Dogs should be Banned

[Wisconsin9]

My dog may be a pain in the ass but if anyone ever tries to take her from me then they'll have to step over my dead body to do it.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I don't post in NSG usually anymore, but this was so out there, I had to.

I don't agree with any of your points. Yeah, they're dangerous. So are stairs, and people are dangerous. So, your going to outlaw people next. People are more dangerous than dogs, they can use their minds and opposable thumbs to do things dogs can't. And dog droppings, really? That's a reason? I can't even tell if you're serious now.

yes many things are dangerous to society, but many things are necessary for society to function.

For example, you mention stairs. Yes stairs can be dangerous but they are a necessary aspect of many buildings.

Dogs are not NECESSARY for a society to function. We can easily envision a society without them that is safer and still livable.

Police dogs are useful, though. And seeing eye dogs...

[Viritica]

I was worried that if I did so one of three things might happen.

1) I miss and then the dog bites the hell out of me, doing me serious damage (and perhaps even killing me if it manages to get my neck)

2) I hit the dog, the dog quickly recovers, and then ''1)'' happens

3) I hit the dog and damage it, nullifying it as a threat. The owner is outraged and then takes ME to court over the property damage done to his/her dog. Its a very litigatious society this is not unheard of. I don't want to waste my time in court.

It is a dog. A full grown male pit bull weighs as much as a 5th grader. Just turn around and punt its head. If his owner sues you sue them for being a terrible owner who put the public and you in danger.

Um, sir, I don't think you quite understand the power of pitbullterriers.

[Norstal]

Dog bites someone- worst thing in the world, the dog must be put down

Cat scratches someone- lol just being a cat

Cat scratches do a lot less damage. I knew someone in high school who had a big chunk of her lower jaw bitten off by a dog, ended up in the ER, and will probably have big scars on her face for the rest of her life. Cats don't do that.

Cats can't do that. But they can devour your soul. Slowly but surely.

[Americanada]

I don't post in NSG usually anymore, but this was so out there, I had to.

I don't agree with any of your points. Yeah, they're dangerous. So are stairs, and people are dangerous. So, your going to outlaw people next. People are more dangerous than dogs, they can use their minds and opposable thumbs to do things dogs can't. And dog droppings, really? That's a reason? I can't even tell if you're serious now.

yes many things are dangerous to society, but many things are necessary for society to function.

For example, you mention stairs. Yes stairs can be dangerous but they are a necessary aspect of many buildings.

Dogs are not NECESSARY for a society to function. We can easily envision a society without them that is safer and still livable.

We also do not need indoor plumbing to function as a society, yet you seem content to criticize dogs for properly obeying your philosophy by not bothering with things that we do not need.

[Viritica]

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Can some dogs be dangerous? Yes. Are all dogs dangerous? No. Besides, the training is dependent on the owner.

The droppings? Ever heard of doggy potty bags? If you haven't, here. Inform yourself.

Planes are dangerous too. Should we ban them?

People are dangerous.

Ban people.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Can some dogs be dangerous? Yes. Are all dogs dangerous? No. Besides, the training is dependent on the owner.

The droppings? Ever heard of doggy potty bags? If you haven't, here. Inform yourself.

Planes are dangerous too. Should we ban them?

People are dangerous.

Ban people.

This would probably solve a lot of issues.

[Reploid Productions]

You my good friend are a retard.

Burn in idiot hell asshat.

You, my good friend, are rapidly careening toward account deletion. These are the rules. You should read them. You should follow them.

In the meantime, *** Conglomerate of Iron, 3-day ban for yet more flaming. ***


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[Zataristan]

There's no bad dogs, only bad owners. Clearly, if we want to reach the TRUE source of the problem, bad owners should be banned.

^

[Conglomerate of Iron]

Lets ban all wild animals.

Cuz they could hurt somebody or shit somewher.

[Sun Wukong]

Just so we're all 100% clear, this is poorly-constructed satire of gun control advocates, right?

The irony: OP manages to produce a compelling case that some people probably shouldn't be trusted with firearms.

[Viritica]

yes many things are dangerous to society, but many things are necessary for society to function.

For example, you mention stairs. Yes stairs can be dangerous but they are a necessary aspect of many buildings.

Dogs are not NECESSARY for a society to function. We can easily envision a society without them that is safer and still livable.

Police dogs are useful, though. And seeing eye dogs...

Blind people don't deserve to be helped by loyal animals, obviously.

[Magna Libero]

Seriously, come on

I think OP is just afraid of dogs.

[Viritica]

Just so we're all 100% clear, this is poorly-constructed satire of gun control advocates, right?

The irony: OP manages to produce a compelling case that some people probably shouldn't be trusted with firearms.

Even more irony: OP wants honor killings legalized.

[Nazi Flower Power]

:blink:
what da hell is this?

An example of satire, or a case of a person with odd views.

Considering who it is, I am guessing a person with odd views.

[Norstal]

You my good friend are a retard.

Burn in idiot hell asshat.

You, my good friend, are rapidly careening toward account deletion. These are the rules. You should read them. You should follow them.

In the meantime, *** Conglomerate of Iron, 3-day ban for yet more flaming. ***


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

Are we really considering "should dogs be banned" as a legitimate discussion? Unless there is an impending lock coming and I didn't know about it.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Can some dogs be dangerous? Yes. Are all dogs dangerous? No. Besides, the training is dependent on the owner.

The droppings? Ever heard of doggy potty bags? If you haven't, here. Inform yourself.

Planes are dangerous too. Should we ban them?

People are dangerous.

Ban people.

That could solve a few things, but I digress.

[Infected Mushroom]

And do what with them? Kill them all? Send dogs into slaughterhouses and use them to make meat? Last time I checked, animal cruelty is a bad thing.

Yes, dogs can be dangerous; so can humans, and humans cause a lot more deaths to other humans than animals. Just because a very minuscule portion of the deaths and other accidents in the world are because of something doesn't mean that something should be banned; cars, electricity, planes, and all kinds of other things that do good things of all sorts also cause the occasional death or two, but they obviously shouldn't the banned.

The fact of the matter is that oddities and isolated incidents don't justify radical, far-fetched pieces of legislation. The vast majority of dogs aren't going to seriously hurt a human in their lifetime, and getting rid of all dogs just because of a minority is almost as ridiculous as calling all Muslims terrorists because of the Jidadist minority.

Stupid idea, shouldn't be done.

You can do the same thing you do with assault rifles when you outlaw them. You would allow some kind of grandfather clause.

So the law would say that existing dogs won't be allowed to reproduce but that the existing dogs will be allowed to stay with their current owners. However, to disincentivize dog ownership there would be a tax against dog owners. All imports of dogs would be banned immediately, exporting dogs to other countries would be encouraged with tax deductions.

Then you would take the lifespan of the longest dog (I don't know, I'm not an expert, let's say it was 30 years) and then in the law you would say:

''in 30 years since under this law no dog is allowed to reproduce all dogs should have died in this country, therefore in 30 years from the date of this bill all dogs found in the nation will put to rest by the relevant authorities.''

Logistically this would be how I would do it if I were in charge. This way, all dogs can be eliminated from society in 30 years (either they die naturally, are exported, or get hunted down when the time is up). The neat thing about this law is that we know for a fact that after those years are up (maybe its not 30), all existing dogs are illegal.

And obviously you would be breaking the law if you still keep a dog by that time (I expect you would be fined and if you don't surrender the dog or ship it out of the country, perhaps stricter measures will be taken). All dogs should be registered too.

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Can some dogs be dangerous? Yes. Are all dogs dangerous? No. Besides, the training is dependent on the owner.

The droppings? Ever heard of doggy potty bags? If you haven't, here. Inform yourself.

Planes are dangerous too. Should we ban them?

People are dangerous.

Ban people.

Aright. I'll go first.

[Olthar]

Now I may be a cat person, but this is just shear insanity.

[Bulgar Rouge]

I smell Doctor Cocteau.

[Washington Resistance Army]

And do what with them? Kill them all? Send dogs into slaughterhouses and use them to make meat? Last time I checked, animal cruelty is a bad thing.

Yes, dogs can be dangerous; so can humans, and humans cause a lot more deaths to other humans than animals. Just because a very minuscule portion of the deaths and other accidents in the world are because of something doesn't mean that something should be banned; cars, electricity, planes, and all kinds of other things that do good things of all sorts also cause the occasional death or two, but they obviously shouldn't the banned.

The fact of the matter is that oddities and isolated incidents don't justify radical, far-fetched pieces of legislation. The vast majority of dogs aren't going to seriously hurt a human in their lifetime, and getting rid of all dogs just because of a minority is almost as ridiculous as calling all Muslims terrorists because of the Jidadist minority.

Stupid idea, shouldn't be done.

You can do the same thing you do with assault rifles when you outlaw them. You would allow some kind of grandfather clause.

So the law would say that existing dogs won't be allowed to reproduce but that the existing dogs will be allowed to stay with their current owners. However, to disincentivize dog ownership there would be a tax against dog owners. All imports of dogs would be banned immediately, exporting dogs to other countries would be encouraged with tax deductions.

Then you would take the lifespan of the longest dog (I don't know, I'm not an expert, let's say it was 30 years) and then in the law you would say:

''in 30 years since under this law no dog is allowed to reproduce all dogs should have died in this country, therefore in 30 years from the date of this bill all dogs found in the nation will put to rest by the relevant authorities.''

Logistically this would be how I would do it if I were in charge. This way, all dogs can be eliminated from society in 30 years (either they die naturally, are exported, or get hunted down when the time is up). The neat thing about this law is that we know for a fact that after those years are up (maybe its not 30), all existing dogs are illegal.

What in the actual fuck? Because you're scared of dogs you want to kill and or wait for every dog in the nation to die off?

[Norstal]

Now I may be a cat person, but this is jus shear insanity.

Fur real.

[Viritica]

And do what with them? Kill them all? Send dogs into slaughterhouses and use them to make meat? Last time I checked, animal cruelty is a bad thing.

Yes, dogs can be dangerous; so can humans, and humans cause a lot more deaths to other humans than animals. Just because a very minuscule portion of the deaths and other accidents in the world are because of something doesn't mean that something should be banned; cars, electricity, planes, and all kinds of other things that do good things of all sorts also cause the occasional death or two, but they obviously shouldn't the banned.

The fact of the matter is that oddities and isolated incidents don't justify radical, far-fetched pieces of legislation. The vast majority of dogs aren't going to seriously hurt a human in their lifetime, and getting rid of all dogs just because of a minority is almost as ridiculous as calling all Muslims terrorists because of the Jidadist minority.

Stupid idea, shouldn't be done.

You can do the same thing you do with assault rifles when you outlaw them. You would allow some kind of grandfather clause.

So the law would say that existing dogs won't be allowed to reproduce but that the existing dogs will be allowed to stay with their current owners. However, to disincentivize dog ownership there would be a tax against dog owners. All imports of dogs would be banned immediately, exporting dogs to other countries would be encouraged with tax deductions.

Then you would take the lifespan of the longest dog (I don't know, I'm not an expert, let's say it was 30 years) and then in the law you would say:

''in 30 years since under this law no dog is allowed to reproduce all dogs should have died in this country, therefore in 30 years from the date of this bill all dogs found in the nation will put to rest by the relevant authorities.''

Logistically this would be how I would do it if I were in charge. This way, all dogs can be eliminated from society in 30 years (either they die naturally, are exported, or get hunted down when the time is up). The neat thing about this law is that we know for a fact that after those years are up (maybe its not 30), all existing dogs are illegal.

Most dogs only live to be 14.

Sadly.

RIP Django.

[Norstal]

And do what with them? Kill them all? Send dogs into slaughterhouses and use them to make meat? Last time I checked, animal cruelty is a bad thing.

Yes, dogs can be dangerous; so can humans, and humans cause a lot more deaths to other humans than animals. Just because a very minuscule portion of the deaths and other accidents in the world are because of something doesn't mean that something should be banned; cars, electricity, planes, and all kinds of other things that do good things of all sorts also cause the occasional death or two, but they obviously shouldn't the banned.

The fact of the matter is that oddities and isolated incidents don't justify radical, far-fetched pieces of legislation. The vast majority of dogs aren't going to seriously hurt a human in their lifetime, and getting rid of all dogs just because of a minority is almost as ridiculous as calling all Muslims terrorists because of the Jidadist minority.

Stupid idea, shouldn't be done.

You can do the same thing you do with assault rifles when you outlaw them. You would allow some kind of grandfather clause.

So the law would say that existing dogs won't be allowed to reproduce but that the existing dogs will be allowed to stay with their current owners. However, to disincentivize dog ownership there would be a tax against dog owners. All imports of dogs would be banned immediately, exporting dogs to other countries would be encouraged with tax deductions.

Then you would take the lifespan of the longest dog (I don't know, I'm not an expert, let's say it was 30 years) and then in the law you would say:

''in 30 years since under this law no dog is allowed to reproduce all dogs should have died in this country, therefore in 30 years from the date of this bill all dogs found in the nation will put to rest by the relevant authorities.''

Logistically this would be how I would do it if I were in charge. This way, all dogs can be eliminated from society in 30 years (either they die naturally, are exported, or get hunted down when the time is up). The neat thing about this law is that we know for a fact that after those years are up (maybe its not 30), all existing dogs are illegal.

What about wolves?