10:01pm
9th August 2011
3,566 notes
in response to a conversation that popped up around a photograph of london riot police treating the paw wound of a police dog
on people using animals as tools for use. My gut sense is that it’s wrong at a fundamental level. This came up the other day when my family started talking about dogs being trained to sense when their owners were about to have a heart attack, and something about that felt sick to me. Hiring a “heart attack detector” in the form of a living dog, that can’t have a life because it’s function is to act as your life force machine. but this is also where I get confused at times. Was it wrong, inherently, for indigenous hunters to ride on horses? or only contextually …are they absolved of the ethical dilemma due to a nutritional necessity they had to meet through hunting which couldn’t have happened without the added speed of horses? I guess I’m feeling a gray area here that I’m not sure how to articulate. [musings in response to the below tumblr post I read here)
Dogs shouldn’t have been used in the first place. They don’t fully understand the risks involved. They can’t consent. DOGS ARE NOT SECURITY DEVICES, WEAPONS, OR ANY OTHER TOOLS FOR OUR USE, PERIOD. (via: veganmudblood)
(Source: thepicturedictionary)
