Actually I think it's you that's taking things out of context.
You say stores in England are better than in America, and yet you also say there are no stores there that don't sell animals. In the US, there ARE stores where you can buy supplies that don't sell animals. It seems that if folks have the option to shop at stores that don't sell live animals, that's a step above a place where that option is not available.
You also claim to "know" the horrors of pet stores and yet you say you've never seen the back rooms or the breeders/conditions the animals come from. Sure, they might not be mills, but that doesn't mean they're in ideal (or even humane) conditions. You say they take animals that are abandoned, from accidental litters, etc., and yet I'm certain that's not always the case. It may be the case in a few instances. They're still being supplied with animals to sell. To me, it's almost worse, because when animals come from sources like that, the store isn't likely paying anything at all for them, as they would from a breeder. They aren't putting out any money, but they are still getting a product to sell.
Great, there are legal regulations pet stores "must" comply with. That doesn't mean pet stores always abide by those regulations - much the same way people don't always abide by the legal regulations on speeding down the highway.
And good grief, no one's judged you or folks from your country. What I've said, what others have said, is that pet stores that sell animals are wrong. Whether that's in New York City or Zimbabwe, I don't care. Selling animals for profit, no matter the source, is wrong. Frankly, it seems it's you that's making a judgment on the US legal system and the nation's views on animals. You keep saying I don't have a right to judge it - yet you seem to have taken the liberty to make judgments about the US, its laws, its people, and its pet stores.  |