Originally Posted by
mgmoore7
I understand the statistics. It still proves the same point. I can't imagine that the statistics would be any different if you put some sort of degree on the damage done. Obviously a small dog may bite more but the wound is much less and it is much easier to defend yourself.
Maybe I'm not clear on your argument then. Large dogs have a higher potential for damage so they should not be allowed to exist? Humans can cause more harm than any dog, as can be seen by your father and his gun. Please rephrase your point.
Originally Posted by
BostonRoadee
Has anyone had any luck with the "Dazer" type dog-repellent?
Clip it to your waistline or bike, press the button, it emits an ultrasonic pitch that's supposedly harsh to dogs and makes 'em back off. (Hurts my ears, too -- hmm...)
My experience is that no one thing is effective against all dogs. They have their own personalities and therefore different things work with different dogs. I can tell you that my dog loves to "attack" anything that makes a high pitched, electronic noise. I suppose the good thing in that case is he'd bite your Dazer instead of you, but it wouldn't really work as a repellent.
