Thailand Pet-Owners On High Alert For Dog-Nappers

[KKK]

My three dogs stolen from the road in front of my GF house in the middle of the night, at two different occasions, had me as caretaker.

Dogs gone, never came back, I felt miserably for some days, sitting alone in the kitchen in the evening at dinner without my dogs eyes around and on me.

Yes, some dogs have owners!

You're not a very good owner if your dogs were out in the road in the middle of the night. Serves you right...Keep your dogs on your property NOT in the public street...A dog is only as good as it's owner and most dog owners are about the same as what comes out of the rear end...CRAP

[thailand49]

thailand49

Sounds like what they do to chickens, pigs and cattle?

""captured, stuffed in a wire crate with several others with no room to move, if not sophocated along the way, faces a brutal beating, alive, to torture it prior to skinning, still alive, and left to hang with a meat hook through it's face, and then gutted, often while still in shock and breathing, .. to be finally butchered for cooking. The entire torture process, which is done to make it "taste better", can take anything from two hours for the lucky ones to a day or more.""

In which countrys slaughterhouse did you glimpse inside? Deep in the jungle of AFRICA?

Yes, I eat meat, but not dog meat! Dogs are a different animal to me, I grew up with dogs and my mother showed me the love for dogs

"Since I know the people (special some of that kind in this thread) I love the dogs!"

That's great but is that in American where even there they are packed in cages too? Might be too much for you to believe. I love dogs too and have 4 in Thailand and take great care of them. But remember many of the comments pertain to this country and not other western ones. Here is Thailand it is a reality that Thai people love to have dogs but don't take care of them just like so mnay fathers leaving their kids without a second thought. There are many forms of abuse and the dogs here running around loose, no medical care or food, full of disease and sickness running and hanging around Sois,

Here is a good example and true story my next door neighbor a jackass as they can be as Thais time after time his daughter wants a dog they go out get one and it cries for hours because it is hungry laying in its own shit and urine. Two things will happen like before! it will die from lack of food and water or if it is able to survive as soon as the door is open it will take off and never come back because any animal knows when they are better off! I have no scientific proof for you but living here for over 10 years and not in a nice condo where Faranges take care of their dogs and pick up their shit in the real world in Thailand I say 95% of the dog owners here don't give a rats ass what happens to them. They can't even feed themselves but they want a dog. Sorry but here in Thailand I think they are better off being eaten whether for the rich or poor!

[BigJohnson]

Now I have a question: "What have all the people who agree with "belg" done lately?"

BBQ'd a kangaroo the other week...

I've eaten Kangaroo before; so what beer (or should I say many beers) did you swill down to get that piece of stringy, gamey piece of meat (that only an Aussie would enjoy) down with; Tooheys, XXXX, Carlton, Boags? Or perhaps you downed a nice big can of FOSTERS and then threw another "shrimp on the barbie". Now don't go whinging mate, I'm just trying to take the "piss out of you".

BTW... the next time you try to troll a Yank, you better bring more "game".

[Bagwan]

Dogs are domesticated animals, so every soi dog was once owned or its ancestors were owned. British readers might remember the slogan, ""A dog is for life, not just for Christmas".

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Dogs_Trust

Are you by chance employed to promote the sale of Paxo sage and onion stuffing?

[cup-O-coffee]

well, in all honesty, this is the best solution of the millions of soi dogs

Is it? Maybe something better is to develop laws which humanely control animal populations and strive to prevent animal cruelty. But even if such laws existed in Thailand we come back to the age old problem in Thailand of no, weak, and/or selective enforcement of laws. TIT

thank you for some common sense - its not ok to treat animals cruelly or to condone a bad practice because of bad laws and no real justice system

Its a shocking inditement of a modern society that behaves this way to any animal. On any level its criminal and morally corrupt

Oh really? How was that pork steak and beef rib you had last night?

What is truly cruel is letting these feral beasts come into this world in the first place. Anything that happens after that is just natures way of natural selection. There doesn't have to be a reason for it and just because human beings are in the natural selection process does not qualify it as cruelty if we do away with something that should never have been.

Just because these female canines pop out litters of 6 to 15 puppies does not mandate that humans jump to their aid and nurture them through life with no purpose other than to let them run around and defecate and threaten human being's property and their persons.

Unless one is a vegetarian, they should keep their mouths shut regarding opinions on what is cruel and what isn't when it comes to the issue of sources of meat and how it is obtained.

Edited March 17, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[samsiam]

Now I have a question: "What have all the people who agree with "belg" done lately?"

BBQ'd a kangaroo the other week...

I've eaten Kangaroo before; so what beer (or should I say many beers) did you swill down to get that piece of stringy, gamey piece of meat (that only an Aussie would enjoy) down with; Tooheys, XXXX, Carlton, Boags? Or perhaps you downed a nice big can of FOSTERS and then threw another "shrimp on the barbie". Now don't go whinging mate, I'm just trying to take the "piss out of you".

BTW... the next time you try to troll a Yank, you better bring more "game".

Didnt 'try...'did'..obviously.

[samsiam]

What is truly cruel is letting these feral beasts come into this world in the first place.

2 days ago the missus tried to get the local vet to spay our dog and what to do now to stop any pups...as she was raped recently....as it was longer than 10 days, he said nothing as they did not do abortions and it was best to let them come and find homes for them.

Found another vet...he did it and she is now spayed.

[annabel]

well, in all honesty, this is the best solution of the millions of soi dogs

Well in all honesty, if I tell you exactly how ignorant that sounds, and/or stupid you are, my post will be deleted.

But consider this: A dog, whether wild, privately "owned", or living as a resident street dog with regular food source (and name), is captured, stuffed in a wire crate with several others with no room to move, if not sophocated along the way, faces a brutal beating, alive, to torture it prior to skinning, still alive, and left to hang with a meat hook through it's face, and then gutted, often while still in shock and breathing, .. to be finally butchered for cooking. The entire torture process, which is done to make it "taste better", can take anything from two hours for the lucky ones to a day or more.

You think this is the "best solution" .. ? You perhaps deserve the same.

Sounds like what they do to chickens, pigs and cattle? What are you eating by the way?

Nah!, Nah!, Nah.... you obviously don't know what you talking about ..... Jeeezzz .... !!!

[annabel]

well, in all honesty, this is the best solution of the millions of soi dogs

Is it? Maybe something better is to develop laws which humanely control animal populations and strive to prevent animal cruelty. But even if such laws existed in Thailand we come back to the age old problem in Thailand of no, weak, and/or selective enforcement of laws. TIT

thank you for some common sense - its not ok to treat animals cruelly or to condone a bad practice because of bad laws and no real justice system

Its a shocking inditement of a modern society that behaves this way to any animal. On any level its criminal and morally corrupt

Oh really? How was that pork steak and beef rib you had last night?

What is truly cruel is letting these feral beasts come into this world in the first place. Anything that happens after that is just natures way of natural selection. There doesn't have to be a reason for it and just because human beings are in the natural selection process does not qualify it as cruelty if we do away with something that should never have been.

Just because these female canines pop out litters of 6 to 15 puppies does not mandate that humans jump to their aid and nurture them through life with no purpose other than to let them run around and defecate and threaten human being's property and their persons.

Unless one is a vegetarian, they should keep their mouths shut regarding opinions on what is cruel and what isn't when it comes to the issue of sources of meat and how it is obtained.

Also doesn't mean they have to be tortured by sadistic idiots ..... which obviously you can't make the difference and would .... ouf never mind.... you're obviously too dense for anything to penetrate your brain cells

[annabel]

well, in all honesty, this is the best solution of the millions of soi dogs

Is it? Maybe something better is to develop laws which humanely control animal populations and strive to prevent animal cruelty. But even if such laws existed in Thailand we come back to the age old problem in Thailand of no, weak, and/or selective enforcement of laws. TIT

thank you for some common sense - its not ok to treat animals cruelly or to condone a bad practice because of bad laws and no real justice system

Its a shocking inditement of a modern society that behaves this way to any animal. On any level its criminal and morally corrupt

Oh really? How was that pork steak and beef rib you had last night?

What is truly cruel is letting these feral beasts come into this world in the first place. Anything that happens after that is just natures way of natural selection. There doesn't have to be a reason for it and just because human beings are in the natural selection process does not qualify it as cruelty if we do away with something that should never have been.

Just because these female canines pop out litters of 6 to 15 puppies does not mandate that humans jump to their aid and nurture them through life with no purpose other than to let them run around and defecate and threaten human being's property and their persons.

Unless one is a vegetarian, they should keep their mouths shut regarding opinions on what is cruel and what isn't when it comes to the issue of sources of meat and how it is obtained.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dngvRb3i-s&feature=share

[cup-O-coffee]

Oh really? How was that pork steak and beef rib you had last night?

What is truly cruel is letting these feral beasts come into this world in the first place. Anything that happens after that is just natures way of natural selection. There doesn't have to be a reason for it and just because human beings are in the natural selection process does not qualify it as cruelty if we do away with something that should never have been.

Just because these female canines pop out litters of 6 to 15 puppies does not mandate that humans jump to their aid and nurture them through life with no purpose other than to let them run around and defecate and threaten human being's property and their persons.

Unless one is a vegetarian, they should keep their mouths shut regarding opinions on what is cruel and what isn't when it comes to the issue of sources of meat and how it is obtained.

Also doesn't mean they have to be tortured by sadistic idiots ..... which obviously you can't make the difference and would .... ouf never mind.... you're obviously too dense for anything to penetrate your brain cells

I am quite certain that the people who butcher those beasts in order to prepare them for the dinner plate are not intentioned on cruelty, but rather on the art of cooking dogs and making dog meat palatable.

Meat is meat! History shows that.

What you think about it, and the preparation of it does not concern others who are interested in that cuisine.

There are preparatory methods for all the kinds of meat out there that - if we look into the matter - would turn your stomach.

Spare me the idealistic BS and childish insults.

The word is getting smaller. People gotta eat. If one dog feeds 30 kids then I am all for it!

Annabel, think about what I wrote. It will broaden your mind to reality and push aside your ideals! People have got to eat! Do you deny them that right because of your personal preferences?

I am not talking about fluffy here. You probably fret over when the chick becomes aware and lose sleep at night wondering if they feel the heat when they are boiling in mama's kettle.

No! I think you are the dense one, girl!

Edited March 20, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[BookMan]

...through life with no purpose other than to let them run around and defecate and threaten human being's property and their persons.

What property do they threaten? Are you concerned about the local pack joy riding in your car? Making off with the large screen television? Spiriting away the smartphone perhaps? Burning down the house?

Seems a bit alarmist to say the least.

[cup-O-coffee]

...through life with no purpose other than to let them run around and defecate and threaten human being's property and their persons.

What property do they threaten? Are you concerned about the local pack joy riding in your car? Making off with the large screen television? Spiriting away the smartphone perhaps? Burning down the house?

Seems a bit alarmist to say the least.

You cannot possibly be that obtuse, can you?

[ALFREDO]

My three dogs stolen from the road in front of my GF house in the middle of the night, at two different occasions, had me as caretaker.

Dogs gone, never came back, I felt miserably for some days, sitting alone in the kitchen in the evening at dinner without my dogs eyes around and on me.

Yes, some dogs have owners!

You're not a very good owner if your dogs were out in the road in the middle of the night. Serves you right...Keep your dogs on your property NOT in the public street...A dog is only as good as it's owner and most dog owners are about the same as what comes out of the rear end...CRAP

You live in TH? In the countryside? Isaan? I think no you do not!

Most houses in the villages have no fence, where do I give the GFriends dogs inside?

All open space and the dogs like it that way, used to that, works since long time here in the countryside!

Enough, I provide some dry food, left overs and fresh water.

But you think it is ok, to steal an animal, only because its easy possible to steal it? That is what you are saying!

So I would be careful, to leave my pocket open nearby you, sitting in the same Bus or plane!

Edited March 20, 2012 by ALFREDO

[ALFREDO]

thailand49

That is not what the thread should be about.

Thailand Pet-Owners On High Alert For Dog-Nappers

Its about that -Dog Owners- who are concerned, take care their dogs, feed their dogs and that must not be done only in closed gardens. Stealing is stealing, also outside the garden!

And you ment also, SLAUGHTERHOUSES in the WEST, everywhere, abuse all animals extremly before killing them. Read your post again.

Skinned at live? In Western slaughterhouses, where?

[cup-O-coffee]

Gandhiji’s writings on the stray dog issue, in his paper Young India.

Mahatma Gandhi wrote extensively about our duties towards animals, specifically about dogs on the streets and their welfare. He wrote about responsible ownership long before the term had even been coined. He brought attention to the plight of homeless dogs and legislation to protect them decades before any research had been done on the issue. Ironically except in India, humane societies the world over, implement dog control based on the same principles propagated by him over 80 years ago.

A mill owner in Ahmedabad, Ambalal Sarabai, had 60 stray dogs killed outside his mill. Being a Hindu he felt remorse over his actions and went to Gandhiji. When Gandhiji approved of his deed a huge controversy arose. The Ahmedabad Humanitarian Society and many other people asked him how he, the apostle of Ahimsa, could approve of the killing when religions like Hinduism and Jainism prohibited the taking of life. It is then that he used his paper Young India to explain what true Ahimsa really meant.

“When I wrote the article on this subject I knew that I was adding one more to my already heavy burden of problems. But it could not be helped. Angry letters are now pouring in. At an hour when after a hard day’s work I was about to retire to bed, three friends invaded me, infringed the religion of ahimsa in the name of humanity, and engaged me in a discussion on it. They had come to me in the name of humanity. How could I refuse to see them?”

“So I met them. One of them I saw, betrayed anger, bitterness and arrogance. He did not seem to me to have come with a view to getting his doubts solved. He had come rather to correct me. Everyone has a right to do so, but whoever undertakes such a mission must know my position. But he was not to blame for it. This impatience which is but a symptom of violence is to be found everywhere. The violence in this case was painful to me as it was betrayed by an advocate of non-violence.”

“He claimed to be a Jain. I have made a fair study of Jainism. But the Jains have no monopoly of ahimsa. It is not the exclusive peculiarity of any religion. Every religion is based on ahimsa, its application is different in different religions. I do not think the Jains of today practice ahimsa in any better way than others. I can say this because of my acquaintance with the Jains, which is so old that many take me to be a Jain. Mahavir was an incarnation of compassion and Ahimsa. How I wish his votaries were votaries also of his ahimsa. Protection of little creatures is indeed an essential part of ahimsa, but it does not exhaust itself with it. Ahimsa begins with it.”

“The Mahajan may not allow the dogs to stray… It is a sin; it should be a sin to feed stray dogs and we should save numerous dogs if we had legislation making every stray dog liable to be shot. Even if those who feed stray dogs consented to pay a penalty for their misdirected compassion we should be free from the curse of stray dogs.”

“Humanity is a noble attribute of the soul. It is not exhausted with saving a few dogs or a few fish; such saving may even be sinful. If I have a swarm of ants in my house, the man who proceeds to feed them will be guilty of a sin…. The Mahajan may feel itself safe and believe that it has saved their lives by dumping dogs near my field but it will have committed the greater sin of putting my life in danger.”

“A roving dog without an owner is a danger to society and a swarm of them is a menace to its very existence…. If we want to keep dogs in towns or villages in a decent manner no dog should be suffered to wander. There should be no stray dogs even as we have no stray cattle…. But can we take individual charge of these roving dogs? Can we have a pinjrapole for them? If both these things are impossible then there seems to me no alternative except to kill them.”

“Connivance or putting up with status quo is no ahimsa, there is no thought or discrimination in it. Dogs will be killed whenever they are a menace to society. I regard this as unavoidable in the life of a householder. To wait until they get rabid is not to be merciful to them. We can imagine what the dogs would wish if a meeting could be called of them, from what we would wish under the same circumstances. We will not choose to live anyhow. That many of us do is no credit to us. A meeting of wise men will never resolve that men may treat one another as they treat rabid or stray dogs… We offend against dogs as a class by suffering them to stray and live on crumbs or leavings from our plates that we throw at them and we injure our neighbours also by doing so.”

“I am therefore strongly of the opinion that if we practice the religion of humanity we should have a law making it obligatory on those who would have dogs to keep them under guard and not allow them to stray and making all stray dogs to be liable to be destroyed after a certain date.”

“What I have insisted upon is a municipal by law authorizing municipalities to destroy unowned dogs. Every unlicensed dog should be should be caught by the police and immediately handed over to the Mahajan if they have adequate provision for the maintenance of these dogs and would submit to municipal supervision as to the adequacy of such a provision. Failing such a provision all stray dogs should be shot. This simple legislation will also prevent dogs from cruel neglect.”

“I have never meant that everyone should own a dog. What I have said is that the dogs should in no case be ownerless. Not that owned dogs will be immune, but the owners will be responsible for them if they are diseased or get rabies.”

Letter to Gandhiji:

“You ask us not to feed stray dogs, but we do not invite them. They simply come. How can they be turned back…we are all sinners, why should we not practice what little kindness we can?”

Gandhiji’s reply:

“It is from this false feeling of compassion that we encourage himsa in the name of ahimsa. But as ignorance is no excuse before man-made law, even so is it no excuse before divine law… It is the duty of society to support the blind and the infirm, but everyone may not take the task upon himself… If it is thus a sin on the part of the individual to undertake feeding beggars, it is no less a sin for him to feed stray dogs. It is a false sense of compassion. It is an insult to the starving dog to throw a crumb at him. Roving dogs do not indicate compassion and civilization in society; they betray instead the ignorance and lethargy of its members… That means we should keep them and treat them with respect as we do our companions and not allow them to roam about. By aggravating the evil of stray dogs we shall not be acquitting ourselves of our duty to them… It is my firm conviction that this sorry plight is due to our misconception of ahimsa, is due to our want of ahimsa. Practice of ahimsa cannot have as its result impotence, impoverishment and famine. If this is a sacred land we should not see impoverishment stalking it.”

“Cows we cannot protect, dogs we kick about and belabour with sticks, their ribs are seen sticking out and yet we are not ashamed of ourselves and raise a hue and cry when a stray dog is killed. Which of the two is better – that 5000 dogs should wander about in semi-starvation living on dirt and excreta and drag on a miserable existence, or that 50 should die and keep the rest in a decent condition?... But it is possible that the man who kills the dogs that he cannot bare to see tortured thus, maybe doing a meritorious act. Merely taking life is not always himsa, one may even say there is sometimes more himsa in not taking life.”

“The destruction of bodies of tortured creatures being for their own peace cannot be regarded as himsa, or the unavoidable destruction caused for the purpose of protecting ones wards, cannot be regarded as himsa.”

“For instance an alternative has been suggested in the shape of confining even rabid dogs in a certain place and allowing them to die a slow death. Now my idea of compassion makes this thing impossible for me. I cannot for a moment bear to see a dog or for that matter any other living being, helplessly suffering the torture of a slow death.”

“If they really want to be humane they should finance a society to keep these dogs. But since neither the State nor the humanitarians care for these dogs driven mad by hunger and thirst, it is kinder to destroy them.

“Letters on this subject are still pouring in, but I fail to discover any new question or any fresh argument advanced. I would therefore ask those who have been thinking on this subject to read this series of articles over and over again. I do so without the slightest hesitation, inasmuch as they are a result not of ideas hastily formed, but of experience of many years. I have presented no new principles, I cannot say how far the presentation is correct, but as it represents my honest conviction, and as many friends expect me to solve intricate problems in ahimsa, I can only ask them to turn to the series I have been writing. Some of my correspondents wrench my own sentences from their contexts and quote them against me, some quote part of them and omit the most essential remainder.”

“A correspondent reminds me of the advice given to me by Shri Rajchandra when I approached him with a doubt as to what I should do if a serpent threatened to bite me. Certainly his advice was that rather than kill the serpent I should allow myself to be killed by it. But the correspondent forgets that it is not myself that is the subject matter of the present discussion, but the welfare of society in general as also of the suffering of animals. If I had approached Rajchandrabhai with the question whether I should or should not kill a serpent writhing in agony, and whose pain I could not relieve otherwise, or whether I should or should not kill a serpent threatening to bite a child under my protection, if I could not otherwise turn the reptile away, I do not know what answer he would have given. For me the answer is as clear as daylight and I have given it.”

Letter to Gandhiji:

“You advocate the destruction of stray dogs. Do you include in the category the very useful village dogs?”

Gandhiji’s reply:

“Most certainly I do not. The village dogs are the cheapest and most efficient police we have for protecting villagers against thieves at night and intruding dogs and other animals during the day. But I have not advocated an indiscriminate destruction of even stray dogs. Many other remedies have to be adopted before that drastic measure is resorted to. What I have insisted upon is a municipal by-law authorizing municipalities to destroy unowned dogs. This simple legislation will prevent dogs from cruel neglect and put the Mahajan upon their mettle. It is the indiscriminate and thoughtless charity which has to be resisted. That charity that feeds dogs and indeed men who choose to become beggars harms the beggars and the society which encourages such false charity.”

Letter to Gandhiji:

“You say that if we can neither take individual charge of roving dogs nor have a pinjrapol for them, the only alternative is to kill them. Does that mean that every roving dog should be killed, although it may not be rabid? Don’t you agree that we leave unmolested all harmful beasts, birds and reptiles, so long as they do not actually harm us? Why should the dogs be an exception? Where is the humanity of shooting innocent dogs wherever they are found roving? How can one wishing well to all living beings do this?”

Gandhiji’s reply:

“The writer has misunderstood my meaning. I would not suggest even the destruction of rabid dogs for the sake of it, much less that of innocent roving dogs. Nor have I said that these latter should be killed wherever they are found. I have only suggested legislation to that effect, so that as soon as the law is made, humane people might wake up in the matter and devise better management of stray dogs. Some of these might be owned, some might be put in quarantine. The remedy, when it is taken, will be once for all. Stray dogs do not drop down from heaven. They are sign of idleness, indifference and ignorance of society. When they grow into a nuisance, it is due to our ignorance and want of compassion. A stray dog is bound to take to his heels if you do not feed him. The measure I have suggested is actuated no less by a consideration of the welfare of dogs than by that of society. It is the duty of the humanitarian to allow no living being aimlessly to roam about. In performance of that duty it may be his duty once in a way to kill some dogs.”

Letter to Gandhiji:

“How did you hit upon the religion of destroying dogs at the old age of 57? If it had occurred to you earlier than this why were you silent so long?”

Gandhiji’s reply:

“Man proclaims a truth only when he sees it and when it is necessary, no matter even if it be in his old age. I have long recognized the duty of killing such animals within limits laid down above, and have acted upon it on occasions. In India the villagers have long recognized the duty of destroying intruding dogs. They keep dogs who scare away intruders and kill them if they do not escape with their lives. These watch-dogs are purposely maintained with the view to protecting the village from other dogs etc., as also from thieves and robbers whom they attack fearlessly. The dogs have become a nuisance only in cities, and the best remedy is to have a law against stray dogs.”

Letter to Gandhiji:

“You have been so much under the Western influence that you have learnt to think that it is proper to kill lower beings for the sake of man. It is better to confess your error and apologise to the world. You should have made up your mind in this mater after exhaustless sifting. Instead you have passionately taken sides and discredited yourself.”

Gandhiji’s reply:

“This is the least offensive sentence I have picked up from letters of this type. I submit I have not formed my opinion without much deliberation. It is not an opinion I have recently formed, neither is it hasty. One should not let his so called greatness come in the way of the formation of opinion, otherwise he cannot arrive at truth.”

“I do not think that everything Western is to be rejected. I have condemned the Western civilization in no measured terms. I still do, but it does not mean that everything Western should be rejected. I have learnt a great deal from the West and I am grateful to it. I should think myself unfortunate if contact with and the literature of the West had no influence on me. But I do not think I owe my opinion about the dogs to my Western education or Western influence. The West (with the exception of a small school of thought) thinks that it is no sin to kill the lower animals for what it regards to be the benefit of man. It has therefore encouraged vivisection. The West does not think it wrong to commit violence of all kinds for the satisfaction of the palate. I do not subscribe to these views. According to the Western standard it is no sin, on the contrary it is a merit, to kill animals that are no longer useful. Whereas I recognize limits at every step. I regard even the destruction of vegetable life as himsa. It is not the teaching of the West.”

“Argumentum ad hominum has no place in a discussion of principles and their practice. My opinions should be considered as they are, irrespective of whether they are derived from the West or the East. Whether they are based on truth or untruth, himsa or ahimsa is the only thing to be considered. I firmly believe they are based on truth and ahimsa.”

“If anyone thinks that the people in the West are innocent of humanity he is sadly mistaken. The ideal of humanity in the West is perhaps lower, but their practice of it is very much more thorough than ours. We rest content with a lofty ideal and are slow and lazy in practice. We are wrapped up in deep darkness as is evident from our cattle, paupers and other animals. They are eloquent of our irreligion rather than our religion.”

[Nickymaster]

well, in all honesty, this is the best solution of the millions of soi dogs

"well, in all honesty" the best solution is to round up all the sick, perverted, inhumane bastards that enjoy torturing small animals (a trait often found in serial killers) and turn them into dog food.

On a more serious note; I have personally communicated with several of the wonderful and unselfish people who have been rescuing these dogs and they are doing a brilliant job in finding them good homes with people who do not turn them into a "delicacy" entree for their dinner table.

...and before anyone questions me with "What have you done to help the problem besides running your mouth on Thai Visa?" Here is my answer: I have adopted a dog and am in the process of adopting another who was saved from becoming dinner; I have adopted two cats and rescued another seven (all whom live with me); and nursed back to health five pigeons.

Now I have a question: "What have all the people who agree with "belg" done lately?"

I have a street dog and cat. The dog I found when he was a puppy and the cat was an injured kitten lying next to the highway. Both have cost me many trips to the vet but are 100% ok now.

I will take more when the situation calls for it.

(I am not saying I agree with Belg)

[PattayaParent]

well, in all honesty, this is the best solution of the millions of soi dogs

The best solution of the millions of dogs? To put 10 dogs in a cage made for maximum two dogs is a good solution?

To kill them bruatlly by beating them down for hours is a good solution?

To make them suffer from hunger and thurst for weeks is a good solution?

I belive you are as barbaric and unhuman as those bastards who treats those poor animals like that.

Dogs and cats were made what they are by humans. It is the humans RESPONSIBILITY to now take properly care of them.

Soidog Foundation in Phuket is doing an amazing job to help solving the problem but they used their brains to find a real humanly solution not a barbaric thai style one!

I don't think dogs that have been starved of food and drink 'for weeks' and beaten 'for hours' would be very saleable to a restaurant or butcher.

Edited March 21, 2012 by PattayaParent

[PattayaParent]

"Sompong Lertjitcharoenboon's dog, Tao Tao, was stolen before Christmas. It was a month before Chinese New Year, when demand for dog meat rises sharply."

Could just as easily been stolen by Filipinos to fatten up for Christmas dinner.

[BigJohnson]

I have a street dog and cat. The dog I found when he was a puppy and the cat was an injured kitten lying next to the highway. Both have cost me many trips to the vet but are 100% ok now.

I will take more when the situation calls for it.

(I am not saying I agree with Belg)

That is so great to hear!! The world needs more people like you who unselfishly do what they can because it is the right thing to do.

It is unfortunate that there are those who hide behind a facade while they justfy the injustices against nature because they they are emotionally and inhumanely unable to focus on anything else but themselves. Of course, these are usually the same people who expect everyone else to jump up to their rescue if they are ever in trouble.

[ALFREDO]

Whatever Gandhi said and wrote, MY dogs got stolen and before somebody took them to eat or kill them he has to ask if they belong to somebody.

Easy to do so, at the next house!

if you not come in the middle of the night and take what you can catch fast, without care of anything!

[bigbamboo]

Annabel is jai dee and an animal lover so why not accept that. Of course dogs can be a nuisance but then so can people and there is no excuse whatsoever for stealing pets or the raiding of animal sanctuaries. We have a beautiful sisuwath cat that has just had five cute little kittens and even we get a bit paranoid when they disappear for a while.

Edited March 23, 2012 by bigbamboo

[KKK]

My three dogs stolen from the road in front of my GF house in the middle of the night, at two different occasions, had me as caretaker.

Dogs gone, never came back, I felt miserably for some days, sitting alone in the kitchen in the evening at dinner without my dogs eyes around and on me.

Yes, some dogs have owners!

You're not a very good owner if your dogs were out in the road in the middle of the night. Serves you right...Keep your dogs on your property NOT in the public street...A dog is only as good as it's owner and most dog owners are about the same as what comes out of the rear end...CRAP

You live in TH? In the countryside? Isaan? I think no you do not!

Most houses in the villages have no fence, where do I give the GFriends dogs inside?

All open space and the dogs like it that way, used to that, works since long time here in the countryside!

Enough, I provide some dry food, left overs and fresh water.

But you think it is ok, to steal an animal, only because its easy possible to steal it? That is what you are saying!

So I would be careful, to leave my pocket open nearby you, sitting in the same Bus or plane!

Yes I live in Thailand and have done so for the last 26 years. I used to live in the countryside but now live in at the rural edge of a city. My countryside house was not in Issan but in the north, (Lampang province) and was fenced. I fenced it to protect my property including my dogs.

Just because somethjing has been like that for a long time does not make it correct. Times, attitudes, laws, opinions change. You need to keep up with the time. Current thinking is now that does should be kept off of public land unless on a leash. This makes it safer for the dogs as well as the general public. For many years wearing helmets on a motorcycle was NOT a requirement. Because of that staus for many years is it now correct to say that helmets should not be worn. I think not. It is not just a law for law's sake. It is for safety. The same goes for dogs. Any dog found wandering unleashed on public land is at the peril of the dog nappers as well as the local authorities dog catchers. If you really love your dogs and want to protect them put up a fence and keep the dogs on your side of it. I have never said it was OK to steal a dog...what I am saying it is your duty as a dog owner to protect that dog from the theives.

Edited March 25, 2012 by KKK

[ALFREDO]

KKK-

We can agree that we disagree.

The dogs are the dogs of my GF and her family, the family does not care much, but provide enough food, that they not wandering off,

when I am in the village, than the dogs have better days and the boys go hunting with the dogs, Rats, frogs, snakes, anything eatable.

To compare that stealing problem with the good security law of wearing a helmet is far fetched.

I do not think, I have to make an expensive fence, the people just have to stop stealing!

On the other side, my GF home financed from me-mostly, has a fence, but the families home not.

That is a rural village,nearly nobody has a fence and the dogs are wandering in the roads, but as you know usualy not far from the house.

The dogs of my GF family walk from the GF parents house just 200 m to my building and stay in front of the houses or in the garden.

Everything works fine, why I have to submit to dog handlers?

Anyway the dogs do not want to be behind a fence and most have the possibility to jump the fence-wall out and in as they please at my GF place.

In the moment its more quiet, after some crackdowns on dog smugglers. I not saw a dog Pick Up since month. Normal was weekly or twice weekly or more a Pick up with dogs passing by.,they passed the house in the middle of the village. Saw a bunch of dogs, did not stop, but came back in the night!

Wait until i catch them red Handed!

Regards Alfred

By the way,

I had at my Ex GF place in Chayaphum (other house in Udon Thani province) a pack of pure breed dogs, mostly big dogs, now only 2 left, as the others died of snake bites,

sickness and age.

Sure, I had and have that precious dogs behind a fence and looked that they did not escape.

As it was once 2 Bullmastiff, Dogue de Bordeaux, Rottweiler, American Boxer and French Bulldog.

All boys, was sometimes funny to keep them quiet together, had to use for periods kennels and used them also during feeding times.

Now the brother of my Ex GF takes care my dogs, (she went to other province) I see them only seldom,maybe bring them to me now.

But my new GF and her family cannot be trusted with animals and I am not always at home!

Edited March 26, 2012 by ALFREDO

[cup-O-coffee]

Whatever Gandhi said and wrote, MY dogs got stolen and before somebody took them to eat or kill them he has to ask if they belong to somebody.

Easy to do so, at the next house!

if you not come in the middle of the night and take what you can catch fast, without care of anything!

Thai law states that it is illegal to steal someone's pet (or property). When this law was passed, it also had the requirement that the owner register the dog and get it all the necessary vaccinations (tags and licenses just like your car). Rabies is a chief concern here.

Clearly, and this is inferred conjecture, and in all likelihood not far from the truth, I submit: when the Thais heard that they had to follow the law, they unleashed these dogs and turned them loose on the streets. Who wants to be liable for a 5000 THB fine and up to one month in jail for not complying with the law? Who wants to be self-disciplined and responsible towards your neighbor in society? Typical Thai and Farang do-gooder thinking. Try to go around their own government and do what they want as long as it benefits self and makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

It is NOT against Thai law for anyone to round up strays. If you can prove the pooch is yours as outlined above, then what is the worry. And why is your licensed and vaccinated pooch getting rounded up in the first place?

On the other hand, anyone keeping a stray on their property is creating a nuisance, just the same as I am accused of saying they should be all rounded up and detained if they do not have a legal owner and signs to indicate (tag and license on collar). How do you know that the stray on your property is not mine?

It could be just as easy for a dog napper to say that the stray is his or hers, and they simply want to take them back home. You cannot say the stray is yours, because you have no proof, because you break the law by defying it and make your do-gooder spiel disingenuous at best. Inside your heart it is yours, but you resist abiding by the same body of law that you degrade Thaksin about breaking (for example), and try to come across as a kindly person who saves un-owned, feral animals.

Is "your dog" tagged and licensed and vaccinated? Can you prove that the dog is your property and not a stray?

All good-hearted argument goes out the window when people defy the law and do whatever they want, and then bitch about those who like a little consistency in their lives regarding animals, their up-keeping, and how responsible people are - NOT just towards the animal, but towards abiding by the Law that sets the standards of being able to have and prove possession of said animal.

Edited March 30, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[cup-O-coffee]

Incidentally, I have Thais come into my yard all the time while I am away because they need to get to the backside of an adjacent house for repairs.

They don't ask or get my permission. They simply do it. I see rubbish and cigarette butts in the grass and know they were there.

Are they trespassing to get to something legal?

Would it be legal for me to go onto your property to get at a stray to "round it up" if that stray had no collar with a license and vaccination tags fastened around its neck on a collar?

Until humans begin to abide by their own laws, then there is no additional law or laws (including the current PETA law being filibustered) that will make any difference.

If Thais and foreigners cannot simply follow the rules of their government they live in and under, and "legally" own what they love; and extend that courtesy to other human being around them, then there is no animal law that will protect wild animals that exist within the confines of man's environment and dominion.

[ALFREDO]

cup-O-coffee

I stay in the middle of now where in an Isaan province and when you see a bicycle on the road side you just take it? No number plate, no lock, so no owner? Be careful if its my bicycle and I catch you "in flagranti"!

The same with dogs in the village, the dogs know who their owners are, the owners now who their dogs are and the neighbors now it to.

That is why the dog stealing people came in the night, only in the night to steal and they will not care what the dog has on its collar and if he has a collar!

You want bring the laws of your home country to TH. Please let them their, your laws, if you say stealing dogs is allowed in your home country?

You come with such sentences as

==It could be just as easy for a dog napper to say that the stray is his or hers, and they simply want to take them back home. You cannot say the stray is yours, because you have no proof, ==

Please

cup-O-coffee you are unreasonable, the whole village can proof who are the dogs roaming in that village since years and who is the family who takes care them! Most houses have no fence in the village, so the dog nappers make the problem!

But quiet in the moment, since some crackdowns in the last 6 month!