5 ms·

There are literally countless videos online of unleashed dogs attacking other dogs, animals, children and adults. Even if you think your precious Fifi would nev

by veeti 3y ago

There are literally countless videos online of unleashed dogs attacking other dogs, animals, children and adults. Even if you think your precious Fifi would never do such a thing a leash keeps them safe and close to you in the event something happens or scares them off. For this reason using a leash is not only a recommendation on a sign but the law in many locales.

mjburgess 3y ago
I don't have a dog, but i've known many and never a dangerous one. In the UK its very common to have large parks with dogs just running around; I'm not aware of any cases where this has caused a problem. I've no objection to the rule. My issue is with how the rule is being interpreted. If someone were to ask, 'please keep a leash on' i'd expect people to be polite enough to do so. But that's the gravity of the situation here. In almost no universe is the guy we're talking about one of these fringe youtube dog owners you're having some fantasy about. This is the problem with these abstractions: they invite people to have fantasies of catastrophe rather than engage with the reality in front of them And what are these fantasy scenarios but just another mechanism by which a brutal system of values comes to be imposed? Consider the police coming out here and enforcing such a value on this guy walking his dog. Concretely, which is worse: police discipline or a dog in a park ?
- Podgajski 3y ago
  Can you imagine if the whole country was run this way? Please don’t steal things from other peoples houses. In this case, the discipline on the person who would be a fine. What do you think they’re going to do? Beat him and throw him in jail? As I said, I’m an advocate for anarchism, so my view on the police should be clear. But we do not live in an anarchistic society, and this is all I have to work with. unlimited freedom for each individual is untenable. That’s what you are looking for. I’m going to make the obvious observation that you’re probably a libertarian. The truth is that the dog owner was not being compassionate to other people, rather he was focusing so on himself. He was being selfish, and that to me was the moral failing here, it had nothing to do with the rules, as I said, but the rules aligned with my moral beliefs.
  - mjburgess 3y ago
    > Please don’t steal things from other peoples houses. That is how the country is run. You can, if you so wish, steal from peoples houses with impunity. The crime will very rarely be investigated, you're unlikely to be caught, etc. This system of black/white rules that you perceive exists, does not. This misperception lies at the origin of what's trigged your impulse to imagine some threat (which then triggers compassion). Rather social reality comprises a series of negotiations whose moral content lies in how that delicate interaction takes place. Reducing this down to a chessboard-like system with presumed violent enforcement is itself immoral. It deprives people from living in this negotiated space where morality can take place.
    - Podgajski 3y ago
      So now you wouldn’t call the place if you saw someone breaking into someone else’s house? Would you even call your neighbor? Would you do anything yourself? Gather gang of people together and go over there? But then you would be the police wouldn’t you?
      - mjburgess 3y ago
        As ever, it would be a case-by-case basis. I do not reason from the abstract to the particular, which i find generally immoral. Rather I consider the particular in all its details. In general, someone breaking into a house is a present dangerous and serious threat. On that basis I would call the police, etc. If someone opened the door, saw a mobile, grabbed it and ran off -- then i'd maybe leave a note with the neighbor
- veeti 3y ago
  - A 2021 study of fatal dog attacks in Europe during the period 1995–2016 placed the United Kingdom (with 56 fatalities) as fourth in the top five countries for number of human fatalities alongside Hungary (#1), France (#2), Romania (#3), and Poland (#5). - Hospital episode data for England also reveal an upward trend in the number of attendances for dog related injuries in the past 15 years. There has been an 88% increase in attendances, from 4699 in 2007 to 8819 in 2021-22. - BBC News - Dog attacks: 34% increase recorded by police in England and Wales (2023). Last year, there were nearly 22,000 cases of out-of-control dogs causing injury. In 2018, there were just over 16,000. But hey, you weren't a witness to any of this, so I'm sure it never happens. If you are trolling well played. You might as well argue we don't need seatbelt laws since you've never been in a crash.
  - mjburgess 3y ago
    I'm not arguing against dog leash laws; nor against dog leash signs. The dog leashing issue is irrelevant to my point. My point is about the role of such signs and rules in policing people's behaviour in the abstract. If, in the situation so-described, the owner and their dog were in any way an actual danger, then they should be reprimanded. If they werent, then let's observe that they werent. 56 fatal dog attacks in a decade is perhaps lower than what i would have guessed anyway. I would have bet higher. I just dont see why when invited to imagine that on some sunny day in a park, a person walking their dog without a leash, is precipitating the 57th death. This is absurd. Removing all the information from the situation and reducing down to a fantasy of possible violence is the pretence here for 'preventing harm'. This prevents no harm in the particular situation involved. I have no doubt dogs are dangerous, as is almost everything. I have extreme levels of doubt that some random guy in a park with a dog off a leash has anything to do with any marginal changes to the safety of people in that park. My concern is how this snowballs in people's imaginations away from the concrete reality into some abstraction where there are victims involved.
    - Podgajski 3y ago
      You have not asked me once about what types of dogs they were or how the dogs were behaving. so I would say it’s you. That’s operating without any data and it’s just acting out of your imagination. But it’s irrelevant. Because you’re just thinking about people being in danger and not the dog being in danger or not if it is disturb the other animals that also have at the park like the squirrels in the birds. You’re only seeing the dog owner as the victim in the circumstance. And all that doesn’t matter either, because we as a community created this rule, this law, that your dog needs to be on a leash went in this park. If you don’t like the law, you could push to overturn the law. Or if you don’t like the law, you can move to a place that doesn’t have these laws. We have decided that the risk of even a slight chance of a dog hurting someone is more important than the slight inconvenience of someone having a dog on a leash. Of all people you in data science should understand risk benefit. What is the harm of a dog being on a leash?
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  I don't have a dog This largely disqualifies all your subsequent opinionation. I could tell you some stories about the ups and downs of owning/training large working dogs, but instead I'd urge you to reflect on whether your elaborate critique of abstraction is grounded in anything firmer than your assumptions.
  - Daneel_ 3y ago
    One does not need to own a dog to have been around them for extended periods of time.
    - anigbrowl 3y ago
      This is like lifelong pedestrians having opinions on car drivers; they're valid to some extent, but if you've never driven a vehicle your understanding of driving issues is necessarily superficial.

by veeti 3y ago

mjburgess 3y ago

I don't have a dog, but i've known many and never a dangerous one. In the UK its very common to have large parks with dogs just running around; I'm not aware of any cases where this has caused a problem. I've no objection to the rule. My issue is with how the rule is being interpreted. If someone were to ask, 'please keep a leash on' i'd expect people to be polite enough to do so. But that's the gravity of the situation here. In almost no universe is the guy we're talking about one of these fringe youtube dog owners you're having some fantasy about. This is the problem with these abstractions: they invite people to have fantasies of catastrophe rather than engage with the reality in front of them And what are these fantasy scenarios but just another mechanism by which a brutal system of values comes to be imposed? Consider the police coming out here and enforcing such a value on this guy walking his dog. Concretely, which is worse: police discipline or a dog in a park ?

Podgajski 3y ago
Can you imagine if the whole country was run this way? Please don’t steal things from other peoples houses. In this case, the discipline on the person who would be a fine. What do you think they’re going to do? Beat him and throw him in jail? As I said, I’m an advocate for anarchism, so my view on the police should be clear. But we do not live in an anarchistic society, and this is all I have to work with. unlimited freedom for each individual is untenable. That’s what you are looking for. I’m going to make the obvious observation that you’re probably a libertarian. The truth is that the dog owner was not being compassionate to other people, rather he was focusing so on himself. He was being selfish, and that to me was the moral failing here, it had nothing to do with the rules, as I said, but the rules aligned with my moral beliefs.
- mjburgess 3y ago
  > Please don’t steal things from other peoples houses. That is how the country is run. You can, if you so wish, steal from peoples houses with impunity. The crime will very rarely be investigated, you're unlikely to be caught, etc. This system of black/white rules that you perceive exists, does not. This misperception lies at the origin of what's trigged your impulse to imagine some threat (which then triggers compassion). Rather social reality comprises a series of negotiations whose moral content lies in how that delicate interaction takes place. Reducing this down to a chessboard-like system with presumed violent enforcement is itself immoral. It deprives people from living in this negotiated space where morality can take place.
  - Podgajski 3y ago
    So now you wouldn’t call the place if you saw someone breaking into someone else’s house? Would you even call your neighbor? Would you do anything yourself? Gather gang of people together and go over there? But then you would be the police wouldn’t you?
    - mjburgess 3y ago
      As ever, it would be a case-by-case basis. I do not reason from the abstract to the particular, which i find generally immoral. Rather I consider the particular in all its details. In general, someone breaking into a house is a present dangerous and serious threat. On that basis I would call the police, etc. If someone opened the door, saw a mobile, grabbed it and ran off -- then i'd maybe leave a note with the neighbor
veeti 3y ago
- A 2021 study of fatal dog attacks in Europe during the period 1995–2016 placed the United Kingdom (with 56 fatalities) as fourth in the top five countries for number of human fatalities alongside Hungary (#1), France (#2), Romania (#3), and Poland (#5). - Hospital episode data for England also reveal an upward trend in the number of attendances for dog related injuries in the past 15 years. There has been an 88% increase in attendances, from 4699 in 2007 to 8819 in 2021-22. - BBC News - Dog attacks: 34% increase recorded by police in England and Wales (2023). Last year, there were nearly 22,000 cases of out-of-control dogs causing injury. In 2018, there were just over 16,000. But hey, you weren't a witness to any of this, so I'm sure it never happens. If you are trolling well played. You might as well argue we don't need seatbelt laws since you've never been in a crash.
- mjburgess 3y ago
  I'm not arguing against dog leash laws; nor against dog leash signs. The dog leashing issue is irrelevant to my point. My point is about the role of such signs and rules in policing people's behaviour in the abstract. If, in the situation so-described, the owner and their dog were in any way an actual danger, then they should be reprimanded. If they werent, then let's observe that they werent. 56 fatal dog attacks in a decade is perhaps lower than what i would have guessed anyway. I would have bet higher. I just dont see why when invited to imagine that on some sunny day in a park, a person walking their dog without a leash, is precipitating the 57th death. This is absurd. Removing all the information from the situation and reducing down to a fantasy of possible violence is the pretence here for 'preventing harm'. This prevents no harm in the particular situation involved. I have no doubt dogs are dangerous, as is almost everything. I have extreme levels of doubt that some random guy in a park with a dog off a leash has anything to do with any marginal changes to the safety of people in that park. My concern is how this snowballs in people's imaginations away from the concrete reality into some abstraction where there are victims involved.
  - Podgajski 3y ago
    You have not asked me once about what types of dogs they were or how the dogs were behaving. so I would say it’s you. That’s operating without any data and it’s just acting out of your imagination. But it’s irrelevant. Because you’re just thinking about people being in danger and not the dog being in danger or not if it is disturb the other animals that also have at the park like the squirrels in the birds. You’re only seeing the dog owner as the victim in the circumstance. And all that doesn’t matter either, because we as a community created this rule, this law, that your dog needs to be on a leash went in this park. If you don’t like the law, you could push to overturn the law. Or if you don’t like the law, you can move to a place that doesn’t have these laws. We have decided that the risk of even a slight chance of a dog hurting someone is more important than the slight inconvenience of someone having a dog on a leash. Of all people you in data science should understand risk benefit. What is the harm of a dog being on a leash?
anigbrowl 3y ago
I don't have a dog This largely disqualifies all your subsequent opinionation. I could tell you some stories about the ups and downs of owning/training large working dogs, but instead I'd urge you to reflect on whether your elaborate critique of abstraction is grounded in anything firmer than your assumptions.
- Daneel_ 3y ago
  One does not need to own a dog to have been around them for extended periods of time.
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    This is like lifelong pedestrians having opinions on car drivers; they're valid to some extent, but if you've never driven a vehicle your understanding of driving issues is necessarily superficial.