I saw part of that... and had to turn it off. It's disgusting to stick up for those people . I strongly believe that breeders *need* to be limited to how many pups they produce per year and how many dogs they own, kennel license or not. Honestly, how can TWO people take care of 120 dogs in a way that is fulfilling and healthy for the animals?! There is NO way. what I don't fully understand is why the SPCA and Animal Control is SO freakin lenient on these scumbags, people who destroy animals lives and use them then dump them for their own profit should be in jail. Its these puppy mills, the puppies they sell and their puppies, that are FILLING shelters, killing dogs, costing tax-payers $millions. It makes no sense to me why 20/20 would stick up for puppy millers ... and, have they ever done a show about all of the millions of dogs that are euthanized every year? or the millions of dogs that suffer abuse/neglect in puppy mills? They're more concered about the feelings of the "poor" "hard-working" animal abusers? ewwww.

And, no, the ASPCA makes no profit from siezing puppy mill dogs. Most come in with waay more health problems and needs, on top of altering and shots and housing and feeding, than the $80-120 adoption fee they get. How much money would a puppy mill owner make on the poor dogs they breed and breed until they can't breed anymore? probably $10,000+ on each female, more on males... from selling their puppies to random brokers and whoever will pay. I don't care if that isn't the law, it *should* be, and I'm glad some one is making steps toward enforcing that law. I've never seen any amendment in the constitution granting stupid people to do whatever they want to whatever animals they can find, and making the entire country and all of the animals suffer for it. Yeah.. that show made me a little bit angry.


However, it is against my moral law. And I listen to a higher authority than 20/20.
so well put, Sophie!!