On 2015-12-29 5:36 PM, wrote:

> I prefer to back in and drive out.

That is the second safest way to do it. Defensive driving teaches you to
drive in and drive out, but you have to find a spot where you can do that.

> YMMV but we have idiots here who
> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
> seen.

I would not object to a bounty on people who do that. In my experience,
they not only walk behind backing vehicles, but they seem inclined to
walk across diagonally, so they will be in the way even longer.

On 30/12/2015 11:05 wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 23:15:13 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
> wrote:
>
>>On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>>
>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>> seen.
>>
>>Don't they have right of way?
>>
>>(...)
>
> My father once told me "Here lies the body of William Grey, He died
> maintaining his right of way"

So the vehicle that's backing up is the idiot, not
the pedestrians.

--
Bruce

On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 00:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
wrote:

>On 30/12/2015 11:05 wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 23:15:13 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>>>
>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>>> seen.
>>>
>>>Don't they have right of way?
>>>
>>>(...)
>>
>> My father once told me "Here lies the body of William Grey, He died
>> maintaining his right of way"
>
>So the vehicle that's backing up is the idiot, not
>the pedestrians.

Nooo, think about it.

wrote:
>>> My father once told me "Here lies the body of William Grey, He died
>>> >>maintaining his right of way"
>> >
>> >So the vehicle that's backing up is the idiot, not
>> >the pedestrians.
> Nooo, think about it.

Vehicle vs. pedestrian.

Every court in the world chooses the pedestrian.

Dumb old bag.

On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 5:40:28 PM UTC-7, la llorona wrote:
> wrote:
> >>> My father once told me "Here lies the body of William Grey, He died
> >>> >>maintaining his right of way"
> >> >
> >> >So the vehicle that's backing up is the idiot, not
> >> >the pedestrians.
> > Nooo, think about it.
>
> Vehicle vs. pedestrian.
>
> Every court in the world chooses the pedestrian.
>
> Dumb old bag.

Tsk! Tsk!...that is not very respectful Mr. Troll (or is that Ms. Troll) as I suspect.
====

On 12/29/2015 8:37 AM, Gary wrote:

> Here's a pic of Mr.Kitty checking one out. He knew that small pets
> here were off-limits so he didn't try to eat one.
> http://i63.tinypic.com/34t8qd3.jpg

How did you get him to go against nature? I kept fancy mice for about a
year, the first ones were rescued off of freecycle but any opportunity
one of mine had to snatch one he'd try. He was successful once* which is
why I stopped keeping them. It wasn't fair to either of the species.


*He snatched one out of the aquarium so quickly I didn't even see him do
it, and ran with it in his mouth downstairs where I caught up with him
and he only left it a little soggy, it wasn't hurt at all. But as you
know, cats like to play with their prey so I have no doubt that he would
have killed it if left to do so.

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

Roy wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 5:40:28 PM UTC-7, la llorona wrote:
>> wrote:
>>>>> My father once told me "Here lies the body of William Grey, He died
>>>>>>> maintaining his right of way"
>>>>>
>>>>> So the vehicle that's backing up is the idiot, not
>>>>> the pedestrians.
>>> Nooo, think about it.
>>
>> Vehicle vs. pedestrian.
>>
>> Every court in the world chooses the pedestrian.
>>
>> Dumb old bag.
>
> Tsk! Tsk!...that is not very respectful Mr. Troll (or is that Ms. Troll) as I suspect.
> ====
>

Mind your suspicions Roy, they may be the undoing of you yet...

Roy wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 5:40:28 PM UTC-7, la llorona wrote:
>> wrote:
>>>>> My father once told me "Here lies the body of William Grey, He died
>>>>>>> maintaining his right of way"
>>>>>
>>>>> So the vehicle that's backing up is the idiot, not
>>>>> the pedestrians.
>>> Nooo, think about it.
>>
>> Vehicle vs. pedestrian.
>>
>> Every court in the world chooses the pedestrian.
>>
>> Dumb old bag.
>
> Tsk! Tsk!...that is not very respectful Mr. Troll (or is that Ms. Troll) as I suspect.
> ====
>
Mind your suspicions Roy!

On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 4:36:30 PM UTC-6, wrote:
>
> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
> seen. At least when I come into the parking lot, when I back in, I
> have sized the situation of people on foot up more readily. It is
> also easier getting out if one of those monster vans or trucks have
> parked beside you.
>
>
YES!!

wrote:
> I back into a guy walking that was oblivious of
> his surroundings. It cost my insurance company $13,000
> when it was all over with.

You dumb bunny, use yer mirrors!

On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 5:17:54 PM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:
> >
> > I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
> > will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
> > seen.
>
> Don't they have right of way?
>
> Bruce
>
>
Evidently they do. See my previous post.

On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-6, Groupkilla wrote:
>
> wrote:
>
> > I back into a guy walking that was oblivious of
> > his surroundings. It cost my insurance company $13,000
> > when it was all over with.
>
> You dumb bunny, use yer mirrors!
>
>
Dummy, there is no mirror that will spot someone suddenly
appearing behind your vehicle out of nowhere.

wrote:

> YES!!
>

Was it _that_ good for you?


Them Nashville bitches, they's dumb as ****ry water...

Them Nashville bitches, they dunno wut they otter...

wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-6, Groupkilla wrote:
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I back into a guy walking that was oblivious of
>>> his surroundings. It cost my insurance company $13,000
>>> when it was all over with.
>>
>> You dumb bunny, use yer mirrors!
>>
>>
> Dummy, there is no mirror that will spot someone suddenly
> appearing behind your vehicle out of nowhere.
>

They's on the doors, outside yer vent wings, ya pathetic webteevee'r....

On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:


>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>> seen.
>
> Don't they have right of way?

They can put that on your tombstone.

nancy

Nancy Young wrote:
> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>
>
>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>> seen.
>>
>> Don't they have right of way?
>
> They can put that on your tombstone.
>
> nancy
>

Pizza...mmm....

On 29/12/2015 6:36 PM, wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-6, Groupkilla wrote:
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I back into a guy walking that was oblivious of
>>> his surroundings. It cost my insurance company $13,000
>>> when it was all over with.
>>
>> You dumb bunny, use yer mirrors!
>>
>>
> Dummy, there is no mirror that will spot someone suddenly
> appearing behind your vehicle out of nowhere.
>
When I'm backing out, my car detects any cross traffic or person.
Graham

On 30/12/2015 13:19 Nancy Young wrote:

> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>
>
>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>> seen.
>>
>> Don't they have right of way?
>
> They can put that on your tombstone.

Right under "Killed by idiot driver"?

--
Bruce

On 12/29/2015 11:05 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On 30/12/2015 13:19 Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>>> seen.
>>>
>>> Don't they have right of way?
>>
>> They can put that on your tombstone.
>
> Right under "Killed by idiot driver"?

"who still can't believe some moron wasn't watching for
backup lights in a parking lot" but is happily enjoying his
life with his family and friends.

nancy

On 30/12/2015 15:44 Nancy Young wrote:

> On 12/29/2015 11:05 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On 30/12/2015 13:19 Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>>>> seen.
>>>>
>>>> Don't they have right of way?
>>>
>>> They can put that on your tombstone.
>>
>> Right under "Killed by idiot driver"?
>
> "who still can't believe some moron wasn't watching for
> backup lights in a parking lot" but is happily enjoying his
> life with his family and friends.

If the pedestrian had right of way, I don't think the
driver would be happily enjoying his life.

--
Bruce

On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 05:19:05 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
wrote:

> On 30/12/2015 15:44 Nancy Young wrote:
>
> > On 12/29/2015 11:05 PM, Bruce wrote:
> >> On 30/12/2015 13:19 Nancy Young wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
> >>>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
> >>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
> >>>>> seen.
> >>>>
> >>>> Don't they have right of way?
> >>>
> >>> They can put that on your tombstone.
> >>
> >> Right under "Killed by idiot driver"?
> >
> > "who still can't believe some moron wasn't watching for
> > backup lights in a parking lot" but is happily enjoying his
> > life with his family and friends.
>
> If the pedestrian had right of way, I don't think the
> driver would be happily enjoying his life.

There's right and there's dead right.

--

sf

On 30/12/2015 17:54 sf wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 05:19:05 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
> wrote:
>
>> On 30/12/2015 15:44 Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>> > On 12/29/2015 11:05 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> >> On 30/12/2015 13:19 Nancy Young wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> >>>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>> >>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>> >>>>> seen.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Don't they have right of way?
>> >>>
>> >>> They can put that on your tombstone.
>> >>
>> >> Right under "Killed by idiot driver"?
>> >
>> > "who still can't believe some moron wasn't watching for
>> > backup lights in a parking lot" but is happily enjoying his
>> > life with his family and friends.
>>
>> If the pedestrian had right of way, I don't think the
>> driver would be happily enjoying his life.
>
> There's right and there's dead right.

Too right, mate.

--
Bruce

On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 05:19:05 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
wrote:

>On 30/12/2015 15:44 Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> On 12/29/2015 11:05 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>> On 30/12/2015 13:19 Nancy Young wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>>>>> seen.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't they have right of way?
>>>>
>>>> They can put that on your tombstone.
>>>
>>> Right under "Killed by idiot driver"?
>>
>> "who still can't believe some moron wasn't watching for
>> backup lights in a parking lot" but is happily enjoying his
>> life with his family and friends.
>
>If the pedestrian had right of way, I don't think the
>driver would be happily enjoying his life.

Anybody, any pedestrian, who counts on themselves having the right of
way, is an idiot. We can make a right turn on a red light, having
come to a full stop first and checked the road is clear.

As a pedestrian, that is very dangerous. When the Walk light turns in
my favour, I always check behind me to my left, odds on the driver
making the right is not including pedestrians in the check, even
though they have the right of way.

On 30/12/2015 21:53 wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 05:19:05 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
> wrote:
>
>>On 30/12/2015 15:44 Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/29/2015 11:05 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On 30/12/2015 13:19 Nancy Young wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>>>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>>>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>>>>>> seen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't they have right of way?
>>>>>
>>>>> They can put that on your tombstone.
>>>>
>>>> Right under "Killed by idiot driver"?
>>>
>>> "who still can't believe some moron wasn't watching for
>>> backup lights in a parking lot" but is happily enjoying his
>>> life with his family and friends.
>>
>>If the pedestrian had right of way, I don't think the
>>driver would be happily enjoying his life.
>
> Anybody, any pedestrian, who counts on themselves having the right of
> way, is an idiot. We can make a right turn on a red light, having
> come to a full stop first and checked the road is clear.
>
> As a pedestrian, that is very dangerous. When the Walk light turns in
> my favour, I always check behind me to my left, odds on the driver
> making the right is not including pedestrians in the check, even
> though they have the right of way.

Of course. Nevertheless, I'd rather hit a pedestrian who didn't have
right of way than one who did.

--
Bruce

On 30/12/2015 22:39 wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 11:08:17 -0000, "Ophelia" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Bruce" > wrote in message
...
>>> On 30/12/2015 10:34 graham wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 29/12/2015 3:36 PM, wrote:

>>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>>>> seen. At least when I come into the parking lot, when I back in, I
>>>>> have sized the situation of people on foot up more readily. It is
>>>>> also easier getting out if one of those monster vans or trucks have
>>>>> parked beside you.
>>>>>
>>>> If you back into spot in a city-owned lot in Calgary, you'll be
>>>> ticketed! Alberta vehicles don't have front plates so the parking patrol
>>>> cameras wouldn't be able to record your number.
>>>
>>> Does that mean I can speed ticketless through Alberta as long as I drive
>>> backward?
>>
>>lol You need to stop winding people up <g>
>
> He's trolling - nearly as bad as sf's boy/girlfriend

Oh, come on, was that so bad?

--
Bruce

On 12/30/2015 7:05 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

> SUVs typically have some sort of four-wheel drive or all-wheel drive.
> However, on glare ice or other extremely slippery conditions, they'll
> lose traction and slide just like any other Newtonian body. Since
> they're going faster (because the driver feels invulnerable and the
> 4WD/AWD enables them to achieve higher speeds), they go a lot farther
> before expending their momentum.

For a time there, it seemed like 90% of the vehicles on the road
were SUVs, big ones. Whenever it snowed, I almost thought the paper
got a charge out of printing pictures of SUVs in a ditch. It seemed
like SUV drivers lived for a snowy day when they could show off what
they could do, racing around us mere mortals in cars.

> I have an SUV. I drive as carefully as I ever did with two-wheel
> drive. I use the added traction for the uphill climb out of my
> driveway to the road.

Years ago I kind of wanted a Bronco type of vehicle but the
truth is, I don't need one. It would come in handy at times,
I'll admit. With your property it's probably a good choice.

nancy

On 12/30/2015 5:53 AM, wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 05:19:05 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
> wrote:

>>> "who still can't believe some moron wasn't watching for
>>> backup lights in a parking lot" but is happily enjoying his
>>> life with his family and friends.
>>
>> If the pedestrian had right of way, I don't think the
>> driver would be happily enjoying his life.
>
> Anybody, any pedestrian, who counts on themselves having the right of
> way, is an idiot. We can make a right turn on a red light, having
> come to a full stop first and checked the road is clear.
>
> As a pedestrian, that is very dangerous. When the Walk light turns in
> my favour, I always check behind me to my left, odds on the driver
> making the right is not including pedestrians in the check, even
> though they have the right of way.

I see people walk out of stores and right into the driving lane
without looking all the time. Not a glance. Doesn't seem too
smart, especially in this age of texting. Everyone needs to be
paying attention, including not walking behind a car with the
reverse lights on. Drivers and pedestrians both have a responsibility
to be alert to what's going on around them. Just because you're
on foot doesn't mean you are off the hook.

Bruce can just walk unawares wherever he'd like, of course, it's
his right and he should exercise it.

nancy

In article m>,
says...
>
> On 12/29/2015 8:37 AM, Gary wrote:
>
> > Here's a pic of Mr.Kitty checking one out. He knew that small pets
> > here were off-limits so he didn't try to eat one.
> > http://i63.tinypic.com/34t8qd3.jpg
>
> How did you get him to go against nature?

We had a hunting killer-cat who never, ever touched our freerange hens
chicks or ducklings, she understood warnings they were completely off
limits.

In the same way (intelligent) dogs can easily be taught to distinguish
permitted chasing/killing from prey that's totally banned.

I used to have a collie who if he saw a hen had unruly new chicks, he
would lie guarding them. If one escaped from its mother he would very
gently pick it up and return it to her, (or occasionally, me) completely
unhurt.

Janet UK

On 2015-12-29 11:31 PM, graham wrote:

> When the winter weather is bad, it's the SUVs that outnumber other
> vehicles in the ditch because people think that they can stop as easily
> as the 4WD/AWD allows them to accelerate. Ignoring the laws of physics
> again.
>

It never ceases to amaze me that people go out and spend a lot of money
on SUVs because they believe them to be safer and then end up rolling
them one running into ditches. I have AWD in my CRV and it is great for
getting me going, but I make sure to take it easy. AWD allows you to
get up to the speed limit quickly on slippery roads, but that does not
mean it is safe to do the speed limit.

On 2015-12-30 1:54 AM, sf wrote:

>> If the pedestrian had right of way, I don't think the
>> driver would be happily enjoying his life.
>
> There's right and there's dead right.
>


I don't know about other cities, but it seems that Toronto can be a very
dangerous place for pedestrians. I think my chances of being struck by
a car are minimal because I stop and look before crossing the road and
make sure the way is clear. I do not assume that cars are going to stop
or that drivers will see me. There have been a few days recently where
there were close to a dozen pedestrians struck between 6 and 8 am. They
were dark, rainy mornings, and one thing the pedestrians had in common
was that they were all dressed in dark clothes.

Pedestrians may indeed have the right of way on roads and in parking
lots, but since they are the more vulnerable ones, they should be
looking out for their own safety. They should be aware of the difficulty
that drivers have in seeing them. They are backing out almost blind.
If I am walking along and someone pulls out when I am right there I am
likely to yell at them to watch where they are going, because they
clearly did not look, but if I am walking along and a car starts to pull
out further along I stop. I sure as heck don't keep walking and putting
myself at risk.

On 12/29/2015 11:44 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 12/29/2015 11:05 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On 30/12/2015 13:19 Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/29/2015 6:15 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On 30/12/2015 09:36 wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I prefer to back in and drive out. YMMV but we have idiots here who
>>>>> will walk right behind a vehicle backing up and assume they will be
>>>>> seen.
>>>>
>>>> Don't they have right of way?
>>>
>>> They can put that on your tombstone.
>>
>> Right under "Killed by idiot driver"?
>
> "who still can't believe some moron wasn't watching for
> backup lights in a parking lot" but is happily enjoying his
> life with his family and friends.
>
> nancy
>
Yesterday I observed someone backing out of a parking spot while some
woman (she wasn't old) took her sweet time walking right behind the
vehicle. He did see her and he did stop. She probably could have put
more giddy-up in her gait but she didn't seem to care. Meanwhile, they
were both holding up traffic. No one else could go anywhere until she
got out of the way and he was able to leave.

Jill

On 12/30/2015 10:20 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> Pedestrians may indeed have the right of way on roads and in parking
> lots, but since they are the more vulnerable ones, they should be
> looking out for their own safety. They should be aware of the difficulty
> that drivers have in seeing them.
>
I hear that! I'm not taking any chances when walking through a parking
lot. I have no idea whether or not the driver can see me. But I can
sure see those back-up lights on the vehicle. I get out of the way.

Jill

On 12/29/2015 9:48 PM, graham wrote:
> On 29/12/2015 6:36 PM, wrote:
>> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-6, Groupkilla wrote:
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I back into a guy walking that was oblivious of
>>>> his surroundings. It cost my insurance company $13,000
>>>> when it was all over with.
>>>
>>> You dumb bunny, use yer mirrors!
>>>
>>>
>> Dummy, there is no mirror that will spot someone suddenly
>> appearing behind your vehicle out of nowhere.
>>
> When I'm backing out, my car detects any cross traffic or person.
> Graham

For those of us driving older vehicles that don't come equipped with
cameras and sensors... hey, use the mirrors (both sides and rear-view)
and keep looking back and forth. That doesn't prevent people from being
stupid and walking right behind your car. As Nancy said, that's what
the reverse lights are for. The pedestrian needs to be paying attention.

Jill

On 2015-12-30 10:30 AM, jmcquown wrote:

> For those of us driving older vehicles that don't come equipped with
> cameras and sensors... hey, use the mirrors (both sides and rear-view)
> and keep looking back and forth. That doesn't prevent people from being
> stupid and walking right behind your car. As Nancy said, that's what
> the reverse lights are for. The pedestrian needs to be paying attention.
>
I have a back up camera on my CRV and one of the more useless options I
can think of. I will say that it is handy when backing into a backing
space because you can see how close you are to whatever is behind you.
It does not have a clear enough picture or wide enough angle to let you
know about people or vehicles approaching as you back out. You get a
lot more and much better information from looking through the windows
and mirrors. If anything, it is more of a distraction.

On 12/30/2015 9:14 AM, Janet wrote:
> In article m>,
> says...
>>
>> On 12/29/2015 8:37 AM, Gary wrote:
>>
>>> Here's a pic of Mr.Kitty checking one out. He knew that small pets
>>> here were off-limits so he didn't try to eat one.
>>> http://i63.tinypic.com/34t8qd3.jpg
>>
>> How did you get him to go against nature?
>
> We had a hunting killer-cat who never, ever touched our freerange hens
> chicks or ducklings, she understood warnings they were completely off
> limits.
>
> In the same way (intelligent) dogs can easily be taught to distinguish
> permitted chasing/killing from prey that's totally banned.
>
Exactly. People think cats cannot be trained. That's not true.

> I used to have a collie who if he saw a hen had unruly new chicks, he
> would lie guarding them. If one escaped from its mother he would very
> gently pick it up and return it to her, (or occasionally, me) completely
> unhurt.
>
> Janet UK
>
Mr. Kitty looked like my cat Persia. When Persia came to live with me I
had two parakeets. I had to teach her they were pets, not prey. It
involved segregation when I was not around to supervise (no, I didn't
let them fly around the apartment). Gradual integration when I was
home. And a big NO! if she showed too much interest.

Cats, like dogs, react to tone of voice and posture as much as anything
else. If you express disapproval, they'll learn.

Jill

On 12/30/2015 8:51 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> If you express disapproval, they'll learn.
>
> Jill

You never do.

On 12/30/2015 5:17 AM, Gary wrote:
> I see Bruce as just a normal poster.

But then you are not known for sound judgment.

On 12/30/2015 5:17 AM, Gary wrote:
> Why
> does everyone keep picking on him?

Oh boo ****ing hoo!

After what happens to Julie???

You ferret farting assbag hypocrite!

On 12/30/2015 4:10 AM, Bruce wrote:
>> lol You need to stop winding people up <g>
> It's a fine line between winding people up and asking an honest
> question

Only for a troll like you.

In article >, says...

> Cats, like dogs, react to tone of voice and posture as much as anything
> else. If you express disapproval, they'll learn.

I'm struggling to train an old black feral cat I'm feeding in the
garden. He was in poor shape with big bald patches and much too wild to
catch for a vet visit. Every time he saw a person he just ran. After
several months of Whiskas, milk and occasional eggs and chicken his fur
has grown back in and he looks much fitter, and no longer runs for the
hills as soon as I appear.

Now he's losing his fear of people and gaining confidence, he lies in
wait under a bush by the food dish, to launch a hissing, spitting,
biting and clawing attack on the hand that's trying to fill it :-( I'm
thinking of naming him Satan.

Janet UK