It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Experiment: What would YOU do?

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 10:29 PM

Originally posted by Sandalphon
Why would I be in a pet store that sells puppy mill pit bulls? The pet stores that do not sell dogs adopt them out, and adopting stores are thorough with breeds and adopters.

A person who gets into pit bull fighting does not go into a pet store to buy a fighting dog. No, that would be an idiot, not a dog fighter. The real pit bull fighters buy and sell their pit bull puppies through private connections. They go through breeders, just like other serious breed investors, like show dog owners do. They look at lineage, like other buyers and betters do with horses.

But if I did hear it, it depends on the person on the phone. It might be a joke or a fantasy. Too early to tell, but I would make a mental note of it.

Umm, and a dog fighter is not an idiot? What a pathetic disgusting human being who needs to see animals rip each other apart in order to feel some thrill or "fulfillment". Its people like that who are the real "animals"and dangerous animals belong in a cage... Unfortunately it's not a crime to be a miserable dumb f*****. If so, you think our prisons are full now?

posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 10:31 PM
reply to post by seabag
OP, let me guess what this is about.

TALKING about a criminal act vs commiting one.

In both senarios, people were only talking about a criminal act. And as far as I know, that is legal. 1st ammendment stuff.

Are people more apt then, to turn in individuals just for talking about it?

Apparently so.

(do I get a cookie for guessing right?

posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 11:11 PM
reply to post by beezzer

Well…that’s been part of it. What I’m really trying to get at is the way people apply their morality to some scenarios and not others. Morality is subjective, so why does one person's "morality" override another's?

If you’re willing to speak out about something illegal that you don’t know for sure would happen involving a dog (a subject you feel strongly about) would you feel the same moral obligation to speak up about the gay marriage scenario I posed (a subject which most conservatives feel strongly about)??

If not…why not? Is it because it doesn't conflict with YOUR morals? Is that why YOU don’t agree with one but do agree with the other, even though both scenarios I posed are illegal?

Double standard?? Intolerance on your part??

Does the constitution differentiate between what YOU personally DO or DON'T morally agree with or is does is apply to ALL people equally??

edit on 28-1-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 11:17 PM
reply to post by seabag

I think morality is universal.

The application of moral principles is subject to interpretation.

I love my country. (America, also luv UK but hey, gotta pick one)

But HOW I love my country is different from how (pick a leftist on this site) loves America.

Ultimately, it's the application of ones principles that defines them.

Of course, just my humble opinion.
edit on 28-1-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 11:56 PM

Originally posted by ballisticmousse
reply to post by seabag

Although the store manager has the authority to refuse adoptions, he does nto have other authority such as prohibit visitors from making telephone calls nor censor them nor to humiliate them nor to use force to enforce other actions such as demanding that they call the people back to cancel the dog fight nor to keep their money even lock them in the store until they change their mind.

Where in heaven's name do you even suggest that I implied all of this? Whew! All I said was that the store policies for "adoption" would be upheld. I am assuming that any usage of an "adopted" animal for dog fighting would be unacceptable to that pet store francise. If it is not, then sadly, I must step out of the argument.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 12:06 AM

Originally posted by ballisticmousse

The major difference is consenting adults are involved in this scenario, not a "dumb" animal,

How do you know they are consenting? Maybe one is a nutcase psycho who is holding the others family tired up with a hand grenade strapped to them or maybe has a concealed weapon, say, a gun hidden his trousers.

For this rerason, one should call the Polcie and allow them to handle it.

Besides, this also rings up one other moral point. The Police are paid to enforce the law - who are you to do their job for them and threaten their need and future employment by handling yourself.

Oh, come on! By doing "nothing" I do not threaten law and order in the least. How do I know they will in fact get married? Too many unknowns. As in the fighting dog scenario, I will not directly intervene. But people are not "dumb animals" and have the intellect to make cogent decisions regarding their own lives, animals, sadly, do not.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 12:11 AM

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by QueSeraSera

Wow, from dog-fighting to gay marriage? You should have started another thread. Seriously.


The major difference is consenting adults are involved in this scenario, not a "dumb" animal, None of my business, I say. Love comes in all shapes and sizes and genders. We need more of that in this world, don't you think?

Agreed! So would you respond the same way?

"Uncomfortable"...not at all.
And yes, I absolutely would respond the same.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 12:18 AM
id throw an elbow against their temple and ask why they no like when they're the ones feeling the pain

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 05:09 AM
notify store employee and if they do nothing talk to the people myself.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 07:05 AM
I would keep it to myself. Its nothing to do with me. I also know nothing from listening to bits of a phone call. It would be easy to get things wrong. We need to stop spying on each other and treating each other as the enemy.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 07:25 AM
I live in a rural area in Australia. Every second guy that lives in the area owns a 'pig dog' that is used for 'pigging'. The dogs wear 'chest plates' to protect against the wild pigs. Dogs are often killed by the pigs. These guys do this for fun. I dont know if I should feel more sorry for the pigs or the dogs but at the end of the day its nothing to do with me.

Some people are into cock-fights. Some dog-fights. Some bull-fights. Some pigging. In some places these thing are legal. The pitbull may be destined for a location that allows dog-fights to take place.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 08:11 AM
reply to post by seabag

I'd wait until they were leaving, take a photo, then go to the cops... I don't want the dog hurt, but god knows if the store staff cares and people that are willing to hurt dogs would prolly be willing to hurt me.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 08:39 AM
As someone has already mentioned, people who breed and raise dogs as fight dogs do not use pet shops. So my concern would be that the shop itself may be involved in (possibly illegal) dog fighting business's. With this in mind, upon leaving the shop, I would contact possibly, the local animal warden but most likely the police and suggest to them that the shop may be involved in crime and the unecessary suffering of animals.

If dog fighting were legal in the area the shop operates, I would make my views more personally known and just sneeringly say something like 'disgusting' directly to the couple and possibly the shop owner as well.
edit on 29/1/2012 by teapot because: edit

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 08:52 AM
I was watching this one.
I kept thinking to myself, "CONFRONT THEM! BUST THEM!" I would have. I would make a scene until I could get security. No animal deserves to be mangled for money.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 08:54 AM
reply to post by theubermensch

Dog-fighting is illegal in all 50 states.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 09:19 AM
Complacency is a sin.

I would interject myself into their conversation by telling them I would pay much more than the person on the phone to fight their dogs, Get their number so I could see the pups first. Talk them up all the way to their car memorize their plate number. Then call animal services and get them involved and hope they dont drop the ball.

This hopefully would keep me busy and quell the urge to show them how it feels to be a defenseless creature in a fight with something stronger and more violent than yourself.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 09:38 AM
reply to post by Avalessa

Maybe its going overseas. Theres a whole world out there beyond your 50 states.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 09:39 AM
If I am in a pet store, I am in there to purchase a pet. The universe just showed me the pet to purchase. I would be slapping my money into the store clerks hand so fast, the other couple, sorry about your luck. This animal will receive love because I know when a gift is given to me.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 10:31 AM
Give the store the money for the dog right away then say you are going out for ID or something, or say you have to make an emergency call. Then get the couples car tag if possible. Notify the police. I would think your responsibility is for the dog first, then for trying to do something to help the cops bust the dogfighting ring second. In my opinion, besides the fact that it is illegal, I think it is horrible to make dogs fight each other. I would feel responsible to do something.

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 10:43 AM
Mind my own business.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in