Quote:
Originally Posted by moon
When you say minimizing the dog risk and then no dogs is minimizing the risk would the examples above be have no hot water heater and never fly a kite?
By not owning a vicious dog people are minimizing the risk, by watching the dog when it is interacting with the baby you are minimizing the risk etc.
You seem to advocate minimizing risk in some cases and yet eliminate the dog in that case because you don't like them.
I don't anyone is saying that a family should bring in a former Michael Vick dog and then leave it with you baby with a steak around the babies neck. People are saying like what you did with the hot water heater and the kite examples that with taking the proper steps the risk is so minimal that eliminating the dog isn't worth it and that worrying about it is pointless as well because the risk is so small.
|
No, turning your hot water tank down to non-scalding temperatures eliminates the risk. Not flying a kite in a storm eliminates the risk. I'm interested in eliminating risks wherever I can for my kids to maximize their probability of growing up un-maimed.
IDK, maybe there's a surgery you can get on a dog to disable their
320 pounds of bite pressure and round their teeth, in which case you'd probably eliminate any risk they'd pose.