Shock Collar Containment Systems for Pets – Not Recommended by the Large Fierce Mammals

Posted By on June 18, 2010


12 Responses to “Shock Collar Containment Systems for Pets – Not Recommended by the Large Fierce Mammals”

  1. Paula Cardinell says:

    I would just like to say THANK YOU for saving my dogs from me 🙂 I came very close to installing one of these underground fences but on your advice decided not to. At the time there wasn’t very much discussion about it, so I am also grateful for the article. Once again…enlightened and always blessed to know you 🙂

  2. Randy says:

    Thank you Paula. Your dogs have us on retainer to protect them from you. They don’t have a lot of money on their own but your pig is a loan shark.

  3. Kim says:

    ok I have to stop reading your blogs…they have me all fired up and no one to bitch at! My neighbor has an invisible fence and guess what? It didnt work! They left their little jack russell out unattended, he broke the barrier and got hit by a car. Luckily he did survive…and he has been tied since. I always felt bad walking by with my 3 dogs and seeing this poor little guy who got to see the rest of the world through his invisible fence but never got to experience it. To me, that is mental torture. so I guess one day he decided to rebel. and as for the little shit in NFLD…he should be locked up…as I predict we have a little Jeffrey Dahmer emerging. I won’t tell you what I would do if it was my dog but it would involve severe pain and eventually death.

    • Diana says:

      Kim – don’t you dare stop reading and commenting! We need more people coming forward with their experiences about incidents like this!

  4. Randy says:

    This subject got into my craw so deeply that it was days before I was able to write about it in a controlled fashion.

  5. Selina says:

    Hopefully this opens ppls eyes to what an invisible fence really is.. it is just for lazy owners. I would b scared to death about other animals and ppl coming in my yard. The other day I had kids trying to pick at my dogs through my fence. They asked if they could go in, I said “no” because my dogs should never b around ppl they don’t know unsupervised. Now if I would have had an invisible fence they would have walked right in my yard and started playing with my dogs not even knowing what my dogs may do to those kids. I can’t believe that dog was shot for protecting itself and his property. I am very upset about this. But a human can harm another human (kill, rape, abuse) and they get to live happy for the rest of their useless lives!

  6. Stu Cyberstud Dunn says:

    I would say most users of the collars I have met and all that I have helped work with their dogs, are indeed lazy self excusing and downright abusive. Now on the right/other hand I have met a few who did not even charge the batteries in their unit and the dogs were awesome. Like most things, knowledge is power…buying and using a collar is just a short cut to having power or control over one wee small part of the owners life. SMS (short man syndrome) maybe, or even so simple as the person being badly bread and the recipient of shitty parenting.



  7. joe says:

    Interesting arguments put forth in the article. I noticed toward the end that there was a lot of “you could say” concerning the arguments about what could have saved the girl from getting bitten. This is all true and should not be pushed aside so easily. Where were the childs parents? What if the dog could have been able to exit the yard easily and attack many children? There are inumerable instances of kids/adults being attacked by dogs that were not contained yet this story was chosen simply because an invisible fence was in use. Cherry picking.

  8. Diana says:

    Thanks for the comment Joe, but you missed a few key points. First, this was an article about why we do not recommend invisible fencing, not about unsupervised dogs, which is a problem deserving its own post. We do not condone letting dogs “roam” under any circumstances. Second, and more importantly, the parts you are referring to are the text of an article by Rob Goddard, provided here in case that article disappears. Third, providing examples of incidents where electronic collars have caused damage, whether to the dog or to humans, can hardly be considered “cherry picking”. The story with the little girl is only one example; there are many more in Randy’s article above that. I suggest you read the whole thing, including the articles linked therein, instead of doing your own cherry picking.

  9. robin says:

    certainly there must be a way to make electricusion devices for dogs, illegal and banned EVERYWHERE. It has been achieved in other countries. This torture must be stopped.

  10. Randy says:

    I find it particularly troubling that places like Walmart sell such things, along with items like flea and tick remedies that require more understanding in their use than the casual purchaser will get from a block of small print on the back of a blister pack that will be discarded before it’s read.

Leave a Reply