while cats are clean

???

Nah. They're covered all over in dried saliva. Dogs are just more honestly filthy, especially after finding something dead to roll in.

A vet told me once that she'd never had problems with dog bites and scratches, but that cat bites and scratches invariably became infected if they weren't dealt with very promptly. I must say, I've never had a problem with a dog bite, other than the mess (and temporary loss of temper with the stupid beasts for fighting and chomping me just 'cos I was dumb enough to intervene.) I've seen cat scratches lead to yukky warts, though.

(You might think I'm not really a cat person.)

The observation about foxes behaving more like cats than dogs makes sense, now I see it written. Untamed self-interest and all that - compared with a dog's willingness to subject itself to slavery. In return for luxury board and lodging, lifelong medical treatment, extravagant affection and so on, whilst letting us think we have the upper hand.

Aren't dogs and cats both fundamentally stupid.  They don't know what's going on.

So why should we bother with them. They repel me with their stupidity.

I'd rather have intelligent intercourse with a human being. 

woof meeow ?

Years and years since I had a cat, but I wouldn't say either cat or  dog was stupid.

Hence the many assistnce/guide dogs.

I always think dogs have life pretty well worked out, they understand anything that concerns them, dinner, walks they soon let you know what they wannt or need, and let the rest go.

---

@malacandran wrote:

Aren't dogs and cats both fundamentally stupid.  They don't know what's going on.

 

So why should we bother with them. They repel me with their stupidity.

 

I'd rather have intelligent intercourse with a human being. 

 

 

---

Some people repel me with their stupidity. Binge drinkers, space cadets, boy racers, the looney tunes who get ridiculous tattoos inked on when they are off their trolley on the local sauce in Ayia Napa and Magaluf, people who think soaps are the real thing, 90% of the Houses of Parliament, Facebook devotees, rappers, mobile phone addicts, the PC clan...

I'd rather have dogs personally, than any of the above. And as Margs says, dogs can be useful members of society as buddy dogs, assistants, guide dogs, etc. But cats ? Have you ever seen a sniffer cat ?

grrrrr hissss woof woof bark hiss hiss meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeowww !!

---

@electric*mayhem*band wrote:

---

 https://uk.news.yahoo.com/man-killed-alligators-shouting-f-105508534.html#mQSRcXo

 

 

---

Some people repel me with their stupidity. Binge drinkers, space cadets, boy racers, the looney tunes who get ridiculous tattoos inked on when they are off their trolley on the local sauce in Ayia Napa and Magaluf, people who think soaps are the real thing, 90% of the Houses of Parliament, Facebook devotees, rappers, mobile phone addicts, the PC clan...

 

I'd rather have dogs personally, than any of the above. And as Margs says, dogs can be useful members of society as buddy dogs, assistants, guide dogs, etc. But cats ? Have you ever seen a sniffer cat ?

---

Mmmmmmmm.........

*cue Dansette*

Bring back hunting and trading in Fox fur, sort some of the buggers out while providing fun for some and commerce for others!

There is no need to bring back fox hunting despite the hunting fraternity spouting their nonsesnse about pest control. Urban foxes are only a pest in our cities because we are so profligate with our waste.  There is no such problem in the countryside.

If a farmer has problems with a fox taking livestock he is quite entitled to take a gun and shoot it without the inconvenience of a pack of hounds and an equally repulsive pack of hunters on horses trampling all over his land.

Fox hunting is nothing less than a bloodsport disguised in the garb of tradition.

It seems to me, that we have more important things to think about, than fox-hunting.

---

@malacandran wrote:

It seems to me, that we have more important things to think about, than fox-hunting.

---

If you don't find it important why bother replying?

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

 

---

@malacandran wrote:

It seems to me, that we have more important things to think about, than fox-hunting.

---

If you don't find it important why bother replying?

---

I like to reply to posters such as yourself, because you give me pleasure.

You're very kind, thank you.

You have a fine mind.

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

There is no need to bring back fox hunting despite the hunting fraternity spouting their nonsesnse about pest control. Urban foxes are only a pest in our cities because we are so profligate with our waste.  There is no such problem in the countryside.

 

If a farmer has problems with a fox taking livestock he is quite entitled to take a gun and shoot it without the inconvenience of a pack of hounds and an equally repulsive pack of hunters on horses trampling all over his land.

 

Fox hunting is nothing less than a bloodsport disguised in the garb of tradition.

---

 Well said JD old chap. Couldn't agree more. So much so that I've given you a kudos. Actually I tried to give you two, but this appears to be disallowed under the rules of the Board. Makes sense though, when you think about it. Well a damned sight more sense than charging through the undergrowth on horseback yelling 'Tally Ho', dressed in a red coat and cravat, with a dozen yapping hounds, in pursuit of poor old Basil Brush.

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

There is no need to bring back fox hunting despite the hunting fraternity spouting their nonsesnse about pest control. Urban foxes are only a pest in our cities because we are so profligate with our waste.  There is no such problem in the countryside.

 

If a farmer has problems with a fox taking livestock he is quite entitled to take a gun and shoot it without the inconvenience of a pack of hounds and an equally repulsive pack of hunters on horses trampling all over his land.

 

Fox hunting is nothing less than a bloodsport disguised in the garb of tradition.

---

I think you'll notice I made no mention of pest control! I said it would let some people have some fun, quite readily acknowledging that it is more to do with fun, recreation and sport than anything else! I believe there is some tradition invilvolved though, even though they may not be traditions that all find tasteful.

I'm not trying to disguise Fox hunting as anything but am quite happy to see those who take part get some enjoyment and recreation from it, at least this makes the Foxes of some use!

As for disguise, how about those who disguise class hatred as concern for animal welfare?!

---

@electric*mayhem*band wrote:

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

There is no need to bring back fox hunting despite the hunting fraternity spouting their nonsesnse about pest control. Urban foxes are only a pest in our cities because we are so profligate with our waste.  There is no such problem in the countryside.

 

If a farmer has problems with a fox taking livestock he is quite entitled to take a gun and shoot it without the inconvenience of a pack of hounds and an equally repulsive pack of hunters on horses trampling all over his land.

 

Fox hunting is nothing less than a bloodsport disguised in the garb of tradition.

---

 

 

 Well said JD old chap. Couldn't agree more. So much so that I've given you a kudos. Actually I tried to give you two, but this appears to be disallowed under the rules of the Board. Makes sense though, when you think about it. Well a damned sight more sense than charging through the undergrowth on horseback yelling 'Tally Ho', dressed in a red coat and cravat, with a dozen yapping hounds, in pursuit of poor old Basil Brush.

---

Yes, deserved kudos despite having barely any relation to what I had said!