Your Opinion: Informed and in favor of Prop. B

Dear Editor:

Some of the comments I have seen from Prop. B opponents are absolutely ludicrous. If any of those people would take the time to read and study the actual verbiage within Prop. B themselves, perhaps then they would see that Prop. B is about the humane care and treatment of the adult dogs in breeder facilities, the breeding dogs, not the puppies they produce. And Prop. B is specific to dogs, no other animal.

Opponents insist that current ACFA regulations are good enough and work just fine. I disagree. Current regulations are ridiculously vague and provide inadequate protection for the very animals they are supposed to protect.

It took three years and repeated violations that were ignored, while defenseless dogs suffered at the hands of Missouri's socalled Premiere Breeding Facility in Mexico owned and run by Hermann and Bonnie Schindler, before their license was finally pulled last year. Strengthening current ACFA regulations is what Prop. B does.

Eleven million pets in this country are killed in shelters every year, the majority of which are purebred. To even think that the public will no longer have access to pets, that dog food manufacturers and everyone associated with the dog industry will be adversely affected, is blatantly ignorant.

Prop. B passed, using our Democratic process, by a margin of 4 percent of the voters in this state in an off year election. In my 40 years of experience voting, and I don't know of one election I ever missed, off year elections bring out the truly informed voters.

For anyone to say that I was misinformed, misled or duped into voting for Prop. B is an insult. And for our elected officials, some of whom are in the dog breeding business themselves or have family who are and have an obvious stake in gutting Prop. B, to use their position to undo the will of the people is both disheartening and disrespectful to the citizens of this state.