We own two dogs. They’re fine. I like them. They don’t need to go places with me. And I’m not particularly interested in seeing other peoples dogs when I’m out and about. Limits on where you can bring a dog has never been a problem for me.
No more rights than a stapler? Really? I assume that you’re engaging in hyperbole to get across the idea that different standards should apply to people than to dogs, which is fair enough, but I do object to the statement as it stands. Taken literally, it seems utterly dismissive of the fundamental fact that dogs are sentient, intelligent beings who experience pleasure, pain, and fear as we all do, and deserve to be treated with compassion.
I could write many paragraphs about why this is so, but that should suffice as being self-evidently true. Of course dogs are not “people”, and as a wise man once said, comparing them to people does a disservice both to people and to dogs. Those of us who have had the privilege of knowing dogs well understand this, and we know that their attitude to life and, indeed, to death is different from ours yet sometimes, to those who have come to love them and who care enough to listen and observe, can carry in their depths wisdom for us all.
Above all, dogs are the result of millennia of domestication and have come to be dependent on us. In return, they work for us, provide companionship, comfort, loyalty, and unconditional love. They ask little of us except to be treated as the sentient beings that they are. We should at least have the decency and compassion to do that much.
I’m going to venture my educated guess that such “dog problems” are usually (though not always) really people problems at some level. And I think they’re attributable to three principal causes: poor training, unethical breeding practices, and abuse. The point being that they’re preventable and not intrinsic to the nature of dogs as some might be tempted to believe.
OK, You admit that the reason of “accepting” for the ban is pure fear and not the relative risk or public health.
I will never agree to public policy that is based purely on fear. Now if the goal was to reduce the number of dog bites there are far better ways to address that issue. Banning well behaved dogs from public spaces does not accomplish that goal. A broad campaign to educate dog owners about how to train their dogs would be better, and maybe a ban of “The Dog Whisperer” and other aggression based BS which is as scientifically dis-proven as the MMR autism link would be a first step.
I also think you discount the number of people who have a crippling fear of germs. Why do the dog fearing population deserve legal protection from their phobias yet the anti-vax and germaphobes must suffer?
Sure. But why should that matter? If I get bitten by a dog because it was badly trained or abused by its owner, I’m still bitten.
No, I’m rather of the view that dogs should be allowed in more public spaces.
I’m merely pointing out that a fear of being bitten is not irrational, as dog bites are not uncommon. It is quite irrelevant that they are preventable with good training.
Those who fear germs simply cannot go out in public - taking away kids does not take away germs, that requires taking away human contact.
Note that most dog bites are in the dogs home and owned by family and friends, not in public.
The deaths and illnesses caused by kids is delayed but they are the most common transmission vehicle of several very serious pathogens that cause illness like the flu.
A well socialized and trained dog will not bite and cause injury. Creating a fearful dog by doing alpha rolls or abusive training or socially isolating them will create a dog that will bite. This is why the anti-vax community works as a good comparison. Banning dogs from public places is going after the result and not the cause of bites and will probably cause more in the homes as the dogs will not be as well socialized due to a lack of opportunity.
That’s like saying more accidents happen with five miles of home, isn’t it? More dog bites at home because more interaction with dogs at home. If there are more interactions with dogs outside of the home, there will be more dog bites outside of the home.
I like dogs and think dogs are great, but just saying “Oh, dog bites are caused by stupid people” doesn’t make the stupid people go away.
I am not suggesting the banning of children, I was refuting an argument to ban dogs.
But you are wrong, the main illnesses caused that are prevented by vaccination and transmitted by un-vaccinated children are passed through both air, saliva, and fecal oral transmission. There have been a few very public cases where they found the patient zero that was a child recently.
It is impossible to prevent kids from taking everything from hand to mouth all the time and it is impossible to get them to cover their cough until they reach an age where they can understand why.
This type of ban that is based on fear is just silly and ineffective.
I know this is true of course. But gaddammit, corporations apparently have rights, so my dogs do too!!
Of course, and that’s pretty much the last sentence I was going to add myself. But the reason it matters is that understanding why these things happen helps us set effective policies around things like breeder requirements and certifications and laws and enforcement policies against animal abuse. We haven’t done nearly enough in those areas, IMHO. For instance some breeders continue to be breed dogs entirely for championship-winning physical characteristics with no regard for genetic integrity, and worse, horrible puppy mills still operate all over the place. So you get people buying dogs with questionable genetic background, failing to train them properly, maybe even abusing them, and then the dog bites someone and some people (not you) will go around saying, “dogs are just wild animals – they’ll do that!” :rolleyes:
How is it ineffective not to allow dogs in restaurants, etc? You said most dog bites happen in the home, so most dog bites are not happening in public areas. If people want to avoid dog bites in public areas, it sounds like keeping dogs from public areas is probably a good way to do that.
Now, you can say that the risk is overblown, and that’s fine. But to say that it’s ineffective does not seem to be borne out by the facts. As for it being based on fear, aren’t all bans based on fear?
No, that’s a stupid comparison. The anti-vax people want to get rid of something that saves millions of lives because they’re afraid about something completely unrelated. I don’t want dogs bothering me in public because they are frequently actually dangerous. As in, they actually attack people. It doesn’t matter what the base cause is - if there are no dogs in public, I won’t be attacked by a dog in public. That’s a valid cause-and-effect chain.
If I wanted to ban dogs because I thought they were carriers for airborne Ebola, whereas there were actually scientific proof that 15% of people would die if they didn’t take their dogs everywhere with them, that would be similar to the anti-vax viewpoint. I don’t think that. Neither, so far as I know, does anyone else.
I just wanted to say that as the OP, I am still following this thread and am very interested. I have lots of thoughts but unfortunately am at work now . . . will give a more lengthy post later on. Just wanted to let y’all know I haven’t fallen off the face of the earth.
No, it isn’t. Because any place that isn’t private property is, pretty much by definition, a “public place”. It makes up most of the world. There have always been dogs in public places, and always will be. Either you’re proposing something totally preposterous and unworkable, or there’s no useful validity to that particular cause-and-effect chain. What the discussion is about is what specific public places, if any, dogs should be excluded from.
Cite?
[
](https://www.avma.org/public/pages/Dog-Bite-Prevention.aspx)
These are not random strangers dogs, they are poorly behaving kids and dogs that know each other.
Now ignoring that reality lets us compare the relative risk. There are about 39 ER visits per year per 100,000 people in the under 18 age bracket due to dog bites. Compare that with 500 per 100K for assault or 2200 for motor vehicle injuries. Note that due to Rabies concerns ER visits for dog bites are inflated too. Not that many out of that 39:100,000 need serious medial treatment.
Your kid is dozens of times more likely to go to the ER due to assault from another human, maybe we should ban humans from public places.
As far as public places go where are dogs barred by statute? The only statutes I’m familiar with are the ones that bar dogs from restaurants and other food establishments though I wouldn’t doubt it if they were barred from other places like medical establishments. Dogs are allowed by law to go into a lot of public spaces it’s just that most retail establishments and places of employment have policies forbidding animals to be on their property. Dog owners just have to obey the leash laws.
My dog is superior, obviously, but I think both dogs and children should be largely excluded from public buildings unless it’s a clearly defined and highly supervised learning experience for the child. I think they’re both about as likely to raise hell as the other, and in both cases, it’s the grown-up who is to blame. But unless the grown-up is prepared to focus on the pet/child and not the experience, then the rest of the room shouldn’t have their experience disrupted.
A dog that bites is the fault of the owner, 99.99% of the time. Dogs should not bite children, ever, unless the child is actively torementing and hurting them. Of course children should be taught to be careful around dogs, but that is because most dog owners don’t correctly train their dogs. Blaming the child for a badly trained dog is kind of like blaming a murder victim for walking alone at night; sure, you’re safer not walking alone at night, but it’s still the murderer’s fault.
If a dog bites a human, the dog is poorly trained or sick. Dog bites are inexcusable. A properly trained dog does not bite. Even if it’s “stressed out.” I realize you know this, as clearly indicated in your other posts, but it can’t be stressed enough; well trained dogs, assuming they aren’t very ill and mentally impaired as a result, do not bite. Dogs can be taught to obey and to command themselves with truly astounding levels of discipline, but most people don’t bother.
If we can’t even agree that no dogs in public places means no dog bites in public places, I have no idea how to continue the conversation.
Here is a cite that shows that a simple 30min instruction session with kids reduced behavior that is likely to cause biting in poorly behaving dogs. The improvement is massive
[
](http://www.bmj.com/content/320/7248/1512.1)
Note that most of the time a dog doesn’t just bite out of the blue, there tend to be lots and lots of warning signs.