Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Threats to pets?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    https://www.kitv.com/story/43062924/...t-kahului-pier

    Kusai nei.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kaonohi
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by craigwatanabe View Post
    If there's a chance not to hit anything on the road, that's always the best measure.
    (...)
    A safe, attentive driver will spot things like animals on the road or even animals on the side of the road. When we do, we will slow down in the event we must brake to avoid hitting that animal that didn't move out of the way or got in the way as our vehicles approach. Even if the animal cannot be seen because of trash cans, parked vehicles, or even road conditions such as blind hills or sunlight in your eyes, you as an attentive driver will slow down to a safe speed to allow for speed adjustments if necessary.
    (....)
    Awesome post Craig. It told me what I needed to know.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    There was a scene in Family Guy where Brian the Dog was feeling guilty that he drove over and killed a dog. The human cartoon characters just laughed at him because killing a dog isn't a a criminal act as killing a human.

    Leave a comment:


  • craigwatanabe
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by turtlegirl View Post
    Um, I dont agree with that, buuuut to get back on topic, yes, cars are certainly the number one, numero uno, ichiban, way that pets are endangered.
    I have six boys and one dog. The humans get preferred treatment over the dog. But if I see you barrelling down the road and couldn't stop in time and I could only save myself, I'll leave my dog since I know you'll save him by killing yourself instead of my dog.

    Leave a comment:


  • craigwatanabe
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
    Craig,
    Did you want me to stop changing the subject?? I wasn't sure.

    Anyway, I think the point I was trying to get as was:

    If there was no danger from braking, swerving, endangering people, would you still hit the dog? I understand your reasonable conditioning in your described situation, but your closing line was always "Hit the Dog."

    Would you avoid hitting the dog if it's safe? Or mare you so conditioned you hit them no matter what?

    Nothing personal, but that would explain some of the behaviour I've seen and experienced on O`ahu.

    Naturally, we're not talking about animals that run under your tires unexpectedly - we're talking about animals that can be safely avoided. And since you are in the industry - driving BIG trucks - what kind of feedback do you get from co-workers?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    K + pets
    If there's a chance not to hit anything on the road, that's always the best measure. One thing about safe driving is being an attentive one. However animals (and humans) do dart in front of vehicles once in a while. I just had an encounter with a Pheasant yesterday when driving over on the Saddle Road. One was flying across the street into the sun when it flew right in front of my minivan packed full of kids. I saw it coming but because the speed was 45-mph and it flew from my left to my right, I couldn't have avoided it in that split second. I could have swerved or slammed on the brakes, but I realized in doing so it would have sent my van out of control and all of us in the van careening off the roadway and into some ironwood tree...so I hit the bird.

    A safe, attentive driver will spot things like animals on the road or even animals on the side of the road. When we do, we will slow down in the event we must brake to avoid hitting that animal that didn't move out of the way or got in the way as our vehicles approach. Even if the animal cannot be seen because of trash cans, parked vehicles, or even road conditions such as blind hills or sunlight in your eyes, you as an attentive driver will slow down to a safe speed to allow for speed adjustments if necessary.

    In my case this Pheasant came flying out of brush, cut almost 10-feet back from the roadway at a speed that was very fast. Even if I was stopped in the road, because the sun was in the bird's eyes it would have hit the side of my van anyway. That was an unavoidable situation.

    As for feedback, most of us are required to ride with the truckers to get the feel of what they do. Trucks can't stop as quickly as cars so when a car cuts off a fully loaded tanker full of LPG, there's a good chance that tanker won't stop in time to avoid rear-ending the vehicle that cut it off. I've heard of tankers rolling their trucks and cargo to avoid hitting the rear of a van packed full of kids. I've visited truckers in hospitals who did that to avoid killing innocent people and instead almost killing themselves because of ignorant drivers cutting off trucks.

    Drive safe and drive smart. Stop if you can but if it was between killing a dog bent on getting in the wrong place at the wrong time or getting killed yourself or innocent bystanders...like I said...kill the dog.

    If it was a human being, then the Book of John 15:13 applies and that is: Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends or his fellow man.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walkoff Balk
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    http://shine.yahoo.com/event/green/f...-pets-1455341/

    Treating pets as living garbage disposals was wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • buraian-kun
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Agreed that cars--actually drivers--are the biggest threat to pets anywhere. Our dog is always on a very secure leash when not safely in the house. Really makes me crazy when I see people letting their dogs walk around loose. Whose fault is it going to be when they run into traffic?

    Thanks for all the responses.

    Cheers,
    -Brian*

    Leave a comment:


  • Kaonohi
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by craigwatanabe View Post
    This thread is about animals so stop changing the subject.
    Craig,
    Did you want me to stop changing the subject?? I wasn't sure.

    Anyway, I think the point I was trying to get as was:

    If there was no danger from braking, swerving, endangering people, would you still hit the dog? I understand your reasonable conditioning in your described situation, but your closing line was always "Hit the Dog."

    Would you avoid hitting the dog if it's safe? Or mare you so conditioned you hit them no matter what?

    Nothing personal, but that would explain some of the behaviour I've seen and experienced on O`ahu.

    Naturally, we're not talking about animals that run under your tires unexpectedly - we're talking about animals that can be safely avoided. And since you are in the industry - driving BIG trucks - what kind of feedback do you get from co-workers?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    K + pets

    Leave a comment:


  • turtlegirl
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by craigwatanabe View Post
    One kid is worth more than one dog.
    Um, I dont agree with that, buuuut to get back on topic, yes, cars are certainly the number one, numero uno, ichiban, way that pets are endangered.

    Leave a comment:


  • craigwatanabe
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
    If you get the attitude of "Hit the Dog," will you also "Hit the Kid?"

    After all, it's one live vs. a potential dozen, right? Instead of swerving to avoid hitting the 4-year-old and hitting a car full of 40-year-olds, doesn't it make sense to save the four and sacrifice the one?

    What's one kid, anyway?

    An animal.... sure. It's different - human lives are not only more important, they are legislatively more important.

    Bottom line:
    Do what is the best for the world, and do what you can live with.

    Avoid killing animals and people when you can, and numbers (quantities) count.

    K
    To answer your questions:

    No. Because we're talking animals not kids. This thread is about animals so stop changing the subject.

    Yes. But we're talking animal lives not human lives. This thread is about animals so stop changing the subject.

    Yes. It does make sense to save more if it means losing one. But we're talking animal lives not human lives. This thread is about animals so stop changing the subject.

    One kid is worth more than one dog. This thread is about animals so stop changing the subject.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kaonohi
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by craigwatanabe View Post
    that's the problem with big rigs. Stopping distances are far and if an animal darts onto the roadway, slamming on the brakes could mean a jack-knifed tractor-trailer, or in the case of a propane tanker, cause it to become unstable and begin to fishtail out of control. Even if there is no traffic nearby or pedestrians (ie country road), the driver's life can be put in jeopardy with an out of control rig.

    Hit the dog.
    If you get the attitude of "Hit the Dog," will you also "Hit the Kid?"

    After all, it's one live vs. a potential dozen, right? Instead of swerving to avoid hitting the 4-year-old and hitting a car full of 40-year-olds, doesn't it make sense to save the four and sacrifice the one?

    What's one kid, anyway?

    An animal.... sure. It's different - human lives are not only more important, they are legislatively more important.

    Bottom line:
    Do what is the best for the world, and do what you can live with.

    Avoid killing animals and people when you can, and numbers (quantities) count.

    K

    Leave a comment:


  • craigwatanabe
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    that's the problem with big rigs. Stopping distances are far and if an animal darts onto the roadway, slamming on the brakes could mean a jack-knifed tractor-trailer, or in the case of a propane tanker, cause it to become unstable and begin to fishtail out of control. Even if there is no traffic nearby or pedestrians (ie country road), the driver's life can be put in jeopardy with an out of control rig.

    Hit the dog.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kaonohi
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by craigwatanabe View Post
    Hitting another vehicle head on could mean a blast crater 20-feet across and 10-feet deep with fatalities in the blast area and blown out windows up to a quarter mile away.

    Hit the dog.
    It all depends on the conditions. On a country road with intermittent traffic when you're able to stop safely, hitting a roaming pet is roughly equivalent to the incident on the mainland a few years ago when in an argument with a female driver the other low-life driver grabbed her bichon-friese and tossed it into oncoming traffic.

    Sure, be sensible. Don't put human lives at stake, but respect other life, too. Pets are not meant to be targets.

    K
    Last edited by Kaonohi; May 17, 2010, 12:21 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • craigwatanabe
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    naturally as a truck driver you'd want to avoid any loss of life and would drive cautiously enough to foresee a dog wandering around traffic. But they bolt and they get in the way at times.

    In my case the interview was about driving a truck carrying 4000 gallons of liquified petroleum gas or Propane. Hitting a dog would amount to a damaged front bumper. Hitting another vehicle head on could mean a blast crater 20-feet across and 10-feet deep with fatalities in the blast area and blown out windows up to a quarter mile away.

    Hit the dog.

    Leave a comment:


  • Frankie's Market
    replied
    Re: Threats to pets?

    Originally posted by craigwatanabe View Post
    When I interviewed for the Gas Company back in 1982, our safety manager asked me if I were driving a truck with a heavy payload and a dog wandered in front of my vehicle, what would I do? The two choices were swerve and avoid hitting it, or hit it?

    I answered, "hit it". He asked why. I responded when carrying a heavy load, I would lose control of my vehicle as the weight shifted during this evasive action. If I were in traffic or if there were pedestrians, my out of control truck could seriously injure or kill others.

    That apparently was the correct answer.
    There's no question that's right. I would also argue that when you're carrying a "precious" payload (read: human passengers), then even more so, your responsibility and concerns for their safety and wellbeing needs to come first over some stray animal on the road. As much of a dog lover as I am, I would not evasively steer if the traffic conditions were such that there was even a remote chance of someone in my car getting hurt. Fortunately, that scenario has not happened to me yet.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X