Kim_MacMillan
Posted : 12/13/2007 9:26:12 PM
willowchow
I just don't see a choke collar a form of violence.
That's fine that you don't. I was just stating that I do. We're both entitled to that. :-)
willowchow
And, sorry Kim but it did seem to me that other than clicker training you pretty much consider everything else violence.
Then I think, sadly, you have missed out on the majority of posts I have ever posted on this forum. ;-) I think if you take some time to read some of the threads over the past few months you'll get a better view of what "I" think, as it's all posted out there for people to see! A clicker is only one small portion of how I teach dogs, as I think I've said on at least a dozen other posts. Perhaps you missed them, or just forgot about them.
sillysally
Objects have no ability on their own to be violent, only actions or thoughts can be violent.
Oh, you're quite right. But I think you also know exactly what I meant. I don't think we really need to play semantics again at this point.
sillysally
I guess it all depends on how you define "violent." If it is potential to cause physical, mental, or emotional discomfort then you should probably add head halters and Easy Walks to your list of offenders.
Not potential, no. Anything has the potential to be used as a violent item. I qualify them based upon their intent. All of the things I have described are inherently intended to cause pain, aversion, fear, or intimidation - some of them a combination. Once again, if you've read many of my posts, you'd know my thoughts on head halters. I do not like them much at all, and there are very few dogs I would ever use them on personally. However, their intent is not to be used as a violent mechanism - of course the risk is there, but the intent is not. I can find the discussion on head halters for you, or you can look it up. Easy Walks, I have to say I have never yet met a dog that found them aversive, and of course they in no way cause pain that has been identified anywhere as of yet. If it has, believe me I'll look into it. And again, the intent is to control, yes, but not to inflict anything aversive at all. All a front-clip harness does is shift the dogs pulling ability by taking the dog off its center of balance and shifting the body to the side.
sillysally
In the wrong hands ANYTHING, including a flat collar, could be used in a violent manner.....
Of course it can. A carrot and a remote control can be used in a violent manner, but they aren't intended to be violent acts. That's the difference. These things I described specifically, in their inherent creation were meant to be aversive, each and every one of them. That's the difference.