• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Should homeless people have pets?

Typhon

Typhon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,115
PLEASE READ FIRST

I am not suggesting animal control control take away people's pets. I'm merely asking if it is right from a moral perspective. These animals do not have a proper home, they are not getting medical care that they need and have almost no chance at a healthy diet.

I would like Era's thoughts on the matter but please try to avoid getting emotional just because I asked the question.
 
Doctor_Thomas

Doctor_Thomas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,654
I've noticed that homeless people with animals generally forget about their own needs to make sure the animal is looked after.
 

Deleted member 4367

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
12,226
Sure. There's a billion strays out there that would be better off with a homeless person. And any dog from a kill shelter.
 
NameUser

NameUser

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,015
Sure. If a stray wants to hang with a homeless person that's fine. There are at least a dozen stray cats in my neighborhood, and they seem to be getting along fine. So I don't think being with a homeless person would really hurt them. Hell, they'd probably eat better.
 

Deleted member 3345

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,967
Homeless people don't "have" pets, what the hell.

Homeless people and homeless dogs end up together in a co dependent relationship out of necessity.
 
Cats

Cats

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,929
Depends on the situation. Some areas have shelters that are full, are kill shelters, or have very bad reputations. So the situation there might not be better, and at the same time, just leaving domesticated animals to be total vagrants may not be best either. Even if a homeless person cannot provide adequate care, they might be able to spare some food/water/shelter in some degree, which is better than nothing.

Like everything, it's just not a simple binary answer. Now if someone is holding an animal hostage in a terrible situation, that's different.
 
Seesaw15

Seesaw15

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,819
Sure. It's not like that pet was going to end up in a proper home. 9/10 they would either get picked up by animal control or run over by a car. This way both parties get companionship and the homeless person probably gets more donations.
 
ascii42

ascii42

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,798
Isn't a homeless person's pet basically a stray that stays around because they feed it? If they didn't, it still wouldn't have a proper home or medical care, and would have an even worse chance at a healthy diet.
 
JoJoBae

JoJoBae

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,493
Layton, UT
I think some of them do know that they can't properly take care of their pets. I once had a homeless guy try and give me his dog since he saw me out in my yard with my two dogs.

I think they most likely shouldn't have them, but I think many homeless people have them for companionship. Can't fault 'em for that.
 
iSnack 2.0

iSnack 2.0

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
87
Their life is bad enough and these animals provide at least some happiness. These animals would be strays otherwise and probably be worse off

Edit: jumped the gun the a little bit
 
Rangerx

Rangerx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,499
Dangleberry
Doctor_Thomas said:
I've noticed that homeless people with animals generally forget about their own needs to make sure the animal is looked after.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Absolutely this. There is quite a few homeless people in Dublin with dogs, one even has a rabbit, and they always put the animals welfare first from what I can see. That might not be smart from their perspective but sometimes their pets are the only things keeping them going. It would be monstrous to take them away.
 
Anti

Anti

Banned
Nov 22, 2017
2,972
Australia
Animals are able to survive on their own, they do not need humans to survive as many stray dogs can be used as proof, in adition this homeless people usually are completely alone don't know anyone and are terrible at social interaction, pets are a way for them not to be completely alone and miserable and you want to take that away because in your view animals are only able to have a proper live if they are enclosed in a house and eating purina?
 

scotdar

Banned
Dec 10, 2017
580
Every homeless person with a pet the pet always looks better cared for than the person. I see no reason they cant take care of unwanted animals
 
Neutra

Neutra

Member
Oct 27, 2017
988
NYC
those crust punks/heroin heads you see in NYC always seem to have pitbulls and neither the people nor the dogs look like they're enjoying life. guess i don't know enough to judge tho.
 
TheBeardedOne

TheBeardedOne

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,189
Derry
I don't know how I feel about this. On one hand, I think that it's great for everyone to have a pet and the companionship that comes with it, because it is very beneficial. Also so long as they can provide for the pet and feed it, and look after its needs, then it's good.

On the other hand, I don't know how or if some do that, which isn't fair to the animal. But if they gave them up, would they just be put to sleep? That's a sad thought.

I donate to the homeless whenever I'm in a city. I don't go to the city much though, or live near one. I do feel more inclined to donate to someone with a dog, however, because I want them to be able to buy food for both of them.
 
Vuze

Vuze

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,186
I was just thinking about this yesterday when I saw a beggar with their small freezing dog in town when I crossed the street. Dog was wrapped in a blanket but still. As a huge dog person I felt bad I didn't do anything in hindsight. Wish I'd gotten them food, water/hot drink, maybe an extra blanket.

Ultimately, the "bad" kind of beggars have pets for easier cash. On the other hand, they're genuine beggars/homeless peoples best friends so I'm conflicted. As always, if you can't properly take care of a pet, you shouldn't have one - but that's easier said than done when you lose everything else.
 
Last edited:
stupei

stupei

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,801
GrimGrinningGuy said:
Anyone who can't properly take care of a pet shouldn't have one
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Unfortunately a lot of those people buy pets anyway and then end up abandoning them to fend for themselves as strays. Luckily sometimes homeless people are able to provide the animal with affection and food to the best of their abilities, which is more than it had on its own.

Or did you mean something else?
 
Grewitch

Grewitch

Member
Oct 25, 2017
214
UK
Yes. Otherwise what is the likely scenario for the pet? Being put down if they're unlucky to find a home. It's not like society is doing much to help either the homeless or stray animals much. There's only so much the current agencies can do. Besides, those pets are loved, most of them I hope. Help them out next time you see them if you're concerned about their welfare.
 

Ashhong

Member
Oct 26, 2017
16,619
I see homeless people with dogs all of the time and it looks like the dog is being taken care of. Sometimes they even have a dog bed. I assume they are strays that would otherwise be on their own, so I don't see why not? Do you have an alternative for the hundreds (thousands? millions?) of stray cats and dogs out there?
 
Wyman Manderly

Wyman Manderly

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,447
Typhon said:
PLEASE READ FIRST

I am not suggesting animal control control take away people's pets. I'm merely asking if it is right from a moral perspective. These animals do not have a proper home, they are not getting medical care that they need and have almost no chance at a healthy diet.

I would like Era's thoughts on the matter but please try to avoid getting emotional just because I asked the question.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They still wouldn't with a homeless person..
 
jjreamPop

jjreamPop

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,134
Some people have homes and pets and then lose their homes. Some people don't have homes or anything of value or even regular proper social interaction. Sometimes a pet is the only thing of value that they have.

Everybody needs somebody, regardless of circumstance. So, yes.

I'd go so far as to say known pets of homeless persons should at least get basic vaccinations pro bono.
 

Deleted member 4367

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
12,226
Bear said:
Not exactly. It's pretty basic - food, love, shelter. People who are homeless are usually missing two of the three.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Yeah those poor dogs would be so much better off without the homeless person. There just aren't enough dogs to go around, they all must be sent to those perfect homes.
 

Faust

Member
Oct 25, 2017
633
I'm not sure I understand the premise of this thread, they're likely at best taking a homeless stray as a "pet", they're not exactly buying one in a pet store. They're also not locking the animal in a house and not letting them eat or use the bathroom.
 

Werd

The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
471
I think in general I'd place more value on a homeless person having the companionship than an idealistic scenario where every dog on the planet gets a well balanced diet and monthly vet visits.
 
Wood Man

Wood Man

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,449
It sure helps out with panhandling. There's was a homeless guy I'd see get hand outs way more than other homeless people because he had a dog. Then animal services came and took the dog away since it was considered a "stray." The guy really seemed to heart broken over it. The dog looked healthy and happy and the homeless guy seemed to take care of him. Really sad considering they took him in most likely got euthanized when he could've been living a happy care free life with the homeless guy.
 
Last edited:

Watercolour

Member
Oct 27, 2017
428
Seems okay from my perspective.

As long as the individual can take care of the pet, why not? A pet can be a reliable companion, and I recall reading a story of how a dog helped saved a homeless man's life and encouraged him to not commit suicide. In return, he does his best to care for the dog.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUaEDuxAVhY
 

Deleted member 4367

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
12,226
Faust said:
I'm not sure I understand the premise of this thread, they're likely at best taking a homeless stray as a "pet", they're not exactly buying one in a pet store. They're also not locking the animal in a house and not letting them eat or use the bathroom.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


They are almost certainly giving the dog a better life than it would have otherwise. And in turn getting companionship where it would otherwise be sorely lacking.

But no, dogs must have an idyllic life no matter what with no regard for reality.
 
Sanjuro

Sanjuro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
31,076
Massachusetts
Faust said:
I'm not sure I understand the premise of this thread, they're likely at best taking a homeless stray as a "pet", they're not exactly buying one in a pet store. They're also not locking the animal in a house and not letting them eat or use the bathroom.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah. I feel like some people are thinking the homeless save up to drop $1K on a purebred.
 
John Dunbar

John Dunbar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,229
this thread is a pretty good way to determine which posters care more for pets than homeless people.
 
Waddle Dee

Waddle Dee

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
3,725
California
The only people who shouldn't have a pet are abusive people. If you're homeless, but actually care for your pet, you have the right to keep them.
 
y2dvd

y2dvd

Member
Nov 14, 2017
2,481
I don't get the problem. The pets a homeless person may have are probably strays to begin with. They have each other's companionship. It's a hell of a lot better than possibly being in a kill shelter.
 
Hecht

Hecht

Blue light comes around
Administrator
Oct 24, 2017
9,735
It's more than likely the pets aren't living in good homes to begin with, so, strays. Both pets and humans benefit from companionship, primarily for morale. As long as the person can provide food and shelter for the pet as best they can, I don't see an issue, and honestly if the alternative is euthanasia for the pet it's preferable. The homeless are people too, and if they get any sort of emotional benefit from having a pet as a companion, then great.
 

Deleted member 18821

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
373
Rangerx said:
Absolutely this. There is quite a few homeless people in Dublin with dogs, one even has a rabbit, and they always put the animals welfare first from what I can see. That might not be smart from their perspective but sometimes their pets are the only things keeping them going. It would be monstrous to take them away.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That guy had some scum take his rabbit and throw it in the Liffey. He jumped in after it to save it in the freezing water. This post is pretty accurate I guess:
Doctor_Thomas said:
I've noticed that homeless people with animals generally forget about their own needs to make sure the animal is looked after.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

These pets are either strays, or animals they had before they ended up in their unfortunate situation. In many cases, neither they nor the animal much choice in the matter. Speaking locally, the DSPCA doesn't have the resources for these animals, and the animals themselves are at risk of being abused or killed by the many sick fucks out there if left alone. On the homeless person's side, again many of them take very good care of those animals and they provide them with comfort in a harsh situation. I understand people saying that they shouldn't have a pet if they can't take care of it, but the alternative is generally the animal is put down or fend for themselves (in a city read: picked up by animal control and put down, or picked up by a sicko and "put down")
 
You must log in or register to reply here.