Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How neutering dogs became the norm

moosenuggets.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 233 posts

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#211

Post by sn_master »

michaelmrose wrote: post #71
sn_master wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a reason BSLs exist. Scientists in those countries have decided pitbulls in particular are statistically more dangerous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breed-specific_legislation Please be cautious before getting a pit bull yourself or for a loved one. I don't see this discussion moving forward regardless of whatever evidence I present. God bless, have a great holiday.

Breed specific legislation depends on the argument that certain breeds are more dangerous. It's illogical to posit this is so because the legislation exists its circular.

What are you even saying?

Scientists use statistics from hospitals. They find that 90% of brutal gruesome deaths are caused by one breed or variation of such breed, they ban that breed from being adopted.

Result? 90% less gruesome bloody murders of innocent children and elderly -> success, the law is here to stay!

Where is the "illogical" or "circular" part? I don't understand what those words have to do here.

Do you like to allow poisonous snakes and tigers to be owned by the general population without any special license and guards too?

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#212

Post by sn_master »

perardi wrote: post #90
sn_master wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I shared a YouTube link with hundreds of videos of pitbull attacks caught on camera. Watching one or two of those videos should constitute a substantial argument if someone has an open mind. From experience, I can spend a solid hour writing arguments and I'll get downvoted anyway by all the SJWs here who refuse to accept anything differing from they believe in. Even if one person decides to watch any of those videos…

Define a “pit bull”. Go right ahead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

No one is going to confuse a German Shephard, Huskey or a Chihuahua for a "pit bull".

If you insist, there are DNA tests that exist and can "define" the aggressive genes very precisely.

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#213

Post by sn_master »

etempleton wrote: post #209
hn_user82179 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"With no prior warning" is a tough one. Pit Bull Terriers and other bully-type dogs are known to have high prey drives, and you can't really be surprised if one goes after a cat or small dog. I'm pretty tired of both the people who blame the dogs for everything and the people who are trying to convince the world that bully breed dogs are great beginner- or family-friendly pets. Certain dogs have certain traits that y…

You must be able to control the dog you adopt. Not all dogs are good for every person. Your experience raising dogs, space available, physical strength, and your time should all be considered. I have heard a good measure for physical strength required is that you should be able to carry any fully grown dog you own. If you can’t pick them up and carry them a short distance you probably do not have the physical stength…

Yes! And if that dogs keeps being aggressive and attacking and killing innocent pets around the house for several months and then goes and attacks a child or an elderly, you should be held 100% accountable.

Pets are like your children, you're responsible for keeping an eye on them always and to be accountable for what harm they cause to others, unless its truly a one-off case, which it almost never is in all the horrifying cases of dog to human attacks.

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#214

Post by sn_master »

dragonwriter wrote: post #95
sn_master wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a reason BSLs exist. Scientists in those countries have decided pitbulls in particular are statistically more dangerous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breed-specific_legislation Please be cautious before getting a pit bull yourself or for a loved one. I don't see this discussion moving forward regardless of whatever evidence I present. God bless, have a great holiday.

> There is a reason BSLs exist. Largely, responding to cultural trends among humans, and taking easy, symbolic legislative outs without supporting science.

Hospital reports on dog fatalities and violent attacks are not "supporting science"? What do you consider constitutes supporting science then?!?

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#215

Post by sn_master »

denimnerd42 wrote: post #165
michaelmrose wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association Co-occurrence of potentially preventable factors in 256 dog bite–related fatalities in the United States (2000–2009) Objective—To examine potentially preventable factors in human dog bite–related fatalities (DBRFs) on the basis of data from sources that were more complete, verifiable, and accurate than media reports used in previous studies. Design—Prospective ca…

One thing I just remembered: Previous to Michael Vick's very public dog fighting bust in 2007 most dogs were destroyed after being seized from dog fighting(1). After Michael Vick's exposure organizations popped up to save these dogs. Now saving pit bulls is more popular than ever but not every shelter has the resources to do it. 1. https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/764790714/what-happened-to-th...

And in many cases shelters were caught lying about the breed of pit bulls.

https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/neighborhood-politics-...

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#216

Post by bloodorange »

etempleton wrote: post #209
hn_user82179 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"With no prior warning" is a tough one. Pit Bull Terriers and other bully-type dogs are known to have high prey drives, and you can't really be surprised if one goes after a cat or small dog. I'm pretty tired of both the people who blame the dogs for everything and the people who are trying to convince the world that bully breed dogs are great beginner- or family-friendly pets. Certain dogs have certain traits that y…

You must be able to control the dog you adopt. Not all dogs are good for every person. Your experience raising dogs, space available, physical strength, and your time should all be considered. I have heard a good measure for physical strength required is that you should be able to carry any fully grown dog you own. If you can’t pick them up and carry them a short distance you probably do not have the physical stength…

Not many can pick up and carry a St. Bernard. However, I agree that one must be able to control one's dog. There is no flexibility there. If you are attentive and diligent you can train the dog without resorting to having to overpower it.

Speaking of overpowering, I used to walk a German Shepherd at a shelter many years ago. He wasn't well trained and in the beginning he used to tug at the leash with all his might. He was rather strong and not being dragged along was a good challenge for any adult human. This was despite the fact that he had only one hindleg. Eventually I taught him to walk without a leash. However, I will never forget him because he demonstrated to me how strong dogs are. It is not hard to exert control over them but if it has to be via physical means, it is not easy.

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#217

Post by sn_master »

wavefunction wrote: post #107
neolog wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like they're common anyway though. > According to Petchi, there are around 1.2 million pet dogs across Iran and about 350,000 of them are in Tehran. https://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-iran-dog-walkers-2019013...

Semi-feral dogs perhaps. In many parts of the world one must be cautious about the street dogs, especially if they pack up as they can be unpredictable and quite dangerous to individual humans.

yup, specially around places with a lot of trash, which happen to be anywhere in developing countries' cities, where dogs gather to find food. Very very dangerous. Even if you survive the encounter (unlikely, specially at night), you'll usually need a dozen shots to prevent a serious infection.

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#218

Post by sn_master »

hansvm wrote: post #126
anonAndOn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, plenty of rental properties in the US prohibit pets.* *Service animals are often excepted, by law.

I like the way that's phrased -- it's the law to allow service animals, but they're only often allowed. Landlords have a lot of power, especially over anyone living paycheck to paycheck, and some of them will knowingly break laws if they think you're unable to fight back.

No one likes to have loud dog barking all day and night from their neighbors. Its not about enjoying power over people, its about making the lives of everyone around you less sucky.

You can always get a turtle, a fish a hamster, guinea pig etc and no one will even know you have one and you can enjoy their company just as much as a dog. Lookup YouTube to find evidence of how fun small animals can be.

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#219

Post by michaelmrose »

sn_master wrote: post #211
michaelmrose wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breed specific legislation depends on the argument that certain breeds are more dangerous. It's illogical to posit this is so because the legislation exists its circular.

What are you even saying? Scientists use statistics from hospitals. They find that 90% of brutal gruesome deaths are caused by one breed or variation of such breed, they ban that breed from being adopted. Result? 90% less gruesome bloody murders of innocent children and elderly -> success, the law is here to stay! Where is the "illogical" or "circular" part? I don't understand what those words have to do here. Do you…

Surely you could provide some studies that show that in areas with breed bans the rate of gruesome violent deaths are down 90%, or you could if that were real.

Outside of fantasies pushed by a professional victim there isn't such proof and on net the number of people killed by dogs is about 1/10 of the number that drown in bathtubs and you could do more for the world by demanding grab bars be installed in every bathroom.

Re: How neutering dogs became the norm

#220

Post by michaelmrose »

sn_master wrote: post #215
denimnerd42 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I just remembered: Previous to Michael Vick's very public dog fighting bust in 2007 most dogs were destroyed after being seized from dog fighting(1). After Michael Vick's exposure organizations popped up to save these dogs. Now saving pit bulls is more popular than ever but not every shelter has the resources to do it. 1. https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/764790714/what-happened-to-th...

And in many cases shelters were caught lying about the breed of pit bulls. https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/neighborhood-politics-...

They aren't lying about the breed of dog they aren't providing the shelters best guess as to the dog breed to the prospective owners prior to adoption. More to the point the link doesn't even state anyone was "caught" doing anything. This is literally you misrepresenting what your own link actually states.

In essence you were literally in the comment where you say they were caught lying the only one caught lying.

Post reply on HN