# Can anyone from Quebec verify this?



## jamie lind (Feb 19, 2009)

http://thenormaldog.blogspot.com/2014/02/oh-yes-they-did-quebec-government-has.html


----------



## Gerald Guay (Jun 15, 2010)

I am from Québec and there is some discussion here about that. However the document says "unacceptable". The word banned is not used. Québec has a difficult time legislating puppy mills. Will post if I can get more info.

GG


----------



## Haz Othman (Mar 25, 2013)

Quebec is forever trying to emulate Europe. The govt there tends to be big on appearances and low on substance, I hope this is not a law but I would not be shocked if they do enact such a fallacy.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

AKA the article there have already been warnings given.


----------



## Catherine Gervin (Mar 12, 2012)

i disagree with the stance that disallowing prong/electronic collars is the same as banning indoor smoking--secondhand corrections don't exist, using stimulation to hone behavior doesn't cause cancer, and the legislation against cigarettes only ever came about because Insurance lobbyists became more powerful than Jesus, let alone more powerful than Tobacco lobbyists. that's really the only reason, not to protect the health of ANYBODY, not to prevent fires, but because people who smoke get expensive to treat medically and it came time to trim down the number of current and incumbent smokers. an easy way to reduce people who smoke is to ratchet up the price and restrict the venues.
hopefully people are trying to help animals when they go out and make these ridiculous laws, rather than just meddling with private citizens. the intent is important, but i would personally prefer that they enforce nastier penalties for animal abuse and spend some of that money they used gathering their tainted data on providing resources for the health/care of dogs in poorer demographics.
in addition to a flat collar, my dog wears a prong collar on all walks and sometimes i attach the leash to it and sometimes i don't. i'd like to think it should be up to me how i get my dog to adhere to the societally-desired behavior of NOT taking bites out of joggers/pedestrians/other dogs so long as i am not mistreating her. i also agree with the notion of not requiring one of these now-black-listed devices in order to abuse a dog because it's true, removing these collars from the public marketplace will not end the mistreatment of dogs...sorry folks.
if the UK and Canada have banned these collars how long will it be before the public outcry in the US follows suit? my husband states that the military will continue to do as they see fit, and they spend more money on their trained K9s than any single private citizen...they would not consistently abuse their investments, nor would they get that high level of performance out of a mistreated animal even if they did turn a blind eye to their quality of life. no matter what the tenderfoot consensus decides, at least someone will still be employing one or both of these devices to school their dogs in higher education.
for my part, i've had two people come over to scold me for using a prong collar on my girl--one lady called it "a crown of thorns"--but they both were backed waaayyy off the moment they drew close enough to chastise because my dog has some behavioral issues and they come with a German Shepherd set of teeth. i feel most certain that those two do-gooders left my periphery understanding why we had that collar, and maybe they were even glad that it was there?


----------



## Haz Othman (Mar 25, 2013)

Not all of Canada so far just that one province that always does its best to be different..



Catherine Gervin said:


> i disagree with the stance that disallowing prong/electronic collars is the same as banning indoor smoking--secondhand corrections don't exist, using stimulation to hone behavior doesn't cause cancer, and the legislation against cigarettes only ever came about because Insurance lobbyists became more powerful than Jesus, let alone more powerful than Tobacco lobbyists. that's really the only reason, not to protect the health of ANYBODY, not to prevent fires, but because people who smoke get expensive to treat medically and it came time to trim down the number of current and incumbent smokers. an easy way to reduce people who smoke is to ratchet up the price and restrict the venues.
> hopefully people are trying to help animals when they go out and make these ridiculous laws, rather than just meddling with private citizens. the intent is important, but i would personally prefer that they enforce nastier penalties for animal abuse and spend some of that money they used gathering their tainted data on providing resources for the health/care of dogs in poorer demographics.
> in addition to a flat collar, my dog wears a prong collar on all walks and sometimes i attach the leash to it and sometimes i don't. i'd like to think it should be up to me how i get my dog to adhere to the societally-desired behavior of NOT taking bites out of joggers/pedestrians/other dogs so long as i am not mistreating her. i also agree with the notion of not requiring one of these now-black-listed devices in order to abuse a dog because it's true, removing these collars from the public marketplace will not end the mistreatment of dogs...sorry folks.
> if the UK and Canada have banned these collars how long will it be before the public outcry in the US follows suit? my husband states that the military will continue to do as they see fit, and they spend more money on their trained K9s than any single private citizen...they would not consistently abuse their investments, nor would they get that high level of performance out of a mistreated animal even if they did turn a blind eye to their quality of life. no matter what the tenderfoot consensus decides, at least someone will still be employing one or both of these devices to school their dogs in higher education.
> for my part, i've had two people come over to scold me for using a prong collar on my girl--one lady called it "a crown of thorns"--but they both were backed waaayyy off the moment they drew close enough to chastise because my dog has some behavioral issues and they come with a German Shepherd set of teeth. i feel most certain that those two do-gooders left my periphery understanding why we had that collar, and maybe they were even glad that it was there?


----------



## Meg O'Donovan (Aug 20, 2012)

Haz Othman said:


> Not all of Canada so far just that one province that always does its best to be different..


Haz, if you scroll down this website, you can see there is noise at the federal level (Parliament), and from more than just Q.
http://www.banshockcollars.ca/alerts.php


----------



## Haz Othman (Mar 25, 2013)

There may be noise but our current govt is conservative so not likely to pass that kind of law.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

off topic, but if you want to be an ambassador for prong collars when you are out, you should use them on a dog that is not aggressive in public that people can approach

THAT will make a better impression imo. i have done it and people are surprised when they get close and see it......then you can throw in your story about how it worked

otherwise people may tend only to get the "evil tool for evil dogs" impression as they beat a hasty retreat

that's my take; ymmv


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

i do the same thing with muzzles. the first thing people ask me who have seen the dog without a muzzle is : "did he bite someone ?" 
.......or, "is he sick ?"


----------



## Haz Othman (Mar 25, 2013)

Lots of dogs walking around here with prongs on including mine. No one looks twice or says a word.


----------

