I like 1/20 people I meet.
I love 10/10 dogs I meet.

Easy choice OP considering the state of society these days.

Agreed OP. People like that should be euthanized.

I'd save a random dog over a random person.
Heck, I'd save a random dog over anyone but my family and friends. Acquaintances and co-workers can get fuked.

This is so fuking stupid. Seriously how do you manage to get yourself ready every day?

[QUOTE=badbl00d post_id=1543750841]What are the odds of that human doing something great? How many doctors do you know? How many inventors do you know? The majority of people are largely average, and will not contribute anything great to humanity. There were 31 dog related fatalities in the US in 2016...There were 17,250 homicides in the same year...But dogs would treat each other worse? Even if they were all wild, the stats speak for themselves...Humans treat each other like chit.[/QUOTE]I know more doctors than I know serial killers and rapists. I know more good people than I know bad.

Even if they contribute little, what is dog going to contribute? Zero.

He used the fact that a person could turn out to bad as reason for him saving his dog; I explained that the person could just as easily be good.

[QUOTE]So the fact that you've improperly socialized your dogs is on them? This is aiken to a person locking there kid in the basement and then attacking the first person that tries to give them a hug. Maybe if you took your dogs around one of these animals it would learn that it's not prey, and not kill it.[/QUOTE]No, it could be just as plausible that because you HAVE socialised your dog, this is the reason they don't run out of the basement and attack people. Have you ever encountered wild dogs before? They are not always nice and friendly by their nature.

Also, that was a response to a miscer who said that they were "Incapable of evil". I was giving examples that demonstrate they are capable of evil. Think you may have misunderstood.

EDIT: Talking of wild dogs. Did anyone see this?
[URL=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/25/british-woman-mauled-death-wild-dogs-greece-named]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...s-greece-named[/URL]

Absolutely rogue. I've also had a run in with wild dogs in Greece before. Not always nice puppers.


[QUOTE]And you had the nerve to talk about mental illness. Not deter the attack. Not stop the attack...But "hurt it"[/QUOTE]When you are attacked by a dog 99% of the time the only way to deter the attack is to hurt it. It is obvious what I meant. Blatantly trying to misrepresent what I said.
If I could stop the doge using non violent means, I would obviously take that option.

[QUOTE]Are any of those pictures more graphic than human atrocities against each other? Mass graves in Africa? Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings? Holocaust? Etc. Are you fuking serious?[/QUOTE]And? He said dogs are "innocent"? No they are not. And nor are humans, but I've never claimed that. Strawman.

[QUOTE]They do this all the time...It's called behavioral analysis. This is how dogs are evaluated for adoption. Dogs are capable of sharing. Now place 2 strangers in a room, with a loaded gun and a briefcase full of cash...What's going to happen? The chances of them sharing the cash is about the same as one dog taking the lion share of the food[/QUOTE]Most dogs are trained to share - it's not normal pack mentality. They are capable, but a lot will not. The first one will eat til he is full, and then next pupper will have the scraps.

What are you talking about? Most people will share the cash before reverting to violence. But again this is also societal thing. No one is going to die as a result of not having any, or all of the money.
If you're thinking you would kill for the money, you are probably a psychopath and far away from the social norm.

Although, I'm pretty sure cavemen will have butchered each other over scraps of food thousands of years ago (higher consequences of not eating).

[QUOTE]Do you understand why people would save the dog over the human? You use reasoning and logic in parts of your argument, but can't grasp that more than likely the human was there out of some idiotic decision making. The dog would be there because of A. My human error, or B. His lack of understanding of the situation at hand. Unless it was a young child, then naturally, and instinctively you would save the child.[/QUOTE]Perhaps. In this circumstance I would be more sympathetic (to the doge), as the persons negligence may have been a big factor in the predicament they found themselves in.
Sometimes this is the case and sometimes this is not.
In the example given, it gave no indication as to whether this was a result of human negligence or not, therefore you are just assuming this.

So, are you saying I am not using "logic" because I did not assume the same things as you did from the scenario given, despite the fact there was no evidence presented in the scenario to support your assumption? U FOKIN WOT M8?

[QUOTE]If you were starving, and your dog was too weak to defend itself, would you not eat it? Srs question, because you seem to believe you're above anything any other animal is/ or isn't[/QUOTE]Probably... if it came too it. But I wouldn't want to. And who knows how you would actually act in that situation?
But, that's not the point and you are using another strawman.

My response was to the post from BenchWellington where he said:

[i]"Dogs are the loyalest creatures on Earth, loyal to a fault even. Not much I let rustle me but when I see a dog mistreated it really upsets me.

A dog is innocent and aside from being a glutton it is selfless in it's actions and lives to serve its master."[/i]

My post was to prove the point that: A) They are not loyal[b]to a fault[/b], and B) They are not selfless in their actions.

Unsure if you are genuinely misinterpreting what I am saying, or instead trying to deliberate misrepresent me?

[QUOTE]Humans pay top dollars for canned big game hunts[/QUOTE]Exactly. Humans are not selfless either. Who would have guessed!

[QUOTE]The fact that you think dogs are more selfish or violent than humans is just flat out wrong.[/QUOTE]Selfish? Yes, they do not have the ability to use reason like us, therefore, more decisions they make will be based upon natural instinct (which is more often than not, selfish).
Violent? Not necessarily. Humans have the capacity to be just as, if not more violent than any other animal.

[QUOTE]You use faulty logic,[/QUOTE]Nah

[QUOTE]in an attempt to make yourself seem edgy.[/QUOTE]Nah

[QUOTE]Two dogs who are complete strangers will literally yank your arm off in an attempt to say hi to one another, and people walk by each other without even a glance. [/b][/QUOTE]This literally proves/means nothing.

I also think it's sad how unfriendly Western Society has become. Although, I say hello to anyone who passes me by in my village.



If you're going to respond, please do so in a format that makes it easier for me to respond. Thanks!



[QUOTE=Zerafian post_id=1543754571]not our fault you dont understand the connection you can have with a pet. Its actually more about how you're raised, environmental exposure, not some mental disorder. You should probably be a little more educated before using such large font AND bold, it makes you look dumb, like actually low IQ.[/QUOTE]Still think it's mental illness! Dry those tears mate! No need to be upset!

Yes, because "how you're raised" and "environmental exposure" have never played an impact on mental health.

Also, I have a wonderful friendship with my doggos.



[QUOTE=tng83 post_id=1543756371]Agreed OP. People like that should be euthanized.[/QUOTE]Mate.... das not it. Not helping our side of this HUGELY IMPORTANT debate.

Spoken like a true sociopath

The irony

i love my dog

Any dog over OP every time[100% dead srs] [Roldz]

lol @ the anti-puppers ITT getting all rustled

I'd probably save a pet over OP because his neck is annoying, but normally I'd choose a human

I think identifying a subjective answer as stupid, might be a clear identifier of stupidity. There is no objective answer to the topic at hand. Philosophers have debated variances of this question for decades. IE the train that must go either left or right... on the left is your most cherished loved one(son, daughter, etc etc), on the right are 10 strangers. You have control of the lever, which way are you sending the train? Regardless of your answer, I could rip it apart easily. Same concept applies here. Yes we are talking about a dog, but we are emotional creatures by nature, so the same concept applies. I am choosing my dog, I have learned far too much about people and their selfish tendencies to save a random stranger...nowadays people would rather record a tragedy or someone being attacked then to actually put their ****ing phone down and help.

I would rather save a random poodle than a 1000 miscers who are drowning in a burning lake without hesitation

Damn put your personal bias away and think about it, you honestly think the average dog is more human than the average human? Dogs have no morals no rules to follow nothing, the only reason why they learn is we beat them. I have never met a dog that took care of me when I was sick, never met a dog that saved me when I failed on a rep in the gym, never met a dog that made sure I got home when I was drunk, I could go on. Yeah theres a lot of humans who are sick individuals, but theres also a lot of dogs that would eat you alive if it was hungry enough.

I'd save your family and friends over a random dog, or my dog, or my kids dog.

Lmao this is your stance.

Never met a ****ing dog responsible for millions or murders. Never met a ****ing dog who dropped an atom bomb on a city killing hundreds of thousands of women and children. I could author a ****ing book on this topic.

I hope your response was sarcastic and/or a joke.

You should write a book on it. In crayon.

Solid contribution to the thread, airhead.

Have you met a person responsible? I'm not debating the existence, I'm saying since all you *******s are using personal stories I'll give you some more to think about. This is not a topic that can be debated logically, because the average human has more value to society than the average dog. Stay butt hurt though my man, I'm sure you're an extremely intelligent individual
edit: My stance has already been stated, and it wouldn't contribute to the thread if I repeat what someone else says, that does not make a point any more correct

This could probably be debated.

What's your definition of "value to society"... ?

What does the average human contribute to society?

"Why I think dogs are more important than people"

- By TmaC828

Seriously, you should write a book on it.

I dont have pets and never will, I don't see the need/want. I would definitely save a human life over an animal any day.

It can't be debated you fuking potato.

Imagine a world where there was only you and a bunch of dogs.

The topic would be more along the lines or... "The terrible **** humans have done to one another".

I wouldn't doubt there are already publications on that subject.

Doing more than licking my own balls and making people feel better about themselves. I'm sure one could make an argument that a dog is valuable, but if you're going to ask me to bet my life on a random baby doing more for society than a random puppy I'd take that bet every time.

"the average human".

Strong reading comprehension.

Humanities greatest achievements have literally nothing to do with the average human. Society as we know it today can probably be attributed to just a handful of very bright individuals. But that wasn't the argument. He said the "average human"... so my question is. Today... what does the average human leave behind when they die?

Everything I said is true, dogs were not only companions but useful hunting and war instruments in early human ages. Your dog was worth more then anyone outside your immediate family (tribe). It's instinctual to choose your own dog over a random stranger. Your pack of dogs would of been the most valuable tool you had in your arensal, far more useful then your spear. They would of protected you and your family, as well as helped you hunt. In return you provide them with shelter, cooked food, leadership and a place to raise their young.

I have a theory that if you do not choose the dog your DNA reigns from a conquered tribe, where you were not allowed to have dogs or other instruments of war since your only job was to farm for your conquerers.

Just like sloots will choose chad over timmy, you should also choose your dog over timmy. This is our DNA.

What has the greatest dog in the history of the world left behind? Jesus potato christ. The greatest individuals had average parents, or average grandparents.

das it mane, essentially people who don't like dogs are betas.

This is laughable.

I'm not arguing Einstein vs. the smartest dog. I'm speaking strictly about the "average human"... which is exactly where my reply to that original post derived from in the first place.

The average human doesn't contribute anything to society today. YOU won't contribute **** to society, if you had never existed, nothing today would be different. Same can be said about me. Most people are forgotten about in months... perhaps weeks after they die. The AVERAGE human. I'm not talking about the top 1%... I'm talking about the bottom 50%.

You call me a potato, yet you can't even grasp the simple notion of my original post...

- Talks about warrior DNA

- Lets his dog kiss him on the lips every day, and sleep in his bed

LOL at all the mad human-savers ITT calling the dog-savers "mentally ill" and "retarded". u mad I'd let every single one of you die to save my dog?