CarX Auto Service Will Change Your Oil, Give You A Puppy

Kari sent us this photo she took last night in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. We’ll give them points for finding a unique promotional angle, but we wonder if they saw sales increase or drop off? Update: is it legal to give away animals as a store promotion?

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. jwissick says:

    Not cool.

    • brent_r says:

      @jwissick: Really?
      First thing I said upon seeing it was “awesome”.

      I don’t see any problem with this.
      The Owner or Employee’s dogs had some puppies.
      They can’t take care of them all, so, they’re giving them away.
      Puppies get a new home.

      • GoVegan says:

        @brent_r: You have no idea what the puppies are getting. Animal testing laboratories routinely comb ads for free animals and you never know if that person you gave the animal to will abuse it. If you are the guardian of an animal you have an obligation to try to find a good home for that animals babies. Purchasing an oil change does not guarantee a good home by any stretch of the imagination. This is a sick promotion.

        • Kloud says:

          @GoVegan: Well by golly I think you should fire off an EECB to them right now.

        • nicless says:

          @GoVegan: Yeah, I know that when I need a puppy to test on, I’m getting my oil changed here

        • Real Cheese Flavor says:

          @GoVegan: Thank you for the early morning laugh.

          The mental picture of big ebil testing labs sending people out posing as ordinary folks interested in adopting pets to get their testing stock is pretty chuckleworthy.

          • mobiuschic42 says:

            @Real Cheese Flavor (et al): Well, whether or not it’s a testing lab (which is a little out there), when you give an animal to a random person without checking them out, you’re putting the animal in danger.

            GoVegan has a point, though (s)he didn’t really need to color it with the “evil lab” angle…people are crappy enough without making up nefarious scientists.

        • Raekwon says:

          @GoVegan: Sweet! and I was looking for some puppies to make me a new coat too.

        • animeredith says:

          @GoVegan: I don’t know why people are jumping on your back here.It’s true that labs do this sometimes. However, I think it’s far more likely for the puppies to just end up in a shitty home, one where the kids were all “OMG Daddy get us a free puppy!”, but then forget all about their new “toy” in a couple of weeks.

          Animals are never a good idea as a gift, whether it be birthdays, Christmas, or Easter. And they are CERTAINLY not a good “free giveaway”. They are living, breathing creatures who deserve good homes with devoted owners, not assholes looking for a freebie.

          • Phydeaux says:

            @animeredith: People are jumping on his back because it’s PRECISELY what we’d expect to hear from someone named “GoVegan”.

            After tolerating militant vegans at a liberal arts college for four years, I rate them down there with radical religious fundamentalists and conservatives, militant atheists and Mac fanatics. Even if I do love my Mac.

            I’m just sayin’.

            • GoVegan says:

              @Phydeaux: Lets put your college education to the test and let us know exactly what was militant about my statement. Was critical thinking offered as a subject?

        • frodo_35 says:

          Please post your address I would love to know where to drop the puppies the stray mutt had behind my shed. As the local county animal is pretty bad I was thinking of going to wallmart and wasting an afternoon giving them away in stead of leting them just run wild or shooting them. But now I know there is someone like you out there. Please put your address where your mouth is. If you are to far from me I am sure there are some local people who would be glad to drop off a few strays to you.

        • SBR249 says:

          @GoVegan: I doubt testing labs will comb free animal ads for puppies to test. Lab testing animals have very strigent requirements in terms of pedigree, breed., history, characteristics, etc They can’t just do testing on any random speciment picked up on the street, that would likely result in unusable data.

      • mythago says:

        @brent_r: I think you can step back a bit and ask why the owner or employee is letting their dog have puppies they can’t keep.

    • humphrmi says:

      @jwissick: What if they’re giving away free plush toy puppies? Have you stopped in to ask? Or just assuming that the sign means “live” puppies?

      [yhst-94528393123852.stores.yahoo.net]

    • Wormfather is Wormfather says:

      @jwissick: I dont think the promotion or article is a problem, but you’d think the Consumerist would learn about even mentioning dogs after this backlash…

      [consumerist.com]

  2. EllenRose says:

    Meh. So business is going to the dogs in the current economy?

  3. albokay says:

    must be a way to drum up some controversy in order to get there name out. Animal rights will be all over this.

  4. Citron says:

    That can’t be real. It doesn’t make any sense. I wonder if someone pranked their signage.

  5. Knippschild says:

    In all honest, it’s probably a plush animal.

    dogs are generally fairly expensive, so “any purchase”… so if I buy the cheapest item there, I get a baby canine that might be worth three, four times that?

  6. EdaDiores says:

    I don’t see an issue here. So the shop owners dog had a litter of pups. He doesn’t want them obviously. Why not advertise your company and take care of a personal problem at the same time? At least he’s trying to find homes for the pups instead of leaving them at the pound where there probably gonna be put down if they don’t get a home. If I was him I’d probably do that or something similar.

    • aerialmaps says:

      @EdaDiores: I don’t think these hypothetical puppies are necessarily better off with random people getting service on their car than at the pound. At a shelter they’d at least be vaccinated, spayed/neutered, their potential owners would have to go through some kind of screening process to insure that they’re able to take proper care of them and many shelters and rescue organizations offer to take back any pets in the future if for some reason down the line you can no longer take care of them. Somehow I doubt Mr. CarX up there would take as to kindly to puppies being returned to his store after someone impulsively took one home after their last tune-up without consulting their spouse/roommate/parents or realizing how much work, time and money they cost. Plus, when someone gives away an animal for “free,” there are all kinds of horrible places they could potentially end up (labs, dog fighting, someone’s dinner?!). I think it’s one thing to give away complimentary items to bring customers in, but it’s shady when you’re dealing with living, sentient beings.

      However, I’m betting (hoping) that this more than likely isn’t real anyway (or perhaps is a promotion with stuffed puppies, as previously mentioned).@EdaDiores:

    • Oranges w/ Cheese says:

      @EdaDiores: Because its irresponsible. You don’t hand off puppies to whoever walks into your shop.
      At least, not if you care for them in the slightest.

    • socialSTD says:

      @EdaDiores:

      Showing up and getting an oil change should not be the basis of whether or not you can give a dog a good home. There are plenty of shelters and rescues around that will take the puppies in. They would not sit in a pound and be put down. Puppies find good homes quickly, it’s the older dogs that they unfortunately have difficulty finding homes.

      • mac-phisto says:

        @socialSTD: oh, i dunno. around me, the activists got hold of most of the shelters & how even puppies have a hard time finding a good home.

        why? b/c no home is good enough. have kids? NO PUPPY FOR YOU! no fence? NO PUPPY FOR YOU! work during the day? …i think you get the idea.

        • animeredith says:

          @mac-phisto: That’s kind of a misconception about shelters, and usually I hear it from people who didn’t have good enough homes and are bitter, like the lady I talked to who never,ever to her cats to the vet and couldn’t understand why they wouldn’t give her another one. Not saying you’re bitter, just that you’ve probably talked to someone who was.

          I mean, if you’re at work all day you most definitely shouldn’t have a puppy anyway, unless you’re willing to hire someone to walk it every few hours. They need to pee a lot! But other than that, they try to find a dog that fits with the owner. If you have kids, then obviously they’re not going to give you the dog that doesn’t do well with kids, right?

          Shelters have to have restrictions in place, or they end up with yahoos who just stick them right back into the system. But they definitely do WANT them to get into homes. It’s hard, and emotionally stressful, to see animals get put down every day.

          NEUTER AND SPAY, EVERYONE!

          • drfaustus71 says:

            @animeredith: But I don’t wanna get spayed or neutered! :)

          • mac-phisto says:

            @animeredith: i understand the point of restrictions on adoptions, but here in NW CT, the joke is that it’s easier to adopt a kid than a pet. & from my experience, that’s true at a good number of shelters.

            there are still some shelters out there that don’t require 10-page applications, site visits to your home, vet & personal references & i support those shelters. but what i’ve found is that a highly restrictive application process usually occurs at no-kill shelters that have a wealth of foster homes for adoptees. funny how they have trouble placing pets if you don’t meet their stringent criteria, but they have no problem passing off a dozen animals on a foster family (i know one woman who currently houses 20 pets for a bridgeport-area shelter).

            here’s the thing: not adopting a pet out to a family doesn’t stop them from getting a pet if they want one (whether or not they are “responsible owners”). there are plenty of other avenues to get a pet that don’t involve a lengthy approval process. a co-worker of mine has two young children that wanted a puppy. she couldn’t find a shelter willing to adopt out a pet to her – they always had an excuse as to why she failed the screening. she finally gave up & bought a puppy from a breeder.

            furthermore, there’s no indication that the approval process even works. my co-worker still has her puppy 2 years later & he’s happy as could be. i failed the test at 3 shelters before i adopted my 2nd cat (yes, i already had 1, but evidently couldn’t take care of 2). i still have both 6 years later, they’ve each been neutered/spayed, they are up-to-date on their shots & they have a great home. i’m not bitter – i’m glad i found oliver, but i can’t help but think that 3 shelters said i couldn’t have a cat in need of a home, even though i am (& was at the time) a responsible owner.

            & they wonder why they have problems placing animals. here’s an idea, instead of trying to predict who is responsible & who is not with an imperfect process that inevitably is going to weed out as many good prospective owners as bad ones, why not reduce the restrictions & implement programs to aide new owners in becoming responsible?

          • sophistiKate says:

            @animeredith:
            I disagree that overly-picky shelters are merely a misconception.

            To adopt my first cat (I now have 2), I had to sign a document stating that the shelter could perform an unannounced site visit to my home at any time during my pet’s life. I firmly believe they have no right to ask something like that.

  7. unpolloloco says:

    Sounds like the owner was trying to get rid of puppies – way more likely for someone to take one if its free with purchase than free.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Having lived in Tennessee and rural Mississippi all my life, this doesn’t really shock me. I’ve been in at least two or three backwoods gas station/bait shop/garages with puppies just free for the taking. They’d usually let you take the mother as well, if you asked. AND they didn’t even make you buy anything. =}

  9. bastion72 says:

    Maybe he should get the dog fixed?

    • Oranges w/ Cheese says:

      @bastion72: People are too stupid for that. “It shows the kids how life is made!” and all that shit.

      I wish I could find everyone who irresponsibly breeds their animals and shove THEM in a 2×2 stainless steel cage for a week and let them see how it feels.

    • madanthony says:

      @bastion72:

      It is possible that the puppies were born to a stray or something and the owner didn’t have control over it.

      I got my (then)kitten from a friend who rescued them from a feral cat that gave birth behind his college dorm.

    • Phydeaux says:

      @bastion72: Without Bob Barker, how will the world know? How. Will. The. World. Know.

  10. silver-bolt says:

    Animals are property, and can be given away as a promotion like any other property (Unless there is a law specifically against that, natch). But the thing is, how often does that happen that there would be a cause to legislate it? How close would the government get to interfering with personal property rights to decide to who and when and how someone can give away their property, short of maltreatment of the animal? To damn far on the wrong side.

    Disclaimer: I am an animal lover, but a realist. There’s a different between ideal, and what is real in regards to laws.

    • bubbledumpster says:

      @silver-bolt: Not in Boulder; Berkeley; West Hollywood; Rhode Island; Sherwood, AR; Menomonee Falls, WI; Amherst, MA; Woodstock, NY; San Francisco; Marin County, CA; Sebastopol, CA; Wanaque, NJ; Windsor, ON; Albany, CA; St. Louis; Bloomington, IN; Santa Clara County, CA; Imperial Beach, CA, or San Jose, CA.

      There, people are considered ‘Animal Guardians’, not owners.

    • Anonymous says:

      @silver-bolt: In the state of Virginia and the city of Berkeley pets are not property; rather, owners are considered guardians. Thus, their responsibility is not simply to prevent their pets from damaging others (or the property of others) but also to prevent unreasonable damage to their pets. There may be more states or cities which have instituted guardianship policies.

      There is actually an excellent resource on laws relating to dogs, it is the only aptly named legal text you’ll ever encounter:
      Dog Law (by Nolo Press)

  11. PatrickIs2Smart says:

    I’m down for an oil change, but only if it’s one of those Shiba Inu pups… those little buggers are damn cute.

  12. GoVegan says:

    Let us hope that this is some kind of gimmick and it is a toy puppy or something like that and not a real one. It would be immoral and just plain sick for a store to give away a puppy with a purchase. We have an obligation to do everything within our power to ensure that any animals we need to give away will go to a responsible and caring home.

    • Jaynor says:

      @GoVegan: There are far more puppies and kittens than potential owners out there. Having your animals Spayed and Neutered (thanks Bob Barker) is the greater responsibility.

      If a store manager has a litter of puppies to get rid of this probably beats tossing a sack of them into the river, turning them loose in a forest preserve or using them for batting practice (I know these are terrible things – they’re also alternatives that people use when they’re saddled with unwanted animals). I imagine that you’d actually probably get people who wanted pets accepting these.

      • GoVegan says:

        @Jaynor: It just the idea of getting a free puppy with purchase that doesn’t seem right. If the owner of the sign were to put something like “puppies available for a great home” it would be much better. This sign makes it seem like you are entitled to a puppy upon purchase. As terrible as they are, most animal shelters do have a screening process in order to adopt an animal. A good shelter will also ensure that the puppies guardian will get the puppy shots and have it spayed or neutered within a certain period of time. I do see a lot of “no kill” animal shelters now but they seem to have their problems as well. I agree that Bob Barker has done a lot of work to get people to care for their animals and he should be commended.

      • Oranges w/ Cheese says:

        @Jaynor: They may “want” a puppy (who doesn’t!) but that doesn’t ensure they’re adequately equipped to OWN one.

        There’s a difference, and most adoption centers and shelters will “vet” the owners before letting them take a pet home.

        It’s supposed to be a Forever Home, not “this puppy grew up into a dog and now I don’t like it Mamma!”

    • HFC says:

      @GoVegan: Maybe they’re giving away free stuffed puppies! The owner may also be a taxidermist. That’s the best of both worlds. Looks and feels like a puppy, never gets bigger, no need to take it for a walk. Maybe they even come in different poses and settings. I want mine digging through a trash can… oooh, or eating from a litter box!

  13. Anonymous says:

    Think tongue in cheek here peeps. Get your animal rights undies out of a bundle. Even if he is giving away puppies, what makes you think he is not qualifying his new owners? More than likely, this poor guy is frustrated with the lack of business lately and other economic woes. Everybody loves puppies – he is probably trying to get some attention. If you are not from WI or the Midwest, you may not be familiar with the dry wit and take everything with a grain of salt attitude. It’s funny, not criminal.

  14. themikebrown says:

    Though I personally think that’s a unique and interesting promotion, and also find it pretty funny, I know there are going to be people out there who will strongly disagree with my opinion.

    This is going to get really bad…

  15. TPK says:

    While driving to work one day, I saw a hand-written sign on the side of the road that said:

    “Kittens for Sale – $20″

    I laughed the whole rest of the way to work!

    :-D

  16. Corporate-Shill says:

    Stuffed Puppies?

    Texaco was giving away Tigers when I was a kid. Stuffed Tigers. I didn’t understand the difference and was major disappointed when my Tiger didn’t growl and purr.

  17. Morticia says:

    I’m picking it’s a soft toy puppy too. Unless they have one of those ghastly puppy mills, they would run out pretty quick.

  18. Marshfield says:

    Puppies can be used as positive or negative motivators. Like at this Seattle restaurant I visited recently:

    [www.flickr.com]

  19. KStrike155 says:

    I don’t understand why people are getting so upset over this. I see signs all the time advertising free puppies or kittens. What’s the difference if somone is giving them away with purcahse?

    Hell it might be even better, at least you would know the person has enough money to have their car serviced.

    • Oranges w/ Cheese says:

      @KStrike155: I get upset with those too because 1) it means they were irresponsible and didn’t get their animal fixed and 2) they’re just unilaterally handing them out to whoever comes up to them.

      Both cases, bad outcome for kitties.

      • animeredith says:

        @Oranges w/ Cheese: This.

        Just because everyone else is doing it doesn’t make it right!

        You’d be surprised at how many people who get a free/cheap animal will then not spend anything on its health, upkeep, supplies, etc because they rationalize that they only spent X dollars on it and therefore shouldn’t have to spend more money than it cost getting it spayed/shots/toys/etc. I’ve talked to vet techs about it before, and they say it’s a fairly common protest from customers.

      • humphrmi says:

        @Oranges w/ Cheese: Still, that’s a pretty presumptuous reason to get upset. You don’t know the whole story, you just see a picture of a sign. What if… (and I’m only repeating what others have posted here…)

        1) They are toy (stuffed) puppies.
        2) The owner found them stray behind his store, and had nothing to do with their birth or the lack of the parent’s birth control.

        We as a society spend too much time and energy getting enraged about things that we know nothing about, and then even more energy getting enraged at people who aren’t wasting their time getting enraged with them.

  20. mavkato says:

    maybe it is a promotion with the local humane society, where they waive the adoption fee or something.

    • mike says:

      @mavkato: True. Without more info, we’re left assuming (I’m looking at you GoVegan).

      My take is this is some family establishment that had a litter of puppies that weren’t expected. What’s the difference between a oil change place and my next door neighbor asking me if I want a puppy?

      My neighbor probably didn’t take it to the vet to get shots and all that but that’s the responsibility to the dog owner. Now, if my neighbor had these puppies for a few months, then maybe it’d be an issue. But I don’t see anything wrong with a company doing something that my neighbor would do.

      Heck, I think it’d be worse if he put an ad out on craigslist! At least in the store, the guy might know the people that stop in.

  21. homerjay- Smiling politely says:

    This reminds me, I need to get an oil change AND get my dog spayed.
    Thanks, Consumerist!

  22. pgh9fan says:

    The service station probably had an employee or owner who had some puppies to give away. I get the feeling that to get a puppy you probably didn’t even have to get the oil change. Methinks you could have just asked for one of the cute little buggers.

  23. WiglyWorm must cease and decist says:

    Why, exactly, is it so wrong for someone to give away a free puppy with purchase?

    People give away free dogs all the time, if their dog has a litter. So this business man is trying to give them away, and just happens to be the owner of a large sign on a major road, giving him much better odds he’ll actually get rid of all the puppies and not have any left behind that he doesn’t want/can’t take care of.

    Perhaps you’d all rather he gave them to a shelter where they could be euthanized if they weren’t adopted expediently?

  24. ImeldaLoralee says:

    Where in Oak Creek was this particular station? I have a friend that lives in the area that I want to go check out what the scoop is on this story.

  25. polyeaster says:

    Yeah I think it is legal to give away free puppies…although as a responsible pet owner, I would never give my puppies to someone who’d be willing to go to a repair shop that gives away puppies:0 Also…are there legal issues resulting from them running out of puppies? What if I want my free puppy with purchase and they’re all gone? Or what if I get one and it’s defective…

  26. CountryJustice says:

    OMGPUPPIEZ!!!11!

    Seriously though, I can see both sides of it. Is this any different than someone giving away puppies via the newspaper classifieds? On the other hand, is this an ethical way to drum up business?

    • floraposte says:

      @CountryJustice: I’m a little creeped out by the prospect of this working well enough that somebody there is breeding their dog just to produce puppies for promotional purposes.

  27. Anonymous says:

    Yes it’s legal. But don’t you think it might be easier to get rid of the unwanted puppies by just making them free without any purchase required like millions of people do all over the world every day? He’s probably got some horrendous puppy mill operating somewhere and he uses the poor things to lure in business. Great thing to do in this day and age when animals in shelters are being put down – 1 every 7 seconds.

  28. snazz says:

    could they have meant a free slush puppy?! gas stations are the only place that i know of that have them…

    • VigilanteKitteh says:

      @snazz: yeah! Thanks for reminding me of that. It could very well be a slush puppy. We have them in many places here in Canada : gas stations, corner stores, ice cream stands, fast food places.

  29. synergy says:

    As someone else already said, animals are property and can be given away in any way the owner sees fit. This is no different than giving away animals by putting an ad in the paper. Almost all people who put out an ad just hand over the animal and don’t do a “screening” or “background check” or any of that other nonsense.

  30. AD8BC says:

    Hey guys,

    What if this litter of dogs just happened to show up on his doorstep? Or a neighborhood bitch (sorry!) happened to have a litter behind their dumpster?

    Way to automatically blame the shop owner here. It may not have even been his dog.

  31. TheUncleBob says:

    I’m interested in all the people talking about how horrible it is that the shopowner is giving away puppies and then going on to say how the owner should have had his dog’s genitals mutilated. Nice double standard there.

    • madanthony says:

      @TheUncleBob:

      People feel that animals should have good homes. That means 1)they want to make sure that animals that have been born find good homes and 2)that the birth of unwanted animals are limited, so that there aren’t a bunch of unwanted animals that end up being strays or put to sleep.

      It’s no different than helping foster kids while promoting condom usage.

    • h3llc4t, breaker of office dress codes says:

      @TheUncleBob: Ah, the old “gender mutilation” tactic.
      For starters, spaying and neutering is by no means “mutilation”. They are routine procedures (and relatively simple ones at that) that have been done ad infinitum. I would hazard a guess based on my vet intern experience that they are the most common surgical procedure for domestic cats and dogs. We’re not talking experimental surgery here; vets have this down to an art by the time that they begin practicing.
      Secondly, animals that have been altered have longer lifespans and have much lower risk of various maladies; kind of hard to get testicular cancer when you don’t have testes any more, you know? Not only that, but it often lowers aggression levels, curbs marking problems, and eliminates the risk of complications due to pregnancy or fights during mating season.
      And, for those of you concerned about how Ol’ Blue is going to feel without his nads, you can always have the surgeon implant Neuticles: [www.neuticles.com]

      Ear cropping is mutilation. Tail docking is mutilation. A surgery that can prolong your pet’s life? Not so much.

      • rhinestonedarling says:

        @h3llc4t: Drives me crazy. I know several men who have had vasectomies- does that mean they are mutilated too? What about people who have their appendices or tonsils removed? Mutilated? Come on.

        • h3llc4t, breaker of office dress codes says:

          @rhinestonedarling: Oh, I know. After all my years working for animal welfare, about the only reasonable excuse I’d heard to not get an animal spayed or neutered (aside from being a show dog or cat, whole other issue there) was that the animal might not survive the anesthesia. That’s it.

          I understand that animals do not have the ability to choose this procedure, or object to it. In the spirit of being their guardian for the rest of that animal’s life, however, I feel it is the owner’s responsibility to do what they can to make that life as long and happy as possible.
          And with that…
          /end soapbox
          /start pita and hummus

          • HFC says:

            @h3llc4t: Let me preface this by saying that I don’t actually have anything against spaying and neutering animals. My wife’s cat is spayed, no big deal.

            Now, on to the animals live longer comment. This is from Wikipedia, which, I know, isn’t a definitive source of information and has been known to be misleading and/or wrong.

            Disadvantages

            General

            * As with any surgical procedure, immediate complications of neutering include the usual anesthetic and surgical complications, such as bleeding and infection. These risks are relatively low in routine spaying and neutering; however, they may be increased for some animals due to other pre-existing health factors.

            * Neutered dogs and cats of both genders have an increased risk of obesity. Theories for this include reduced metabolism, reduced activity, and eating more due to altered feeding behavior.[4].

            * Neutered dogs of both genders are at a twofold excess risk to develop osteosarcoma as compared to intact dogs[5],[6][7] as well as an increased risk of hemangiosarcoma[8][9] and urinary tract cancer.[10]

            * Neutered dogs of both genders have an increased risk of adverse reactions to vaccinations.[11]

            * Neutered dogs have also been known to develop hormone-responsive alopecia (hair loss).[12]

            Specific to Males

            * Neutered male dogs display a fourfold increased incidence of prostate cancer over intact males.[13][14]

            * In addition, neutered male dogs are at higher risk than intact males of developing moderate to severe geriatric cognitive impairment (geriatric cognitive impairment includes disorientation in the house or outdoors, changes in social interactions with human family members, loss of house training, and changes in the sleep-wake cycle).[15]

            * As compared to intact males, male neutered cats are at an increased risk for certain problems associated with feline lower urinary tract disease, including the presence of stones or a plug in the urethra and urethral blockage.[16]

            Specific to Females

            * Spayed female dogs can develop urinary incontinence.[17][18][19]
            * Spayed female dogs are at an increased risk of hypothyroidism[20]
            * Despite the risk of pyometra being greatly reduced in spayed females, Stump pyometra may still occur in this group.

            • VigilanteKitteh says:

              @HFC: definitely. I have both my kitties spayed, since there is nothing more annoying than a horny female cat. Now I can get some sleep.

    • animeredith says:

      @TheUncleBob: Yeah, totally. Instead of getting it neutered, he really should just let it be! I mean, it’s not like accidental litters could happen and then the desparate owners have to give away free puppies with an oil purch-oh….wait.

      Less neutering/spaying=more accidental litters. It only takes a few seconds for dogs to mate.
      More accidental litters= more puppies in shelters
      More puppies in shelters= more dogs put down every day.

      And don’t worry, dogs don’t even notice that anything happens. The male dogs don’t feel less dudely by not having balls, which is pretty much what most of these guys opposed to neutering are worried about anyway.

    • TheUncleBob says:

      To may of those who responded to my earlier post:

      I’m not going to change your mind, nor did I intend to. However, there’s no around it – cutting off body parts to change the behavior of a creature so it’s more desirable to you is something I will never understand. Period. No matter how nice and tidy you try to make it sound, in the case of male animals, you’re going out of your way to cut off the animal’s balls – simply because they’re inconvenient to you.

      If genital mutilation is so great, I suggest you see a doctor about having it done to yourself and your children. The world will be a better place. :)

  32. lostdisk says:

    Ok, I was able to contact this Car-X and they are giving away puppies, but I don’t think they are live ones. There was way too much flipping though a book sound when I asked about them. He told me I had to come in to see them for myself, so I might have to go investigate later today.

    Oh, and his puppy selection didn’t seam to be all that great, he didn’t even have a bulldog.

    When I find out, I will let everyone know.
    LD

  33. MrEvil says:

    I’m sure in alot of places there are animal welfare laws that prevent this sort of thing. But I would be more likely to beleive that this is a joke by a desperate business owner. I bet more people are changing their own oil at home with the $15-20 oil change kits you can get from Auto Zone or O’RLY.

  34. mariospants says:

    I’m guessing kids playing with the signage as an actual reason for this sign.

  35. timmus says:

    @undefined: @GoVegan: I’ve heard this a lot but have yet to see any real evidence that laboratories are doing this on any widespread basis. Lab experiments tend to require healthy subjects of specific breeds, and then you get into the logistics of shipping the dog to the lab. There are probably puppy farms that exist for this purpose. Plus if a lab supply company wanted to get a supply of free dogs they could broker it from animal control agencies in less progressive counties (and possibly with a bit of payola). I’m chalking this “beware of the laboratories” meme as urban legend.

  36. mzs says:

    Around here a few years ago on the way to work there was a sign, “rabbits for sale.” Then later added underneath, “for food or pets.” Finally the for sale was crossed-out and free was added above. That always made me chuckle.

    I always imagined some hair brained redneck with a GREAT idea. He would get two rabbits, make a hutch, and feed them his lawn clippings. Quickly supply outstripped demand do to the nature of rabbits, and he was in over his head.

    The sign is no more, but the same shack and 70’s detroit iron on jack stands is still there. Actually now that I think about it it really is more sad than funny.

  37. Anonymous says:

    So nobody thinks this sign is just a joke? Something along the lines of those “unattended children will be given a puppy and espresso” signs? I think it’s just a clever attempt at getting people to notice the store. It’s apparently working, but i find it hard to believe that it’s an actual promotion that the business is running. Maybe if they’d said “free unicorn with purchase” people wouldn’t get so bent out of shape. Although I’m sure someone would threaten to sue for false advertising.

  38. Anonymous says:

    The real problem with this is that what if the promotion works? What if people starting coming to CarX because, oh that’s so cute? The owner is like, man this is a gold mine, so he starts getting his dogs to breed and then he’s got tons of puppies. Those puppies grow up, people don’t think it’s cute anymore. He’s annoyed, at the best, he drops them off at the shelter, where many of them will get put down eventually. More than likely, he “lets them fend for themselves” and just lets them loose in a field somewhere. Domesticated companion dogs who have been fed by humans their whole lives can’t just “fend for themselves.”

  39. jimv2000 says:

    Dear Lord, everyone’s freakin’ out. It could be anything…a real puppy, a puppy stuffed animal, some odd thing that you wouldn’t think of called a puppy…

    • h3llc4t, breaker of office dress codes says:

      @jimv2000: Actually, if I found out it was a stuffed dog, I’d probably crack up. I don’t think the owner meant any real harm with this sign, probably just a prank or a quirky idea that went horribly wrong once it hit the Internet.

  40. kittenfoo says:

    @undefined: I used to work closely with two local animal shelters to promote their work and try to find homes for their animals in the newspaper I worked at. The people who run both say that giveaway puppies, whether in a parking lot or whatever, almost always end up in the shelter within a week. Now, while that’s better than ending up in a laboratory, it’s still far from ideal. Fortunately, the shelters in my area won’t euthanize a dog unless it is gravely sick, or cannot be made sociable.

    • RedwoodFlyer says:

      @kittenfoo: I’m an animal lover etc etc, but I’m still not convinced that euthanizing animals that are un-adopted is bad….it’s very painless, basically like going under anesthesia but never coming out. It seems much more humane than keeping the poor animal confined in a tiny cage its whole life….

      GoVeg: I’m glad that there are others out there that look after the welfare of animals, but please don’t be militant…it gives all of us realistic animal welfare concerned people a bad name, and hurts the cause. I say that with sincerity…not trying to be a dick or anything!

      • GoVegan says:

        @RedwoodFlyer: All I can say is WTF and to recommend for people to take a chill pill. If you read my comments I stated that I was unsure if this promotion was real or not but if it was, it was irresponsible to give away animals away that way. As the guardian of a pet, we have an obligation to try and place that pet or that pet’s babies in the best home possible if we can no longer care for them. Based on this, I get comments like I am being militant or how fun it is to abuse animals. For people that enjoy jokes about animal abuse, nothing more I can see other then I feel bad for you. If these views seem radical or militant then so be it but I am hoping that most people will not see it that way. Now, I did see a comment that possibly this business is doing a promotion where they pay the adoption fee required by a local shelter. If that’s the case, more power to that business and I wish there were more business’ like that out there.

  41. West Coast Secessionist says:

    Good lord you people are psychos!

    Giving away puppies is not a crime. Haven’t you ever seen people outside of the grocery store with a box o’ puppies or kittens? Do those people interrogate their “customers” before letting them have a puppy? NO. It’s your responsibility to judge whether you can care for a pet, not the government or the animal rights lobby.

    This guy is just using a creative way to get people, his customers, to consider adopting a puppy. Plain and simple. Chances are if you accepted a puppy from him, you want a puppy and plan on taking care of it. Would you rather they get put to sleep?

    It’s not like he’s throwing a puppy in every bag. Sheesh.

    • pecan 3.14159265 says:

      @West Coast Secessionist: You want to leave sound mind and judgment to them (points at the masses)? You actually think the public at large can properly handle themselves when they see a kitten or a puppy and rationally tally the cost of long-term care?

      The public at large is filled with very, very dimwitted people who don’t see a life; they see a toy or a trend, and once they get tired of the poor animal they’ll abandon it or send it to a shelter. Just go to any shelter and ask how many dogs were brought in because the owners “didn’t think it would get so big” – you buy a saint bernard, it’s going to get to be the size of (you guessed it) a saint bernard. I’ve seen enough to know that many people cannot be trusted to take care of an animal because they lack the foresight to understand the ramifications. If they won’t make the right call and see they are unfit, than there are shelters, humane societies, and other people who will do it for them. I don’t see a problem with that.

  42. mythago says:

    @Phydeaux: I make it a point not to judge any group of people by what their adherents were like when I met them back in college. Otherwise I wouldn’t be on speaking terms with meat-eaters, vegans, atheists, Christians, fraternity members, anti-fraternity co-op residents, or really anyone.

    And yes, how horrible that somebody thinks it’s a bad idea to use puppies as promotional items.

  43. themikebrown says:

    We have actually acquired most of our family cats this way. Not by CarX promotions, but through people we knew who gave away kittens, or something similar. We once got two show cats from an elderly couple who couldn’t take care of them anymore. They were very well taken care of, and were trained to come when you snap your fingers and stay off the furniture. They were great cats.

    So it’s not always the irresponsible people giving away free animals. Sometimes there are circumstances beyond someone’s control and as a result they have to get rid of their cat or dog.

    This might not follow the same rule though, but without a lot of information on this specific case, we’re left speculating.
    So before all the Animal Rights people start pushing “information” down our throats about how this is cruel, there is a possibility that it is being done for a good reason, not just to be irresponsible.

    Let’s be logical about this please, and not turn this into a huge deal.

  44. Anonymous says:

    They are plastic figures of dogs (many breeds available). Just watched a news story on it here in milwaukee.

  45. milrtime83 says:

    It’s not a real dog that they’re giving away. It’s just a small plastic toy…(apparently the local news was slow enough today to do a story on it)

  46. OmicroN says:

    So, here’s the deal: It’s a TOY puppy. Pretty funny, though, if you ask me.

    Is this like the “TOYOTA” that the bar was giving away to its wait staff for bringing in the most business? That is, it turned out to be a “TOY YODA” instead — and the waitress who won ended up suing the restaurant because it was a thinly veiled prank!

  47. LoadStar says:

    The message on this same Car-X a few weeks ago was “Free Goat With Every Purchase.” Seriously. Why this didn’t make news back then, I dunno. (My sister works on S. 27th near this Car-X and pointed it out to me.)

    • shifuimam says:

      @LoadStar: it didn’t have everyone’s undies in a bunch because goats aren’t as cute as puppies.

      It stuns me how unbelievably stupid people are. The kind of people to go atomic over this are the kind of people who will find some reason to be offended by anything and everything. Get over yourselves.

  48. sinfonian94 says:

    @Real Cheese Flavor: Actually, GoVegan is right, they look for free animals to test on. That’s one of the reasons why adoption groups charge a fee, also to cover the costs of the $300-400 worth of medical care that are entailed in getting an animal ready for adoption.

  49. nick.sideras says:

    Turns out it’s not exactly what you might think:

    [www.myfoxmilwaukee.com]

  50. animeredith says:

    I’m relieved that it was a plastic toy instead of a real dog! I’m sure it was a great publicity generator though.

  51. Bog says:

    Several years ago I had a friend who’s dog do had puppies, they just wanted to give them away and did the same kind of thing. Actually the puppies were free anyway…