dogs

[hermes]

When this behaviour occurs though, the dog needs to be controlled, likewise a word of education on how to behave in front of dogs is also required for the boys.

If the dog is well-trained it would not need to be controlled. If you think that people should alter their behaviour in front of your dog then your dog is not properly trained/looked after.

 

[Softus]

Putting my own parental and protective feelings aside for a moment, I'd say that it's the urban environment that isn't compatible with dogs (and other animals), rather than the other way around...

 

[scott1968]

Even very well trained/behaved dogs can turn nasty,
That’s why dogs should always be on a lead when other members of the puplic could be around.

How many times have you heard dog owners (dog not on lead) say they are okay they wont bit you (these dog owners are either unreasonable, selfish or just completely dumb).

 

[Softus]

Even very well trained/behaved dogs can turn nasty,
That’s why dogs should always be on a lead when other members of the puplic could be around.

How many times have you heard dog owners (dog not on lead) say they are okay they wont bit you (these dog owners are either unreasonable, selfish or just completely dumb).

Hm. I'm curious - have you ever owned or lived with a dog, 'cos you don't seem to know much about them?

 

[Softus]

likewise a word of education on how to behave in front of dogs is also required for the boys.

I trust you would not have minded if, had you lost control of your dog and she had "reacted accordingly", the boys had "reacted accordingly", and used their sticks on her to defend themselves?

What a stupid postulate - of course nstreet would mind. This particular owner is a responsible one and is advocating education for humans, not condoning attacks by dogs.

 

[baldy01]

Well he knows them well enough to get this right.

Even very well trained/behaved dogs can turn nasty

I am not a dog owner, however I know many, and I can name half a dozen people I have known who have been turned on by a dog previous thought of as completely soppy. The incidents range from me getting my hand bitten by a daschund to a 6 year old girl having a Collie's teeth clamped around her face.

Dog lovers see this as an acceptable risk, and thats fine - we manage risk all the time and I support your right to make such decisions about the risks you are willing to take in any walk of life.

However I don't accept your right to make such decisions for me or my children.

I'm in the keep them on a lead camp.

 

[baldy01]

likewise a word of education on how to behave in front of dogs is also required for the boys.

I trust you would not have minded if, had you lost control of your dog and she had "reacted accordingly", the boys had "reacted accordingly", and used their sticks on her to defend themselves?

What a stupid postulate - of course nstreet would mind. This particular owner is a responsible one and is advocating education for humans, not condoning attacks by dogs.

Why should other people require education to protect them from the risks of your hobby?

 

[Softus]

Why should other people require education to protect them from the risks of your hobby?

The word "hobby" is inappropriate here, on two counts:

a) Dogs exist in the world whether or not they are owned and trained by people.
b) Life is inherently hazardous.

If you believe the word hobby is a reasonable one to use, then consider who would be to blame in the following circumstances:

1. When I'm out riding my motorcycle for pleasure, albeit responsibly and below the speed limit, a child minces out in front of me and the bike collides with her. The child is above the age when all other children have received road and vehicle awareness education.

2. I'm baking some cakes that have no nutritional value whatsoever, when a friend's 4 year-old child walks in and leans on the immensely hot oven door.

 

[scott1968]

Even very well trained/behaved dogs can turn nasty,
That’s why dogs should always be on a lead when other members of the puplic could be around.

How many times have you heard dog owners (dog not on lead) say they are okay they wont bit you (these dog owners are either unreasonable, selfish or just completely dumb).

Hm. I'm curious - have you ever owned or lived with a dog, 'cos you don't seem to know much about them?

What makes you think I know nothing about dogs or I have never owned one?

Has it something to do with – I would be a responsible owner? And keep it on a lead.

 

[Softus]

Hm. I'm curious - have you ever owned or lived with a dog, 'cos you don't seem to know much about them?

What makes you think I know nothing about dogs or I have never owned one?

I don't know you've twisted my words around. I said:

have you ever owned or lived with a dog?

...because I don't know whether or not you've ever owned one.

And I said:

you don't seem to know much about them.

...because you don't seem to know much dogs.

Has it something to do with – I would be a responsible owner? And keep it on a lead.

If you're asking whether my reason for asking the questions is because of the words you used, then of course it is. It would be far simpler for you just to answer the questions, or just say that you don't wish to answer, than to distort what I asked.

 

[baldy01]

If you believe the word hobby is a reasonable one to use, then consider who would be to blame in the following circumstances:

1. When I'm out riding my motorcycle for pleasure, albeit responsibly and below the speed limit, a child minces out in front of me and the bike collides with her. The child is above the age when all other children have received road and vehicle awareness education.

I do ride my motorbike for pleasure and part of the blame would be mine. There is no escape from that fact however much you might want to duck it.

However this is not an analagous situation. The vast majority of traffic is people going about their livelyhoods and is therefore not a hobby. This warrents that kids should be aware of traffic as an environmental hazard. The fact that the particular journey you were taking had no specific purpose doesn't change that.


2. I'm baking some cakes that have no nutritional value whatsoever, when a friend's 4 year-old child walks in and leans on the immensely hot oven door.

Again, a large part of the responsibility would be mine. If I knew the 4 year old was around I would know he was at risk and take steps to prevent injury. I don't beleive in playing hot-potato with responsibility. I accept it.

However again the situation is not analagous. We need to eat. Food needs to be cooked. Just because in this instance the cooking is frivolous doesn't mean the child should not be aware of the dangers of hot cookers as a class as they are another unavoidable hazzard of life.

How is owning a pet dog an unavoidable hazzard of life?

Lets think ,

1. Guide dogs for the blind
2. Drugs Enforcement officers
3. Police dogs
4. ermm....

Unless you in one of these classes then I class your dog ownership as a hobby, as is the vast majority.

p.s. in places where there are wild dogs, how often are they recorded as attacking humans? Most wild animals learn very quickly to give humans a wide berth.

p.p.s this was not a rhetorical question...

 

[Softus]

I do ride my motorbike for pleasure and part of the blame would be mine. There is no escape from that fact however much you might want to duck it.

I'm not ducking anything - you're the one who made the as yet indefensible claim that the entire onus is on the dog owner.

The fact that you say "part of the blame would be mine" means that the other part of the blame would be upon someone else. You're the one who's ducking!

I'm baking some cakes...

Again, a large part of the responsibility would be mine.[/ If I knew the 4 year old was around I would know he was at risk and take steps to prevent injury. I don't believe in playing hot-potato with responsibility. I accept it.

Again, if part of the responsibility is yours, then the other part must be someone else's - so whose is it?

However again the situation is not analagous. We need to eat. Food needs to be cooked. Just because in this instance the cooking is frivolous doesn't mean the child should not be aware of the dangers of hot cookers as a class as they are another unavoidable hazzard of life.

How is owning a pet dog an unavoidable hazzard of life?

I didn't say that owning a dog was an inherent hazard, I implied that the existence of dogs is.

Lets think ,

1. Guide dogs for the blind
2. Drugs Enforcement officers
3. Police dogs
4. ermm....

Unless you in one of these classes then I class your dog ownership as a hobby, as is the vast majority.

I think I see where you're coming from.

You believe that legislation can remove all danger; that placing the onus entirely on dog owners will remove all hazards arising from dogs, thus removing the need for educating children about the innate unsafeness of a startled dog; that this country, and all countries, are so civilised, and that their society is so stable, that there will never be a situation in which an uneducated child, or adult come to that, will encounter an illegally unrestrained and angry dog.

Are there chocolate lampposts in your fantasy world?

 

[baldy01]

you're the one who made the as yet indefensible claim that the entire onus is on the dog owner

Where did I make this claim? I was simply challenging the mentality that if the kids don't know how to behave around a hazard that you choose to maintain that its all their fault. Which was, or appeared to be, the indefensible claim that WAS being made. It appeared to me that the maintainers of the hazard were trying to duck responsibility, so I challenged it.

We then got into semantics about the use of the word "hobby", which I beleive I have established is a valid term to use. Not derogatory or demeaning, just valid.

Any other interpretation of my posts is entirely in your own head. I'm sorry if someone challenging you causes you to make invalid interpretations of what people are saying, but thats your problem, not mine.

And who said anything about legislation? Where did I use this word? I'm fascinated to know how you are reading things I never wrote.

 

[scott1968]

Softus you said,

‘Cos you don't seem to know much about them (dogs)’

What makes you say I ‘don't seem to know much about them’?


My statement has nothing to do with owning a dog, living with a dog or never owning a dog. It’s about dog owners that have no respect for others ‘They are unreasonable, selfish or just completely dumb’ this seems to apply to most dog owners I have meet.

And for the record there is a black lab in my house (answered you question).

Can you answer my question what make you think- ‘I don't seem to know much about them (dogs)’? not twisted any of your words

 

[baldy01]

Anyone see a trend developing?