Nintendogs blamed for dog attack - Page 8 - MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos
The Lounge General off topic chat.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #71 of 76 (permalink) Old 10-03-2010, 05:42 AM
 
K R Y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wales, Boyo!
Posts: 10,705
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBadGuy View Post
And a dog doesn't care or love. The only thing it's doing is following it's instics. It's only loyal to humans because humans feed them and give's homes to them. The second a owner couldnt offer any of those to a dog, it would eat it's owner at the first second it could. To survive. That's the only thing a dog cares about.
This is the most ridiculous statement I've ever read. First off 'A dog doesn't care or love. Whilst absolutely wrong in every way, you later follow up with 'That's the only thing a dog cares about. So which is it?

A dog would NOT eat it's owner if it couldn't provide. Dogs are loyal, caring and loving.

If, in the following situation, a man and a dog were stranded, starving with no food, the man would most likely kill, and eat the dog, not the other way round. It's happened loads of times, there have been plenty of documentaries about such happenings. Does that mean all humans care about is surviving?

Just because a species wants to survive, does not mean it cannot care or love. It's not either/or.






“There are three things all wise men fear: the sea in storm, a night with no moon, and the anger of a gentle man.”
K R Y is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #72 of 76 (permalink) Old 10-03-2010, 08:23 AM
Amateur
 
TheBadGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 138
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by KryOnicle View Post
This is the most ridiculous statement I've ever read. First off 'A dog doesn't care or love. Whilst absolutely wrong in every way, you later follow up with 'That's the only thing a dog cares about. So which is it?

A dog would NOT eat it's owner if it couldn't provide. Dogs are loyal, caring and loving.

If, in the following situation, a man and a dog were stranded, starving with no food, the man would most likely kill, and eat the dog, not the other way round. It's happened loads of times, there have been plenty of documentaries about such happenings. Does that mean all humans care about is surviving?

Just because a species wants to survive, does not mean it cannot care or love. It's not either/or.
Of course a man would eat the dog first. Dog wouldnt be able to eat the man. If it were able it would eat the human

It's sad when people dont realise how stupid animals are. Dog doesn't even know ot exisist's. It's just following its instics. Dogs are loyal because we keep them alive. That's because their not capable of due to their small brains.

And no. Humans care about other stuff then surviving. But in the beginning that was humans primary mission. Not anymore. That's because in todays world, you dont have to think it anymore.

Actually your right about dogs caring.(Didnt think when wrote that sentence) They care about suriving first. It cares loves and is loyal in a different way than humans when they love and care. But they put themselves ahead of everything else. Humans can sacrifice themselves for other people. Dogs cant.

About the article, I think it was wrong to kill the dog, so dont think that I'm some kind of animal hater

Always supporting:

Frank Mir - BJ Penn - Shogun Rua - Vitor Belfort - Demian Maia - Cole Miller
TheBadGuy is offline  
post #73 of 76 (permalink) Old 10-03-2010, 11:39 PM
DP's Queen
 
Toxie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,268
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBadGuy View Post
Of course a man would eat the dog first. Dog wouldnt be able to eat the man. If it were able it would eat the human

It's sad when people dont realise how stupid animals are. Dog doesn't even know ot exisist's. It's just following its instics. Dogs are loyal because we keep them alive. That's because their not capable of due to their small brains.

And no. Humans care about other stuff then surviving. But in the beginning that was humans primary mission. Not anymore. That's because in todays world, you dont have to think it anymore.

Actually your right about dogs caring.(Didnt think when wrote that sentence) They care about suriving first. It cares loves and is loyal in a different way than humans when they love and care. But they put themselves ahead of everything else. Humans can sacrifice themselves for other people. Dogs cant.

About the article, I think it was wrong to kill the dog, so dont think that I'm some kind of animal hater
Let's take your man and dog stranded somewhere scenario. If the dog were a large size dog, it would most certainly be able to eat the human first, especially if the human had no tools.

Dogs aren't loyal to survive. Have you ever seen severely abused and famished dogs that would rather die (many do) than do anything against their abusive master? I can't think of any other creature that operates that way. I have an anecdote to share about a German Pointer that was owned by my grandmother's colleague who died of cancer. When the man died, the dog stopped eating. A few days later, it ran away and the man's widow found it lying down on his master's grave, dying of starvation. She couldn't get it to come home and it died on its master's grave a few days after. How's that for dogs not being able to sacrifice themselves for the person they loved?

Back to the topic at hand, the dog in question was a Bullmastiff, which aren't aggressive dogs by nature and are known to be great family dogs, unlike what someone said earlier. Say the girl kicked it indeed, or just teased it repeatedly as children that age do sometimes. Maybe the dog reached its limit and lost it and attacked her. That would be an extenuating circumstance for the dog's behavior, but it is in NO WAY an excuse for its behaviour. It could have growled, bared its teeth, or walked away. No dog should ever bite anyone, except in extreme situations. Also, many of you forget that this is a 100lbs+ dog and it was a 9 year old girl. How hard can a 9 year old girl kick? Also, the dog drew blood, while the little girl's kick didn't. Dogs do think and make decisions on their environment (while my mother was pregnant, our hyper active and not so obedient German Shepherd male completely stopped jumping on her, out of his own will. He even stopped playing rough with her during that time.). I love dogs to death, anyone who knows me can testify to it, but the dog had no excuse in that case.

This piece of news does draw an interesting question: what if the sound from the Nintendogs game did excite the dog negatively and led it to attack? What if it attacked the console and in his frenzy mauled the little girl unintentionally? In that case, it shouldn't have been put to sleep IF its owners made it pass a behavioural test that proved that the dog wasn't normally aggressive.

In any case, the indisputable culprits in this case are the dog's owners (as in the other little girl's parents). 9 year old children should never be left without surveillance with a large dog or any animal that has the physical ability to cause harm. It was highly irresponsible of them and they should be held accountable.



Sig made by the awemazing D.P
Toxie is offline  
post #74 of 76 (permalink) Old 10-04-2010, 01:20 AM
I Finish Threads
 
HexRei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,915
                     
did they bury the guy in their backyard or something? how the heck did the dog find the grave?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toxie View Post
This piece of news does draw an interesting question: what if the sound from the Nintendogs game did excite the dog negatively and led it to attack? What if it attacked the console and in his frenzy mauled the little girl unintentionally? In that case, it shouldn't have been put to sleep IF its owners made it pass a behavioural test that proved that the dog wasn't normally aggressive.
I think that if you have a dog that just savages and frenzies at nearby objects at the sound of a dog barking, you probably have a dangerous animal. You can't expect to have your animal never hear a dog bark on TV or in a movie or game in a normal household, it's way too common of a trigger. At the very least that animal will need to be relocated to... I dunno, a farm or something.

Everybody good, plenty of slaves for my robot colony?
HexRei is online now  
post #75 of 76 (permalink) Old 10-04-2010, 01:52 AM
DP's Queen
 
Toxie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,268
                     
Nah, it was in Romania and the distances there are much smaller than in North America. It takes me approximately 20 mins to walk from my house to the nearest cemetery there.

As for the other part, all you need to do is have a firm grip on the dog, control it and teach it to react normally when the trigger is active. Idk how accurate the Nintendogs thing is, but if it sounds like an aggressive or threatening dog and the real dog is dominant, then I think it's plausible that the mastiff reacted to that noise in a way that it wouldn't normally react from other stimuli. And following that same line of thought, maybe the dog perceived that noise coming from the little girl.



Sig made by the awemazing D.P
Toxie is offline  
post #76 of 76 (permalink) Old 10-05-2010, 03:44 PM
Curitiba Food and Liquor
 
swpthleg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 16,176
Blog Entries: 14
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by HexRei View Post
I agree with Xeb to a large degree. I'm not sure I would postulate a number like 1 human >1,000,000 dogs because there is so much context that needs to be explored when you confront a situation like that, but I don't think animal lives are worth as much as human lives. At the same time we do need laws against animal abuse and they should be well-enforced, animals don't deserve to suffer because some human has no conscience. But as humans we are the ones who are most likely right now to accomplish the most amazing things and we need to give ourselves moderated precedence. If that makes me "specieist", so be it.
Humans should be stewards of animals, as we should be of children and other innocents.

And, the grandma quoted in the article is retarded, and it's a cash grab.


Sig Credit to Toxic
swpthleg is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome