ABC News: ‘Hollywood Tough Guy Teams With Animal Rights Groups for Tax Change’
by Big Hollywood“What a pro-active way to be able to help the economy and change the culture in this country around animals,” Robert Davi, a veteran actor (”The Goonies,” “Die Hard,” “License to Kill”) who was a main force behind the bill’s introduction, told ABCNews.com in a telephone interview.
“This money goes back into the economy, and it encourages people to understand the social responsibilities we have toward animals,” Davi said. …
***
A bill making the rounds on Capitol Hill marries two feel-good propositions — tax cuts and pet ownership — to generate a novel idea: A tax break of up to $3,500 per person for pet care expenses.
The measure is a legislative long shot. But it’s been championed by a veteran Hollywood tough guy and by a conservative Michigan congressman [Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich], and has drawn the enthusiastic support of animal rights groups eager to promote pet ownership during economic down times. …
***
The tax break would apply to more exotic pets as well, so long as they’re being owned within the bounds of the law. Any “legally owned, domesticated, live animal” would qualify, under the terms of the bill.
According to the ASPCA, a cat costs about $670 a year on average to take care of, while dogs are about $200 a year more expensive. The tax break would be capped at $3,500 per person, regardless of how many animals a taxpayer owned.
Davi, the owner of four dogs and a cat, said the concept of using the tax code to promote pet ownership occurred to him a few months ago, in thinking about the stimulus package passed by Democrats in Congress — a package, he said, that he opposed.
Davi’s cousin runs a prominent California animal rescue foundation, D.E.L.T.A. Rescue, and is always looking for ideas that would get more pets adopted, he said. Why not let people deduct expenses like pet food and veterinarian bills from their taxes, like child care expenses or mortgage interest can help reduce your tax burden?
Read the full article here.
Also see Robert Davi’s Big Hollywood articles:
Leo Grillo Defines What Makes America Great
Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years (HAPPY) Act
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
83 Comments
[...] A bill making the rounds on Capitol Hill marries two feel-good propositions — tax cuts and pet ownership — to generate a novel idea: A tax break of up to $3,500 per person for pet care expenses. (more…) [...]
I agree with Ed Morrisey when he talks about unnecessary complication of the tax system.
I also agree with finding ways to lower the tax burden.
So while this strikes me as nobel it also strikes me as a silly idea.
I'd like to see some serious discussion of flat taxes.
I agree with Ed Morrisey when he talks about unnecessary complication of the tax system.
I also agree with finding ways to lower the tax burden.
So while this strikes me as noble it also strikes me as a silly idea.
I'd like to see some serious discussion of flat taxes.
This is actually a pretty good idea. It might reduce the burdon on cities from abandon pets and encourage people to adopt animals from shelters if they could deduct the costs. This would certainly help me out. I have a Husky/Lab mix who weighs about 70 lbs. and a Jack Russel who weighs about 20 lbs. And that Jack is eating me out of house and home. I mean she eats everything. Food, toys, mail, plastic, trees….heck she chews on the other dog sometimes.
I have 3 dogs but I disagree. It would be way too easy to abuse the system. How is the IRS supposed to confirm whether people really have a pet or not? With human dependents, they have a SS number. With pets, you would send in receipts, but that means millions of man-hours will be needed to sort out the receipts and make sure they are real.
This is insane, totally INSANE!! Bad enough I have to pay for peoples houses, new windows, new cars, health insurance, etc… Now I have to pay for their pets!! Our government is completely out of control!!!
I'm with you, I'm all for a flat tax… but that's not going to happen any time soon, so in the meantime, i'll take all the tax breaks i can get… i have 3 big dogs!
This is stupid. Why should we be subsidizing pet ownership? I have no interest in paying for people's pets through tax subsidies. But then, I had no interest in helping people buy cars either. Guess I'll just have to work harder and produce more so the unproductive can breed like blowflies and take what I earn.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Michael Chavez. Michael Chavez said: ABC News: ‘Hollywood Tough Guy Teams With Animal Rights Groups for Tax Change’ http://bit.ly/6b8xr [...]
My flat-screen viewing is very therapeutic to me, the keepers should give me a tax break for purchase price, pay-per-view, and flipper batteries.
YES!!! I knew those damn goldfish would one day be good for something besides the mandatory bowl cleaning. Why stop here? How about off-setting the financial burden of houseplant ownership?
Just the other day I was in NY and passed a man with two dogs, a cat, a guinea pig and about seven puppies. They were all chained to a pole, the puppies sitting in a cramped box. He was panhandling, the various pets an incentive for amused pedestrians to give him money. When one of the dogs started barking, he yanked it up by the collar and began smacking it incredibly hard in the face several times before letting the whimpering mutt down. I'm not aware of the laws pertaining to pets in NY, but regardless of legality it was pretty horrid.
As someone who loves animals and has two cats, I'm strongly against this tax break. This could inevitably lead to people adopting pets for the quite large tax break and not putting in the time, money and care required for them to lead a decent life. Owning a pet shouldn't be a cheap endeavor; if there are potential profits to be made from pet ownership, people will indoubtedly adopt pets for the money rather than for the animals. The last thing we need is more people like that creepy panhandler attempting to milk money from their miserable, abused pets.
absolutely
what is a pet? at what point is someone an animal hoarder?
what about service animals are they actually pets?
it seems to be overly complicated and burdonsome.
$3500 for a pet tax break? Ok… really, I know I spoil my cat but there is no way on this earth I spend that much on my cat… not even with the vet bill included in there.
if someone will run out and get an animal simply for the tax benefits, is that the kind of person you want for a pet owner?
How would this bill encourage shelter animals over breeder animals? is that a distiction we want the to have to prove to the IRS?
Isnt' $3500 dollars also the figure being bandied about in the Baucus bill as the fine for people who don't have health insurance? I could see people deciding not to buy health insurance, paying the fine, and getting a dog to offset the cost. We love dogs in our house–we have two–but that's our choice and our responsibility. I don't think a tax break for all pet owners is the way to go here. The potential for abuse and fraud is huge, and it opens the door for further government involvement in yet another aspect of our lives. Ugh!
My Yorkie and I could get our TEETH into that piece of legislation…. This llittle gal has cost me a fortune….as a spoiled dad !
I love furry little animals.
Right next to the 'taters and gravy.
Oh shoot we are going to get a tax break but then the democrats will get the idea that we need a pet health care bill to get the vote lost from animal right folk who will support this. So then we will need a one payer for the pet health insurance, because we all know that big gov can do it better.
One more regulation, one more slippery slope for the snakes.
[...] this article: ABC News: ‘Hollywood Tough Guy Teams With Animal Rights Groups for Tax Change’ This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
What do you mean, you don't want to pay for people having pets? We could also pay for them to get rid of the pets when they are no longer cute and don't want them. When the health bill passes we will be paying to get rid of people (unborn first, old and not worthy second) so why not paying for the pets as well.
No you will not have to work harder, wait a while and there will be no incentive for work. Look at any communist country and see how eager they are to work harder. You get to power by agreeing with the government, then you get the perks, vacations, big house and so on… Look at what is going on, Snow does not want to vote for the bill, she is invited to talk to the president, she votes for it. How many groups and people have changed opinion after a white house meeting.
I have a pet rock from the 70's, he is getting old, he needs a lot of care, I will get a big tax break.
the pet rock seems to be the ultimate loophole. it is a pet and yet requires zero in expenses.
we have a winning strategy here.
I agree. If I choose to own a dog (and I've got a huge one) I have no right to force other people to pay for it through the tax code. It's our choice, and our responsibility.
Simple, create a federal pet police dept., under fund it till it stops working, then reform it, half assed, and continue to keep getting elected promising to be "tough on crime."
You could feeding a growing German Shepherd. Trust me I know.
Not fair! I can't get a pet because I work all day and don't want to leave the poor thing at home alone. And I have to agree with some of the other posters here; people who get pets just to get the tax breaks would not make good pet parents.
It's a nice thought, though.
Well said. I totally agree. No one should be paying for my cats other than myself.
[...] News Sources wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptABC News: “What a pro-active way to be able to help the economy and change the culture in this country around animals,” Robert Davi , a veteran actor (”The Goonies,” “Die Hard,” “License to Kill”) who was a main force behind the bill’s introduction, told ABCNews.com in a telephone interview. “This money goes back into the economy, and it encourages people to understand the social responsibilities we have toward animals,” Davi said. … *** A bill making the rounds on Capitol Hill marri [...]
BTW, would anybody love to adopt this cutie? Bulletins are posted everyday at MySpace to help find him a permament home:
http://www.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?p...
Thanks for the heads up… my husband and I have talked about getting a reject German Shepard from the Air Force… already trained, but too nice to be of any use to the military..
Thanks for the heads up… my husband and I have talked about getting a reject German Shepherd from the Air Force… already trained, but too nice to be of any use to the military..
Oh this should be a real winner. The big warning flag started flapping in the breeze as I read "marries two feel-good propositions".
Feel good laws and regulations rarely do what they are intended to do. Usually they only increase taxes, increase prices for goods and increase the size of government.
If your getting a pet for a tax break, 10 to 1 your going to treat it badly. Just look at the people who pop out babies to get more welfare yet won't take care of them. This plan will result in the same scenario after a time.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Wolfgang is just about 7 months old, we got him at 8 weeks.
His sire is a retired NY State trooper K-9 dog. And he's got two uncles serving in Afghanistan.
Here's some pics so you can get an idea what you're getting into.
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2980&id...
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=8138&id...
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=8796&id...
My mom's best friend from when we were stationed in the Netherlands had a German Shepherd…. I think his name was Max… but he was a sweet dog…
Thanks for the pics… I will look at them when I get home… my workplace doesn't allow me to go onto facebook (though if I did I would be virtually farming instead of working… or posting >:-)… )
This sort of reminds me of the story about when India was under colonial rule. There was a cobra infestation problem so the Brits started offering a monetary reward for every cobra captured and turned in. It succeeded beyond their wildest expectations as the number of cobras turned in began to grow exponentially. They soon realized it was because people had stated breeding them.
Wolfie is a giant love bug. And I do mean giant! My plan is to keep as lovable and friendly as possible with lots of love, affection, and attention.
And then we use just his size for protection. Any one walking through our neighborhood, casing the joints hears that deep bark that rattles windows, will be more than enough. Even now, people when my wife walks him, people move to other side of the street.
Not all of them, she tells me he has his own fan club in the neighborhood. And every time the police drive by, they beep and wave at him.
He's a lot of work, but he also gives us a lot of love in return.
Are you insane?? Whether or not people own pets is a personal decision, and there is absolutely no — NO — reason for the taxpayer to subsidize any of it, especially when children are going wanting without adoptive families. It's just a symptom of a sick society that places more value on the lives of dogs and cats than it does on people — which was evident in the furor over Michael Vick but the shrugs given to athletes who abuse women. If you can't afford a dog or a cat, don't have one. If dogs and cats go homeless — that's too bad, but it's none of the government's business to alleviate that. Give people tax breaks for adopting CHILDREN, AMERICAN CHILDREN before you do this. Absurd.
why is encouraging pet ownership a laudable goal for the govt to promote? This is the dumbest idea EVER.
"it encourages people to understand the social responsibilities we have toward animals,” what about social responsibility to unborn children? do you think abortion on demand, without parental consent for minors, encourages 'people to understand the social responsibilities we have toward" children?
We know how Hollywood views our responsibilities torwards children…playthings (a la, "the reader" etc) as per Polanski
My sister has put in $3500 in one of her pet boxers in the past two weeks alone.
Count me in as a FLAT TAXERS too.
I completely understand your point, so here's mine.
Any money the IRS takes from me that is spent on unconstitutional programs and departments is money that is stolen from me. So any funds that I can get back or don't have to contribute to illegal government entrerprises, I am totally in favor of.
To address the fraud issue. All pets that are adopted from any SPCA facility are chipped. As are almost all service animals and purebreds. Chips come with serial numbers and paperwork that trace back to your and your vet, so this is as good, if not better than an SS#. Regardless of your opinion on this issue, I recommend that if you have a pet, GET THEM CHIPPED. It may just save their life.
I love my dog, I rescued him from a shelter a little over a year ago, but – no. This is unnecessary. While I think the goal is a good one, this is not the way to go about it. It was my decision to adopt my doggie, it's nobody else's responsibility to pay for him.
I am stunned. A Hollywood type comes out and offers people a way to pay fewer taxes and everyone starts freaking out. You're not subsidizing someone else's pets. You're just paying a little less in taxes. It's a flipping deduction. We can deduct the cost of clothing, we can deduct gym memberships, we can even deduct booze in some cases. So why is everyone up in arms about deducting dog food?
I agree. Any taxes we don't have to pay are the best taxes.
I agree. You should get that deduction. Any taxes we don't have to pay are the best taxes.
You watched a panhandler smacking a dog and didn't do anything about it? Are New Yorkers that "cold" that someone didn't have the balls to take those animals away, or at the very least call a local rescue organization? I'll take you at your word that you love animals, but come on, you watched this and couldn't bring yourself to do something?
I own 4 Bernese Mountain Dogs & a Border Collie, so I know how expensive the upkeep of a dog is. Having said that, this idea is just dumb! If you need a tax break to own a pet, you have no business having one, period!
BTW, I'm VERY offended that they chose to use a Berner in that picture to promote this asinine idea! Anyone that owns one knows very well that Berners "pull their own weight"!
I own 4 Bernese Mountain Dogs & a Border Collie, so I know how expensive the upkeep of a dog can be. In fact we have pet insurance for all of our dogs, except the Border (they never get sick). Having said that, this idea is just dumb! If you need a tax break to own a pet, you have no business having one, period!
BTW, I'm VERY offended that they chose to use a Berner in that picture to promote this asinine idea! Anyone that owns one knows very well that Berners "pull their own weight"!
Tell me about it. Hell, my Jack Russell eats more than my 70 lb. Husky/Lab. I couldn't figure out how she putting away all that food. Plus she still had room left to consume her toys, cardboard boxes, styrafoam cups…Then I went out to the back yard.
I don't out there anymore.
As much as it pains me to admit it, my dog is a connoisseur of his own poo. Not uncommon among puppies, but we're still just shaking our heads.
We're trying home made dog food in addition to his regular diet to see if that works. We're still crunching the numbers, but so far it looks like we're saving money too. For this particular breed, experts recommend a whole bunch of different foods, including carrots, apples and rice.
So far he likes it. But he still likes his poo too.
Sure this SOUNDS silly, but it's a good way to give people back a bit of their money. That's never a bad thing.
I think we need tax breaks for everything. Pets, children, cars, houses, toothpaste, cable TV, deodorant, those little umbrellas you put in cocktails. We already work about four months of the year just so we can fork that money over to the government (tax breaks for forks!). That's far more ridiculous than giving people back some of their money so they can take care of their pets.
Anything to starve the beast and shrink the government is a good thing in my book.
Sure this SOUNDS silly, but it's a good way to give people back a bit of their money. That's never a bad goal.
I think we need tax breaks for everything. Pets, children, cars, houses, toothpaste, cable TV, deodorant, those little umbrellas you put in cocktails. We already work about four months of the year just so we can fork that money over to the government (tax breaks for forks!). That's far more ridiculous than giving people back some of their money so they can take care of their pets.
Anything to starve the beast and shrink the government is a good thing in my book.
No, you're not paying for their pets. They're paying for their pets. Don't confuse tax breaks with government handouts like Cash for Clunkers, et al. Anything that keeps the Obamacrats out of my pocket is a good idea in my book.
This is as stupid an idea as it gets. Government involvement in how many pets we have.
Remember: The bait hides the hook.
Oh yeah, McKinzie eat her own poo too. And Fiona's (my Husky/Lab mix). She eats EVERYTHING. Rubberbands, tin cans, grass…. If it fits in her mouth, she eats it. If it won't fit in her mouth, she chews on it until it does.
Unfortunately, poo is easy. So I've given up on that. I just buy the medication to get rid of worms because I know that no matter what I do, she will find a way.
I like this bill.
Uh, I guess count me in for Flat Tax too. LOL!
I'm an animal nut and have two dogs. This is not a good idea.
LOL!
Remember this comes from Robert Davi, who is a conservative.
This bill is not a bad idea, and it will help to promote pet ownership, and prevent the animal shelters from having to euthanise more strays. If it works, it will be an extra 3,500 in your pocket at tax time…yes…what was your money to begin with, of course.
lets see: The government gives a mortgage deduction because it strengthens the community -well that has had mixed results aye? Government gives a childcare deduction because we need future taxpayers. That makes sense.
My horses, dogs, nor cat are never going to become taxpayers. So pet care deduction can only be justified as pets 'strengthen' community. Well given the history of unintended bad consequences when uncle Sam gives $ incentive for folks to do something we should not say no but HELL NO.
Also if pets are dependents than this throws in all sorts of very weird legal wrinkles where animals will now have legal rights, euthanasia could cease to be an accepted form of end of life care and enough animals suffer from people clinging instead of doing the right thing now. Read the PETA article above. Everyone should run screaming from this.
BTW If you want to see a petition for this check out the website a vote for Lost Fantasy Stables and Animal Rescue in VA in the shelter challenge while you are there. Its run by a real person who works to support herself and her personal pets, is a military pet foster home and would use the $ wisely.
As a dog lover (and breeder) I say NO NO NO. This is ridiculous on many fronts, but dangerous on another. Animal Rights Whackos have been trying to get pets "humanized" for years. This is a nail in the coffin for pets as personal property. We PAY taxes on most personal property we own!. This is about the worse thing that could happen to the concept of Pet OWNERSHIP in America (other than not having them at all, which won't be far off if some insane thing like this happens). Accckkkkkk!!!
GIVE ME A BREAK!!! TAX CUTS FOR PET OWNERSHIP, BUT NO TAX CUTS FOR EMPLOYERS!!!
"DAD! That tree was going to hurt you so I killt it!"
Hehe loved the pics.
A $3500 tax credit for my furry kids beats out $500 trust for every newborn popped out! They should first start with a business tax cut, a federal tax cut, a capital gains tax cut, no cap and trade, no government run health care or taxing of benefits, quit giving illegals social security and food stamps, ect.
It's a baby step in the national socialist movement. Next up, civil union with your pet. Maybe it will start in the states that haven't outlawed bestiality. I'm just sayin'!
ROBERT DAVI IS MY BOY!!!!
SUPPORT HAPPY!!!!
TAX BREAKS FOR MAN'S BEST FRIEND!!!!!
No offense, Buck, but I'll play realpolitik and take my reduced tax burden anyway I can. Silly or not.
Flat tax would be righteous, but you (and me, and a helluva lot of other people) are gonna have to whack some sense into the approx. 42% of Amerikans who are too dip shiite to understand that socialism is evil.
(You're welcome to take the whole "whack some sense," thing literally or figuratively, as you prefer. At this point, either works for me.)
That's the ONLY good argument against the pet food deduction that I've heard on this thread. That does worry me a bit. I'm still not against it though. Maybe for starters they should exclude it to service animals.
I adopt pets from the SPCA. I have two dogs, both terribly abused. One has an active cruelty case open on her. She was found in a dumpster, beaten and cut to hell with a wire wrapped around her neck. The top of her head was split open. They really worked her over. Even with all that, she was the cutest thing in the world. The SPCA almost didn't let me take her, until they read my file. Since I had already adopted a severely abused animal, I got to have her home that night. It was two months before she completely physically healed.
So yeah, you have a point.
God bless you for the fight for our 'little guys.'
The day I became a dog person was a game changer in my life. With all of the corruption and truly disgusting behavior beset upon us by our fellow 'humans' the EMOTIONAL REPAIR from the innocence, honestly and loyalty of our pets is – no hyperbole – invaluable.
I held Rooney when he was 48 hours old (born golden so he had to be a Steeler) and the unspoken dialogue we've had ever since has made me a better person. He is a better person than thousands that flock inside the beltway.
You're fighting an uphill battle but not because the value isn't there. It's because the sub-species who would decide on this fate flock inside the beltway. If only Vick knew he was electrocuting the wrong souls…
There are VERY tough animal abuse laws in NY. If you saw that happen you should have stepped in to call teh police as the ASPCA in NY works through them. They have the full rights of any police officer. DO NOT EVER walk by again without doing something. We need more people willing to do something to stop abuse of animals. Please, next time call the cops.
Do pet rocks qualify. I don't think there should be discrimination against certain types of pets.
This is a pretty good idea. Pres. Opompous will just hate it!
Yes, under this scheme the non pet owners will be subsidizing pet owners. For the same government expenditure level it is a zero sum game. If one subset of taxpayers gets a deduction and consequently pays less in taxes the general rate (or rates if there are brackets) must be raised in order to raise the same amount of revenue in order to support the given level of government expenditure. So, yes, a tax deduction like this translates specifically into those who don't own pets will subsidize though who do by carrying more of the tax burden. The effect becomes systematically worse if government spending is increasing, which it most certainly is. You can also borrow the lost revenue from the tax break, but that is not practical in the long run either as we are about to find out.
[...] Read it. [...]
I like the idea in principle, however the first problem I see is one of verification. How is the presence of the pet verified? Unlike humans, animals aren't issued SSN cards at birth. I also prefer to not license a dog or cat as it allows local gov't to opportunity to stick its nose where it doesn't belong. So, will animals be issued a gov't number?
Which leads to…
Providing/declaring civil rights for animals.
I'm usually in favor of people being able to keep more of what they earn. In this case, I appreciate the idea, but I can't support it because the Costco-sized can of worms it would open.
Well, just for the record, i pay many thousands of dollars in taxes every year because, silly me, i went out and got a well paying job…. and if i get some of my tax dollars back for some expenses i have, thats not really you paying for it.. thats me getting to keep more of my own money. just sayin'.
and i believe the number of people who pay zero dollars in taxes is somewhere around 30%-40% of the country.
a flat tax would fix all this nonsense, anyway… which is exactly why we should go to a flat tax.
I think Mr. Davi's heart is in the right place, but I disagree with him on this. I am the owner of a 12 year old cat that I got as a kitten and love dearly, but it is not the obligation of my fellow tax payers to subsidize my pets care which is really what is happening when I get a tax break for a responsibility I took on with pet ownership. I purchased my cat Tobby from a shelter (see my avatar) and when I did so I took and accepted the responsibility for her care, I didn't get her as a tax break. Don't get me wrong, I definitely feel I am over taxed and very much favor tax cuts, but keep in mind that the welfare leftist who already pay no federal taxes get money back from the government on tax day, this would just end up being another welfare check to these people courtesy of this countries producers. Personal responsibility people!
Let me enter in as a stone cold reactionary heartless Neanderthal on this one. I would like to exercise my Second Amendment Constitutional Rights to gun down any pet that trespasses on my private property, or poses the slightest appearance of a threat to me at any time. No, I'll water that down a little bit — some of my best friends love pet animals. Me, I'd rather stick with plants. A lot less to clean up after.
Children are human beings. Dogs, cats, geckos and pythons are not. I do not want to subsidize pet owners by paying more taxes so they can pay less. Nor do I want millionaires investing in private zoos to avoid paying their fair share. A simple tax code WOULD provide breaks for by God human families, on the obvious ground that it costs more to raise a family that to not do so. I ought to know, I'm single, and I've found that on a wage double the minimum required by law, I can live comfortably. God knows how my co-workers raise kids on this. Choosing to have a pet is a luxury, a personal choice, and those who choose to do that can damn well pay for their hobby. It is not a social necessity. I respect working animals, and in some circumstances, they might even be deductible. Not pets. A good simple tax would be, everyone gets the first $20,000 tax free, families with children $50,000, and run the graduated tax up to 50% over $500,000. Very little in the way of other deductions. Keep it simple. No tax deductions for pets. Maybe for bees, they do work. Not for pets.
Yeah, next time I will. I was visiting the States and ignorant as to whether that was normal or common in New York or in the U.S.
Well, part of the problem is that I'm from Canada and unfamiliar with U.S animal abuse laws. Being in the States, I was ignorant as to whether this was legal or normal or what. I've actually never seen anything like it before in my own city, so I was thinking maybe it was allowed in NY or just some common thing over there. There were a plethora of instances of things I found dramatically different than from back home (a man on the subway announcing himself as a recently released convict with HIV and pestering people for change while mentioning he 'didn't want to go back to jail' was met with indifference by other passengers, something that also probably would have warranted a police call back home for me). If it had been in my own city, I would have intervened, unless there was a high risk of danger in which I would have called the police. In this instance the guy was small and old, posing no danger or anything of the sort, but I didn't do anything for the above stated ignorance, aided by the indifference of the other passerbys who didn't even take note of the incident. I thought it was some sort of common occurence.
It was a weird position for me being a foreigner and visitor, but you're right, I probably still should have at least called the police.
Dylan, I completely understand your hesitation in acting. I've traveled internationally as well and the way animals (especially dogs) are treated around the world is very, very different than here in the States and in Canada. Here in North America, dogs are considered family members. But it's difficult for many Americans to understand that in other countries (largely due to economic conditions and historical circumstances), dogs are looked upon as disease ridden curs. Much like rodents. These attitudes are changing in some of those regions, but there are valid reasons for them. Rabies is not a controlled disease like it is in industrialized nations. In Greece, for many years, dogs were severely mistreated because during WWII, many carried very dangerous diseases. Greece is now a modern nation so that sort of behavior is largely condemned. But in many areas of the country (mostly rural) there are throwbacks.
It is difficult to know, nation to nation, what the customs are. And you can wind up in a serious jam if you start making trouble for what locals consider "normale".
You must be logged in to post a comment.