advertisement


Dogs

Blzebub said:
Currently training my killer rook.
Click to expand...

I knew someone who had been brought up in a tenement in Campbletown, above a large, feckless matriarch who had a 'pet' crow. It lived freely in the fiat as part of the family and perched on her shoulder. She decided to strip the living room wallpaper and redecorate and the crow helped by pulling off the ripped paper with its beak.
As an aside, he mentioned that the woman decided to commit suicide by jumping out of her window. Her fall was interrupted by the telephone cables which she bounced off of allowing for a non fatal landing. He didn't mention what the crow made of this but the implication was that one of the two was smarter than the other.
 
kasperhauser said:
Is "macho dogs" code for breeds predisposed to respond violently if conditioned to do so?
Click to expand...
this might be Bradder's view, but I don't think this is quite the case. I'd say it's breeds that look the part, which end up being raised to be aggressive, but the breed is probably less significant than the way they are raised/treated.
 
Bradders said:
By "macho dogs", I mean dogs that look tough, which if handled incorrectly & irresponsibly will be a menace.
Click to expand...

Yep, I just quoted myself. Pretty strong stuff.

--

Dogs don't kill people. People kill people. Sometimes the people killing people are actually people, but sometimes "people" would be a weaponized extension of those people, who in actual fact is a dog.

Haven't seen it much, but it could happen.

killer_988835.jpg
 
Fox said:
I think 17 deaths to dogs a year is about right.

Because if I worried about 17 death of kids a year to dogs, I would be overlooking something more important. Like death via suicide to bullying, which claims about 4,400 a year.
Click to expand...

You are clearly not nearly as neurotic as me. I can worry about more than one thing at once. That said.. and in all seriousness, 4400 is , if correct, a horrifying number.

Yes 17-ish dog mauls is bad, one-ish death a year is bad, but I stack things in an order of things I will get to, one that places higher numbers of death that are stoppable above much, much lower numbers of death that are, frankly below the level of being able to reliably stop. Some basic high number deaths you need to sort out first before you can get to building utopia.
Click to expand...

Yebbut..as I have now said umpteen times. This is the 'worrying about dog mauling thread'. There are at least two 'worrying about assorted driving issues' threads, a number of 'worrying about war' threads etc., which we can participate in if we so wish.

Well, that's the way I see it. You see it differently, so I tell you what, you work out a solution to dog mauling deaths, I'll work on stopping child suicides because kids are taunted for liking ponies and we can all work on shit we find important (pun not intended), spread the workload a bit.
Click to expand...

Fox, I like your persona on here and I respect you, but that is just unfair. You are implying that I only care about the dog issue. That is simply not true and it isn't an 'either/or' situation.
This is a thread about Dogs. Feel free to start a thread about bullying. You won't find me trying to divert it.

Mull
 
I'm gratified to see that something resembling a meaningful discussion of dog attacks is emerging, finally. And just for info, I have kept dogs. We had two for years, but when both inevitably died, I decided never again. I can do without the mess, the smell, the vet's bills and the millstone effect.

My own take on the dogs themselves is this:

Any dog can lose the plot, for whatever reason, and go on the attack. I was only half jesting when I mentioned 'drop-kicking' into the next field.

It is simple common sense that anyone but a small child should be able to see off the angriest Yorkie, sustaining the minimum of injury. The same does not apply to Rottweilers and other large, powerful breeds. If they decide they are 'having' you.. you're screwed. Some years ago I recall reading about a 14 year old girl killed by her neighbours Rotties as she took them for a walk. It really shouldn't happen

The 'pitbull types' are also bloody powerful, as are Staff's etc.

Whilst I am happy to place the blame for most attacks on crap owners, I'm not convinced that there are no rogue dogs. They are fundamentally pack animals and have all sorts of instinctive behaviours which most of us just don't understand.

What really pisses me though is that the 17.. or 27.. or whatever stat you believe, people killed by dogs in the last couple of decades were almost certainly preventable if people weren't so bloody stupid.

Mull
 
So you're really talking about people killing other people, murders using animals rather than guns, yet you seem to blame the weapon.

I am sorry you don't like dogs. They are an asset to human society and give far more that is positive than many people do.
 
avole said:
So you're really talking about people killing other people, murders using animals rather than guns, yet you seem to blame the weapon.
Click to expand...

You know this isn't the first time I've had to say this on here. I really do wish people would read what I post and respond to what I post, rather than what they think I posted, or what they would like to imply that I posted.

I have made neither of the points above that you claim I have made. I have stated very, very, clearly that most dog attacks are due to irresponsible owners. But, I have also not ruled out the possibility of there being the odd 'rogue' dog.. for whatever reason, just as there are 'rogue' humans.

I am sorry you don't like dogs.
Click to expand...

Once again. I have not said anywhere on this site that I do not like dogs.
I choose not to keep them myself. It isn't compulsory. What I definitely don't do is ascribe all the soppy anthropomorphisms which many owners seem to indulge in.

They are an asset to human society
Click to expand...

I acknowledged that they can be such in my first post in this thread.

and give far more that is positive than many people do.
Click to expand...

That's a silly, emotionally driven statement with no possibility of verification.
Depends on the dogs, the context and the people.

Mull
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top