Does something need to be done about dogs?

dowie said:
Similar cope that some come out with in this thread... yet another confused owner who thinks they're good and their dog is harmless etc.
Click to expand...
After making this comment, can you confirm why you think the problem is always the dogs fault?
The owner made all the mistakes here;
no lead on the dog
no ability to physically control the dog
refused to even get involved with the event

Again if bought up correctly with boundaries and authority, the dog should not attack other parties human or animal.

As for your same incident of the staffie, even though you'll turn round and say, "oh but you are only one", I have had my own and seen a number of staffies around horses without a problem. So it is not all dogs or the breed is naturally violent or wanting a tear up with other animals.
Secondly and most importantly, again this shows extreme owner negligence - Dog was off the lead, could not be controlled, owner was many meters away shouting at a dog who does not have boundaries or authority installed in it. A third party got off their bike and restrained the dog as the owner could not.

Again, please tell me straight why this is the dogs fault and not the owners.
 
sidimmu said:
After making this comment, can you confirm why you think the problem is always the dogs fault?
The owner made all the mistakes here;
no lead on the dog
no ability to physically control the dog
refused to even get involved with the event

Again if bought up correctly with boundaries and authority, the dog should not attack other parties human or animal.

As for your same incident of the staffie, even though you'll turn round and say, "oh but you are only one", I have had my own and seen a number of staffies around horses without a problem. So it is not all dogs or the breed is naturally violent or wanting a tear up with other animals.
Secondly and most importantly, again this shows extreme owner negligence - Dog was off the lead, could not be controlled, owner was many meters away shouting at a dog who does not have boundaries or authority installed in it. A third party got off their bike and restrained the dog as the owner could not.

Again, please tell me straight why this is the dogs fault and not the owners.
Click to expand...

I'm not speaking for dowie here, but you have to protect the public (and their animals) from the lowest common denominator of owners. Intelligent and responsible owners should be doing something to help make it difficult for these denominators to have such a dog instead of saying "Butch never bit anybody, he's a softie really". If they don't then legislation will and with a very wide tarred brush.

Let's allow intelligent and responsible owners to have wolves, coyotes and jackals because it'll be the owner's fault if they maul somebody right? Of course not, nature overrules nurture even in domesticated dogs, it just takes something more for it to flip.
 
Mysterae_ said:
I'm not speaking for dowie here, but you have to protect the public (and their animals) from the lowest common denominator of owners. Intelligent and responsible owners should be doing something to help make it difficult for these denominators to have such a dog instead of saying "Butch never bit anybody, he's a softie really". If they don't then legislation will and with a very wide tarred brush.

Let's allow intelligent and responsible owners to have wolves, coyotes and jackals because it'll be the owner's fault if they maul somebody right? Of course not, nature overrules nurture even in domesticated dogs, it just takes something more for it to flip.
Click to expand...
Legislation is fine, but why legislate the dog when it should be owners responsibility for what they purchase and choose to look after.

As for the wolves, coyotes etc, not really a fair comparison against dogs which have been domesticated for hundreds of years. Not debating natural habits or rogue examples (we have that in humans too), but a large majority is caused by poor upbringing and ownership.
 
sidimmu said:
Legislation is fine, but why legislate the dog when it should be owners responsibility for what they purchase and choose to look after.
Click to expand...

How else do you stop owners with no sense of responsibility from getting such a dog? IQ test at the breeders? Gene-pool history check? The only guaranteed way to stop irresponsible owners from getting such a dog is for their to be no such dog in the first place. Unless you can think of a better way?

sidimmu said:
As for the wolves, coyotes etc, not really a fair comparison against dogs which have been domesticated for hundreds of years. Not debating natural habits or rogue examples (we have that in humans too), but a large majority is caused by poor upbringing and ownership.
Click to expand...

I think it is a fair comparison. Domesticated dogs still have that natural born killer instinct buried deep in their psyche, some way deeper than others for sure. It's impossible to know or detect just how deep but in particular breeds it's quite shallow and easily brought to the surface. So many examples of this in the news articles of attacks.
 
I came to say why can't we own tigers and lions and take them to the park for excercise.
It's the owners fault if they shred anyone after all.
I'm glad others see this nonsense as valid.
 
sidimmu said:
Legislation is fine, but why legislate the dog when it should be owners responsibility for what they purchase and choose to look after.

As for the wolves, coyotes etc, not really a fair comparison against dogs which have been domesticated for hundreds of years. Not debating natural habits or rogue examples (we have that in humans too), but a large majority is caused by poor upbringing and ownership.
Click to expand...

Why can't I own a flame thrower or a tactical nuclear weapon?
 
Dis86 said:
Why can't I own a flame thrower or a tactical nuclear weapon?
Click to expand...
Go to America and you can, then whatever happens to that weapon is your responsibility.
Not hard is it.

As for banning the dogs, all this would do is push to further cross breeding and genetics to make a different dog that gets round the ban.
Same thing happens in drugs.
 
sidimmu said:
Go to America and you can, then whatever happens to that weapon is your responsibility.
Not hard is it.

As for banning the dogs, all this would do is push to further cross breeding and genetics to make a different dog that gets round the ban.
Same thing happens in drugs.
Click to expand...

You can't own a tactical nuclear weapon in America. I also don't want to go to America.

Dangerous things are restricted because even in 'good hands' they can be a danger. Not hard, is it?
 
Efour said:
I came to say why can't we own tigers and lions and take them to the park for excercise.
It's the owners fault if they shred anyone after all.
I'm glad others see this nonsense as valid.
Click to expand...

It wasn't that long ago when "exotic" pets were walked in our cities.

Here's the actress Phyllis Gordon shopping in London in 1939, with her pet cheetah. In the early seventies a shop on the main A6 in Stockport, Greater Manchester, called Seven Milers Out (the owner lived in Disley seven miles away) had a black panther tied up on a golden chain and the public, including toddlers, would come in to stroke and pet it. The owner was a stunning woman, and in an open top Peugeot with a panther sat next to her, was something of a traffic stopper :)


To think kids today want a mere pit bull.... ;)

cheetah.jpg
 
Last edited:
Dis86 said:
You can't own a tactical nuclear weapon in America. I also don't want to go to America.

Dangerous things are restricted because even in 'good hands' they can be a danger. Not hard, is it?
Click to expand...
Dreadful comparison again, why are you talking about weapons that would level miles upon miles as a justification for banning a dog, bit pathetic really.
 
Last edited:
sidimmu said:
Dreadful comparison again, why are you talking about weapons that would level miles upon miles as a justification for banning a dog, bit pathetic really.
Click to expand...

You have no idea what a tactical nuclear weapon is, do you? Bit pathetic really.
 
Dis86 said:
Why can't I own a flame thrower or a tactical nuclear weapon?
Click to expand...

you can, if you deposit 20,000 in my bank as an introduction fee i will hook you up with my Uncle Yuri, he has a silo full of ordnance that he will sell at the right price, he will also throw in special tablets that will give you a strong penis..............
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom