26 minutes ago, snowgard said:

You don't know the reason and want to eleminate a dog? Maybe this kid throw a stone on the dog?
 

well you are somewhat correct,  however the jury says if it bit a child then chances are it was running out side freely to bite anyone who came near it.   So based on that I say eliminate the dog and the owner for being irresponsible and stupid. 

The dog should be in it's yard, not running free outside .....   understand   ?

Some breeds are designed to bite and savage so severely they kill. It's not the dogs fault for existing, but no one is convincing me these animals have a place on the streets of civil society.

 

5 minutes ago, steven100 said:

eliminate the dog and the owner

This idea works for me.

1 hour ago, Will B Good said:

Are they no soi dogs hanging about that might threaten them?

No. And they usually all take a walk together so it would be a brave dog who attacks six. They occasionally meet one in the field and tails wag. There are several dogs that live across the road but no-one crosses, except the one male we have who gets into scuffles when any females there are on heat. All quite peaceful, really.

18 hours ago, 2long said:

A sober Somchai in front of cops is always going to tow the line and be all smiles... let's wait and see how he behaves the next time he's drunk.

As for what really happened before that (dog allegedly biting the kid) there's no information here, so pro & anti dog posters should think before throwing in their (expert????) opinions. ????

Where I live spearing a dog is common place, not because the dog is bad , because the dog is cheap food.

1 hour ago, vandeventer said:

Where I live spearing a dog is common place, not because the dog is bad , because the dog is cheap food.

It makes no sense to eat warm-blooded carnivores.

Most of the stored energy in plants is transferred to the animal that eats the plants.

- If that animal is a herbivore, then there's just one step of lost energy from the plant to the animal, so eating that herbivore (warm or cold blooded) reaps benefits from the original energy.

- If that animal is then eaten by a cold-blooded carnivore, such as a crocodile or shark, then (moral issues aside) it's ok to eat the predator because that creature doesn't burn crazy amounts of energy living its life as warm blooded.

- But if the predator of the herbivore is a warm-blooded carnivore, then there's simply too much energy lost from the original plant, The original plant's energy is lost through the prey herbivore, and most of what's left is used by a warm-blooded carnivore. It's too many steps and too much energy is already used up. And most warm-blooded carnivores don't have a great deal of edible flesh or fat.

 

Ever wondered why humans don't eat more dogs and cats? Also, warm-blooded carnivores tend to be clever (hard to hunt or farm) and don't reproduce as much.

2 minutes ago, 2long said:

- If that animal is a herbivore, then there's just one step of lost energy from the plant to the animal, so eating that herbivore (warm or cold blooded) reaps benefits from the original energy.

Even then the efficiency of the energy transfer is horrendously low.

 

Logic would dictate we only eat plants for sure.

1 hour ago, 2long said:

It makes no sense to eat warm-blooded carnivores.

Most of the stored energy in plants is transferred to the animal that eats the plants.

- If that animal is a herbivore, then there's just one step of lost energy from the plant to the animal, so eating that herbivore (warm or cold blooded) reaps benefits from the original energy.

- If that animal is then eaten by a cold-blooded carnivore, such as a crocodile or shark, then (moral issues aside) it's ok to eat the predator because that creature doesn't burn crazy amounts of energy living its life as warm blooded.

- But if the predator of the herbivore is a warm-blooded carnivore, then there's simply too much energy lost from the original plant, The original plant's energy is lost through the prey herbivore, and most of what's left is used by a warm-blooded carnivore. It's too many steps and too much energy is already used up. And most warm-blooded carnivores don't have a great deal of edible flesh or fat.

 

Ever wondered why humans don't eat more dogs and cats? Also, warm-blooded carnivores tend to be clever (hard to hunt or farm) and don't reproduce as much.

Funny you should say this ,as some in my area have heads like a shark and butts like a crocodile and don't  care  if they ever reproduce.

On 3/5/2022 at 8:57 AM, steven100 said:

if it's true that the mutt bit his child it should be eliminated and the owner fined. 

if it was my kid it bit .id have killed it.. to many of these flea ridden things out there ..one of my major hates of Thailand..

14 hours ago, Led Lolly Yellow Lolly said:

Some breeds are designed to bite and savage so severely they kill. It's not the dogs fault for existing, but no one is convincing me these animals have a place on the streets of civil society.

 

This idea works for me.

great idea..

4 hours ago, vandeventer said:

Where I live spearing a dog is common place, not because the dog is bad , because the dog is cheap food.

great needs more spears

5 hours ago, vandeventer said:

Where I live spearing a dog is common place, not because the dog is bad , because the dog is cheap food.

Someone else from Middlesbrough?

On 3/5/2022 at 8:51 AM, webfact said:

Suphachoke, 48, who admitted to being drunk and angry, attacked Panchalos's dog with a metal pole.

 

He said that the mutt bit his child.

 

He then threatened to kill Panchalos.

So a drunk thai man attacks a dog with a metal pole and threatens to kill its owner as well as claiming it bit his kid. Do you not think the police would have checked if the kid is ok? or even has a bite?  and it's not just drunken BS to justify attacking the dog? Guess better to just kill the dog as a lot of you have decided