Home Off Topic

Dog or Coyote?

145679

Replies

  • SchmidtySchmidty Posts: 6,814 Admiral
    Many is the person who believes that they are of a superior intelligence and will say that killing a murderer can not change what they did so why do it...

    It most assuredly will never bring back those that they killed.....BUT it most assuredly will stop them from ever killing anyone ever again.....in jail or out.

    Maybe the fire ant serves some useful purpose...of this I don't know...I do know that I spray to kill every insect known to mankind and so far I am doing a good job.

    On the average.....1000 people per day get bitten by dogs in this country...most of which are Pit Bulls. I have a simple solution...shoot all the Pit Bulls...eradicate them and we would have an immediate drop of 680 dog bites per day......take out the Rottweiler's and few other AH breeds and a few "Fee-Fee" bites from Granny's poodle will be about all there will be left.

    I believe that the people who are of the "save the coyote" mindset have never seen them scoop up some rich woman's Siamese cat and take off with it.....with the woman running after it.....only to see the woman running back a minute later with two coyotes on her heels.

    Kill all bad things...
  • jcbcpajcbcpa Posts: 1,878 Captain
    Well Tarp you are wrong again. See when a coyote is dead that means it can't reproduce, kill, or harass anymore.
    <br />
    <br />
    Did you miss post #136?<br />
    <br />
    Since people have been killing them for decades if not millennia, and we still have a "problem", please tell me how killing them is an effective solution to the "problem" again?<br />
    <br />
    Let me use an example you might understand...<br />
    <br />
    <i>Question:</i> If I shoot 3 uneducated rednecks this year, but 3 more uneducated rednecks are born next year, have I reduced the uneducated redneck population anything more than temporarily? <br />
    <i>Answer:</i> No.<br />
    <br />
    <i>Question:</i> If I do the same for the next hundred years, what's the net result to the population?<br />
    <i>Answer:</i> None.<br />
    <br />
    Perhaps the uneducated rednecks need to try harder.

    Ahhh. But if you dont kill any rednecks they will eventually overrun the world ;)

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
    I can't give you a sure-fire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time.
    Herbert Bayard Swope
    US editor & journalist (1882 - 1958)
  • coldaircoldair Posts: 11,498 Officer
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Did you miss post #136?

    Since people have been killing them for decades if not millennia, and we still have a "problem", please tell me how killing them is an effective solution to the "problem" again?

    Let me use an example you might understand...

    Question: If I shoot 3 uneducated rednecks this year, but 3 more uneducated rednecks are born next year, have I reduced the uneducated redneck population anything more than temporarily?
    Answer: No.

    Question: If I do the same for the next hundred years, what's the net result to the population?
    Answer: None.

    Perhaps the uneducated rednecks need to try harder.
    I can tell you are a democrat.

    you have three coyotes, you don't kill them because of feels, three more are born, you know have 6 coyotes. we call that math.

    now we have 3 coyotes plus 3 more which is 6 now we kill three, so now we call that subtraction. this stuff called math is really cool.

    now another way i can tell you are a democrat, you look down your nose at other people, you think nothing of killing rednecks just because they are not like you. one could safely say you are a racists because he hate certain white people
    169304.GIF
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    Your math is fine, but your logic has holes. The point you're missing: If we leave nature to its own devices, it seeks a balance. If the ecosystem can't support 6 coyotes, the extra will die. That's how nature works, in case you didn't know.

    Also, I'm not a Democrat. So, do you care to rethink that?

    I look down at people who kill things for the sake of killing, and refuse to learn from past mistakes...no matter their party affiliation.

    And if you think I was anything but speaking tongue-in-cheek of killing uneducated rednecks, then perhaps you should stick to fixing air conditioners and leave the harder stuff to those with the capability to recognize the difference between hyperbole and reality.

    How's that for looking down my nose?
  • coldaircoldair Posts: 11,498 Officer
  • Mango ManMango Man Posts: 11,436 AG
    coldy, you're out of your league in a battle of wits against Tarponater.

    You can gracefully bow out or, well, continue to look like a knucklehead...:grin


    America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
    Abraham Lincoln
  • coldaircoldair Posts: 11,498 Officer
    Mango Man wrote: »
    coldy, you're out of your league in a battle of wits against Tarponater.

    You can gracefully bow out or, well, continue to look like a knucklehead...:grin

    sorry, bullies tend to **** me off
    169304.GIF
  • SchmidtySchmidty Posts: 6,814 Admiral
    If we didn't kill things then man would be the first species to go....
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    Schmidty wrote: »
    I do not ever want to converse with you ever again...ok?
    Schmidty wrote: »
    Many is the person who believes that they are of a superior intelligence and will say that killing a murderer can not change what they did so why do it...

    It most assuredly will never bring back those that they killed.....BUT it most assuredly will stop them from ever killing anyone ever again.....in jail or out.

    Maybe the fire ant serves some useful purpose...of this I don't know...I do know that I spray to kill every insect known to mankind and so far I am doing a good job.

    On the average.....1000 people per day get bitten by dogs in this country...most of which are Pit Bulls. I have a simple solution...shoot all the Pit Bulls...eradicate them and we would have an immediate drop of 680 dog bites per day......take out the Rottweiler's and few other AH breeds and a few "Fee-Fee" bites from Granny's poodle will be about all there will be left.

    I believe that the people who are of the "save the coyote" mindset have never seen them scoop up some rich woman's Siamese cat and take off with it.....with the woman running after it.....only to see the woman running back a minute later with two coyotes on her heels.

    Kill all bad things...

    For someone who doesn't ever want to converse with me again, you sure do have a lot to say about my position.

    Can't help yourself, can you?
  • SchmidtySchmidty Posts: 6,814 Admiral
    I don't...and what I wrote was not about you .....now toddle off....
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    coldair wrote: »
    sorry, bullies tend to **** me off

    Bully?

    I didn't start this, but I'm sure willing and able to finish it.

    That's not bullying, that's punching the bully in the face in order to stop him from bullying.

    That's how I roll.
    coldair wrote:
    if you say so

    That's more like it. :grin
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    Schmidty wrote: »
    I don't...and what I wrote was not about you .....now toddle off....

    Stop lying.

    And I suppose this wasn't written to me, either.

    :Spittingcoffee
  • Turner River TerrorTurner River Terror Posts: 7,609 Admiral
    WHOA...
    I showed up at page 13 ,I'm not going to read all this crap.
    Cliff Notes.. Tarponator does not want to kill anything , Schmidty wants to kill them all.
    How bout we kill half of them and keep the Survivors in our scopes...Winning...
    Killin and Grillin :grin
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    Your cliff notes are wrong, brother. I'm completely OK with killing any coyote that threaten humans or our possessions, and I think we should do more to ensure that doesn't happen. I'm not OK with killing for the sake of killing (i.e. shooting them on sight).
  • JohnnyBanditJohnnyBandit Posts: 8,305 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    For you, it's always the owner's fault. And I suppose in some sense it is. That doesn't make the people who died from their attacks any less dead, it only allows you to shift the blame from your favorite animal. Furthermore, it doesn't change the logic or the question I asked -- after all, since both coyotes and dogs kill humans, why not simply kill them all? Could it be that we simply value dogs as a pet and a companion more than the lives it costs? More to the point of the thread, why shouldn't we value wildlife similarly?




    I'll take your word for it and increment our count to 3 humans killed. What's the relative count of dog and coyote killings, again? Which present a larger threat to humans?



    And none of that change the fact that there are less than a handful of cases where a coyote -- pure bred or "coywolves" -- have killed humans.



    At what point do humans figure out that we're not God? It is not our place to needlessly kill or reintroduce wildlife. It's folly and hubris to believe otherwise, IMO, and there are innumerable lessons from history where this has been shown to be the case. Let them be, and do whatever we can to live with them and stay out of their way.... you know, like building fences to keep them out and not shooting them on sight when it's been shown to be ineffective anyway.

    You are, of course, free to disagree.

    Take care....Mike

    Dogs are domestic animals... The owner is responsible for them ALWAYS... 24/7.... And if your dog has a bite incident and you give the dog away, sell it, etc.... The dog bites someone with the new owner.... They can come after the new owner AND you..... No matter what type of animals you own... YOU are responsible 100 percent for ALL of their actions...


    The rest of the post is yada yada yada
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    So says the dog lover, attempting to justify his love for his dogs by holding their owners responsible for their actions. The facts are they are killers, whether you like it or not.

    What's more, why do we often kill dogs who have shown they are a threat to humans, if the owners are ALWAYS responsible?

    Could it be the offending dogs are at least partly to blame?

    The rest of the post, you know, the part you summarized as "yada yada yada", shows the folly in the position of those advocating killing coyotes on sight, so please feel free to ignore it if you're OK with us presuming you agree with me.

    Take care, Johnny, and I hope you and yours are well....Mike
  • JohnnyBanditJohnnyBandit Posts: 8,305 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    So says the dog lover, attempting to justify his love for his dogs by holding their owners responsible for their actions. The facts are they are killers, whether you like it or not.

    What's more, why do we often kill dogs who have shown they are a threat to humans, if the owners are ALWAYS responsible?

    Could it be the offending dogs are at least partly to blame?

    The rest of the post, you know, the part you summarized as "yada yada yada", shows the folly in the position of those advocating killing coyotes on sight, so please feel free to ignore it if you're OK with us presuming you agree with me.

    Take care, Johnny, and I hope you and yours are well....Mike
    Nope... You own it... you control it... IF you cannot control it... do not own it.... It has nothing to do with my interest in dogs.... that is a WEAK argument.

    By the way... The above words were told to me by a judge 29 years ago... Not over dog but a cow....
  • SchmidtySchmidty Posts: 6,814 Admiral
    I have never hit an animal or a child...though all seem to get along with me well....and listen to me.

    My last dog was a product of ****...when we went on vacation and our very large golden retriever was being watched by the neighbors up the street and a giant mastiff/pit bull mix **** her and produced one giant black as coal puppy who weighed 147 pounds in his prime and was a bully around children and a killer of other dogs....our cat straightened him out from day #1

    He was good as gold with the bride and me, but he just had it in his temperament to do things like wrestle cattle...and he not only killed dogs who trespassed, but he ate them raw also.

    I "controlled him" by putting him in the kennel when people came around ....because as "Johnny Bandit" just said...."You own it....You control it".....

    He never bit anyone and went to heaven...with some help... a few years ago....I hope he turned over a new leaf......:)
  • Triple Threat 33TTriple Threat 33T Port CanaveralPosts: 18,669 Admin
    Holy smokes, 7 pages?

    About coyotes?

    And it started as a "ID" thread. Lol
    "Lord, hold our troops in your loving hands. Protect them as they protect us. Bless them and their families for the selfless acts they perform for us in our time of need. Amen."
  • Triple Threat 33TTriple Threat 33T Port CanaveralPosts: 18,669 Admin
    Thread facts

    260 replies

    viewed 6743 times by 437 different members and countless "guests"
    "Lord, hold our troops in your loving hands. Protect them as they protect us. Bless them and their families for the selfless acts they perform for us in our time of need. Amen."
  • SchmidtySchmidty Posts: 6,814 Admiral
    Holy smokes, 7 pages?

    About coyotes?

    And it started as a "ID" thread. Lol

    Hey "33T"...

    People will talk about anything as long as there aren't people being nasty to them all the time....:)

    ...and I commend you and the other good moderators around here for that...
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    Nope... You own it... you control it... IF you cannot control it... do not own it.... It has nothing to do with my interest in dogs.... that is a WEAK argument.

    By the way... The above words were told to me by a judge 29 years ago... Not over dog but a cow....

    None of that changes a word of what I wrote. All you're saying is that the human holds responsibility -- which I did not disagree with. It does not change the argument that so does the animal, nor does it change the fact that you completely ignored that part of my response, which I will now repeat because it cuts a huge hole in your logic:

    If the animal is not to blame, why are they often put to death for their transgression? If we are to believe your perspective, the appropriate answer would be to allow it to be taken on by an owner who can control it and will be responsible for it. Yet that's not the case.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    Schmidty wrote: »
    Hey "33T"...

    People will talk about anything as long as there aren't people being nasty to them all the time....:)

    ...and I commend you and the other good moderators around here for that...

    I take note of your backing away, quickly, from an earlier post that said: "I had never seen a internet site that was so pizz poorly run and it effected the entire site".
  • JohnnyBanditJohnnyBandit Posts: 8,305 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    None of that changes a word of what I wrote. All you're saying is that the human holds responsibility -- which I did not disagree with. It does not change the argument that so does the animal, nor does it change the fact that you completely ignored that part of my response, which I will now repeat because it cuts a huge hole in your logic:

    If the animal is not to blame, why are they often put to death for their transgression? If we are to believe your perspective, the appropriate answer would be to allow it to be taken on by an owner who can control it and will be responsible for it. Yet that's not the case.


    Your twisting is funny..... You cannot re home a dog that has harmed someone..... No one can deal with the liability.... The owner of the dog when it hurt someone cannot deal with the liability of it going to a new owner...
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    So the dog is at least partially to blame and should also be punished?

    I agree.

    But that's not, at all, what got this started, I might point out.
  • JohnnyBanditJohnnyBandit Posts: 8,305 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    So the dog is at least partially to blame and should also be punished?

    I agree.

    But that's not, at all, what got this started, I might point out.

    You are the one that brought the dogs into it...

    And no... Te dog is not to blame.... But who can accept the liability of a dog with a bite history...
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    I did indeed, and it brought you here like the smell of a cat to a coyote. :)

    Who can accept the liability? Anyone willing, to be honest.

    The problem, of course, is there aren't enough people willing and the law doesn't give them the chance, the latter of which was, not coincidentally, an earlier point I was attempting to make.

    Bottom line: Of course the dog is partially to blame. Just like you were partially to blame for your mistake, and so was the bull partially to blame as proven my your grandfather's actions.

    I don't expect you to admit it, but you've essentially proven the point for me, so thanks. Lunch time is over and I'm back to work. Have a good evening, Johnny....Mike
  • JohnnyBanditJohnnyBandit Posts: 8,305 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    I did indeed, and it brought you here like the smell of a cat to a coyote. :)

    Who can accept the liability? Anyone willing, to be honest.

    The problem, of course, is there aren't enough people willing and the law doesn't give them the chance, the latter of which was, not coincidentally, an earlier point I was attempting to make.

    Bottom line: Of course the dog is partially to blame. Just like you were partially to blame for your mistake, and so was the bull partially to blame as proven my your grandfather's actions.

    I don't expect you to admit it, but you've essentially proven the point for me, so thanks. Lunch time is over and I'm back to work. Have a good evening, Johnny....Mike
    I admit.... Readily I might add.... That I was fully to blame for incident I was sued for involving livestock.... And if any one of my dogs hurts someone, I am to blame....
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    Well, there you go. We agree. :)
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 16,988 AG
    On second thought, we don't agree. I don't think it was all your fault with the bull, nor do I think it's all your fault if your dog maims someone either. Sorry, I misread your response.
Sign In or Register to comment.