Keeping Pets Is Reprehensible

[lemit]

No, I'm not advocating baby killing. I'm sorry you think that.

 

--lemit

[Turtle]

No, I'm not advocating baby killing. I'm sorry you think that.

 

--lemit

 

I'm sorry people don't think the effects of keeping pets is a legitimate concern. For every documented account of the detriment that I give, I get an emotional/subjective rebuttal. Sorry to say, that's not good enough. That baby is dead because Grandma didn't think through the real costs of keeping her pets. Bummer huh? :hihi:

[lemit]

Your syllogism isn't really worth comment, so I won't in the future.

 

Farewell and good luck.

 

--lemit

[Turtle]

Your syllogism isn't really worth comment, so I won't in the future.

 

Farewell and good luck.

 

--lemit

 

If it wasn't worth a comment, why did you bother to make one? Good luck to you as well and here's hoping your pets never kill a child. :cocktail:

 

Meantime we have the Coast Guard risking their lives & expensive equipment, risking the lives of others, using time, and consuming resources to rescue pets from the flooding. :doh: Good grief. :eek2:

 

Dogs and Cats Rescued from North Dakota Floods | Hero | News | PEOPLE Pets

Machinery Technician 3rd Class Dan Fraley, pictured here, used an airboat to rescue a dog from an Oxbow-area woman’s home on Thursday. Nearby Petty Officer 1st Class Gabe Wilch helped a family leave the flood waters and lifted their cat out in a carrier. The Coast Guard even used helicopter buckets to rescue at least three dogs and a cat. ...

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

Yah yah yah....but Mr Turtle just think of all those poor vetrinarians that would have gone to school for nothing If we stopped keeping pets....and all those nice folks that design and make the toys My lil Chloe loves so much and of course those that earn their livings making her food and those that create the advertising, and those that design and print the packaging for the food and toys, and lets not forget all the nice folks that transport it all;)

 

I'm helpin keep alot of people workin...that my extremely docile pup should snap and maul someone is like a billion to one shot...hardly worth puttin all those nice people out of a job by gettin rid of her;)

[Turtle]

Yah yah yah....but Mr Turtle just think of all those poor vetrinarians that would have gone to school for nothing If we stopped keeping pets....and all those nice folks that design and make the toys My lil Chloe loves so much and of course those that earn their livings making her food and those that create the advertising, and those that design and print the packaging for the food and toys, and lets not forget all the nice folks that transport it all;)

 

I'm helpin keep alot of people workin...that my extremely docile pup should snap and maul someone is like a billion to one shot...hardly worth puttin all those nice people out of a job by gettin rid of her;)

 

I spent 15 years lifeguarding, teaching swimming & training lifeguards. 'Scuse me if I don't f**k around with the safety of human life.

 

Red Deer Advocate - Hard times put strain on keeping pets

There is no countrywide data being collected on the reasons dogs and cats are being abandoned by their owners, but shelter managers and advocates for animals say the trend is undeniable — and probably a bigger phenomenon than they are aware of.

 

“People are embarrassed to admit that’s why they’re giving up their pets,” said Betsy McFarland, the Humane Society’s director of communications for companion animals.

 

An Associated Press-Petside.com poll found that one in seven owners countrywide reported reduced spending on their pets during the past year’s recession. Of those cutting back, more than a quarter said they have seriously considered giving up their pet.

 

The average annual cost of owning a dog is about $1,400, while the average annual cost of a cat is about $1,000, according to a survey conducted by the American Pet Products Association. The survey suggests there are some 231 million pets — excluding fish — in more than 71 million homes in America.

...

“When it came down to whether I was going to charge food for the month of September or give medicine to my cat, that was a clear decision for me,” Farrell-Talbot said. “It was horrible. It killed us.”

 

No; you killed the cat...at your convenience. :cocktail:

[TheBigDog]

Turtle: you stand accused of being a HUMAN SUPREMEST. What say ye to this accusation?

[Turtle]

Turtle: you stand accused of being a HUMAN SUPREMEST. What say ye to this accusation?

 

I say guilty of being human and the term is "supremacist".

supremacist - definition of supremacist by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

su·prem·a·cist

n.

One who believes that a certain group is or should be supreme.

 

supremacist

a person who advocates supremacy of a particular group, especially a racial group.

 

If the charge is that I value human life over other animals, then yes I am a human supremacist. By all accounts so too are most pet owners or at least I have yet to find a story of anyone euthanizing their kids because of hard economic times.

[TheBigDog]

I am too Turtle; good to know you friend. It is amazing to me that two hard core peoplists like you and me would have animal monikers.

[CraigD]

Balter's Blog: Another child killed by dogs

Having heard mention of him in references to his several books and stories from popular science websitessites and print sources, I was surprised by this blog entry by Journalism professor Michael Balter. While one doesn’t expect a journalist to have a stronger grasp of statistics and public health information sources than a member of the general public, his blog entry is very emotional and non-scientific. It’s closing sentence

Oh, Fluffy, cute dog, good dog, ooh Fluffy such a sweet dog! Makes me want to vomit.

summarizes the overall tone of it: visceral, emotionally charges, and unsupported by objective data. In short, this strikes me as journalism of tabloid quality.

 

With the words

I was absolutely shocked to find out that thousands of children in the United States and other countries are mauled and killed by dogs every year

Balter implies that thousands of children are killed each year by dogs in the US. However, in nearly all western countries, all deaths are recorded and compiles by public health record agencies. In the US, this data is available to the public. Starting with data from 2003, it is available online at Mortality - Multiple Cause of Death

 

From this data, we can see that, for people of all ages for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005, “bitten or struck by dog” (ICD-10 code W54) is listed as the cause of 32, 27, and 33 deaths in the US for people of all ages. For comparison, in 2005, 48 deaths are listed as caused by “victim of lightning” (X33), 82 by “contact with hornets, wasps and bees” (X23), 12,352 by “assault by firearm discharge” (X93-X95), and 47,717 by “transport accidents” (V01-V99). Browsing this and similar sources of public mortality and morbidity information can provide many other comparisons.

 

You are literally more likely be killed in the US by being struck by lightning, hundreds of times more likely to be shot to death, and over a thousand times more likely to be killed by a car, than to be killed by a dog. The assertion that dogs (the only common pet animal to have its own ICD-10 code, because few deaths result from any other) pose a significant risk of death to the public, is unsupported.

 

Lack of factual support, however, appears to me to rarely discourage people, journalists and webzens alike, from seizing a terrible incident such as infant Jaden Mack’s killing by two dogs, and concluding that it’s indicative of a significant risk to human health and safety. Leading questions like Turtle’s

Anyone think keeping a pet is worth a child's life?

are typical of this sort of appeal, which not only distorted reality by failing to consider objective evidence, but, as I noted previously, are an example of a common fallacy, the false dichotomy, or either-or fallacy.

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

I spent 15 years lifeguarding, teaching swimming & training lifeguards. 'Scuse me if I don't f**k around with the safety of human life.

According to the NSC Accidental drowning and submersion accounted for 3,482 deaths in 2000....by your implied logic...going near or encouraging anyone else to go near any body of water larger than a shot glass is also reprehensible....what say you:hihi:

 

Dog caused deaths for 2000: 26

 

:hihi:Lifeguards that let people into the water are reprehensible:hihi:

[Turtle]

...Lack of factual support, however, appears to me to rarely discourage people, journalists and webzens alike, from seizing a terrible incident such as infant Jaden Mack’s killing by two dogs, and concluding that it’s indicative of a significant risk to human health and safety. Leading questions like Turtle’s are typical of this sort of appeal, which not only distorted reality by failing to consider objective evidence, but, as I noted previously, are an example of a common fallacy, the false dichotomy, or either-or fallacy.

 

Mmmmm... seems to me you are rather cavalier about a preventable death. :cocktail: I believe I gave statistics for animal caused human deaths earlier (post#86), and horses lead dogs. Now as to a logical fallacy, you seem to prefer the reductio ad absurdum wherein you give some small likelihood of an occurence and then claim that it occuring is so absurd as to make it discountable.

 

Here's another leading question or two. Do you suppose the lady that killed her cat 'cause she couldn't afford it will get another when the economy improves? Do you think that baby's grandma is getting more dogs or if they didn't destroy the ones that killed the child, keep them?

 

According to the NSC Accidental drowning and submersion accounted for 3,482 deaths in 2000....by your implied logic...going near or encouraging anyone else to go near any body of water larger than a shot glass is also reprehensible....what say you

 

Dog caused deaths for 2000: 26

 

Lifeguards that let people into the water are reprehensible.

 

Floppin' around there like a fish outa water, aint ya? :doh: Tell me, how many people killed by pets would it take to have you consider it a serious concern?

 

As to the drownings I dare say 99% were preventable, and yes in many cases a good lifeguard if present would prevent people from going in the water contingent on conditions. I saved a few children from drowning and no one died on my watch because I knew my job, I took it seriously, and I did it no matter if I cheesed some folks off. (Obviously, I cheesed a lot of folks off. :hihi: )

 

Gee, it's only a few people killed by pets, it's only a little food diverted, it's only a little of fuel use, it's only a few hospital visits, it's only a little dog **** on my shoe, it's only a few birds and other wild animals being killed by domestic cats, it's only once in a while a dog rushes me in my yard, it's only a few people afraid to go out, it's only a few kids contracting feline disease, yada, yad, yada reductio adsurdum. Way to go humans. :eek2:

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

Floppin' around there like a fish outa water, aint ya?

:hihi:No, but you seem to be though:hihi:

 

Tell me, how many people killed by pets would it take to have you consider it a serious concern?

T'would at the very very least have to be as likely the two deaths I fear most and worry bout which are drowning and suffocation.

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

Gee, it's only a few people killed by pets, it's only a little food diverted, it's only a little of fuel use, it's only a few hospital visits, it's only a little dog **** on my shoe, it's only a few birds and other wild animals being killed by domestic cats, it's only once in a while a dog rushes me in my yard, it's only a few people afraid to go out, it's only a few kids contracting feline disease, yada, yad, yada reductio adsurdum. Way to go humans.

Could say the same for havin babies with slight modifications. How much wild space is destroyed to make more space for more peoples....more people is never a good thing...but they're out there reproducing....destroying green space, pummeling their neighbor, shootin and lootin, etc.etc....the only argument you have to offer is the whole human supremacy thingy :cocktail: big whup, that only last's till the party's over then it will be the insects and rodents that will rule the roost:hihi: I mean really:rolleyes: you worry about a few animals....SH** that ain't nuthin' look at what people do to wild life, domesticated animals, and each other and tell me pets is a bigger problem:D

 

And BTW people that euthanize or otherwise dispose of their animals when things get tough, SUCK! That is reprehensible, truly...perhaps that's the difference between pet parents like me and the misses and pet owners:shrug: If their truly part of your family you never let them go (unless they're dying and suffering horribly and there is no hope).

[Turtle]

Floppin' around there like a fish outa water, aint ya?

:hihi:No, but you seem to be though:hihi:

 

Not at all. I'm in my element. :cocktail: After all, the law is on my side. I mean if dangers from pets was some benign negligible measure, why all the laws controlling them? The reason they don't get enforced more often is this misbegotten idea that keeping pets is all hunky-dory and it wouldn't be politically correct to offend anyone now would it? Guess who doesn't give a pet rat's *** who is offended by callin' a trough a trough and a fig a fig? Yes there's plenty of other figs & troughs and don't I have a passel of my own selfish foibles, but that does not discount or negate the selfish, wasteful, destructive, and yes deadly, practice of keeping pets. Woof! :eek2:

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

Not really, the laws only on your side as far as lousy pet-keeping is concerned...A caring pet owner has their pet under their control as much as possible not only to protect the community from their pet (no matter how well behaved) but to protect them (the pet) from harm....you wouldn't let a two year old child roam unattended....something bad could happen, they could get hit by a car or sumthin.....why would you let a dog or cat do so?

 

100% of all pet related injuries and death can be traced exclusively to bad pet-keeping or in short bad owners...a properly cared for pet will not attack (with the exception of wild animals kept as pets) it's owner, a pet that is under it's owners control at all times will not have the opportunity to harm others.

[Turtle]

Not really, the laws only on your side as far as lousy pet-keeping is concerned...A caring pet owner has their pet under their control as much as possible not only to protect the community from their pet (no matter how well behaved) but to protect them (the pet) from harm....you wouldn't let a two year old child roam unattended....something bad could happen, they could get hit by a car or sumthin.....why would you let a dog or cat do so?

 

100% of all pet related injuries and death can be traced exclusively to bad pet-keeping or in short bad owners...a properly cared for pet will not attack (with the exception of wild animals kept as pets) it's owner, a pet that is under it's owners control at all times will not have the opportunity to harm others.

 

:cocktail: Caring pet owner strikes me as an oxymoron, but I guess I got that across. I don't expect you to change your view because gee, wouldn't that be a bitter pill to swallow.

 

Your last bit is unsubstantiated twaddle. (I said "twaddle! :eek2: ) I think the most recent attack by dogs here in the area was when repeat offenders got out of the good dog-owner's properly built fence and killed some neighbor dogs. Want that story referenced? Or would that be too visceral & emotionally charged? Meow! :doh: