Bday Prang

4 minutes ago, billsmart said:

What you say above is more accurate is you replace "soi dogs" with "humans." We are the real "vermin" and cancer that is destroying all life on this planet.

Now you are starting to sound ridiculous, have you thought of joining "extinction rebellion" or another of those crackpot organisations

33 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

We, as humans, or most of us anyway, are ‘species-ist’....  we value other human life over dogs... we value dogs over most other mammals and we value mammals over other species. 

 

Why is a dogs life valued more than that of a mouse ?... why a dogs life valued more than that of a fish ???

 

 

Speak for yourself , I certainly don't value dogs above any other mammals, fish  or any other species for that matter. 

54 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

The first person ever to receive a face transplant was a French woman and the dog that did it was her own pet dog and it was a Labrador.

Labradors feature quite a lot in dog on human attacks, more so than pit bulls 

2 hours ago, redwood1 said:

And WHY is the nationality a big secret?

 

If it was a Thai man or a western man the news would be more than happy to say so I think......

 

Not many Chinese or Russians around now....

 

Soooooooo.......Who does that leave?

 

Well I guess I should say no more or Some one might say I am racist...

 

 

I don't think Thai news has been tainted with political correctness like in the west. If they have not mentioned his nationality it is because they don't know. 

Strange how she allegedly refused to accept his offer of money at the scene, but she probably thinks she will get a better offer at the police station, I wonder if she has allowed for the % that will be claimed by the BiB.

IT could well turn out to be an unfortunate case of mistaken identity for all we know

 The comments made on this website have no  bearing whatsoever on the ongoing investigation, members should be able to comment as they wish without the "virtue signallers" screaming about "victim blaming"  What are you trying to achieve by using phrases like that in such an inflammatory manner, other than to derail the topic for your woke agenda. 

5 minutes ago, billsmart said:

"Inconvenience" is now being willing to share the territory with them. Many humans want the place they live to be free from all other life forms. They move into a place, tear down everything that's there, build their home, and then want all the animals they've displaced to just disappear, or they'll kill them. 

You send me all the reports of a four-year-old, or any other human, getting hurt by a dog, and I'll send you 1,000,000 times that amount of reports of humans killing other animals for convenience (defined above) or even just for fun.

There are plenty of reports of kids getting attacked by dogs so don't try to deflect from that. Humans killing other animals for whatever reason  is a completely different matter 

11 minutes ago, billsmart said:

You first sentence could apply to humans who do not wear masks or keep their distance in public.

I don't see regular reports of people getting attacked by dogs. I do see regular reports here on AseanNow of people who are in favor of killing soi dogs. In fact, this very thread is the result of someone shooting a dog (not even a "soi" dog but someone's pet) with a rifle.

What you are suggesting with your last sentence is to judge all soi dogs by the few that are aggressive. That's what I object to. It's the "kill them all" attitude that disgusts me.

"Wearing masks and social distancing" have nothing to do  with this thread whatsoever, All these dogs have the potential to become aggressive that's why they all need to be got rid of as soon as possible, 

Just now, IvorBiggun2 said:

Bring back the man who used to give you a basket for each soi dog he was given. He did not take dogs off the street other than the ones that were given to him. He was a god send where I live.

Exactly what I posted a few minutes earlier, he was indeed a god send 

5 minutes ago, billsmart said:

It tells me that you just wash your hands of any problems and blame them all on someone else.

Its not a problem I have caused is it ?   The blame lies squarely at the feet of people like you who feed them 

Clearly I have not washed my hand of the problem , its just that you  don't have the stomach for the solution I am advocating

4 minutes ago, billsmart said:

No, you should go out and walk on the streets. As I've said earlier, if you are attacked by a dog, cat, snake, rat, or human, you should defend yourself. If that means killing the attacker, kill it. What I'm saying you shouldn't do is go out and kill soi dogs (or anything else) just because you are AFRAID they will do something that will harm you. But, actually, it's worse than that. In the case of most of the posters in favor of killing soi dogs, they just want to kill them because they are an inconvenience.

"inconvenience" is that what you call it when a 4 year old gets their face ripped off?  

How on earth do you expect a child to defend itself against one of these aggressive creatures 

5 minutes ago, billsmart said:

Your statement above "They are not there because of me at all they are there because of others" tells me all I need to know about you. ????

It Tells you that I have never owned a dog  and I am not allowed to shoot them.   nothing else 

4 minutes ago, billsmart said:

No different than humans who think they own the planet and everything else is subject to their whims. Humans kill many more other life forms every day than soi dogs or rats.

That's the poorest excuse I have ever heard for allowing these disease ridden aggressive creatures to roam the streets. There are regularly news reports of people, many of whom are young kids, getting savagely attacked. I imagine you are a bit quieter when that happens.

As far as I am concerned there is no justification for taking chances

1 hour ago, billsmart said:

I agree. Killing them is just to "easy" of an answer. They are there because of "us," so "we" should do something for them to help live their life in relative ease.

I have no problem if the answer is "easy"  the easier the better for me .  They are not there because of me at all they are there because of others. It is not a problem of my making ,  The situation needs sorting out and its not helping matters when people get sentimental and emotional.  

14 minutes ago, billsmart said:

Female dogs, if they are spayed, are not of interest to either male or other female dogs. They are not subject to either male sexual advances or other females seeking dominance. That's been my experience with the dogs I have, anyway.

They can still be territorial, and can still attack and maim people, still carry diseases  still defecate everywhere spreading more disease. No different than rats and should be treated accordingly 

I don't think shooting a dog is cruel it's actually a very humane way to despatch them when done properly

Years ago there was a very effective way that was used to keep the numbers down out here in the sticks,  The "dog man" was a regular visitor to all the villages, unwanted dogs were rounded up and taken to places like vietnam , korea and china  were they are really "appreciated"   This not only kept the numbers of wild dogs under control but people also thought twice about letting their (pet)  dogs out unaccompanied lest they were rounded up too.  Seemed to work quite well until the sentimental animal rights types eventually put an end to it without suggesting an effective alternative.  The resultant mess is now seen everywhere and nothing short of a national cull can sort this out now.

Its a real problem if you get bitten, stitches and infection  and several trips to a clinic for rabies jobs, and don't expect to find anybody admitting to being the dogs owner. Conversely they all appear out of the woodwork to claim ownership and financial compensation should one end up under your vehicle

36 minutes ago, billsmart said:

The males need testosterone to help defend themselves against other male dogs (and maybe a stray human ????).

So female dogs are defenceless ?   I don't think so!

53 minutes ago, DezLez said:

Why get upset?  The "missis" is going to end up with the money anyway!

I know she is, but that's not the point really is it. ?

Well according to the linked article they now have 1000 doses of a new vaccine, and will now decide who deserves it . I wonder how that will assessed ?  Probably according to wealth / influence

Reading between the lines it looks like they don't routinely use the smallpox vaccine anymore as there has not been a case here for "several decades"  that does not seem very sensible , have other countries stopped vaccinating for smallpox?

Could just be a consequence of using sub standard or out of date smallpox vaccinations in the first place, or perhaps the people used in the test had not even actually been vaccinated.

Could even be a made up story. I could not imagine anybody here actually volunteering to be infected with monkeypox

Or is it just another "expert" raising their profile with a bit of doom mongering?

10 hours ago, Kalasin Jo said:

It's not only banks. Take along your missus or girlfriend and usually you are totally ignored. When paying cash for purchases with my wife present I hand over the cash and the change is more often than not offered to my wife.

Being ignored probably stems from the perceived language barrier and fear of losing face as you say ( as if give a fig, I just would like to be included and no longer give a toss about my appalling Thai either) and is understandable, the change thing is just rude imho.

So I often prefer not to take the wife unless I must. That can be quite entertaining but nowadays the translation app on phones is a great help.

Recently had dealings with the local IO along with my wife. The friendly officer spoke good English but spent some time explainng things in Thai to her, presumably thinking she would explain to me. Her lack of understanding or indeed interest prompted him to start talking to me in English. Ah you understand all this better than she does he said, after I'd made a few intelligent comments At the end of the session he turned to my wife and said in English " you need to be taking better care of your husband than you have today".That made my day!

 

It boils my pi$$ when I hand over the cash and they try to give the change to the missis  

1 hour ago, JohnHans said:

Exercise is allowed but showing off is not.
 

The Five Precepts that are important are:

• Refrain from harming living beings (eating meat)
• Refrain from taking that which is not freely given
• Refrain from sexual misconduct
• Refrain from wrong speech; such as lying, idle chatter, malicious gossip or harsh speech
• Refrain from intoxicating drink and drugs which lead to carelessness (smoking)

Cigarettes and eating meat of any kind are not allowed in teachings so these should be the areas lay people could focus on and avoid giving them in alms to the monks, the public should be educated about something they should already know.

There is no obligation for monks to be vegetarian or to refrain from smoking, That is your own incorrect interpretation  

2 hours ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

Your reply is rediculous. 

 

It's the law, believe it or not. 

No it is not, why would you post rubbish like that?

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

There's no humour in racism. There is no racist joke which is anything other than toxic.

But many jokes that mention race are not racist or toxic  to anybody except people like you

There is humour in everything even death  buy you need a sense of humour to appreciate that

13 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Are racists somehow not scum?

Its a matter of degree in my opinion

as a member of a lynch mob yes

as a concerned politician seeking an effective immigration policy then no