38 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

There is no comparison, neither I, or anyone else has suggested there is - that is your hyperbolic leap, one which highlights a struggle with comprehension. 

 

 

'Man to me, at least’....  >> seriously ?? who writes or speaks like this ?... man ? !!! ... 

 

The 1980 want their vocabulary back ?

 

You’ve failed to recognise the difference between ‘on topic’ and ’response to a comment’... 

... or perhaps you just like the stink of cat-pi$$ on your drive way... 

 

If you struggle with that concept... the broader point could be raised about the responsibility and accountability of people for their pets, if they are not pets the authorities are responsible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Man, you're babbling!

8 hours ago, 2long said:

- The only way to BE SURE a mammal isn't rabid is to cut off its head and examine its spinal chord.

- This poor girl was 'savaged' but is expected to be back at school by the end of the week... today's Thursday.

- Dogs rarely attack without reason. Before everyone jumps on this comment, please note I wrote 'rarely.'

- If all soi dogs were eradicated, as many here would like, what might happen to the populations of rats, snakes, cats and other species which are considered vermin but are part of these dogs' diet?

Are countries where there are no or few soi dogs over run with rats and snakes? Never seen a soi dog eating a rat or a snake

13 minutes ago, sambum said:

"Dogs born here have just as much right to a life here than some people who chose to come and live here."

 

The people that choose to come and live here (and the people that already live here) have to (Cancel that - I mean are supposed to) abide by certain rules.

 

The same can not be said for dogs - it appears that they are above the law, and as such can not be held accountable for their actions! 

what about the rats and snakes, not to mention the pigs and cows right to life ???? Soi dogs are a dangerous pest and need to be done away with if this country is ever going to look anything other than third world.

9 hours ago, Golden Triangle said:

Nothing a 9mm bullet won't fix, but this is Thailand, so that won't happen.

Where would it that happen?

Well, the "last supper" solution also works for stray dogs ........ as long as the official Thailand is doing absolutely nothing. 

Under what statute are dangerous dogs  protected?

I don't  believe the official

27 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

Where would it that happen?

I take it you meant to say " where would it be that that happens " 

 

Anywhere you like mate, it has been known to happen in the UK & also in the states & Australia just for a couple I know of.

25 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

Under what statute are dangerous dogs  protected?

I don't  believe the official

I think he was refering the the statute of ‘lazy official hiding behind virtuous buddhism’ ...

 

 

There is actually an ‘animal welfare act’......

 

[Section 21. The following shall not be deemed cruelty to animal under section 20;

(6) killing animal in the case where there is a necessity to prevent danger to life or body of a human or other animal, or to prevent damage to property]

 

Thus... the ‘officials’ hands are not tied at all....   the dog, having proven that it is dangerous is not protected. 

 

https://dld.go.th/th/images/stories/law/english/en_cruelty_prevention_act2014.pdf

 

 

 

9 hours ago, webfact said:

Manop Srinuan of the Na Wang Hin municipality said that strays were protected.

 

Total BS ! There was one of these "Charities" took my very sick dog to the vet, tumour, told no, vet can not euthanize, I watched her slowly die for 3 weeks, hand feeding her.

 Fast forward ; took my cat to the same vet, for medication, I talked to her about my dog, and was told 'yes i would have put her down'. Dog are not a protected species, unless you benefit from a 'charity'. IMO

Reported Troll comment removed.

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Any dog ’should’ have an owner who is responsible and accountable for the actions of that animal. 

IF an owned dog bites someone, the owner is fully responsible and held accountable.

There is an Owner near me a 'Falang' who lets his dogs run free when out for a Walk Sh!t. A couple of months ago it bit a 12 yr old girl neighbour, he goes to the hospital and pays the bill, then two days ago his dogs running free as Always, bit another neighbour stiches needed, off he goes again to pay the bill, I berated him in no uncertain terms lots of F's at full volume on how stupid he is. He thinks paying money will solve the problem, WOE Be him if it bites me or the missus, my missus would take him to the cleaners.

58 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

Under what statute are dangerous dogs  protected?

I don't  believe the official

But this poor demented stupid fool of an official thinks otherwise. 

25 minutes ago, brianthainess said:

There is an Owner near me a 'Falang' who lets his dogs run free when out for a Walk Sh!t. A couple of months ago it bit a 12 yr old girl neighbour, he goes to the hospital and pays the bill, then two days ago his dogs running free as Always, bit another neighbour stiches needed, off he goes again to pay the bill, I berated him in no uncertain terms lots of F's at full volume on how stupid he is. He thinks paying money will solve the problem, WOE Be him if it bites me or the missus, my missus would take him to the cleaners.

I'm surprised someone hasn’t already poisoned the dogs, especially after they have already bitten people..... 

.... Sometimes people are forced to become the person they don’t like to be and act to protect their loved ones.

 

IF this guy loved his animals he would take care of them, train them in doing protect others from them, in turn protecting them from others people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9 hours ago, gerritkaew said:

soi dogs are a big problem, everywhere.

In my vilage they also bite everyone or try to. When i move there in July i bring my own dog to protect my kids..

So it is true that owners look like their dogs!

????????

For a country that is so concerned about the welfare of mongrels and animal rights, Thais sure eat a lot of meat. I guess they don't care about the animals when others are doing the killing and they don't have to see it. 

While. most of these soi dogs are harmless, many are not and if they are in a pack they can be dangerous and lethal to passers by. 

14 hours ago, Photoguy21 said:

help it on its way to its maker.

And how to do? Do you have some ideas,, because I don't dare to do anything

14 hours ago, Photoguy21 said:

Cats are not vermin but do kill rats and snakes.

and not many reports of stray cats savaging small children.......

10 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Why did the other villagers think that it was necessary to kill your dogs ?

Were they guard dogs that barked often ?

My dog, and the other family member's dogs, were pets that roamed,looking for other dogs in the country area where I live, and were gentle. All I heard was that some don't like dogs barking at them when they harvest rubber at night. Not a reason to kill, unless you're a disturbed individual that is a narcissist control freak. All these dogs liked people, and weren't aggressive in any way. My dogs weren't barkers. We think it is one individual doing this. Lucky for him I haven't caught him, yet.

Edited May 19, 20224 yr by fredwiggy

15 hours ago, RafPinto said:

Dogs rarely attack without reason. Before everyone jumps on this comment, please note I wrote 'rarely.'

So now you can get inside a dog's head? The problem is that it happens.....all too often. 

Yes we know its Budda's  dog,  thats the excuse they use , Im sure if it bit the officials child  they would be wanting compensation

2 hours ago, jacko45k said:

So now you can get inside a dog's head? The problem is that it happens.....all too often. 

Sorry, I did not write this.
 

2 hours ago, jacko45k said:

So now you can get inside a dog's head? The problem is that it happens.....all too often. 

Don't cut comments.

There’s no money involved in rounding up stray dogs,costs them money. 
No one seems to own these Soi dogs,they are left to fend for themselves. But run over and kill one and everyone in that Soi owned it and wants compensation.

19 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I love dogs, but if that was my daughter then that particular dog would be having an unfortunate accident in the next few days.

Exactly......................but let the locals deal with it likewise.

i reagree with "golden triangle"  100% as above 

3 hours ago, actonion said:

Yes we know its Budda's  dog,  thats the excuse they use , Im sure if it bit the officials child  they would be wanting compensation

Actually that is not the excuse

If a human would assault the 5-yrs old, needing 24 stitches ...would immediately locked up, after the customary re-enactment and wai.

 

If a dog does it, mai bpen rai, business as usual, the kid's or parents' fault.

 

If the parents would assault the dog, they would be criminals, jailed.

 

Bit of a double standard?

 

Most places a brutal attacker would be taken out of normal life, minimizing the chance of repeat.

We live in a strange world where a stray dog's wellbeing is more important than an innocent child's well being and life.

Don't be fooled people,most Thai people deal their own way with dogs that are

a pest.

Happens all the time,i do not condone it but usually complaining does not work

and angry confrontations are frowned upon.

The result is usually a few dead dogs.

22 hours ago, webfact said:

He could spay them and vaccinate them but that was all.

There's a deluded Soi Dog Foundation that does this THEN releases them back on to the sois to continue spreading disease and traffic mayhem; perhaps this was one of their 'patients'? 

There is only one answer; all parents should protect their kids with the permanent solution.

13 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

I think he was refering the the statute of ‘lazy official hiding behind virtuous buddhism’ ...

 

 

There is actually an ‘animal welfare act’......

 

[Section 21. The following shall not be deemed cruelty to animal under section 20;

(6) killing animal in the case where there is a necessity to prevent danger to life or body of a human or other animal, or to prevent damage to property]

 

Thus... the ‘officials’ hands are not tied at all....   the dog, having proven that it is dangerous is not protected. 

 

https://dld.go.th/th/images/stories/law/english/en_cruelty_prevention_act2014.pdf

 

 

 

The official will only be interested in actions that provide him with additional income.

 

No money in protecting children.