Won't Somebody Please Think of the Puppies?!?!

|

How many goldfish died during Katrina? Porktastic Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) demands a pet section in every superdome:

Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and one of his colleagues from New Jersey have introduced a measure to increase the safety of pets in emergencies.

Stevens and Senator Frank Lautenberg introduced the Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006. The legislation requires state and local authorities to include evacuation procedures for household pets and service animals in their emergency preparedness plans.

Stevens promises to resign here.

Stevens explains why he will not resign here.

Via To the People.

NEXT: I'm a Foot Soldier?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Is there any piece of stupid legislation that Frank Lautenberg doesn’t have his name on? I thought it was bad when he authored the ban on model rocket engines.

  2. The reality is that people will not leave without their pets. If you do not allow pets in shelters people are going to stay home and get killed rather than leave their pets behind. That may be crazy but it is a fact. If you want an effective evacuation and shelter plan, you have to plan for pets. You can say fuck them let them die for fluffy, but in that case why have an evacuation plan at all?

  3. This makes more sense than a lot of things the government spends money on. If one assumes (as most American voters do) that the government must facilitate the evacuation of people from disaster areas, then making arrangements for those people to take their pets is a natural extentsion of that. I know it is an unpopular view in some circles, but there really are quite a few people for whom their pets are their “children”.

  4. Wow. This is one of those proposed laws that you could see being done both on a sketch comedy show and in the US Senate and not be suprised to see it in either place.

  5. You know, if you have a pet, and cherish it the same as you would a child, well, I’ll look askance at you, but hey, if it makes you happy, go for it.

    But if you cherish your pets that much, then perhaps you ought to maybe, possibly, just, you know, give a smidge of thought to what you will do with your pet in the case of an emergency.

    I mean, hey, if you love Fluffy like others love their children, then maybe you ought to go to some lengths in order to protect them in the event of a disaster.

    /just sayin’

  6. You can say fuck them let them die for fluffy

    OK. Fuck them and let them die (for Fluffy).

  7. The problem is Ed, when they do, we have to hear about how the government failed them. If you are going to bother to have an evacuation plan and shelters, you ought to recognize reality and make them as effective as possible. To do that, you have to take pets into account.

  8. The problem is Ed, when they do, we have to hear about how the government failed them. If you are going to bother to have an evacuation plan and shelters, you ought to recognize reality and make them as effective as possible. To do that, you have to take pets into account.

  9. Yes, mediageek, and if part of your emergency plan for your pet is “Get pet into carrier, collect pet food, and take pet with me to emergency destination,” then you show up and the shelter says, “Sorry, no pets,” that’s a problem. This appears to be designed to address that.

  10. Does the proposed bill stipulate that the pets be stored in barrels of oil?

    There’s gotta be an oil angle. He’s from Alaska.

  11. Forget the puppies, won’t somebody think of the ferrets?

  12. Actually, I’m not sure what you guys are opposed to here. I think every emergency shelter should have space for people to bring their pets. It encourages evacuees to bring their own emergency food source.

    /me hides

  13. I think I’d rather ride it out in a crumbling, flooded house than endure a shelter full of yapping ankle-biters. And I’m not talking about the children. But if the measure is actually intended as a means to an emergency food supply, then I’m all for it.

  14. Actually, I’m not sure what you guys are opposed to here. I think every emergency shelter should have space for people to bring their pets. It encourages evacuees to bring their own emergency food source.

    /me hides

  15. A real man doesn’t abandon his dog when things get inconvenient.

    And speaking as a small “l”.. anyone who thinks a dog (and I’ll even stretch it to cats) is simply a piece of disposable property is a heartless prick.

  16. We have three dogs and a cat. If it came down to a choice between my family or my pets, the pets lose without hesitation. I’d confine them in the house where I thought they had the best chance of survival, then we’re gone.

  17. “Die for Fluffy” would be a great name for a band.

    Something about it sounds like the name of a Japanese pop band, in particular.

    Only then it would be “Die for Fruffy,” so I guess not.

  18. There’s already the grrl-punk band Fluffy


  19. Yes, mediageek, and if part of your emergency plan for your pet is “Get pet into carrier, collect pet food, and take pet with me to emergency destination,” then you show up and the shelter says, “Sorry, no pets,” that’s a problem.

    IMO, if your “emergency plan” is “go to whatever shelter they tell you to go to”, you didn’t really have a plan.

  20. MNG,

    Disposable property and tasty treat.
    8 billion Asians can’t be wrong.

  21. Stevo,

    That is a good name for a band. Japanese pop or maybe an all girl punk band. My personal favorite never used name for a band is “The Zoodadies”. Make a good rockabilly or blues band I think.

  22. If only we had cameras in orbit that could warn us about Hurricanes three or four days in advance. Because then (bear with me on this, it’s pretty crazy) people could put their pets in the car and drive the fuck out of New Orleans. Or walk. Seriously. Fifteen miles a day, Wolfie on a leash, Fluffy in a cat carrier. Sixty miles inland, you can ride out a hurricane in a fucking ten-dollar tent from Wal-Mart, assuming the cops haven’t looted them all yet.

  23. Why the hell did I capitalize hurricanes?

  24. Doogie – because you’re a Carolina hockey fan?

  25. Didn’t somebody tell you Doogie, Bush lied so that black people in New Orleans would die!!? Anytime someone is washed away by a storm that formed in the Atlantic, crossed Florida and sat in the gulf for four days all on national TV, it is Bush’s fault and all part of his plan to kill black voters. Bush knew black folks don’t watch the weather channel and left them all there to die!!

  26. I tried to post something 90 minutes ago on how amazing it was that John said something I agreed with. But in the time it took the Reason server to eat my comment, it was rendered obsolete.

  27. Rick,

    You I and Phil all agree on this. It is either the most reasonable policy imaginable or the end of the world as we know it.

  28. There are people who died rather than leave their pets behind. This may be stupid, and some of the more smug among you may even laugh at them. It’s not funny, now, seeing starving pets on the streets, the ones that were abandoned by people who did decide to flee to shelters, whose neighborhoods are decimated, who have not been able to return. The SPCA has only been able to do so much. Come on down and get a good belly laugh. I’ll be happy to drive you around myself. Nothing funnier than starving, pregnant dogs and dead kittens in the street.

    If you think having pet accommodations at emergency shelters is a stupid idea, I’d like to see you be the person that rips the puppy from the arms of some crying child who’s lost his house, his school, and everything he’s known in life. Allowing pets in shelters is not an onerous requirement, but I guess it doesn’t fit the heroic self-image of the bootstrapping libertarian. Well fuck that.

  29. There are people who died rather than leave their pets behind. This may be stupid, and some of the more smug among you may even laugh at them. It’s not funny, now, seeing starving pets on the streets, the ones that were abandoned by people who did decide to flee to shelters, whose neighborhoods are decimated, who have not been able to return. The SPCA has only been able to do so much. Come on down and get a good belly laugh. I’ll be happy to drive you around myself. Nothing funnier than starving, pregnant dogs and dead kittens in the street.

    If you think having pet accommodations at emergency shelters is a stupid idea, I’d like to see you be the person that rips the puppy from the arms of some crying child who’s lost his house, his school, and everything he’s known in life. Allowing pets in shelters is not an onerous requirement, but I guess it doesn’t fit the heroic self-image of the bootstrapping libertarian. Well fuck that.

  30. At the risk of being impolitic, I’m a little more desirous of legislation to preserve my right to bring a firearm into a government shelter than that for bringing pets. Needless to say, I won’t be looking to Mr. Lautenberg for it.

    It’s nice to know that people have their priorities in order. I’m all for letting people have their pets with them if they are managed humanely and safely, and aren’t consuming resources that should be devoted to the preservation of human life.

    As for people not being willing to go to a shelter without their pet, that’s their decision.

    Signed,
    Apparently one of the most dogmatic of libertarians.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.