Well at least 80% of the people that know me wish
I'd take a dirt nap.
Krause loves Smithers
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
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.
And then there's the flip side - why the owners don't deserve to exist in
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
Why? You would be better off calling the police or your attorney to deal
with noise problems rather than throw fule on the fire by duplicating the
irresponsible behavior of the pet owner.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.