Started By
Message

re: Bill to ban dogs in truck beds passes out of committee

Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:09 am to
Posted by Galactic Inquisitor
An Incredibly Distant Star
Member since Dec 2013
15176 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:09 am to
The OP should be updated to include the very important word "unrestrained." Then, it should be moved to political talk before the dick measuring contest goes too far here.
Posted by pointdog33
Member since Jan 2012
2765 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:09 am to
quote:

It's just on more freedom that is being taken away from us and I don't like it



Load laws are already on the books nothing novel is being introduced here.
Posted by LSUballs
RayVegas LA
Member since Feb 2008
37743 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:11 am to
quote:

But when your freedom puts others and/or my family at risk, that is when I have a problem with your freedom.



Ok. Where does it end. Your family has a much greater risk of being injured from a dog running out in the road. So let's just ban dogs all together. You may go to Popeye's and choke on a chicken bone at lunch. Lets ban chicken. There comes a point where you have to quit making laws for every little thing that may or may not happen and let people live their life.
Posted by pointdog33
Member since Jan 2012
2765 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:12 am to
quote:

Your family has a much greater risk of being injured from a dog running out in the road


Leash laws already exist as well.
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:13 am to
quote:

Load laws are already on the books nothing novel is being introduced here.


According to this nothing new is being introduced and it's just wasting time.

Change this law to include dogs riding unrestrained in cabs and watch the uproar. My ex girlfriend, who was FURIOUS if I let my dog ride in the bed of my truck across a cow pasture, rides with her dog in the back seat all the time. She would throw fits when I insisted she put her dog in a box. Those are the kind of people who would push some feel good shite like this and it pisses me off.
Posted by Salmon
On the trails
Member since Feb 2008
83556 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:15 am to
quote:

Your family has a much greater risk of being injured from a dog running out in the road.


Leash laws exist...

quote:

You may go to Popeye's and choke on a chicken bone at lunch.


My family can choose to not eat chicken.
Posted by pointdog33
Member since Jan 2012
2765 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:17 am to
I think you and I are saying the exact same thing. Include animals in the definition of load and also include in cab animals. I rode around all the time with my heelers on the 4-wheeler while going through pastures and now when my pointers want a ride they can ride too. I don't do it on the open public road.
Posted by LSUballs
RayVegas LA
Member since Feb 2008
37743 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:19 am to
quote:

Leash laws exist...




What's your point? They're obviously not working. I probably passed 5 dead dogs on my way to work. Dogs are still getting squished at an alarming rate and putting themselves in front of vehicles.

quote:

My family can choose to not eat chicken.


Amd? Your family can choose to live in a bubble if you want to.
Posted by Salmon
On the trails
Member since Feb 2008
83556 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:22 am to
quote:

What's your point? They're obviously not working.


It's not my fault that LEO do not enforce certain laws.

quote:

Your family can choose to live in a bubble if you want to.


My point was that eating chicken is a choice that I can make. If I feel it is unsafe, I can choose to not eat chicken.

I cannot choose who gets in front of me while driving on the highway.
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:22 am to
quote:

nclude animals in the definition of load and also include in cab animals


I'd get on board with that.

Don't single out dogs in truck beds. If the housewives can ride their ankle biters in the driver seat because locking them up hurts their feelings, well damnit tying my dog up hurts my feelings and he's riding in the back.
Posted by pointdog33
Member since Jan 2012
2765 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:24 am to
quote:

If the housewives


I've seen more than a few F-250 and 350 men drivers who have their ankle biters in their lap.
This post was edited on 4/15/14 at 9:25 am
Posted by ComicTiger
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2005
992 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:25 am to
some people are literally too stupid to talk to and ULM is that guy today.

and I'm all about freedom. Want to ride your bike with no helmet? have at it. Eat whatever you want, smoke all the cigarettes you want.

This is about someone being reckless with their responsibility that can cause harm to another human and cruelty to animals that are supposedly cared for by their owner.
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:29 am to
quote:

This is about someone being reckless with their responsibility that can cause harm to another human and cruelty to animals that are supposedly cared for by their owner.


No it isn't. It's about making the subdivision wives happy.
Posted by LSUballs
RayVegas LA
Member since Feb 2008
37743 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:32 am to
I don't understand your thinking. Unless you live in a bubble you are putting yourself at risk everyday. Having to be policed for every little aspect of life is not the way I want to live. There comes a time when you have to police yourself and have the government stay out of it. The end.
Posted by Salmon
On the trails
Member since Feb 2008
83556 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:35 am to
quote:

There comes a time when you have to police yourself and have the government stay out of it. The end.


When your actions could potentially put others at harm, sometimes you need to be policed.

You can put yourself at harm all you want, but when it comes to my family, if it takes government intervention to stop you from putting them at risk, then so be it.

This all just seems like common sense to me.
Posted by YellowMouthJunkie
South LA
Member since Dec 2012
77 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:38 am to
quote:

When your actions could potentially put others at harm, sometimes you need to be policed.


Your rights stop where my rights start.

I'm sure you would feel different if you lost a loved one because someone couldnt take an extra 30 seconds to hook a leash to their dog's collar.
Posted by Palo Gaucho
Benton
Member since Jul 2013
3334 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:39 am to
Waste of time and money
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:40 am to
quote:

I'm sure you would feel different if you lost a loved one because someone couldnt take an extra 30 seconds to hook a leash to their dog's collar.


This law already exists. If that happened right now, I'm sure the dog's owner would have some serious legal repercussions to deal with.

ETA: AND if it did happen, people wouldn't ride with dogs in the back of the truck. If that has actually happened, advertise that on facebook and you'll solve a wholeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee lot more of the problem then you would passing this law, for free, without requiring legislative approval.

It's not about fixing problems. It's about making emotional people feel better.
This post was edited on 4/15/14 at 9:46 am
Posted by tenfoe
Member since Jun 2011
6846 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:42 am to
quote:

You can put yourself at harm all you want, but when it comes to my family, if it takes government intervention to stop you from putting them at risk, then so be it.


If it's really about safety, they would decide everyone needs to pass a driving test and written test every year, or otherwise have their car impounded and license taken away. I cannot believe a regulation that governs only one tiny percentage of traffic hazards is genuine in its intent until the regulators begin to tackle the largest problems in the same manner.
Posted by Salmon
On the trails
Member since Feb 2008
83556 posts
Posted on 4/15/14 at 9:47 am to
quote:

I cannot believe a regulation that governs only one tiny percentage of traffic hazards is genuine in its intent


what do you think the intent for this law is then?

they just want to piss off rednecks?
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram