Should Pets Be Required to Wear a Seat Belt?

by SodaHead Living Posted 2012/06/11 19:39:13

Related Topics: Pets, Seat, belt, Car, Pet, Dogs, jail, Animals, Cars, American, Driving, News, Dog, New Jersey

746 votes
Read all 654 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	278 votes	37%
	No	468 votes	63%

Hmm ... we've never really thought about this one before. Should owners have to buckle up their pets in the car, or face a hefty fine? In New Jersey, penalties for driving with an unrestrained pet range from $250 to $1,000 and as much as six months in jail, NorthJersey.com reports.

"That’s for each offense," Col. Frank Rizzo, police superintendent for the New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, told reporters. "So, if you have more than one animal loose in your car, just do the math…"

The New Jersey statute defines unrestrained pets in cars as animal cruelty. Some pet owners use small cages, but most buy seats and harnesses that attach directly to existing seat belts, NorthJersey.com reports. However, a 2010 survey conducted by the American Automobile Association showed that 20 percent of those polled allow their dogs to sit on their laps while they drive. And nearly one-third of the respondents admitted that unrestrained pets are distracting.

“Some people tell us they like to let their pets hang their heads out the window to take in the fresh air," Rizzo said, "but dogs and cats become projectiles in a crash." Do you think people should be forced to buckle up their pets?

+33

Add a comment above

glass_butterfly ~YSU~ 2012/06/11 21:28:33 (edited)

Yes

+19
I tie my dog up in the passenger seat or the back seat cause she'll try and jump in my lap (this is no purse dog, this is a 65-70lbs adult black lab, who still thinks she's a puppy) She could obstruct my view! Very dangerous. And for the safety of the dog too, if in a car accident I'd hate to think of my poor girl to fly out the window and getting hurt worst!
>> See Replies

More polls by SodaHead Living

darlene... to Tom Cam... 2012/06/12 16:25:48

+2
the picture is of a dog in a child seat, and a misrepresentation... a real dog seat belt consists of a harness the dog wears, which attaches to the lap belt in the back seat. it keeps the dog sitting or lying on the back seat, rather than allowing it to be a distraction to the driver. Hardly cruel or inhuman.

reply
katchan to darlene... 2012/06/12 18:30:40

I wish I could "like" this multiple times!

reply
Michelle to darlene... 2012/06/12 20:52:46

Wait... so the logic here is that you can't take your dog anywhere (to the vet, ect) unless you buy a special seatbelt and install it, as well as get them into it. And then listen to them cry about it the entire way. And, if there is an accident, it will be restrained, injured, and struggling... yeah, we're so cruel to animals by letting them wander around and then driving safely.

reply
democoach to Tom Cam... 2012/06/12 17:42:24

dogs are not people, they are a great pet but they are stll an animal! a dog ridding in a truck or car is not animal abuse! putting them in a seatbelt? i do agree with you! ridding a bike with your dog is not abuse either! if you dshoose not too because of your belief thats your choice! but its not abuse in any way to take your dog out for a cardio workout, in fact its very healthy for the dog! just as long as you don't go to fast, and you give the dog breaks! for water and such!

reply
Alexis82 2012/06/12 16:00:57

Yes

It would be difficult to drive, especially safely if you have your pet(s) in the background.

reply
Rebel Uke 2012/06/12 15:59:02

No

+2
PEOPLE shouldn't even be required to wear a seat belt.

reply
cheighti g 2012/06/12 15:58:09

No

that dog looks dead.

reply
TKramar 2012/06/12 15:52:57

No

restraining an animal is cruelty.

reply
darlene... to TKramar 2012/06/12 16:32:02

the picture is of a dog in a child seat, and a misrepresentation... a real dog seat belt consists of a harness the dog wears, which attaches to the lap belt in the back seat. it keeps the dog sitting or lying on the back seat, rather than allowing it to be a distraction to the driver. Hardly cruel

reply
TKramar to darlene... 2012/06/12 18:02:55

The only reason for an animal to be in the car is to take it to the vet. Unless your vet comes to you, and then there's no reason.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/12 21:57:21

There are lots of other reasons for a pet to be in a car besides going to the vet. For example, travelling for an overnight-or-longer trip (which is, needless to say, too far to walk), taking them across town to the park or something for a day-trip so it can get exercise while you spend the day there, bringing it with you for a day-trip which will last long enough that you can't leave a dog alone, ect. (That's just off the top of my head).

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/13 09:21:05

Dogs should have a yard. If you don't have a yard, then you shouldn't have a dog.

reply
Aingean to TKramar 2012/06/13 12:20:29

I agree but sometimes people do move and the dogs have to be in the car for a while. I never have to restrain my dogs though they are all good in a car.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/13 19:57:15

Agreed, but the one example of going to the park was more of a "if you're going to the park and think you should take the dog so it can run with you"-type of thing, and the park is across town. If you're suggesting that for long trips, you should leave your dog outside in the yard... well, I live in Canada, and that's downright inhumane for over half the year.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/13 20:25:53 (edited)

I don't believe in going on long trips...and the reason I don't have a pet of my own is because I have to be gone for 8-10 hours a day, 5 days a week. And that isn't fair to it.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/14 00:04:23

Not everyone has that luxury of never having to go further than an eight-hour drive from home. A lot of people have family who live quite far away that they visit on a semi-regular basis, and it's best if they take their animals with them. I understand why you wouldn't want an animal with a schedule like that, people who work normal hours and/or have a family around take day trips, and it's perfectly reasonable for them to take their animals with them, especially when it's going to be nice and outside wherever they're going (or warm and inside in the winter).

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/14 09:26:36

A normal schedule is five 8-hour days. Plus, I walk, so it adds about an hour to either side of that. I don't do day trips. Any time not spent at work, I spend at home. But that's still more than 40 hours a week where I'm not home.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/14 20:20:20

Most people spend more than forty hours a week not at home. I realize a normal schedule is eight-hours, but ten is more than the average person. Spending over forty-hours not at home is normal, and people with pets don't go out of the way to be home more. If you're at home whenever you're not at work, you could handle a dog. Most people just take the dog with them when they can. IE: day trips. Which is why I said it's a reasonable reason to put your dog in a car.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/14 21:05:18

It's not fair to the animal to leave it completely alone for that much time. Unless you have multiple animals, and they interact well with each other, they don't really thrive on solitude.

And like I said, I don't go on day trips. Don't believe in them.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/14 21:33:07

... what are you trying to argue? The point I'm trying to make is that there are reasons other than bringing it to the vet to put your animal in the car.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/15 11:04:01

Not to me. Pets belong at home.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/16 04:30:48

But people have no reason to leave their pets at home all the time: people with family too far away will take their pets with them to Christmas celebrations because they can't leave them home alone, ect.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/16 09:45:38

Or they stay at home with their pets and celebrate at home.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/17 22:35:30

!!???!!! I honestly have no other response to this stupidity! This is why people shouldn't argue with idiots: they bring you down to your level and beat you down with experience.

Right. Let me put this into perspective. As a woman, I would never live by myself without a dog, simply because I wouldn't feel very safe, especially if I'm living far from my family. Instead of taking a well-trained, car-friendly dog on a five-ten hour car ride to spend Christmas with my family, I would have to spend it all by myself, except with my dog. Am I the only one who sees the problem in your train of thought, here?

WHY do you think it's so wrong to take a dog in a car? Do you have some underlying trauma or something that I'm missing here, because your argument doesn't hold any water as it is.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/17 22:52:57 (edited)

Get married, and you won't have that problem.

Dogs don't belong in cars. If you have to take it to the vet, then you have little choice, but otherwise it belongs with you, at home.

Also, I NEVER visit family. I don't like them.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/17 23:51:59

Are you listening to yourself? "Get married and you won't have that problem"? Ha. A rottie will protect me just as well, if not better, than any man. And my dog is coming to me to visit my family, whom I love.

If you'd give me a REASON why dogs don't belong in cars, then I'll listen to your argument. As it is, you have given no arguments as to WHY you think dogs don't belong in cars, all you've done is repeatedly say, "Dogs don't belong in cars".

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/18 00:04:14

You're the one complaining about being alone.

Neither people or dogs were meant to be in cars. We've both got legs.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/18 00:14:45

... neither were people meant to cook their meat (we have canines) and I don't see you complaining about that. People weren't meant to use fire for warmth (we're meant to heat ourselves), build houses (there's caves, and buildings take over the hunting grounds), farm (we have the eyes of a predator), or stare at a screen and debate issues over an electronically-powered piece of technology which was invented using sciences that include Quantum Mechanics, which we have no practical reason to need to know.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/18 00:53:50

Cooking meat wasn't about making it more edible, it was about killing bacteria.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/18 00:54:53

All I can say is that I don't drive. I have no need or desire for a vehicle.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/18 01:14:47

You've still yet to give me a good reason why dogs shouldn't be in cars except when going to the vet's.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/18 01:22:19

You haven't given a good reason they SHOULD.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/18 01:41:36

I have. I offered many reasons why they should, over and over. Starting with a list, and ending with a personal example. Travelling. You haven't yet rebuked that argument, either, besides, "I don't travel" and "Don't travel with animals because they don't belong in cars." Neither proves your point.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/18 02:15:24

I have addressed it. Those trips are completely and totally unnecessary.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/18 02:27:09

No, they are not. You have not proved any of those trips are unnecessary, only that you wouldn't make them. Most people need to see their family once in a while, for example. I already proposed a necessary one in my personal example: I love my family, if I lived alone I would spend Christmas with them, not alone with my dog. That, in my opinion and many other people's opinion, is a necessary trip.

So, why SHOULDN'T I make that trip? Why SHOULDN'T a dog be in a car. Because until you give me a reason, your argument is null-- because you made the claim that dogs shouldn't be in cars, the burden of proof lies on you to support your point.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/18 02:34:04

How and why are they necessary? There's no logical reason for them, you're responding emotionally.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/18 20:05:52

There's no logical reason not to drive with them in the car. It's logical for me to want protection, and it's logical for me to bring the dog home with me for Christmas (I can't afford a kennel and I leave it alone. Staying home isn't even on the table.) How is that not logical? You just can't seem to admit you have no case. If you're not going to start supporting your argument, I will not post again. It's impossible to debate by myself. Good day.

reply
TKramar to Michelle 2012/06/19 09:38:26 (edited)

There are no "necessary" trips where you need to bring any pet, unless you're going to the vet. Otherwise, the pet AND you can stay home. You've got to work, of course, but someone should be able to stay home with the animal most of the day.

I don't even HAVE a pet and I don't leave my house for Christmas! It isn't necessary.

reply
Michelle to TKramar 2012/06/19 19:18:27

Yes, it is necessary. Maybe you don't understand what it's like to be a human being with emotional attachments, but the rest of us aren't spending Christmas alone.

And, look, yet again you've yet to provide any argument. Have a nice life, moron. And learn how to have a debate, because I'm through.

reply
RoyJLores 2012/06/12 15:51:25

No

+3
I'm fed up of stupid laws telling people what they should think, say, eat, wear in short micromanage every aspect of people's lives.

reply