Dogs should be Banned

[MERIZoC]

Infected Mushrooms once chased me down an alley, yelling about how dogs should be banned. Then, (s)he took a dump in fright when my dog showed up.


So, since I don't like him/her/it, the OP should be banned.

10/10.

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

Don't ban dogs, ban shitty owners from owning dogs.

Some of the sweetest dogs i've ever met have been Pitbulls

Funny thing is, pitbulls are not even the most aggressive dogs. The dachshund (wiener dog) has been proven to be the most aggressive breed of dog. Don't mess with the wienies...

[United Western States of America]

We have been arguing over whether or not dogs should be banned for over three months? That's dedication to your cause!

However, at the same time, I think that everyone has made up their mind at what they believe, and we you have all made it blatantly obvious. Maybe we should all go our separate ways and leave this discussion where it stands; all anyone will get really is a few laughs and a headache. Besides, no one's going to change anyone's mind anytime soon.

Just a suggestion.

[Gauthier]

Don't ban dogs, ban shitty owners from owning dogs.

Some of the sweetest dogs i've ever met have been Pitbulls

Funny thing is, pitbulls are not even the most aggressive dogs. The dachshund (wiener dog) has been proven to be the most aggressive breed of dog. Don't mess with the wienies...

Aren't you glad they're tiny for a reason?

[Hunniclan]

This idea is completely dumb

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

Funny thing is, pitbulls are not even the most aggressive dogs. The dachshund (wiener dog) has been proven to be the most aggressive breed of dog. Don't mess with the wienies...

Aren't you glad they're tiny for a reason?

Tiny, but still very scary...

[Benuty]

Funny thing is, pitbulls are not even the most aggressive dogs. The dachshund (wiener dog) has been proven to be the most aggressive breed of dog. Don't mess with the wienies...

Aren't you glad they're tiny for a reason?

Not all of them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvZ7ykR3dDo

[Esternial]

Pigeons are worse.

[Great Kleomentia]

Pigeons are worse.

Don't remind me of that thread. That OP was even more idiotic than the current.

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

Aren't you glad they're tiny for a reason?

Not all of them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvZ7ykR3dDo

My mom is friends with Obie's owner. She has made the walrus-dog a bunch of blankets and such.

[South Pacific Republic]

Please, cats should be banned, not dogs

[Benuty]

Please, cats should be banned, not dogs

Too many mice as is.

[Grand Britannia]

Pigeons are worse.

We should ban humans.

[Dyakovo]

You ran because a dog barked at you? That's really rather silly. A dog barking doesn't make it viscous. Dogs can't speak like you and me. Barking is one of the ways they communicate.

And no, dogs shouldn't be banned. Dogs are some of the most loyal and caring creatures humanity has ever known. And they can be used for more than just pets. They are used by our police to sniff out drugs and bombs and they are used by our military as scouts.

If you want my dogs you can take them over my dead body.

It's a deal.

[Kommeria]

Ban mosquitos.

[Esternial]

Pigeons are worse.

Don't remind me of that thread. That OP was even more idiotic than the current.

But I just did.

[Arglorand]

Ban temperatures above 25 Celsius.

I can't bloody fall asleep because of this heat.

[The raptors that eascaped jurassic park]

Yesterday, while I was taking a walk by the harbor, a vicious white dog suddenly barked in my direction. Within seconds it was chasing me down the lenght of the harbor and I was running for my life. I never knew I could run that fast but I managed to emerge from the incident, unscathed. This isn't the first time this sort of thing has happened to me; in fact as a little kid dogs have attacked me on many occasions throughout various cities around the world. I also cannot stand the sight of dog droppings on the sidewalk.

I have come to the conclusion that dogs should be banned. And its not just because I personally don't like them. Here are some reasons why it would benefit public policy to outlaw them.

1. They are dangerous

Dogs are very dangerous because they can bite people. Owners can try to control their dogs but the fact of the matter is, they can't always keep everything under control; accidents will happen. Dogs are a safety hazard, not just to the people who buy them but also to everyone else. When guests come to a house with dogs their lives may be in danger; when dogs are taken out for walks, pedestrians are in danger. Its not right that someone can buy a dog and then endanger other people.

The power of dog bites must not be underestimated. Some dogs have so much power that they can bite human fingers off; they are a carnivorous species after all. I've heard some horror stories about dogs going crazy and maiming people. If a dog attacks you and bites you and then you get infected by disease, you could die if not treated. Sure, dog owners are liable and you can go after them for what their dogs do. But the system is imperfect (you need to prove stuff, courts are slow). Also, if a dog attacks you and you lose your fingers or a hand... do you REALLY think an owner can adequately compensate you for your loss with money (your body parts are priceless)? If dogs did not exist, the danger would not be there.

2. The Dog Droppings

People have a right to walk down sidewalks and throughout parks without having to worry about stepping on dog droppings. People should not have to contend with these sights. Yes in theory owners are supposed to clean up after their dogs but in my experience, too many owners don't and its costing the rest of us. I suppose if you accidentally step on dog droppings you could go after the owner and try to sue him but there are obviously problems with this (1. the courts aren't likely to award you sufficient damages 2. you don't know who the owner is, you just know that you've just stepped on some serious crap). If dogs were not around in society, there would be no dog droppings. I think we could adopt an approach similar to Singapore, where they have a no tolerance policy towards chewing gum on the floor in public areas with respect to the dog dropping problem.

___

So NSG, what do you think?

Is it time to outlaw dogs? Make our streets safe from droppings and random dog attacks?

People Lille you are to be destroyed and your remains incenerated.
Seriously people as stupid and unimaginative as you should not exist!

[MERIZoC]

Pigeons are worse.

Don't remind me of that thread. That OP was even more idiotic than the current.

What happened then?

[Great Kleomentia]

Ban mosquitos.

I second this notion.

[Kommeria]

Ban mosquitos.

I second this notion.

I second your seconding of my notion.
Is that cheating?

[Davinhia]

Please tell me this is a troll.

[Great Kleomentia]

I second this notion.

I second your seconding of my notion.
Is that cheating?

Ill allow it. *slams hammer on the desk*

[Infected Mushroom]

It does not follow that just because dogs should be banned... that anything ranging from humans to mosquitos to lightning and to whatever (most of which can't be effectively banned) should be banned.

Dogs are a special category. They can and often do bite people and so are a serious threat (and a very serious one because their teeth can maim/kill/infect, many people have horror stories about dog attacks), they aren't necessary for a society or a modern economy to function (unlike say cars or elevators), and the ban can be practically carried out (ex you can round up all dogs and move them to government-run reservations to be raised as colonies away from population centers, thus banning them from regular domestic use... by contrast, you can't ''ban'' human beings or lightning or bad dog owners). Thus, I consider many of these melodramatic ''humans should be banned'' or ''mosquitos should be banned'' to be silly arguments.

The above criteria are part of the reason why for example, I would say guns should be banned while cars shouldn't be (one is essential to the modern economy, the other isn't while both can be characterized as a serious threat).

Please stay away from slippery slopes. If someone says ''we should regulate the economy'' it seems silly that some people should jump to conclusions like ''along the same line of reasoning we should regulate everyone's private life.'' Come on... really?

I am very dissappointed by the majority of counter-arguments. They all do one or more of the following things.

1) They jump to absurd places (''dogs should be banned? Lightning should be banned'') without considering subtle distinctions or policy considerations

2) They downplay the danger of dogs and their teeth. Its a scientific fact that dogs can and do kill/injure people. Its a scientific fact that dogs spread dangerous diseases and make our streets unsanitary with their droppings. Its a fact and I can testify to it personally, that leash or no leash dog attacks will happen.

I see that there is no changing the mind of many of you. Many of you (and I suspect many dog owners) are quite content to focus only on the benefits that dog bring to YOU as dog owners while ignoring all the dangers that activity exposes all of the rest of us to with or without our consent (this is not at all, unlike some gun owners who dismiss casualties of gun violence as acceptable statistical anomalies). You downplay the danger that dogs (leashed or unleashed) pose to ALL of us (people who spend money to buy dogs and everyone else)... to civilians, to children, to the every day pedestrians. You don't focus on overall social utility and social safety; you are content to continue sacrificing what you consider a marginal number of people as casualties so that you can continue to keep dogs... endangering everyone while making our streets unclean and unsightly.

That is how I would characterize your position. My position is ''silly'' and yet it would create a better, safer, and cleaner world. It would get rid of unfair externalities (why should all of us have to pay the price for the decisions of a few people to raise carnivores as pets who leave droppings on public streets?).

The majority of the people aren't willing to stand behind a ban? Then how about a series of less decisive but still firm decisions (accidents will STILL happen that don't need to happen if only dogs were not on the domestic front)

1) A special tax against dog owners to disincentivize dog ownership (this would be like a carbon tax except against dog owners) That way, they can also pay for the externalities they impose on everyone else.

2) All dog owners MUST register their dogs and MUST attach to dogs while they are in public or in the presence of house guests a special type of very firm mask (there will be regulation, registration, and licensing of these masks by the government; they will prioritize safety) which prevents them from chasing down and biting the hell out of people

3) If a court case involves a dog, civil or criminal, the law shall operate with the assumption that the victim is telling the truth (a rebuttable presumption) and the penalties shall be very steep for the owners involved (mandatory imprisonment). This is to deter irresponsible dog owner behavior.

4) When an owner decides to purchase or adopt a dog, during registration, the purchase/adoption will NOT be allowed UNLESS... ALL member of the household sign forms of consent (to the effect of saying: I CONSENT to putting myself in danger of having a dog in the house and am fully aware of the possible consequences)... if there are children in the households or toddlers who cannot consent, people in that family obviously cannot buy the dog (all signing parties must have capacity to consent to the dangerous activity).

5) Anyone who violates ''1)'' or ''2)'' and ''4)'' would be fined heavily to ensure compliance

[Destiny Island]

You ran from a dog that "attacked" you (Probably just started barking at you) and your blaming the dog?