What would the crime rate look like if everyone had a large dog?

[simonov jr]

In thinking about the recent kidnapping in Utah, where the sister was told to keep quiet, it AGAIN made me think about how the mere presence of a large breed dog would probably have made such a sneak and grab impossible. I wonder how many of the thousands of robberies, rapes and murders would still take place if the homeowners were also large dog owners...Maybe we need to mandate dog ownership ; )

 

[Azrael256]

Large dogs? no. They look all mean and scary, but a dog cannot defend you nearly as well as you can defend yourself. A dog that will raise hell when somebody it doesn't know enters the house is much more effective, large or small.

 

[C.R.Sam]

If everybody had a large dog we would have massive dog related crime problems. Many people are neither capable nor qualified to own a dog of any size. An untrained dog on the loose is a sign of a irresponsible owner and can either cause trouble or get itself into trouble.

Sam

 

[spacemanspiff]

i must only come into contact with dogs that are stupid or their owners are stupid. either the dog is untrainable, or owners havent properly trained them, or the dog is too docile, or overly vicious (can't count how many dogs i wind up pepper spraying).

obviously, there would be a crime deterrant. there would also be a lot more dog attacks, and a lot more people making use of the litigious means to sue people. not to mention that people would be denied home owners insurance for having so-called 'dangerous breeds', but across the board personal lines insurance would skyrocket because of all the injury claims that would arise.
so the end product is less crime by criminals and more crime by lawyers.

 

[444]

In theory, you are correct. Having a large agressive dog to protect your family is a capital idea.
However in reality, as was mentioned, most people have no business owning a dog of any kind or having children for that matter. Owning a large agressive dog (I am using this term to mean a dog that would defend your house and family and not a dog that randomly savages people) is more of a responsibility than owning a firearm because the dog will act on it's own. With a gun, you can put it in the safe and it won't harm anyone. Like children, dogs need to be made a part of the family. They can't be ignored, they can't be chained up to a tree in the backyard, they can't be beaten, they have to be fed, they have to be exercised, they have to be watered; The effect of this caveman moronic treatment has the same effect it would on a human child. And, it takes the same devient mind to do it; unfortunately there are plenty of devient minds to go around.
The one thing it would do is to move up the dog shooting threads on here from one a week to one a day.

 

[wolfman97]

I have a better idea. Think of what the crime rate would be like if they eliminated drug prohibition. After alcohol prohibition was stopped, the homicide rate dropped dramatically. If that happened, it would take a lot of steam of the anti-gun arguments.

 

[Fred Hansen]

Think of what the crime rate would be like if they eliminated drug prohibition.

Only the category of crimes would change. The tiny little monkey mind that social deviants are equiped with has almost no ability to allow its owner to funtion like a normal human being in the first place, much less be able to discern that it is whacked on "legal" or decriminalized poison.

Homicide rates drop because people that traffic in the illegal generally have few inhibitions about offing the competition. Losers on legal/decriminalized drugs will continue to exhibit all of the quaint peccadillos that endear them to so many e.g. rape, robbery, assualt, burglary, theft, molestation, absenteeism, vehicular homicide etc.....:barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf:

 

[JAMES L.SMITH]

Having dogs is not allways a deterrent,one of my freinds HAD 3 big Pit Bulls.Good fence around house+alarm.Someone shot the dogs,drove over fence,broke in house stole his guns,and they were in a safe!Safe&guns still missing.

 

[38Mike]

large dog?

"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog"

Rover and Heidi
long haired miniature dacshunds
fearless defenders of the ranch...

 

[JohnKSa]

You guys better watch it!

The "Dog Mafia" will descend upon you like a plague of peeved Disney characters if you keep making even remotely negative statements about animals.

You'll hear ALL about how dogs never bite unless provoked by some evil human and how that even when provoked, dog bites are rarer than male ballet dancers with three testicles. You'll get an earful about the media conspiracy whose desired pinnacle of achievement is to engender fear and mistrust of large dogs.

I'm glad I didn't say anything bad about dogs! I learned my lesson the last time...

Good shooting,

John

 

[Cosmoline]

"but a dog cannot defend you nearly as well as you can defend yourself."

Generally true, but even the lamest mutt is can hear and smell far better than any human. Get one that barks when something strange is happening and you've got the world's greatest security system.

As far as actual personal protection, that's another story. Most dogs, even big mean dogs, will run off with their tails between their legs if someone actually calls their bluff and smacks them. Only a very few have the blood lines and training to take down a fighting, armed intruder. Happily, my GSD is one of them ;-) He's got my back.

 

[bruels]

Dogs can surprise you. We had a male whippet I thought was an absolute wuss. He was terrified of my guns. Yet one day the UPS man came to the door and tried to hand my wife a package. Tucker came up and grabbed the UPS man by the wrist. He didn't bite. He just held on as if to say, "Just who do you think you are trying to touch my mama?"

Bruce

 

[wolfman97]

Only the category of crimes would change. The tiny little monkey mind that social deviants are equiped with has almost no ability to allow its owner to funtion like a normal human being in the first place, much less be able to discern that it is whacked on "legal" or decriminalized poison.

No, decidely not true. Even the DEA admits that the vast majority of illegal drug users have no particular problems with their use -- that is, it isn't any more of a problem to them than alcohol is for the typical wine or beer drinker.

Homicide rates drop because people that traffic in the illegal generally have few inhibitions about offing the competition.

Yes, Al Capone and the St. Valentine's Day Massacre are good examples -- not to mention the latest headlines on multiple homicides and kids being wounded in shootouts.

Losers on legal/decriminalized drugs will continue to exhibit all of the quaint peccadillos that endear them to so many e.g. rape, robbery, assualt, burglary, theft, molestation, absenteeism, vehicular homicide etc.....

Alcohol is the drug most commonly associated with crimes like rape -- including being associated with about 70 percent of all sexual assaults on children. None of the illegal drugs is even close, and none ever has been. The only drug with any real connection to drug-induced violent crime is alcohol. See "Pyschoactive Substances and Violence" - US Dept. of Justice, Feb., 1994 at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/govpubs/pscyviol.htm

The violent crime associated with the other drugs is primarily the result of prohibition -- as you accurately described above.

The property crime that is associated with drug addiction today was virtually nonexistent before drugs were made illegal. It has been reduced as much as 80 percent in places which have tried different approaches from the US strict prohibition. See the first several chapters of the Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/cu/cumenu.htm

If the drug laws were changed we could see a drop of 10,000 annual homicides (estimate of Milton Friedman, Nobel laureate in Economics) and perhaps 80 percent in property crime (given results comparable to those achieved with recent programs in Switzerland). If those two things happened, I contend that the anti-gun folks would lose a whole lot of political steam.

 

[Hal]

Doggies helping drive the crime rate down? ,,,well the bad guy DID run away and he DID make sure the door was closed behind him in the end.

I'll retell this one again.

My wife heard footsteps downstairs and woke me up. I grabbed my Ruger Blackhawk .45Colt and loaded it up,,stuffed it in the back of my underwear and grabbed both of the dogs (a pure white German Shepherd and a black/brown Great Dane) by the collar to go,,,GET IM Kids!!. What followed was legendary,,,,*sigh*. The Dane decided he'd much rather sleep than fight and decided the time was right to do the ole Alpha Male challenge on me (IIRC, he was about a year old at the time and at the feeling his oats stage). The Shep, not really caring for the Dane from the get go, decided it was time to do the Alpha Female thing,,or whatever,, on the Dane for "threatening her Daddy"<--me. So here I am,,stuck in the middle of close to 300 pounds of disagreeable dogs,,,heavy S/A revolver stuck in the back of my "elastically challenged" drawers trying to sort things out. End result, the gun fell on the floor, I fell on the gun and put a real nasty bruise on my back and ended up with a real "kidney killer" ache that lasted for months. Ended up with the drawers at half mast, and the "moon over Miami" pointing down towards the living room from the staircase.

 

[Fred Hansen]

The only drug with any real connection to drug-induced violent crime is alcohol.

Ever heard of crack or crank????? Ever spent any time around the (purported) human rejects that use the stuff???? What nonsense.

The statistics you are refering to suffer from simple ommission. That is to say that if the cops pick up some mugger with booze on his breath, they aren't going to spend several hundred dollars (per scumbag, per offense) to see what else he was whacked on. Ergo the crime was "alcohol" related.

I spent 14 years of my life boozing and losing. I have seen more than my fair share of life's underbelly. Drugs and most of the people that use them are &%#*ed.

I'll make you a deal. Legalize whatever you want. Anyone committing a crime under the influence gets ten times the sentence. If you are correct, the enhanced penalty will almost never get used. If I am correct, most of the deviants that do 80+% of all crime will be doing 25 to life inside of a year.

RAE LMFAO

 

[nascarnhlnra]

I.M.O. a large dog is just another tool in your toolbox. A large guard dog is great for when you are at work to help deter thiefs.The dogs hearing is better than ours and the dog could give you the alert and the precious time needed to wake and arm yourself. I believe that is where the dog comes in to the picture.The main problem I see with large dogs nowadays is the insurance companies are getting crazy with the premiums for people with big dogs if they will cover you at all.

 

[Bud Helms]

A dog can provide cover while you reload.

 

[tyro]

The main problem I see with large dogs nowadays is the insurance companies are getting crazy with the premiums for people with big dogs if they will cover you at all.

I had two sweet natured mixed breed dogs (pit bull, boxer, and English bull dog) that looked like they might be dangerous. The purpose in having these dogs was to deter intruders without risking harm to children and innocent adults. I also had an electric fence around the property to keep the dogs on my land, and a sign (pure bluff) saying "Beward of Dog".

Well, a represenative of the insurance company came by, photographed the fence, sign, and dogs, and cancelled my home owner's insurance. My insurance agent was not able to get any other insurance company to insure my property until he found one that agreed to do so only with a clause in the contract that excluded any dog related claim.

This happened even though no one had ever had cause to complain about, or be bothered by, my dogs.

Tyro

 

[WESHOOT2]

BIG DOG

Feeds how many people?




-----------------------

"Don't worry, I got enough toothpicks for everyone"

 

[wolfman97]

Ever heard of crack or crank????? Ever spent any time around the (purported) human rejects that use the stuff???? What nonsense.

If you had bothered to read the DOJ research cited, you would have seen that it discusses crack. And, yes, I am quite familiar with its effects on people. I also happen to have read the government's own research on it.

The statistics you are refering to suffer from simple ommission. That is to say that if the cops pick up some mugger with booze on his breath, they aren't going to spend several hundred dollars (per scumbag, per offense) to see what else he was whacked on. Ergo the crime was "alcohol" related.

All the research says the same essential thing. I take it you didn't actually read it. That is covered in the Drug Use Forecasting reports which specifically list what drugs people had in them when they were arrested. They have been doing that for a couple of decades, at least.

I spent 14 years of my life boozing and losing. I have seen more than my fair share of life's underbelly. Drugs and most of the people that use them are &%#*ed.

I don't know what 14 years of boozing would teach you about the facts of the subject -- except perhaps that 14 years of boozing is not terribly productive. It wouldn't teach you much about the statistics or research.

I'll make you a deal. Legalize whatever you want. Anyone committing a crime under the influence gets ten times the sentence. If you are correct, the enhanced penalty will almost never get used. If I am correct, most of the deviants that do 80+% of all crime will be doing 25 to life inside of a year.

Fine with me - same basic rules as for alcohol -- and most of the people going to jail would be behind alcohol.