|
Nenonen posted:How do you think dog babby is formed? Should people just let bitches in the heat loose in the streets if they want new dogs? At the very least stop intentionally breeding dogs together that both carry recessive disorders. And if there are some breeds where their characteristics are inextricably bound to recessive disorders, well, do we really need more of those breeds?
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 12:52 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1702676142132752596 Let's Go Brandon
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 19:54
|
|
|
Quixzlizx posted:https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1702676142132752596 Christ, I don't even know what's real anymore, wtf is this crap.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 19:56
|
|
|
They co-opted RWM bullshit and made it their own joke and now it’s not as fun for conservatives. Can’t really do that as easily with “Biden’s brain is pudding” but they should try! He’s gotta figure out some form of “yeah I’m old as poo poo and I’m not as sharp as I used to be but I can still run circles around Trump because I actually know how to govern instead of bitching about everything on Twitter.” Honestly his go to in every debate should be “why don’t you go complain about it on the internet? That’s all you did as President.” negativeneil fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Sep 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
haveblue posted:At the very least stop intentionally breeding dogs together that both carry recessive disorders. And if there are some breeds where their characteristics are inextricably bound to recessive disorders, well, do we really need more of those breeds? That is a good idea, but OP wanted to ban breeding while allowing dogs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:05
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:That is a good idea, but OP wanted to ban breeding while allowing dogs. This is what I said: quote:Just ban all dog breeds so people will stop breeding them for fucks sake. I’m not saying ban dogs just dog breeding. Leave those poor dogs alone and stop breeding them to have deformities and health issues just because they look cute.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:This is what I said: I know!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:09
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I know! So what’s the confusion then? People who breed pure bred/designer dogs suck and that whole practice should be banned. You said that was a good idea to the other poster. I’m not sure what the issue is?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:13
|
|
|
The United Auto Workers have gone on strike at all three major American car companies. Biden has said that the "record corporate profits should lead to record contracts for the union" and that administration officials have been speaking with the heads of car companies urging them to compromise. However, the head of the UAW says they agree with Biden's statement, but he needs to do more to support the UAW. quote:We agree with Joe Biden when he says ‘record profits mean record contracts.’ We don’t agree when he says negotiations have broken down. Our national elected negotiators and UAW leadership are hard at work at the bargaining table. Our members and allies are standing strong at the picket lines. Anyone who wants to stand with us can grab a sign and hold the line. https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1702753696201744688 In response, Biden has sent the Acting Labor Secretary and White House economic advisor to assist in the talks. It's not clear what kind of assisting they will be doing because they legally aren't allowed to be directly involved. But, they will "be available to assist in any way" and act as a direct conduit to the White House. The new UAW President acknowledges that his initial ask is high, but says that the union has been too complacent and cozy with the automakers for too long and that has dragged down average earnings from where they should be. He also says that they haven't shot high before and compromised to get even less, so they are going to shoot high now instead of compromising right out the gate. The major asks from the union are: quote:- A 36% pay increase (GM is offering 20%) UAW President Shawn Fain himself has acknowledged that the union’s demands are “audacious.” But he contends that the richly profitable automakers can afford to raise workers’ pay significantly to make up for what the union gave up to help the companies withstand the 2009 financial crisis and the Great Recession. The last 10 years have been some of the most profitable on record for the big 3 automakers. The UAW says they won't be negotiating today because union leaders are joining the picket line. It's not clear how long it will go on, but negotiations are scheduled to resume tomorrow. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Sep 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:18
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1702679061787766829 She absolutely got away with it, it's been known since 2019 or so locally and they've barely hid it. None of her voters give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:23
|
|
|
Those demands don't seem that audacious in relation to the profits auto companies have made, and negotiations have broken down if things escalated to the point of a strike.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:26
|
|
|
Reminder that the UAW president was elected this year in a surprise upset after a) the previous president was held to be far too cozy with the auto makers and unwilling to press them for concessions and b) a massive corruption scandal
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:27
|
|
|
32 hour work week sounds nice. I hope that catches on and becomes a spreading demand.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Those demands don't seem that audacious in relation to the profits auto companies have made Yeah, that was basically what he said. He said they were big demands, but the companies can afford it because of the huge profits and they have been aiming too low in recent negotiations, so they are aiming high now. quote:I know these demands sound ambitious, but the Big Three can easily afford them. Cost-of-living adjustments are essential to simply maintain the same standard of living. There's more to life than just work. It's not enough to just survive. COVID-19 has taught people to live life, not work 60 to 80 hours a week. There's merit to a 32-hour work week. We have to work longer and harder to maintain the same standard of living. That means missing Little League games and family reunions. Over the past decade, the Detroit Three have made a quarter-trillion dollars in North American profits. In just the first half of 2023, the three automakers made a combined bottom line profit of $21 billion. Randalor posted:and negotiations have broken down if things escalated to the point of a strike. Yeah, I'm not sure why he is focusing on that turn of phrase. Negotiations are technically ongoing, but a strike is pretty literally a result of negotiations breaking down and I'm not sure what the significance is of getting hung up on that semantic definition. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Sep 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:So what’s the confusion then? People who breed pure bred/designer dogs suck and that whole practice should be banned. You said that was a good idea to the other poster. I’m not sure what the issue is? Because you made it sound like you want to end dogs permanently, except for street dogs. People getting dogs together to reproduce is also breeding, it doesn't have to be intentional inbreeding. There's so much variety in dogs that there will always have to be some type of breeding if there are to be dogs, because mixing altogether different types of dogs makes no sense. Some types of dogs make good home companions, others are good as shepherds, yet others as retrievers or pointers etc. And then some are good at being absolute goofs  The point being that just randomizing all those qualities would be bad. But on the other hand some breeds have become unviable and it doesn't feel humane to continue those in any form. And some are prone to illnesses that might be solvable but it requires widening the gene pool, ie. combining them with close breeds. But I'm not a dog breeder nor a lawmaker so I don't know how any such bans might be arrangeable in practise. "Ooh our pooch got mysteriously knocked up and the puppies look exactly like purebred pugs, heavens be blessed!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:37
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:32 hour work week sounds nice. I hope that catches on and becomes a spreading demand. This is exactly why they will move heaven and hell to crush those demands. The new guy seems like a real winner, if my understanding is correct UAW seems to be playing smart with their strikes though so there might not be wiggle room to get out of this particular jam. From what I've read since they know the workflows and supply chains as good or better than management they're doing surgical work stoppages, on localized and rotating basis so the strike fund doesn't get depleted and individual sectors don't get crushed to peel off support while overall productivity still gets tanked to hell.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
Mods please change my name to American XL Bully Dog
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:41
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I'm sure the media will get bored, but the PM is already moving through with the law. It's not going to dramatically impact that many people, but it is also a little weird that there is a (currently not legally real) dog breed in the U.K. that they are trying to address by banning other dogs like it. Big Dog has apparently wrapped around from being one of those t-shirt brands that's at every right-wing tourist trap store to tepidly embracing their ironic status.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Mods please change my name to American XL Bully Dog It's going to be interesting to see how they attempt to legally define a non-existent breed. Unless its parents are pure-bred American Pit Terrier and Staffordshire Terrier and you have proof, then how in the world are you going to determine the exact legal definition of what constitutes an "American XL Bully Dog"? You can't even use percentages because DNA tests don't work like that and there could technically be a dozen different breeds of dogs in the family line. American XL Bully Dog is an objectively hilarious name, though. Shine on you crazy Brits.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:49
|
|
|
I know that about a dozen people have died in dog attacks this year in the U.K., but it is still really bizarre, and kind of funny, that the Prime Minister had to drop what he was doing to address the nation about his anti-dog plans. The only other emergency address he has made was about the financial disaster the U.K. was undergoing earlier this year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
My understanding of the American XL Bully Dogs thing is it relates to how a huge chunk of them in the UK have been sired by the same father (Killer Kimbo), that have been heavily interbred over the past few decades and there's been a massive explosion in dog fighting in the UK, and a number of them have killed people, and they're, according to the Telegraph, responsible for 70% of dog attacks in the UK, which seems absurdly high, but what do I know.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:00
|
|
|
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-66820591quote:Mr Sunak said he was ordering work from police and experts to legally define the breed so it can then be banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act, which applies in England, Wales and Scotland. I mean they know that an “American Bully XL” is not a breed. That’s why the PM wants “experts” to work on defining it as one. That it’s not a breed right now is not a gotcha because they already know that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Require puppies to be pre-liscensed. Or more aggressive spay and neuter laws. But people are gonna just do it, we have for a really long time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
It's called a sparkling spaniel
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:04
|
|
|
Kalli posted:My understanding of the American XL Bully Dogs thing is it relates to how a huge chunk of them in the UK have been sired by the same father (Killer Kimbo), that have been heavily interbred over the past few decades and there's been a massive explosion in dog fighting in the UK, and a number of them have killed people, and they're, according to the Telegraph, responsible for 70% of dog attacks in the UK, which seems absurdly high, but what do I know. I guess if a huge chunk of them have been sired by the same dog, then it might be easier to determine what one is. But, it is still pretty weird for the Prime Minister to address the nation that they are going to find a way to categorize a non-existent dog breed, so they can ban them. Because two people were recently attacked by dogs (granted one was a 11-year old kid). According to the telegraph, only 10 dog attacks have been confirmed to be from dogs bred from "Killer Kimbo." It's a weird level of national action for something like this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
Eh, I can understand the uproar. If you've ever seen the result of someone getting mauled by a dog its horrific. And for some reason the worst type of people seems drawn to getting the types of dogs best knowm for mauling people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-66820591 Right, but it is just a name for a type of dog that is big and has some Staffordshire terrier and pit terrier in it. There isn't really any way to define or prove that. If something has 25% Staffordshire, but was also part Cocker Spaniel, then is it a separate breed or more dangerous than something with 12.5% Pit terrier and 75% German shepherd? Defining a mutt that isn't a specific mix of things is going to be very difficult legally.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:09
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:You can't even use percentages because DNA tests don't work like that and there could technically be a dozen different breeds of dogs in the family line. Duh, just use dog phrenologists Uh, as in people who measure doggie skulls, not doggies who measure skulls. Although I guess the latter would be an adorable buddy cop show.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:12
|
|
|
Wow AP spiked the Susanna Gibson story that WaPo ran a week later. https://twitter.com/lukerosiak/status/1702721393463267510 This is of dubious news value at best and arguably revenge porn at worst, it was extremely poor ethics for the Post to run the story, granting anonymity to the GOP hack that took it to them while violating Gibson's privacy. The article even explains the ethical loopholes they used to get around their stated policy about printing such stories and anonymous sources. That the AP had it, notified the principal so she could protect herself, and then didn't run it is a nail in the coffin to WaPo's appeals to newsworthiness.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but the American Bully does appear to be an actual real and recognized dog breed? It originated in the US and it's just not recognized as a valid/legal breed in the UK. My understanding is that it was an effort to make a more physically powerful/larger and aggressive pit bull (Why???). I really don't get why dog breeders are allowed so much leeway to create dogs with major health issues/genetic problems.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
The Teamsters union has vowed not to cross any UAW picket lines, meaning already assembled vehicles won't be delivered during the strike. All shipments have stopped.quote:Teamsters won't deliver Detroit 3 vehicles if UAW strikes https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2023/09/14/uaw-strike-contract-negotiations-teamsters/70836748007/
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:46
|
|
|
Zeron posted:Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but the American Bully does appear to be an actual real and recognized dog breed? It originated in the US and it's just not recognized as a valid/legal breed in the UK. My understanding is that it was an effort to make a more physically powerful/larger and aggressive pit bull (Why???). I really don't get why dog breeders are allowed so much leeway to create dogs with major health issues/genetic problems. The semi-short version: - American Bully is not an actual AKC recognized breed. It is recognized by the "American Bully Kennel Club" which is basically an organization that exists to recognize different Pit breeds. The actual American Kennel Club does not recognize them. - The Brits are using "American XL Bully Dog" in a way similar to how Americans sometimes use Pitbull. A Pitbull is an actual thing. It is a dog descended from specific group of Bulldog and Terrier breeds in the 1800's. But, people use the term "Pitbull" to describe basically any large dog that has visible characteristics similar to an American Pit Terrier, Staffordshire Terrier, or Pit Terrier. People use the term to describe the look or size of the dog rather than the specific breed or mix of breeds. The Brits are trying to find a way to define "Big dog, aggressive, looks like an American Bully Pitt" into a cohesive legal definition that will allow them to ban it without accidentally banning a lot of other dogs. The problem is you can't be very specific with "big" and "looks like X" or "aggressive" because you can't know if a dog is aggressive beforehand, big is not a definite legal breed of dog, and "looks like a American Bully" isn't a strictly legal definition that is workable either. If you have two dogs, Dog A is a large dog that looks like a Pitbull, but is only 12.5% pit terrier. Dog B does not look like one, but he is 50% Pit Terrier. They want to get rid of Dog A, but Dog B technically is what the law bans. They are trying to find some way to work the thread that lets them do it in a workable way other than just using Doggy pre-crime to guess what dogs are aggressive and specially profiling dogs that look like one breed, but might not be one. Otherwise, they are just going to have to ban all large dogs with X ancestry and they don't want to start confiscating thousands of dogs just to make sure they get all the specific kinds that they are looking for. It's hard to pin down "big aggressive dog that looks like this and I want to get rid of" into a 100% consistent definition that only applies to the dogs you want to get rid of. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Sep 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:47
|
|
|
Say the ban goes through. They’re not going to start confiscating existing dogs from people’s homes right? Just make it illegal to own/register new dogs going forward?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 21:57
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Say the ban goes through. They’re not going to start confiscating existing dogs from people’s homes right? Just make it illegal to own/register new dogs going forward? Nobody knows. The PM literally just made a surprise address to the nation and announced they are working on it. It was an announcement right after someone died after an attack and there were no details. They aren't sure how to actually write a ban that would be enforceable right now and no decision on whether they are confiscating existing dogs or putting down the dogs afterwards. quote:It is unclear exactly how a ban on XL bullies would work, and Downing Street said there had been "no final decision" on what would happen to people who already owned XL bullies when they are banned or whether the dogs would be destroyed. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-66820591
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 22:04
|
|
|
those UK tv signal vans will get dog detecting dogs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 22:04
|
|
|
Bully Dogs and other forms of pitbulls are the dog version of a luxury SUV or pickup - they're status symbols that occasionally kill people. As long as people can make $5,000 a puppy by breeding fearsome dogs, they will continue doing so. The UK is perfectly within its rights to object to a rare dog breed linked to the majority of fatal attacks on humans.Boris Galerkin posted:Say the ban goes through. They’re not going to start confiscating existing dogs from people’s homes right? Just make it illegal to own/register new dogs going forward? The breed would be added to the list of types covered by the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991. Owners of existing Bully Dogs would be required to chip and neuter their animals, and be subject to a variety of requirements such as having them covered by insurance (generally house insurance covers pets), secure them at home, leash and muzzle them in public, etc. Americans would probably lose their poo poo over this sort of thing, but frankly a lot of these requirements are simply being a responsible pet owner which everyone should be doing anyways. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_Dogs_Act_1991 Kaal fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Sep 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:those UK tv signal vans will get dog detecting dogs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnq96W9jtuw
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 22:29
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's a weird level of national action for something like this. To Be Fair, weird levels of national action is a contest they're losing among countries bordering the English Channel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 22:31
|
|
|
Is there some kind of veterinary assessment that shows these breeds are objectively more aggressive than regular pitbulls? or is this the "meanest" dogs bred together as determined by animal abusers?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 22:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 12:52 |
|
|
Kaal posted:Bully Dogs and other forms of pitbulls are the dog version of a luxury SUV or pickup - they're status symbols that occasionally kill people. As long as people can make $5,000 a puppy by breeding fearsome dogs, they will continue doing so. The UK is perfectly within its rights to object to a rare dog breed linked to the majority of fatal attacks on humans. The thing is that it isn't a specific breed. You're going to end up banning (and possibly killing) a lot of innocent dogs that fall into a similar category. It's a mutt that usually is part of one of 5-6 specific breeds. Some shelters and breeders in the U.S. have threatened to take some action depending on how broadly and vaguely the law is written, but I have no idea how serious they are. I assume it would rely on trade treaties between the U.S. and U.K., but that is not my area of expertise and I can't even begin to estimate how effective it would be. It's a tough situation because all of the solutions aren't fair. All of these are true: - Some dog breeds are more aggressive than others. - No dog is inherently aggressive from the second it was born. - Some smaller breeds are actually the most aggressive dog breeds, but we make a pragmatic choice to not worry about them because they can't do much damage to humans. - Any dog can be trained and properly leashed/cared for to ensure it never gets loose on people. Any instance of a dog running loose and attacking someone is 100% the result of the owner, but the dog dies for it. - All the various dog breeds that make up Pitbulls aren't even the most aggressive dog breeds. It's just that they are big (so they can do damage) and they have a confounding factor of having a reputation for being aggressive, so shitheads who want them to be aggressive are drawn to them as well. Above average aggression + people seeking to make their dog aggressive + size = a problem. It's not fair that someone can get injured because of a shithead owner. It's also not fair that shithead owners are attracted to and try and make their dogs aggressive. It's also not fair that the dogs die because of the owner. It sucks all around, but unless you have a dog pre-crime unit, then you can't actually tell when a dog will be aggressive. "More aggressive breed" doesn't even mean a majority are aggressive - it just means more than average. It also seems pretty wild that the government is all about this after 10 deaths from dog attacks (of any breed) in a country of 68 million.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 22:35
|
|