Housepets!

Does anyone here think that BG could use a new level of awareness as far as pet ownership practices in the neighborhood are concerned, in order to better get them in line with the treatment of Peanut and Grape, which should be the model? Discounting Pete's practices, we have at least two irresponsible/bad pet owners in the neighborhood. The first is Jake, who has shown himself to be impulsive, and who has resorted to shock collars for Bino, and who has left Max out in the rain, apparently more than once. The second one is, obviously, Sasha's owner. Does anyone else think this will come up eventually as a community issue?

I didn't even realize the extent of Jake's abuse (or even that his name was Jake) until you pointed it out just now....

That leads me to wonder if perhaps King might find that out--maybe that would even bring about a reconciliation, if only an attempted one, and only on King's part, between himself and Bino.... Certainly it can't help Bino's situation that his owner is like that, but if King knew that Bino's owner (the guy who PUNCHED HIM IN THE FACE) was like that, maybe...?

Or does he already know? After all, when we first saw Joel, he visited Jake and said he was from PETA.... If that's the case, then maybe he NEEDS to try to reconcile with Bino since he knows how badly Jake is treating him, but he still hates Bino anyway.... Maybe that's part of the problem that Pete's trying to make him see...?

So many possibilities.... And that's not even taking Sasha and her owner into account, which we've already discussed in detail, except now I have another thing to add to it: is that how Bino and Sasha started getting together, because they have abusive owners? Or is it simply part of it, or even not part of it at all?



EDIT: Okay, Jake isn't necessarily as abusive as Sasha's owner, but he's still NOT a good pet owner.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that Jake's scenarios are mere plot devices and that in the complete universe inside Rick's head, Jake is a perfectly kind owner.

Teh Brawler wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that Jake's scenarios are mere plot devices and that in the complete universe inside Rick's head, Jake is a perfectly kind owner.

You're joking, aren't you? Come on, now. Shock collar.

PhoenixAsper wrote:

Teh Brawler wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that Jake's scenarios are mere plot devices and that in the complete universe inside Rick's head, Jake is a perfectly kind owner.

You're joking, aren't you? Come on, now. Shock collar.

All I'm saying is that if Jake has not been obviously portrayed as an abusive owner, I don't think Rick intended him to be.

The first thing Teh Brawler said might be....

Jake used a SHOCK COLLAR. SHOCK COLLAR. AND he locked Max out in the RAIN.

If he's not abusive, he's at least irresponsible and neglectful, and clearly unaware of how his own pets have it.

ChewyChewy wrote:The first thing Teh Brawler said might be....

Jake used a SHOCK COLLAR. SHOCK COLLAR. AND he locked Max out in the RAIN.

If he's not abusive, he's at least irresponsible and neglectful, and clearly unaware of how his own pets have it.

THAT seems a little more accurate to me.

Which is NOT a "perfectly kind owner".

Agreed. And one of these days, that may bite him. The issue, not Bino.

Teh Brawler wrote:mere plot devices

Bino's shock collar was the basis for the zap! arc, and Max being locked out in the rain was essential to the end of the n-ple date arc.

Besides that, Max is basically an alley cat and is out all the time. It's not like my cat hasn't been locked out before just because I am not sitting up all night waiting for her to come home.

I don't really picture Jake as a abusive owner, just a rough one.

You have owners that can be rough to their pets sometimes, but generally responds in an affectionate manner. I have to admit though that Jake can still be credible for being abusive, but i highly doubt it seeing how Max and Bino both are treated more family-like than what i would presume is Sasha who gets her affection from the neighbourhood more than the owner.

GameCobra wrote:I don't really picture Jake as a abusive owner, just a rough one.

You have owners that can be rough to their pets sometimes, but generally responds in an affectionate manner. I have to admit though that Jake can still be credible for being abusive, but i highly doubt it seeing how Max and Bino both are treated more family-like than what i would presume is Sasha who gets her affection from the neighbourhood more than the owner.

I agree I always assumed that Jake was just a strict parent.

I don't think it would be very helpful for BG to have a nazi like Homeowner's panel saying "You must treat your pet this way." because Mrs. Jones down the street doesn't like the fact that you might leave your two dogs tied out in the yard all day and night. We 'really' don't know enough about Jake to call him a bad owner and shock collars are used for behavior modification therapy which in Bino's case might have been the only way his 'dad' could get to him.

And seriously, your labeling him bad because Max got left out in the rain? Come on people, it's not cool to superimpose your feelings of reasonable animal care on someone like that over something so small. As noted, Max is a alley cat and is clearly used to wandering out and about. He did it one night and his dad didn't stay up to leave a door open. Geez.

I'd say the only 'bad' owner could be Sasha's and even then we don't know enough about him, only that he's clearly really lonely and sees Sasha more as a pet then a member of the family.

Foxstar wrote: I'd say the only 'bad' owner could be Sasha's and even then we don't know enough about him, only that he's clearly really lonely and sees Sasha more as a pet then a member of the family.

Well, we never see Sasha being physically abused by her dad so its not all bad. Oh wait, there are other forms of abuse too. such as emotional and what not. And we already know that he is just using Sasha to get "babes" or whatever in BG.

*Snaps fingers*

"BG" stands for Babylon Gardens!

Teh Brawler wrote:*Snaps fingers*

"BG" stands for Babylon Gardens!

I think we already know that. I think...

Barkeron wrote:

Teh Brawler wrote:*Snaps fingers*

"BG" stands for Babylon Gardens!

I think we already know that. I think...

Oh, this thread ain't about Baldur's Gate...

*walks off*

ChewyChewy wrote:The first thing Teh Brawler said might be....

Jake used a SHOCK COLLAR. SHOCK COLLAR. AND he locked Max out in the RAIN.

If he's not abusive, he's at least irresponsible and neglectful, and clearly unaware of how his own pets have it.

Jake is also Fido's and Joey's owner...

An Fido, understands if not agrees with Jake's training attempts with Bino.

Bino will chase an attack the mailman! so something has to be done..

Actually, Keeshah, Ryan is Fido's ower and I don't think we've seen Joey's owner yet.

Still, I don't think Jake is cruel. I don't know what I think with how little he has appeared, but I don't think he's cruel. Call it a theory of a crazy man, but that's my thoughts...

I think that Jake's attitude adds diversity to the BG pet owners. You got the pampering parents (Sandwiches), no nonsense tough attitude owner (Fox's owner), geeky gamer (Fido's owner), weird god man bird (I'm sure you know who I'm talking about), the i get tired of my pets sometimes owner (Max ,Bino, Joey's owner), and others.

Typhon wrote:Weird god man bird (I'm sure you know who I'm talking about)

Tiger/Marvin/Zach's Owner?

CoffeeJunkie wrote:

Typhon wrote:Weird god man bird (I'm sure you know who I'm talking about)

Tiger/Marvin/Zach's Owner?

Um, i was actually thinking King.

I was actually kidding

ah.

ChewyChewy wrote:The first thing Teh Brawler said might be....

Jake used a SHOCK COLLAR. SHOCK COLLAR. AND he locked Max out in the RAIN.

If he's not abusive, he's at least irresponsible and neglectful, and clearly unaware of how his own pets have it.

See... That just makes him an irresponsible parent, not a bad one.

I'm gonna pull something out of the RPs, since I see that most of the people in this thread are in the RPs themselves. Look at Sid's owner: he's a kind loving owner, but at the same time, he's a college teen who doesn't provide for his pet anywhere near as much as the other owners in BsM. Look at what Sid gets away with: he constantly abuses (dominates) his human roommate, only eats things which are not healthy, is rude to everyone in public, and even threatens Kytes with physical violence at several points. That's not saying his owner is bad, that's saying his owner isn't holding him with a steady hand, which isn't abusive, only casually neglectful. What's important is that he gets love, food, and shelter.

What I'm going to say is that Jake is LAZY and isn't that worried about what happens to his pets as long as they're safe, even though he loves and cares for them That means his not a perfect owner, but it doesn't make him bad. You can't compare him to Sasha's owner who doesn't seem to even care about her beyond her getting him girls at parties, and even punishes her out of anger when that doesn't happen. He is obviously a terrible owner. Bino is Bino because he's got a Napoleon complex, not because his owner mistreats him, but because his older brother is bigger and better than him. He obviously has an owner who cares about him enough to provide for him, despite being irresponsible. There are other owners who seem to be like this, mainly Fido's owner who is always playing D&D.

Now going back to the original question. No. Of course not. Communities only get involved with the way people treat their pets, or even children, when they're in some sort of danger.
Even though Sasha's owner is terrible, he's never been shown physically harming her. He obviously neglects her feelings, and he gets angry and punishes her for not living up to his unreasonable expectations, but he's not abusive to the point where he's breaking the law or anything.
Same with Pete, he's not treating King worse than any typical pet, even though they're in a neighborhood where pets are typically family members. We see his actions as abusive because we know that King is in fact a human adult, and only a dog in form because Pete used magic on him to punish him for being a bad human, so we know he's treating a human adult like an animal. But Pete hasn't done anything downright evil or downright abusive, he's "more of a Jerk" than that.

If we're getting into RPG characters, Honey's and Vanilla's owner is "lazy". But he would never put a shock collar on either of them for any reason, nor would he lock either out in the rain.

The most abuse they take at his hands is to their ears when he fires his (non-loaded) gun.

ChewyChewy wrote:If we're getting into RPG characters, Honey's and Vanilla's owner is "lazy". But he would never put a shock collar on either of them for any reason, nor would he lock either out in the rain.

The most abuse they take at his hands is to their ears when he fires his (non-loaded) gun.

1) I am pretty sure that he locked him out on accident, not on purpose, as that seemed to be the context. I'm setting it up so that will happen to Sid tonight while his owner is out of town. (This is Trinkets fault for giving him bad luck) Max's owner, as Ebly stated, probably doesn't worry about it, seeing as Max is an outdoor cat.
2) Bino is a very bad dog. What if the Shock Collar was for physical violence? What if Bino attacked the mailman? That's a big deal, and I can totally see why his owner would do that. I agree that ti's not the nicest way to treat him, but is it abusive? Obviously the shock collar just hurts and isn't actually endangering Bino's health. The fact that he lost the remote means it wasn't supposed to be a big deal.

Edit: This is a silly comic though. It's probably not meant to be analyzed on this level. I really don't think Rick thinks out every little thing.