Are You Serious Jo Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Tralee was advocating that people should take the law into their own hands when they thought a dog was being mistreated. LisaCC I wasn't doing any such thing. Although they had a red hot go at beating it up to look as though I had. I always employ the same triple criterion. "Which intervention, in which situation, with which dog is the most efficacious." If it was me, I would have removed the dog. I don't care what others want to call it, it was just next door. If one of us were able to prevent an injustice, but instead allowed it to take place, then we could not justify our inaction. If we were to say that although we could have prevented it, we thought it best to protect the perpetrator by allowing him (sic) to carry out his plan, then we would be judged to have made a moral error. No-one said that it is the universal case that dogs should be removed from their home and spirited away from their rightful owners. I don't understand, you have contradicted yourself with the bolded quotes above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 If one of us were able to prevent an injustice, but instead allowed it to take place, then we could not justify our inaction. If we were to say that although we could have prevented it, we thought it best to protect the perpetrator by allowing him (sic) to carry out his plan, then we would be judged to have made a moral error. I don't understand, you have contradicted yourself with the bolded quotes above. Where's the contradiction? They both present the negative case: inaction. Case 1. If one of us were able to prevent an injustice, but instead allowed it to take place, then we could not justify our inaction. Case 2. If we were to say that although we could have prevented it, we thought it best to protect the perpetrator by allowing him (sic) to carry out his plan, then we would be judged to have made a moral error. You're reading the perpetrator as 'me' removing the dog when in fact it is the 'person' who put the collar on the puppy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melzawelza Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Tralee you just speak in circles, it's very frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Tralee was advocating that people should take the law into their own hands when they thought a dog was being mistreated. LisaCC I wasn't doing any such thing. Here you seem to be denying that you advocated that people take the law into their own hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Tralee was advocating that people should take the law into their own hands when they thought a dog was being mistreated. If it was me, I would have removed the dog. Here you seem to be advocating that people take the law into their own hands. That's as simple as I can make it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Tralee you just speak in circles, it's very frustrating. I do have a point which means they must be square circles. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Tralee, We cant just have people who think they are doing the right thing doing what you are advocating .You are wise enough to understand this. This has been taken to the RSPCA - the people who have been charged with ensuring people are not committing acts of cruelty and whether you agree or not in Queensland putting a shock collar on any dog of any age is not considered to be cruel . You have no defense and worse you have nothing to go on but something someone is reporting based on assumptions on an internet forum. I think crating is cruel but that doesnt mean I can go into people's homes and just liberate their animals and take them home. I think tethering is cruel but again I cant just go into someone's yard and take the dog because I have made that decision. Some people think breeding is cruel some think I am cruel because I never walk my dogs off the property .I think they are cruel for yanking a dog by the neck around the block - who decides? do we save dogs which are made to stay outside or do we save dogs which are made to stay inside ,perhaps we should decide whether someone is being cruel and feeding the wrong food. Many feel using the collar is a preferable outcome to the pup being cruelly run over or injured or lost and like it or not in that state its their prerogative to make that decision and we cant have peopel deciding all over the place what they will be justified in when they steal a dog. The chances that this really is a 6 weeks old pup and that it is getting constantly zapped isnt that great anyway . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 My back neighbours have recently got a 6wk old gsd pup: approx (he is A LOT smaller than my now 4yr old gsd - he was 8wks from a Breeder). I woke up one morning to find that the pup had gotten through the back fence and was running around with our boy. When the owner got my note and picked him up, I assured him that my partner would look at our side of the fence and fix any loose panels and that it didn’t bother us that he had got through and that we were just happy he was safe. Anyhow, the next day I saw yellow wire laced up to their side of the fence and an electric collar on the pup. It’s one of those systems where it beeps when the dog is too close and then it constantly zaps when he’s at the perimeter. As you can imagine, the pup is still always at the fence just wanting attention. Doesn’t even care that he’s getting a constant electric pulse through him. I don't go near the fence, yet he's still there. I’ve now been sneaky enough to put my hand in between the fence panels to see how strong the pulse is on the collar. It was so strong that I just went ahead and took the collar off leaving it just near their side of the fence hoping the batteries would just fry. Naughty! I just didn't care at that point lol. P.S Just so you know my stance- I'm not against electric collars with the proper training and in my opinion the right age of the pup/dog. I feel in this situation the pup is too young and is getting no training Maybe some direct personal contact rather than all the subterfuge. The dogs/pups interest is at stake. And who knows, since you have a common interest, you may find some new friends. Yeh! Shouldn't have taken it off, a quick reaction when I felt the pulse. Disagree! The pup's hardly a few weeks old, and should have had supervised, intermittent training. I would've removed the whole dog. Tralee, we cant just have people who think they are doing the right thing doing what you are advocating. You have no defense and worse you have nothing to go on but something someone is reporting based on assumptions on an internet forum. Some think I am cruel because I never walk my dogs off the property. I think they are cruel for yanking a dog by the neck around the block - who decides? Many feel using the collar is a preferable outcome to the pup being cruelly run over or injured or lost and like it or not in that state its their prerogative to make that decision and we cant have peopel deciding all over the place what they will be justified in when they steal a dog. The chances that this really is a 6 weeks old pup and that it is getting constantly zapped isnt that great anyway. Where did I advocate for anything? The dog was in the yard previously and its welfare considered. Same again only on the second time there was a different concern. Holes in the fence are not the answer, and neither in my opinion are electric collars. That's my opinion, that's what was asked for. It would be a different matter if no puppies were harmed in the event. The OP clearly felt there was a clear and present concern. Whatever else has been implied was beaten up by others and if you care to go back and look over the thread you'll find who made the accusation, and who rallied in behind them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persephone Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 It would be a different matter if no puppies were harmed in the event. I must have missed the description of injury/ effect suffered by the pup in question ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 (edited) Whatever else has been implied was beaten up by others and if you care to go back and look over the thread you'll find who made the accusation, and who rallied in behind them. And who became obtuse and evasive rather than answering the questions about his position. Must you always be the person in the right Tralee? Just because a bunch of people disagree with you, it doesn't make them a lynch mob. Edited November 7, 2012 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m-sass Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Please give me your feedback, I would like some reassurance on what to do and if in fact I should just "butt out of it" What pulse is delivered from the collar......it's not just a vibration collar is it??. A adult dog high powered Ecollar would fry a 6 week old pup, there is no way he would just be sitting there absorbing a constant shock. Does the puppy squeal in pain and ran away in the collar's switch on zone, if not it doesn't sound too aversive to be worried about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 (edited) Tralee: Listen carefully to Unca Jed. If you think dogs/pups/chooks/peacocks/snails/hermit crabs are being shabbily and cruelly treated, do what you feel is best for the welfare of aforsaid animal, but do not ever ever ever, discuss it here. Now Repeat the above 10 times after me. Why people who are totally unprepared for a dog, who have no fences or unsuitable or damaged fences, persist in getting a pup, Dog only knows. That they are often the same people who given insufficient attention and training is part of the same whole. To the op - maybe go an speak to your neighbours about your concerns? Edited November 13, 2012 by Jed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simply Grand Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Totally OT, but is Tralee male? HW mentioned 'he' and I'd just assumed 'she' so just wondering... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now