the office was closing at 5 p.m., Adam Riff said. But the veterinarian said Lucky would only be released after the bill was paid.

The Riffs took Lucky to an E.R. about 45 minutes to an hour away, where doctors had already been told by Willie that Lucky's problems were pulmonary, according to the Riffs. Many hours later, the ER doctors realized that Lucky's illness was due to the anesthesia he received at Welleby. Later that day, Lucky died.

The Riffs filed suit against Willie and his facility, charging him with breach of contract, malpractice and emotional distress.

Willie's defense attorney, Dan Bachi, said that under state law, pet owners are only entitled to the market value of their pet.

Pets Considered Chattel

"Currently, the law in the state of Florida, is that a household pet, such as a cat or dog, is considered chattel or property damage," Bachi said. "Recovery for loss of such a pet is the fair market value of the pet, and generally, a claimant is not entitled to pain and suffering for that loss."

Ironically, while the case is about whether people should recover damages for the pain and suffering for the loss of a pet, the Florida legislature has voted to put a cap on pain and suffering on people who are the victims of medical malpractice, Bachi said.

"In any event, to recover pain and suffering for the loss of a pet is something that should be addressed in the legislature and not the court system," Bachi said.

The groundbreaking suit has survived two motions to dismiss by the defendant, and is now awaiting a trial date.
---

I don't particularly like this article, but for now it's the best I could find. The interview of Adam Riff was much more interesting. He related how the vet had treated him rudely, had treated the dog unkindly, and been uncaring about the suffering the family was obviously going through (how anyone can act like that and become a vet is beyond me).

I'll post more articles about it if I find them. I encourage anyone else to post what they can find and offer comments.

My personal view? We don't give animals the respect they deserve. Mankind never has. The idea that "animals are property" and "animals can't feel emotion" is preposterous. And if someone mistreats a dog, or cat, or any other animal, they should be given the same punishment as if that creature was a person. I liked how Adam Riff's lawyer brought up how in early America "blacks, Jews, women...they had no rights. But eventually the system caught up. Now it's time for the same review of animal treatment." It was a quote along those lines...you guys get the idea. And he's right, we need a serious rewrite of our laws concerning animal cruelty.

[Drix D'Zanth]

This frightens me alot. Animals having the same rights as humans? Don't you realize how unbelivably insane that sounds? Wait.. hold the phone. You say animals don't get the respect they deserve!!?? They are lucky history took a fluke fad through the domestication of dogs, or else your beloved pets wouldn't exhist. Do you think animals were ALWAYS domesticated? No, usually it was some hunting dog, or an Egyptian queen's cat. I think the animals today get more than enough respect in terms of domesticated animals. TV shows are dedicated to them, countless books, internet sites, toys. I'm sorry, some animals get more respect than most humans. However I stray off track... here..


Here's why Animals will never have the same rights as humans.
1) Animals are stupid, compared to humans, it takes extreme training to get them to sit on command, they live by instinct most of the time.
2) Animals cannot voice opinion. They cannot speak, they cannot write, they cannot express proper body language to give reasonable argument to anything, such as my argument for example.
3)Animals are not self sufficient.
4)People should NEVER die for animals. I don't care if it's the best damn collie in the United States, NO person should die as a result of killing/injuring that dog. It's an ethically nightmarish problem.
5)Animal's don't care much about eachother, they can't create a society.
6)Most of any animal's "emotions" are based on self preservation, any animal will override emotion for instinct.

Those are just a FEW of the myriad of reasons why animals should never be treated as humans. I ran over a cat on the way to another town a few weeks ago. Sure, I felt bad for the poor thing, and I didn't mean it. But I'll be damnned if it sends me to JAIL.

Next, I understand the boy's saddness. I understand the Vet may have made a mistake in giving the dog anesthesa. But suing the vet is an extremely selfish act. What good is it doing? Nothing. The vet may go out of business. Wonderful. A man who has saved HOW MANY pets, and WILL save how many more? Doesn't this brat care about the other dogs that have no other Vet to go to?? Doesn't he care about the other dog's he's helped? Doesn't he care about the Vet's contribution to that community? Oh, wait, he was on vacation. That kid needs to wipe his tears, move on, and understand things like this happen and Suing the problem wont fix it.

On a final note, I have a pet, His name is Jake. He's a 9 year old yellow lab with diabetes and a thyroid problem. Do you know how hard it is to take care of a Diabetic dog? Anyway. He's snuggly and nice, and when he dies it's going to be the saddest moment in my life thus far. I sympathize, but disagree.

[Guest pantalaimon]

I agree with drix animals shouldn't have the same rights as humans.I love them but whats the point they can't talk and they only remember things if you force it into them.[QUOTE]Till All Are One Optimus Prime Transformers the movie.[/QUOTE] :flaming:

[Raiha]

[color=royalblue]What does that kooky quote have to do with anything? ....oy.

Drix has good points. But I never understood in taking care of an animal that's doomed to live a half life. My dog died in my arms, shot up with euthinasia, but they screwed it up and had to give her another shot while she suffered. Do you know what that's like? I could've sued for malpractice, but it would've gotten me nowhere but empty.

This suit is definetly a way to get some fame, and all that kid wants is some compensation for his emotions. He should grow up and deal with them. I did. Instead of putting a doctor out of his practice. That is very selfish, I agree.

It's really amazin what people will do for money.[/color]

[Drix D'Zanth]

Raiha and I are on the same page here. I suppose answering your question about why taking care of a diabetic dog is worth it? Well, he seems happy, we are happy around, and we consider him a part of the family. My dog is diabetic because of pancreatitis that resulted during a surgery on a benign tumor. It may have been the vets fault, he may not have sterylized the procedure correctly. But going around blaming him wont help anything, as Raiha pointed out. Nothing but emptyness. So I'll live with the few fleeting years my dog may have on his life, and enjoy every second.

[Mist]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Raiha [/i]
[B][color=royalblue]
It's really amazin what people will do for money.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson][size=1] I completely agree with you, Raiha. If they're so "emotionally distressed" , than why are they playing the blame game so quickly? "It's the vet; he was always so mean to me and my dog!" Than how come you didn't say anything before you had the whole nation's attention? Oy, these people are money-grubbers...

I know that if [i]my[/i] lovely litle pomerianian were to die, I'd be too sad to even think. (My poor Grizzley...) I say it's a ploy at five minutes of fame.

If the boy is sincere in his notions, I [b]still[/b] think he needs to get over it. Call me cold, but animals die. Humans die. Everything dies eventually. Get over it.

(Although I probably would have taken a swing or two at that slimey vet...) ^_~[/color][/size]

[Guest pantalaimon]

Yep your a bit cold but everything dies eventually people can't go round sueing for every little thing "oh i tripped on the curb and broke my leg i'm sueing the government for low matinence of street curbs booohooo" lol.

[Baron Samedi]

I think that the case is fair, as far as malpractice goes. They should at least get some kind of re-imbursement for it. But the emotional side... I dont know. The vet doesnt have to be nice. And how are you rude to a dog? Oh, i see now it says treated the dog 'unkindly'. If that was the case, why didn't he say 'screw you' to the vet and go to another practice?

[Brasil]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]Here's why Animals will never have the same rights as humans.
1) Animals are stupid, compared to humans, it takes extreme training to get them to sit on command, they live by instinct most of the time.
2) Animals cannot voice opinion. They cannot speak, they cannot write, they cannot express proper body language to give reasonable argument to anything, such as my argument for example.
3)Animals are not self sufficient.
4)People should NEVER die for animals. I don't care if it's the best damn collie in the United States, NO person should die as a result of killing/injuring that dog. It's an ethically nightmarish problem.
5)Animal's don't care much about eachother, they can't create a society.
6)Most of any animal's "emotions" are based on self preservation, any animal will override emotion for instinct.[/B][/QUOTE]

Dude, um...

1) Ever had a baby? By your point, babies shouldn't be considered human or even equal to humans, just because they're helpless and they take extreme amounts of training to become pottytrained and so forth.
2) What do you think barking is? An involuntary spasm? Animals can voice their opinion. You're just too ignorant to realise that. What about when your pet puts their head on your lap or sits there staring at you? Don't you figure they want something? The moment you realize they want something, THEY HAVE COMMUNICATED. The ability to speak does not make one important and/or intelligent. Just look at George W. Bush. He's an idiot--the village idiot no less. He communicates worse than my dog, Sam.
3) So, how do you regard packs of wolves and lions and such? They are self-sufficient. Hell, they have no human influence and/or help whatsoever. They survive on their own, thus making them very much "self-sufficient."
4) If you're so against ppl dying for an inferior being, how do you feel about Henry V? He was most certainly not a wholesome being and ppl died for him. We mustn't forget Hitler; most of his army died for him. So, you have a problem with ppl dying for an innocent and/or helpless (sometimes helpless) dog, but are totally OK with soldiers dying for a dictator's deathly militarial campaign?
5&6) How are humans different from that? Are you really that naive that we humans care about each other? Do you really believe that we humans have actually created a utopian society where we all get along? The "emotion" comment is contradicting. Self-preservation is the PRIMARY instinct of any animal. Why do you think wild animals gorge on a kill? Cause they don't know when their next meal will be. That's instinct. That's self-preservation.
We aren't different from animals concerning self-preservation. What was the entire point of every war? Survival. To suppress the other side. Self-preservation. Again, self-preservation is the primary instinct.

Your reasons for calling animals inferior are invalid. Your comments can be applied to both humans and animals.

Anyway, as Raiha...or somebody said...stuff dies. **** happens. My dog died when I was in 6th grade. It was really hard to see her start coughing up blood in the living room. She died on the way to the vet. We grew up together. There's this one photo of us playing in the grass. I must've been 1 or 2. I'm crawling, she's walking next to me. We were the same size, too, so there was a really cool symmetry in the photo.

In this case, while I feel the vet could have done much more and been more forthcoming in his method of informing the family of the dog's status, and while I do totally empathize with their loss (as I've suffered the loss of a dear pet), people need to lose the lawsuit happy attitude.

I don't believe that changing legislature will change the public's opinions. This world is full of ppl who don't agree with the current laws and regulations we have; what makes us think that we can draft another law/regulation and change their opinions or actions?

[Raiha]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by PoisonTongue [/i]
[B]Dude, um...

1) Ever had a baby? By your point, babies shouldn't be considered human or even equal to humans, just because they're helpless and they take extreme amounts of training to become pottytrained and so forth.
2) What do you think barking is? An involuntary spasm? Animals can voice their opinion. You're just too ignorant to realise that. What about when your pet puts their head on your lap or sits there staring at you? Don't you figure they want something? The moment you realize they want something, THEY HAVE COMMUNICATED. The ability to speak does not make one important and/or intelligent. Just look at George W. Bush. He's an idiot--the village idiot no less. He communicates worse than my dog, Sam.
3) So, how do you regard packs of wolves and lions and such? They are self-sufficient. Hell, they have no human influence and/or help whatsoever. They survive on their own, thus making them very much "self-sufficient."
4) If you're so against ppl dying for an inferior being, how do you feel about Henry V? He was most certainly not a wholesome being and ppl died for him. We mustn't forget Hitler; most of his army died for him. So, you have a problem with ppl dying for an innocent and/or helpless (sometimes helpless) dog, but are totally OK with soldiers dying for a dictator's deathly militarial campaign?[/B][/QUOTE] [COLOR=royalblue]1: I think you're overlooking his basic idea here, but oh well.

2: Yes yes, you're very smart.

3: He's talking about domesticated creatures Alex.

4: **** happens. He's trying to make a point.[/COLOR]

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by PoisonTongue [/i]
[B]Dude, um...

1) Ever had a baby? By your point, babies shouldn't be considered human or even equal to humans, just because they're helpless and they take extreme amounts of training to become pottytrained and so forth.
2) What do you think barking is? An involuntary spasm? Animals can voice their opinion. You're just too ignorant to realise that. What about when your pet puts their head on your lap or sits there staring at you? Don't you figure they want something? The moment you realize they want something, THEY HAVE COMMUNICATED. The ability to speak does not make one important and/or intelligent. Just look at George W. Bush. He's an idiot--the village idiot no less. He communicates worse than my dog, Sam.
3) So, how do you regard packs of wolves and lions and such? They are self-sufficient. Hell, they have no human influence and/or help whatsoever. They survive on their own, thus making them very much "self-sufficient."
4) If you're so against ppl dying for an inferior being, how do you feel about Henry V? He was most certainly not a wholesome being and ppl died for him. We mustn't forget Hitler; most of his army died for him. So, you have a problem with ppl dying for an innocent and/or helpless (sometimes helpless) dog, but are totally OK with soldiers dying for a dictator's deathly militarial campaign?
5&6) How are humans different from that? Are you really that naive that we humans care about each other? Do you really believe that we humans have actually created a utopian society where we all get along? The "emotion" comment is contradicting. Self-preservation is the PRIMARY instinct of any animal. Why do you think wild animals gorge on a kill? Cause they don't know when their next meal will be. That's instinct. That's self-preservation.
We aren't different from animals concerning self-preservation. What was the entire point of every war? Survival. To suppress the other side. Self-preservation. Again, self-preservation is the primary instinct.

[/B][/QUOTE]

1. Good point. But babies grow up. Tell me when a dog graduate's highschool and i'll give you points for that.

2. Yes, in fact it is. No wild dog barks, they yip or whine. Barking is only found amongst domesticated dogs. Scientists speculate that barking really has no real purpose amongst canines but to announce their presence. You continue to miss the point. Get a dog to give me a reason why he would vote for anyone and I'll give you points. So before you go off calling me an idiot, try a little reasearch. Sling your mud litte boy, sling away.

3. You miss the point again. I don't think little adam is suing over his pet Lion pride. Are you always this palatible?

4. I'm not trying to merit the atrocities that humans have commited, nor do I consider the life of a dog even worth mentioning within the same context as the brutal course of human history. However I'm talking about your life to a dog's life. Put it into perspective here. They are two seperate Justices. Historically, domesticated animals are lucky to be in the position they are today.

5. Awww man, give peace a chance. Tell that to the Vets of world war 2 who died for the freedoms I posses, ***. Better yet, tell that to your family, I'm sure they will be glad to know you care.

6. My point here was that animals aren't going to care about anything but themselves. If you somehow wander outside your parent's basement long enough to get married, tell your wife that you are primarily interested at SELF preservation. Next time... figure out the best way to make your life better... screw society, rob a bank or something!

You seem to belive that animals should be given basic liberties like humans. Very well, you run along, let your animals hold equal voice in your government (or bark, meow, whatever). I'd love to see the day you run over a cat and get sentanced for manslaughter. That's what implications I'm reacting to here poision. You seem to miss the point. So before you try to assume my position on humanitas, Hitler, and the like. Read the whole thread ;).

You aren't a very happy person are you :bawl:

[Shaun]

I am thinking that the issue here is that, in fact, this vet...who is by all means a healthcare professional has failed to do an important part of his job. People need companionship. They're designed for it. Whether it be that of an animal, or a best friend, shouldn't matter. This vet has overlooked the fact that Lucky has probably been there for that guy through more crap than any of his human friends have. I think that is just sad. People can be so heartless.
It's like the other day at work...we were talking about our pets. I was saying how I'd cried when one of my cats got hit. The girl I was talking to called me a sissy...but then the customer I was helping said something I'll never forget. "He's not a sissy. He's one of the rare ones out there that still has a heart."
It is my opinion that all life should be held in respect. It's true that Humans are higher than animals. Humans have souls. But both humans and animals have life. That is something that is priceless...because any life can affect any other life in some way. I'm sure all of us pet lovers would agree that there are times that we might not have been able to go on were it not for the selfless love of our pets. As one person has already said here...they don't know any better. Would you have it any other way?

[Raiha]

[color=royalblue]I agree, dogs don't have souls.

And I've read that article again and talked to my dad about it. He works with dogs alot. In all logical thinking here, I'm quite sure that dogs usually don't have problems with anesthesia. Our once dog, she's gone now, was put to sleep to be spayed, and she was fine afterwards. Perhaps the dog already had problems that were augmented by the anesthesia. You can't exactly blame the doctor. He probably did the usual routine here.

Can't exactly blame him for that. But I'd need more facts about the dog's health before he died.[/color]

[Shaun]

That's true too. But I still say he could've been nicer about it. I hate it when people don't have respect for other people's feelings. A kinder attitude from the vet and this whole thing could've probably been avoided.

[The Original]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]5)Animal's don't care much about eachother, they can't create a society.
6)Most of any animal's "emotions" are based on self preservation, any animal will override emotion for instinct.
[/B][/QUOTE]

I would have to disgree with that point. While you seem to not accept answers that involve wild animals (apes, lions, wolves, ect.), I will have to cite my three cats for you. My cats are a mix of indoor and outdoor, but when they are outside they aren't extremely territorial, maybe because they are all female, spayed, or what have you. One day I was playing outside with Tiger and Stella when the third, Trixie, wandered off. Minutes later I heard a yell of pain. I rushed to the other side of the yard, yards behind my other cats. When I got there, the next door neighbor's dog was standing over Trixie, who was bleeding from the thigh. Before I could even reach her, Tiger immediantly rushed over to her and shielded her with her body, and Stella took several steps toward the dog, hissing and swiping at an animal easily four times her size and weight. Trixie is still well and healthy today, and she might not have neccaseraly died had my cats not been there, but the point is that they seemed to be protecting her. You may say they were being territorial or something, but it seems to in my opinion that they were protecting a family member they had grown up with by putting their lives at risk. But say what you will.

[Drix D'Zanth]

You know what.. your reply has given me the greatest idea. Tiger and Stella have inspired me to endorse a "cat army" where today's cats can devote themselves to the protection of America's freedoms! They will HISS the enemy away, swiping at their usless AK 47 5.56mm assault rifles, sheilding their fallen comrades with all their 15 pounds of mass (a guess) can provide! Do you get it now?
I think it's great your cats love eachother, I'm sure they gather together for regular dialectics once a week. PLEASE PEOPLE!

[RPCrazy]

I'm not even going to touch your "valid points," Drix. Number one, that's what you wanted and that's you've already got. Number two, you are heartless person who sees your poor family "pet" as nothing more than that. A burden on your life and not even close to resembling a friend or family member. You don't deserve the undying love that dog gives you.

And complain and justify as you wish. I promise you, I'll ignore every statement. You have claimed that animals feel no emotion and convey no emotion. That's proof enough for me that you have no heart, and nothing will EVER change that point of view.


Thousands of years ago human beings knew nothing more than instinct. I think what many of us have forgotten is (if you believe in evolution) that at one point man was nothing more than an animal. He knew nothing about emotions...there were no emotions. Love wasn't love, it was a need to find the best mate and reproduce. Hate was only pain. Anger was pain. Sorrow? There was no sorrow. The weak died, that was that. As you've all pointed out, life goes on.

But man kind evolved, didn't we? We learned how to feel all of these emotions and more. We now choose our mates because they make us happy and feel loved, not because "they are the best" to carry on the genes of our kind. I'm sure many of you will agree that there are some couples out there who should not be reproducing. We hate and we kill not because the opposition is a threat to our personal lives, but because they have angered and insulted us. Hell, we've [I]created[/I] the insult.

I will give you that today, many of an animal's thoughts are based on instinct. But they are different instincts than what they were thousands of years ago when Man first domesticated the dog and cat. Because everything evolves, and with us evolving, animals have developed their own emotions. Their own very simple ways of knowing that they love their master, they are happy to be in his or her company. They know hate and anger beyond the scope of physical pain into the mental. They mourn the loss of their loved ones. Not as long as we do, but they notice that empty spot where a person once was in their heart. They're getting there. They're where we were when our minds first started developing into what we have today.

And please, don't twist my words and tell me I'm saying "that one day dogs and cats will walk and talk like a human." I'm not. Their minds don't have that room to expand like ours did.


I'd like to bring to attention the fact that all of you have missed the point of my original post. Granted, it was my fault to assume you would understand the meaning of my words...I hope I've fixed that now. Though, I'm sure someone will read this the wrong way...but oh well.

I never meant for it to be taken that animals deserve [B]the exact same[/B] rights as human beings. They are still animals. They cannot vote (like I give a damn about voting...but anyway), they cannot build towering cities of brick, stone, or metal, they cannot carry on the terribly complex thoughts that a human being can do. However, as I've pointed out, they can feel. They know what love is. They know was pain is. They know what suffering is.

We have laws in place (granted, often ignored laws, but laws) to keep human beings from suffering and to repay that suffering if it is felt. Our laws concerning animal cruelty and the malpractice of vets need to be looked over to prevent animals from suffering. Lucky suffered. Doesn't matter if Adam is a lawsuit happy [I]adult[/I] who wants fame and money. Lucky went through unnecessary pain as a [I]direct result[/I] of the vet doing [B]something[/B] wrong. That's what needs to be justified.

If Adam wins this case, you won't be put in jail for running over a stray cat. You won't be sentenced to the death penalty for shooting a wild dog that's attacking you. But vets, just like doctors, who let their patients suffer will pay for that pain. That's why this is important. That's what I meant when I said "we need a serious rewrite of our laws concerning animal cruelty."

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by RPCrazy [/i]
[B]
1) Number two, you are heartless person who sees your poor family "pet" as nothing more than that. A burden on your life and not even close to resembling a friend or family member. You don't deserve the undying love that dog gives you.

2) And complain and justify as you wish. I promise you, I'll ignore every statement. You have claimed that animals feel no emotion and convey no emotion. That's proof enough for me that you have no heart, and nothing will EVER change that point of view.


3) Thousands of years ago human beings knew nothing more than instinct. I think what many of us have forgotten is (if you believe in evolution) that at one point man was nothing more than an animal. He knew nothing about emotions...there were no emotions. Love wasn't love, it was a need to find the best mate and reproduce. Hate was only pain. Anger was pain. Sorrow? There was no sorrow. The weak died, that was that. As you've all pointed out, life goes on.

4) But man kind evolved, didn't we? We learned how to feel all of these emotions and more. We now choose our mates because they make us happy and feel loved, not because "they are the best" to carry on the genes of our kind. I'm sure many of you will agree that there are some couples out there who should not be reproducing. We hate and we kill not because the opposition is a threat to our personal lives, but because they have angered and insulted us. Hell, we've [I]created[/I] the insult.

5) I will give you that today, many of an animal's thoughts are based on instinct. But they are different instincts than what they were thousands of years ago when Man first domesticated the dog and cat. Because everything evolves, and with us evolving, animals have developed their own emotions. Their own very simple ways of knowing that they love their master, they are happy to be in his or her company. They know hate and anger beyond the scope of physical pain into the mental. They mourn the loss of their loved ones. Not as long as we do, but they notice that empty spot where a person once was in their heart. They're getting there. They're where we were when our minds first started developing into what we have today.

6)And please, don't twist my words and tell me I'm saying "that one day dogs and cats will walk and talk like a human." I'm not. Their minds don't have that room to expand like ours did.


7)I'd like to bring to attention the fact that all of you have missed the point of my original post. Granted, it was my fault to assume you would understand the meaning of my words...I hope I've fixed that now. Though, I'm sure someone will read this the wrong way...but oh well.

8)I never meant for it to be taken that animals deserve [B]the exact same[/B] rights as human beings. They are still animals. They cannot vote (like I give a damn about voting...but anyway), they cannot build towering cities of brick, stone, or metal, they cannot carry on the terribly complex thoughts that a human being can do. However, as I've pointed out, they can feel. They know what love is. They know was pain is. They know what suffering is.

9)We have laws in place (granted, often ignored laws, but laws) to keep human beings from suffering and to repay that suffering if it is felt. Our laws concerning animal cruelty and the malpractice of vets need to be looked over to prevent animals from suffering. Lucky suffered. Doesn't matter if Adam is a lawsuit happy [I]adult[/I] who wants fame and money. Lucky went through unnecessary pain as a [I]direct result[/I] of the vet doing [B]something[/B] wrong. That's what needs to be justified.

10)If Adam wins this case, you won't be put in jail for running over a stray cat. You won't be sentenced to the death penalty for shooting a wild dog that's attacking you. But vets, just like doctors, who let their patients suffer will pay for that pain. That's why this is important. That's what I meant when I said "we need a serious rewrite of our laws concerning animal cruelty." [/B][/QUOTE]

First a warning: my response will be gratuitously violent and not for the feint of heart :demon: . Just joking. I've taken the liberty of numbering each paragraph so I can respond to your points individually.

1) I would invite you to my house to see how much i love my dog. Just because I don't think dogs and cats should run the country doesn't mean I don't love him. I love Jake like family. Saying that made me cry. That's not very nice of you. :(

2) I'm sure you don't care about what I have to say.. that must be the reason you sent this long-winded breath of hot air through the forums. Probably for ****'s and gigles right? And no, your arguments probably won't change my point of view, usually that takes someone to make me realize something new or different.

3)I don't belive in evolution, so your point is invalid to me.

4) I don't belive they did, sorry again bud :\ .

5. "They know hate and anger beyond the scope of physical pain into the mental." This was an especially funny statement. Maybe someday, in a future life, we shall meet in the "mental". :laugh: Oh ya, I'd love to see your support on the evolution of a pet's psyche. Go back 3000 years and record what pets were like. They didn't change a whole lot. I do belive some pets show emotion, but let's be serious here, fluffy wants the bacon-flavored rawhide over stock dividends. I don't try to give him an excuse, I accept reality. Try it sometime, it tastes good.. reality, i mean.

6) I think you do that well enough for the both of us , champ!

7)No I'm glad you posted this and you should be too. But dont YOU forget that you posted this for a better reason than to have everyone here just mindlessly accept your opinion right? I mean, you wanted an exchange of Ideas here right? No? Oh, well then, nevermind. :smirk:

8)I know this, so lets prevent the pain and suffering of animals by keeping our vetrinary professionals in business here ok?

9)Actually, the fact that Adamn is money grubbing and lawsuit happy has everything to do with the article. Everyone is human, ironically enough, but Adam seems to be less unforgiving of that fact. No, 5 thousand dollars isn't going to make you any happier that your dog died if you [B] truly [/B] cared about the animal, it just makes a sad man who lost his dog 5 thousand dollars richer. This is the pressure that malpractice puts on well meaning professionals that do NOTHING but BENEFIT SOCIETY! Jesus, how would you feel if you were out of a vet cause some kid lost his cat?

10) I, for one, know how much doctors LOVE inducing suffering on their patients! And on a side note, when i think anesthesia induced comas, i think suffering! As for: "we need a serious rewrite of our laws concerning animal cruelty.", I hope you mean "we need a serious reconsideration..." otherwise that wouldn't make sense. Lucky you, cause you got that serious reconsideration today!

I'm off to give my dog a big hug, then pray that he never has to die suffering, and no, I'm being serious in this last sentence.
-Drix

[RPCrazy]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]5. "They know hate and anger beyond the scope of physical pain into the mental." This was an especially funny statement. Maybe someday, in a future life, we shall meet in the "mental". :laugh: Oh ya, I'd love to see your support on the evolution of a pet's psyche. Go back 3000 years and record what pets were like. They didn't change a whole lot. I do belive some pets show emotion, but let's be serious here, fluffy wants the bacon-flavored rawhide over stock dividends. I don't try to give him an excuse, I accept reality. Try it sometime, it tastes good.. reality, i mean.[/B][/QUOTE]

Did you read the rest of my post or were you too busy trying to force your views on other people (I'll get back to this later) to get what I'm saying? I'm not saying pets are highly intelligent, but they know emotions. You said it yourself right there, "some pets show emotion". So stop trying to make it seem like we're all preaching that our pets are the geniuses they depict on TV.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]7)No I'm glad you posted this and you should be too. But dont YOU forget that you posted this for a better reason than to have everyone here just mindlessly accept your opinion right? I mean, you wanted an exchange of Ideas here right? No? Oh, well then, nevermind. :smirk: [/B][/QUOTE]

Looks who's talking. Every time someone says something about how their pet has shown a shred of action against your "valid points," you have ripped them apart and made them into a fool, myself included. Yes, I posted this to get input from others. Yes, I posted this to get other's views. YOU are the one who is putting everyone down. I am trying to clarify what I stated earlier.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]8)I know this, so lets prevent the pain and suffering of animals by keeping our vetrinary professionals in business here ok?

9)Actually, the fact that Adamn is money grubbing and lawsuit happy has everything to do with the article. Everyone is human, ironically enough, but Adam seems to be less unforgiving of that fact. No, 5 thousand dollars isn't going to make you any happier that your dog died if you [B] truly [/B] cared about the animal, it just makes a sad man who lost his dog 5 thousand dollars richer. This is the pressure that malpractice puts on well meaning professionals that do NOTHING but BENEFIT SOCIETY! Jesus, how would you feel if you were out of a vet cause some kid lost his cat?[/B][/QUOTE]

The one problem with your statement is that this wasn't a well meaning professional. How simple do you want me to put it? This was a bad vet. Like you said, every one is human and you can make a lot of money from being an animal doctor. Laws need to be "reconsidered" to keep the good vets in practice and put the bad ones out of business. And just because one vet is sued doesn't mean the whole animal hospital is going down the drain. There will be another doctor there, who takes better care of the animals, to fill the spot.

[Drix D'Zanth]

Good point. But I stand by my arguments. I think posting a rebuttal to what he said now would make me sound redundant. No one wants that. But remember you just tried "forcing" your opinions as much as I have, and well I think we both hurt eachothers feelings here havent we? So I put my dedication to this thread to the rest, what's said has been.

[RPCrazy]

I couldn't agree with you more. Heh...ironic, isn't it? We finally agree on something! -hears cheers from the crowd of people-




Edit: Needed to add more to keep with OB's codes. ^_^;

[Charles]

I feel that Riff is justified in filing suit against Willie.

Let's sift through all the debate concerning evolutionary processes and whether or not animals have the ability to communicate. What we're left with is negligent and deceptive practice. Let's not forget that the Riffs called repeatedly and were never informed of complications related to the anesthesia. It shouldn't take over six hours to remove two bad teeth. So, I'm curious as to how long the animal was experiencing problems before concern motivated Ellen to visit the medical center and investigate for herself. The vet had to be withholding information.

If that isn't unethical conduct on the part of the veterinarian, then I don't know what is. That's the issue here. He shouldn't be blamed for the illness that arose through the use of anesthesia but he has to be held accountable for acting wrongly in a professional position.

Honestly, I'm quite shocked that people say Adam Riff is acting selfishly, and that stuff happens and he should "deal with it." Regardless of whether or not someone believes animals deserve basic rights (which they most certainly do), one must recognize that a pet isn't a simple item, a mere piece of property. People love their pets and can develop bonds with them. And, although it's true that someone can hold a personal artifact dear, they can never develop a bond with it. That's the key difference here.

With that in mind, it's a bit ignorant to accuse the Riffs of being money-grubbing crooks.

[The Original]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]You know what.. your reply has given me the greatest idea. Tiger and Stella have inspired me to endorse a "cat army" where today's cats can devote themselves to the protection of America's freedoms! They will HISS the enemy away, swiping at their usless AK 47 5.56mm assault rifles, sheilding their fallen comrades with all their 15 pounds of mass (a guess) can provide! Do you get it now?
I think it's great your cats love eachother, I'm sure they gather together for regular dialectics once a week. PLEASE PEOPLE! [/B][/QUOTE]

Did I ever say that they were capable of anything near humanity's intelligence? Did I ever say they will go through anything resembling biological evolution? No. I was stating that they appeared to be showing an emotion of fear and devotion to Trixie. You seem to think animals can't have human-like emotions, and thats fine. Everyone's entitled to they're own opinion fter all, and I'm not trying to force anything onto you. But answer me this. When Stella and Tiger's mother died, they curled up next to her empty sleeping bed and didn't move or eat for four days. Is it anamilistic instict to do that when a family member has died? I don't want to us the word "mourn" to describe their behavior, because apparantly you scoff at that. Again, I'm not saying this to offend or force anything on you. I am only curious to see what you're response is.

[Raiha]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Charles [/i]
[B]I feel that Riff is justified in filing suit against Willie.

Let's sift through all the debate concerning evolutionary processes and whether or not animals have the ability to communicate. What we're left with is negligent and deceptive practice. Let's not forget that the Riffs called repeatedly and were never informed of complications related to the anesthesia. It shouldn't take over six hours to remove two bad teeth. So, I'm curious as to how long the animal was experiencing problems before concern motivated Ellen to visit the medical center and investigate for herself. The vet had to be withholding information.

If that isn't unethical conduct on the part of the veterinarian, then I don't know what is. That's the issue here. He shouldn't be blamed for the illness that arose through the use of anesthesia but he has to be held accountable for acting wrongly in a professional position.

With that in mind, it's a bit ignorant to accuse the Riffs of being money-grubbing crooks. [/B][/QUOTE] [COLOR=royalblue]Do you know how long it takes for an animal to recover from anesthesia? We had to wait that long for our dog to be spayed. Scratch that, according to my mom it was a day and a night. So this sounds somewhat normal. But seriously. Suing for "emotional devastation?" I was devastated when they told me what they did to my chest after surgery, but did I sue them? Not exactly.[/COLOR]

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by The Original [/i]
[B]Did I ever say that they were capable of anything near humanity's intelligence? Did I ever say they will go through anything resembling biological evolution? No. I was stating that they appeared to be showing an emotion of fear and devotion to Trixie. You seem to think animals can't have human-like emotions, and thats fine. Everyone's entitled to they're own opinion fter all, and I'm not trying to force anything onto you. But answer me this. When Stella and Tiger's mother died, they curled up next to her empty sleeping bed and didn't move or eat for four days. Is it anamilistic instict to do that when a family member has died? I don't want to us the word "mourn" to describe their behavior, because apparantly you scoff at that. Again, I'm not saying this to offend or force anything on you. I am only curious to see what you're response is. [/B][/QUOTE]

Alright, I'm not trying to force my belifs down your throat either. I belive pets show emotion, I'll agree that they care about certain people, I've heard the stories. I think you misunderstand my argument. I'm not arguing against pets showing emotion, I'm returning to my previous point that Pets shouldn't be given the same freedoms as humans. There is a difference here. Please refer to my earlier arguments, because It is just a big rebuttal to the first comment on the topic, so let's not sidetrack here.
As for Stella and Tiger, well give them a big hug from their pal Drix.