🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Apr12.201321.24624@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@atropa (Mike Berger) writes:
>I write:
>
>>Shock, in the sense Jon means, is NOT torture.  It's simple the slightly
>>undesirable sensation of current running through the skin.  Go put a nine
>>volt battery on your tongue.  You probably won't like it, but it's far
>>from torture.
>*----
>You're right - I wouldn't like it at all.  And it most certainly WOULD
>look like torture to me if somebody strapped a collar around me that
>could shock me at HIS discretion, and I have no control over it.

If you're a dog, you learn that you only get shocked when you try to leave
your yard.  I agree that some jerk indiscriminantly causing even slighly
unpleasant sensations could be construed as torture.  (Chinese water
torture, for instance.)

>>If dogs were smart enough that you could tell them not to wander outside
>>their yards, fine -- maybe we wouldn't need shock collars.  But they can't,
>>and the only thing that a dog is going to understand when its master isn't
>>standing right over it is some remote physical stimulation -- high frequency
>>sound, shocks, or whatever.
>*----
>If owners were responsible enough to take proper care of their dogs, they
>wouldn't resort to torture devices.  Shock collars are not a constructive
>or positive way to teach a dog anything but fear.  I know many well-behaved
>dogs that didn't need pain and fear to teach them.

OK, I don't know enough about training dogs to refute this, so I'll assume 
you know this is true and agree that it's possible.  I still don't like
your use of the word "torture," though, since that makes me think of
things that make people scream out in pain.  9 volt batteries on the tongue
don't make me scream out in pain...

I thnk the point you're making is a good one: Shock collars are a negative
feedback means of training.  You prefer positive feedback methods.  Fine.
Which is more effective?  I don't know... Perhaps some psychologists could
comment on this.  (On sci.electonics?  Fat chance, but...)

I'll give you this, though: If you could demonstrate an effective means of
trying my dog to stay in my yard using positive feedback, I'll personally
use it as compared to negative feedback.  However, just because I do this,
I'm not so sure I want to force everyone else to use the same method 
(positive feedback).

>>If you want to talk about taking this idea a little too far, perhaps we should
>>discuss cattle prods.  I've been told that these things are quite painful to
>>the beast of which they're applied...
>*----
>Nobody asked for help with a cattle prod, or I might have replied similarly.

I mentioned this because cattle prods, to me, are a lot closer to "toture"
than shock collars.

>>Finally, if you meant this humorously, you can disregard the above.  But
>>I didn't see a smiley...
>*----
>You really think it's funny?!

Little "shake my hand and you'll get a buzz!" novelty toys certainly can
be funny, for a little while.  

In conclusion, let me say this: I think myself, and a large number of other
people reading this don't consider low current shock collars akin to torture,
and don't have a problem with using them on dogs.  If you do, fine: Don't
use them yourself.  It's good that you remind people that they should 
consier their own morals before they blindly answer a question that you
find offensive, however.

Anyway, this is getting way off of sci.electonics...  Anybody know of a better
group for these kinds of discussions?

						---Joel Kolstad