Mad dog wrestling

The answer to your question is - obviously not otherwise one should have expected him to keep the little runt on a strong lead. As a usual rule of thumb - all dogs when 'packed' are dangerous. Packed meaning more than one singular. Dogs are prone to wild and natural instincts which can surface when 'activated' with devastating results. The cry of a child, sometimes misconstrued by canine thinking for 'danger' - numerous cases of dogs attacking screaming children - etc etc etc. One thing we learned living here in the countryside is that dogs cannot be trusted off lead and have had, one more than one occasion, devastating results when the 'dog/s' have managed to get free of their confines. One NEVER takes dog for granted. Otherwise - watch out - - - - -

That owner who wants to keep big dogs but knows nothing much about them, says he suffers from asthma. To be walking two dogs so big strong and heavy that he could neither hold on to their leads nor control them tells us he is too gormless to be in charge of a guinea pig never mind a dog.

Indeed. There isn't a cure or a condition that can alleviate stupidity. The law is there to keep 'control' and in a democracy can only be used 'after' the event. A price we pay for relative freedoms.

Dog breeds that have been selectively bred for particular temperaments and behaviours over many generations for particular tasks are quite 'specialist' animals, an owner needs to have a good understanding of them and how they are likely to behave in various situations, and at different ages; depending on the breed and circumstances, a freindly puppy can become a ferocious killer at a year old, as in the news story.

Perhaps stupidity can be, if not cured; to an a extent, modified and made less dangerous by education? Life tends to educate by cause and effect, sometimes it needs a trauma to make a dent in stupidity, to cause a re-think.

The trickiest sort of stupidity is when it's combined with arrogant egotism. As arrogant and egotistical people seem to be attracted to owning big fierce-looking dogs, ideally, some sort of control and/or education should be arranged for such potential dog owners.

There is very little sense in keeping dogs breeds that have been bred specifically for fighting, as pets.

And yet again you propose spending yet more money on what at the end of the day pales into almost obscurity when put against that which is more important and critical to our species survival. I read in today's reports of yet another multiple deaths caused by arrogant, egotistical wayward teenagers - the stealing of a car and the crash that killed all 5 of them. There are 66 million of us in this country. There are 7 billion of us on this planet. How do you propose to educate and safeguard even 10% of them if we take on board every minuscule abnormality that dogs the species (not a pun). Where does this cash-cow of a money tree come from? Well now I will tell you - - .
100 years from now the First World will have automated to the extent that we will have sufficient man-power at a reasonable cost to take on board all these anomalies and the time and funding - but not before then. The Third World will lag behind as always and will still have quite a number of today's problems and will be some time later before they catch up - always and providing we don't self annihilate or become struck off by nature or the universe itself in the meantime. Meanwhile - we will have to live with it all and be satisfied we did our best with what we have been given -.

The car crash sounds bad, teenage is a dangerous age. On changing 'stupid' behaviour. We all (present company excepted) do stupid things from time to time. Being too sheltered from consequences can be counter-productive. Better to learn little by little than from disasters.

But - but - man doesn't 'learn'. He rarely reads his history. In fact he rarely reads at all. He continues along a pathway of self-destruction oblivious to anything other than his favourite TV programme, what's for dinner, where's the next party and where did you put my socks? Beyond that he's bloody hopeless. His minuscule world (that which resides inside his own head) barely goes beyond the confines of his ears. Or straight down to between his legs. He quite often pisses against the wind and wonders why he's getting wet.

And so my dear little by little may be the mantra - deeper and deeper digs the hole -.

As you describe, there is plenty of stupidity about. The room for improvement is enormous.

Perhaps if vans with loudspeakers toured the streets, shouting out the wisdom of the ages, we might see improvements?

"A stitch in time saves nine!"
"Many a mickle makes a muckle!"
"Mirror, signal, manoeuvre!"
"Etcetera!"

The advent of mass media - and all that such entails one might expect most people to be offay with almost everything that is going on - however it appears that such is not the case and that most people only delve into that which 'turns them on'. They say - 'ignorance is bliss' and I can well believe it. Taking everything on board on a daily basis can leave one very light-headed and depressed at the end of the day - not a condition I suppose the majority wish to live with and therefore most ignore the mass of information they have at their fingertips. The consequence of which is that they never delve and never learn anything of any great import. Being satisfied with 'dross' seems to be the easiest way out. Sad world - but understandable -.

From the start of radio broadcasts, through tv, internet, smartphone, all that development from a disembodied and crackley voice speaking out of a wooden box in the 1920s to where we are today has happened within a hundred years.
Can people born into the smartphone age even imagine a world completely without electronic media?

Not at all - is the answer to your question. However - tomorrow's wars may well be fought on the removal of the enemies 'comfort blanket' - crash the computers and attack everything else with viruses which will leave the whole of the populations without almost anything on which to survive. Such will thrust the populations back 100 years into a Victorian survival mode and one which they are not equipped to deal with. It will be a question of who gets in first and destroys the others capabilities. Some might say it will be better than killing each others soldiers - but when its whole populations at risk I'm not so sure that's a goer. Meanwhile - the people move gaily on oblivious to what they are heading towards and oblivious of the 'machines' and the blue-meanies that will control them.

People who lived in the world as it was, before the age of media, had the nearest experience of the real world.
The media everyone absorbs everyday now is the contents of human brains spilling out electronically.

As D.H.lawrence said, in the olden days,

For God’s sake, let us be men
not monkeys minding machines
or sitting with our tails curled
while the machine amuses us, the radio or film or gramophone.

Stop the world I want to get off - is only possible for those that can afford it. D.H.Lawrence being one. For the rest born at the back of the stable it's only 'progress' that affords the majority what might be classed as a decent way of life. Whichever way we look at things - progress (reaching for the stars in everything) or (curiosity) has provide successive generations with a slightly better way of life. Machines of one form or another, even down to the lowly potato peeler, have brought social improvements. We still propagate the idle rich and the aspiring rich who see their sole purpose as one of 'showing the way' and we still get our literary/artistic idlers who scorn the rest. Man has a purpose - to complete the biological/physical/technological experiment that the Universe afforded it. Beyond that there is no further purpose.

Lawrence (as you know) was writing a long time ago, a moody chap apparently. A popular writer of his times, expressing a qualm about the dawning of the media age.
The development of science and technology is tied to the cultures it works in. It may eventually enable us to escape from Earth, but can we escape from ourselves? Probably not, so we will have to take ourselves with us.

Because of astronomical distances and the inability (for the present) to travel safely and quickly enough to other 'worlds' that would sustain life I suspect the first 'leap' to be one of biological intelligence, possibly transmitted by laser. The human body itself would come later. Perhaps 200 years from now - if we survive that long. However - even a transmission of this kind with the ability to utilise its new surrounding will carry with it 'our' DNA and thus, as you say, man himself will still be present. A disturbing thought -.

How far can a laser go? The moon seems easy enough, but does it dissipate and fade away after that?

No. Light continues on whatever the distance - it's time that only allows us and others to see it - eventually - but that eventually can be billions of years. Lazers are more powerful and thus easier to detect. It is still however only a 'light' beam and so far can only carry within it the smallest of molecules as opposed to a greater mass such as a human being. It is being done at the present time but very much in its infancy.

A laser beam, travelling space over great distances would probably encounter some dust? If dna sequences were transmitted as bar-code information in a laser beam strong enough to reach the stars, aliens might eventually de-code it and make humans some time in the future. Is it worth bothering though? The problem we have is too many humans.

Dust compacted humans -? There's a thing. I would imagine anyone with half a brain that could construct human tissue from DNA bar-codes would firstly ensure that the finished product is well secured in order for it not to contaminate its makers/constructors. The point here is the continuance of the human race on other worlds in good time before our world becomes uninhabitable through whatever reason - preferably sometime in the next 500 years or sooner. Although the Earth isn't going to be destroyed for something like another 5 billion years man cannot wait or go anywhere near that critical point and must evacuate the planet well in advance. He could 'theoretically' exist in the universe elsewhere for perhaps another 10 billion years before the universe itself becomes uninhabitable - but at what cost and in what condition? Nothing is forever - and was never meant to be.

The continuence of humans on faraway planets is a bit iffy really. If we can't cope with ourselves on this planet, why go to a lot of trouble to make a mess of other planets?

Mad dog wrestling today. http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/05/woman-dragged-ground-mauled-pair-staffordshire-bull-terriers-7133978/ Quite amazing really, getting a staffie that is 'tearing lumps' out of someone in a headlock.

As regards your first comment - because man has an innate self-survival instinct and a curiosity that would shame a herd of cats. So why wouldn't he do just exactly that?

As regards your second comment - we've been here before have we not. Dog's and packs (more than one). All should be penned in properly. Taken for exercise singularly. Micro-chipped and vaccinated with proper certification. Kept away from children if known species - fighting dogs - or under strict supervision. Owners should be made properly responsible under the law - i.e. large fines for non-compliance. Jail time for injuries and deaths caused. All breeders should be registered and dogs should carry licence for identification etc. And who pays for all that -? The owners - per dog. At today's rates I would suggest £200 per dog payable for the licence which today can be obtained on-line. Let's see just who really wants a pet or is playing silly buggers.