Dogsled Guy’s dog BIT ME — BEWARE

[baiskeli]

@dasgeh 70576 wrote:

Yes, but dogs actually are not people. There’s a legitimate difference there.

Hobo the Trail Cat doesn’t like where this is going any more.

[consularrider]

Probably better to ban the deer who wander the trails than the dogs. There are sections of trails in the Arlington area where I see more people with their dogs than I see people with their bicycles.

[baiskeli]

Just to play dog-owner’s/devil’s advocate: bikes aren’t people either!

Nor are the automobiles, so get them off the roads!

Oh, wait, went too far with that devil thing.

[jnva]

@roadrunner 70551 wrote:

Again, my sole intent was to increase awareness. I do not know this man at all, nor do I wish him any harm. I just don’t want anyone else bit.

So the dog bit you, and you admitted assaulting the owner. Something just doesn’t add up. Since your wound is healing up nicely, and the dogs don’t have rabies (10 day quarantine?) then Im not too worried about his dogs. I’ve had way more bad interactions with people than dogs on the trail. Most people are nice, though.

[rcannon100]

@baiskeli 70584 wrote:

Just to play dog-owner’s/devil’s advocate: bikes aren’t people either!

Nor are the automobiles, so get them off the roads!

Oh, wait, went too far with that devil thing.

Yup. This would be the argument taken to completion. If anything that is not human that is a problem can be banned, than we ban bicycles, skateboards, strollers, jogging shoes, cellphones, ipods, …..

There are lots of bad actors. There is no difference. A cyclists killing a pedestrian. A pedestrian not paying attention because of a cell phone. A skate boarder who latches onto a truck for a free ride. Electric bikes….. Declaring entire tribes forbidden is a non-starter solution. If we as cyclists even begin to suggest that another tribe should be banned because of the actions of a few, then we ourselves have a lot to answer for.

[mstone]

@baiskeli 70584 wrote:

Just to play dog-owner’s/devil’s advocate: bikes aren’t people either!.

I fully support a ban on unmanned bicycles on the trails.

[baiskeli]

@mstone 70596 wrote:

I fully support a ban on unmanned bicycles on the trails.

But what if a dog is riding the bike?

See, you can’t get anything past me.

[Tim Kelley]

@baiskeli 70601 wrote:

But what if a dog is riding the bike?

See, you can’t get anything past me.

Looks sketchy.

[baiskeli]

Hobo the Trail Cat is now extremely concerned about where this thread is going.

[mstone]

@rcannon100 70595 wrote:

Yup. This would be the argument taken to completion. If anything that is not human that is a problem can be banned, than we ban bicycles, skateboards, strollers, jogging shoes, cellphones, ipods, …..

No, that would be a separate and illogical argument. None of those things are independent, uncontrollable sentient beings competing with citizens for use of public property. Bicycles, skateboards, strollers, jogging shoes, cellphones, ipods, etc., have no independent motivation. Pets do. To claim that someone might be suddenly attacked by a skateboard in the same way that someone might suddenly be attacked by a dog is patently absurd.

[mstone]

@baiskeli 70601 wrote:

But what if a dog is riding the bike?

See, you can’t get anything past me.

I stand by my position.

[baiskeli]

@mstone 70608 wrote:

I stand by my position.

Darn. Because I was totally serious about that.

[jnva]

Two solutions to this problem.

1:[ATTACH]4188[/ATTACH]

2:[ATTACH]4189[/ATTACH]

[baiskeli]

@mstone 70607 wrote:

No, that would be a separate and illogical argument. None of those things are independent, uncontrollable sentient beings competing with citizens for use of public property. Bicycles, skateboards, strollers, jogging shoes, cellphones, ipods, etc., have no independent motivation. Pets do. To claim that someone might be suddenly attacked by a skateboard in the same way that someone might suddenly be attacked by a dog is patently absurd.

If so, as devil’s advocate I’ll ask you why we have restrictions on what vehicles can be on the trails then–cars, motorcycles, mopeds, etc.?

[mstone]

@baiskeli 70619 wrote:

If so, as devil’s advocate I’ll ask you why we have restrictions on what vehicles can be on the trails then–cars, motorcycles, mopeds, etc.?

No, I don’t want this thread to go any further off topic into yet another unproductive discussion. Use the search function to find previous threads addressing your question. I replied to the assertion that a ban on dogs would be equivalent to a ban on things, and the resulting reductio ad absurdum; I made no assertion regarding bans on non-human things, so your devil’s advocacy is misplaced.

[Author]

Posts