Dog kills cat, cat owner shoots dog, dog owner shoots 5 people.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Let me see here, the figure you cited was what, something in the neighborhood of 5 million attacks & 75 million dogs, so about 1 in every 15?
Dang, that's even higher than I would I have guessed.

1 in 15, that's about the same as the rate in which people who get paid every other week take home a check and I'd damned sure say they're paid with regularity.

Given that, anyone who doesn't acknowledge the regularity with which dog attacks happen is indeed pretty laughable afaic.

This is a really good example of how someone can manipulate numbers. By comparing a regularly occurring event in time (once every 15 days) against an irregular occurrence within a group (one in every 15 dogs) you make it look like they are equal. Let me ask you this: if one of every 15 Americans earned money every year, would you say that Americans usually earn money?

Anyways, I'm going to go back to watching Noop and RendeR both continue to act like idiots. And while we are coining Noopid, I'd like to throw Rentarded up for grabs.

[Passacaglia]

If so, I haven't seen him.

[Lathum]

I fully expected this thread to be locked when I woke up

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Why are you filled with so much hate for the people on this board?

Not really sure you can get on Noop about this, he was beaten up pretty badly in this thread.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by BrianD

I think we hear about many more dog attacks than cat attacks since the cat attacks usually result in a scratch-and-run.

Well I also think the difference is when a cat attacks a person ir usually requires a band-aid. When a dog attacks a person it requires stitches, plastic surgery and scarring for life.

I would venture to say a good majority of people know someone with a scar from a dog attack, I can't say I know anyone with a scar from a cat attack.

[Kodos]

I think saying dogs "usually" attack people is unfair. A solid super-majority of dogs never attack people. But there is certainly a fraction of the dog population that does attack people with little provocation. And, like many have said, it is usually the dog owner's fault in those situations.

One thing I know for sure: I give an angry looking dog a much wider berth than and angry looking cat.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Eh, kind of hard to give him grief about that.

I mean, there's certainly no love lost between me & him for example but I could probably match him target for target with people that I have nothing pleasant to say about at my most generous.

But the ratio isn't noticeably different than the one I have offline just living day to day so it's not as though FOFC is any worse than the general population by any means & there's probably a somewhat higher percentage of people here that I could fairly describe as actually enjoying their company (which is mind bogglingly low in the population at large, I encounter an incredibly small number of people that I do more than tolerate enough to honestly say I genuine enjoy being around them).

edit to add: Waaaaay off topic I know but it struck me somehow relevant to what you asked him.

If I am ever in Athens, Ga I am buying you lunch, or 7 cups of coffee, or a carton of cigarettes, or whatever you consume for lunch. I would love to just chat with you for an afternoon.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

This is a really good example of how someone can manipulate numbers. By comparing a regularly occurring event in time (once every 15 days) against an irregular occurrence within a group (one in every 15 dogs) you make it look like they are equal. Let me ask you this: if one of every 15 Americans earned money every year, would you say that Americans usually earn money?

Anyways, I'm going to go back to watching Noop and RendeR both continue to act like idiots. And while we are coining Noopid, I'd like to throw Rentarded up for grabs.

OK, we have gotten on MBBF's case about what the "vast majority" of a percentage of a population is, but... 1 in 15 dogs is a LOT. And that's PER YEAR. I'm sorry, but I'm with JIMGA that the number surprises me. Granted, "1 in 15" doesn't actually mean 1 in 15 dogs. There could be 5 dogs attacking 3 times per year. Regardless, I would have guessed PER YEAR that roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported.

[Kodos]

One of my more vivid childhood memories is of the time my family was out on a bike ride, and a doberman started chasing us, so my father went slow to save the rest of us, and got bit on the leg. Scary. That dog could have really hurt one of us.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Well I also think the difference is when a cat attacks a person ir usually requires a band-aid. When a dog attacks a person it requires stitches, plastic surgery and scarring for life.

I would venture to say a good majority of people know someone with a scar from a dog attack, I can't say I know anyone with a scar from a cat attack.

I have scars from cats, but that's from playing with them, not being attacked. And they're not big gruesome scars, but little scratches do leave marks for quite some time on my skin (probably exacerbated by my slight allergy to cats)

[Logan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Let me see here, the figure you cited was what, something in the neighborhood of 5 million attacks & 75 million dogs, so about 1 in every 15?
Dang, that's even higher than I would I have guessed.

I was really surprised when I saw that too. Could that attack number be loaded up by one dog flipping out in a group of kids and biting 6 of them? Still, I would think that would be a huge minority of the attacks.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

OK, we have gotten on MBBF's case about what the "vast majority" of a percentage of a population is, but... 1 in 15 dogs is a LOT. And that's PER YEAR. I'm sorry, but I'm with JIMGA that the number surprises me. Granted, "1 in 15" doesn't actually mean 1 in 15 dogs. There could be 5 dogs attacking 3 times per year. Regardless, I would have guessed PER YEAR that roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported.

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, I think 1 in 15 sounds awfully frequent as well (though I would also assume that there are lots of multiple offenders that when accounted for would drop the numbers).

My point was that JIMGA's statistical manipulation was misleading. He was comparing apples and oranges to prove his point, and that always annoys me so I decided to point it out.

Anyways, lets get back to discussing Noopid and Rentarded, that's more fun.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

I have scars from cats, but that's from playing with them, not being attacked. And they're not big gruesome scars, but little scratches do leave marks for quite some time on my skin (probably exacerbated by my slight allergy to cats)

Well that was my point. I can't speak for everyone, but I've seen several kids with terrible scars from dog attacks.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

This is a really good example of how someone can manipulate numbers. By comparing a regularly occurring event in time (once every 15 days) against an irregular occurrence within a group (one in every 15 dogs) you make it look like they are equal.

But it's really the difference in "regularly" and "usually". Notice which word I used in that post. And it does happen with such frequency that I'd say it's a regular occurrence. Those stories don't hit the news now because they're particularly notable for being out of the ordinary, they hit the news strictly for the horror value.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Lathum

If I am ever in Athens, Ga I am buying you lunch, or 7 cups of coffee, or a carton of cigarettes, or whatever you consume for lunch. I would love to just chat with you for an afternoon.

The part that usually scares people is when they realize how rational I seem in person

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

OK, we have gotten on MBBF's case about what the "vast majority" of a percentage of a population is, but... 1 in 15 dogs is a LOT. And that's PER YEAR. I'm sorry, but I'm with JIMGA that the number surprises me. Granted, "1 in 15" doesn't actually mean 1 in 15 dogs. There could be 5 dogs attacking 3 times per year. Regardless, I would have guessed PER YEAR that roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported.

I don't even think those numbers are CLOSE to real. I highly doubt 1 out of 15 dogs attack.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Well that was my point. I can't speak for everyone, but I've seen several kids with terrible scars from dog attacks.

Right, I was just commenting, really.

Originally Posted by DanGarion

I don't even think those numbers are CLOSE to real. I highly doubt 1 out of 15 dogs attack.

DOG BITE LAW - Statistics about dog bites in the USA and elsewhere

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

I don't even think those numbers are CLOSE to real. I highly doubt 1 out of 15 dogs attack.

Don't blame me, I just worked with the number provided here by someone trying to show how harmless dogs were.

At first blush it surprised me too but it was less surprising when I thought about anecdotal evidence like as far as I can recall there's been at least one kid in my son's class every year with a significant scar from a dog attack or an in-year incident that required an emergency room trip. You could figure that's one in 20ish from multiple samples so that does make 1 in 15 seem less surprising but only after I thought about it a while.

You'd also have to figure in the number of attacks that don't result in serious injury (such as the incident at my house earlier in the year) as well as most likely some factored estimate of the number of attacks that occur but aren't reported. If the baseline numbers of 5m attacks & 75m dogs are correct after thinking about it a bit it really isn't as surprising as I first thought.

[Passacaglia]

Like LS said, it's not necessarily one in 15 dogs. It's 5 million people bit.

DOG BITE LAW - Statistics about dog bites in the USA and elsewhere

[wade moore]

I'm looking at some numbers and I wonder if JiMGA pulled stats from the same place i'm looking at.

If so, I think something is slanted here from this site. It's very much a "DOG BITES ARE KILLING OUR CHILDREN!" type site.

A survey by the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta ("CDC") concluded that dogs bite nearly 2% of the U.S. population -- more than 4.7 million people annually. (Sacks JJ, Kresnow M, Houston B. Dog bites: how big a problem? Injury Prev 1996;2:52-4.)

But then..

Almost 800,000 bites per year -- one out of every 6 -- are serious enough to require medical attention. (Weiss HB, Friedman D, Coben JH. Incidence of dog bite injuries treated in emergency departments. JAMA 1998;279:51-53.)

So.. what happens in that gap of about 4 million bites? How was the survey question asked? My dogs have bitten me before, but not hard enough to draw blood. Would that be counted in this survey? Could that really be considered an "attack"?

and..

The statistics on fatal attacks are more accurate, and more current, than those on dog bites in general. Researchers have to be careful to use current numbers when reporting about canine homicides, because of the sharp increase over the past decade.

[wade moore]

Dola: sorry, it wasn't JiMGA that initially posted the numbers.

Looks like we're all pulling up the same site though.

[Lathum]

Interesting about those stats but not surprising.

There is a reason why when you get homeowners insurance they ask you what kind of dog you have. IIRC there was nothing about cats on there.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

But it's really the difference in "regularly" and "usually". Notice which word I used in that post. And it does happen with such frequency that I'd say it's a regular occurrence. Those stories don't hit the news now because they're particularly notable for being out of the ordinary, they hit the news strictly for the horror value.

It's still an apples and oranges comparison, even if we assume that 1 in 15 dogs are attacking people (which is a stretch based on the numbers itself, but lets go with it for now).

90% or so of American humans regularly receive a paycheque once every 15 days during a year.

7% or so of American dogs regularly attack a human once every 365 days during a year.

How do you make a meaningful comparison out of those two things? You can't, so I don't see the point. The only similarity between them was that they both had "1 in 15" in them when you worded them as you did.

Now, we can all have a discussion over whether 7% of dogs attacking people on a regular basis is cause to state that dogs usually attack people, but lets not try to throw unrelated numbers around to confuse the issue.

[JonInMiddleGA]

And since we're on this road already, let me put in a quick stop at the rest area labeled "It's not the dog's fault". While the dog constitutes the threat (the NC case notwithstanding) there are quite a few human factors that lead to the problem, the dog is largely just being what the dog is or has been turned into.

[wade moore]

heh..

http://www.absolutelycats.com/22Ouch.html

A cat bites one in every 170 people in the U.S. each year. This includes children and people who don't even own a cat. So, everyone stands a fairly good chance of experiencing this trauma sometime. My suggestion is to treat it with respect–the cat too.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Subby

Do we still have mods? I thought we weren't allowed to make direct personal attacks at FOFC.

I just want some clarification b/c I am itching to make fun of mr. poon.

Go for it.

[Fidatelo]

I can't believe I'm not getting any love for Rentarded. You people suck. Fuck you all. PM me if you really want the business.

[JonInMiddleGA]

And now wade let's find the numbers on how many of those cat bites are fatal versus the number of dog bites.

I imagine that there's no shortage of pet birds who bite too but I haven't heard of many of those ending with a trip to the morgue.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

I can't believe I'm not getting any love for Rentarded.

It's not bad by any means, it's just a more awkward construct and doesn't roll as trippingly off the tongue.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And now wade let's find the numbers on how many of those cat bites are fatal versus the number of dog bites.

I imagine that there's no shortage of pet birds who bite too but I haven't heard of many of those ending with a trip to the morgue.

I'm trying to find that fwiw.

There are (depending on which stat you believe) 12-17 fatal dog bites a year.

Trying to find similar numbers for cats, but I'd argue that 12-17 out of 800k, 4.7mil, whatever it is is pretty low.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I imagine that there's no shortage of pet birds who bite too but I haven't heard of many of those ending with a trip to the morgue.

It's a good thing people don't have pet geese, those fuckers are vicious!

[Lathum]

Yeah but Wade, like I said earlier, Cat bite equals band aid, dog bite equals stitches

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

It's a good thing people don't have pet geese, those fuckers are vicious!

And then there's the llamas and emus.

[molson]

I think it's funny that people are taking this estimated 5 million dog bite number and distributing those bites to 5 million different dogs, all of whom apparently bite one person, one time, each year.

I mean, come on.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

I can't believe I'm not getting any love for Rentarded. You people suck. Fuck you all. PM me if you really want the business.

I like it man. Doesn't quite flow like Noopid but its good.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Yeah but Wade, like I said earlier, Cat bite equals band aid, dog bite equals stitches

And I'm saying that a large portion of dog bites are the same thing. Even that one cheesy little website says that 800k of those 4.7 million require any medical attention at all.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by Noop

I like it man. Doesn't quite flow like Noopid but its good.

What if we get rid of the past tense, so instead of saying "you're being Rentarded" we say "stop being a Rentard"? That would flow better, right?

Bah, I'm just disappointed that no one wanted to get the business. Pussies.

[wade moore]

FWIW - I agree that a dog is capable of more damage than a cat. But I'm trying to put some sanity to the growing idea in this thread that dogs are out in huge numbers on a massive rampage mauling people to death.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

What if we get rid of the past tense, so instead of saying "you're being Rentarded" we say "stop being a Rentard"? That would flow better, right?

Bah, I'm just disappointed that no one wanted to get the business. Pussies.

Sounds good.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

I think it's funny that people are taking this estimated 5 million dog bite number and distributing those bites to 5 million different dogs, all of whom apparently bite one person each year. I mean, come on.

What was the stat cited just a bit ago, that over half of the incidents involved first-time offenders?

Here's the reality of it: it's a problem, it's one that is long overdue to be addressed, and it's time that either state/local governments step up to the plate and (pun intended) put some real teeth in both regulations on dogs and the punishment for irresponsible ownership or get used to an increasing number of stories that start like the one in Lenoir City. I've had my one near miss for this phase of life, watching a dog larger than my child headed straight for him with clearly bad intentions. There's now an ax handle right inside the garage door in the event of a repeat, with the first target being the dog & the second being the worthless bastard down the street too lazy to control his fucking dog.

And it's time for strict federal regulation on the breeding of domestic animals -- cats & dogs -- to stem the tide of overbreeding, overpopulation, and oversupply.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by sabotai

If you are suggesting that a cat can not be aggressive towards dogs, even ones that are much larger than they are, you would be completely wrong.

One of my favorite experiences as a child was taming a pair of feral kittens (mother was abandoned in the wild where she had them, they got taken to a vet, we adopted them). It took a month to get to the point that they would let me near the crate they were in, let alone pick them up and pet them.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

What was the stat cited just a bit ago, that over half of the incidents involved first-time offenders?

Here's the reality of it: it's a problem, it's one that is long overdue to be addressed, and it's time that either state/local governments step up to the plate and (pun intended) put some real teeth in both regulations on dogs and the punishment for irresponsible ownership or get used to an increasing number of stories that start like the one in Lenoir City. I've had my one near miss for this phase of life, watching a dog larger than my child headed straight for him with clearly bad intentions. There's now an ax handle right inside the garage door in the event of a repeat, with the first target being the dog & the second being the worthless bastard down the street too lazy to control his fucking dog.

And it's time for strict federal regulation on the breeding of domestic animals -- cats & dogs -- to stem the tide of overbreeding, overpopulation, and oversupply.

Despite my points in this thread, I agree with your overall assessment that more should be done about irresponsible dog owners/breeders. I do not necessarily thing there is some growing epidemic (and the statistics do not really support that either), but it doesn't change the fact that a vast majority of these incidents are easily preventable.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by wade moore

heh..

http://www.absolutelycats.com/22Ouch.html

[/color][/size][/color][/size][/color][/size][/b][/font][/color][/b]

Originally Posted by wade moore

And I'm saying that a large portion of dog bites are the same thing. Even that one cheesy little website says that 800k of those 4.7 million require any medical attention at all.

Your point is moot unless we know how many people were hospitilized for cat bites.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Your point is moot unless we know how many people were hospitilized for cat bites.

If I could find those stats, I'd share them.

But it's not moot. 4.7 million (and most sites say a lot more go unreported) dog bites, 800k require medical attention.

So, definitely less than 25% of dog bites require ANY medical attention. I'm sure some portion of those are not even needing stitches.

As I said above, I'm not claiming that dogs (purely based on size though) are not capable of more damage than a cat, they are. I'm just saying folks in this thread are blowing it WAY out of proportion based on some suspicious statistics.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by wade moore

So, definitely less than 25% of dog bites require ANY medical attention. I'm sure some portion of those are not even needing stitches

I'd argue that it could be higher, considering the lackadaisical reporting likely to occur (based on experiences with other lax reporting standards) in rural areas where this sort of thing happens with some frequency (due to the absurd allowance for dog to free range).

[molson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'd argue that it could be higher, considering the lackadaisical reporting likely to occur (based on experiences with other lax reporting standards) in rural areas where this sort of thing happens with some frequency (due to the absurd allowance for dog to free range).

The 5 million bite number takes into account unreported cases. So it's a very rough estimate.

What's with the sudden anti-dog sentiment here? If a person's dog bites someone, is loose, or kills a cat outside its property, the owner should be held accountable. Otherwise, what do you dog-haters want? A nationwide dog ban?

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by molson

The 5 million bite number takes into account unreported cases. So it's a very rough estimate.

What's with the sudden anti-dog sentiment here? If a person's dog bites someone, is loose, or kills a cat outside its property, the owner should be held accountable. Otherwise, what do you dog-haters want? A nationwide dog ban?

I think it's more about preventing these incidents in the first place.

I agree with Jon - the areas (and I only found out recently this existed) where there are not leash laws need to get there act together. Areas where there are laws that are really note enforced, need to get their act together. Areas that still allow you to chain a dog outside need to get their act together (that same website mentions how a chained dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite).

Etc, etc. It goes on and on.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

If a person's dog bites someone, is loose, or kills a cat outside its property, the owner should be held accountable. Otherwise, what do you dog-haters want? A nationwide dog ban?

Would one bother me personally? Not a bit outside of any negative impact on the existing dog population.

But "dog-hater" is really somewhat of a misnomer there, what you keep inside your house or on your property is your business right up until it has a negative impact on my quality of life.

I've donated to dog welfare causes, nearly gotten myself killed on numerous occasions trying to avoid running over a dog in the road, am a staunch proponent of anti-fighting & cruelty laws, and rather notably don't go around cheering or encouraging random acts of violence or creative forms of murder of dogs (which occur with some frequency with the unenlightened anti-cat population). If I was a dog "hater" I'd just keep a pan of anti-freeze outside with some kibble to attract them to their demise. If you've been a part of any of the animal threads you know that damned sure ain't my style. I harbor dogs in general no ill will at all, the extent of my distaste for their company in strictly personal and rests on me, not on the dog so I harbor them no ill will.

What I actually want is strict & consistent regulation on the obligation for owners to control their dogs, far reaching strict control of breeding, and most likely stricter guidelines on not only how dogs must be maintained but also on where & by whom they are maintained.

edit to add: After reading my own post, I'd say it's not just "somewhat of a misnomer", it's a pretty strong mischaracterization.

[molson]

Originally Posted by wade moore

I think it's more about preventing these incidents in the first place.

I agree with Jon - the areas (and I only found out recently this existed) where there are not leash laws need to get there act together. Areas where there are laws that are really note enforced, need to get their act together. Areas that still allow you to chain a dog outside need to get their act together (that same website mentions how a chained dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite).

Etc, etc. It goes on and on.

I wonder what the numbers are like if you take out pit bulls and rottweilers.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

I wonder what the numbers are like if you take out pit bulls and rottweilers.

Noticeably lower.

Those breeds are almost a separate issue at this point, and as for them I'd like to see their possession in the U.S. outlawed entirely.