Omnileech
(?)Community Member
- Report Post
- Posted: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 14:37:53 +0000
David2074
Miss Dorm Leader
David2074
What the animal shelter wanted was to give this dog a forever home. No they are NOT after a profit. Plus that money could benefit the animal shelter more then you know. cat_sweatdrop
The animal shelter got their money. They charged $100 and they received $100.
I don't know why you seem to assume that if a different person had picked up the dog they would have paid more.
And as I said. A person who would purchase that dog for $200 would likely have the means and desire to take care of it. Thus it likely would be a 'forever home'. The interim time with the first lady was probably a better living existence than living in the shelter. I've been in shelters, it's not a happy scenario. Typically cement floors they can hose down, a bit smelly even though they try to keep it clean and almost always one or more animals barking, whining or mewing because they are not happy to be there and/or are stressed from all the other animals around them.
I'm not defending the first woman as being ethical. Most likely she lied on the forms she filled out. And I've even seen some shelter forms where you have to agree that if you get rid of the animal you have to give it back to the shelter.
I am only talking about in terms of the life of the dog.
Forget the profit thing for a minute. Suppose hypothetically they had a whole team of people who volunteered to take animals from the shelter and care for them while they tried to find permanent homes for them with people who would not ordinarily shop at a shelter. Perhaps they are volunteers who turn over all money they receive to the shelter, perhaps they only give the amount the shelter normally requires. Either way the net result is more animals being placed in homes and fewer animals being euthanized. Effective shelter capacity would be up due to some animals being housed elsewhere and animal placements would be up due to additional people / places of exposure.
Unethical woman is unethical but either way it is one more person trying to find a home for a dog. And because she is trying to make a profit she wold most likely take decent care of her little profit package. Remember that you are not comparing "loving home" to "evil profit lady". You are comparing "pretty miserable life in an animal shelter" to "profit lady" AND extending the countdown clock on the number of days before the dog is put down. No matter what you think of the lady it is a net win for the dog.
We would all like to pretend every animal living in a shelter will sooner or later go to a good home but that is far from reality. The American Humane Society says it is difficult to have complete and up to date statistics but that from a 1997 study -
In 1997, roughly 64 percent of the total number of animals that entered shelters were euthanized -- approximately 2.7 million animals in just these 1,000 shelters.
Not ethical? She gets a dog for $85 and tries to sell it for 200. She made up a false story for why she was selling the dog and lied about the dog's age and claimed it was 5 years old when it was in fact 10. She attempted to commit fraud. "Not ethical." is an understatement. And when she got caught? She kept on lying.
Or at least would have been fraud if she had actually gone through with a sale and had someone with standing for such a lawsuit.