Posts: 224
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2009
According to the CDC, 55,000 people a year die worldwide because of rabies. In the U.S. 40,000 people a year receive the PEP vaccination (post exposure). They don't give a specific number, but say that "most" of the 40,000 people requiring vaccination, were exposed by domestic animals. The cost in the U.S. is 300 million annually.
Your argument is, that you and your dog live outside of town and have limited contact with people, and you don't use the services provided by your registeration fee.
Why can't I make the same argument about my firearms?
http://www.cdc.gov/Features/dsRabies/
Posts: 12,291
Threads: 249
Joined: Jun 2011
(03-22-2013, 11:03 PM)footballfan Wrote: According to the CDC, 55,000 people a year die worldwide because of rabies. In the U.S. 40,000 people a year receive the PEP vaccination (post exposure). They don't give a specific number, but say that "most" of the 40,000 people requiring vaccination, were exposed by domestic animals. The cost in the U.S. is 300 million annually.
Your argument is, that you and your dog live outside of town and have limited contact with people, and you don't use the services provided by your registeration fee.
Why can't I make the same argument about my firearms?
http://www.cdc.gov/Features/dsRabies/
Your argument is that most of the people who die or are injured are from registered or unregistered home guns?
Posts: 224
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2009
03-22-2013, 11:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-22-2013, 11:30 PM by footballfan. Edited 2 times in total.)
No, it just seems to me Ponder is being a little hypocritical. He's all for the registration of firearms, because he believes it would reduce the number of people hurt or killed by them. Someone looking at the numbers, could conclude that rabies are pretty harmful as well, (and more common than I would have thought).
The registration and subsequent vaccination of his and other dogs could drastically reduce 40,000 people a year being exposed to a potentially deadly virus.
But, he's against the registration of his dog. Why?
Posts: 27,872
Threads: 1,668
Joined: Sep 2009
(03-22-2013, 11:15 PM)footballfan Wrote: No, it just seems to me Ponder is being a little hypocritical. He's all for the registration of firearms, because he believes it would reduce the number of people hurt or killed by them. Someone looking at the numbers, could conclude that rabies are pretty harmful as well, (and more common than I would have thought).
The registration and subsequent vaccination of his and other dogs could drastically reduce 40,000 people a year being exposed to a potentially deadly virus.
But, he's against the registration of his dog. Why?
I'm in favor of vaccinating my dog for rabies, I thought I made that clear. What I'm not in favor of is being forced to license my dog at the same time, or risk having my information given to county animal control. That's a law that discourages doing the right thing, which is innoculating my dog for rabies.
And how is that different than your views on gun control again???
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
So do they ID you at the Vets.
Just take your dog in, tell them your name is chuck white and pay in cash.
Posts: 224
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2009
(03-23-2013, 02:21 AM)PonderThis Wrote: (03-22-2013, 11:15 PM)footballfan Wrote: No, it just seems to me Ponder is being a little hypocritical. He's all for the registration of firearms, because he believes it would reduce the number of people hurt or killed by them. Someone looking at the numbers, could conclude that rabies are pretty harmful as well, (and more common than I would have thought).
The registration and subsequent vaccination of his and other dogs could drastically reduce 40,000 people a year being exposed to a potentially deadly virus.
But, he's against the registration of his dog. Why?
I'm in favor of vaccinating my dog for rabies, I thought I made that clear. What I'm not in favor of is being forced to license my dog at the same time, or risk having my information given to county animal control. That's a law that discourages doing the right thing, which is innoculating my dog for rabies.
And how is that different than your views on gun control again???
You're a responsible pet owner. Just like I'm a responsible firearms owner. You don't want to be forced to register your pet, I don't want to be forced to register my firearms. Both of us have the same reason, it's none of their business. Neither issue would be solved by registration/licensing, because you can't innauculate the wild animals/criminals who are responsible for the majority of the infection.
I'll forward you this NRA membership form, since your on our side now.
Posts: 14,339
Threads: 709
Joined: Jan 2011
(03-23-2013, 08:07 AM)footballfan Wrote: You're a responsible pet owner. Just like I'm a responsible firearms owner. You don't want to be forced to register your pet, I don't want to be forced to register my firearms. Both of us have the same reason, it's none of their business. Neither issue would be solved by registration/licensing, because you can't innauculate the wild animals/criminals who are responsible for the majority of the infection.
I'll forward you this NRA membership form, since your on our side now.
Posts: 27,872
Threads: 1,668
Joined: Sep 2009
(03-23-2013, 08:07 AM)footballfan Wrote: (03-23-2013, 02:21 AM)PonderThis Wrote: (03-22-2013, 11:15 PM)footballfan Wrote: No, it just seems to me Ponder is being a little hypocritical. He's all for the registration of firearms, because he believes it would reduce the number of people hurt or killed by them. Someone looking at the numbers, could conclude that rabies are pretty harmful as well, (and more common than I would have thought).
The registration and subsequent vaccination of his and other dogs could drastically reduce 40,000 people a year being exposed to a potentially deadly virus.
But, he's against the registration of his dog. Why?
I'm in favor of vaccinating my dog for rabies, I thought I made that clear. What I'm not in favor of is being forced to license my dog at the same time, or risk having my information given to county animal control. That's a law that discourages doing the right thing, which is innoculating my dog for rabies.
And how is that different than your views on gun control again???
You're a responsible pet owner. Just like I'm a responsible firearms owner. You don't want to be forced to register your pet, I don't want to be forced to register my firearms. Both of us have the same reason, it's none of their business. Neither issue would be solved by registration/licensing, because you can't innauculate the wild animals/criminals who are responsible for the majority of the infection.
I'll forward you this NRA membership form, since your on our side now.
Joining the NRA might be a bit extreme, but (and contrary to popular opinion here maybe) I'm not really against having guns for personal defense. What I don't like is the attitudes of people who are most vociferous in liking to kill other creatures and seem to get off on the violence of it all, whereas I find no joy in killing and indeed, I don't even want to be around these kinds of people. Especially when, the most vocal gun defenders are the ones that come off most violent and angry in their posts - those are especially especially the ones I'd just as soon mock as endorse. Watch and you'll see.
It doesn't help either that one of my early life experiences was being accidently shot by my boss with a 7mm round. Hunter types do sort of seem like buffoons to me. (Fortunately, the round went through a fleshy part of my leg and not much for harm came of it.)
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
03-23-2013, 09:05 AM
(This post was last modified: 03-23-2013, 09:06 AM by chuck white. Edited 1 time in total.)
You'll be glad to have a gun when a rabid dog comes after you.
Posts: 41,856
Threads: 560
Joined: Mar 2009
(03-23-2013, 09:01 AM)PonderThis Wrote: (03-23-2013, 08:07 AM)footballfan Wrote: (03-23-2013, 02:21 AM)PonderThis Wrote: (03-22-2013, 11:15 PM)footballfan Wrote: No, it just seems to me Ponder is being a little hypocritical. He's all for the registration of firearms, because he believes it would reduce the number of people hurt or killed by them. Someone looking at the numbers, could conclude that rabies are pretty harmful as well, (and more common than I would have thought).
The registration and subsequent vaccination of his and other dogs could drastically reduce 40,000 people a year being exposed to a potentially deadly virus.
But, he's against the registration of his dog. Why?
I'm in favor of vaccinating my dog for rabies, I thought I made that clear. What I'm not in favor of is being forced to license my dog at the same time, or risk having my information given to county animal control. That's a law that discourages doing the right thing, which is innoculating my dog for rabies.
And how is that different than your views on gun control again???
You're a responsible pet owner. Just like I'm a responsible firearms owner. You don't want to be forced to register your pet, I don't want to be forced to register my firearms. Both of us have the same reason, it's none of their business. Neither issue would be solved by registration/licensing, because you can't innauculate the wild animals/criminals who are responsible for the majority of the infection.
I'll forward you this NRA membership form, since your on our side now.
Joining the NRA might be a bit extreme, but (and contrary to popular opinion here maybe) I'm not really against having guns for personal defense. What I don't like is the attitudes of people who are most vociferous in liking to kill other creatures and seem to get off on the violence of it all, whereas I find no joy in killing and indeed, I don't even want to be around these kinds of people. Especially when, the most vocal gun defenders are the ones that come off most violent and angry in their posts - those are especially especially the ones I'd just as soon mock as endorse. Watch and you'll see.
It doesn't help either that one of my early life experiences was being accidently shot by my boss with a 7mm round. Hunter types do sort of seem like buffoons to me. (Fortunately, the round went through a fleshy part of my leg and not much for harm came of it.)
The truth is that it's moronic to simply DECIDE that people like to kill other creatures and seem to get off on the violence of it all.
You decide that because that's what you want to think and that's what you want others to think.
You beg to be mocked with your anti everything superior attitude more than anyone else on the forum.
Posts: 27,872
Threads: 1,668
Joined: Sep 2009
You're the type of person rules are required for.
For example, let's take this forum for example. People wanted the profane personal attacks to stop. Most people don't make profane personal attacks into a lifestyle. They don't need rules for that sort of thing, they just naturally self control themselves.
Only a few really need rules, and they ruin it for all the rest of us.
Posts: 12,291
Threads: 249
Joined: Jun 2011
(03-23-2013, 06:44 AM)chuck white Wrote: So do they ID you at the Vets.
Just take your dog in, tell them your name is chuck white and pay in cash.
Well, yeah. You'd have to go to a different vet and pay in cash. I'm guessing if you went to a clinic, they would ID you.
Posts: 27,872
Threads: 1,668
Joined: Sep 2009
What good does it do if your dog bites someone and you tell them "but really, I have a rabies vaccination and I told them my name was Chuck White"? I suspect that's not going to get you far. Especially when you explain about how you really didn't want to buy a dog license on general principles.
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
(03-23-2013, 02:24 PM)PonderThis Wrote: What good does it do if your dog bites someone and you tell them "but really, I have a rabies vaccination and I told them my name was Chuck White"? I suspect that's not going to get you far. Especially when you explain about how you really didn't want to buy a dog license on general principles.
If your dog bites someone, tell them your name is chuck white, and pay them in cash.
Posts: 27,872
Threads: 1,668
Joined: Sep 2009
Last time a dog of mine bit somebody, animal control got involved before I could pay the guy off.
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
(03-23-2013, 02:32 PM)PonderThis Wrote: Last time a dog of mine bit somebody, animal control got involved before I could pay the guy off.
Did you have a license?
Posts: 27,872
Threads: 1,668
Joined: Sep 2009
When they got through with me I did.
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
Both of mine are as well. It's such a small cost, compared to the total cost of a dog.
There are those who have dogs on the cheap. We could only hope they at least get rabbi shots.
Posts: 27,872
Threads: 1,668
Joined: Sep 2009
(03-23-2013, 02:41 PM)chuck white Wrote: Both of mine are as well. It's such a small cost, compared to the total cost of a dog.
There are those who have dogs on the cheap. We could only hope they at least get rabbi shots.
Going kosher seems a bit extreme.
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
03-23-2013, 02:43 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-23-2013, 02:47 PM by chuck white. Edited 1 time in total.)
|