FOAK: Dog training and 'shock' collars

Of course - I thought you knew that?

 

I would have worn something more revealing if I'd known.

 

Ben Blaney says...

We've outsourced it.

 

I think he suspects his comments might polarise opinion somewhat.

 

Never been out of work though, least not for more than a week or so.

 

porl left a note on my windscreen which said:

Firstly it has to be addressed that I don't think having a pet is, in
any way, a 'need'. The only exception is, arguably, the use of working
animals which has declined considerably.

Secondly I would be interested to hear what you would describe as a
common pet - such as domestic dogs or domestic cats' natural habitat.

I acquired my dog out of desire. Firstly the undesirable, to me,
alternative of this particular dog being destroyed. Secondly the desire
to have a dog. A non-pet person such as yourself may not understand my
reasons but that doesn't make them any less valid.

In the case of domestic pets then their only function is to exist as
members of the family - I agree with that. However, maybe not to
yourself, but pets can provide mutual enjoyment, companionship and love
in a family and I see nothing wrong with that whatsoever. The same
could be addressed to people who have children. Some adults may not
want to but I do not begrudge people who's opinions on these matters
differ to my own.

Maybe in some sense of 'kill everything and let god sort them out' you
are correct in your opinion and I am wrong. In the case of domestic
pets they don't have a natural habitat outside of the home and the
eradication of all domestic cats and dogs may not have much implication
in the natural world as they are only unnecessary servants of mankind.
But I find the idea of the extermination of species or sub-species quite
abhorrent for whatever reason perhaps unfathomable to yourself.

Having said all that I have the strangest feeling I have been trolled.
The bait was obviously quite a juicy one.

 

Well, yes. But, I'm fairly sure Ben meant what he said, so I don't
think that count as a troll.

 

Champ left a note on my windscreen which said:

But owner and pet have a *mutual* relationship. You cannot argue a dog
doesn't get any sort of benefit with companionship and safety.

 

Sure, blind guide dogs, etc. They help mankind, despite still being bred
into slavery. Lucky us. Not so lucky them.

Valid to you, no doubt. I would offer that the subject of your slavery not
only has no recourse to dispute your reasons but also wouldn't understand
them.

How do you know? Humans can barely express a coherent idea of "love", even
less can agree on a definition. It seems naive of _you_ to think that
animals can share this elusive concept, much less adhere to our own
morality, especially as a result of slavery.

Extermination would be an uncomfortable solution. A natural dying out would
be fine.

Not a troll. I find it astonishing that so much hypocrisy abounds in the
pet-owners world that is parallel to the human world and people don't see
it.

 

The dog doesn't get to electrocute you though.

 

If the relationship is mutual, explain to me how the dog would choose
to leave it.

 

I'm not doing anything here that I wouldn't do in a pub - I like to
throw a metaphorical hand grenade into a conversation and watch it go
off. And yeah, most often that's to give me an opportunity to
forcefully state that I'm right, and sometimes it's to give other
people an opportunity to make themselves look stupid.

If that's trolling, so be it.

 

You've not seen the littlest hobo, have you?

 

OI. If I want to make myself look stupid I'll do it when I want.
I don't need help from anybody.

 

Yebbut look at that film "The Incredible Journey" where a dog, a cat and (I
think) an octopus travel hundreds of miles to find the owners they love.

 

You seen the film, or read the book?

I read the book a couple of months, and really enjoyed it.

 

Seen the first twenty minutes of the film. Then Ellen started crying,
so I had to go and tend to her; not seen the rest yet.

It might get searched out at some point...

Author?

 

Generally they don't. Which is why there are far far more abused dogs
than cats recovered by people like the RSPCA.

A dog will stay with someone who mistreats it (and it considers to be
pack) until it either goes mad and attacks or dies..

Phil

 

How were the first twenty minutes, then? Good enough to make it worth
watching the rest?

Do it.

Some Japanese dude.

Ummm... Koushun Takami (translated by Yuji Oniki)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos...1208/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_11_1/202-1574214-0616626

 

Nice emotive words Porl. "Slavery". Yeah!

Dogs are pack animals. They need to be part of a pack (even if it's
only a pack of two). Their instinct is to follow the orders of the
pack-leader.

A well-looked after guide dog is as happy a creature as you could hope
to find..

There you go. That S word again.

Hint - dogs don't understand slavery. They understand pack.

Sigh. That S word again. Hint (again). Dogs *want* to be part of a
pack. Even if the pack leader only has 2 legs and is very very tall.
And doesn't seem to want to sniff butts.

A dog without a pack is a very very unhappy dog indeed.

Pets != humans. They have very different psychology to us. What would
be an intolerable situation to a human is great happiness to a dog.

Hint (the third) - look at how 'wild' dogs act..

Phil