Coming February 6, 2024 . . .
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
Coming February 6, 2024 . . . MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Here in this community of the rich and powerful, where the average household income is $460,000, barking is the subject of a ferocious (fur-ocious?) debate — one that has divided the two-legged one-percenters for nearly a year. The drama began last fall when the village spent $134,000 to turn a muddy triangle of land into a park where pups could run off-leash in a fenced refuge. Chase tennis balls. Sniff one another’s butts. But after about a month, signs decrying the barking of those dogs began appearing around the park. The village police started receiving almost daily calls about the noise
Comments
Since this is mostly a problem between white people calling the police on white people this article will pass without notice as a local problem. This is just a debate about the use of the commons. No one is claiming it's not a police matter. But if the offending dog owners were black this would become a national issue on racism.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/white-woman-police-black-man-dog-humping_...
As a responsible dog owner in both of these cases I sympathize with those calling the police.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 4:09pm
While the discussion was occurring, according to the article
Also so regarding the black guy trying to explain his dog’s behavior
The viewpoint of one veterinarian
https://www.petmd.com/blogs/fullyvetted/2012/apr/let_dogs_be_dogs-14532
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 5:06pm
Some dogs are well trained and have responsible owners some dogs don't. Pointing out that some dogs are well trained with responsible owners is not relevant to a discussion of what to do about ill trained dogs with irresponsible owners.
In most areas the police are the only enforcement mechanism. Your only answer to regulations regarding the quality of the commons is that if a black person is involved they should not be enforced because some cops abuse their authority. What this means is the quality of the commons will only be protected in white areas. In black areas and mixed group areas the commons will quickly become degraded.
"My rule of thumb is that if the dogs involved seem relaxed and happy with whatever behavior they’re engaged in and it doesn’t pose a risk of injury, let 'em play."
That's a good rule of thumb but it doesn't address the problem of what to do if one of the dogs is not relaxed and happy with the behavior. Most dogs get along most of the time. That's not the issue. The issue is what to do about problem dogs and irresponsible owners. If the irresponsible owner is white the problem can be discussed or police can be brought it to enforce regulations. If the irresponsible owner is black nothing can be done.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 5:30pm
The police officer told the black guy that the discussion could be considered an assault.
So now we need rules/distances for when the black guy is assaulting the white woman.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 5:38pm
In arguments sometimes a person will invade another person's space to attempt to force them to back down with an implied threat. Some white people do that in arguments with other white people. Don't some black people do that with other black people? There already are unspoken rules and societal conventions regarding distances people should maintain between them. Sometimes there's discomfort that is merely due to cultural differences. Some people deliberately break them to establish dominance. We can't know what happened here as there is insufficient evidence. You immediately assume the complaint was racist. One question, when the women complained did the man step back a few steps and continue the discussion from a slightly greater distance? That's what I would have done. But then, If my dog persisted with constant unwanted humping I would have intervened before the women complained.
But my point with this article is that when there are disagreements between white people police are called to deal with the problems. That is considered normal behavior. When a black person is involved your contention is police should not be called and regulations to protect the quality of the commons should not be enforced. Do you have any other solution to the Tragedy of the Commons?
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 6:00pm
The crime rate is decreasing. I don’t see a Tragedy of the Commons here or in the case of BBQ Becky. I see isolated incidents not requiring police intervention.
How far back should the man have stepped for an assault charge not to have been in play? What distance prevents the assault charge?
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 6:17pm
Do you have a dog? I have often had dogs and I've had problems like this women. Exactly the same problem except it was with white dog owners so there were no accusations of racism. All dog owners I know have experience with problems with other dog owners. So I do see this as dispute over the use of the commons. Inability to resolve these disputes will lead to a degradation of the commons.
The fact that there are regulations put in place is evidence that public health officials see this as a degradation of the commons. The fact that you will not offer any explanation why public health officials have put these regulations in place nor explain why the regulations are unjust leaves your opinion unsupported and lacking any rational basis.
If there are disputes over the use of the commons one of the people involved in the dispute always thinks that it's not a Tragedy of the Commons issue. NO enforcement of regulations leads to a race to the bottom with the lowest common denominator deciding the conditions of the commons. My point which you refuse to address is that from this article about white people's dispute over the use of the commons the police are regularly called to resolve the dispute but if a black person is involved your suggestion is that the laws be ignored and there be no police involvement. I think it's obvious that no enforcement of regulations will inevitably lead to a degradation of the commons. I've also given clear explanations why and how the commons will be degraded, which you have refused to even address.
Does the exact distance matter? If someone complains that I'm invading their personal space and there's room for me to back up I do. I'll give them more personal space even if I think I wasn't very close. What do you do if someone complains that you're too close? From your posts here I think you'll decide your subjective feelings about personal space are an objective truth and all others must conform to your interpretation.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 9:10pm
Society is not going to crumble because of humping dogs in one dog park. There might be a reason to call police if a man who has a dog accused of biting a woman’s dog calls the woman a female dog and pulls a gun on a man coming to her defense.
https://thegrio.com/2019/05/30/walkingdogwhileblack-angry-white-man-pulls-gun-and-hurls-racist-slurs-at-black-people-in-dog-park-and-sherriff-says-he-was-justified/
Fortunately for black people, ocean-kat and PP get to rant at dagblog but are not in charge of anything impacting the lives of black people.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 9:47pm
Society isn't going to crumble if dogs fight and hurt and damage each other. Yet we have rules regulating how owners must control them. Society won't crumble if we allow dog fighting for money or even cock fighting. Yet we still ban them and jail those who break those laws. Our society is governed by many laws to help people get along that fall far short of society crumbling. For example society won't crumble if we eliminate speed limits. Frankly your arguments are ridiculous. And you ignore the bulk of my arguments. You're simply not capable of rational dialog.
eta: I doubt that you have a dog or if so you rarely take it to interact with other dogs. Yet you feel capable of weighing on the conflicts between dog owners. But only if you can make it about racism.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 10:49pm
Oddly I was just reading Malcolm Gladwell's "What the Dog Saw", and one subject area he addresses was the banning of PitBulls after an attack on a child, when facts could have easily pointed to banning them and other meaner, antisocial breeds, *not* banning calmer sub-breeds of PitBulls, requiring training, and other possible sane ways of tackling the perceived problem(s).
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 10:56pm
It's a multilayered problem. Pit bulls erroneously got a reputation for being vicious. Some people suggest it was because of the Omen movies. People who want vicious dog get pit bulls and train them to be vicious. So it is slightly more likely that if you meet a pit bull it will be vicious. Not because of the breed but because of the owner. People also get the message and fear pit bulls even though most are sweet. I sorta knew this from reading but experienced it when I watched a friend's pit bull for several months when she toured South America. This pit bull was so good, so calm, so sweet. But most of the people who saw her when I went out for a walk were terrified. That fear can cause what's know as anxiety biting. The dog senses the fear, doesn't know why, gets afraid, and bites to in it's mind defend itself. It's not a full bite or attack, just a snap with little or no damage to say stay away from me, but it's still a problem.
Pit bulls are nice dogs but sometimes you have to conform to society's misconceptions. I like to take my dog with me to flea markets and other public events. My dog is always very well trained, carefully watched, and never a problem but I don't want to deal with the irrational fear. I won't get a put bull.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 11:27pm
In this case 3 pitbulls attacked for no reason, 1 put jaws around kid's head and started swinging it, father finally beat the pitbulk enough to get the kid, toss to its mother to cover it while dogs attacked her and she tried to at least cover her neck, meanwhile father and passerby kept beating the digs who wouldn't give up until nearly unconscious.
In this case wasn't much "erroneous". But to extrapolate? Were these 3 like all others? Was the fashion of too many training pitbulls to be mean too much to accept? How to reun in the bigger problem, bad owners?...
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 08/29/2019 - 4:05am
Oh that case. I remember reading about it. It was unusual, bizarre, and I can't explain it. That type of attack is exceedingly rare and shouldn't be used to label the breed. Pit bulls are an aggressive breed but I've seen many studies that doesn't show the pit bull as markedly more aggressive than other aggressive breeds. German Shepherds, Dobermans, Rottweilers, Labradors, Akitas, a few others, all have about the same tendency to bite. The pit bull is usually near the top but often not the top biter. Some people write that Terriers are by far the most aggressive breed but they're so small that the bites go unreported because they're only small puncture wounds that aren't very deep.
by ocean-kat on Thu, 08/29/2019 - 5:09am
Gladley covered many of the same points, incl small dogs produce some of the most vicious injuries/deaths each year, so what're the sane criteria for assessing, categorizing and legislating against risk and danger. Do nothing? It's an option, just isn't always politically or viscerally satisfying.
Note that much of society's actions is to address minor exceptions like 9/11, vs the much larger, more frequent occurrences (even gun massacres tho more frequent these days, vs the much larger business-as-usual killings, so we'll ban assault weapons and feel good, even though over time handguns have the most casualties - but there's a different type of concern re massacres, so it's not entirely illogical to legislate this way)
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 08/29/2019 - 7:39am
Sometimes politicians pass legislation for no good reason beyond the politics. If the legislation isn't harmful I don't get upset by it. If a dog breed is banned for no rational reason I don't care. It's not like the species is going extinct which is happening to hundreds of wild species every year.
While I support stricter enforcement of regulations controlling dogs to lessen the number of dog bites I don't worry much about dog bites or fatalities from them. Life is inherently dangerous and imo the costs are too high to meaningful or pleasurable life by attempting to remove all danger. I'll go to the cliched lightning strike comparison. About 30 people die each year from lightning strikes. About 30 to 50 people die from fatal dog bites. Just slightly more. Out of a population of 350 million. Or compare it to 37,000 deaths each year from car accidents. The increase in the quality of life for so many people from having a dog is worth the small increase in danger in this dangerous world.
by ocean-kat on Thu, 08/29/2019 - 3:31pm
If I rant at black kids to get off my lawn, that has an impact, no?
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 10:12pm
I don’t see a Tragedy of the Commons here or in the case of BBQ Becky. I see isolated incidents not requiring police intervention.
Three times in the last 14 years I've had a problem with dogs humping my dog and I don't often take my dog into group settings where many dogs run free. Despite my dog growling and snapping at the dog to get away the dog persisted. The dog's owner decided their dog harassing mine wasn't a problem. It was a problem for my dog and therefore me. If I hadn't handled it it would have led to a dog fight that might have been dangerous to the dogs and the bystanders. All dog owners know this is a problem and not an isolated incident. The reason you see isolated incidents is you either don't have a dog or rarely take it to places where it must interact with unknown dogs.
Again you feel capable of weighing in on a subject you have no knowledge or experience of. Only because you want to claim racism.
by ocean-kat on Thu, 08/29/2019 - 1:28am
I also have multiple reasons for my mounting behavior, sometimes combined for a paricular event or happening. When I was a kid I dreamed of joining the Canadian Mounties, which would put me on both sides of the equation, tho more mellow than south of the border.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 8:19pm
Well sure but as rmrd's vet pointed out, " If the dogs are running around having a good time and first one mounts the other and then vice-versa, there’s a good chance that they’re just messing with each other." Question, Are you determined to force all other's into being a bottom or is your mounting behavior reciprocal?
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 8:48pm
You really see this as a major problem? This is the Tragedy of the Commons?
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 9:51pm
Absolutely. PP started a serious discussion about his mounting behaviors and I made a totally rational completely serious reply. Why the question? You understand comedy so you are correct in surmising that we weren't joking. I have nothing but admiration for your reading comprehension skills.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 10:00pm
To be clear, we were talking dogs and people. When Fido tries mounting Little Cindy, or at least her leg, not much harm is done. But when moose start humping or a Grizzly or Elk tries mounting a Land Rover, there can be significant repercussions.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 10:16pm
To be sure. That's why I encourage guests in my house to respond to that by humping my dog so she know it's all just friendly messing around. I've also installed an artificial penis on my land rover so I can mount grizzlies and defuse tensions to avoid serious repercussions.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 10:29pm
Yes, but proper mounting involves so much more than just the penis. Are you sure your vehicular proxy prosthetic expresses enough of the concept to satisfy the Grizzlies' need for a comaradely just-foolin-around? Or do you ever have to do a manual assist? (which sounds like folly, but when push comes to shove...)
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 08/28/2019 - 10:37pm
I just saw this article. Colorado Woman Fights Off Bear With Baseball Bat Why didn't she just mount the bear to signal she was just friendly messing around? If only more people would read dagblog to reach a better understanding of the world.
by ocean-kat on Thu, 08/29/2019 - 3:13am
Oceankat: I've enjoyed what you've done with this story and discussion as an example, metaphor and teaching moment.
Ok now that I'm done with that, can I just point out that the real actual trouble behind this particular example and story: people who think their dogs are more important than other people.
by artappraiser on Thu, 08/29/2019 - 2:19am
You don't have to put a smiley face for me. I agree with you. Of course my dog is more important to me than most people but when I take my dog into public spaces I'll control her as much as I need to based on how people feel about it. Even if I have to control more than I think necessary because some person is imo an idiot. It's easy to train a dog if you take the time and care. If she is well trained you can actually allow her greater freedom without causing problems with other people. Also I spend so much time with just my dog in wilderness areas where she is completely free. When a dog has that much freedom she much more readily accepts control when necessary.
by ocean-kat on Thu, 08/29/2019 - 3:39am