My point regarding the negligence of the owner was not in justifying the hit and run, or the failure to report it, but only in response to the suggestion that she should pay for the entire vet bills or the cost of a new pet. I have a HUGE problem with that - because the animal could not have been hit if the owners had not been negligent.
It doesn't mean I'm saying that it's ok to run over animals just for fun because hey, it's the owner's fault for letting the animal out of the house.
I'm also not trying to "punish" the owner for being negligent - I think for most folks the death or injury of the animal is far worse punishment than any that could be imposed. But I strongly believe that offering full restitution implies not only to the owner, but as an example to the community, that the owner has no responsibility for keeping their animals safe. Just let them run, and if someone kills your pet, they'll just buy you a new one.
How often do you see small dogs running free? It's rare, because most folks know they must keep them indoors to keep them safe. Sadly, the statistics are that most dogs at loose are loose because the owner either let them out to roam or worse, dumped the dog intentionally (this is unfortunately, especially true of the smaller breeds - if they're wandering, it's because they've been dumped) or because the owner was aware that the dog had "escape" issues, but hadn't "gotten around to" fixing the fence, or otherwise addressing the escape issue. And I suspect that anyone who would dump a small dog, would happily accept payment for their "pain and suffering," even though their intention was to be rid of the dog, in the first place.
I'm normally a fairly trusting and optimistic person (not so much because of my experience with people, but more because I choose to be) , but working with the humane society, sadly I can't choose to pretend where roaming pets are concerned. I've learned how rare it is for small "strays" to be wanted pets. With big dogs, there's at least a fair chance of the owner reclaiming the dog,(and they're warned of the dangers of letting the dog run), but with the small dogs - even if the owner is tracked down, the odds are that they won't reclaim the dog. Some will say that the dog "escaped," but then not be willing to pay the relatively small fee to reclaim the dog. It is often very apparent that the person doesn't want to admit to dumping a dog intentionally, so they'll say they can't afford the reclamation fee (and if they're told there's a fund to for financial aid to needy families, they just have to fill out the application and provide proof of income and expenses.... huh, what do you know the person has a new excuse for not being able to do so, or they promise to come in and just never do).
In my experience with humane societies in both Wisconsin and Illinois, at least 80% of "strays," are deliberately allowed to run (either because they want the dog to have its "freedom" or because they're deliberately trying to rid themselves of the animal). For small dogs, unfortunately, the odds are even higher that the dog was an intentional dump, because most people are smart enough to realize that allowing a small dog to run is a very stupid idea. I think the risk of rewarding someone for deliberately dumping their animal is just too big a risk, especially since a responsible owner, would almost assuredly feel far too guilty to accept the money, knowing the driver could not have prevented the accident.
__________________
Want to know what I'm doing to keep from snacking?
Visit my etsy shop to see!
http://www.dreamstormdesigns.etsy.com
etsy link by permission from 3fc! Want to add yours? Ask them!
Last edited by kaplods : 03-31-2009 at 09:31 AM.
|
good luck with forgiving yourself! you do deserve to be forgiven!
1/30/2012
for every 10 lbs lost!Start date 1/24/2012=weighed in at 325 lbs
