Tuesday, 8 February 2011

A little light satire

Over at the Free Society, Joe Jackson has written an amusing article in praise of the, ahem, 'dog ban' of 2007.

Of course, I have nothing against dog addicts! I am a tolerant person. If they want to roll around in dog hair in their stinking homes, then good luck to them. Unless, of course, there are children present, in which case the dogs should be forcibly removed and shot. Likewise if the dog addict’s flat adjoins another. The same, naturally, goes for their cars.

Go read.


Curmudgeon said...

Excellent stuff!

He could also have brought in the one about "every time I went to the pub I had to have all my clothes dry-cleaned to get rid of the vile lingering dog stink."

Anonymous said...

In some US cities, dogs have more rights in public parks to run wild, growl and make threatening attacks than do the innocent smokers who are banned. Dogs permitted off-leash to run amuck, outdoor smoking banned by threat of fine.

Zaphod said...

Perhaps Big Pharma could devise some patches to wean these weirdo off their peculiar bestial fetish? Not too effective, though, they won't want the market to dry up!

Anonymous said...

As someone who not only has been bitten by a dog, but who has a sister who has been permanently disfigured by a dog, I fully agree with Mr. Jackson's sentiments. Many of my friends are allergic to dogs. I've seen many people whom I'm close to, including family members, become so addicted to their dogs that it was a concern and strain for everyone around them.

And, yes, I once owned a dog, and I thought I loved it at the time. Only after did I realize the error of my ways. The truth is that the dog required a great deal of my attention, which I could have been devoting to more productive endeavors. The pay off I got in return was having to dutifully feed, walk and clean up after the vile creature. The expense was significant and unnecessary. Sometimes the dog would get loose despite my best efforts and wreak havoc on my neighbors. People will tell you that they've trained their dogs, but this really isn't true of most dog owners. I went through all of this to serve my selfish dog addiction.

How powerful is dog addiction? Even though my sister was permanently disfigured by a dog at an early age, she has been addicted to dogs her entire life and even has a dog now.

Last, I tend to be rather nervous and I find nothing more unnerving than being barked and charged at by dogs. Thank God most of these fur-and-flea-besotted addicts usually have at least the sense to fence their yards. Nonetheless, I'm sick and tired of having my right to simply walk down the street constantly disrupted by the barking and charging of fenced-in dogs. In fact, even while enjoying the privacy of my own home, I often have to hear the barking of my neighbor's dogs, who seem to be set off by any passing pedestrian or other innocuous occurrence in the street.

I hear many of these dog addicts go so far as to refer to their dogs as "their children" or as "one of the family". Dogs live hardly longer than 15 years! How tragic it must be for these addicts to repeatedly go through that grief every time their beloved object of addiction passes away

The time wasted! The medical expense! The social disruption! The dollars-and-cents societal cost!

Sean O'Hare said...

I had this blog listed under "Libertarian". Obviously got that wrong if the reader comments are anything to go by. Dogs do very little harm and a great deal of good and have very little to do with hygene. It is perfectly possible to have a dog and keep your home and clothes free of dog hairs etc. There are plenty of dog free places people can go to without banning them from every public amenity.

Anonymous said...

Sean, what about the "level playing field argument"? If some places allow dogs, dog owning is such a strong addiction that owners will all congregate in these places to the detriment of the dog free premises. You could argue that's just their choice. But the employees of the dog places don't have a choice. Working in dog places might be the only option for poor people with criminal records who cannot get anything else. A ban must be total.