ONCE AGAIN, read my posts.

Post #212,507

6/24/05 11:35:33 PM

Or didn't you read "This was a tragedy borne of ignorance".

Also, I didn't say anything about the pet loving the owner. Anywhere.

The article sure indicated that the owners loved the pets, though.

And NOWHERE did I excuse the owners responsibility for these tragedies.

Wow.

[link|http://www.runningworks.com|

]

Imric's Tips for Living

Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.

Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.

Post #212,512

by Silverlock

6/24/05 11:54:53 PM

That's what I'm responding to

I've read them. More than once. My point stands. Get a family dog of a breed that was bred as fighter and love it. It's still a fighting dog. Not suitable as a family pet. Why is this so hard to understand? It's still a dog that has been bred to fight. These dogs have their places, they are not in apartment houses or suburbia. These are "edge of wilderness" animals, not housepets.

Your "love" of the animal does not change the animal.

-----------------------------------------
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for. As for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican."
-- H. L. Mencken

Support our troops, Impeach Bush.
D. D. Richards

Post #212,515

by imric

6/25/05 12:04:32 AM

And THAT'S where 'tragedy borne of ignorance' comes in.

Or are you saying that love for 'edge of wilderness' animals is less genuine? THAT is horseshit, plain and simple. All I was doing was chiding Ash for dismissing the feelings the families had for these animals. EVERYBODY was hurt to some degree by the ignorance of the owners. The victims more, of course.

Christ, man, NOWHERE did I say that this was OK, that all dogs were suitable for family pets, or pets in suburbia. NOWHERE did I excuse these pet owners from their responsibility.

The idea that that post blew into this thread amazes me. It simply amazes me.

[link|http://www.runningworks.com|

]

Imric's Tips for Living

Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.

Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.

Post #212,517

by Another Scott

6/25/05 12:22:50 AM

I think Ashton was talking about 2 kinds of love.

In both cases, the owners (and in SF - the victim) 'loved' their 'pets'; the mother of the dead boy somewhat disgraced herself, post. this. mortem. via paeans of rationalizations about how this 'accident' happened... and how loving were the male/female dog pair cha cha cha.

So we have here the classic dichotomy: devotees of a schizophrenic love object. It 'loves you' but it may 'eat you' ... depending upon circumstances, luck and perhaps.. how you smell today.

I think Ashton's saying: People end up projecting their love of the dog back onto themselves. "I love Killer so much so he must love me back!" Love is blind, after all. As in the case of the abused wife or child mentioned elsewhere, one can't really say whether the returned love is genuine or a pathology.

I have no doubt that the 13 year old girl in the story felt very loving toward the dog. But in this case, I think we can all agree that it doesn't matter whether the dog was loving with her before hand. And it really doesn't matter if the owners genuinely loved the dog but couldn't or wouldn't train it. It became a weapon - guided or not.

My $0.02.

Cheers,
Scott.

Post #212,518

by Silverlock

6/25/05 1:11:20 AM

I think I may begin to see a glimmer of your point

Somehow, you think that the "love" for the animal is, in any way, a consideration. Correct me if I'm wrong. You *have* mentioned love of the animal quite often. That is your point, right? We who find objection to keeping attack bred animals as pets aren't considering just how much those who own these attack bred animals love them? If that is the case, all I can say is make sure you have paid up insurance and I won't be visiting.

Post #212,519

by bepatient

6/25/05 1:12:40 AM

Keep trying...you are VERY cold (meaning far from the point)

If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition}

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]

Post #212,520

by Silverlock

6/25/05 1:14:50 AM

Correct me then. Show me the error of my understanding

Post #212,522

by bepatient

6/25/05 1:17:58 AM

6/25/05 1:19:14 AM

Re-read Imrics first response to Ashton

Several times, if necessary. His point is crystal freakin clear and it had nothing to do with dogs. (well, maybe a little bit..in that a dog was the object of affection that simply could not be loved)

If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition}

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]

Edited by bepatient June 25, 2005, 01:19:14 AM EDT

Expand All History

Post #212,527

by Silverlock

6/25/05 1:27:47 AM

I have, many times.

Please educate me on the point I am missing.

Post #212,524

by boxley

6/25/05 1:24:46 AM

define attack bred animal

strong jaw, impervious to pain (which makes them unaware of giving pain since their own threshold is so high) however these dogs do not fight unless trained specifically to fight.
Now dogs are pack animals, when they move in with a family they will take as high a pack attribute as the alpha male/female in that pack will allow or they may determine they are the alpha, in that case viciously attacking someone who is being perceived as trying to better themselves (usually a stranger). This will/can happen with any breed. Pits are no more heinous in this regard as any other breed.
thanx,
bill

All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett
[link|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/]

Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]

Post #212,528

by Silverlock

6/25/05 1:28:34 AM

Umm, Animals bred to fight?

Post #212,529

by boxley

6/25/05 1:31:16 AM

care to name a breed that was not bred to fight?

Post #212,531

by Silverlock

6/25/05 1:43:02 AM

Parsing like a republican you are.

You know the point I was making. Don't pull yet more nit picking shit.

Post #212,532

by boxley

6/25/05 2:16:56 AM

I see, no answer so start wild accusations :-)

Post #212,539

by Silverlock

6/25/05 8:19:23 AM

Here's an answer

Newfoundland

Post #212,540

by boxley

6/25/05 8:24:12 AM

viking war dog

Post #212,934

by ben_tilly

6/28/05 9:06:15 PM

Toy Poodle. :-P

Another fun example is a Lhasa Apso. A watchdog, yes. Fighting dog, no.

Cheers,
Ben

I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)

Post #212,936

by boxley

6/28/05 9:14:39 PM

both examples wrong, toy breeds of fighting dogs

except toy poodles are closer in kin to rats while the other breed is a lovable friend,
thanx,
bill

Post #212,942

by ben_tilly

6/28/05 10:31:04 PM

You do not breed toys to fight

It may have been bred from a fighting dog. But the breed that we now have was not bred to fight, it was bred to be a toy. Hence my point.

As for the Lhasa Apso, [link|http://www.animalforum.com/dbreed/nslhasa.htm|http://www.animalfor...breed/nslhasa.htm] suggests that they are not toy dogs. They are guard dogs. However as anyone who has seen the breed knows, they won't take down intruders, but no intruder will pass unnoticed by anyone within earshot. So my understanding is that the breed is not bred to fight, only to alert people that there is an intruder.

Cheers,
Ben

I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)

Post #212,533

by imric

6/25/05 2:26:05 AM

6/25/05 2:30:40 AM

*sigh*

My point - a very minor one, and not related to the point Ash was driving at, was not to denigrate the feelings the owners had for the animals because of the behaviour the animal exhibited. They didn't 'love' the animal, they feel love for the animal. It's not psycho, it's not wrong, and it's beyond judgement. The animals in the stories hurt others, and that was tragic - the owners were responsible, yes. That doesn't mean that the owners didn't love thier dogs.

We who find objection to keeping attack bred animals as pets aren't considering just how much those who own these attack bred animals love them? If that is the case, all I can say is make sure you have paid up insurance and I won't be visiting.

Geez. Listen a little, will you? *I am not saying that all breeds are appropriate for suburban or family life - heck, I'll extend it and add urban to that. The only thing I objected to was Ash denigrating the feelings of the ones that owned the animals. From the stories, they DID love thier pets - they were more than just weapons or power symbols. That makes it even more tragic - it makes those stories WORSE. Did they make poor choices? Sure. Did it end VERY badly? Yes. Does that excuse the owners? No. Get that? No. I'll say it again. No. Once again, I am not rationalizing thier choice of breed. Again, the owners are responsible for the tragedy. Get it? Really? Get. It?

Now, does this mean that the love the owners held for the pets is somehow lessened, less real, less valid, less than another pet-owner's? No.

How many more times do I have to repeat this?

*edit sentence parsed badly

[link|http://www.runningworks.com|

]

Imric's Tips for Living

Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.

Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.

Edited by imric June 25, 2005, 02:29:08 AM EDT

Edited by imric June 25, 2005, 02:30:40 AM EDT

Expand All History

Post #212,538

by Silverlock

6/25/05 8:18:03 AM

So be it.

I got the impression from your originial reply to Ashton that the fact these animals were "loved" somehow trumped the fact that they are dangerous. Yeah I can be a prick. If that's all you were saying then, duh. I'll go ahead and apologise for breaking out the flamethrower.

Where's that kneejerk emoticon when you need it?

Post #212,541

by imric

6/25/05 8:44:03 AM

*chuckle*

Don't sweat it...

[link|http://www.runningworks.com|

]

Imric's Tips for Living

Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.

Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.

Post #212,585

by CRConrad

6/25/05 6:38:10 PM

Oh, bullpucky.

Imriskip drivels:

My point - a very minor one, and not related to the point Ash was driving at, was not to denigrate the feelings the owners had for the animals because of the behaviour the animal exhibited.

Why the fuck not?

To "love" a fucking killer-beast is moronic, plain and simple; why the fuck should anyone be compelled to "respect" some moron's demonstrably moronic feelings?

They didn't 'love' the animal, they feel love for the animal.

Huh? What the fuck is the differrence? (AFAIK, they are by definition the same thing: "to love [verb] someone/something" *is* to "feel love [noun] for that someone/something". Is this another editing artifact?)

It's not psycho,

Yes it is.

it's not wrong,

Yes it is.

and it's beyond judgement.

No it isn't.

The animals in the stories hurt others, and that was tragic - the owners were responsible, yes.

Oh, how magnanimous of you to admit that much.

That doesn't mean that the owners didn't love thier dogs.

The *main* counter to this is, of course, that it's totally irrelevant: Who the fuck gives a fucking shit about whether these fucking morons fucking "loved" their fucking killer-beasts or not? What the fucking fuck does that have to do with fucking anything?

The fact that you're just plain wrong -- a feeling so pathological as that of the mother who made excuses for her dog after it KILLED HER SON can hardly be called "love" without tainting everything we call by that name -- is secondary. (Unless, of ourse, one considers... It could at least be argued, IMO, that these idiots' "love" for their killer-beasts makes it *worse*. Then, yes, I probably *would* actually give a shit about this aspect.)

Geez. Listen a little, will you?

Heh -- that's rich, coming from you, in this thread.

*I am not saying that all breeds are appropriate for suburban or family life - heck, I'll extend it and add urban to that. The only thing I objected to was Ash denigrating the feelings of the ones that owned the animals. From the stories, they DID love thier pets - they were more than just weapons or power symbols. That makes it even more tragic - it makes those stories WORSE. Did they make poor choices? Sure. Did it end VERY badly? Yes. Does that excuse the owners? No. Get that? No. I'll say it again. No. Once again, I am not rationalizing thier choice of breed. Again, the owners are responsible for the tragedy. Get it? Really? Get. It?

Yeah, well, that's all very fine and good, as far as it goes... But even that is not enough.

Now, does this mean that the love the owners held for the pets is somehow lessened, less real, less valid, less than another pet-owner's? No.

Yup.

It is, as DrooK pointed out, a "love" similar to what battered wives have for their battering husbands; to what Ge^H^HIraqi "patriots" had for Ad^H^HSaddam.

I mean, holy fuck, a woman "loves" her vicious fucking beast to the extent of MAKING EXCUSES for it after it KILLED HER SON -- and you DON'T SEE anything wrong with that "love"?!? (Either you didn't read the original post, and just totally missed this whole part -- which is what makes your exhortations to others to "listen" so hilarious -- or *you* freaking need your head examined, too.)

To sum up, it's STUPID and WRONG and BAD, and therefore, yes, it _I_S_ DEFINITELY less real, less valid, and worth less than other pet-owners' NON-pathological love for their NON-killer pets.

How many more times do I have to repeat this?

None, or infinity: It still won't become true, however often you repeat it.

[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)

Your lies are of Microsoftian Scale and boring to boot. Your 'depression' may be the closest you ever come to recognizing truth: you have no 'inferiority complex', you are inferior - and something inside you recognizes this. - [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=71575|Ashton Brown]

Post #212,589

by imric

6/25/05 6:58:56 PM

CRC

If you want to diminish the tragedies involved, and stand in judgement over the reality of the feelings of others, based on newsbites from US newspapers, fine. Your nature is duly noted.

[link|http://www.runningworks.com|

]

Imric's Tips for Living

Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.

Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.

Post #212,647

by CRConrad

6/26/05 2:34:05 PM

Those are indeed my initials.

If you want to diminish the tragedies involved

Huh?!? How the heck did *I* "diminish the tragedies involved"???

It wasn't *me* who posted post after post of apologia for vicious killer-beasts and the pathological "love" their owners feel for them, all the while neglecting to mention the *victims* of said vicious killer-beasts until about my 731st post in the thread... Who, exactly, is it who is "diminishing" the REAL tragedies here?

and stand in judgement over the reality of the feelings of others,

Ooo, the big bad man dares stand in *judgement* of things! That might hurt somebody's pwecious *feeewings*, and we just can't have that, now can we? Yeah, well, sorry, but I *have* judgement, and am fully prepared to use it. That's what separates man from the animals, you know.

Furthermore, I wasn't actually *mainly* judging "the *reality* of the feelings of others" (although I doubted that too), but was primarily trying to explain that said "feelings" -- be they real or not -- are WRONG and BAD and STUPID(*).

based on newsbites from US newspapers,

Ooh, how extraordinary -- he bases his judgement on the data available to him! So, what do YOU base YOURS on (if you ever have any) -- do you channel Shirley MacLaine, or...?

Your nature is duly noted.

I dare excercise my rational human judgement over the apparent feelings of others based on the data available to me, and that somehow makes me a bad person?

So, are you saying that woman whose dog had killed her son DIDN'T spend all(+) of the interview with her afterwards making excuses for the dog? (If not, then stop whining about my sources.)

Or are you saying that the "real" love this shows she had for the dog somehow makes it *OK* for her dog to kill her son? (If not, then stop whining about my daring to judge.)

If neither of the above is what you're trying to say, then what the Hell *are* you whining about?

(*): Yes, feelings CAN be "wrong" and "bad" and "stupid". Obviously, if feelings like these exist.

(+): Or "most of", or even "much of" -- that would still be almost as bad, AFAICS. Or do you think it would be all right if she spent, say, equal time on the dog and the kid...? (And *I* am "diminishing the tragedies"! Give me strength!)

[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)

Post #212,653

by imric

6/26/05 5:00:12 PM

6/26/05 5:15:17 PM

Love <> Excuse

Nowhere in any of my posts did I post apologia for the owners. Never once, though you certainly want to paint them that way. In fact, in almost every one of them, I said that the owners are responsible.

The thing that Ash was doing WAS impugning the reality of the feelings the owner had for the anmals; he was implying that the love the owners wasn't really love. That's what the quotes around love inferred. The dogs in question were taken away, and that adds to the tragedy, it adds to the hurt of the incidents, and that's REAL. It makes things worse; the fact that it's necessary and right doesn't change that.

The nature of newsbites in our papers is to typically sensationalistic. They rarely give enough data to judge anything, but instead try to lead people to adopt the reporters viewpoint. Making snap judgements of people based on that is silly.

Bad person? Geez. I was trying to emphasize the futility of arguing with you when you've made up your mind on something. Don't go paranoid on me, Christian. Curmudgeon you may be, I've never thought of you as a bad person.

The 'excuses' (note the quotes) that the woman was making was more about the horror she felt about the whole thing, IMO - she never expected it to happen based on the prevous behavior of the dog, and NOWHERE did I say that this excused her. Never once. How many times have I lamented the lack of responsibilty displayed by people? I certainly haven't changed my stance now.

[link|http://www.runningworks.com|

]

Imric's Tips for Living

Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.

Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.

Edited by imric June 26, 2005, 05:15:17 PM EDT

Expand All History

Post #212,656

by CRConrad

6/26/05 6:04:45 PM

Ah. OK, sorry.

When you put it that way, it sounds quite reasonable. (So YTF didn't you put it that way to begin with? :-)

Yeah, I know I can be quite silly sometimes.

Anyway, again, I'm sorry.

[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)

Post #212,659

by imric

6/26/05 6:39:53 PM

*smile*

S'alright! And I didn't mean to annoy you...

[link|http://www.runningworks.com|

]

Imric's Tips for Living

Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.

Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.

Post #212,597

by rcareaga

6/25/05 7:54:34 PM

of dogs and men (new thread)

Created as new thread #212596 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=212596|of dogs and men]

Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.

Post #212,600

by mmoffitt

6/25/05 9:34:29 PM

Nit.

To "love" a fucking killer-beast is moronic, plain and simple; why the fuck should anyone be compelled to "respect" some moron's demonstrably moronic feelings?

s/moronic/psychotic/g

bcnu,
Mikem

It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell

Post #212,521

by bepatient

6/25/05 1:16:04 AM

Interesting.

In that this does nothing at all to explain why I have a very large "bred to fight" dog that is incredibly docile and had to put down a silver show poodle that attacked my daughter and I in the back seat of the car.

If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition}

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]

Post #212,525

by Silverlock

6/25/05 1:25:50 AM

Victim of the RNG in the sky.

Some animals end up psycho. It happens.

Welcome to IWETHEY!