PETA Calls For Shock Collar Ban After Dad Uses it on Kids
Residents of Salem, Oregon, were stunned to find out that their neighbor, 41-year-old Todd Marcum, was using a shock collar to torment his four children—who range from age 3 to age 9. At a trial this week, Marcum pleaded guilty to four counts of criminal mistreatment and was sentenced to three years of probation.
The lieutenant who worked on the case said that Marcum "got great entertainment from chasing his younger child around the house with a dog collar to the point the child was crying and afraid the shock was going to come."
Shock collars hurt, and they shouldn't be used on anyone for any reason. That's exactly why PETA is calling on the mayor of Salem to ban shock collars in the city completely. No human or animal should live in fear of being shocked. In addition to causing animals physical pain and potential injury, shock collars can terrify and lead to psychological problems, including severe anxiety and displaced aggression. The anxiety and confusion caused by repeated shocks can lead to changes in heart or respiration rate as well as gastrointestinal disorders.
I think that most parents are smart enough to know not to shock their kids—but many people get fooled by dominance trainers into thinking that shock collars are the only way to discipline their dog. Please always remember that there are more effective, humane ways to train your dog.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
Making a coorilation between what we ought not do to our children and to what we should and should not do to a dog is laughable logic. Under this logic, it should be socially acceptable to refuse treating a child for cancer if the parent decides it's too much of a burden.
Fact of reality. Dogs are not human, we treat them differently. One psychotic idiot torturing his children can not be used as a rubric to determine what is acceptable or unacceptable. Remember, PETA are the idiots who chastise Obama for killing a fly... Do not listen to them.
For the life of me i just cannot truly understand PETA . Personally i love animals , but to value the life of an animal over that of a human is disgusting. but to the point shock collars being banned is completly absurd, because some moron used them on childern. in the hands of someone who guenily cares about their animals it can be a very useful aid. but in the hands of a sadist it could easily become cruel. all that being said i would personally end the life of my dog (which i love very much) to save a single street junkie.
Now you all understand what a dog goes through; but it's actually worse because a dog doesn't understand. It is animal cruelty to use as a dog and too bad society won't press charges on the companies that make them.
PETA is forever that group of Ivory Tower Cellar activists that I can not argue in defense of even playing the worst of Devil's advocates.
At the end of the day, if we solve the rest of our problems, we might pick up the animal cruelty dilema and solve it.
We got a long day ahead of us before that, though...
Why in the world would they be banned because of this incident? That's like saying because a father beat his child with a belt, we now need to ban belts.
I assume you they aren't referring to electric fences since they aren't that bad. My dogs had them and got shocked 4 times before the figured out the boundary in their 10+ year lifespan. I even shocked myself with it before I would put it on them (although not around my neck - but they have a good deal of fur) and the pain went away in about 2 minutes tops - it barely hurt =/
Assuming you mean just those remote control dog collars, I don't understand the point of them considering you can train the dogs with just food rather than shocking them. That said, maybe if you have an excessively aggressive dog with would have benefits? I don't know. I don't think every time someone abuses a product we need to be called for it to be banned. As a side note, how popular are remote shock collars? I hardily ever see them used and I haven't seen them sold at any pet store (although granted I wasn't looking for one).
Obviously, you can not use it on a small child though. A child isn't a pet.
People doing bad things and instead of looking at the people and demanding justice, we look at that is in their hands and exact our justice in the object.
If a person hits a dog with a stick, it is not the stick which is the problem, but the person.
Stop punishing things and focus your attentions on the people using them cruelly.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
The only use that I know of for a shock collar is to inflict pain on dogs or other animals . It is not like a stick which can be used for many other things. As such if we think intentional, unnecessary infliction of pain is wrong then banning shock collars would make perfect sense.
“The only use that I know of for a shock collar is to inflict pain on dogs or other animals .”
That is not the purpose of a shock collar. The purpose is to provide a means of containing an animal in situations where a physical fence is impractical. This saves animals lives by preventing them from wandering. When used responsibly they are very humane… and are an excellent way to protect an animal who cannot understand why they should remain in a yard.
I have been zapped by a shock collar before (I was holding it in my hand and walked across the line to see what it was like) and it did not hurt in the least, comparable to some shocks I’ve gotten from static electricity.
They are a training aid used to associate certain behaviors with a momentary feeling of pain. Certain behaviors commonly correct include: Jumping on people, escaping fenced-in areas, moving downrange in hunting training, barking, chasing people, chasing other animals , fighting, and chasing cars .
The pain is not debilitating like what you would expect from a taser , and is very temporary. It is humane and effective and once the dog learns its boundaries and prohibited behaviors, the collar would be removed and replaced with an I.D. collar.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
If we shouldn't use a shock collar on a child then we shouldn't use it on an animal.