In some countries it is.

It's actually way worse, because you can have a dog put down that is perfectly healthy, even when other people want to adopt the dog.
If you have a dog you literally own it, and the only regulation that protects the dog are rules against animal cruelty.
You cannot own a human being.

My stepfather made use of Oregon's Death With Dignity law. Him scheduling his death a week out was... weird, but I'm always glad it was an option.

Though at one point a doc did legally have to inform him that instead of the painless and easy medical assisted death he could instead choose to stop eating or drinking.

God this is a weird thread.

How come human laws don't apply to animals?

Sorry to break it to you kids but billions of people all over the world literally eat animals every day.

Barbaric ? Perhaps, but it's fair to assume that 100% of your ancestors in the last 100,000 years have delighted in this activity as often as possible.

You may not wish to acknowledge this but the reality is: your beloved dog or cat is a lesser being, assigned very few rights.

Obviously if you have a pet dog then you treat that dog differently as you would a chicken living in a cage in a shed with 10,000 other chickens in cages but that dog's right to life is merely an extension of your rights as that dog's owner.

Humans should be allowed to be put out of their misery as well

Because of religious moralistic bullshit.

Good lord it is way past time to allow people to Euthanize themselves.

Religion, chiefly.

This is changing. In slow, small ways but it is changing. Where i live voluntary assisted dying has been enshrined in law since 2017

Society does not value animal lives as much as human lives. You're free to draw your personal line elsewhere.

Because legally, pets are chattel.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/chattel

Dogs don’t pay taxes or create new parishoners.

One other point that I think no one has mentioned yet is the importance of informed consent when treating people with otherwise fatal conditions. Surgery and other treatments e.g. chemotherapy for cancer incur a lot of pain and suffering in those going through it as well. A person can understand that all that suffering is for the greater good of extending their life, but for a pet that is far from the case, and they may in fact need to suffer more than if they weren't treated.

I love my dog with my whole heart, but I would never put her through chemo if she had cancer.

Because humans apply higher standards to themselves then they do to other animals.

1. Pets are not intellectually capable of communicating their feelings or desires to humans, so it is up to us as humans to assess the quality of life of our animals in order to prevent them from needless suffering. There is nothing wrong with trying to treat animal illnesses, if you have the resources to do so and can make sure that the animal is maintaining a good quality of life--but that's sadly not always the case. We love our pets and we all want them to live happily forever after, but the sad truth is that they will eventually get old and sick and (unless they die suddenly) one of the most important acts of compassion that we owe them is giving them a humane end of life without suffering. It is sad. It breaks our fucking hearts. But it is our duty and our responsibility to them, and in a strange way, it is an act of love. We owe it to our pets to take care of them in life and in death.
2. Unlike pets, human beings are typically thought to have agency and the ability to express their own wishes regarding their end of life. We can't really decide that "ok, grandma is lives enough, time to put her down", because even if we can see that her quality of life has degraded, we understand that it is not our decision to make whether she can continue to try to live.
3. In some parts of the world, human beings do have the right to choose when to end their own life via physician-assisted suicide, especially in cases where they have some terminal prognosis where they know that their quality of life will not stay high if they continue to live. I don't envy being put in this position, and it's terribly sad to think about, but I do think that it's ethically the right thing to do to allow for that.

It depends on the state, actually. Some states allow that.

Ibfind it ironic that to put an animal out of it's misery is called being "humane" though to do it to another person is called "homicide".

Because religion.

Uh, if you kill yourself early the healthcare system won't be able to extract every last dime of your wealth before you die. What, you think your family deserves to inherit it?

I think

Democracy is, when the laws are NOT according to what you think.

Ideally the laws are according to what most people think, but this cannot be guaranteed. Therefore democracy is not the best possible form of government, but unfortunately no better one is known.