A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
If my dogs ever tried to kill me, I’d just pin them both down. That’s the benefit of not having insanely powerful dogs.
IMO you shouldn’t have a dog that you can’t physically restrain. Any dog can snap and you need to be able to physically stop them if that happens.
So huge dogs should just remain ownerless?
They should require a license to own and a reason to be bred
I agree in the sense that some dog breeds aren't necessary and are actively unhealthy for the animal and the breed should be allowed to die out removing the ability for people to be owners of those breeds, and therefore ownerless
This seems nuts. Is this not an insane opinion? You want entire dog breeds to go extinct? What are your thoughts on that one governor lady? lol
Yes? I am not sure I understand what is making you upset. I am not saying kill all the pitbulls, I am saying stop dog eugenics and let dogs just be dogs and love the animal that comes out. If that means that we stop having access to purebred (inbred) Pugs, so be it. Mutts are just as good doggos.
Idk why you think I'm upset. I'm more shocked than anything.
I would think most people tend to support conservation of different animals and whatnot, except for maybe mosquitoes (and even then I'd be hesitant). It's also blowing my mind that you're heavily upvoted. I had no idea some of y'all thought this way.
That said, I'm just going to assume I don't fully understand what you're saying since it seems so batshit crazy to me. It's clear this isn't really an honest, open dialogue anyway, and that's totally fine
Not the OP, but let me step in. Dog breeds are something we have created as humans, they're not wild species that need to be preserved and don't have any effect on ecosystems.
Dog breeding is largely negative at this point as most breeds have outlived their original use and are now seen as designer pets. We continue to breed them as there is continued demand, but quite often these breeds are so inbred that they have genetic health issues. We also oversupply and don't fix/neuter enough, meaning there are always unwanted dogs without homes.
I love dogs, but all of mine have been rescues and I would have no problem with the vast majority of breeds being phased out. There are still some niche cases where dogs are actually used for their breed's purpose (dog sled, search/rescue, hunting, etc) but no, I don't think a chihuahua or a pug should exist and would not be sad if breeders stopped producing more.
Thanks for sharing your POV. It's definitely the first time I've heard something that radical about dogs, which are basically the most beloved living thing in the US, but I can somewhat understand where you're coming from.
I'd definitely support making it more difficult to own a dog, but mostly because many of the dog owners I've met are borderline abusive to their pets (I'm mainly thinking of neglect here). I don't think I could ever support a ban on entire breeds. That's where it starts to seem crazy to me. Make it a felony to own a dog that bites someone or something but don't make it a felony to simply own the dog. We don't even have such laws for people that own guns or swords and surely those lead to more deaths/injuries than dogs.
I feel I should clarify that I don't hold this position because dogs are dangerous or think it should be harder to have a dog. I hold it because I think our breeding programs are creating a lot of animal suffering.
From puppy mills where dogs are kept in horrible conditions, to overproduction of animals so that there aren't enough homes, to propagating breeds that can barely breath so that they have an "adorable" face. Dog breeding is exploitative and re-enforces that dogs are simply a commodity.
I'm not sure a law making it more difficult to own a dog would have the effect you intend, as there are already too many dogs in need of homes. I think a more palatable middle ground to elimination would be regulation of breeders to ensure that they are not producing more dogs than can be homed.
Any dog can snap
any animal can snap.
I guess you don't think people should have st. bernards or great danes? I mean, I'm not suggesting people keep wolves or lions as pets, but this bully dog fearmongering is out of control. IMHO, it's not the breed, it's the training and owner.
If your breed requires special training to not maul you or others to death, then that just proves the point of the breed being dangerous and that it should be outlawed. But please, continue to make some more bullshit excuses.
If your breed requires special training to not maul you or others to death,
where is this indicated?
My brother/sister in dogs: 30,000ish years ago, some fucking wolf/dingo/mongrel-mutt threw their lot in with ours. We have, mutually, benefitted enormously. I love dogs and trust a lot more of them than I do humans to do the right thing. This isn't developed anecdotally, it's a lifetime of dogs as part of our family, and operating around working dogs in the military. They deserve our respect, and training is one part of any dog's life that humans need to learn. Most training isn't for the dog, it's for the family members.
I'd recommend anyone with any dog go through training, whether a specific program or simply to acclimate the animal to your house (where and when we go outside and who's food is who's etc.,) but also to train them to react and behave in awkward situations. I've had toddlers lurch across the room, grab my dog's faces and and poke at their eyes - and the toddlers got licked.
Special training? YOU SHOULD TRAIN YOUR ANIMALS PERIOD. you wouldn't trust a cat to behave around a toddler, a dog, a parrot (nearly lost a finger meeting a white parrot once!), hells man/ma'am...
apply some sense to it all.
where is this indicated?
In the fact that this keeps on happening even with experienced owners.
it's putting words into my mouth, I never indicated any such thing.
want to make a point? don't use me as your sock puppet to do it, be adult enough to make your own assertions sport.
My brother in buddy, they weren't putting words in your mouth. They were using outside factors to answer a question you made.
Want to talk down to someone? How about doing it to someone without having to make erroneous assumptions and jumping the defensive gun? Be adult enough to not belittle people like this chief.
I wouldn't waste my time talking down to you, sport.
Does Lemmy has a Ban Pitbulls community yet?
Large dog breeds need to be trained very carefully. My friends have a 100 lbs husky, just a massive wolf looking dog. When he was a pup, he was food protective, so they made sure to train that behavior completely out of Steel(the dog).
In the present day, Steel is 8 years old, in the prime of his physical size and health, and the sweetest boi. With different owners, he'd have negative habits that lead his behaviour and made him dangerous.
It was two xl bully Yorkies I'm guessing.
Judging by this thread, I'm honestly surprised someone hasn't said that Chihuahuas are more dangerous yet.
I mean, you're probably more likely to get bit by a Chihuahua than a pitbull.
But a pitbulls bite is a little bit worse.
I wonder if Lemmy will be any more Normal about dogs than snoosite was
Update: prognosis is not looking good
This must have flown right by me, but what was Reddit's attitude?
"All pits are violent and will maul any passing child." It was pretty annoying.
pitbulls are disproportionately predisposed to all kinds of violence/mauling. Even though it's not their fails since they were specifically bred for that purpose.
Dogs? Yes. Satan incarnates born to kill? No.
Ban pitbulls everywhere
people should be required to have really serious animal rescue and psychology training to get one of these dogs (or else astronomical punishment). most people who get these dogs do so on a whim and because of their own unresolved ego issues.
Some are good boys that need a home. We adopted a dog of unknown breed, they had his mom (who looked like a black mouth cur), who came in from a kill shelter pregnant.
I still don't know what breed he is, really don't care to find out. But he has a lot of bully features. Big puffy chest. Blocky head. Strong jaw. Smart. Highly emotional.
And he's a fucking marshmallow. An 80lb slobbery marshmallow.
The best dog I ever had was a pit. Sweet as pie, just wanted to cuddle and love. We chose him because he was a big meaty guy with the most adorable face you'd ever seen, and because he needed a home ASAP. We'd take him on walks and people would cat call him from passing cars, or literally stop us and ask if they could dog-sit. He spent nearly a decade with us, just loving and farting and cuddling and snoring.
He really didn't need any help to become a great dog, except that I needed to train him that the cat was a friend and not something to chase and put our mouth on. That took all of a weekend, and that was after he'd been abandoned and abused for half a year before we got him. I know it's not true for every individual, but many times all a dog really needs a a good home with people that love it.
Cripes, what kind of a dick do you have to be to your own dogs to get attacked by them?
There is no evidence that she was being terrible towards the dogs
Some dogs can just snap and decide to not be nice one day, its a good reason you don't let dogs you've seen be calm interact with babies because it only takes a small amount of the dog not being nice to end up harming a baby
Older people have a better chance of surviving dog attacks but the chance isn't 100% and cases like this can happen
And if I recall correctly this breed is more prone to aggressiveness
I doubt it. Not walking them enough, keeping them cooped up, no outlets - especially if they weren’t fixed. Sad all around, but the dogs are not hatching evil plans, they’re just dogs.
Spay and neuter. Spay and neuter. And adopt.
Some dogs get older and I assume confused and just snap. My grandmother's dog, sweetest girl, golden retriever, service dog, previously good with other animals and cats. My Grandmom brought home a kitten and the dog mauled it. Do not trust dogs. Just like people they can do something totally out of character.
and the two registered dogs were safely seized having been contained inside a room, a spokesperson for the Metropolitan police said.
What is confusing about this?
It's a joke referencing American cops often shooting dogs for no reason