Homeless people should not be able to have dogs.

[Busyman]

I agree with hobbes..... there are some people that choose to be homeless

I'm sure we all knew that. hobbes initial remark was a blanket statement though.

[hobbes]

I'm sure we all knew that. hobbes initial remark was a blanket statement though.

It's like stating that cats have 4 legs, hair and a tail. That blanket statement is actually incorrect.

A cat can have anywhere between 0 and four legs, it may or may not have hair, or it may or may not have a tail.

The blanket statement is a useful way to describe a "general" cat for the convenience of discussion. Exceptions don't diminish the value of a blanket, but serve to illustrate that the world is shades of gray and not black and white.

The more accurate statement is functionally bereft.

Like the guy who wants to tell you about his buddy whose life was saved because he wasn't wearing a seatbelt. Sure, but I still think I'll stick with the percentages and buckle up. Is the rule that buckling up saves lives any less valid or useful? Absolutely not.

That is why we make blanket statements, it saves time and avoids the endless tedium of explaining every permutation.

Back when I was in college, my rent lease was:

I will pay the rent and I won't break your stuff

Now that I rent from a corporation it is 9 pages of pica print with a signature on each page. Who reads any of that crap?

I'm a concepts man, I make blanket statements when I feel that a significant point can be made. Then I get attacked by the Anecdotal Evidence Brigade who want to hoist there 2 legged cat as evidence that my decsrciption of a cat is wrong.

In this particular thread, the mentally ill have come to the fore as exceptions to a blanket statement. I have said, "fair enough", but the truth is that I figured people would "get" that the insane would fall outside this statement.


All posts contain more meaning behind the words. We make certain assumptions that people will "get it". When I refer to baseball, I assume you know what that is, I don't bother to give a detailed description of the game each and everytime.

Blanket statements are effective timesavers and if people wish to mention significant exceptions, more power to them.

[Busyman]

It's like stating that cats have 4 legs, hair and a tail. That blanket statement is actually incorrect.

A cat can have anywhere between 0 and four legs, it may or may not have hair, or it may or may not have a tail.

The blanket statement is a useful way to describe a "general" cat for the convenience of discussion. Exceptions don't diminish the value of a blanket, but serve to illustrate that the world is shades of gray and not black and white.

The more accurate statement is functionally bereft.

Like the guy who wants to tell you about his buddy whose life was saved because he wasn't wearing a seatbelt. Sure, but I still think I'll stick with the percentages and buckle up. Is the rule that buckling up saves lives any less valid or useful? Absolutely not.

That is why we make blanket statements, it saves time and avoids the endless tedium of explaining every permutation.

Back when I was in college, my rent lease was:

I will pay the rent and I won't break your stuff

Now that I rent from a corporation it is 9 pages of pica print with a signature on each page. Who reads any of that crap?

I'm a concepts man, I make blanket statements when I feel that a significant point can be made. Then I get attacked by the Anecdotal Evidence Brigade who want to hoist there 2 legged cat as evidence that my decsrciption of a cat is wrong.

In this particular thread, the mentally ill have come to the fore as exceptions to a blanket statement. I have said, "fair enough", but the truth is that I figured people would "get" that the insane would fall outside this statement.


All posts contain more meaning behind the words. We make certain assumptions that people will "get it". When I refer to baseball, I assume you know what that is, I don't bother to give a detailed description of the game each and everytime.

Blanket statements are effective timesavers and if people which to mention significant exceptions, more power to them.

The thing is your blanket statement was wrong on TOO many fronts.

Your blanket statements are a smack to the homeless that don't choose it as a lifestyle and it's ignorant. No different than a shit stereotype. You have no idea how shit spirals out of control and you don't have an answer for every fucking thing.

Your rationale for many things are ill-conceived...even missing the focus of compassion for a dog and the homeless to dog exploitation and dog fights ffs.

You've already shown yourself to be arrogant. Think outside your little box for a moment.

[JPaul]

Being homeless is a lifestyle choice

NB your bold, not mine.

What you made was a statement, which you saw fit to highlight.

That statement was not qualified in any way, either in or of itself, or by the context in which it was made.

How the feck were people supposed to read between that particular line.

For many people, for many reasons, homelessness is not a lifestyle choice. It is a result of circumstances outwith their control. Whether it be mental illness, being thrown out of their home by parents, bankruptcy, depression due to things which happen to them, whatever.

The sweeping generalization, coz that's what it was, is and remains offensive to the innocent victims and to those who try to help them.

To argue that you were right, or misunderstood based on semantics is poor form, poor form indeed. It does you no credit.

Your only possible redemption is a sentence which begins "Sorry, my bad, what I actually meant to say was ...."

[hobbes]

The thing is your blanket statement was wrong on TOO many fronts.

Your blanket statements are a smack to the homeless that don't choose it as a lifestyle and it's ignorant. No different than a shit stereotype. You have no idea how shit spirals out of control and you don't have an answer for every fucking thing.

Your rationale for many things are ill-conceived...even missing the focus of compassion for a dog and the homeless to dog exploitation and dog fights ffs.

You've already shown yourself to be arrogant. Think outside your little box for a moment.

I do have an answer for every fucking thing, but it is not always right. That is why I come to discussion forums to get different perspectives.

Sometimes you say, "Hey, I never looked at it that way".

My points are as follows:

1. I can appreciate the instincts which motivated Canuk to post such an emotional thread.

2. I felt he may have been hitting on a deeper point than he was aware of. You simply can't outlaw animal ownership based on owning property, that is not a well thought out point.

We don't let homeless people adopt babies because they haven't proven they can even take care of themselves. Even in typical adoptions there is extensive research and follow up. It would be nice to get some assurance for a puppy as well, but the puppy has no choice in the matter and the chance that some external 3rd party will be watching out for his welfare is just about nil.

The important discrimators of this case were the fact that it was a cute puppy which was successfully drawing attention, it was a purebreed and it was a fighting dog.

Had he talked about the guy with the old flop earred mutt, I would have known for sure it was simply a matter of companionship and if the dog was healthy then so be it.

So, in this case, A few alarms sort of triggered for me. I could be wrong, but statistically I will be right.




2. It was a salient point for me to comment that some people are not like the rest of us. They have no incentive or desire to leave their homeless existence. This, to most, strikes us as odd.

I grew up thinking that being homeless would be the worse thing possible. I assumed that they would want to leave that world ASAP.

As I grew up and left my little box of assumptions, I acquired the first hand knowledge that many of these people are choosing to live this life. That was quite an eye-opener.


There is a common slogan:




This "it's a lifestyle" slogan is turned many different ways and I was mimicking it in my post. I thought people would "get it".

And to me it is meant to imply those who beg and make no effort to find employment.

This is far different than those who are temporarily out of house and home but are making every effort possible to correct this situation.

For them being homeless isn't a lifestyle, it's a tragedy.

[JPaul]

Have you read "Down and out in Paris and London".

If not you may wish to.

[hobbes]

NB your bold, not mine.

What you made was a statement, which you saw fit to highlight.

That statement was not qualified in any way, either in or of itself, or by the context in which it was made.

How the feck were people supposed to read between that particular line.

For many people, for many reasons, homelessness is not a lifestyle choice. It is a result of circumstances outwith their control. Whether it be mental illness, being thrown out of their home by parents, bankruptcy, depression due to things which happen to them, whatever.

The sweeping generalization, coz that's what it was, is and remains offensive to the innocent victims and to those who try to help them.

To argue that you were right, or misunderstood based on semantics is poor form, poor form indeed. It does you no credit.

Your only possible redemption is a sentence which begins "Sorry, my bad, what I actually meant to say was ...."

Sure, I have no problem with that.

For those who have been derailed in life and who have fallen into hard times, they may not take that expression in the context that it was intended.

For this thread, I had emblazened in my mind those hardened NYC bums who get belligerent if you don't toss them some change. In my mind, I picture those who HAVE exploited animals for their pathetic lifestyle.

In my mind, homeless is not simply about not having a home, it is a mindset, a lifestyle.

I view those who loss their homes through a turn of bad luck but are doing what they can to return to a stable situation as displaced.

One is a lifestyle,
the other a bad memory.

[JPaul]

So you assume that your own prejudices so pervade your posts that they will be self evident to the rest of us. Sorry, that didn't work for me.

What you had emblazened in your mind says more about you than it does about those of whom you speak.

[hobbes]

So you assume that your own prejudices so pervade your posts that they will be self evident to the rest of us. Sorry, that didn't work for me.

What you had emblazened in your mind says more about you than it does about those of whom you speak.

What do you want, I said I was sorry for those who were offended.

What does that second comment even mean?

[JPaul]

What do you want, I said I was sorry for those who were offended.

Where.

Or do we have to read between the lines again.