"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , Doug Kanter says...

"Banty" wrote in message
...

Or just lack of practical thinking.

If the neighbors with the dog are Martians who would immediately snatch
him and
use his blood should he come to their door for a conversation, then the
next
best option is to go ahead and put up that fence.

Banty


Of course, he *might* have the type of neighbor who is utterly oblivious
to
the generally agreed upon rules of living in a civilized way. These
animals
*do* exist, and in most cases, they cannot be retrained, only controlled,
much like their dogs.



True, true.

But that's one thing that's determined by a converstaion - no?

The OP suggested some vague reason for not having a conversation, and was
hesitant to explain further.


And, if that's the case, then one goes to other options: law enforcement
if
feasible (is there a leash law?), putting in that fence.

I think town justices should give dog criminals a choice of:

1) Buy a fence for your neighbor, since you can't seem to control your
vermin. The fence he wants will cost $4000.00 to install and you'll be in a
holding cell until a family member or friend brings cash. Green cash money.

2) Lose your dog next time it's roaming the neighborhood, *and* you and your
kids will watch it being put to death at the pound. Your grandkids, too, if
you have any.

3) Put your arms behind your back so the bailiff can take you to jail.
You'll need 30 days worth of reading material and a whole bunch of condoms
(for your new girlfriends).

Hey...I'm funny about these things. This is why Henslee has been following
me around the newsgroups for a while. I say the things he wants to, but is
afraid to.

"Oscar_Lives" wrote in message
news:6mQEe.177073$x96.47003@attbi_s72...

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract and
die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day here
on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

--
Jim Yanik



Its just a ****ing dog. Not like it is a human or anything important.

If the dog can't crap where it is supposed to, take it out.


Another person for my free beer for life list. :-)

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Oscar_Lives" wrote in message
news:6mQEe.177073$x96.47003@attbi_s72...

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract and
die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day here
on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

--
Jim Yanik



Its just a ****ing dog. Not like it is a human or anything important.

If the dog can't crap where it is supposed to, take it out.


Another person for my free beer for life list. :-)


I love you, Man!

Instead of telling us this why not tell us what you actually did and
what the result was?

Charlie S. wrote:
Most everyone in the neighborhood has a fenced in yard. So, that
means any stray gods or more likely the god next door find our yard a
convenient place to do his business from time to time. I've thought
of putting up a fence or even talking to the neighbor about his god.
Neither idea appeals to me.

Outside of doing any thing drastic, like shooting the god, anyone have
any ideas how to keep the god(s) out without putting up a barrier.

"Oscar_Lives" wrote in message
news:ZJREe.204463$xm3.111857@attbi_s21...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Oscar_Lives" wrote in message
news:6mQEe.177073$x96.47003@attbi_s72...

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract and
die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day here
on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

--
Jim Yanik



Its just a ****ing dog. Not like it is a human or anything important.

If the dog can't crap where it is supposed to, take it out.


Another person for my free beer for life list. :-)


I love you, Man!


Put your frosted glass on the cd drawer and press
CTRL-ALT-SHIFT-SPACEBAR-~~~-%-B. Beer should come right out. Change the "B"
at the end to an "L" for light beer.

George E. Cawthon wrote:
Charlie S. wrote:

Most everyone in the neighborhood has a fenced in yard. So, that
means any stray dogs or more likely the dog next door find our yard a
convenient place to do his business from time to time. I've thought
of putting up a fence or even talking to the neighbor about his dog.
Neither idea appeals to me.

Outside of doing any thing drastic, like shooting the dog, anyone have
any ideas how to keep the dog(s) out without putting up a barrier.



The key is to find their do and throw it into the middle of the street.
It confuses the dogs! Some people don't like to do this but it is the
best solution and might even have the secondary effect of shamming the
neighbor into controlling the dog.

Another method I've heard recommended is to obtain some lion dung from
your local zoo and spread it along the outer perimeter.
This is purported to keep all dogs and cats far away.




--
If you find a posting or message from myself offensive,
inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know
how to ignore a posting,complain to me and I will demonstrate.

Gort wrote:
George E. Cawthon wrote:

Charlie S. wrote:

Most everyone in the neighborhood has a fenced in yard. So, that
means any stray dogs or more likely the dog next door find our yard a
convenient place to do his business from time to time. I've thought
of putting up a fence or even talking to the neighbor about his dog.
Neither idea appeals to me.

Outside of doing any thing drastic, like shooting the dog, anyone
have any ideas how to keep the dog(s) out without putting up a barrier.



The key is to find their do and throw it into the middle of the
street. It confuses the dogs! Some people don't like to do this but
it is the best solution and might even have the secondary effect of
shamming the neighbor into controlling the dog.


Another method I've heard recommended is to obtain some lion dung from
your local zoo and spread it along the outer perimeter.
This is purported to keep all dogs and cats far away.




I think that solution is worse than the problem.

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 01:24:39 +0000, George E. Cawthon wrote:

Another method I've heard recommended is to obtain some lion dung from
your local zoo and spread it along the outer perimeter.
This is purported to keep all dogs and cats far away.

I think that solution is worse than the problem.

Why? Sounds like it would work fine to me, and nobody gets hurt.

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951

In alt.home.repair on Sun, 24 Jul 2005 15:07:28 GMT "Doug Kanter"
posted:


"Punch" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Banty" wrote in message
...

Or just lack of practical thinking.

If the neighbors with the dog are Martians who would immediately snatch
him and
use his blood should he come to their door for a conversation, then the
next
best option is to go ahead and put up that fence.

Banty


Of course, he *might* have the type of neighbor who is utterly oblivious
to the generally agreed upon rules of living in a civilized way. These
animals *do* exist, and in most cases, they cannot be retrained, only
controlled, much like their dogs.


it took me a month but I shovelled up the poop and dropped it into the dog
owners driveway, after a month of this, never saw poop in my yard again

That's a disgusting thing to do. I love it! :-) Dropping it onto their
windshield wipers also works nicely.

My neighbor's dog doesn't go where he shouldn't -- well maybe he does.
I don't know what he they walk him to or what he does -- but he's
never on a leash and he's a pitbull. I've seen him growl at a couple
high school kids, who then went way out of their way around a bunch of
other houses to avoid him.

I was tending a friend's dog for a day, and as I was returning home,
he came out of the door. I could not yet see him but I called to his
manager to "Get hold of your dog". Instead, she just called to the
dog, two or three times, who ignored her. He also had no collar on
either.

I was afraid to turn and go the other way, because iiuc a dog will
take that as weakness and be more likely to attack.

I was also afraid to go forward because my visiting dog was unknown to
this one, and I didn't want my friends to come home to an injured dog.

(Finally, it seemed like finally, I split the difference, and he
didn't follow.)

Other neighbors have complained to animal control, and probably talked
to the owners before they did that.

I can imagine one in the family retaliating against my car when I'm
sleeping or my home when I'm away. Because anyone who doesn't bother
to leash a pitbull is obviously antisocial in some ways.

Plainly I would make no progress by talking to them, and I could put
myself on their hitlist, especially if someone else gets the pound to
take away the dog, but I"m the one they think did it.


Meirman
--
If emailing, please let me know whether
or not you are posting the same letter.
Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

"meirman" wrote in message
...


Other neighbors have complained to animal control, and probably talked
to the owners before they did that.

Any idea what, if anything, was done by the animal control people?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract and
die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day
here on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

I'm sure you've killed a few mosquitoes and other bugs over the years
because they annoyed you. Do you recommend it to other people?




Only you would equate killing mosquitoes and dogs.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract and
die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day
here on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

I'm sure you've killed a few mosquitoes and other bugs over the years
because they annoyed you. Do you recommend it to other people?




Only you would equate killing mosquitoes and dogs.

Live in a Disney fantasy world if you like, but there's really no
difference. It's chauvinistic for people to claim one type of life has more
value than another.

I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on a
usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of the
yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my address.




"Charlie S." wrote in message
...
Most everyone in the neighborhood has a fenced in yard. So, that
means any stray gods or more likely the god next door find our yard a
convenient place to do his business from time to time. I've thought
of putting up a fence or even talking to the neighbor about his god.
Neither idea appeals to me.

Outside of doing any thing drastic, like shooting the god, anyone have
any ideas how to keep the god(s) out without putting up a barrier.

It's a little hobby of Henslee's. Just ignore it.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:UK6Fe.8989$iR2.126@trndny02...
I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on a
usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of the
yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my address.




"Charlie S." wrote in message
...
Most everyone in the neighborhood has a fenced in yard. So, that
means any stray gods or more likely the god next door find our yard a
convenient place to do his business from time to time. I've thought
of putting up a fence or even talking to the neighbor about his god.
Neither idea appeals to me.

Outside of doing any thing drastic, like shooting the god, anyone have
any ideas how to keep the god(s) out without putting up a barrier.

Thanks for letting me know, only been here a couple weeks. Haven't quite
caught on to the range of humor.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
It's a little hobby of Henslee's. Just ignore it.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:UK6Fe.8989$iR2.126@trndny02...
I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on a
usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of the
yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my address.




"Charlie S." wrote in message
...
Most everyone in the neighborhood has a fenced in yard. So, that
means any stray gods or more likely the god next door find our yard a
convenient place to do his business from time to time. I've thought
of putting up a fence or even talking to the neighbor about his god.
Neither idea appeals to me.

Outside of doing any thing drastic, like shooting the god, anyone have
any ideas how to keep the god(s) out without putting up a barrier.

"Dan C" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 01:24:39 +0000, George E. Cawthon wrote:

Another method I've heard recommended is to obtain some lion dung from
your local zoo and spread it along the outer perimeter.
This is purported to keep all dogs and cats far away.

I think that solution is worse than the problem.

Why? Sounds like it would work fine to me, and nobody gets hurt.

Not that OP is really gonna go get some but I doubt it would work. We have
occasional mountain lions where I live and my dogs go and pee can poop right
on their droppings (easily recognizable by the size and the footprints next
to them) to "reclaim" their territory.

OP didn't say why he won't talk to the dog owner but my experience was that
even the lowliest, deranged, degenerate gang-member type will try to keep
his dogs out of your yard. I had gang-members move in next door and their
dogs (pit bulls) ate through the fence and hung out (and crapped) in my back
yard. They immediately went about reinforcing the fence etc even though
they continuned to play loud boom-boom music and sell drugs in front of my
house.

I posted previously what I did to keep cats from crapping on my front lawn
but I don't know where the post went.

I bought a motion detector light for about $10 and ran wires from one of the
light sockets to a relay which activated my automatic sprinklers when it
detected anything moving on my lawn. I had it set to stay on for 5 minutes.
No more cat poop.



--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951

In your news reader, you can enter whatever name you want to show with your
messages. The only difference between a real message and a fake will be the
email address and other tech stuff that shows in the headers.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:hS7Fe.7166$in2.1422@trndny05...
Thanks for letting me know, only been here a couple weeks. Haven't quite
caught on to the range of humor.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
It's a little hobby of Henslee's. Just ignore it.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:UK6Fe.8989$iR2.126@trndny02...
I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on a
usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of
the yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my address.




"Charlie S." wrote in message
...
Most everyone in the neighborhood has a fenced in yard. So, that
means any stray gods or more likely the god next door find our yard a
convenient place to do his business from time to time. I've thought
of putting up a fence or even talking to the neighbor about his god.
Neither idea appeals to me.

Outside of doing any thing drastic, like shooting the god, anyone have
any ideas how to keep the god(s) out without putting up a barrier.

Greetings Charlie,

You say that: "I can't understand why someone would use someone else's
name (mine) on a usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be
a joke?"

It is very simple to me Charlie. Let me explain it to you.

You are perceived as being weak, without balls, and without spine.
Therefore, bullies will pick on you. Defamation is defined as "an
intentional false communication, either published or publicly spoken,
that injures another's reputation or good name" and it is illegal.
However, you are not protected by those defamation laws because you
"are weak, without balls, and without spine" utterly lacking the
constitution necessary to invoke those laws. You "can't even talk to
your neighbor."

In short, you give Henslee and his type the power through inaction.

Take my advice and prove me wrong,
William

PS: Yes, it IS worth your trouble. Go for it.

Doug Kanter wrote:
In your news reader, you can enter whatever name you want to show with your
messages. The only difference between a real message and a fake will be the
email address and other tech stuff that shows in the headers.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:hS7Fe.7166$in2.1422@trndny05...
Thanks for letting me know, only been here a couple weeks. Haven't quite
caught on to the range of humor.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
It's a little hobby of Henslee's. Just ignore it.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:UK6Fe.8989$iR2.126@trndny02...
I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on a
usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of
the yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my address.




"Charlie S." wrote in message
...
Most everyone in the neighborhood has a fenced in yard. So, that
means any stray gods or more likely the god next door find our yard a
convenient place to do his business from time to time. I've thought
of putting up a fence or even talking to the neighbor about his god.
Neither idea appeals to me.

Outside of doing any thing drastic, like shooting the god, anyone have
any ideas how to keep the god(s) out without putting up a barrier.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract
and die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day
here on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

I'm sure you've killed a few mosquitoes and other bugs over the
years because they annoyed you. Do you recommend it to other people?




Only you would equate killing mosquitoes and dogs.

Live in a Disney fantasy world if you like, but there's really no
difference.

Only in your opinion.

It's chauvinistic for people to claim one type of life has
more value than another.



I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.
There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic pets,but
you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps for them(except
that the law doesn't see it that way.),in "defense of your property",rather
than talk to the owner,or get the authorities involved.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Doug Kanter wrote:



Live in a Disney fantasy world if you like, but there's really no
difference. It's chauvinistic for people to claim one type of life has more
value than another.



Right ****wit. Do us all a favor and have some bacon grease soaked
sponges for your din-din tonite.

Doug Kanter wrote:
It's a little hobby of Henslee's. Just ignore it.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:UK6Fe.8989$iR2.126@trndny02...

I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on a
usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of the
yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my address.



Wrong ****tard. Learn to read headers.

Jim Yanik . wrote in
:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract
and die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day
here on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

I'm sure you've killed a few mosquitoes and other bugs over the
years because they annoyed you. Do you recommend it to other
people?




Only you would equate killing mosquitoes and dogs.

Live in a Disney fantasy world if you like, but there's really no
difference.

Only in your opinion.

It's chauvinistic for people to claim one type of life has
more value than another.



I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.
There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic
pets,but you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps for
them(except that the law doesn't see it that way.),in "defense of your
property",rather than talk to the owner,or get the authorities
involved.


As I said before,many Usenet posters give out bad or unwise advice.
You seem to be one of those.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Jim Yanik wrote:
Jim Yanik . wrote in
:


"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.


As I said before,many Usenet posters give out bad or unwise advice.
You seem to be one of those.


Amen. Typical Kanter, joined at the hip with

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract
and die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day
here on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

I'm sure you've killed a few mosquitoes and other bugs over the
years because they annoyed you. Do you recommend it to other people?




Only you would equate killing mosquitoes and dogs.

Live in a Disney fantasy world if you like, but there's really no
difference.

Only in your opinion.

It's chauvinistic for people to claim one type of life has
more value than another.



I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.
There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic pets,but
you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps for them(except
that the law doesn't see it that way.),in "defense of your
property",rather
than talk to the owner,or get the authorities involved.

Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with irresponsible
dog owners for the past 25 years. There are two types and ONLY two types:

Type 1: Knows that what they're doing is wrong, but doesn't give a damn.
Type 2: Doesn't realize that they're ****ed up. Too stupid to own a dog, in
other words.

My preference is to use the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's 3 strikes
and your doggy is taken away forever. That usually takes weeks. I've learned
to compress the process into as little as a week in one case. This usually
involves retraining the dog catcher. Many believe the dog owner should have
a little time in between visits, to "think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but this is
not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake about this, Jimmy
boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance animals to vanish, and it's
perfectly legal. If I had the opportunity, I'd do the same. You can claim
that a dog is different from an insect because people are emotionally
attached to dogs, but that matters little to anyone but the dog owner.

"G Henslee" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
It's a little hobby of Henslee's. Just ignore it.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:UK6Fe.8989$iR2.126@trndny02...

I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on a
usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of the
yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my address.



Wrong ****tard. Learn to read headers.

The header proves nothing. You could have more than one ISP, and use any of
a wide assortment of news access methods. ****tard.

Doug Kanter wrote:



Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with irresponsible
dog owners for the past 25 years.

My preference is to use the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's 3 strikes
and your doggy is taken away forever. That usually takes weeks. I've learned
to compress the process into as little as a week in one case. This usually
involves retraining the dog catcher. Many believe the dog owner should have
a little time in between visits, to "think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but this is
not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake about this, Jimmy
boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance animals to vanish, and it's
perfectly legal. If I had the opportunity, I'd do the same. You can claim
that a dog is different from an insect because people are emotionally
attached to dogs, but that matters little to anyone but the dog owner.



What's it costin' you these days to have your shot out or otherwise
broken windows replaced, kicked and trampled sprinkler heads fixed, and
24 hour security to guard you against the 25 years worth of vengeful
people who must hate your sorry ass?

Save your phoney keyboard flexing for the gai-boi groups you hang in.

Doug Kanter wrote:
"G Henslee" wrote in message
...

Doug Kanter wrote:

It's a little hobby of Henslee's. Just ignore it.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:UK6Fe.8989$iR2.126@trndny02...


I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on a
usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of the
yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my address.



Wrong ****tard. Learn to read headers.


The header proves nothing. You could have more than one ISP, and use any of
a wide assortment of news access methods. ****tard.



Yes, I could. But I don't, dickweed. You shouldn't speak of that which
you don't know. As with everything else you post you're as full of ****
as a xmas goose.

"G Henslee" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:



Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with
irresponsible dog owners for the past 25 years. My preference is to use
the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's 3 strikes and your doggy is
taken away forever. That usually takes weeks. I've learned to compress
the process into as little as a week in one case. This usually involves
retraining the dog catcher. Many believe the dog owner should have a
little time in between visits, to "think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but this is
not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake about this,
Jimmy boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance animals to vanish, and
it's perfectly legal. If I had the opportunity, I'd do the same. You can
claim that a dog is different from an insect because people are
emotionally attached to dogs, but that matters little to anyone but the
dog owner.

What's it costin' you these days to have your shot out or otherwise broken
windows replaced, kicked and trampled sprinkler heads fixed, and 24 hour
security to guard you against the 25 years worth of vengeful people who
must hate your sorry ass?

What's your alternative? Be a sap and let dogs crap all over your yard? Are
you also OK with spending money to have your carpets cleaned because of
something your neighbor did?


Save your phoney keyboard flexing for the gai-boi groups you hang in.

What's with the sudden gay-bashing? Is your son dating a nice boy?

"G Henslee" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"G Henslee" wrote in message
...

Doug Kanter wrote:

It's a little hobby of Henslee's. Just ignore it.

"Charlie S." wrote in message
news:UK6Fe.8989$iR2.126@trndny02...


I can't understand why someone would use someone else's name (mine) on
a usenet group and make a posting. Is it suppose to be a joke?

For those who don't understand. Open up his " keeping gods out of
the yard" post.
You'll find it is from http://extra.newsguy.com This is not my
address.



Wrong ****tard. Learn to read headers.


The header proves nothing. You could have more than one ISP, and use any
of a wide assortment of news access methods. ****tard.

Yes, I could. But I don't, dickweed. You shouldn't speak of that which
you don't know. As with everything else you post you're as full of ****
as a xmas goose.

Really? Explain where I'm wrong, in the paragraph beginning with "The header
proves nothing...."

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
" wrote in
oups.com:

Dog will eat the sponges and possibly block his digestive tract
and die.

Thanks Ed. I learn something new and useful seemingly every day
here on alt.home.repair



Yes, that many posters give out bad advice.

I'm sure you've killed a few mosquitoes and other bugs over the
years because they annoyed you. Do you recommend it to other
people?




Only you would equate killing mosquitoes and dogs.

Live in a Disney fantasy world if you like, but there's really no
difference.

Only in your opinion.

It's chauvinistic for people to claim one type of life has
more value than another.



I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.
There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic
pets,but you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps for
them(except that the law doesn't see it that way.),in "defense of
your property",rather
than talk to the owner,or get the authorities involved.

Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with
irresponsible dog owners for the past 25 years. There are two types
and ONLY two types:

Type 1: Knows that what they're doing is wrong, but doesn't give a
damn. Type 2: Doesn't realize that they're ****ed up. Too stupid to
own a dog, in other words.

My preference is to use the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's 3
strikes and your doggy is taken away forever. That usually takes
weeks. I've learned to compress the process into as little as a week
in one case. This usually involves retraining the dog catcher. Many
believe the dog owner should have a little time in between visits, to
"think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but this
is not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake about
this, Jimmy boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance animals to
vanish, and it's perfectly legal.

FARMERS,in agriculture-zoned areas,sure.
But most if not all of the queries HERE are from URBAN homeowners,where it
is is NOT legal.

If I had the opportunity, I'd do the
same. You can claim that a dog is different from an insect because
people are emotionally attached to dogs, but that matters little to
anyone but the dog owner.

And the law authorities.

I live in an apartment,and I have about 30 years of experience with dog
owners and poop where it shouldn't be. There are a minority of owners who
either curb their dog in the proper places or clean up after them without
instruction,then there are the ones who were just unaware or clueless(who
straighten up after a talk.),and then the ones who just don't care(even
after you talk with them).

So,that's THREE types.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .


I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.
There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic
pets,but you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps for
them(except that the law doesn't see it that way.),in "defense of
your property",rather
than talk to the owner,or get the authorities involved.

Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with
irresponsible dog owners for the past 25 years. There are two types
and ONLY two types:

Type 1: Knows that what they're doing is wrong, but doesn't give a
damn. Type 2: Doesn't realize that they're ****ed up. Too stupid to
own a dog, in other words.

My preference is to use the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's 3
strikes and your doggy is taken away forever. That usually takes
weeks. I've learned to compress the process into as little as a week
in one case. This usually involves retraining the dog catcher. Many
believe the dog owner should have a little time in between visits, to
"think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but this
is not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake about
this, Jimmy boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance animals to
vanish, and it's perfectly legal.

FARMERS,in agriculture-zoned areas,sure.
But most if not all of the queries HERE are from URBAN homeowners,where it
is is NOT legal.

Actually, in NY, you can end any animal that damages ANY food crop. Not
dependent on zoning. Call the NYS DEC for clarification. This obviously does
not address methods.



If I had the opportunity, I'd do the
same. You can claim that a dog is different from an insect because
people are emotionally attached to dogs, but that matters little to
anyone but the dog owner.

And the law authorities.

They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find". Otherwise,
all they have is a missing pet report.



I live in an apartment,and I have about 30 years of experience with dog
owners and poop where it shouldn't be. There are a minority of owners who
either curb their dog in the proper places or clean up after them without
instruction,then there are the ones who were just unaware or clueless(who
straighten up after a talk.),and then the ones who just don't care(even
after you talk with them).

So,that's THREE types.

Well, even many of the owners who clean up fall into one of the other two
categories, because they won't obey a polite request from a property owner
to do it elsewhere. Or, perhaps that puts them into yet another category:
Criminal, since trespassing is illegal.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .


I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.
There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic
pets,but you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps
for them(except that the law doesn't see it that way.),in "defense
of your property",rather
than talk to the owner,or get the authorities involved.

Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with
irresponsible dog owners for the past 25 years. There are two types
and ONLY two types:

Type 1: Knows that what they're doing is wrong, but doesn't give a
damn. Type 2: Doesn't realize that they're ****ed up. Too stupid to
own a dog, in other words.

My preference is to use the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's 3
strikes and your doggy is taken away forever. That usually takes
weeks. I've learned to compress the process into as little as a week
in one case. This usually involves retraining the dog catcher. Many
believe the dog owner should have a little time in between visits,
to "think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but
this is not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake
about this, Jimmy boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance animals
to vanish, and it's perfectly legal.

FARMERS,in agriculture-zoned areas,sure.
But most if not all of the queries HERE are from URBAN
homeowners,where it is is NOT legal.

Actually, in NY, you can end any animal that damages ANY food crop.

And WHERE do people grow food crops? Farms.
Most people posting here have not mentioned any gardens being devastated.
You're reaching again.AND trying to use an exemption as the general rule.

Not dependent on zoning. Call the NYS DEC for clarification. This
obviously does not address methods.



If I had the opportunity, I'd do the
same. You can claim that a dog is different from an insect because
people are emotionally attached to dogs, but that matters little to
anyone but the dog owner.

And the law authorities.

They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find".
Otherwise, all they have is a missing pet report.

Ah,so you advocate an illegal act,then compound it by hiding evidence,a
second illegal act.
You must be a wonderful law-abiding citizen.(not)



I live in an apartment,and I have about 30 years of experience with
dog owners and poop where it shouldn't be. There are a minority of
owners who either curb their dog in the proper places or clean up
after them without instruction,then there are the ones who were just
unaware or clueless(who straighten up after a talk.),and then the
ones who just don't care(even after you talk with them).

So,that's THREE types.

Well, even many of the owners who clean up fall into one of the other
two categories, because they won't obey a polite request from a
property owner to do it elsewhere. Or, perhaps that puts them into yet
another category: Criminal, since trespassing is illegal.


Well,as I said;APARTMENT(and "curb their dog in the *proper* places"),so
there are "common areas".The first type,those that clean up afterwards
without any prompting,are the sort that would not use another person's yard
anyways. "curb their dog in the *proper* places" should have been a clue to
you.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

In alt.home.repair on Mon, 25 Jul 2005 12:24:01 GMT "Doug Kanter"
posted:

"meirman" wrote in message
.. .


Other neighbors have complained to animal control, and probably talked
to the owners before they did that.

Any idea what, if anything, was done by the animal control people?

I think they talked to the owner. I should have said that they, or at
least the sone, walked him with a leash a couple times that I saw
after that. But they still leave him out when they are out with no
leash, and I think only the son puts a leash on him at all.


Meirman
--
If emailing, please let me know whether
or not you are posting the same letter.
Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .


I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.
There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic
pets,but you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps
for them(except that the law doesn't see it that way.),in "defense
of your property",rather
than talk to the owner,or get the authorities involved.

Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with
irresponsible dog owners for the past 25 years. There are two types
and ONLY two types:

Type 1: Knows that what they're doing is wrong, but doesn't give a
damn. Type 2: Doesn't realize that they're ****ed up. Too stupid to
own a dog, in other words.

My preference is to use the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's 3
strikes and your doggy is taken away forever. That usually takes
weeks. I've learned to compress the process into as little as a week
in one case. This usually involves retraining the dog catcher. Many
believe the dog owner should have a little time in between visits,
to "think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but
this is not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake
about this, Jimmy boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance animals
to vanish, and it's perfectly legal.

FARMERS,in agriculture-zoned areas,sure.
But most if not all of the queries HERE are from URBAN
homeowners,where it is is NOT legal.

Actually, in NY, you can end any animal that damages ANY food crop.

And WHERE do people grow food crops? Farms.
Most people posting here have not mentioned any gardens being devastated.
You're reaching again.AND trying to use an exemption as the general rule.

The law allows for protection of food growing plots of any size. I believe
it's a holdover from the victory garden days, during WWII. Haven't you ever
seen 1 acre food gardens? Some people do that for the food, not just for
enjoyment as I do. But, those plots are not considered "farms". A 40x40 plot
in a typical suburban neighborhood may be protected in the same way as a
farm.

As far as "devastated", in my previous home, a couple of dogs were doing
exactly that: Digging in the easiest soil they could find, which happened to
be my garden. A one week old lettuce seedling does not respond well to being
****ed on and then dug out of the soil. The solution involved a conference
with the town justice, a series of warnings (one of which was rather
horrific), and the sudden "retraining" of the animal control person. It
worked nicely.

I'm glad you haven't had to deal with something like this. It was NOT
enjoyable.



They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find".
Otherwise, all they have is a missing pet report.

Ah,so you advocate an illegal act,then compound it by hiding evidence,a
second illegal act.
You must be a wonderful law-abiding citizen.(not)

If an animal was destroying your handiwork and you could get little or no
help from the authorities, I'm sure you'd handle it any way you saw fit. Or,
if you had to shell out cash to have your carpets cleaned because of some
asshole's pet, again, I'm sure you'd be over the top. You will say
otherwise, however.



The first type,those that clean up afterwards
without any prompting,are the sort that would not use another person's
yard
anyways. "curb their dog in the *proper* places" should have been a clue
to
you.

I don't know what fantasy world you live in, but people who clean up after
their dogs STILL walk them, and let the dogs do their thing on other
peoples' property. And, in some cases, they refuse to obey requests to take
their dogs elsewhere.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .


I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society.
There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic
pets,but you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps
for them(except that the law doesn't see it that way.),in
"defense of your property",rather
than talk to the owner,or get the authorities involved.

Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with
irresponsible dog owners for the past 25 years. There are two
types and ONLY two types:

Type 1: Knows that what they're doing is wrong, but doesn't give a
damn. Type 2: Doesn't realize that they're ****ed up. Too stupid
to own a dog, in other words.

My preference is to use the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's
3 strikes and your doggy is taken away forever. That usually takes
weeks. I've learned to compress the process into as little as a
week in one case. This usually involves retraining the dog
catcher. Many believe the dog owner should have a little time in
between visits, to "think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but
this is not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake
about this, Jimmy boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance
animals to vanish, and it's perfectly legal.

FARMERS,in agriculture-zoned areas,sure.
But most if not all of the queries HERE are from URBAN
homeowners,where it is is NOT legal.

Actually, in NY, you can end any animal that damages ANY food crop.

And WHERE do people grow food crops? Farms.
Most people posting here have not mentioned any gardens being
devastated. You're reaching again.AND trying to use an exemption as
the general rule.

The law allows for protection of food growing plots of any size. I
believe it's a holdover from the victory garden days, during WWII.
Haven't you ever seen 1 acre food gardens? Some people do that for the
food, not just for enjoyment as I do. But, those plots are not
considered "farms". A 40x40 plot in a typical suburban neighborhood
may be protected in the same way as a farm.

Most urban dwellers do not have such garden plots.
And NONE of the posters here mentioned any gardens being damaged.
You're reaching again.AND trying to use an exemption as the general rule.


As far as "devastated", in my previous home, a couple of dogs were
doing exactly that: Digging in the easiest soil they could find, which
happened to be my garden. A one week old lettuce seedling does not
respond well to being ****ed on and then dug out of the soil. The
solution involved a conference with the town justice, a series of
warnings (one of which was rather horrific), and the sudden
"retraining" of the animal control person. It worked nicely.

I'm glad you haven't had to deal with something like this. It was NOT
enjoyable.


You keep on bringing up -exceptions- that are not common in urbania,and not
mentioned in any of the posts on this newsgroup,and then believe that's
justification for cruelty to animals in other circumstances.



They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find".
Otherwise, all they have is a missing pet report.

Ah,so you advocate an illegal act,then compound it by hiding
evidence,a second illegal act.
You must be a wonderful law-abiding citizen.(not)

If an animal was destroying your handiwork and you could get little or
no help from the authorities, I'm sure you'd handle it any way you saw
fit. Or, if you had to shell out cash to have your carpets cleaned
because of some asshole's pet, again, I'm sure you'd be over the top.

It's happened to me,tracked the crap right thru the living room and into
the kitchen,and I had to clean it myself.It's NOT any major carpet cleaning
deal.And I did go "over the top",and let the manager know about it.
The woman moved out shortly after that.(sad,she was VERY hot!)

You will say otherwise, however.



The first type,those that clean up afterwards
without any prompting,are the sort that would not use another
person's yard
anyways. "curb their dog in the *proper* places" should have been a
clue to
you.

I don't know what fantasy world you live in, but people who clean up
after their dogs STILL walk them, and let the dogs do their thing on
other peoples' property. And, in some cases, they refuse to obey
requests to take their dogs elsewhere.

No,people who clean up after their dogs on their own are NOT the sort that
walk their dogs and leave crap where it's improper.


Thus the problem is with the dog's walker and not the dog itself.
So no "justification" for being cruel to the animal.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .


Most urban dwellers do not have such garden plots.
And NONE of the posters here mentioned any gardens being damaged.
You're reaching again.AND trying to use an exemption as the general rule.

Doesn't matter what anyone else mentioned. You're challenging my beliefs
about dogs, and I'm explaining them by using examples which are NOT
exceptions, at least not based on my experience. In order to determine who
owned 3 stray dogs many years ago, I followed those dogs through the
neighborhood and watched as they dug their way through various properties.
That's what dogs do sometimes.



As far as "devastated", in my previous home, a couple of dogs were
doing exactly that: Digging in the easiest soil they could find, which
happened to be my garden. A one week old lettuce seedling does not
respond well to being ****ed on and then dug out of the soil. The
solution involved a conference with the town justice, a series of
warnings (one of which was rather horrific), and the sudden
"retraining" of the animal control person. It worked nicely.

I'm glad you haven't had to deal with something like this. It was NOT
enjoyable.


You keep on bringing up -exceptions- that are not common in urbania,and
not
mentioned in any of the posts on this newsgroup,and then believe that's
justification for cruelty to animals in other circumstances.

Let's dissect this. You used the word "cruelty". Although I have no problem
with someone slowly killing a dog (the sponge trick, for instance), it's not
something I'd do myself. That's not because I give a damn about the dog.
Rather, I'd want to be sure it was dead. If I lived in a place where it was
safe to do so, I'd opt for a bullet. It would satisfy my desire to be
thorough.

As far as "exceptions", you can only make that statement if you realize it's
limited by your awareness of what dog catchers deal with all day. Do you
work for your local government, and have access to those statistics? Or, do
you go from door to door asking people about their experiences with dogs?


They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find".
Otherwise, all they have is a missing pet report.

Ah,so you advocate an illegal act,then compound it by hiding
evidence,a second illegal act.
You must be a wonderful law-abiding citizen.(not)

If an animal was destroying your handiwork and you could get little or
no help from the authorities, I'm sure you'd handle it any way you saw
fit. Or, if you had to shell out cash to have your carpets cleaned
because of some asshole's pet, again, I'm sure you'd be over the top.

It's happened to me,tracked the crap right thru the living room and into
the kitchen,and I had to clean it myself.It's NOT any major carpet
cleaning
deal.And I did go "over the top",and let the manager know about it.
The woman moved out shortly after that.(sad,she was VERY hot!)

My one experience with carpet involved professional cleaning. Some people
have more sensitive noses than others, just as some people can hear higher
frequencies. I was not able to identify the dog criminal responsible for the
gift on my lawn, or we would've met in small claims court.


No,people who clean up after their dogs on their own are NOT the sort that
walk their dogs and leave crap where it's improper.

Dogs are attracted to the scent where other dogs have created a bathroom. It
doesn't matter if it's cleaned up. Nobody carries a bucket of water with
them when walking their dog. So, the spot is attractive to stray dogs later,
and the situation gets out of hand. This is why I tell dog owners to go
elsewhere, even if they intend to clean it up.



Thus the problem is with the dog's walker and not the dog itself.
So no "justification" for being cruel to the animal.

Actually, this isn't quite true. Behavioral psychology suggests that in a
way, the owners are trained by the dogs. Why do they walk their dogs? Not
just for the exercise. The dogs become accustomed to crapping only if
they're walked. Sometimes they crap in the house if they're not walked. So,
the human walks the dog, which leads to the antisocial behavior and
disrespect for property rights. Therefore, the dog is at least equally
responsible. We think we've domesticated them, but this is based on
religious nonsense which says that a higher power made us as his crowning
achievment. Bull****.

On a vaguely related subject, there is a body of evidence suggesting that
the domestication of plants is not a one-way street either. If you find this
interesting, you might pick up a book called "The Botany of Desire". It's a
fascinating exploration of who's zoomin' who.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .


Most urban dwellers do not have such garden plots.
And NONE of the posters here mentioned any gardens being damaged.
You're reaching again.AND trying to use an exemption as the general
rule.

Doesn't matter what anyone else mentioned. You're challenging my
beliefs about dogs, and I'm explaining them by using examples which
are NOT exceptions, at least not based on my experience.


Sure they are exceptions;the majority of the US population lives in URBAN
areas,and few of them have food-producing gardens.


In order to
determine who owned 3 stray dogs many years ago, I followed those dogs
through the neighborhood and watched as they dug their way through
various properties. That's what dogs do sometimes.

SOMETIMES.
Another exception put forth as common occurrence.



As far as "devastated", in my previous home, a couple of dogs were
doing exactly that: Digging in the easiest soil they could find,
which happened to be my garden. A one week old lettuce seedling does
not respond well to being ****ed on and then dug out of the soil.
The solution involved a conference with the town justice, a series
of warnings (one of which was rather horrific), and the sudden
"retraining" of the animal control person. It worked nicely.

I'm glad you haven't had to deal with something like this. It was
NOT enjoyable.


You keep on bringing up -exceptions- that are not common in
urbania,and not
mentioned in any of the posts on this newsgroup,and then believe
that's justification for cruelty to animals in other circumstances.

Let's dissect this. You used the word "cruelty". Although I have no
problem with someone slowly killing a dog (the sponge trick, for
instance), it's not something I'd do myself.

But it IS cruelty to animals,both legally and morally.

And,you recommend illegal things you would not do yourself.
There's that bad Usenet advice I mentioned.


That's not because I give
a damn about the dog. Rather, I'd want to be sure it was dead. If I
lived in a place where it was safe to do so, I'd opt for a bullet. It
would satisfy my desire to be thorough.

and in most urban areas,discharging a firearm for that purpose is illegal.
More of your bad Usenet advice.


As far as "exceptions", you can only make that statement if you
realize it's limited by your awareness of what dog catchers deal with
all day. Do you work for your local government, and have access to
those statistics? Or, do you go from door to door asking people about
their experiences with dogs?

As I said;Sure they are exceptions;the majority of the US population lives
in URBAN areas,and few of them have food-producing gardens.


They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find".
Otherwise, all they have is a missing pet report.

Ah,so you advocate an illegal act,then compound it by hiding
evidence,a second illegal act.
You must be a wonderful law-abiding citizen.(not)

If an animal was destroying your handiwork and you could get little
or no help from the authorities, I'm sure you'd handle it any way
you saw fit. Or, if you had to shell out cash to have your carpets
cleaned because of some asshole's pet, again, I'm sure you'd be over
the top.

It's happened to me,tracked the crap right thru the living room and
into the kitchen,and I had to clean it myself.It's NOT any major
carpet cleaning
deal.And I did go "over the top",and let the manager know about it.
The woman moved out shortly after that.(sad,she was VERY hot!)

My one experience with carpet involved professional cleaning. Some
people have more sensitive noses than others,

Or are just too finicky or lazy to clean it themselves.

just as some people can
hear higher frequencies. I was not able to identify the dog criminal
responsible for the gift on my lawn, or we would've met in small
claims court.


No,people who clean up after their dogs on their own are NOT the sort
that walk their dogs and leave crap where it's improper.

Dogs are attracted to the scent where other dogs have created a
bathroom. It doesn't matter if it's cleaned up. Nobody carries a
bucket of water with them when walking their dog. So, the spot is
attractive to stray dogs later, and the situation gets out of hand.
This is why I tell dog owners to go elsewhere, even if they intend to
clean it up.

It's not that they use your yard and then clean it up,it's that they tend
to NOT USE such places in the first place(the 1st category,not the other
2). They curb their dogs in the proper places-not on others property.





Thus the problem is with the dog's walker and not the dog itself.
So no "justification" for being cruel to the animal.

Actually, this isn't quite true. Behavioral psychology suggests that
in a way, the owners are trained by the dogs. Why do they walk their
dogs? Not just for the exercise.

No,it takes the dog -outdoors- to do their toilet,much preferable to the
alternative.Dogs don't take to litterboxes like cats.

The dogs become accustomed to
crapping only if they're walked. Sometimes they crap in the house if
they're not walked.

Well,indoors WOULD be the only place they could crap,if not
walked(outdoors).DUH...
Now,walking off one's own property means either exercise or an intent to
deposit the dog's wastes on someone else's property.Also that they do not
have a fenced in yard to allow the dog to relieve itself without being in a
person's control.

So, the human walks the dog, which leads to the
antisocial behavior and disrespect for property rights.

No,some humans allow the dog to select the place for their deposits,instead
of being in command and control themselves.No "psychology" about it,just
laziness and no consideration for others.

Therefore, the
dog is at least equally responsible.

Only in your mind.

We think we've domesticated them,
but this is based on religious nonsense which says that a higher power
made us as his crowning achievment. Bull****.

I don't believe in that religious nonsense either.


On a vaguely related subject, there is a body of evidence suggesting
that the domestication of plants is not a one-way street either. If
you find this interesting, you might pick up a book called "The Botany
of Desire". It's a fascinating exploration of who's zoomin' who.


There was something along that line on a recent PBS program;Guns,Germs and
Steel.(how primitive people domesticated food crops that gave the highest
outputs,thus increasing their outputs thru selection)



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .

Let's dissect this. You used the word "cruelty". Although I have no
problem with someone slowly killing a dog (the sponge trick, for
instance), it's not something I'd do myself.

But it IS cruelty to animals,both legally and morally.

And,you recommend illegal things you would not do yourself.
There's that bad Usenet advice I mentioned.

I've already informed you that a dog is no different than a mosquito. When
you apply the same rules about cruelty to a mosquito, then we can talk. If
you don't agree that the two animals have equal value, explain yourself.


That's not because I give
a damn about the dog. Rather, I'd want to be sure it was dead. If I
lived in a place where it was safe to do so, I'd opt for a bullet. It
would satisfy my desire to be thorough.

and in most urban areas,discharging a firearm for that purpose is illegal.
More of your bad Usenet advice.

Yes. I stated that fact about firearms in the paragraph you just responded
to. No need to repeat what I've already said. I'm already well versed about
what constitutes safe shooting.



As far as "exceptions", you can only make that statement if you
realize it's limited by your awareness of what dog catchers deal with
all day. Do you work for your local government, and have access to
those statistics? Or, do you go from door to door asking people about
their experiences with dogs?

As I said;Sure they are exceptions;the majority of the US population lives
in URBAN areas,and few of them have food-producing gardens.

If these are exceptions, then every municipality in this country is wasting
a whole lot of cash keeping dog catchers on the payroll, don't you think?



They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find".
Otherwise, all they have is a missing pet report.

Ah,so you advocate an illegal act,then compound it by hiding
evidence,a second illegal act.
You must be a wonderful law-abiding citizen.(not)

If an animal was destroying your handiwork and you could get little
or no help from the authorities, I'm sure you'd handle it any way
you saw fit. Or, if you had to shell out cash to have your carpets
cleaned because of some asshole's pet, again, I'm sure you'd be over
the top.

It's happened to me,tracked the crap right thru the living room and
into the kitchen,and I had to clean it myself.It's NOT any major
carpet cleaning
deal.And I did go "over the top",and let the manager know about it.
The woman moved out shortly after that.(sad,she was VERY hot!)

My one experience with carpet involved professional cleaning. Some
people have more sensitive noses than others,

Or are just too finicky or lazy to clean it themselves.

Nah...not at all. I do most things myself. But, it doesn't matter. Even if
you do it yourself, the owner of the dog has stolen something more precious
than money from you: Your time.



Dogs are attracted to the scent where other dogs have created a
bathroom. It doesn't matter if it's cleaned up. Nobody carries a
bucket of water with them when walking their dog. So, the spot is
attractive to stray dogs later, and the situation gets out of hand.
This is why I tell dog owners to go elsewhere, even if they intend to
clean it up.

It's not that they use your yard and then clean it up,it's that they tend
to NOT USE such places in the first place(the 1st category,not the other
2). They curb their dogs in the proper places-not on others property.

They tend to NOT USE what? Other peoples' property? That's nonsense. If that
were the case, their owners would not be walking around with plastic bags
and paper towels.


Now,walking off one's own property means either exercise or an intent to
deposit the dog's wastes on someone else's property.Also that they do not
have a fenced in yard to allow the dog to relieve itself without being in
a
person's control.

Conclusion: Dogs are not appropriate as pets, unless they are owned by
exceptionally considerate humans, which we know is not the case. Therefore,
dogs are no better than mosquitoes (like their owners).



So, the human walks the dog, which leads to the
antisocial behavior and disrespect for property rights.

No,some humans allow the dog to select the place for their
deposits,instead
of being in command and control themselves.No "psychology" about it,just
laziness and no consideration for others.

Unless the humans are told otherwise, they stop wherever the dogs tell them
to. You've seen this, but you do not trust what you see.



Therefore, the
dog is at least equally responsible.

Only in your mind.

Nope. Ask your veterinarian. The dogs follows its nose. It marks territory,
and returns to the same place repeatedly.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .

Let's dissect this. You used the word "cruelty". Although I have no
problem with someone slowly killing a dog (the sponge trick, for
instance), it's not something I'd do myself.

But it IS cruelty to animals,both legally and morally.

And,you recommend illegal things you would not do yourself.
There's that bad Usenet advice I mentioned.

I've already informed you that a dog is no different than a mosquito.

WHOA,I've been INFORMED(by you)...well,that just makes it gospel!

When you apply the same rules about cruelty to a mosquito, then we can
talk. If you don't agree that the two animals have equal value,
explain yourself.

Even if I did,you wouldn't accept it.
Who can decide "equal value",anyways?



That's not because I give
a damn about the dog. Rather, I'd want to be sure it was dead. If I
lived in a place where it was safe to do so, I'd opt for a bullet.
It would satisfy my desire to be thorough.

and in most urban areas,discharging a firearm for that purpose is
illegal. More of your bad Usenet advice.

Yes. I stated that fact about firearms in the paragraph you just
responded to. No need to repeat what I've already said. I'm already
well versed about what constitutes safe shooting.

Safe or not,it's still illegal in most urban areas.



As far as "exceptions", you can only make that statement if you
realize it's limited by your awareness of what dog catchers deal
with all day. Do you work for your local government, and have access
to those statistics? Or, do you go from door to door asking people
about their experiences with dogs?

As I said;Sure they are exceptions;the majority of the US population
lives in URBAN areas,and few of them have food-producing gardens.

If these are exceptions, then every municipality in this country is
wasting a whole lot of cash keeping dog catchers on the payroll, don't
you think?

How do you connect dog catchers with urban GARDENS?
I'm beginning to think you are not rational.



They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find".
Otherwise, all they have is a missing pet report.

Ah,so you advocate an illegal act,then compound it by hiding
evidence,a second illegal act.
You must be a wonderful law-abiding citizen.(not)

If an animal was destroying your handiwork and you could get
little or no help from the authorities, I'm sure you'd handle it
any way you saw fit. Or, if you had to shell out cash to have your
carpets cleaned because of some asshole's pet, again, I'm sure
you'd be over the top.

It's happened to me,tracked the crap right thru the living room and
into the kitchen,and I had to clean it myself.It's NOT any major
carpet cleaning
deal.And I did go "over the top",and let the manager know about it.
The woman moved out shortly after that.(sad,she was VERY hot!)

My one experience with carpet involved professional cleaning. Some
people have more sensitive noses than others,

Or are just too finicky or lazy to clean it themselves.

Nah...not at all. I do most things myself. But, it doesn't matter.
Even if you do it yourself, the owner of the dog has stolen something
more precious than money from you: Your time.



Dogs are attracted to the scent where other dogs have created a
bathroom. It doesn't matter if it's cleaned up. Nobody carries a
bucket of water with them when walking their dog. So, the spot is
attractive to stray dogs later, and the situation gets out of hand.
This is why I tell dog owners to go elsewhere, even if they intend
to clean it up.

It's not that they use your yard and then clean it up,it's that they
tend to NOT USE such places in the first place(the 1st category,not
the other 2). They curb their dogs in the proper places-not on others
property.

They tend to NOT USE what? Other peoples' property? That's nonsense.
If that were the case, their owners would not be walking around with
plastic bags and paper towels.

They might use a vacant property,a dog park(where it's allowed,even
expected),or at the curb.

Now,walking off one's own property means either exercise or an intent
to deposit the dog's wastes on someone else's property.Also that they
do not have a fenced in yard to allow the dog to relieve itself
without being in a
person's control.

Conclusion: Dogs are not appropriate as pets, unless they are owned by
exceptionally considerate humans, which we know is not the case.
Therefore, dogs are no better than mosquitoes (like their owners).

Irrational again.




So, the human walks the dog, which leads to the
antisocial behavior and disrespect for property rights.

No,some humans allow the dog to select the place for their
deposits,instead
of being in command and control themselves.No "psychology" about
it,just laziness and no consideration for others.

Unless the humans are told otherwise, they stop wherever the dogs tell
them to. You've seen this, but you do not trust what you see.



Therefore, the
dog is at least equally responsible.

Only in your mind.

Nope. Ask your veterinarian. The dogs follows its nose. It marks
territory, and returns to the same place repeatedly.


Only if the person on the other end of the leash allows it,thus THEIR
responsibility.The dog can only travel where the leash holder permits it to
go.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Jim Yanik" . wrote in message
.. .

When you apply the same rules about cruelty to a mosquito, then we can
talk. If you don't agree that the two animals have equal value,
explain yourself.

Even if I did,you wouldn't accept it.
Who can decide "equal value",anyways?

What a silly question. **YOU** have decided dogs and mosquitoes have UNequal
value, right? Your entire framework in the discussion is based on that
theory.