Archinect
anchor

HBO documentary :: Dealing Dogs

Feb 20 '06 49 Last Comment
3ifs
Feb 20, 06 1:04 pm

Just wanted to give a heads up, there is going to be a documentary on HBO tomorrow night... Watch and spread the word.

The HBO documentary, "Dealing Dogs", premieres Tuesday, February 21st.

Shot over six months, this harrowing undercover investigation exposes one of America's most notorious "Class B" dog dealers, who sells dogs from his Arkansas kennel to research labs around the country, and is known for regularly violating animal-welfare laws,

Premieres Tuesday, February 21 at 10 p.m.(ET/PT). http://www.hbo.com/docs/progra....html " --

You can go to this website and see a preview of the documentary. I have to warn you though, the preview is shocking.

More info on this case: http://www.lcanimal.org/invest/baird.htm
Shocking content on that page as well.

There are some truly evil people in this world.

 

liberty bell
Feb 20, 06 1:40 pm

3ifs, thank you for posting this as it is an incredibly difficult and repulsive issue. I have to admit there is no way I will watch the documentary, as I can't stomach any kind of cruelty to animals. Especially dogs. Honestly it makes me phycially and spiritually sick. But thanks for the heads up about it.

Online
Feb 20, 06 2:27 pm

That kind of stuff pisses me off.

People who abusr dogs should be thrown in jail and never let out.

sameolddoctor
Feb 20, 06 2:34 pm

i happened to see a PETA documentary video showing animal abuse in China, mainly for fur that would be exported. They mentioed that even though natural fur is illegal in the states, they would export actual fur and call it artificial.

Needless to say, it was one of the worst videos i saw - the poor dogs and cats would be beaten to death to extract their fur. And thats just the beginning of it. I dont know why animals are treated so badly in countries like China, Malasyia, Indonesia etc., it makes me want never to visit those places again (no racial slur implied here), but as an architect, with much of the work happening in that part of the world, its difficult.

3ifs
Feb 20, 06 3:15 pm

LB, I too am phycially and spiritually sickened by it, although I am going to make myself watch it with hopes that it will motivate me to become more active in protecting animals' rights.

The penalties imposed on this man and his family are a joke.

I am enraged that there is actually a market to support this kind of organization in this country.

A
Feb 20, 06 3:50 pm

To play devils advocate. While I don't condone or celebrate animal cruelty, there is very positive benefits to animal testing. Would lab testing for new drugs be better done on humans?

So, while I don't condone un-necessary cruelty for personal entertainment or for luxury goods, research labs have saved many human lives by means of a animal lives.

All too often I think organizations like PETA look at the issue as far too black & white. The reality is we all enjoy the scientific benefits, but they too quickly get grouped with the barbaric pointless cruelty.

j
Feb 20, 06 4:16 pm

i think the issue at hand is the treatment of dogs at this particular kennel and not the use of animals for medical research in general.

i don't think any rational human (read: excluding many peta members) would advocate using humans for testing in place of animals. the vast majority of animals used for testing are small animals: mice and rats. larger animals such as dogs are only used at advanced stages of research and all animals used for testing are regulated by the government for levels of pain and suffering.

but again, the issue here is this kennel and its cruel practices toward these animals. there are several places like this in addition to puppy mills who sell to pet stores which maintain deplorable conditions for the animals. animal rights organizations use these few examples as ammo against all pet stores and all animal testing.

j
Feb 20, 06 4:19 pm

i would be more supportive of animal rights were there a rational, professional, non-violent animal rights organization here in the united states.

Janosh
Feb 20, 06 4:27 pm

I think the ASPCA and Humane Society probably meet that measure.

snooker
Feb 20, 06 4:42 pm

Thanks for the heads up. I will be sure neither Matisse or Frito Jack ( my dogs) are watching cause they would most like want a piece of ASS!

ochona
Feb 20, 06 7:23 pm

i remember hearing about this on 20/20 somewhere around 1988-1990 and it made me cry. i was 11 or so at the time. my parents were/are big animal lovers and our dogs and cats were like their kids.

animal cruelty as a child is one of the leading indicators of psychotic behavior in adults.

what gets me is that people--specifically in cities, in apartments/condos--will buy big, expensive dogs and then confine those dogs inside for 20 combined hours a day. when i lived in chicago i saw tons of dobermans, rottweilers, boxers, retrievers, and other big pretty dogs who got maybe 1-2 hours of exercise a day if that because their owners worked all day and they had to be cooped up in tiny apartments. i know that most of those dog owners really loved their dogs but still...most big dogs want to be outside or at least to have some freedom to roam. as much as i love dogs i have resolved to not own one until i have a yard in which my dog(s) can happily roam and play all day.

i'm not saying it's animal cruelty but many breeds of dogs are bred to do certain things that do not include holding their bladders or laying on a cushion for 10 hours a day.

snooker
Feb 20, 06 11:44 pm

ochona....We work from home so were 24/7....and they do control our life....but we love them....nothing like missing an important call when your out walking the dog or tossing him a ball in the backyard. Ten hours equals a flooded living room.

j
Feb 21, 06 8:23 am

the humane society fits in the same class as peta, though not as radical.

but you're right, the aspca is a fine organization which seems to go about things in a legal manner.

Orhan AyyüceOrhan Ayyüce
Feb 21, 06 11:45 am

our dogs have all points + garden passes. that include furniture, bed etc. they have their chairs on the dining table (they eat with us and well behaved) and we are not freaks. they never had a formal training.
oh, they also sniff the neighborhood two three times a day depends on the weather. you can see their pictures here

ochona
Feb 21, 06 2:39 pm

my mother and father both work at home and they have a greyhound...he gets walked 8 times a day and greyhounds are conditioned to be confined anyway. all has to do with the breed.

ether
Feb 21, 06 7:44 pm

thank you for the heads up 3ifs. i too am not sure i can watch but if i can find a way (no HBO), i will definately try. i for one have never heard or put any thought into where vet students/animal testing labs get their dogs. it makes me sad just thinking about it now.

i just took our dogs to a new boarder/day care facility today. it is the 3rd one we've tried in our new town. that is how nutty we are about our dog care. for reasons i'll not get into, we just didn't feel right with the first 2. too see such inhumane treatment of animals enrages me to the point of tears.

i feel like calling auburn (my alma mater which has a huge vet program) tomorrow and demanding to know where they buy their animals used to teach the students.

Orhan AyyüceOrhan Ayyüce
Feb 21, 06 8:06 pm
mdler
Feb 21, 06 8:34 pm

sounds like they treat animals like sweatshop workers in those countries

newstreamlinedmodel
Feb 21, 06 8:45 pm

sounds like they treat animals like our country treats Arabs

and, yes, like the workers in the sweatshops we employ

doberman
Feb 21, 06 8:48 pm

i love animals. i really do.
and it's good to see that people get their priorities right and choose overfed animals over third world poverty. you opened my eyes on a new phenomenon. cheers. i need a (corgi) burger.

sameolddoctor
Feb 21, 06 9:24 pm

idiot

doberman
Feb 22, 06 6:32 am

i know.
i dont advocate hurting animals. came home drunk and unhappy last night

doberman
Feb 22, 06 6:48 am

the reason why i posted this stupid shit is because here in the UK animal rights extremists make some people's lives absolutely miserable by harrassing and threatening them on a daily basis and that makes me very pissed off. they are crazy people slowly drifting towards radical and illegal actions. i believe that they will end up carrying out terrorist actions in the future. animals should not get hurt but i still believe that unfortunately they are sometimes necessary for scientific research, even though it can be really gruesome stuff. research has to be done ethically though.

3ifs
Feb 22, 06 9:31 am

hey doberman, who here has condoned illegal actions or harrassing anyone regarding animal rights? the story is about an investigation and legal (federal) prosecution of this country's most notorious animal abuse case...

i completely and wholeheartedly disagree with you regarding animal testing. no dog should be subjected to experiments to better mankind. in my opinion, its irresponsible.

doberman
Feb 22, 06 10:12 am

i know. i didnt say anybody did. my point was that even though animal welfare is indeed a very important matter, animal rights extremists bullying people who carry out animal research is not acceptable. i was kind of taking the opposite view to get my point across. obviously i failed miserably... i like animals, even though i am scared shitless of dogs (even tiny ones) because i've had some pretty bad experiences with them in the past.

But is it really unfair to argue that medical research does need animal testing, be it cats dogs monkeys etc.? Otherwise how could new drugs and vaccines be tested? In some cases it is necessary, i'm not saying it's pretty though. What is NOT ok is to use animal testing for cosmetics for example.

just out of curiosity: Are you as upset about industrial farming, millions of chickens packed in tiny little cages, calves that never touch the floor and see the light etc? that to me, is a much more serious matter than animal testing. In my opinion what si truly irresponsible is when animal pain serves the sole purpose of corporate greed.

Nevermore
Feb 22, 06 10:14 am

It certainly is a contentious issue

doberman.well said.

Nevermore
Feb 22, 06 10:17 am

just a little tangential trivia.

The animal which is the most closest to human ,in terms of organ and tissue structure is not

1) The chimpanzee
2)not the gorilla
3) not any other ape...

but its the humble ol' pig.

b3tadine[sutures]
Feb 22, 06 10:20 am

doberman - that assumes that canine, feline, rodent, etc. pathology is the same as human pathology. it's certainly erroneous to assume that just because a rat is cured of cancer so will humans. human testing is done everyday, how else can Robert Rodriguez make El Mariachi, or how students earn extra cash? scientific research needs to move beyond the idea that vivisection is necessary in the race for cures. it is wrong no matter how many lives are saved.

Nevermore
Feb 22, 06 10:32 am

betadine : If I may speak for him ,he's just trying to say that some amount of animal life is going to be harmed no matter what.
If it can't be eliminated then it can be atleast reduced.

he's got a very valid point.
.

betadine , for that matter ,most of the vaccines and drugs by virtue of which You,doberman and me are alive today were tested on animals (white mice )once upon a time.

egs -Tuberculosis,Anthrax and Cholera.

as for when scientific research will move beyond vivisection .well that's not going to happen tomorrow

doberman
Feb 22, 06 10:41 am

correct me if my wrong but new drugs are usually first tested on animals and then depending on the results on humans. that's a pretty standard protocole. i'm sorry for being so selfish but if it takes the life of a dog to find the cure of cancer that will save my kid then i can tell you there would be no hesitation on my part as to who should go... simply because i personnaly chose to the value of human life above animals and i completely understand that some people will fundamentally disagree with that. This does NOT mean however that animals should be used irresponsably and in the name of some stupid whims. i believe it should be carried out within very strict and ethical rules and legislations and only when necessary. incubators were first tested with monkeys and they've saved the lives of millions of babies. think about it if you were born premature for example. you might not be taking part in that discussion right now.

b3tadine[sutures]
Feb 22, 06 10:47 am

these tests are not necessary. medicine, the catholic church, and most human beings should force science to look in other directions. if we can model what a nuclear war, and other military events could look like with computers, then medical science should look forward as well. the cruel torture of animals by science, for medical necessity is barbaric, inhuman, and down right unethical - anyway you cut it.

b3tadine[sutures]
Feb 22, 06 10:54 am


Kill To Cure - Skinny Puppy

Skinny Puppy Lyrics - Kill To Cure Lyrics

and would not and it could not cause it would not fade away and it could not ??? justice

??? just go on ??? in this way ??? (skin?) off the street the doctors the psychopaths

they are articulate to government for their right to kill i've seen it you thought it

was beneficial but it kills natural ways of looking at life insist upon respecting the

(christ?) you've got to believe it they're there for a reason not for your own

replicated diseases kill to cure to kill to cure to kill to cure and I walk about and

see all the youngsters believing in what they're taught to believe I wish I could say

hey wait a minute don't go astray believe in respecting life in all it is why so we can

see everything comes back in threes respect the (signs?) killer justice and hate and

greed I hate to believe everything they see ??? (escape this eye?) no no no no no

denying whats killing is the truth they'll always be there we take young ape cat dog

anything mutilate their souls it reflects on our own we cannot see the short term what

it will be it will create with all our antibiotics it's just a farce a money making

commercial pit of shit all that i ask you is that you read something about everything

that is wrong with this we cant say it ??? so in a fucked up way I can't even seem to

say what I want to say but heaven knows heaven doesn't know heaven doesn't know kill to

cure cures that kill kill to cure and cures that kill we kill to cure with cures that

kill this country doesnt make much sense imagine if you took your child, girlfriend,

mother and took out and reversed every product of naturalness there's a man that takes

pregnant dogs through chemicals to try and reverse the birth process what's more I don't

know hate hate hate for life hate hate hate (please?) and you and me seem just as much

animal as you are as I am as I am and I am and I am kill to cure

j
Feb 22, 06 11:34 am
Americans for Medical Progress

has a website that deals with some of these issues.

beta - "it is wrong no matter how many lives are saved."

statements like this borderline on insanity. the life of a human is more valuable than the life of an animal. if scientific research on animals saves human lives, then how can you oppose it?

the fact is that while computer simulation can be an effective tool, it has many limitations including the fact that it can only be based on existing knowledge. until medical research broadens to the point that animal research is not necessary, then i will advocate it.

doberman
Feb 22, 06 11:42 am

testing does not necessarily mean torture. it is true that animal testing can mean suffering though. but i am sorry to re-iterate that without it civilization wouldn't be where it is today. many cures would not be avalaible and people would still be dying from. you could very well argue that we could be better off for it but i believe that it is in the nature of humans to strive for what is generally accepted as progress, even though in many one could argue that we're digging our own grave. but that's a different debate altogether.

Animal testing is wrong only if you put animal and human life on the same level. I don't, regardless of how much i love animals and wilderness in general. before taking medicine do you always make sure that absolutely no animal testing has been involved to make it?? If you were suffering from a serious illness would you be ready to die in the name of your principles simply because you refuse to take the drug that would cure you because it's been tested on animals? Call me inhumane and selfish but i know i wouldn't.

doberman
Feb 22, 06 11:44 am

i meant 'dying from very common illnesses'. sorry about the incomplete sentance.

b3tadine[sutures]
Feb 22, 06 11:52 am

i'll take the other track then, the advancement of society is the reason for all the ill's that plague man. who heard of alzheimers 20 or 30 years ago? ADHD? Autism? what gives mankind anymore special purpose than a chimp, dog, cat, rat??? we fucked this planet up with our medicines, technology and brutallity, so lets test on animals?? human life is no more important than animal life, that borders on the insane. how about instead of worrying about the unlikely potential that you might or a child might get cancer and what that vivisected dog could do for you, why not focus on how to prevent cancer, invest in the environment, raise hell on the unchecked growth of industry and pollution???

b3tadine[sutures]
Feb 22, 06 11:53 am

doberman - i can't change the past, but i can be an advocate for the future.

doberman
Feb 22, 06 12:00 pm

New medical conditions appear all the time. Just the fact that we put a name on them doesn't mean they did not exist before. It is our increased ability to detect them that makes us think they are more widespread than we tink. Autism is a very good example of that actually.

i agree 100% with your last point about improving the environment and cracking down on pollution. but i dont see this in oppostion to animal testing. in my opinion these things simply complement each other and they cannot be opposed.

j
Feb 22, 06 12:04 pm

advocating medical animal research and advocating environmental protection are not mutually exclusive. in fact, i advocate many things which improve quality of life.

i advocate medical animal research. i advocate seatbelts and airbags. i advocate those little plastic things that go in outlets so my son doesn't stick his finger in them. however unlikely injury or illness will impact me, the necessity for these things remains.

b3tadine[sutures]
Feb 22, 06 12:48 pm
ether
Feb 22, 06 1:33 pm
the life of a human is more valuable than the life of an animal.

for arguements sake, what definition would you use for value?

3ifs
Feb 22, 06 2:56 pm
the life of a human is more valuable than the life of an animal.

i completely disagree with that statement, and i also would like to know by what you measure "value."

exactly how is a human life valuable?

conversely, how do you feel a dog's life is less valuable?

j
Feb 22, 06 3:33 pm

human beings are the superior form of life on this planet; the top of the food chain, so to speak. humans have the ability to speak. humans have the capacity for abstract thought and complex emotion. humans have the ability to invent and to use tools. other animals are essentially lesser forms of life.

i make this judgement every day when i eat beef, chicken, and pork; when i wear leather and wool; and when i take my dogs for a walk (and not the other way around).

human life is inherently more valuable than that of other animals.

southpole
Feb 22, 06 4:02 pm

Did anyone hear about the 20k dog that run away at JFK airport- Bee- Bee or something like that.. for what the paper was saying that the airlines lose and kill 1-6 per a month and several are lost, JFK has its own kennel on site and house more than 50 pets loft during air travel…
There you go no Amber alert on Pets


A call it a hattrick….

b3tadine[sutures]
Feb 22, 06 4:18 pm

vivi is the dog's name...

ether
Feb 23, 06 12:18 am

so, the dog that finds the buried skier after an avalance or the dog that smells explosive material before being put on an airplane or the dog that smells vado's pot before getting through customs is less valuble?

give e a fucking break.

Janosh
Feb 23, 06 12:46 am

I value my dog more than most people - but I think that has to do more with a lot of humans underperforming rather than any exceptional qualities of my labrador.

Orhan AyyüceOrhan Ayyüce
Feb 23, 06 1:06 am

thank god i don't have to contemplate who's life is more valuable or whatever. we have two dogs and we love them, i love animals in general. i am going to bed now and i hope daisy dosn't do killer farts tonight because she has done a couple pre bedroom moves and boy they are baaad. this girl just wan't learn that her farts don't smell like roses. she did in front of guests too the other day..
but when i was coming down from some shitty stuff couple days ago,she and her brother made feel so good about life and being loved and everything. i value them as much as any living thing including humans.
yes i do..
thats about it.

3ifs
Feb 23, 06 10:10 am

well i am so glad that there are a few archinecters that value our canine companions as much as i do. there was a tag line on one of the web sites for the documentary that read, "The Betrayal of Man's Best Friend." there are a lot of ways that dogs better the human condition without being used for testing... i think a lot of people fail to realize that.

we currently live with three dogs. we recently adopted a rescued dog that spent 6 months in a shelter. he is one of the most wonderful animals i have ever met, and i regret not finding and adopting him sooner.

anyway, j makes some interesting points regarding human life vs. that of animal's... the thing is that a lot of animals also have the ability to communicate with one another, express emotion, and work through problem solving in a logical manner.

the top-of-the-food chain argument holds little water to me, because there are a lot of animals that would be above us on the food chain if circumstances were different.

ether
Feb 23, 06 11:32 am

where would that put cannibals in the food chain?

  • ×Search in:


Please wait... loading
Please wait... loading