Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why not trust? Basically you make a sweeping generalization about people who make sweeping generalizations.
So do people who don't care for dogs more likely to cheat on their taxes? Do people who don't care for dogs more likely to sell aluminum siding to little old ladies who have brick homes? Do people who don't care for dogs more likely to betray their country?
I'm just interested in your logic, or lack thereof, is all.
I just mean trust as a friend - a true blue - got 'yer back - loyal friend. They are probably not what my grandmother would call - a kind soul.
Yes it is a sweeping generalization, something I usually try not to do, but I'll stand by this one.
Interesting that that struck such a cord with some of you - negative and positive. I was surprised to get some rep points for that post.
Just because someone was attacked by pit bulls is not a reason to hate all dogs. If someone was attacked by a man would they then be expected to hate all men? That's stupid.
Just because a neighbor may be inconsiderate about their dogs is not a reason to hate all dogs...maybe one in particular...or the neighbor. The humans are the issue here not the dogs.
Anyone who would hate all dogs based on inconsiderate/lazy/stupid owners is someone I personally would be very leery of. Not that they are bad people but just not someone I would trust. Why that offends you so much I have no idea.
The point I'm making is in response to the phrase "Never trust anyone that does not like dogs". And the point is this ... This man that was attacked viciously by 'man's best friend' probably is not a dude that likes dogs. At least not anymore. He is probably pretty hesitant about being around dogs.
So ... by your assessment you decry that he is not to be trusted????
That is an unfair evaluation and a blanket statement covering anyone who doesn't like an animal that stinks, barks, licks itself, sniffs butts, humps legs, and craps indiscriminately in any old yard.
I can understand how someonme who was attacked by one dog. It's a scary event and human nature makes us think all other dogs would be like the one that attacked us. It's that true? No... but it's how humans think.
I also think that just because a man hates a dog or DOGS doesnt make him a bad or untrustworthy person.. He has the right to his own preferences, and yo ucna't expect everyone to be like you.
Don't get me wrong. I love dogs and cats (although Im more of a cat woman) but I just do not enjoy having my quiet, relaxing, sleeping time disturbed by constant barking dogs.
I have a problem with owners who don't restrain their animals.
- running free and unrestricted through the neighborhood. I can understand if he/she gets out on accident, but if it becomes a regular occurrence...no. This is a problem at my apartment complex.
- Dog excrement left in the street/sidewalk/yards/parks not cleaned up. Again, a problem at my complex.
- Dogs left to bark uncontrollably and nobody restraining the animal. There's a few dogs that bark just because someone walks by. That's unacceptable.
- Dogs that are not kept clean and groomed.
- Dogs with no collar.
- Dogs walked without a leash.
Quite frankly, if I was leading an HOA, I would ban every one of the above. You can have 1 or 100 dogs, I could care less...as long as every one of those rules is followed. You break one or more, you get fined. Keep breaking one or more, you get foreclosed. It's simple as that.
Banning dogs outright - while that would be heavenly bliss for me I can see the value of having a properly trained, well taken care of dog to keep house and home safe and provide company, especially for elderly.
On a side note, I was given a cocker spaniel mixed breed when I turned 18. He must have been at least 8 years old. He died just last year, but that was one well trained animal - too well trained, in fact. He was completely housebroken and would notify you when he wanted to go out, and was perfectly content going into the backyard to handle his business. He only barked if someone knocked or rang the doorbell. And we spent a pretty penny getting him professionally groomed regularly. THAT is how dog care should be...if every dog owner took that level of pride of ownership, I'd be perfectly fine with dog ownership in general, but recent living experiences have taught me to be less than welcoming.
The other thing to consider is definitely resaleability. I can easily see how it'd be harder to sell a house with such a Draconian policy as that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You missed the point
I can see the value of having a properly trained, well taken care of dog to keep house and home safe and provide company, especially for elderly.