PROPOSITION B - YOUR OPINION

From Ginger Pepple, Russellville:

Dear Editor:

The arguments from those who support Prop. B which are based on news articles and biased studies as proof of Missouri breeder abuse are absurd.

Three hundred and fifty-two complaints and reports against dog breeders and sellers have been filed with the three Missouri BBBs in the past three years. Half of the complaints filed against Missouri dog breeders and sellers were resolved.

According to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), Missouri puts out one million puppies a year. http://www.independent.com/news/2010/oct/08/missouri-puppy-mills/#comments

The percentage of 352 complaints out of three million is so diluted that it is amazing a company such as the BBB would even bother investigating it.

The BBB article also was not able to determine what sources the puppies were purchased from - if they were legal licensed facilities or illegal black market kennels?

The bad math and numbers, the incomplete studies are constantly thrown at the public. To force bans against legal Missouri breeders is inconsistent to ridiculously exaggerated in most parts. http://presszoom.com/story_160780.html

It claims 9,000 puppies were shipped from Missouri to California in 2009. It also claims all puppies were raised in squalid conditions with no vet care or exercise. There is absolutely no way to prove this and it is outlandish to make such claims when there are numerous USDA kennels with no noncompliance inspection reports.

This article also does not prove that the majority of these puppies overwhelmed California animal shelters. Shelter animals do not come with registration papers and seller contracts. In fact California's major problems comes from south of their border. And their own instate breeder problems. http://www.veganrepresent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7804; https://community.hsus.org/campaign/CA_2009_puppymills5

California seems so concerned with Missouri when it can not even control its own breeding problems, and the tens of thousands of diseased animals smuggled over the borders.

The USDA audit which claims it was not capable of proper inspections. The cases were predominantly out of Oklahoma and Texas, not Missouri which has the toughest USDA inspectors in the country. What we have here is a witch hunt. And, those who try very hard to convince to vote yes on Prop B. are the lynch mob. Be wise and vote no on prop B.

From Barbara Schmitz, campaign manager Missourians for the Protection of Dogs/YES on Prop B:

Dear Editor:

California resident Bev Wilmesher's attack on Prop. B is a grossly misleading account of this common-sense ballot measure and the humane organizations backing it (Your View: Proposition B Opposed, Oct. 21.)

The Humane Society of the United States spends more than $20 million a year supporting local shelters and providing hands-on care to animals. But we also work to prevent cruelty, and that's precisely why we support Prop. B. Also supporting the measure are many Missouri animal protection groups, responsible dog breeders, veterinarians and vet clinics, and businesses.

Prop. B only covers dogs bred to produce puppies sold commercially as pets, no other kind of animal. It couldn't be clearer that this measure has no impact on agriculture.

Current laws aren't strong enough to prevent the shockingly poor conditions that have been found at many Missouri puppy mills. At licensed puppy mills in Missouri, inspectors have found dogs with bloody wounds, sick or dying puppies, and dogs shivering in temperatures as low as nine degrees, yet these facilities are still licensed as of 2010.

Prop. B doesn't halt breeding, but simply sets responsible standards for the care of dogs in large-scale breeding operations. It applies to both licensed and unlicensed facilities. Unlike current regulations that are complicated and vague, Prop. B provides clear and consistent standards, access to nutritious food daily, continuous access to drinkable water, veterinary care for illness or injury, adequate space and exercise. Prop. B will improve the lives of tens of thousands of dogs, and it is backed by mainstream animal welfare groups throughout Missouri and the nation. Be skeptical of the outrageous charges being hurled against the measure and its supporters. Missouri voters can stop cruelty to dogs by voting yes on Prop. B this Nov. 2 Visit YESonPropB.com to learn more.

From Mark Pavely, Jefferson City:

Dear Editor;

Kudos to Kristie Scheulen for her letter to the editor published Oct. 24 that advises us to vote no on Proposition B on Nov. 2.

Kristie's letter is absolutely right on. I believe the liberal agenda isn't so much about protecting dogs as it is promoting their religion which is earth worship.

In the Bible, Genesis 1:26 God gives mankind dominion over the creatures that he created. Animals are much more important to liberals than human beings. Liberals feel good to think that they are protecting animals.

Where is this same zest to protest abortionists that have murdered millions of human beings in abortion clinics that are advocated by Planned Parenthood? Nowhere in the Bible can you find that abortion is advocated.

Proposition B, if passed, isn't really intended to save dogs it will open doors for liberals to pass other laws preventing human beings from the use of all animals that God has given to us.

Pray for America and the rest of the world that they will awaken the natural knowledge of God that is given to all of us and enjoy the blessings he has bestowed upon mankind (Romans 2:14-15).