A plea for more responsible dog owners

[tallulah71]

Ron70 :)

[corley]

you should check out ashbourne grove we get humans crapping in the alley,vomit, urine,and food from the local takeaways all over the place.

Dog poo would make a pleasant change.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Who suggested banning dogs?

[Earl Aelfheah]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > keeping a dog in the city is generally

> antisocial

>

>

> That's a bit OTT. Many would argue the opposite.

OK. I casually overstated it. That said... my guess would be that a large number of people will have been kept awake by a barking dog at some point, trodden in their sh*t, or been intimidated by an aggressive canine whilst in a public place. Of course there are a majority of responsible owners, but unfortunately there is no restrictions on who can buy a dog.

Is it generally undesirable to have (at least large) dogs in a modern, densely populated city? It is a strange quirk of history / our culture that we don?t think it weird. Should someone want to keep a similar sized animal in a small flat, or terraced house (such as a pig, or a sheep) we?d probably question their good sense and it?s potential to cause a nuisance more freely.

That said, I wouldn?t want dogs banned, of course not. It would be good if people were generally a bit more conscious of how they affect others though. Most of the time, when a dog has jumped up at me whilst I?ve been out running or started licking my face as I sit in their owners home - I?ve been told things like ?he?s just saying hello?, or ?ah, he?s giving you a kiss?. Well no, no he is not giving me a kiss, he is being poorly controlled by someone who irrationally personifies their pet.

[Edited after reflecting on others comments]

[Ron70]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> first mate Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > rahrahrah Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > keeping a dog in the city is generally

> > antisocial

> >

> >

> > That's a bit OTT. Many would argue the

> opposite.

>

> OK. I casually overstated it. That said... my

> guess would be that a large number of people will

> have been kept awake by a barking dog at some

> point, trodden in their sh*t, or been intimidated

> by an aggressive canine whilst in a public place.

> I would also bet that a significant number of

> ?urban dogs? don?t get two walks a day, don?t have

> enough company during working hours, or sufficient

> space to run around in. Of course there are a

> majority of responsible owners, but unfortunately

> there is no restrictions on who can buy a dog.

>

> Is is generally undesirable to have (at least

> large) dogs in a modern, densely populated city?

> It is a strange quirk of history / culture that we

> don?t think it weird. Should someone want to keep

> a similar sized animal in a small flat, or

> terraced house (such as a pig, or a sheep) we?d

> probably question their good sense and it?s

> potential to cause a nuisance, more freely.

>

> Dogs are bred to have characteristics we find

> pleasing and that are tradable (even where it

> leads to health problems for the animal). They're

> bought for many reasons (fashion, or

> companionship) but fundamentally for the owners'

> pleasure, no one elses. We all do things for the

> benefit of ourselves of course, sometimes causing

> inconvenience to others ? but let?s not pretend

> it?s anything else... It?s not socially beneficial

> to keep animals as pets.

>

> That said, I wouldn?t want dogs banned, of course

> not. It would be good if people were generally a

> bit more conscious of how they affect others

> though. Most of the time, when a dog has jumped up

> at me whilst I?ve been out running or started

> licking my face as I sit in their owners home -

> I?ve been told things like ?he?s just saying

> hello?, or ?ah, he?s giving you a kiss?. Well no,

> no he is not giving me a kiss, he is being poorly

> controlled by someone who irrationally personifies

> their pet.

This statement is up there amongst the most ridiculous things I've read for some time:

- Do you have any evidence to back up your "assumptions" on dogs getting enough walks or having enough room?

- How does our relationship with dogs have anything to do with "a strange quirk of history"?

- I was going to address all of the unfounded and subjective comments that you've posted but I can't be bothered...

Unbelievable!

[LadyDeliah]

Pets can appear to be beneficial to people's health, so saying it's not socially beneficial to keep pets is incorrect.

Benefits to people's health is always a benefit to society:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130509163902.htm

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/48365516/THE-BENEFITS-OF-PET-OWNERSHIP

http://petsfortheelderly.org/research.html#5