Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
New PETA ad...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marguerite" data-source="post: 299051" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>Perhaps because we're less touchy on the topic of government controls, Australian government has laid down rules (becoming stricter all the time) on certain breeds of dog, getting banned. American pit-bulls are now banned from being imported, even half-breed pit bulls are controlled. Certain types of dog may not be on the street without being leashed and muzzled.</p><p>It's still not enough and there are still people who have guard dogs for various reasons. But it's increasingly getting tightly controlled here. Guard dog training is carefully controlled and anybody caught training a guard dog with anything inhumane is in trouble. It's recognised here that the best guard dogs are the ones trained humanely, so they're at least 'nice dogs' for the handlers. Our police dogs are a great example - no crim faces our cop dogs with equanimity, but they are the gentlest things when out in public with their handlers, and not actually tracking anybody. Kids often go up to a police dog on display and give it a cuddle. The handlers take them home and the dog lives with the family. </p><p>So if cops can do it, ANYBODY should be able to use humane training on their guard dogs.</p><p></p><p>We also have dog fights here in this country. Those poor dogs are often pets that have been snatcvhed, or been bred by the dog fighters from other canine victims of this. However, it's difficult to keep breeding stock of fightring dogs when neighbours dob owners in to RSPCA and cops. </p><p></p><p>But we have other 'entertainments' of similar sort (cane toad races, camel races, cane toad 'golf' which RSPCA is against) because people can always be inventive. When it comes to gambling, most Aussie males would bet on two flies crawling up the wall.</p><p></p><p>I think your analysis of a man who 'conquered the vicious fighting dogs" is exactly right. But why would someone so successful in such a macho capacity, need to do this?</p><p></p><p>You're also right about the really serious dog fighters - a winning dog is to be valued and bred from. A losing dog - it COULD fight again and do well and there's no reason you can't breed a fighter from it. But a serious fight organiser hasn't got the time to waste, torturing a dog. They don't do it for the enjoyment, it's just a business for them. A losing dog (especially an injured one) gets a quick bullet (or throat cut) and gets dumped.</p><p></p><p>The problem with a lot of the legal cases you mention - you have to have proof. The people behind PETA use emotion to drive their campaigns but they don't seem to like evidence to get in the way of a good story. And they ALWAYS need funding, so if someone donates enough, maybe they will find something else to campaign about... just a thought, of course. SOMETHING has to explain their actions!</p><p></p><p>There were times when even Greenpeace were doing some pretty ratbaggy things. These days they're a lot more politically aware and scientifically responsible. But then - I remember when Greenpeace first got started! (crikey, I'm old...)</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 299051, member: 1991"] Perhaps because we're less touchy on the topic of government controls, Australian government has laid down rules (becoming stricter all the time) on certain breeds of dog, getting banned. American pit-bulls are now banned from being imported, even half-breed pit bulls are controlled. Certain types of dog may not be on the street without being leashed and muzzled. It's still not enough and there are still people who have guard dogs for various reasons. But it's increasingly getting tightly controlled here. Guard dog training is carefully controlled and anybody caught training a guard dog with anything inhumane is in trouble. It's recognised here that the best guard dogs are the ones trained humanely, so they're at least 'nice dogs' for the handlers. Our police dogs are a great example - no crim faces our cop dogs with equanimity, but they are the gentlest things when out in public with their handlers, and not actually tracking anybody. Kids often go up to a police dog on display and give it a cuddle. The handlers take them home and the dog lives with the family. So if cops can do it, ANYBODY should be able to use humane training on their guard dogs. We also have dog fights here in this country. Those poor dogs are often pets that have been snatcvhed, or been bred by the dog fighters from other canine victims of this. However, it's difficult to keep breeding stock of fightring dogs when neighbours dob owners in to RSPCA and cops. But we have other 'entertainments' of similar sort (cane toad races, camel races, cane toad 'golf' which RSPCA is against) because people can always be inventive. When it comes to gambling, most Aussie males would bet on two flies crawling up the wall. I think your analysis of a man who 'conquered the vicious fighting dogs" is exactly right. But why would someone so successful in such a macho capacity, need to do this? You're also right about the really serious dog fighters - a winning dog is to be valued and bred from. A losing dog - it COULD fight again and do well and there's no reason you can't breed a fighter from it. But a serious fight organiser hasn't got the time to waste, torturing a dog. They don't do it for the enjoyment, it's just a business for them. A losing dog (especially an injured one) gets a quick bullet (or throat cut) and gets dumped. The problem with a lot of the legal cases you mention - you have to have proof. The people behind PETA use emotion to drive their campaigns but they don't seem to like evidence to get in the way of a good story. And they ALWAYS need funding, so if someone donates enough, maybe they will find something else to campaign about... just a thought, of course. SOMETHING has to explain their actions! There were times when even Greenpeace were doing some pretty ratbaggy things. These days they're a lot more politically aware and scientifically responsible. But then - I remember when Greenpeace first got started! (crikey, I'm old...) Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
New PETA ad...
Top