Hello Kitty Hell

Comment from Alicia
Time: June 16, 2007, 8:26 pm

Wow! That is horriable! Why would anyone do that to a dog or any other animal. I like hello kitty but this is wrong!

Comment from Titty
Time: June 16, 2007, 9:42 pm

Okay, I wonder what SHE looks like if her dog has a tattoo. She must have full blown tattoo sleeves and her back has no virgin skin left.

I think the dog killed herself.

Comment from Serena
Time: June 17, 2007, 5:24 am

I am a Hello Kitty fan but you’re right this has crossed the line. Keep in mind this isn’t Sanrio’s project it was a fan’s. I do have a huge Hello Kitty collection and want nothing more in the world but to own all the stuff taht your wife has but I would never go so far as to tattoo an animal! That is just cruel.

Comment from saphiestar
Time: June 17, 2007, 7:41 am

That’s just creepy.

Comment from Neko-chan
Time: June 17, 2007, 7:59 am

I hope that the dog will never turn back home XD
I feel really sad for him….

I think he’s going around the city wondering to cancel that owful tatoo from his back….

Comment from Melanie
Time: June 17, 2007, 8:49 am

http://web.mit.edu/zacheiss/Public/hello_kitty_war.jpg

Comment from Laiane
Time: June 17, 2007, 9:02 am

It could be for identification purposes, in case you need to have “proof of ownership.” To prevent dognapping? I’m just brainstorming.

I have my orange tabby cat microchipped, but I would never tattoo him.

I dislike dogs, but not enough to tattoo one with Hello Kitty.

Comment from Kari Rose
Time: June 17, 2007, 11:30 am

I’m an avid member of BMEzine (body modification site) and this photograph was featured on Modblog.

The owner of the dog didn’t tattoo it because it was cute, it was for identification purposes and they wanted their mark to be unique. I mean, c’mon, you don’t see many dogs with Hello Kitty tattoos, do you?

In fact, the owner of the dog doesn’t even LIKE Hello Kitty, so you shouldn’t brand her a ‘fanatic’

Comment from kookyknut
Time: June 17, 2007, 5:43 pm

I also read modblog, I think the reason they tattooed hello kitty is because the dog was forever humping cats.

Comment from Cade
Time: June 17, 2007, 5:51 pm

That’s beyond cruel. The dog probably ran away from its owner to save itself from the stupidy that was radiating from its owner.

If she wanted a Hello Kitty tattoo so badly she should have gotten one herself. What a friggin’ moron.

Kari Rose: That whole statement is ignorant. You’re right, though, it doesn’t make the owner a Hello Kitty “fanatic”- it just makes her an idiot.

Comment from ABH
Time: June 17, 2007, 6:47 pm

I hope they find that poor pooch!VERY sad! Sometimes people tattoo pets for ID reasons.It’s safe & can make a difference in finding a lost pet.

Comment from Elle
Time: June 17, 2007, 11:50 pm

Get real. Her and the Vet should be prosecuted for animal curelty. Want to tag the dog? Go to any PETA or SPCA site and there a lot of less cruel tagging methods then a tattoo.

The fact it’s HK just makes it beyond stupid. It makes her irresponsible. MOST animals that have to get tattoos, get one that’s small. This is decoration. (And for the record, yes I like HK, but I’ll be damed if I’d put her on ME much less my pet. At the VERY least…shouldn’t she have put Pochacco on it?)

Comment from Meiko
Time: June 18, 2007, 2:11 am

Hello from Thailand!

I’ve read through your blog.. I mean all entries!! and it’s quite nightmare for the one who dislike or hate this little pinky winky kitten (=o=!!!)

I’m not Hello Kitty’s fan and I don’t hate Hello Kitty but! Hello Kitty Tattoo makes me sick! (=[]=!!) Like OMG! even the dog has Hello Kitty tattoo!?!?

but I hope they can find their dog (with Hello Kitty tattoo as a logo!!)

Comment from Kari Rose
Time: June 18, 2007, 3:17 am

The dog went missing quite a long time ago, so it’s either been found or still missing.

Tattooing animals isn’t as bad as it seems. It’s popular for owners who are body modded to modify their animals as long as they are at no extra risk. The poster states that the tattoo was done under anesthesia therefore the dog would of felt nothing.

I know somebody who had a Pikachu head tattooed on the underbelly of their cat, so if it was lost and shaved, she would be more recognizable. Does it make a difference if its Hello Kitty or a Pikachu or a frog or something.

Comment from ABH
Time: June 18, 2007, 6:27 am

DO NOT be so judgemental! The dog was NOT hurt by the tattoo & it might very well help bring it home.It is NOT cruel!!!

Comment from papiercherri
Time: June 18, 2007, 6:30 am

Maybe not a fanatic, just stupid. There are more humane ways to tag a dog. If your going to give a dog a tattoo for identification purposes, why not the owners name and phone number or something? (And even that\’s ridiculous…) Or perhaps the microchip…which actually tracks the pet so you can find them. A f***in\’ HK tattoo…

Comment from liz
Time: June 18, 2007, 1:11 pm

i shaved my dog once…because it was very hot…..
he was soooo pissed.
if i tattooed him a hellokitty, i might have to run for my live.

microchip’s invented for a reason…

Comment from Kari Rose
Time: June 18, 2007, 1:20 pm

I am sorry, but surely microchips cannot be good for your pet. Putting a little device under their skin that can be trackable years later..hmm.

Surprised they haven’t put them in humans yet.

In my opinion I think a electronic microchip getting inserted below a pets skin is worse than a tattoo for identification purposes. I’d honestly tattoo my pet instead of putting a tag under its skin.

Comment from Melissa
Time: June 18, 2007, 2:18 pm

that\’s messed up. Not right at all- if i were to find that dog i would be DAMN sure she never got it back. That\’s abuse- plain and simple…

Comment from Angi
Time: June 19, 2007, 5:51 am

Oh dear… that’s horrible! Poor dog

Comment from Jennifer
Time: June 19, 2007, 2:13 pm

Tattooing a cat on your dog is just perverse.

Comment from Lolly
Time: June 19, 2007, 8:30 pm

Although I know my pooches would look adorable in Hello Kitty pj’s, I would never subject them to wearing a cutie kitty.

Comment from Suzanne
Time: June 19, 2007, 8:59 pm

At first I thought it was messed up but if its for identification purposes, its actually a very good idea. Many vets carry different micro-chip reading devices so you might get a micro-chip imbedded in your pet and then it gets lost and when its found, there will be no record of your pet in the place where its found (do you get what I mean?) because there are more than one micro-chip systems running in the US right now. This is actually an ingenious way to identify your pet. The problem is now that is been released on the net, other people may copy and it may not be so individualized anymore.

Comment from Trish
Time: June 20, 2007, 7:36 pm

That is just CRUEL. A vanity tattoo on a dog is not right! A dog can’t choose to have a tattoo like people. That is animal cruelty!

Comment from Trish
Time: June 20, 2007, 7:38 pm

I also just realized WHERE it is! Near the poor baby’s nipple! WTF? Who DOES that??

Comment from Claudia
Time: June 22, 2007, 12:46 pm

I can’t believe this idiot thought it was ok to tattoo her dog….Hello kitty lover or not, this is just CRUEL. She should be arrested for animal cruelty and the vet should be stripped of their license.

Comment from Stevie
Time: June 25, 2007, 11:04 am

All my dogs are tatooed. Not with Hello Kitty, but they all have ID tatoos. Difficult to remove, easy to read, universally compatible unlike microchip readers,… I know a lot of tatooists if you’re looking for one. BTW - for safety, always on the inner flank or stomach, NEVER the ear. That’s too easy for a thief to chop off. And THAT’s cruel and all too common.

Comment from Bianca
Time: June 25, 2007, 3:26 pm

That is totaly insain and realy sick to tatoo a dog

Pingback from Hello Kitty Dog House: Hello Kitty Hell
Time: July 7, 2007, 5:46 am

[…] it may be better than tattooing a dog with Hello Kitty, it’s not better by much. You have to feel sorry for any dog that must live in a Hello Kitty […]

Comment from d
Time: August 19, 2007, 4:16 pm

so this is the first time i have ever read one of your entries, and you are too funny, best week ever here you come watch out dane cook, there is a man in hello kitty hell commin..

Comment from Melanie
Time: September 13, 2007, 9:24 pm

I have put alot of thought to this and I really dont understnad why you would wont to tattoo your animals and I do understand it would be a good way of I identifacation but and the same time if you were going to do something like that why dont you just get get one of those chips with the taracking divise in it so when he ran away you could have called and they would have told you were he was. A tattoo of the other hand could be coverd up and you would never be able to prove it was you pet in the first place !

Comment from Elise
Time: September 29, 2007, 2:37 pm

In response to Melissa’s last post: how could you cover a tattoo on a dog so that it wouldn’t show? Besides, who cares if it’s a hello kitty tattoo, the dog doesn’t know. I think that a microchip and tattoo are equally as bad. Both the place of insertion of a chip and a tattoo could get infected. If I get my puppy in February, it’s going to be an expensive dog and maybe I would want a tattoo or something so that I could get my dog back if someone took him. If the dog didn’t feel them give the tattoo, then I don’t see what the big deal is. People do a lot worse (i.e.: rubber banding/chopping off tails, ear clipping, etc.) when the dogs can feel it.

Comment from Becca
Time: October 3, 2007, 7:33 am

I have the SAME tattoo as that dog! What a disgrace! lol

Comment from Hope-Elaine Ramos
Time: October 4, 2007, 2:56 pm

I LOVE HELLO KITTY. ANYTHING I CAN GET MY HANDS ON I WILL, WILL BUY. BUT THIS IS STUPID I WOULD NEVER DO THAT TO MY DOG I HOPE THESE PEOPLE GO TO HELL.

Comment from none of your bisness
Time: October 17, 2007, 12:02 pm

you can kill your dog by doin that sick freak

Comment from jeska
Time: October 20, 2007, 1:19 pm

i understand the whole tattoo for identity thing, but a number/ address or just a simple logo design would be more suitable, smaller and less likely to get infected. the fact that there is colour on it proves to me that it has an element of “decoration” to it which in my opinion is unecessary for identification purposes. i like hello kitty but not to that extent. if your gonna do it, get a microchip or a tattoo that is small, painless and suitable for its purpose. cruelty to animals is wrong. full stop.

Comment from Frank
Time: October 23, 2007, 12:39 pm

THE HUMAN SOCIETY RECOMENDS TATTOOS FOR YOUR PETS AND TELLS YOU ABOUT THE DOGS NERVE ENDINGS AND WHY IT DOES NOT HURT THE DOG

Comment from SICK DOGS TATTOO
Time: October 23, 2007, 12:49 pm

NOW THATS A SICK DOG

Comment from Christy
Time: October 30, 2007, 2:02 am

Ya, the dog must had killed itself….. This is horrible and terrible!
I am a Hello Kitty Fan, and had 3 dogs, but I had never done such a sick thing to do it on them! If I am the dog, I would tear off my skin after that tattoo is on me(even though i am a fan) !
Hope that owner would never had her dog back….

Comment from Jo
Time: November 1, 2007, 1:19 pm

What is that orange thing the dog has?

Comment from who cares
Time: November 3, 2007, 10:59 am

I don’t see the big deal. The dog didn’t feel the tattoo and the dog doesn’t see or care about the tattoo. I love my pets and I don’t think it’s so bad. After all, it’s a unique way of identifying it. Plus, that other person was right…there are a few different microchip systems. I mean, the tattoo would be something completely unique so you can prove it’s your animal.

Comment from Ridiculous
Time: November 3, 2007, 6:46 pm

OMG..I have never in my life seen such a ridiculous argument about something so stupid. There is a lot worse going on in this world than to waste your time in a chat room fighting about a HELLO KITTY tattoo. HAHA u all should be ashamed of yourselves. Is everybody in here like 12 and can’t find it in themselves to just say whatever. Who gives a shit besides the owners of the dog and the dog itself. Dogs normally forgive their owners for taking them to the vet to get routine vaccinations. This damn dog was under sedation!!! Are your dogs sedated while getting shots? Go do something worthwhile with your time like help somebody!
I could seriously laugh for a whole day about this.

Comment from jacq
Time: November 6, 2007, 2:13 am

you guys are stupid. if tattooing is ok for people it should be ok For pets.people dont even get put under for tattoos.
pets are hurt/killed giving birth to litters of their young.
guess they shouldnt be allowed to do that either.

Comment from James
Time: November 6, 2007, 6:25 am

I think all of you who think that this is wrong and think that this is animal abuse or cruelty are completely judging somebody you don’t know. Let’s think for a second what we do to ourselves. Women pierce their ears because they think its a custom, it looks pretty, its fun to wear jewelry. But… what about those women who haven’t gotten any piercings? People its called CHOICE. and yes your right that dog didn’t have a choice. but neither did the cows that got tags on their ears, or the cattle that got branded, or the dogs and cats that got spayed or neutered (personally I think anyone who takes those two last things away from a cat or dog is animal cruelty but I know it serves its purpose.) So for those of you who think that this picture is wrong, why don’t you instead think about the reason why this dog owner may have done it. That dog didn’t run away intentionally. I know that my pets which I love very much and take care of them as much as I would my own children have at one point or another gotten out of the house and trying to find them can be very emotional for me. This owner may have opened the door and the dog may have naturally wanted to explore outside it’s territory. With all seriousness, YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK worrying about something like this. Open up your eyes and read carefully, the dog was not hurt. it was sedated and I know for a fact that tattooing dogs and cats is not a new thing for id purposes.

microchip my *&& I can already see it. “Oh look honey a lost puppy, quick go get the microchip scanner! You know the one you bought me for Christmas last year!”

Grow up people.

Comment from James
Time: November 6, 2007, 6:36 am

To be real honest with all of you… I believe that a bunch of people who are “hellokitty” worries me more than a person tattooing their dog that they so much love and with it would come home. do yourselves a favor… feed a starving child or something useful.

Comment from milly
Time: November 8, 2007, 6:22 am

Thats horrible !!!!!!!!!

For the dog ,, how mean

Comment from tulip
Time: November 8, 2007, 9:41 am

I understand wanting to put a tattoo on your pet, for identification purposes. There are alot of cats in my neighborhood that look like my cats, if one of the got out, I’d fear that she’d never come home. A tattoo would at least help identify her.

Ferrets get tattoos frequently, if you go to a pet store and look in the ears (or sometimes under the arm) of the little babies you’ll see one or two little dots. It identifies the breeder they came from.

So, i understand the desire for a tattoo for your pet… but a hello kitty tattoo? That’s just cruel.

Comment from hannah M
Time: November 10, 2007, 12:43 pm

WOW i think thats really bad who would do that to a dog i feel sorry for it. the dog should be taken of them if thats what their doing to it right, it must of hurt as well if it hurts humans then it will hurt it defo

give the dog a REST!

Comment from hm.
Time: November 11, 2007, 10:23 pm

who ever sed the tattoo doesnt hurt the dog is stupid.
they feel pain too. if you got a tattoo it guarenteed to hurt,
and they feel pain more than us. dogs squeal if u cut their
toenail.
they do feel pain. and putting a tattoo on your dog is a really
terrible thing to do. not to mention sad. losers..
micro chips are better. they store info on the dog like its name,
address & number. its not like your just gonna tattoo their
address under the hello kitty tattoo. my god.

Comment from lauren
Time: November 11, 2007, 10:25 pm

i agree with the person above. give them a rest! their not human; theyre compleatly different. dogs are our companions not a hello kitty billboard!!

Comment from Jillian
Time: November 13, 2007, 3:09 am

You are all either ignoring parts of this because you cant read properly or because you want to automatically label someone as an animal abuser, seriously. THE DOG WAS SEDATED. Also, I wouldnt ever put my address, people MOVE you know, Im sure most of you have done that once or twice at least during your lives. Names are also not as reliable. How many female white and brown jack russells do you think have hello kitty tattoo’d on their bellies. Probably not many. Also, the majority of the time that an animal is found its NOT by someone who HAS an ID scanner.
I can assure you the dog doesnt even realize its there, or if it does its hardly worrying about it “OMG what will the other dogs at the park think of THIS!?!”. Please.

Comment from Some Dude
Time: November 13, 2007, 5:34 am

I honestly dont find this THAT bad as someone tattoos their dog.

“who ever sed the tattoo doesnt hurt the dog is stupid.
they feel pain too. if you got a tattoo it guarenteed to hurt,
and they feel pain more than us. dogs squeal if u cut their
toenail”

I saw that in a previous comment.
FIRST.
The dog was SEDATED.
SECOND They only squeal if you cut the nail TOO SHORT.

Get your facts.

I think this is actually a good idea. If the dog is lost, the likelyness of it being found rises because such an odd detail can be described.

This isnt animal cruelty.

Grow up people.
Get your facts.

Comment from Lauren
Time: November 13, 2007, 3:37 pm

Ugh, James’ little thing. If you’re so against animal cruelty and all that, like saying and that. Why don’t you care about the tattooing? You toatally just screwed up your whole point. The dogs don’t deserve that ata ll.

Comment from VolatilePhantom
Time: November 14, 2007, 12:40 am

I agree with both sides of this argument. If the owner just randomly took the dog to the vet to get it a Hello Kitty tattoo because they thot it would be fun, yeah that’s cruelty. But face it people, it IS a good way to identify your animal, and all purebred registered dogs have tattoos as a means of identification, only difference being theirs are letters and/or numbers. It’s done while the dog is unconscious, and some people have their animals tattooed while having their pet spayed/neutered, therefore not putting the animal under anesthetics any more than they have to. I think that this is no more cruel than a microchip or a tag. The only way I would find this offencive would be if some freak just decided that it would be fun to get all sorts of ‘cool tats’ for their favorite poochie. But that is obviously not the case here. So cool it people.

Comment from hm.
Time: November 14, 2007, 11:30 pm

SOME DUDE:
“SECOND They only squeal if you cut the nail TOO SHORT.”

no. i have two dogs and they squeal when i take like even just a bit off when theyre long

but why have a tattoo when you can have a dog tag?
the dog tag provides phone numbers & addresses. tattoos dont.

and theyre also cheaper and BETTER for the dog.

Comment from missie
Time: November 15, 2007, 7:55 am

that poor lickul doggy!!!!
y wud sum1 put a tatoo on a dogs nipple!!!!!!!!!
like people r guna b looking there n e way!!!!!!!!
i dont fink sooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

Comment from suz
Time: November 16, 2007, 2:36 pm

Wow, unbelievable. That’s atrocious, tattooing a dog-with Hello Kitty none the less. It’s one thing to tattoo an unwillingly and unknowingly PERSON, but to do that to an ANIMAL that has no ability to defend themselves [unless they attack, but then that would be grounds for some people to put a poor animal to sleep] is DISGUSTING. PETA should get all over this, pronto.

Comment from Becka
Time: November 16, 2007, 4:18 pm

DOGS CAN GET TATTOOS?!”£!$%&^%!£$^!

Comment from sick dogs tattoo
Time: November 19, 2007, 1:33 am

CHECK THE FACTS- HUMANE SOCIETYS WEB PAGE -”NERVE ENDINGS ARE UNDER THE SKIN, TATTOOS DO NOT GO THAT DEEP IF DONE RIGHT, NO PAIN IS FELT. THEY RECOMEND TATTOOS FOR ID PURPOSES” IF YOU SEEN IT DONE YOU WOULD KNOW IT ONLY CREEPS THEM OUT. I WOULD NOT DO IT TO A SMALL DOG, THEY GET NERVOUS LIKE PEOPLE AND LITTLE ONES SOMETIMES ARE FRAGILE TO STRESS.

Comment from nicki
Time: November 19, 2007, 2:27 pm

u shud be thinking and feeling for the poor dogs that are locked in tiny crates several dogs to one crate, when there being strangled or beaten over the head with sledge hammers or watever they use, to end up on a plate or the cats that are put in boiling water (ALIVE)!!!!!!

Comment from pinkness…?
Time: November 21, 2007, 5:17 am

my god god god. this ish so damn cruel

Comment from hellokittychick#1
Time: November 25, 2007, 11:46 am

ah!! poor doggy!! Noone should a dog like that!

Comment from Flying Potato
Time: December 1, 2007, 7:55 am

Identification purposes? I don’t really get it…
Here in France, pets have to get a tattoo in their ear(just letters and numbers, and it’s painless) and all the tattoos are registered in a national data base, so there are no problems of identification…
I thought it was the same in the US until now :/

Comment from Ashland
Time: December 2, 2007, 4:34 pm

Hello kitty? why, are they sure she got lost? She probably ran away! That poor dog!
And why hello KITTY?

Comment from alice
Time: December 10, 2007, 10:10 am

i actually like hello kitty and found this site on google , but that is cruel !!!! how can you put a tatoo on a dog !!!

Comment from Erika
Time: December 11, 2007, 12:27 pm

The first time I looked at the picture I was thinking, “Wow, I have never in my whole life seen or heard of someone tattooing their dog.”
I never knew that you could.
I thought it was cool in the begining.
But I thought about it and in a way it is animal cruelty.
I don’t know I just think it is wrong.
Wether it was unconcious or not.
:/

Comment from Michell
Time: December 14, 2007, 7:30 pm

Come on peops!!!
Dogs and cats get their ears tattoed with a identificationnumber, at the vet, which isnt done the soft way
Just so you can find the animal if it runs away
So whats the problem in this case, where the dog was under anesthesia?????!!!

Comment from Jessica
Time: December 17, 2007, 1:30 pm

There is absolutely no reason for a dog to have a tattoo for identification purposes. There are microchips with a “unique” serial number for that. That is really cruel.

Comment from jenna
Time: December 21, 2007, 5:16 pm

I don’t see how it is cruel, The dog was under anesthesia and i really doubt it cares about a tattoo on its belly. they tattoo horses lips, i believe most people on hear ave exaggerating by calling this animal cruelty and there is no way that would kill a dog..idiots

Comment from poop
Time: December 22, 2007, 5:40 pm

I do not think that it was right of the owner of the dog in questoin 2 tatto her! I do not wish these people 2 go 2 hell but 4 them 2 think of the stress and pain there pet probebly had 2 go thru. and 4 ur info that is cruel and all those who think not well think again coz it is!!!

Please think of the animals, next time u c people fighting 4 the animals stop and think…………………

ps 2 the porson who last comented ur da idiot not them same 2 all those other ppl who think its all right 2 put animals thru pain and stress!!!!

thanks xoxoxoxoxoxo

Comment from mary & KATI
Time: December 22, 2007, 10:55 pm

who ever did this to this poor dog should die i really mean it….i think u should try it on your nipple or on your dick first & see how it feels and then write back to me and tell me how it feels…?????

Comment from Josh
Time: December 24, 2007, 7:05 pm

I guess everyone didn’t read the part where the tattoo was done at the vet’s so if it was so cruel why did the vet let her do it?

Comment from Nicky
Time: January 1, 2008, 5:05 am

hey there!!!!

i’m a tattoo artist from Greece and it’sd my job to tattoo people!!!
PEOPLE!!!!!!!!! dogs cats and other animals don’t have the choice to think if they want a tattoo like human do!!!!!!
don’t do this to animals!!!!!
the healing progress must have been horrible for this poor animal!!!!!!!

Comment from wyrde
Time: January 2, 2008, 10:34 am

For those that believe ID tags or microchps are enough to identify the pet, they are correct. However, the owner of a pet that is tattooed has additional LEGAL rights in the US that ID tags or microchips do not always deliver. The extent of protection and what constitutes a ‘brand’ varies by state law.

In many jurisdictions criminal felony charges can be brought against individuals that harm, steal, or otherwise impair ownership of a branded animal.

There are also tax reasons, once the animal is branded it becomes legal property and the care and raising it can fall under a business or hobby which is tax deductible.

Those of you that TRULY love your pets should be more than willing to investigate what constitutes branding (tattoo, tagging, freeze or fire brand, etc) in your jurisdiction. It can not only make it easier for a lost pet to be returned, but give that pet and the owner legal protection than an animal would would otherwise not be eligible.

But using hello kitty for a brand? That’s just mean.

./w

Comment from Me
Time: January 3, 2008, 1:10 am

i dont think that tattooing a dog is cruel at all!! actually im thinking of tattooing my dog also she loves the sound of the tattoo gun and is always lying around when its on!

Comment from jasz
Time: January 3, 2008, 9:45 pm

omg i think that was so freakin smart since i love hello kitty and im one of her biggest fan an i was wonderin that who ever did that would u let me know so that i could do that to my kitty but i love it

Comment from Sera
Time: January 4, 2008, 4:02 pm

Why does it seem like nobody is actually reading? Let me spell a few things out.

The. Dog. Was. Under. Anesthesia. And. Under. Veterinary. Care.

“Under Anesthesia” - This means that the dog was unconscious at the time and DID NOT FEEL ANY PAIN IN RELATION TO THE TATTOOING PROCESS.

“Under Veterinary Care” - This means that there was a person trained in maintaining the well-being of animals present during the tattooing process. Surely if it were animal cruelty the veterinarian would have stepped in to stop it.

As a matter of fact, thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of pets are tattooed BY veterinarians, often in the ear WITHOUT anesthesia or sedation. And the process is still LESS painful than many other “culturally acceptable” medical procedures inflicted upon animals - ear cropping, tail docking, and neutering come to mind.

Are dog tags and microchips a better way to identify pets? In some ways, yes, but both have significant disadvantages.

Dog tags are attached to collars. Collars come off. You may never take your dog’s collar off, but that doesn’t mean your dog can’t get it caught on a fence and end up getting out of it, or that someone unscrupulous can’t remove it. Collars with tags are cheap, they’re easy, and most dogs have them (and really, every dog should) - but they can’t be relied upon.

Microchips are a better choice than collars in terms of permanence - your dog is virtually incapable of losing something implanted under its skin. However, they are not visible to the naked eye and the information stored in them is therefore inaccessible to anyone that does not own a microchip scanner - which is the huge majority of the people that may find a missing dog. Even animal shelters don’t all have microchip scanners. So even though your pet is highly unlikely to lose the information stored in its microchip, there’s also a good chance that the person that finds your pet isn’t going to be able to access the information.

Tattooing is just as permanent as a microchip, and the information (while less explicitly identifying than that stored on a microchip) is a great deal more accessible. Many registered purebred dogs are tattooed with their registration number, which could feasibly be used to find you. Dogs that are not valuable registered purebreds are also tattooed, often with small logos or designs that will help identify them. The nature of tattoos limits what you should include in them - a phone number or address would be ill-advised, so it can still be difficult to locate the owners of a found tattooed dog - but it is still an excellent form of identification.

All dogs should wear collars with identifying tags, but they should also have a secondary method of identification - because collars can and do fail. Which secondary methods are used is chosen at the discretion of the dog’s owner. Is tattooing a dog under anesthesia really any more inhumane and unethical than jabbing it with a large needle while it is conscious to implant something under its skin? It is my opinion that it is not. Ideally all dogs would carry all three methods of identification - a lot more dogs would probably find their way back home if they did.

The dog in question is probably the pet of a tattoo artist, which explains why this tattoo is more artistic and whimsical than most ID tattoos. The fact that it is cute and colourful doesn’t decrease its value as an identification mark. This tattoo could be the reason that the dog gets returned to its home and family - isn’t that what you would want?

Comment from Minxie365
Time: January 4, 2008, 6:09 pm

Lets hope they don’t find the dog, and someone caring finds her

Comment from j*
Time: January 8, 2008, 10:38 am

i think i know why the dog ran a way!! poor thing it doesnt matter if it didnt feel a thing it just not right and i dont think it should be legal!

Comment from mel
Time: January 8, 2008, 11:20 am

what the hell is wrong with you!!!!! why did you tattoo your dog??????? you are an idiot!!@! you have no heart you are a cruel person

Comment from April
Time: January 8, 2008, 12:00 pm

ANIMAL CRUELITY.

Comment from Eric
Time: January 11, 2008, 9:47 pm

Thats cool!!

Comment from nick
Time: January 16, 2008, 10:45 am

gettin a tattoo under anesthesia would hurt alot less than being implanted w/a micro chip w/o anesthesia and obviosly this is a person who cares very much 4 his pet otherwise he wouldent even care to find it. so dont judge him you idiots - always worried w/ other peeps buisness

Comment from Mimi
Time: January 17, 2008, 9:04 pm

Everyone needs to read Sera’s comment. EVERYONE.

Comment from BJ
Time: January 18, 2008, 3:09 pm

I have 2 purebred dogs. Both my girls were tattooed on their bellies with a unique tattoo number. As I read this thread, I cant help but wonder who the “idiots” are…

Neither of my girls were sedated when they had theirs done. They were 7 weeks old. My older girl’s isnt as legible because she, quite honestly, was more interested in going to play with her sisters rather than lie with her belly up. My younger girl didn’t move a muscle through the whole time.

A comment about the nails. The reason your dog squeals when you take a little off is because you’ve conditioned them to do so. At one point, you either cut too much or somehow traumatized the dog into thinking nail clipping is scary. Its not because they are hurting. Does it hurt to trim your nails?

Seriously people, tattooing is safe and effective and if they find this dog, you can bet that the dog will be returned to its rightful owner BECAUSE of the tattoo. The dog was probably being altered or something while they did it (which is why I’d think it was sedated) because I know many very responsible, caring, intelligent breeders that dont sedate simply for a tattoo. And there is no difference to the dog whether the tattoo is a bunch of letters and numbers, or a HK face… tell me the difference, please. It’s not any more painful… its a tattoo either way. So why not?

Comment from Zero Tachikoma
Time: January 19, 2008, 10:19 am

The dog was under anaesthetic and a vet was present at the time.
Can anyone tell me where to get this anaesthetic that lasts up to several weeks while the skin heals and the body gets used to the ink?
Also, can anyone provide a reliable guarantee that the vet was not corrupt in some manner?

Comment from bunster
Time: January 19, 2008, 10:48 am

Cool, I dont know what is wr=ong with these people

it’s only a Tatoo,
Im going to take my wife out and get one on her belly so I can find her when she strays

Comment from BJ
Time: January 19, 2008, 3:04 pm

Honestly, tattoos dont take long to heal in dogs (or cats)… several weeks? I’m a little puzzled where you would have got the idea it would take that long. Animals have a very speedy healing mechanism in their skin. That is why one has to be very careful if your cat, for example, gets in a cat fight that they dont get an abcess because the skin heals over “too quickly” and traps infection underneath before it can drain out. Besides that, we’re not talking a large elaborate tattoo. In Canada (and I believe the US as well), for a registered purebred dog, permanent identification is demanded. I believe that it is more than “cruel” to NOT tattoo or microchip, but I still prefer tattoos (call me old school). How many pets are lost every year and never find their way back to their owners? THAT is cruel! Humane societies often tattoo their animals before they’re adopted. Dont you think if it was cruel or painful (neither of which it is), they would stop doing it? Dog’s bodies are not built the same as a humans. Their nerves dont function in the same manner. Remember they are only in the womb for 63 days!! Humans are in there for over 9 mths. They are not humans, no matter how much we love them. They dont think like we do or internalize things like we do. They live in the moment (which is one of the great things about dogs). They dont understand the concept of anger or hate. I’m not saying they dont have feelings, but they dont have feelings like we do. They love with much more of their being than people do. They are truly unconditional. So to equate what a dog goes through to what a human does… it doesn’t work that way. I’m not saying one is more valid than the other, but just that they are different and you will never think like a dog, no matter how hard you try. So suggesting that the dog ran away because of a tattoo at the same time is really mean and uncalled for.

I dont know the vet, but I can bet they know what they’re doing. The way an animal is tattooed (aside from those in the ear) are drawn on with a pen. When my puppy was done at 7 weeks, she didn’t so much as flinch and she wasn’t sedated or under anestetic at all. You can bet that if it hurt in the least, she would have at least moved at some point during the procedure. Unless you have watched it being done, you really cant comment on if it hurts them or not. I’m sorry, but honestly, you’d be talking about something you know nothing about. How could you possibly have an opinion? I would strongly urge you to visit a vet clinic while they are tattooing an animal and watch it done.

If its the very idea that its a HK tattoo that appauls you, well, I guess its a good thing its not your dog. HK tattoo vs registration tattoo… no difference as far as how the dog looks at it. I’m not saying I’d rush out and get a HK tattoo on my pet, but that was the owners choice. At least it serves a purpose, unlike some of the things we subject our best friends to (like dressing them up in little outfits and carrying them in a handbag).

Comment from kittypearl
Time: January 19, 2008, 6:08 pm

Why would they tattoo there dog? If they like hellokitty that much then why don’t they get themselves tattooed.

I love hellokitty and they probably do too but the reason why they got away with that was simply because there was not any police permission or contacts . Get what I am saying? Thanks:) From kittypearl

Comment from deltabob
Time: January 24, 2008, 7:53 pm

I’ve had a dog which was tattooed for ID reasons. She was a greyhound/coonhound mix. In the area where I grew up, these dogs were raced; however, it was through a path in the woods and not on a track.

The dogs were not kept as race dogs are - they were family pets. The dogs were tattooed to remove any question of ownership at the finish.

I assisted in having my dog’s ear tattooed as well as assisting with the tattoos of other dogs.

Like people, some animals tolerated the process better than others.
My dog showed very little discomfort during her tattoo.

The argument can always be made that the animal did not consent to the tattoo thus making it wrong to do.

The same argument can be made for piercing the ears of a very young child or even the keeping of a pet in general.

I don’t think people should tattoo an animial for strictly cosmetic purposes, however there are not likely to be other Jack Russell Terriers with a HelloKitty tattoo, so it would be a boon in identifying the animal.

Comment from calm down
Time: January 28, 2008, 5:11 am

she wrote “done by me at the vet under anesthesia”

so calm down its just a dog. he didn’t felt anything when it was made and I’m sure the dog doesn’t even know that its there. If he knows he will not care about it. its just a tattoo nothing more.

Comment from kaytee
Time: January 30, 2008, 7:43 pm

ok. i work at a tattoo shop and am heavily tattooed. tattooing a dog for identification purposes is way different than an actual tattooed design. tattooed id numbers are single line, tested ink, etc…. single line heals fast and is virtually painless in the healing phase. the techniques used to color and fill an area are completely different, and anyone who has had a tattoo knows that it hurts like hell for at least 3 days afterwards…not to mention the possibility of infection or abscess, or the possibility that your dog might have a reaction to the ink, which does contain human-safe trace amounts of heavy metals, in some instances. i am an avid tattoo collector, and there is no way in hell that i would ever even consider putting my two dogs under the needle, anesthetic or no. its just plain cruel. a dog is a life that you have accepted responsibility for, essentially your child. i wouldn’t take my child to get tattooed, why would i do that to my dog?!?! a pet is not an accessory or flesh to practice your technique on…this is definately cruelty to an animal.

Comment from Skysong May
Time: February 2, 2008, 5:43 am

Tatoo? Verry badd. Why make dog were silly kitty? You are silly Kaytee. Tatoos bad people too.

Comment from Myranda
Time: February 2, 2008, 3:03 pm

I don’t really think that this Hello Kitty tattoo is really attractive, especially on this dog..
But tattooing your dog isn’t animal cruelty, that’s for sure.
My cousins had their dog’s names tattooed in Japanese on the inside of one of the back legs. (Why Japanese, I don’t know; they’re Mexican..)
In any case, this particular tattoo to be on this dog is truly Hello Kitty Fanatic.

Comment from kitty
Time: February 2, 2008, 5:15 pm

i think it is absulutly adorable, that tatoo matches my cats tattoo and mine.

Comment from Skysong May
Time: February 3, 2008, 6:45 am

I have dog named kameeche. He were juct ID number, an happy. No need for Silly kitty. Just ID. Japan would not be this cruel. Kaytee bad influence on us. Tattoo ugly. Not cute Kitty. I never calm down!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comment from mae
Time: February 6, 2008, 11:10 am

Um, Lol, I’m doin my english paper on “chipping” your animal’s in addition to collaring them. Lol, if someone was reeeeaaaaalllllly desparate, couldn’t they remove the tatoo or go over it? IMO, using a chip is probably better and more accurate. Did they ever find their dog?

Comment from Heather
Time: February 6, 2008, 11:41 am

I don’t really think this is a big deal. Before microchiping breeders would tattoo a symbol on their dogs and cows bumbs were burnt and no one thought twice. At least she went to the vet and the dog was under! Think about it….its wrong to let your 5 year old daughter wear make up and get highlights!!! Chill out!

Comment from a veterinary professional
Time: February 6, 2008, 9:44 pm

Seriously, chill out. Dogs have been getting tattooed at shelters for identification for years….and when a vet tattooos ID numbers on a dog it’s under anesthesia…allowing an owner to ID something they enjoy other than lousy sloppy numbers done by a non professional tattoo artist aka the vet is by all means just fine!!! And, why judge an individual with tattoos?? Whoever did in the previous comments is very ignorant beyond belief…and should be ashamed of their idiocity .

Comment from Cerii
Time: February 7, 2008, 11:44 am

Thats awful - poor dog, it may have been painful as you can see the redness around the tatoo.

Comment from Fujiko
Time: February 9, 2008, 1:15 am

This is like taking a family member to tattoo him/her without his/her consent.

Imagine, the dog felt like as if it had been abducted by aliens and woke up in a “normal” state but not actually not the same life anymore.

Comment from Joie Martz
Time: February 15, 2008, 1:02 am

If the tattooing process for animals doesn’t hurt, then why the need for sedation?

Comment from carol
Time: February 18, 2008, 1:26 pm

Let’s see….maybe we need to sedate dogs for tatoos, due to the fact that they can’t sit still…

Comment from HKitty
Time: February 27, 2008, 9:52 pm

Dogs should not have tattoos period.

Comment from babychococat123
Time: February 28, 2008, 7:58 am

it is sad that the owner did that to the dog…stupid

but ummm…other dogs are not going to make fun of that that dog that has that tatto just cause of that tattoo!!they wont even care really…dogs dont judge by the apperence…probally character

Comment from andophiroxia
Time: March 4, 2008, 1:22 pm

I thought it was about butt-sniffing to them and peeing on bushes.

Comment from Mari
Time: March 24, 2008, 6:05 pm

call the ASPCA

Comment from CryingMisery
Time: March 26, 2008, 7:47 am

That is just SO evil! Pour dog! That is animal cruelty! Animal abuse! Oh my, that makes me so angry :@

Comment from babewithbrains#1
Time: March 28, 2008, 11:27 am

poor dogs. they would have their worst enemy tatooed on them.

Comment from ihua
Time: April 15, 2008, 12:53 pm

If u think thats bad then what about cows.
Think about all the little cows (moo moos)
that get branded. They dont even get anesthesia.
At least the dog got anesthesia.
I dont think dogs need tatoos
but there are so many more important things to worry about than that

Comment from Danielle French
Time: April 17, 2008, 4:10 pm

thats just to wrong i would never let any of my dogs go through that pain knowen that they dont like the character but i would get it on me bu tnot any of my dogs thats just crazy why would any crazy person would want to do that to a poor inacent dog.i wonder how they kept him still???????????

Comment from Yui
Time: April 23, 2008, 9:25 am

You are sick to tattoo your dog. You should be reported to animal cruelty. What did that dog ever do to you!!!???

Comment from ahslee
Time: April 28, 2008, 8:57 am

poor dog Awwwwwwww!!!!!!

Comment from jennifer
Time: April 29, 2008, 10:35 pm

personally, i think its really cute. i am a 100% animal lover and totally against animal abuse, but really, this is not animal abuse at all. the dog was sedated! obviously no one here knows what sedated means- the dog is asleep AND CANT FEEL ANYTHING. they wake up and they don’t even know the difference. even if she did notice, doubt she would care, common now its not like dogs and cats are running around trying to look good for each other. They don’t care what they look like. if the dog didn’t feel anything, then there is nothing to worry about and is deffinetly not animal abuse. i think it is awesome, whether it may be for identification purposes or even just for the hell of it. It is very unique and shows a strong relationship between the dog and it’s owner. I love it.
must have been expensive though.

Comment from Markus
Time: May 1, 2008, 3:23 am

I bet my girl wont have any problems at all, I bet she will beg for me to get at tatto like that !! *Screem*

Comment from nessa
Time: May 4, 2008, 11:46 am

a tattoo on ur dog thats just WRONG!

Comment from cenovis
Time: May 7, 2008, 2:24 am

@ Jennifer

You are such a stupid ditz. I really try hard not to insult people on forums but you really take the cake. Animals do not try to look good for one another? Of course they do, you retard. There are plenty of studies documenting animal mating habits, and YES color and pattern are a BIG DEAL when it comes to choosing mates. It’s all an indication of your genes. It also affects social hierarchy, and a multitude of other aspects in the animals life, JUST LIKE WITH HUMANS.

But that’s not even the point. The point is, when you’ve made the decision to own an animal you are supposed to do whats BEST for the animal, not treat it like a fashion accessory. Anesthesia for animals is very risky business because their metabolisms are so high. There’s a very fine line between keeping the animal under and causing it harm. And even then, do you think tattoos heal over night? No. The animal is still going to feel the pain when it wakes up.

I see several people trying to make a case against microchips be because of A) Government conspiracy (which I won’t address because if anyone believes this BS they should be demoted from the human race); or B) there are multiple scanners in use…

Well Sherlock, if the average internet user knows this, I’m pretty sure the Humane Society and vets know this too. They’ll check for more than one. And more likely than not, if you got your pet chipped in a particular city or state, vets around the same area will use the same scanner. Unless you think your dog is going to run away cross-country, you’re safe. And yes, if you change your address it’s YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to register that change with your veterinarian and the appropriate local counsels.

By the way, the health risks of getting your dog chipped are practically NIL. They are very, very small implants. About the size of a grain of rice. If you actually did any research on the matter (which you should, if you have pets) you would make less of an ass out of yourself.

Finally, this tattoo is obviously a vanity tattoo and not a real identification tattoo because REAL ID tattoos are made up of unique alpha-numeric characters which are entered into a national database. A HK tattoo is purely stupid vanity.

Comment from Dusty
Time: May 7, 2008, 10:48 am

I don’t see why it’s so cruel. It was done with a veterinarian present, and while the dog was under anesthesia ( as said in owners posted ad. READ IT!). It couldn’t have been any more painful than the identification number tattoos that almost all of registered breeders put on their puppies before selling them. Those I.D. #’s are usually more than 5 numbers long, as opposed to a small Hello Kitty tattoo. I don’t see what’s wrong with that.

Comment from Dusty
Time: May 7, 2008, 10:50 am

By the way, I think it’s ADORABLE!!!

Comment from Finbarr
Time: May 12, 2008, 1:12 am

Ideally microchips are great. They hurt no more than any other type of injection (Before anyone has a go at me i know the needle is bigger but is is also very very sharp, therefore less pain and a dogs skin is less sensitive that that of a human_ i could go all sciencey here about pain receptors etc but if your interested look it up). However, there is a growing trend with dog snatchers to cut out microchips. Therefore having an identification tattoo as well as a microchip is a good idea on a pedigree dog. No pain no gain. As for HK tattoo because its not registrable on a database its just as useful as the actual picture of the terrier. So HK no identification tat yes!!