NE: Hunt on for "cruel man" who shot and hurt family's pet dog that got out in the street

[billsmart]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I do agree.... 

 

I just believe we should be doing something better and preventing the issue of soi dogs being an issue in the first place.... 

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.

[roo860]

On 9/5/2022 at 3:23 PM, kidneyw said:

Looks like a vigilante on the loose.

Not exactly Charlie Bronson.

[billsmart]

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Question...  As you are ‘feeling responsible’ for these stray animals... how far does that feeling of responsibility extend ???

 

If while running free they knock a motorcyclist of their motorcycle are these dogs then your responsibility ???

 

 

I think the issue is not quite as black and white as we may sometimes thing: 

Its lovely to be caring and look after animals, but there is always a bigger picture, especially when it comes to stray animals we may want to care for, but not want to go so far as being responsible for. 

 

I don't feel "responsible" for them. I feel compassion for them.

I assume you by "running free...knock a motorcyclist off" you are implying the dog was chasing the motorcyclist. That doesn't happen up here, at least I've never seen it, but I'm sure it happens in other places. I have seen cars up here purposely swerve to hit dogs and kill or injure them. In either of these cases, I don't feel responsible for the dog's or the human's actions. They are responsible, however, and should be punished. If it continues for too long, they should be put down.

I do think in both cases that the dog or the human should be 

[billsmart]

9 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I think thats great and agree this is the right way to go about things. 

 

I’m curious why do the males need the testosterone ????

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

[Bday Prang]

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!

[billsmart]

6 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

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

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.

[Mac Mickmanus]

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.

What about the Humans life ? where they can walk the streets without fear of getting attacked , bitten and possibly getting infected with a fatal disease 

[Bday Prang]

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

[Bday Prang]

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 

[billsmart]

7 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What about the Humans life ? where they can walk the streets without fear of getting attacked , bitten and possibly getting infected with a fatal disease 

They can try to walk wherever they want. They might get shot at if they walked on some other human's private property. Or maybe challenged with snarls on some soi dog's "home turf."  If they feel fearful walking in places like these, then they shouldn't go there anymore, or if they want to, try to make prior arrangements with the one's in charge of the property. I guess they could also eliminate the human who owns the property or the soi dogs who live there, but I think that would be the last resort.

[billsmart]

2 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

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 

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.

[Bday Prang]

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.  

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, billsmart said:

They can try to walk wherever they want. They might get shot at if they walked on some other human's private property. Or maybe challenged with snarls on some soi dog's "home turf."  If they feel fearful walking in places like these, then they shouldn't go there anymore, or if they want to, try to make prior arrangements with the one's in charge of the property. I guess they could also eliminate the human who owns the property or the soi dogs who live there, but I think that would be the last resort.

So, I should not walk in the streets , I should stay at home and not go outside , because the dogs rule the streets and they can attack me at will ?

   Humans should remain at home because wild out of control dogs control the streets ?

   You control your dogs and keep them within your property and then people can walk the streets without fear 

[billsmart]

1 minute ago, Bday Prang said:

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.  

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. ????

[Mac Mickmanus]

6 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.

I am quite happy and content to share the streets with dogs and other animals , but its the dogs who aren't happy or content sharing the streets with me . 

   I do not attack any dogs , its the dogs who attack me 

[billsmart]

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

So, I should not walk in the streets , I should stay at home and not go outside , because the dogs rule the streets and they can attack me at will ?

   Humans should remain at home because wild out of control dogs control the streets ?

   You control your dogs and keep them within your property and then people can walk the streets without fear 

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.

[Bday Prang]

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

[billsmart]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I am quite happy and content to share the streets with dogs and other animals , but its the dogs who aren't happy or content sharing the streets with me . 

   I do not attack any dogs , its the dogs who attack me 

Good. Keep it that way. And, if a dog, snake, rat, or human attacks you, you have the right, IMO, to defend yourself up to and including killing them if that what it takes.

[Bday Prang]

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 

 

[billsmart]

1 minute ago, Bday Prang said:

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

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.

[billsmart]

2 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

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

 

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

[Bday Prang]

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 

[IvorBiggun2]

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.

[Bday Prang]

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

Edited September 6, 2022 by Bday Prang

[Bday Prang]

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 

[billsmart]

3 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

"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 

"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.

[Mac Mickmanus]

13 minutes ago, billsmart said:

Good. Keep it that way. And, if a dog, snake, rat, or human attacks you, you have the right, IMO, to defend yourself up to and including killing them if that what it takes.

I really don't want to walk the streets carry a weapon and having to kill any dogs that attack me . 

    Snakes and rats are not aggressive  , they will ignore me if I ignore them .

  Dogs go on the attack for no reason , quite often in packs as well . 

[Bday Prang]

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, 

[richard_smith237]

billsmart is of the belief that any animal has as much right to be here as we have, as a more intelligent species we have to look after other species, we have no right to kill them or displace them from their habitats etc....

 

It's difficult to argue with this from a human perspective, but the issue is not one which is clear cut, black and white... or is it ??? it depends purely on the perspective from which we base our argument. 

 

I will argue from the perspective of a parent - I do not want any unsupervised dog near my child, be that walking into a 7-11, playing in front of our house or on the beach while on holiday. I believe any wild animal, soi dog or unsupervised dog which may inadvertently attack my child for no obvious reason should be removed from that area - that basically means any dog which is not restrained. 

 

Humans and dogs are not equal, both have rights to a life of course - but my child has more rights not to be injured by dog or other animal than that animal has a right to live - disagreeable, but thats how protective I am as a father. There is no grey area for me. 

 

Thus: While I have hit like on many of bill’s posts, I commend what he is doing, partially having spayed the female in the group of soi dogs he looks after it doesn’t wholly deal with the issue of ’stray dogs’ in Thailand.

 

IF there were stray dogs in front of my house, pooping or making a mess, making a noise at night and / or presenting a risk to my son while he plays outside our house I will take measures to have that dog or group of dogs removes. I will pay someone to do this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bday Prang]

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