Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
In the following post my ORIGINAL comments are in BLACK. Jag's response to them are in RED and my response to Jag are in BLUE
Knowing what you know about Ecollars, I'd agree that, FOR YOU, it's over the top. For anyone who can read and following simple instructions, it's a good way to go.
Jag responds: Yet you don't have a clue what I know about E-collars!
Lou responds: I know what you've written about them and it's so far off the mark that it's accurately characterized as myth and misconception. You've spouted just about every lie that's told about them by those who oppose their use.
Jag responds: Talk about being rude by taking gratuitous cheap shots.. which you've done over and over.
Lou responds: You opened the door. When you throw a punch, expect MANY to come back your way You seem not to like it. I suggest that you don't start it.
Jag responds: Why you can't seem to handle someone who disagrees with you without taking it as some sort of 'attack' is puzzling.
Lou responds: Your "vested interested" comment WAS AIMED DIRECTLY AT ME PERSONALLY. You could have made your point without the insult, but YOU CHOSE not to. It's a shame that you are unable to tell the difference between talking about a tool or a method and talking about a person.
Jag responds: I thought that cops had to have communication skills and thicker skin?
Lou responds: What part of retired do you not understand? When I was working I took all sorts of insults from all sorts of scum, without responding. Now that I'm retired (or when I was off-duty) there's no such requirement. And so when someone starts up with me, as you continually do, I'll respond in kind. If you don't like it, again, I'll again suggest that you not start it.
Jag responds: There are posts here about people using E-collars incorrectly, as well as putting them on puppies. Yet, you don't get into those conversations.
Lou responds: Conveniently you forget that "there are posts her about people using [EVERY TOOL UNDER THE SUN] incorrectly." I take part in conversations that 1. I see. 2. That interest me. Your statement that [i]" don't get into those conversations" IS WRONG. I've taken part in MANY of them.
Jag responds: You also have people who can't tell the difference between play and aggression or protectiveness and fearful behaviors. Yet you think it's a good idea to have those people use internet instructions to use an E-collar?
Lou responds: Yep. I really don't care if a dog is biting someone because he's playing, being aggressive or being protective. The fact is that NO ONE on the planet can tell with 100% certainty which is at work every second of a dog's life. That FACT will not stop lots of people from pretending that they can though. And so when people do this, they're guessing. It may be an educated guess, but it's still a guess. If they guess wrong, then their solution will likely be wrong as well. Instead of playing games like this, I stop the behavior. Usually the dog's energy is redirected onto something that's incompatible with the biting. Somehow those who have actually USED my methods have a different opinion about them than you do, and you've ONLY READ about a few of them. AND you fail to take into account that I use many other tools besides the Ecollar.
Jag responds: How do you evaluate a dog when you aren't there and can't see it?
Lou responds: I don't need to. And, in reality, neither does anyone else. I know a behaviorist who does a two−hour−long history before she even starts training a dog. Of course, she's billing the owner during that history. A MEDICAL DOCTOR doing a history of a 30 year old human doesn't spend that much time doing a history and he's dealing with life and death! There are only so many things that a dog can do and so many reasons that he does them.
Jag responds: You want to boil this down to an anti-E-collar issue. That's never been the issue from my POV.
Lou responds: Your statement, "IMO, an E-collar is over the top." says that the Ecollar IS "the issue."
Given your past comments I'd bet the farm that you're talking about me and my website. Pretty rude of you to take such a gratuitous cheap shot, when I'm not even in the discussion.
Quite a few people who DO NOT HAVE A VESTED INTEREST think that "it IS a great option."
Jag responds: I never said it wasn't a great option. I said it's not the ONLY option.
Lou responds: I didn't see anyone write that it WAS "the ONLY option." Can you direct us to such a statement? You did write "IMO, an E-collar is over the top." Somehow I missed you say that the Ecollar was not the only option. Can you show us that statement please?
Some people are incapable of learning how to do something by reading about it. Assuming that's the case with everyone, is a mistake.
Jag responds: Again, you're skirting calling me stupid or unable to read.
Lou responds: I don't "skirt" such things. If I WERE to say those things, it would look like this, "Jag, you're stupid and unable to read." See the difference?
Jag responds: To add insult to injury, you're basically accusing me of saying everyone is too stupid to read.
Lou responds: You're "injured" by my comments? ROFL.
Jag responds: However, there are people out there that do have issues with interpreting their dog's behavior. Speaking of the dog and handler's best interest, an in person trainer would probably be the best thing for them both. NOT because of lack of intelligence, but a lack of experience or simply needing a trained eye.
Lou responds: People who have difficulty "interpreting their dog's behavior" have that problem no matter what tool or method they use. If this was JUST about you suggesting that they seek out a trainer, you could have said so without any reference to the Ecollar, to my website, or to me. Instead, you went for the cheap shot. I have no trouble with someone going to a trainer, for some, it's the best solution. But it's not the only solution. If the trainer isn't competent, it's a waste of time and money.