Colo. May OK First Pet Companionship Law

The Coloradoan · Post by **The Coloradoan** » Mon Feb 10, 2003 3:31 pm

Several Colorado lawmakers are supporting legislation to elevate the status of cats and dogs from property to companions.

The measure would allow people in Colorado to sue veterinarians and animal abusers and seek damages for "loss of companionship," up to $100,000.

Colorado has more than 2 million dogs and cats in 1.6 million households. Current law classifies them as property, and pet owners can seek only "fair market value" in a lawsuit.

If passed, it would be the first such companionship law in the nation, said lawyer Josh Pazour.

A related ordinance, making pet owners guardians so pets will not be seen as property, was recently passed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. "We're really trying to get to the heart of trying to treat animals more humanely and promote guardianship," said Matt Gonzalez, the board's president and chief sponsor of the ordinance.

Rob Eshelman, an aide to Gonzalez, has said Boulder was the first city to make pet owners guardians, followed by others including Berkeley and West Hollywood in California and the state of Rhode Island.

The Colorado measure is opposed by the state Veterinary Medical Association, which contends the proposed changes would increase the cost of veterinary care.

"Veterinarians will have to pass on to consumers the increased costs of doing businesses, including time spent responding to frivolous lawsuits and additional diagnostic tests that will now be required to practice defensive medicine," the association said in a statement to its members.

Colorado already is among 14 states legally recognizing dogs and cats as beneficiaries and allowing people to leave money and property to their pets.

"If you can leave something to your animal, they're obviously a status beyond property," said state Rep. Mark Cloer, the chief House sponsor of the companionship measure.

Republican Gov. Bill Owens, who owns a springer spaniel named Hannah, would not say if he would sign such a bill into law if it passes. But he added: "Hannah is very much in favor" of the bill.

Ice Cream Jonsey · Post by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Mon Feb 10, 2003 3:55 pm

Jesus Christ.

I'd like to go on record and officially state that I am not *from* here.

Wait, shit, I am, however, from New York. The last thing I want is crap being brought up on my home state.

They ought to make posters for this companionship bill in the style of "Minority Report" and place them all around. The tagline could be, "EVERYBODY LOSES."

There really is nothing for lawmen to do out here. This is how speed cameras enter a community: boredom. I'll say it if nobody else will: mugger, murderers and arch-villans at least give the cops and representatives something to do at work all day. They at least perform that service.

Roody_Yogurt · Post by **Roody_Yogurt** » Mon Feb 10, 2003 4:17 pm

While pet fanatics can be a crazy annoying bunch, I think it's good to put some more value on animals. I mean, it sucks a lot more that someone poisoned your dog than getting a couple games stolen or something.

That's one of the things I never understood about libertarianism. What do they do about 'victim-less' crimes, like cruelty to animals and environmental concerns (like dumping and what not)?

Ice Cream Jonsey · Post by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Mon Feb 10, 2003 7:46 pm

Why is this here and not in the Pleasure Wharf?

Worm2 · Post by **Worm2** » Wed Feb 12, 2003 5:54 pm

I posted the same exact thing not noticing this about three hours after he did.

AArdvark · Post by **AArdvark** » Wed Feb 12, 2003 7:11 pm

Question:

So in as far as considering a pet to be a companion, won't that raise the beastiality rates out there? Prob'ly pretty high now, I would imagine. Yeesh!

THE
YOU DID WHAT
TO THE CAT?
AARDVARK

The Coloradoan · Post by **The Coloradoan** » Wed Feb 12, 2003 8:02 pm

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:Why is this here and not in the Pleasure Wharf?

I fancy myself quite the celebrity.

Worm2 · Post by **Worm2** » Wed Feb 12, 2003 8:19 pm

AArdvark wrote:Question:

So in as far as considering a pet to be a companion, won't that raise the beastiality rates out there? Prob'ly pretty high now, I would imagine. Yeesh!

I don't think the legal status of your cat at the same level as your toaster is going to stop you from fucking it if you want to. Though this may lead to people marrying their house pets. Also may lead to legal beastiality.

AArdvark · Post by **AArdvark** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 3:59 pm

Hey, toast in bed. Sounds crumbly. Ding! Ready again?

THE
POP TART
AARDVARK