How about a dog collar for dog lovers? If you find companionship in dogs, and read in their faces such “human” qualities as insight and empathy, why not show some empathy yourself and submit to their leash. I don’t mean a collar and rope which your dog can restrict or yank at whim, but a collar tethered to his collar. Why not?
I’m guessing it would mean the end of straining at the leash in either direction, if you want to modify your best friend’s behavior so radically. Otherwise it might disrupt the imbecilic notion that dogs have inherent civility enough to be taken out in public.
Leash-less dogs would be the ideal, un-neutered even, taken to dog parks where everyone is into that sort of thing. Or a free-for-all everywhere. But if you’re going to regulate how people use sidewalks and other common spaces, I’d rather not have to negotiate beings not behaving on their own accord.
If dogs have the emotional development of a toddler, but an unrestrained sex drive, perhaps you’re projecting a little in what you think you’re getting out of exchanges with your companion. The good which pet “owners” get from having an animal in their lives sounds drastically one sided. Do we dismiss the domestic pet as just another beast of burden to serve human existence, or should we seek a sustainable balance showing full respect for all beings in a near as possible natural state?
Could be worse, although that wouldn’t SEEM likely. You can still buy a monkey or a baby raccoon mail order. No questions asked as in, other than does your bank account actually work for the extraction of money. Some places, most in the U.S., do require a minimal skill level for having a license to own one.
There’s a heavier price to pay too. Momma Monkey or Momma Raccoon ain’t gonna give up her babies. So they have to shoot the mommas. Raccoons only socialize to one person, not a family friendly thing. and they have to bond YOUNG. Like, Baby Young.
Give an asshole a dog and the dog will pick up on his leaders personality traits. If the dog is an asshole, that means he learns it from his “owner”.
A training requirement for dog ownership sounds like a DUH Captain Obvious moment, but apparently not. It would work a lot like the Concealed Carry laws or even a drivers test.
only probably more like the former. The Concealed Carry instructors own gun stores, thus, they want to sell as many guns as possible, and
would probablyfudge on the requirements a bit just to make the sale.So we do now the equivalent of waiting for somebody to go all sniper-bad before taking his guns away. Wait until the dog kills or maims or attempts to kill somebody. THEN question the owner’s capacity to actually take care of his dog.
There’s a moral in there somewhere.