Reading mode: Light Dark

UK Jessops have made me a criminal!

Go to last post
Lin Evans said:
Lin
wudyi wrote:

snip> What in the hell is a Kuvasz? Not everyone is from NY. Speak english will ya.
Click to expand...
The Kuvasz is a dog that you "teach," and not "train." If you train them, they'll disobey everytime that they disagree with you.



Dave
 
Chato said:
Lin Evans said:
I don't believe anyone here has suggested that the power of the gun will solve all the problems
Click to expand...
(Snip) No argument from me... :)
Chato said:
On your other point, I can't completely agree with you that all are born into the world as tabula rasa. I firmly believe that just like other animal species, there are those which are born "good" and there are those which are born "bad." I do agree that society plays a major role and that in the "majority" of cases, criminals are created rather than born that way. As a long time breeder of dogs, I've witnessed puppies which were simply born bad. Talk to literally "any" experienced breeder and you will find that they agree with me. Their environment and handling by humans is virtually identical to their siblings yet they are aggressive event to the point of viciousness from the time they are old enough to see. Good breeders "bucket" these individuals to remove whatever genetic material is responsible from the gene pool. We are not allowed to do this with humans and there are those sociologists who try to blame the environment for all their bad behavior which is genetically driven. There are "bad" children who will eventually become bad adults and spend most of their lives incarcerated in either mental hospitals or in jails. We are no different that other members of the animal kingdom in that respect though we may delude ourselves into thinking otherwise. The human mind is a variable and behavior is driven by variously the environment, our hormones and our genetic makeup.

Lin
Click to expand...
This is a complex question. As someone whose trained dogs for a living, I've always found this a troubling question. And as student of human nature, even more so. I've found that most of these dogs simply need a completely different approach in order to channel this aggression. While it's not difficult to train dogs, it's always difficult to "teach' dogs. But people are not dogs, and can be taught.

And then there are those dogs, and probably people, who are damaged before birth, or early in their lives. Something missing. Not much can be done with them until science finds an answer

But overall I don't look at this as a "genetic" problem.

Dave
Click to expand...
You can't help it, do you?

Mr Evans was giving us a simple explanation for a millenium old question based on his extensive knowledge of statistics, endochrinology and , um, oh, yes, real (although only perceived by him) world, and you had to come up with a balanced non absolute point of view. Shame on you, my friend!

Take, for example, the training. Are you suggesting that if you apply the same methods to individuals of different characteristics yoyu don't necessarily get the same results? Or even worse that people are different from dogs? What are you a Charlie with a liberal agenda?
--
-------------------------------------------------------
My Galleries: http://webs.ono.com/igonzalezbordes/index.html
 
igb said:
Chato said:
Lin Evans said:
I don't believe anyone here has suggested that the power of the gun will solve all the problems
Click to expand...
(Snip) No argument from me... :)
igb said:
On your other point, I can't completely agree with you that all are born into the world as tabula rasa. I firmly believe that just like other animal species, there are those which are born "good" and there are those which are born "bad." I do agree that society plays a major role and that in the "majority" of cases, criminals are created rather than born that way. As a long time breeder of dogs, I've witnessed puppies which were simply born bad. Talk to literally "any" experienced breeder and you will find that they agree with me. Their environment and handling by humans is virtually identical to their siblings yet they are aggressive event to the point of viciousness from the time they are old enough to see. Good breeders "bucket" these individuals to remove whatever genetic material is responsible from the gene pool. We are not allowed to do this with humans and there are those sociologists who try to blame the environment for all their bad behavior which is genetically driven. There are "bad" children who will eventually become bad adults and spend most of their lives incarcerated in either mental hospitals or in jails. We are no different that other members of the animal kingdom in that respect though we may delude ourselves into thinking otherwise. The human mind is a variable and behavior is driven by variously the environment, our hormones and our genetic makeup.

Lin
Click to expand...
This is a complex question. As someone whose trained dogs for a living, I've always found this a troubling question. And as student of human nature, even more so. I've found that most of these dogs simply need a completely different approach in order to channel this aggression. While it's not difficult to train dogs, it's always difficult to "teach' dogs. But people are not dogs, and can be taught.

And then there are those dogs, and probably people, who are damaged before birth, or early in their lives. Something missing. Not much can be done with them until science finds an answer

But overall I don't look at this as a "genetic" problem.

Dave
Click to expand...
You can't help it, do you?

Mr Evans was giving us a simple explanation for a millenium old question based on his extensive knowledge of statistics, endochrinology and , um, oh, yes, real (although only perceived by him) world, and you had to come up with a balanced non absolute point of view. Shame on you, my friend!
Click to expand...
Mr. Evans is a reasonable, rational, old fashioned Conservative who in todays America (but not the rest of the world) is therefore a liberal.

Whereas I'm a Socialist with a strong Libertarian streak...
igb said:
Take, for example, the training. Are you suggesting that if you apply the same methods to individuals of different characteristics yoyu don't necessarily get the same results? Or even worse that people are different from dogs? What are you a Charlie with a liberal agenda?
--
Click to expand...
Bad Igb, bad Igb...

I gave this example to Lin, to point out that this breed is to a Pitbull as a Pitball is to a Shitzu. Yet, I can walk him around my lower Manhattan neighborhood, often without a leash, with complete trust in his judgement. And I "had" to teach him, because training just didn't work... :(



Dave
 
Actually,

My explanation was based on my own experiences, education and observations and yes, I do have a good deal of experience and formal education with genetics, statistics and human behavior for whatever that's worth.

Nature versus nurture is indeed an age-old question and we certainly won't solve it here. My own belief is as I stated: there are components of each involved in social behavior of the human species.

As for what constitutes the "real world" - I can only speak from my personal experiences and observations gleaned from extensive worldwide travel, two combat tours in Vietnam and 68 years of living in this world.

What I do know for certain is that there are a lot of false theories which simply don't hold water when "applied" to populations. If history has taught us anything it is that it is relatively simple to brainwash entire populations.

I'm a pragmatist. I believe in what works and I believe in throwing out theories which have been proven wrong in practice. What may "work" well in Manhattan may fail miserably in Watts. If one lives in an upscale, gated community a totally different world view might be "learned" than when one lives in the slums and abject poverty of some U.S. neighborhoods and some third-world countries.

Unfortunately, laws are made and enacted often by people who have been born into wealth, power and social status and who have "never" walked a mile in the shoes of the majority of the governed. They may be enacted in good faith and the "belief" that they are "right" because they reflect the experiences of those who create these statutes. Sadly, they are often unfair and simply plain "stupid" from the perspective of the governed. Our representative government here is designed to allow us to replace these individuals when they fail to serve the governed fairly and equitably, but it is often difficult or impossible to get a representative in the race who truly understands the needs and requirements of the masses.

There are many idealists who truly haven't a clue, but who are able to argue forcefully and eloquently and convince most that they truly know what's "best" for them. It's a sad reality that we are frequently doomed to repeat our errors and that we rarely learn from history. It's also sad that we often fail to realize that we share a tremendous amount of genetic material with some of our animal "relatives" and that we are not as "different" from some other species as we would like to believe.

Lin

igb wrote:
snip
igb said:
igb said:
Dave
Click to expand...
You can't help it, do you?

Mr Evans was giving us a simple explanation for a millenium old question based on his extensive knowledge of statistics, endochrinology and , um, oh, yes, real (although only perceived by him) world, and you had to come up with a balanced non absolute point of view. Shame on you, my friend!

Take, for example, the training. Are you suggesting that if you apply the same methods to individuals of different characteristics yoyu don't necessarily get the same results? Or even worse that people are different from dogs? What are you a Charlie with a liberal agenda?
--
-------------------------------------------------------
My Galleries: http://webs.ono.com/igonzalezbordes/index.html
Click to expand...
 
Lin Evans said:
Actually,

My explanation was based on my own experiences, education and observations and yes, I do have a good deal of experience and formal education with genetics, statistics and human behavior for whatever that's worth.
Click to expand...
I don't want to go there, really. Suffice it to say that if you think that you made the most of any introductory course you may have taken a century ago, you were wrong.
Member said:
Nature versus nurture is indeed an age-old question and we certainly won't solve it here. My own belief is as I stated: there are components of each involved in social behavior of the human species.

As for what constitutes the "real world" - I can only speak from my personal experiences and observations gleaned from extensive worldwide travel, two combat tours in Vietnam and 68 years of living in this world.

What I do know for certain is that there are a lot of false theories which simply don't hold water when "applied" to populations. If history has taught us anything it is that it is relatively simple to brainwash entire populations.

I'm a pragmatist. I believe in what works and I believe in throwing out theories which have been proven wrong in practice.
Click to expand...
I hope you don't expect to disprove social theories on the effect of firearms in crime in personal experience right?
Member said:
What may "work" well in Manhattan may fail miserably in Watts. If one lives in an upscale, gated community a totally different world view might be "learned" than when one lives in the slums and abject poverty of some U.S. neighborhoods and some third-world countries.
Click to expand...
Oh, boy. You do like platitudes and blanket statements.
Member said:
Unfortunately, laws are made and enacted often by people who have been born into wealth, power and social status and who have "never" walked a mile in the shoes of the majority of the governed. They may be enacted in good faith and the "belief" that they are "right" because they reflect the experiences of those who create these statutes. Sadly, they are often unfair and simply plain "stupid" from the perspective of the governed. Our representative government here is designed to allow us to replace these individuals when they fail to serve the governed fairly and equitably, but it is often difficult or impossible to get a representative in the race who truly understands the needs and requirements of the masses.
Click to expand...
You said pragmatist or demagogue? But there's no need to resort to labels t approach the issue in a rational way.

Did you ever noticed that possession of arms by the masses has been frown upon by ruling classes since the middle ages, at least?

I contend that the motives of your "upper class idealists" for opposing firearms (or knives or yawara sticks) are the same today.

See? I made the case for the right to bear arms without using would be "scientific" arguments or an alleged deeper knowledge of "reality". And that without having been to war.
Member said:
There are many idealists who truly haven't a clue, but who are able to argue forcefully and eloquently and convince most that they truly know what's "best" for them. It's a sad reality that we are frequently doomed to repeat our errors and that we rarely learn from history.
Click to expand...
Member said:
It's also sad that we often fail to realize that we share a tremendous amount of genetic material with some of our animal "relatives" and that we are not as "different" from some other species as we would like to believe.
Click to expand...
I see we're back to check one. How (and if) it translates into similar behaviour is still open to debate. You cannot use it to support any claim, let alone the convenience of bearing arms.
Member said:
igb wrote:
snip
Member said:
Member said:
Dave
Click to expand...
You can't help it, do you?

Mr Evans was giving us a simple explanation for a millenium old question based on his extensive knowledge of statistics, endochrinology and , um, oh, yes, real (although only perceived by him) world, and you had to come up with a balanced non absolute point of view. Shame on you, my friend!

Take, for example, the training. Are you suggesting that if you apply the same methods to individuals of different characteristics yoyu don't necessarily get the same results? Or even worse that people are different from dogs? What are you a Charlie with a liberal agenda?
--
-------------------------------------------------------
My Galleries: http://webs.ono.com/igonzalezbordes/index.html
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
-------------------------------------------------------
My Galleries: http://webs.ono.com/igonzalezbordes/index.html
 
Chato said:
carl english said:
This is absolutely insane and highlights the amount of time that can be wasted be the courts on such trivia. when searching for drugs be it in homes or vehicles the Police always emphasise how important it is to catch the suppliers. in this case why wasn't Jessops taken to court for supplying the knife?
Click to expand...
No offense to all Brits, but are you guys telling me that if I walk around with a pen knife (and I DO carry a knife all the time in New York as a handy tool) I can be arrested and actually sentenced to jail?

Good thing they didn't catch you with a steak knife.

Dave
Click to expand...
Jeez. Send those cops to Virginia. My wife and I stopped by to see her son yesterday. He was home from work, and heading for the woods with a .45 auto on his hip to do some target shooting.

I carry an old Stanley pocket knife for the same reasons as the OP, and usually have a hunting knife of some kind in the old truck. That's mainly there because I forget it's there. It bounces along next to two monopods and a CF tripod, a couple of Toys for Tots signs and similar accumulated gear.

Unreal. You cannot go out in public with a penknife, something almost every school boy used to carry, in your car glove box. Things have changed here, too, but by the time that change arrives, I'll have been pushing up daisies for a number of years and won't have to deal with it.

Of course, in some states, cops have been noted for busting 8 year old kids who have scissors with them in school, so the idiocy is not confined to Europe.

IMO, cops who go that far to get an arrest should be fired instantly, too.

--
Charlie Self



http://www.charlieselfonline.com
 
I see. Of course you do... (want to go there).

"Introductory course?"

Now you are making assumptions about the level, value and dates of my education and experiences which couldn't be further from factual; and you apparently believe that you, instead, know the "truth"?

O.K., I agree that there is no reason to discuss it further since you seem to enjoy special knowledge to which I'm not privy, and apparently your education and experiences are superior. I yield. And speaking of proclaiming absolutes.......

Lin
igb said:
Lin Evans said:
Actually,

My explanation was based on my own experiences, education and observations and yes, I do have a good deal of experience and formal education with genetics, statistics and human behavior for whatever that's worth.
Click to expand...
I don't want to go there, really. Suffice it to say that if you think that you made the most of any introductory course you may have taken a century ago, you were wrong.
Click to expand...
snip
 
Lin Evans said:
"Introductory course?"

Now you are making assumptions about the level, value and dates of my education and experiences which couldn't be further from factual; and you apparently believe that you, instead, know the "truth"?

O.K., I agree that there is no reason to discuss it further since you seem to enjoy special knowledge to which I'm not privy, and apparently your education and experiences are superior. I yield. And speaking of proclaiming absolutes.......

Lin
igb said:
Lin Evans said:
Actually,

My explanation was based on my own experiences, education and observations and yes, I do have a good deal of experience and formal education with genetics, statistics and human behavior for whatever that's worth.
Click to expand...
I don't want to go there, really. Suffice it to say that if you think that you made the most of any introductory course you may have taken a century ago, you were wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Remember the case of Richard Speck? I forget the sequence but something to the order of having an extra "x" gene? While I forget the details I wont forget the hype that stated that he was born with a missing (or extra) gene, and was, as the newspapers stated, "predisposed to violence and crime."

There are physical characteristics that go with this.

So anyway, some wise guy discovers an odd humanitarian society in Sweden, that consisted primarily of such people, and were about as far away from criminal activity as anyone could imagine.

Lincohn probably had this condition.

There is a difference between physical damage to the brain, and genetic change in the brain. I have a hard time with the entire concept of being "predisposed" to crime.

I brought up the Kuvasz because this is an entire breed with a "predisposition" to violence - But it just ain't so. I mention him and the breed, because after five or six thousand years of selective breeding, one would think that we are talking about genetic change - And it's true, like all breeds, their temperment is close to being a built in or bred in instinct - But it's not a predisposition to violence, it's predispostion to protect things. This is far more vague and abstract, and therefore responds to different methods of training - In his case "teaching."

Dave
 
Chato said:
Chato said:
MikeSoCal said:
Laws such as banning weapons are needed to control the masses. As a Fabian Socalist I support these laws.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Chato said:
I Love Fabian Socialists. It's a synonym for "I want a Nanny State NOW, and I'll kill you if I have to, in order to get it (For your own good of course). :)

Dave
Click to expand...
MikeSoCal already has his "Nanny State," he lives in one.

And what's-up with all these cutesy shortened ways of of pronouncing names of states - etc.? "Nat Geo" - "SoCal" - etc.

Greg
 
Hi Dave,

It's always difficult, at least until the entire human genome is known, just what the myriad interactions between genes and behavior might be. There have been lots of guesses and some interesting studies using planarian flatworms where they were trained (in the very rudimentary sense that worms can be trained or perhaps a better choice of words is "conditioned") to respond to the combination of bright light coupled with electrical shock. The experiments indicated that genetic memory (or hormone/RNA) might be passed from generation to generation. Just how this could or could not impact a very highly developed species such as a dog or even human is not totally clear, but it raises the possibility that there are stronger components to genetic encoding that perhaps we have previously been aware. Further experiments with more evolved members of the animal kingdom didn't substantiate the 1955 experiments and double blind experiments failed to produce the same results in later testing.

As a long time breeder of both American Pit Bull Terriers and Alaskan Malamutes, I've had the opportunity to see interesting traits including phenotypical, genotypical and behavioral traits passed through line breeding experiments. I've also seen the results of letting puppies which were apparently born with "issues" mature. There are definitely large differences in predispositions toward certain behaviors between different breeds. The Kuvasc, Chow Chow, German Shepherd and a few other breeds are good examples of differentiations in the theme of protectiveness. Also it is interesting to witness how observers can mistake a protective instinct for generalized aggression.

An example of this is with the American Pit Bull Terrier. Though they have a reputation for being human aggressive, this is a rare thing with a well bred specimen. They have had years of breeding to be canine aggressive and this is a normal trait for the breed. But contrary to popular belief (promoted by the press) they are one of the most human friendly and amicable breeds I've ever encountered. In over 60 years of my personal experience (my parents and grandparents were breeders) I've never had one of my puppies ever bite or act aggressive toward a human other than in rough play where grabbing at a toy or towel and accidentally nipping a finger was involved. Yes, like most puppies they will chew on your hands when teething, but never bite out of aggression.

Yet there are some which are simply badly bred and can easily be made human aggressive. One of the most human aggressive species I've seen in recent years are Cocker Spaniels. This didn't used to be the case so something has happened and it's "not" environmental which has produced a line of this breed with undesirable characteristics.

For a time, it was difficult to find a decent Doberman Pinscher in my area. Backyard breeders apparently mistook nervousness for the "alertness" called for in the standard and bred numerous fear biters. In the past 10 years or so, this has greatly diminished and now I'm seeing lots of well behaved and very predictable temperaments in this breed.

The bottom line is that breeding dogs has shown that selective breeding can definitely change behavioral traits over time. This has also been shown to be true with cattle and a few other members of the animal kingdom. I have no reason to doubt that it "probably" also applies to humans as well. There is no easy way to be certain, but whatever the specifics of the mechanism, there is "likely" to be a genetic component.

Best regards,

Lin
Chato said:
Remember the case of Richard Speck? I forget the sequence but something to the order of having an extra "x" gene? While I forget the details I wont forget the hype that stated that he was born with a missing (or extra) gene, and was, as the newspapers stated, "predisposed to violence and crime."

There are physical characteristics that go with this.

So anyway, some wise guy discovers an odd humanitarian society in Sweden, that consisted primarily of such people, and were about as far away from criminal activity as anyone could imagine.

Lincohn probably had this condition.

There is a difference between physical damage to the brain, and genetic change in the brain. I have a hard time with the entire concept of being "predisposed" to crime.

I brought up the Kuvasz because this is an entire breed with a "predisposition" to violence - But it just ain't so. I mention him and the breed, because after five or six thousand years of selective breeding, one would think that we are talking about genetic change - And it's true, like all breeds, their temperment is close to being a built in or bred in instinct - But it's not a predisposition to violence, it's predispostion to protect things. This is far more vague and abstract, and therefore responds to different methods of training - In his case "teaching."

Dave
Click to expand...
 
Lin Evans said:
Hi Dave,

It's always difficult, at least until the entire human genome is known, just what the myriad interactions between genes and behavior might be. There have been lots of guesses and some interesting studies using planarian flatworms where they were trained (in the very rudimentary sense that worms can be trained or perhaps a better choice of words is "conditioned") to respond to the combination of bright light coupled with electrical shock. The experiments indicated that genetic memory (or hormone/RNA) might be passed from generation to generation. Just how this could or could not impact a very highly developed species such as a dog or even human is not totally clear, but it raises the possibility that there are stronger components to genetic encoding that perhaps we have previously been aware. Further experiments with more evolved members of the animal kingdom didn't substantiate the 1955 experiments and double blind experiments failed to produce the same results in later testing.

As a long time breeder of both American Pit Bull Terriers and Alaskan Malamutes, I've had the opportunity to see interesting traits including phenotypical, genotypical and behavioral traits passed through line breeding experiments. I've also seen the results of letting puppies which were apparently born with "issues" mature. There are definitely large differences in predispositions toward certain behaviors between different breeds. The Kuvasc, Chow Chow, German Shepherd and a few other breeds are good examples of differentiations in the theme of protectiveness. Also it is interesting to witness how observers can mistake a protective instinct for generalized aggression.

An example of this is with the American Pit Bull Terrier. Though they have a reputation for being human aggressive, this is a rare thing with a well bred specimen. They have had years of breeding to be canine aggressive and this is a normal trait for the breed. But contrary to popular belief (promoted by the press) they are one of the most human friendly and amicable breeds I've ever encountered. In over 60 years of my personal experience (my parents and grandparents were breeders) I've never had one of my puppies ever bite or act aggressive toward a human other than in rough play where grabbing at a toy or towel and accidentally nipping a finger was involved. Yes, like most puppies they will chew on your hands when teething, but never bite out of aggression.

Yet there are some which are simply badly bred and can easily be made human aggressive. One of the most human aggressive species I've seen in recent years are Cocker Spaniels. This didn't used to be the case so something has happened and it's "not" environmental which has produced a line of this breed with undesirable characteristics.

For a time, it was difficult to find a decent Doberman Pinscher in my area. Backyard breeders apparently mistook nervousness for the "alertness" called for in the standard and bred numerous fear biters. In the past 10 years or so, this has greatly diminished and now I'm seeing lots of well behaved and very predictable temperaments in this breed.

The bottom line is that breeding dogs has shown that selective breeding can definitely change behavioral traits over time. This has also been shown to be true with cattle and a few other members of the animal kingdom. I have no reason to doubt that it "probably" also applies to humans as well. There is no easy way to be certain, but whatever the specifics of the mechanism, there is "likely" to be a genetic component.

Best regards,

Lin
Click to expand...
Perceptive post Lin, and if I read you right, you're saying, if from a different slant, the same thing I'm saying. We simply don't know.

And it may be that in this vast amount of not being sure, and not being certain, we lean in different directions.

But so many ARE sure, and they are ready to act on their bias. Just as we both know about the movement to actually outlaw Pits, because their "killers." And these same people would obviously embrace the same concepts with people - "They're born to be killers." And thus my Richard Speck example.

BTW, I agree with you 100 percent on Pits, and time and time again I have seen owners who abuse and encourage their puppies to be aggresive. What a surprise when they turn out to be aggressive and turn on someone? And then of course, since it's a popular breed, sh!t happens. Inevitable statistical flukes quoted as "proof."

But people have never been bred. Incest is discouraged by both law and custom. Those aggressive Spaniels are simply inbred nervous wrecks, and some of them wont bite, they just cower.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top