Arms Locker banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,165 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am about sick about this talk about shooting dog's. Dog's are man's (and woman's)best friends. I would not have a dog that bites's people, never have. That is NOT their job. They are an early warning system, not a land mine. It's MY job to have an M-16 or Glock on my hip to defend my home, the dog alert's me, that's all. You ,as a Human,train your Rottwelier, Pit Bull, German Shepherd, or whatever breed to NOT bite. Just to let you know there's a threat. I have owned (no, that's not right, partnered up with) Labradors my whole life. NEVER have they BIT anyone. They looked mean as hell, but that's all they did. My children poked their fingers in their eyes and all they did was lick them away. WE ARE the trainers, get a grip! Shooting dog's, indeed!
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
Terry,

I love dogs probably better than most people but there are times when a rogue dog that poses a danger to people and livestock has to be put down. Not talking about people's friendly pets but rogues. Fact of life.

You are correct. We are the trainers and masters of the animals. Some dogs like Dobes, Rotties etc. are quite sane but aggressive. A Dobe is extremely protective and can act of its own accord. It is a dog's nature to bite and not even training will guarantee that it won't happen. Protection training teaches them that there is a time to bite (only on command) and teaches them to call off without biting. Thats the reason I'm comfortable with animals and Dobes in particular - I understand them and command them. You, as the master, have to work within the limits of your particular dog - and dogs are as different as people.

Labs are probably the gentlest creatures in the world but if you provoke them enough or ever invade what they consider theirs they will bite. Ever been to a field trial and seen Labs fight over a duck. I have and their owners have been bitten too -by their own Labs.

This is not a flame but my opinion as an dog owner and an off again-on again trainer.

Sometimes dogs, just like rogue people, have to be terminated. I hate it but thats the way it is.

One other thing, I don't claim to be the dog 'guru' but just somebody familiar with them.

RIKA
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,467 Posts
good read,

TERRY, in fact I JUST had to call my yellow lab back in the walled area of the back yard as my g.f. and i, are grilling rib-eyes and a hairless mangy coyote[they look weired] was prowling around not 30' from us . he went chasing after him [no!, he can't run with the riff-raff] and i came indoors for my varmint pistol, this happend just 5 minutes ago,


gotta go flip the steaks, later!


thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,890 Posts
Hey Terry I figure you know the difference between shooting a feral dog and someone's pet, so I'm going to assume you're talking about our resident short bus rider's proclivities towards gunning down people's pets.

I think it's just a matter of control. He's proven himself a weakling and a coward time and again, and the only way he can feel powerful is by attacking weak women, children, and the friendliest animals you can find.

Tell me something Terry, you're a Fed, why is someone, on parole, this mentally ill still walking around?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,728 Posts
Terry -

As far as the thread I started, I'm talking SOLELY about a feral dog that's already killed three animals that I know of, including one of its own species (a neighbor's puppy). In that case, I see no other moral course of action but to eliminate this threat, as any animal that will kill & eat one of its "own" is IMO, a danger that cannot be tolerated.

Shooting unfamiliar dogs to see the effect of ammo performance, no, I don't do that and wouldn't advocate that, as they're likely just someone's pet or farm dog just cruising around. I have two dogs of my own, and wouldn't want someone shooting them for "research" or for whatever reason.

But a feral animal (whether dog, coyote, whatever) that kills domestic animals randomly, imo, MUST be put down. Just as it's not immoral to shoot a human serial killer, it's the moral thing to eliminate a serial kiler of ANY species.

I do understand (I think I do anyway) why you brought this up, as dog-shooting has been advocated here as a means of seeing what happens when a bullet hits flesh. That's not what I'm talking about at all; I'm just looking to get rid of a known killer in my area.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
legit research, or just having the mutts captured, (or shot by) the animal control officer, then kept at the pound for amonth, then gassed to death (choking for 30 secs or longer) So how is THAT death ANY more humane than a shot to the lung, and within a couple of seconds, another to the head? U have no answer, cause you'd rather BS about what bullets do in flesh than KNOW what they do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
Keep trying to excuse your actions, you've convinced yourself - that's about the extent you're going to get on this topic.

People have tried to educate you on what's wrong about your (un)scientific research and the false assumptions you have made (moral and ethical issues aside - can't even begin to discuss either topic with you as you lack both)

You once commented that the .308 was worthless because a rabbit you shot in the leg with one didn't die. I wonder what that says about the validity of your research?

You'd be much further ahead to avoid certain topics, like this one. You are not making yourself look knowledgeable or as someone with anything to contribute.

I'm trying to be nice, as there's a lot that could be said here.

Just suggesting that you consider that there are topics that you need to avoid. This is clearly one of them - unless you are trying to provoke people.

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,728 Posts
andy said:
...or just having the mutts captured, (or shot by) the animal control officer,
No such animal as an "animal control officer" around here. In the city, very likely, but not out where I am.

Sounds like you're assuming that all the dogs running around should or at least "are likely to" be rounded up or shot. Not true, here anyway. Dogs run loose, and as long as they don't hurt anything or anyone (which most don't) they're treated like anything or anyone that doesn't hurt anything; they're left alone. If they DO start hurting things, then they need to be dealt with, but that's actually a rare thing, percentage-wise.


andy said:
then kept at the pound for amonth, then gassed to death (choking for 30 secs or longer) So how is THAT death ANY more humane than a shot to the lung, and within a couple of seconds, another to the head?
Two reasons;

First, at the pound, they at least have the opportunity to be picked up by their owner or adopted by a new owner. Lung-shooting them doesn't give them that opportunity.

Secondly, they're someone else's property, and (this is the important part): I don't have the right to destroy someone else's property, even if I believe it's for "legit research"

Simple "yes" or "no" answer would be appreciated on this one. Do you believe you have the right to destroy someone else's property, just because you want to?

Because that's literally what you're advocating, when talking of killing a domestic animal that poses no threat to anyone or anything.


andy said:
U have no answer, cause you'd rather BS about what bullets do in flesh than KNOW what they do.
My answers are above.

I do know what bullets do in flesh; they penetrate, tear things up, and sometimes kill. Growing up in the country, animals often had to be put down. Sometimes they've turned rogue or predatory, sometimes they're injured domestic animals that are suffering, sometimes just plain hunting. I've also twice had to put down animals on duty; once an injured deer, and once a feral dog. (We do get a fair amount of those here.) CAR-15 on the dog, and 9mm +P+ on the deer; both normal factory loads, and both worked fine. I've killed more than enough animals in my life. (Maybe that's why I don't obsess about it. Kind of like sex; once you have a "regular supply", you still think about it and enjoy it, but you don't dwell and obsess on it like a pimply 14-year-old does.)

I've shot bullets into flesh, as have many here, and frankly, the only reason I can see for using random dog shooting for "testing" is convenience; they're just about everywhere, which makes it easy. But for comparing to human flesh, I suspect a deer is substantially more representative than dogs, when extrapolating performance to human defense. And randomly shooting deer is no more illegal than randomly shooting dogs, at least in my area. The difference is that dogs are often just out wandering around, and shooting deer takes work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,165 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Magnum88C said:
Hey Terry I figure you know the difference between shooting a feral dog and someone's pet, so I'm going to assume you're talking about our resident short bus rider's proclivities towards gunning down people's pets.

I think it's just a matter of control. He's proven himself a weakling and a coward time and again, and the only way he can feel powerful is by attacking weak women, children, and the friendliest animals you can find.

Tell me something Terry, you're a Fed, why is someone, on parole, this mentally ill still walking around?
He still has First Amendment Rights, some rights you never lose. All he is is talk, trust me, he would not step out the door with a firearm. He has a lot of problems. He is being monitored, and he know's it. He is a joke to listen to, but that's all he is. Look how much time he spends posting, would a normal person have that much time?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,165 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
John in AR said:
Terry -

As far as the thread I started, I'm talking SOLELY about a feral dog that's already killed three animals that I know of, including one of its own species (a neighbor's puppy). In that case, I see no other moral course of action but to eliminate this threat, as any animal that will kill & eat one of its "own" is IMO, a danger that cannot be tolerated.

Shooting unfamiliar dogs to see the effect of ammo performance, no, I don't do that and wouldn't advocate that, as they're likely just someone's pet or farm dog just cruising around. I have two dogs of my own, and wouldn't want someone shooting them for "research" or for whatever reason.

But a feral animal (whether dog, coyote, whatever) that kills domestic animals randomly, imo, MUST be put down. Just as it's not immoral to shoot a human serial killer, it's the moral thing to eliminate a serial kiler of ANY species.

I do understand (I think I do anyway) why you brought this up, as dog-shooting has been advocated here as a means of seeing what happens when a bullet hits flesh. That's not what I'm talking about at all; I'm just looking to get rid of a known killer in my area.
John, you seem to have a grasp on a problem that's affecting you, you have to do what you have to do. I have no problem with that at all. But with all this talk, mostly from an idiot, let's just not start blasting some dog that's enjoying running in the woods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,165 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
andy said:
legit research, or just having the mutts captured, (or shot by) the animal control officer, then kept at the pound for amonth, then gassed to death (choking for 30 secs or longer) So how is THAT death ANY more humane than a shot to the lung, and within a couple of seconds, another to the head? U have no answer, cause you'd rather BS about what bullets do in flesh than KNOW what they do.
You have not fired a shot in twenty years, 84034-012, now have you? Tell me you have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,683 Posts
Ditto,Terry G.....regards,all.
Hey ,lets get Andy,GK(whatever)'s parole modifed with the following chaser:
1)He has to adopt a medium to large working/fighting/sporting breed.

2)He has to prep and train the dog for suitability as an assistance/therapy dog(final selection/qualifiers optional).

3)Successful training,health&welfare of the dog being monitored leads to apprentice/job placement assist as or with a reputable dog training facility/kennel.

4)Failure to maintain health&wellbeing of said dog(excluding that he has no control over) resulting in tightening of parole conditions.Conversley,the opposite would hold true in that:

5)Maintenance/upgrading of said dog's condition may result in more favorable parole conditions.

OK,is this insane, or possibly a useful idea,due to the recurring themes and people involved here??If its crazy,WTH, the overtime monster has wiped the floor with me all week;if anyone could suggest anything to build on this...after all GK WAS a dog handler at some point. :idea:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
Gunkid was a glorified dog walker, not a handler. With his fear and hate of dogs I wouldn't let him near one. What he needs is to work in maybe a hospice for the terminally ill for a while with extremely close supervision. Perhaps it would touch whatever is left of his soul to see people handle their own death with dignity and see how fortunate he is.

Maybe I'm crazy too but he needs to learn that there is more to life than guns and shtf.

RIKA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,683 Posts
Ok.Me,I always wanted to do the dog handler thing in the army,but somehow,I never got outside of the 11B/19D MOS spread.Almost caught a gig as a doghandler ,both with Customs and Border Patrol( was in the process) but that BS in Worcester back in '02 screwed me on the background check;I was under the age cutoff when I started the testing/selection process for both jobs,but by the time I got out from under the legal cloud,I was aged out. They could'nt/wouldn't re start the process.Oh well,FIDO.....
Hey,maybe I could cut it as a "contrabandista" ,I'll smuggle copies of "The Enemy Within"(or other non pC books) to the closeted constituionalists here in Darkest Massghanistan.Here at my job,the client is kind of lefty/PC...I actually had one of their folks ask me if I really agreed with what I was listening to on my car radio one day(Walter Williams pinch hitting for Rush)during a lunch break.I guess she and her friend were "stunned" that the guy on the radio was a black guy,and the guy listening was one of their minders(I do security/protective contract work on a high tech campus in Burlington Ma.)My ansere to her was that WW was a gentling influence on me.... :nyah:
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top