Comments On: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance by Lisa Sorg

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

tobenn5412 — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:53:25 -0400

ykw, would you please indicate your business license and sales tax id nuumber for your breeding business operation, as well as proof of taxes paid on your income?
Posted by tobenn5412

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

tobenn5412 — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:52:16 -0400

Chaining dogs also affects the entire community negatively. It increases barking and disruption that travel for miles.
Posted by tobenn5412

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

tobenn5412 — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:48:24 -0400

ykw has cut and pasted the usual propaganda, deception, and hypocrisy rationalizing their dog chaining practices and abuse from the AKC/dog fighter/puppy mill/dog breeder industries. "Responsible ownership" is code for BREEDER FINANCIAL INTERESTS.
Posted by tobenn5412

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

tobenn5412 — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:41:34 -0400

Please be aware that the AKC also supports abusive chaining, because the AKC supports profits (through cheap, substandard care) for dog breeders by any means possible! AKC makes most of its money by registering puppy mill dogs, and puppy mill breeders want chaining.
Posted by tobenn5412

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 08:07:05 -0500

and one more p.p.s. I happen to spend about 500 a month on my dogs, but what business is that of yours? you seemed to try to also make it out in that last post like it's a class issue ('if you don't have money for a big fence and a pretty house then you don't deserve a dog'), when it isn't about that at all either.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 07:51:55 -0500

john/jalt/etc I also wanted to point out since you seemed intent on simpleton reasoning - one big, beautiful, perfect fence does nothing for the fact that I have many dogs that cannot (or I prefer not) run together, some at all times, some at one point or another. I know this is hard to conceive for those that picture them as little furry people but they have to be contained, controlled and gulp, even isolated at times.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 09:04:45 -0500

Tethering has lately become an Animal RIGHTS' hot button issue and yet man has tethered dogs since the very beginning of our time together with no ill effect. The vast majority of pet owners who use a tether do so in a responsible fashion.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

JohnD — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:19:53 -0400

Once again, you put a lot of fluff in but you're still saying the same thing. You only list two reasons why one might use tethering instead of a fence: 1) The dog might escape and 2) The dog might get hurt trying to escape.
Posted by JohnD

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:41:31 -0400

tsk, tsk...I thought I already told you to give up this idea john/johnAlt/JP/D etc. how odd that no one would post for days, then suddenly there's yet another poster using the same arguments and complaints you are within 20 minutes of each other, lmao.

If you don't see the numerous other reasons why it's reasonable and valid, that's because your mosquito length attention span didn't allow you to digest the many more examples mentioned in my article.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

JohnD — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:08:52 -0400

Man, climb down off your cross already, ykw. This isn't all about making you a victim.
Posted by JohnD

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

D. Davis — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:41:54 -0400

What I find interesting about this discussion is how it has degenerated into concern over the rights of those who have pets to treat them however they feel is best, without interference from "the government." I think there is a long way to go from banning tethering (which I do think is cruel and inhumane in most circumstances) to banning pets.
Posted by D. Davis

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

JohnD — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:56:30 -0400

Well, ykw just because you can't figure out simple html tags doesn't mean that those of us out there who use them properly are all the same person.

And sure, I'll agree there's a handful of dogs out there who can scale a fence.
Posted by JohnD

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:12:15 -0400

hey "john" I notice you use the exact same style of bolding one word in the middle of a reply just like "jalt" does. lol

tethering is NOT abusing.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

JohnD — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:07:03 -0400

Waaaaah.

Look just stop abusing/tethering your dogs, build'em a nice yard, with a nice high fence, and then you'll be in compliance with the law.
Posted by JohnD

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:17:07 -0400

Tethering has lately become an Animal RIGHTS' hot button issue and yet man has tethered dogs since the very beginning of our time together with no ill effect. Tethering is a perfectly acceptable and humane way to keep an animal when done properly and responsibly.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

JohnD — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:33:17 -0400

Ok, ykw, you convinced me. I'm against tethering.
Posted by JohnD

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:12:11 -0400

yeah, you can keep trying to focus in on one or two words of my comments all you want to attempt to divert the issue and the fact that you are a meddling busy body who is wrong and I am right.

that comment was also made, just like the other, in the observational context of the dogs are not dead from being hit by a car, running loose in my neighbor's field and getting shot or otherwise being a danger or nuisance to themselves or others and are all well fed and well tended.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

JohnD — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:20:20 -0400

Also have you noticed everyone else can keep their posts to less than 20 paragraphs? Maybe you could work on that.
Posted by JohnD

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

Jalt — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:26:14 -0400

Hey ykw, while you're backpeddling, why don't you go ahead and retract this anthropomorphism as well. I really like it how you put it in ALL CAPS with an exclamation point:
Posted by Jalt

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 03:54:06 -0400

you continue to attribute HUMAN EMOTION to dogs. I said my comments was meant more as an observation on their health, welfare and safety needs being met.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

JohnD — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:30:29 -0400

ykw, I don't even know what your stance is on this issue but I'd be willing to bet that I disagree with you just because you're so annoying.
Posted by JohnD

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

Compassion Please — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 15:32:24 -0400

I assure you that I am one, unique individual. I do agree with Jalt though that you can't tell me that you know that your dogs are "happy" or "satisfied" or "content" based on you observations of their behavior and then simultaneously deny that someone might be able to tell that a dog is frustrated or miserable or even the generic "unhappy" based on their observations of a dog's behavior.
Posted by Compassion Please

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

ykw — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:59:47 -0400

well at least you have given up the pretense that you're not several of the handles posting. lol I find you amusing too.
Posted by ykw

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

Jalt — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 09:22:09 -0400

"it also seems to have given you the rather preposterous idea that you can diagnose a dog's bark as "frustrated" or look as "miserable" and yet you disclaim your obvious anthropomorphism. My dogs are perfectly happy and healthy and many live on chains."
Posted by Jalt

Re: Durham commissioners to weigh tethering ordinance

Jalt — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 07:49:09 -0400

Don't you just love it when someone starts out a post, "I'm through arguing with you," and then they continue to argue? qehounds, which type of dog would you prefer to be bitten by?
Posted by Jalt