+- Animal Lovers Web Forum (http://www.animalloverswebforum.com)
+-- Forum: General (http://www.animalloverswebforum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Miscellaneous (http://www.animalloverswebforum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+--- Thread: Tattoo artist "inks" his dog (/showthread.php?tid=2487)
Tattoo artist "inks" his dog - Catherine - 10-18-2016
I must say he was a beautiful dog before he was tattooed. I don't know what the guy was thinking. It wouldn't have been a comfortable procedure for the dog and it looks very odd.
http://news.google.ca/news/url?sr=1&ct2=ca%2F5_0_s_12_1_a&sa=t&usg=AFQjCNFr4EGxvKYw7k5ObNBMNrK03MPaDw&cid=52779243594805&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesun.co.uk%2Fnews%2F1988845%2Ftattoo-artist-accused-of-animal-cruelty-after-pictures-emerge-of-his-dog-with-inkings-on-its-nose-ears-and-eyes%2F&ei=558FWMDqG4OdhQHq_JqwAQ&sig2=FNFLqcjjxLUh8c41QqjHNw&rt=HOMEPAGE&vm=STANDARD&bvm=section&did=-3880375966928996782&sid=-8045216523962456070&ssid=cstm&st=2&at=dt0
It is a bit of an act of cruelty certainly, but is more an act of stupidity. It has no positive benefits for the dog. The dog didn't ask for the tattoos. The tattoos don't look that good on the dog. I can't see that it is right to tattoo an animal like that.
I wonder if the dog is aware of how it looks.
RE: Tattoo artist "inks" his dog - LPC - 10-18-2016
If that man wants to tattoo his own body - fine! But that doesn't give him the right to force tattoos on another being without consent. Did the pup give verbal or written consent to this procedure?! Of course, that is a rhetorical question, but not without purpose. We just don't have the right to force our personal fads on to other beings' bodies, human or otherwise.
Yes, the man is legally the "owner" of the dog, but that is just in human law. Morally, he has no right to inflict his fads and whims on another living creature. That is apart from the other, also important, issue of possible animal cruelty.
RE: Tattoo artist "inks" his dog - Tobi - 10-19-2016
The dog will not care what the tattoos look like. All the dog will have known is being held down (or even mildly sedated?) while something happened which was fairly unpleasant. Tattoos can hurt. Humans are prepared for it, but a dog isn't, and doesn't desire such things or particularly wish to be 'inked'.
When the pain stops the dog will probably take an hour or two to feel even slightly normal again. The tattoos also can sometimes carry a risk of inflamed skin or even infection. Even when done by a careful tattoo artist. Sometimes there are skin reactions or allergies to the ink.
Tattooing a dog for identification purposes -I can understand. Doing it for 'art' is not fair to the dog, is egotistical, and not sensible.
RE: Tattoo artist "inks" his dog - Catherine - 10-19-2016
The dog certainly didn't ask for or give consent to a tattoo. It was an unnecessary procedure that had some risks.
It is not different from ear cropping and tail docking. These are things that people have decided to do to dogs. They are not pleasant for the dog. They do not make life better for the dog. We might have the legal right to do some of these things, but we don't have an ethical right.
It does make the dog look stupid. No dog should have its looks ruined like that.