|03-05-2014 12:36 AM|
Anyway, not sure what your points are in this thread? You would have understood if the dogs had been shot by police BUT you think it's ridiculous that people carry a weapon to defend themselves against aggressive loose dogs?? I don't understand your thoughts.
|03-05-2014 12:28 AM|
Not sure why it matters if the potential for fatality is high or low. I'm with Longfisher on this one. He isn't trying to compare dogs to sharks (to take it that way is to misdirect and de-validate the entire point of his post). He's simply stating that STATISTICS can be misleading, and he gave examples. Also, when they are only looking at fatalities, of course they are going to be smaller numbers than attacks (even if the attack leaves a permanent disfigurement).
My hubby has several scars on his face and the iris of one of his eyes is lacking pigment in one area from a violent attack from two GSDs when he was 4 years old. He was standing on the fence of their property, they both stalked and attacked him, a four year old child...while his dad was talking to their owner just down the driveway.
When it comes to a loose dog attack, I really don't care if the dog is shot dead or sprayed with pepper spray and lives to see another day lose, I don't care if death by dog attack is rare, I don't want stitches either....when it comes to my kid walking to school and encountering lose, aggressive dogs, I'd rather have the dog shot dead than even the POTENTIAL that my kid could be hurt. Sure most of the time I'd say, pepper spray would be great....however, I think this situation and the reasoning behind thoughts of deadly force, is pretty black and white.
It also makes me think of people who ask why cops don't "aim for a leg or arm so the person has a better chance of living??" It's so silly, but I understand people who don't understand firearms, targets, and how fast someone can get to you even from 20 feet away...why they ask those kinds of questions.
Why should someone have to take the chance because it's "only a dog bite and probably will be non-fatal?" That person should have to take a bite because it's so sad for the dog to die?
Bottom line, owners need to take more responsibility for their dogs. Yeah, accidents happen, and we all hope common sense will be used, and a non-aggressive dog will be shooed away or grabbed by a good samaritan and taken to the pound. However, the expectation that someone should stop and use a non-lethal force, because it will "probably" work, is just silly to me, especially if the dog is being aggressive.
I tend to be of the thought that pepper spray will be more than enough. LF, I think it's great what you did. I always have an extra slip lead somewhere on me, and have grabbed a few wandering dogs and taken them to the pound if I didn't know their owner.
However, I think it's great what you did, for the kids...honestly I couldn't care less about the dogs or the plow boy lol. The fact that the cross walk person had to shoo them away and multiple people thought they were being aggressive (including yourself), I don't care what happens to them, I don't care if the aggression was because of fear, rabies, temperament, whatever....when it comes to kids and aggressive dogs, whatever means necessary I say. I wouldn't have faulted cops at all for shooting them....glad the owner was ticketed. I get what you're saying about your concern of "shoot first," but in this situation? Aggressive dogs around little kids trying to get to school? You really are surprised they were in the "eliminate the threat" mind set?
And Bleach bottle? Seriously? Haven't heard of that idea before lol.
|03-04-2014 10:30 PM|
Okay Lonefisher i have got to be completely honest here, the word crap is totally not uncivil i mean just check out this cereal.
|03-04-2014 08:41 PM|
But my 10th grade English teacher once explained the proper use of language, specifically swearing, and though that was decades ago, I used that term to make a point. I wanted to say something strongly. Because what you are saying, about dogs killing people, is a real problem. When people shoot a friendly dog at a dog park because they are afraid of the dog, and think lethal force is what is necessary, why? Because people are believing that dogs can kill people. People are believing that they can go out on a walk and get eaten by dogs. Do you realize this sort of fear-mongering damages people with breeds like ours?
No, you are offended by an insignificant baby term, my seven year old nieces can use without repercussions.
Have a nice day.
Go and scare some people about big dogs.
Bring up scuba diving with sharks, is like taking a walk and being killed by dogs.
I am getting too old and too cranky to hang out here I think.
|03-04-2014 08:25 PM|
This is the sort of, well, crap that makes people think this board is filled with either teenagers with no control of their facilities or the beknighted and demented oldies who are similarly out of control.
It seems this sort of stuff always comes from the "regal" members of the board. Just what the heck do you beknighted members do to become beknighted, cuss like sailors?
|03-04-2014 06:40 PM|
|Chip18||Thank you for your effort and for some good tips for those of us that try and help dogs in trouble!|
|03-04-2014 06:39 PM|
|03-04-2014 05:54 PM|
That's an excellent question! I'd like to see the statistics of loose dogs that get hit and killed by cars each day? How many strays are picked up by each day and PTS by animal control? These numbers are in the 10's of thousands. When do owners begin to take responsibility for their dogs? When will people take responsibility when their dogs get loose?
|03-04-2014 03:45 PM|
When people spout crap like that, it plays into the hands of those that want to pass BSL, and makes it even more difficult to get home-owner's insurance, or to be able to rent places. Dogs killing people is so rare, that on average each state in our union has only a fraction of one death per year. People have enough irrational fears about our dogs, please stop thinking like this.
|03-04-2014 09:35 AM|
Anyway, to the quote above.
I heard the same sort of thing about shark attacks when I was in the service and learning to scuba (CA, Phillipines, Taiwan, Red Sea, etc.). So, I dismissed the possibility of an attack.
Then I repeatedly saw attacks or near attacks WHILE I WAS SCUBA DIVING. I think that statistic is based on an average which includes all those who have never even seen an ocean much less been in the company of aggressive sharks. They will absolutely attack you and your gear on, at least, an irregular basis and that's the reason many film-makers wear mail armor.
I think the same goes for dog attacks. With my Zeus growing up as a puppy we've been attacked at least a half dozen times and we've been menaced more than that. All of the attacks and menacing were either in dog parks (twice before I stopped taking Zeus) or just simply walking my dog and there were strays or untethered dogs who took an evil interest in Zeus.
I ALWAYS JUMP RIGHT IN NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE HERE SAYS ABOUT IT BEING DANGEROUS. So, far we've (Zeus and I) prevailed every time. Pepper spray works wonders and don't let anyone tell you it doesn't. IT SENDS THEM SCURRYING BACK TO THEIR HOME TURF AND THE NEXT TIME WE SEE THEM THEY ARE THE MOST DOCILE LITTLE PUPPIES YOU CAN IMAGINE.
Anyway, I think the probability that a do might attack millions of people who live, essentially, away from dogs is irrelevant. What is relevant is the probability of an attack from a dog when you're engaged in activities that might invite an attack, like innocently walking your dog (or with sharks SCUBA diving).
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|