Dog Health Insurance

Listen up dog lovers, we have good news! China may be set to ban the eating of dogs; a practise that may date back thousands of years, but causes unfathomable suffering to hundreds of thousands of dogs every year. Law professors and legal experts are joining forces to propose that eating dog meat causes so many social problems that it simply shouldn’t be allowed to continue. On top of this, they claim, the animal cruelty involved in the dog meat trade is simply unacceptable on any level.

Although the initial draft proposal simply suggested illegal sale or consumption of dogs should be punishable by up to 15 days in prison (or a fine of 500,000 yuan for businesses); the new revision demands thousands of butchers and dog restaurants to be shut down altogether!

There is, of course, opposition to the movement; mainly in the form of traditionalists or people who call the proposal hypocritical. The former blame the middle class and their love for all things cute; the latter can’t understand why dogs and cats deserve special treatment. Why, they ask, should the government take action to protect dogs and cats when there is still so much human suffering in China? Furthermore, why should it only be dogs and cats that are protected; what about all the other animals that suffer for our food? Should there be pet insurance for sheep?

What do you think readers?

The US Marine Corps has officially banned Rottweilers, Pit Bulls, and Wolf hybrids from all bases and housing facilities, under the claim that their “dominant traits of aggression” make them dangerous for children to be around. With many marines having families on the bases, they want to ensure that the kids are protected from aggressive pets.

However, as many dog trainers will tell you, a large part of the aggression seen in dogs in due to their training, not their nature. I have seen dozens, perhaps hundreds of Rottweilers and Pit Bulls that are marvelously behaved family pets because they have received proper training. In my opinion, this problem isn’t with the dogs, but with the people. As has been noted, Marines prefer aggressive pets – possibly because they themselves are aggressive people. In my experience, these breeds of dogs (that have been banned) have a reputation for aggression and are hence bought by people that want an aggressive or intimidating pet. To that extent, they are trained to be intimidating pets – living up to their reputation not because they actually are naturally aggressive, but because they are trained to be. Give a dog the wrong training and any breed will become aggressive!

Banning these certain breeds won’t stop Marines from owning aggressive dogs; it’ll just change the types of dogs that are being aggressive. If anything, this would seem to be a move likely to increase the number of aggressive dogs being abandoned by the American military, which is about the last thing they need. I’m not denying that some dogs are more naturally aggressive than others; I’m just saying that maybe we should consider the importance of our own impact on the way dogs behave.