AArgh... neighbors

[Vox Humana]

Let me guess, that was just another exercise in humor?

[Bourne Identity]

No, that's how it is supposed to be done. That's what I was saying about this tree being taken down without a warning to the neighbor. I didn't say they could not take it down, only that it would have been thoughtful to make Toni aware of it so she could plan for the noise, not wonder what was going on, not throw a party that day, whatever. I do the same thing.

When we had the pool built, I also went to all the neighbors and told them for the next week or so the noise level will be high. They all thanked me and went on with life. When we put up a ten foot satellite dish in the back I went around and asked all the neighbors if they minded because till my gardens got bigger, they'd all see it. It's little nice things. Not huge things.

Oh well, I am a nightmare to live next to according to someone who doesn't know me.

v

[Bourne Identity]

Buddhists are human beings at all different levels of knowing. Don't throw that crap in my face, Ann. I can sit here in judgment all day long, how that translates into being tough to live near is freakishly odd.

Then, you turn around and mirror exactly what I said to you! I'm bored.

[Bourne Identity]

No, she's just full of herself and hasn't got a clue. I'd bet people run fast to get away from her "humor."

[Rod & Betty Jo]

"Doug Kanter"

Did I get this right?....The damn dog barks but it is the owners fault and not the fault of the actual dog doing the barking?.....and with a hopeful spirit you someday hope that people with whom you presumably simply don't approve of will get killed simply on your whim? So may we presume that you value trees and dogs more than you actually value humans? I guess people pick their own values, too bad you picked yours.....Rod

[Doug Kanter]

Actually, I think killing the dog is the way to go, because of the misery it may cause the owner and its family. But, try and get people to agree with THAT idea. Not easy. As far as "people I don't approve of", the word "you" (meaning me) doesn't fit. ***NOBODY*** approves of humans of allow their dogs to bark endlessly. Yes, that's an absolute statement, and is inarguably true, all the time, everywhere. Period.

Now, if you have some spare time, conduct a survey. I already know the results, but you'll want to find out for yourself. Ask 100 people "If, for one day, you could pick one unbelievably obnoxious neighbor, take a rifle and shoot that person dead, and know that there would be no legal consequences, would you do it?" I promise you that the results would shock you. If you asked the question face to face, at least half would respond "yes". If you conducted it anonymously, on paper, I think more like 80% would say "yes".

[Hound Dog]

You are in serious need of help. Get it now before it's too late!

[Vox Humana]

Yes. That's right. Dogs that are appropriately cared for don't constantly bark. Brining the barking dog inside the house will generally solve the problem. Dogs are both social and territorial. Dogs that are left outside get bored and bark, especially when they feel threatened or they hear other dogs barking. People who live in close proximity to others shouldn't keep their dogs outside, and when they do and barking becomes a problem, then it is the responsibility of the owner to find a solution.

[Doug Kanter]

Nah....I'm just an HONEST observer of human nature.

All day long, farmers legally eliminate animals that are destroying crops or livestock. Could be dogs, deer, coyotes. Do those farmers need help, too?

[Doug Kanter]

And then there's the flip side - why the owners don't deserve to exist in polite society:

1) They KNOW full well that the barking is bothering people, but they make a clear choice to do nothing about it. That means there's intent, and this needs to be taken no further. Everyone will draw their own conclusions.

or:

2) They do NOT know it's a problem, which means they're too stupid to own a pet. So, it's the responsibility of SOMEONE to help them not own a pet. In a dream world, an animal control department takes care of this. In reality, they do NOT take care of it much of the time, for a host of reasons.

[Travis]

If a dog is a barker it should not be outside unattended.

[Vox Humana]

I don't disagree with you on this point. In fact, it was my intention to place the blame on the owner, not the dog. People who don't want to take care of their pets shouldn't be pet owners. Owning a companion animal involves more than supplying food and shelter. Dogs require social interaction and discipline. They shouldn't be left alone to bark for hours on end. Killing a barking dog doesn't seem to be a rational alternative. If your neighbor's car was loud, you wouldn't be permitted to destroy it.

Being a good neighbor is an obligation and involves some effort. I don't believe that money absolves people of all responsibilities or entitles them to be obnoxious. If you pay the mortgage and taxes, you have not fulfilled you obligation to society. That is an elitist attitude that implies that property owners have more rights than others. I agree that people can be stupid or aggressive, sometimes both. Killing a dog that barks because it isn't appropriately cared for ignores the true issue - the owners. A better solution would be a stiff fine and maybe a few nights in jail for repeat offenses. The dog should be removed from an abusive/neglectful home and placed for adoption at the owner's expense.

[Doug Kanter]

Oh DAMN! And I already went out and bought the explosives! :-) Are you sure I can't do it?

Well, it certainly solves the problem for a few nights, and sends a message. Fortunately for the dogs, most gun owners are careful and responsible, and know that they can only dream.

It's a rare judge that will do all that, although it's appropriate, especially the jail time.

[Doug Kanter]

Gee....ya think? :-)

[Vox Humana]

alternative.

The only message that it sends is that owner isn't responsible. All he has to do is leave the dog unattended and let someone else take action. Dogs are a dime a dozen to some people. If you kill one, they can get another one "free to a good home" by tomorrow afternoon.

[Janet Baraclough]

The message from "Rod & Betty Jo" contains these words:

Well done.

.....and with a hopeful

You've been listening very closely to Mr President, I can tell

If you presume that, I shall deduce that you are a somewhat naive person who has probably never heard of Lilliput or Swift and wouldn't recognise irony if a large chunk of rusty metal crashed onto your nose.

Rod, you aren't equipped to pick anything deeper than your nostrils.

Janet

[Rod & Betty Jo]

Since I was simply addressing a blanket and rather ignorant statement " It is never the animal's fault. Never. It is always the fault of the people who leave animals out to bark incessantly" .......The statement had no qualifier for time, duration or circumstance.....one could surmise a barking dog for 10 minutes as easily as 10 hours (both can be rather irritating)....as it is dogs bark...its what they do...and just because a dog barks the owner does not inherently deserve the subsequently proffered penalties. Now granted expecting any sort of reasoned discourse here may have been a bit optimistic.....nonetheless I thought it worthy to at least call attention to such sloppy thinking or even flawed values...besides I was bored.

Politics? I'm sure there is a connection here however obscure....Does the Presidents dog bark incessantly?

I don't think I'd actually put this newsgroup prose quite in the same category in either style or content....are you actually familiar with such writing? Incidentally in follow-up posts such values were again propagated so I'd seriously question such subtle irony as either intended nor achieved.....One may hope it was simply hyperbolic exaggeration.....or the writing tool of choice for the less gifted.

And your choice of such purposeless insult demonstrates your own intellectual prowess? Rod

[Vox Humana]

I think assigning "fault" to a dog for barking is at best pointless. Under the right circumstances a dog will bark. If your only point is to place blame and not come to a resolution, then blaming a dog for baking would meet your goal. On the other hand, if you goal is to resolve the noise problem, then the only rational conclusion is to find fault with the owner for not managing the problem. A barking dog will seldom, if ever, take steps to make the neighborhood quite. The dog has other goals. Gun owner will quickly point out that guns don't kill people, people kill people. Blaming a gun for making noise or killing people is exactly the same as blaming a dog for barking. We could argue into eternity about whether guns kill people and not change the fact that tens of thousands of people are killed by guns each year, just as you could blame a dog for barking and not make things even a tiny bit quieter.

[Bourne Identity]

For the record, my answer would be, unquestionably NO. I am gleefully among the

20%.

[Bourne Identity]

Most likely not. These "types" have this grand ability to ignore everything which is no consequence to them. Seeing dogs tied out to trees and whatever else literally breaks my heart.

This is more close to truth than not. For this reason, I sometimes wonder if animals aren't the ones who are more evolved.