124 replies to this topic

[Scat]

Hi

I would rather have my elderly parents have a barking growling dog in their house rather than them be subjected to a home invasion from the weaklings that prey on pensioners on a regular basis

My 2 cents.

Cheers
Craig

[Den]

Ok Den you've exposed us to what you believe is a problem. What's your thoughts on how to address it?

Daz

Dazzabazza that decision is up to dog owners mate, they are your problem! but usually your neighbours problem too! like my neighbour who lets their lapdog crap all over my lawn, and the other guy across the road who used to let his dog cry and howl all day and all night, the escaped bulldog that savagedly mauled my elderly cousin and tore half her face off, the stray healer that attacked and bit my dad, dog crap all over our parks and beaches, I could go on and on about all the responsible dog owners I see in society, when I find one I will let you know.

Sterilise them all, let them die out naturally, ban them from society and lets finally move on into the 21st century and focus on humanity and nature, thats what I would like. and before you start our dogs are not natural! I remind you they are man made incestual, inbred, genetical abominations.

I would rather have my elderly parents have a barking growling dog in their house rather than them be subjected to a home invasion from the weaklings that prey on pensioners on a regular basis

For the cost of a dog, food & vet bills all added together your grandparents could have the top of the range alarm with security company monitoring and video survellance, in fact monitoring is cheaper than feeding a dog, about 25-30bucks a month.


Cheers
Den

[Krystal]

I remind you they are man made incestual, inbred, genetical abominations.

Just like some humans i know Den can i borrow you to do some 'natural selection' hahahaha

[CCA001]

HELL YE CRAIG

Our Rotty has stopped 2 ppl from stealing my car and its in a garage. It has also helped Tracey out once when some freaks pulled over to do we will never know untill the dog obviously sensed something wasnt right and went tottally SPARKO

Tracey and i agree with you there Jaxon was what we consider our first child he is dearly loved and the best big brother to emily.

Sorry den but i think you mite be fighting a loosing battle with this one as you do keep fish in a tank like the rest of us, which is a PRISON.

Hey DEN dam thats CHEAP for all those functions from any company i had an alarm for my old shop and it was $150 a month to have it monitered and all with no surveylance, but a alarm aint gunna make a dam bit of difference do deter them DO YOU pay attention if an alarm be it house or car is going off, its either have a dog with me or keep a gun under my pillow which shall it be. OOPS think i may have opened another can of worm sorry all

My 2 cents and NO more

[Trekrider]

For the cost of a dog, food & vet bills all added together your grandparents could have the top of the range alarm with security company monitoring and video survellance, in fact monitoring is cheaper than feeding a dog, about 25-30bucks a month.

I know you don't have a dog so I don't know where you got your figures from. I have a 42kg German Shepherd and it costs me $20 for 36 days food and that's good quality food not supermarket rubbish!

OK- you can blast me for going OT

[Den]

OK thats fine you want the dog for protection, that doesnt effect or address the arguement if you have followed it.

I believe there are better, cheaper and more reliable solutions for home security than a dog. My home alarm system costs below $90 a quarter to monitor.

Den can i borrow you to do some 'natural selection' hahahaha

I just first need to find my leash and collar before Im allowed out of the house.

[Donna]

Den,

What about companionship?

Something to cuddle up too?

A bit of mutualism?

Den, humans and dogs were meant to be together...trust me...it's right for so many reasons...I know it doesn't suit you, but that may have something to do with your fear of intimacy

I am like you...I hide behind my intellect....search for the "truth" entertain my mind with all kinds of stimulating debates etc...but let me tell you..it is cold comfort..one day you will yearn for the love and companionship of a friend...whether it be human or canine.

This is a lesson that is sometimes learned too late Not all things can be rationalised

Regards,

Donna

[Den]

Den,

What about companionship?

Something to cuddle up too?

A bit of mutualism?

Den, humans and dogs were meant to be together...trust me...it's right for so many reasons...I know it doesn't suit you, but that may have something to do with your fear of intimacy

Thats quite a presumtuous statement, in fact I would argue the opposite, people who have to imprison and control either a person or in this case an animal to forfull their needs of intamacy and effection are the ones who have issues to contend with.

I can be very intimate, but I believe love and intimacy is true and natural only when conducted by mutual choice between "independant" beings.

PS : Donna you complain that I dont read your posts, but it seems by your recent comment that you have missed some of mine.

Cheers
Den

[Donna]

No Den, I understand them more deeply than you think...

I was right, interesting to see how you squirm when invited to use some emotional intelligence

My humblest apologies if I am wrong

[Den]

I was right, interesting to see how you squirm when invited to use some emotional intelligence

Please explain, another statement/accusation with no explanation? are my points not clear enough on my understanding of love and intimacy? do you not agree that to own and imprison an animal that is completely at your mercey is nothing but a forced unnatural relationship, and creates a situation which makes true & mutual love or intamacy impossible?

Edited. Sorry, I accidently used some condascending words and had to change them.

PS: Donna you are such a good sport, not many can put up with me like you do!

Cheers
Den

[Donna]

[marie90]

So basically Den
You have come up with a topic about a companion animal which a majority of people on this site would have.
Peoples dogs are like children, we are all going to jump to their defence and have an emotional response.
I see this thread as a means of s**t stirring when you have clearly stated that you have no intention of posting up your solution to the problem because they are our animals and our problem but then sit back and fire posts back at ppl for having a different opinion to yourself.
Not everything in this world is black and white. We could let our animals roam free. The difference compared to thousands of years ago and now is that we have people abusing animals for their own enjoyment, cars running animals over, dangerous gases and chemicals etc.. that will KILL our dogs. So because we love our dogs this is only a means of protecting them......not imprisoning them.

That is all

[Den]

Marie90 with the nicest of sincerity, I dont think you read my posts completely, I assume when someone accusses me of being a stirrer that they have taken some form of offence, its true I don't agree with all the pro dog owners views expressed here and I put what I believe is a valid explanation of why I disagree. I don't find people disagreeing with me to be offensive, if I am proved wrong I appreciate when I am corrected. Amazingly some people continued to believe the Earth was flat their whole life even though it was proven round just because they couldnt handle being proved wrong, too insecure and ridgid to change. If you find disagreement offensive you should not read or enter discussions with people, or you must accept that disagreement provides opportunity to grow and appreciate it instead of feeling threatened or offended by it. So far I have not found any comment that alters my understanding or warrants me to change my views, and I make no appology for that.

Back on the subject, we seem to have transgressed to the reasons for dog ownership and interestingly some of Marie90's response outlines and supports my view regarding the attraction some humans have to owning dogs and the relationship between dog owner and dog. What it appears to me is that some dog owners(particularly women) experience the triggering of their primordial maternal instinct, a survival tool which is a chemically triggered emotional response in your biochemical electrical machine aka the physical body, this "chemical love" like lust, is not considered by some(including me) as true love, I agree with others in thinking that true love is pure conscience, consisting only from thoughts and spiritual in nature, not chemical feelings over which you have no control, and occurs in situations as mentioned in my previous posts.

Cheers
Den

[marie90]

Hi Den
You have not offended me and I hope I havent offended you.
I actually enjoy a little disagreement every now and then.
What i mean by s**t stirring is that you start topics in which you know people will get emotionally responsive, defensive and have a completely different point of view. Did not mean it to sound nasty or negative towards yourself.
Gotta admit though, you got some balls to do that kind of stuff.

I agree there is different kinds of love though. You might have true love with your wife etc in a physically, mentally and emotionally connection. But you love your kids and animals in a maternal loving way. But to me that is still love in a different form.

Oh and I have read all your posts thoroughly and I do agree with some of your points, but some are very black and white.

Agree to disagree

[Warby]

For the cost of a dog, food & vet bills all added together your grandparents could have the top of the range alarm with security company monitoring and video survellance, in fact monitoring is cheaper than feeding a dog, about 25-30bucks a month.

What good is an alarm system as defence against a home invasion? It may be of use if the person sets the alarm while they sleep (which many people dont), but while they are sitting in their living room watching TV during the evening? Alarms protect property, not people.

And even if they do have an alarm set, which is triggered when the intruder enters the home.. how long until the security company determines that it is not a false alarm and actually does something about it? And then how long from that time until help arrives? Certainly longer than it takes for the intruder to beat poor old grandma senseless and steal her pension.. And as someone else pointed out, nobody pays attention to alarms these days. If I happen to hear a neighbours alarm I glance out my window at the house, if I see nothing that looks amiss - that's the end of it for me, just another false alarm, and I'm sure most people's reaction is much the same. We have been conditioned to assume that the alarm is false...

When I was living in a rather shithouse neighbourhood I had people attempt to break in twice while I was home.. I credit my staffy X with stopping them each time. The fact that we had an alarm didn't deter them, but the sound of that dog did.. man I miss that dog...

-Dave

[Den]

We were debating wether the needs of a dog are met in the suburban environment, you cannot justify the practice of dog keeping through stating you have a need for some form of personal security.

Getting back to the matter of the "owner and dog love" experience, which is the seemingly most common form of justification of this cruel practice which I call the "my dog is happy cause it loves me syndrome" may I remind you all of which you are aware in that the dog social structure "pack" consistis of a hierarchy that revolves around a dominant individual who threatens, intimidates and uses physical aggression towards the other pack subordinate members in order to be the pack leader. Generally when a human enters this relationship the human becomes the dominant pack leader, this is commonly achieved through the same exerted aggressive behaviour, either vocal or physical or in most cases both.

I have only in one first hand instance seen an owner take no disciplinary or aggressive action against his dogs and this resulted in the dogs assuming a dominant behaviour pattern which made them unpredictably violent and agressive towards both each other, the owner and any individual stupid or unlucky enough to visit that premises.

Therefore it is both well known as descibed here above that the Dog & Master relationship is about ownership and aggressive physical domination and as you all know that love is the complete opposite of dominatation, it is only possible on a level platform of mutual respect, and not obedience through fear, love is the opposite to ownership, its about completely letting go. From these points(which you already knew I just had to possibly remind you) it is impossible for a dog to love its owner and for an owner to love their dog, a complete condradiction of our knowledge, understanding and values.

Cheers
Den

[Hydonia]

I just love it when I am not on the net for awhile and come and read one of these debates, it's amazing how passionate people get about these things.

I myself am the owner of....wait for it....TWO dogs.
One is a pure bred staffy and one is a cross whom we rescued. I love my dogs more then my husband, and he knows it and I try and provide the best possible environment for them that I can. I have left the gates and doors open and they always choose to come back to me, although not very often since my "type" of dogs are readily stolen for dog fights.
I originally bought my pure bred (which is a debate in itself but I refuse to buy animals from pet stores or backyard breeders). I rescued my bitch a year later because we were desperately seeking a packmate for my dog. I started working and I refuse to let a pack animal sit at home alone, to me that does seem like a form of torture.
There is no reason for me to own dogs, I do it because I love them, because I love caring for them, exercising them and helping them be as happy and healthy in the captive environment they are in. I don't deny they live in a "prison", but so do my fish, and for that matter so do I, although mine is a self made prison.

Just my opinion and I wanted to join in on the fun!

[Ronny]

Point, set and match lol.

Very good point there about love and Dominance.
One of the most important things about training a dog is establishing whos the boss.

When people say they have a great dog, one word that often comes up is OBEDIENT.

This implies the dog does what YOU say.
When training a dog we teach commands.
We say sit, stay, drop.
Not can you sit, please drop, or you shouldnt eat that child lol.

My dogs are trained in the same way.
It's how it has to be for us to live together peacefully.

As Alize said, they are in a 'prison' but it's the best prison they could be in lol.

[marie90]

One is a pure bred staffy. I love my dogs more then my husband, and he knows it

You got good taste. Me and my partner both love our purebred staffy more than we love eachother.

may I remind you all of which you are aware in that the dog social structure "pack" consistis of a hierarchy that revolves around a dominant individual who threatens, intimidates and uses physical aggression towards the other pack subordinate members in order to be the pack leader.

Would you not also say then that your parents are a heirachy to yourself as the dominant figure in the household, yet they do not have threaten, intimidate or use physical aggression towards you to be considered the pack leader. I have not ever used physical, threatening or intimidating behaviour towards my dog in order to train or punish them. I use positive reinforcement towards my animals and yet they still know that we (my partner and I) are pack leaders. Why is that? Because we are the ones who feed her, decide whether she can sleep on the bed, what toys she can play with, where I take her for a walk, what room she is allowed to go in etc... She knows that she plays by our rules. If she doesnt we simply take away her toys.....and then give them back to her when she does the right thing later.
Thats not cruelty at all. Its called parenting.
The same thing you do to your children

[Ronny]

I see what you're saying Marie, however, it's alot easier with a puppy to establish whos boss.
Try it with a one year old dog whos been mistreated and neglected.
And I agree totally with the fact that you don't need to use aggression or threats to train a dog but you are still showing that you're in charge and there's no other way.
Threats aren't always as obvious as raising a fist or something, if you're dog knows you will take away her toys if she misbahaves, that is still a threat.
A threat to take her belongings. Positve reinforcement is just like a passive threat. If you don't sit, you don't get this treat.
Does that make sense? It does in my head lol.

Anyway, sorry for getting off topic