Ban Fireworks!

Lathyrus3

ViceVersa

You do realise that it's not just cats and dogs - fireworks cause untold distress and misery to wildlife and livestock too. Do they not matter to you either?
Or the humans who are distressed by fireworks - presumably you couldn't give a toss about them either because you happen to like fireworks?
As I said, I fail to see what 'benefits' fireworks bring - other than a fleeting enjoyment to some people, whereas animals play a vital role in the lives of so many people. Limiting fireworks to organised displays on certain occasions would be a compromise which many people would find acceptable, would it not?

Well yes. I don’t dispute any of your points.

But logically if you can ban fireworks because of the distress that they cause t animals and humans then you can ban cats and dogs as pets because of the distress that they cause to humans and to other other animals, especially wildlife.

Can’t you see that the argument of causing distress applies to both and therefore, can’t really apply to either. Or is it one rule for what I like and a different rule for others?

No, I don't agree with that argument at all. There are many proven benefits to having a pet - please explain to me what are the actual 'benefits' of fireworks, apart from a fleeting display which is over in a few minutes.
And in answer to Rosie51, at least if fireworks were limited to organised displays on certain occasions, then those living close to them would know in advance and could be prepared to limit any distress caused either to themselves, their family or their animals.

dogsmother

M0nica

Why spoil the fun for so many people. It is up to animal owners to take any action necessary to protect their animals.

I dislike the way people want to ban everthing that they do not like.

We have just bought a house opposite the parish church. We knew it had bells and a clock. We did not realise until we moved in that the church bell rings the quarter hour bell 24/7.

There are about 100 or more houses within 100 yards of the church, but we are by far the nearest. We could have complained and tried to stop the night time bells, but we didn't and three months in we hardly notice them. I haven't consciously heard them all morning and I am in a room opposite the church. The same with fireworks. If your animals get frightened, keep the in and central

Oh my goodness this has brought back memories of my disgust of church bells .
Living very close at one point to a church that was popular for its bell and its use for occasional “ringing the changes” which went on for hours. I can honestly say I loathe them. Try sleeping off night shift when this occurs, it’s cruel noise nuisance. In my humble opinion of course.

That's what could happen if you buy a house near a church, unfortunately.

The sound of Church bells is lovely.

If you buy a house in the countryside you might hear cows mooing too.

Church bells aren't generally dangerous (unless you live in Midsomer).

Well pets and fireworks both give pleasure. That were agreed on.

And pets and fireworks both cause distress and damage.

The difference seems to be that you like pets and don’t like fireworks.

Allira

Church bells aren't generally dangerous (unless you live in Midsomer).

😂😂😂

Can you really accuse others of not caring about distress when you, yourself, don’t care about the distress that cats and dogs cause?

I love fireworks, but do think they should only happen at licensed organised events. I do think pet owners have a tendency to be selfish. All the people moaning that their dog is scared off fireworks don't care that I am scared off their dog and my life has been severely restricted in recent years. Very few places are no dogs allowed now and eating out is virtually impossible.

Lathyrus3

Well pets and fireworks both give pleasure. That were agreed on.

And pets and fireworks both cause distress and damage.

The difference seems to be that you like pets and don’t like fireworks.

I do like fireworks.

I've just met at least two people, one with fingers blown off and one blinded in one eye by fireworks.

They might be pretty but they can be dangerous.

And no, I'm not keen on all pets. Some, others can be dangerous in the wrong hands. That is why some are illegal.

Grannybags

Allira

Church bells aren't generally dangerous (unless you live in Midsomer).

😂😂😂

The Vicar got bumped off this Christmas.

He’d just been ringing the bell……..

ViceVersa And in answer to Rosie51, at least if fireworks were limited to organised displays on certain occasions, then those living close to them would know in advance and could be prepared to limit any distress caused either to themselves, their family or their animals.

Sorry but I think that's a cop out. You are saying it's perfectly possible to limit the distress on one hand but not on another. Surely the same strategies would apply whenever the fireworks were? Either it's possible to deal with the distress or it's not.
I wish someone would be honest enough to say "I'm unlikely to be affected by an organised display so my concern for affected animals and people including wildlife is now very much diminished."

Allira

Lathyrus3

Well pets and fireworks both give pleasure. That were agreed on.

And pets and fireworks both cause distress and damage.

The difference seems to be that you like pets and don’t like fireworks.

I do like fireworks.

I've just met at least two people, one with fingers blown off and one blinded in one eye by fireworks.

They might be pretty but they can be dangerous.

And no, I'm not keen on all pets. Some, others can be dangerous in the wrong hands. That is why some are illegal.

Exactly, that’s why I said there were good reasons for limiting ( or even banning) fireworks but “ it causes distress to my pet” isn’t one that can be logically applied.

That should say of not off. Flipping autocorrect 😑

There are alternative light shows available now without the distressing sound effects. Time to move on from the old fashioned bangers etc .

Rosie51

ViceVersa And in answer to Rosie51, at least if fireworks were limited to organised displays on certain occasions, then those living close to them would know in advance and could be prepared to limit any distress caused either to themselves, their family or their animals.

Sorry but I think that's a cop out. You are saying it's perfectly possible to limit the distress on one hand but not on another. Surely the same strategies would apply whenever the fireworks were? Either it's possible to deal with the distress or it's not.
I wish someone would be honest enough to say "I'm unlikely to be affected by an organised display so my concern for affected animals and people including wildlife is now very much diminished."

No, it's not a cop-out. If you have a pet which is distressed by fireworks, and you know in advance when those fireworks are taking place, you can take measures to deal with that. As things stand at the moment, you get fireworks going off weeks in advance of Bonfire Day, for example. You can't possibly medicate a pet for weeks, or keep livestock indoors for weeks. The same applies to humans. This thread is yet another which reminds me why I prefer animals to humans.

Lathyrus3

Well pets and fireworks both give pleasure. That were agreed on.

And pets and fireworks both cause distress and damage.

The difference seems to be that you like pets and don’t like fireworks.

I thought that post was addressed to me, Lathyrus.

Perhaps it wasn't.

So basically it’s all about you and your pet and you don’t really care about anyone else’s distress - human, wildlife or other people’s pets, as long as the fireworks aren’t near you.

Great logical argument 🤔🙄

There are lots of posts on Mumsnet from people who have to spend the bonfire nite plus NYE calming frightened animals. Their hearing is much more sensitive than ours and they can hear high putched noises that we cannot. It must be the equivalent to that dreadfum BOOM BOOM music that humans can feel in the inner ear.

My nephew has two cats. One is very nervous and he has to give her frequent cuddles at such times. The other sits on the window ledge and watches the lights. He lives in a tower block so had a granstand view of the official fireworks last night.

Allira

Lathyrus3

Well pets and fireworks both give pleasure. That were agreed on.

And pets and fireworks both cause distress and damage.

The difference seems to be that you like pets and don’t like fireworks.

I thought that post was addressed to me, Lathyrus.

Perhaps it wasn't.

No it wasn’t.
Sorry if you thought it was.

I’m always frustrated by people who can only see things as they personally affect them and not take a wider view😬

The Midsummer church bell one was yours though……..

Oh, I do wish they would ban the ruddy things! I did think silent fireworks were to become the acceptable thing, maybe that didn’t work out.

If you want to talk about injuries, dogs win hands down against fireworks. Perhaps we could suggest that dogs should not be allowed in public places, parks, streets, etc.
I am a dog owner and I like fireworks.

Lathyrus3

So basically it’s all about you and your pet and you don’t really care about anyone else’s distress - human, wildlife or other people’s pets, as long as the fireworks aren’t near you.

Great logical argument 🤔🙄

No, that's absolutely not what I am saying at all. I've been at pains to point out the distress caused by fireworks to humans, livestock and pets. Our current dog isn't at all bothered by them, so it's not all about me, contrary to what you have assumed. It's a much wider issue and I've yet to see any logical argument about how the 'benefits' of fireworks outweigh the harm and distress they cause to so many - both humans and animals. Ask the emergency services, veterans' charities, animal welfare organisations and you'd soon see the wider picture.

ViceVersa

Rosie51

ViceVersa And in answer to Rosie51, at least if fireworks were limited to organised displays on certain occasions, then those living close to them would know in advance and could be prepared to limit any distress caused either to themselves, their family or their animals.

Sorry but I think that's a cop out. You are saying it's perfectly possible to limit the distress on one hand but not on another. Surely the same strategies would apply whenever the fireworks were? Either it's possible to deal with the distress or it's not.
I wish someone would be honest enough to say "I'm unlikely to be affected by an organised display so my concern for affected animals and people including wildlife is now very much diminished."

No, it's not a cop-out. If you have a pet which is distressed by fireworks, and you know in advance when those fireworks are taking place, you can take measures to deal with that. As things stand at the moment, you get fireworks going off weeks in advance of Bonfire Day, for example. You can't possibly medicate a pet for weeks, or keep livestock indoors for weeks. The same applies to humans. This thread is yet another which reminds me why I prefer animals to humans.

So you limit, by law, when and what type of fireworks may be used, or maybe you ban them completely. I just think saying that organised displays are fine but back garden ones aren't isn't logical when referring to the possible distress to animals and people. There needs to be more enforcement of the current laws surrounding the use of fireworks and in my opinion a limit to the size sold to the general public, but of course that will need an increase in the numbers of police which successive governments seem not to address.

ViceVersa

Lathyrus3

So basically it’s all about you and your pet and you don’t really care about anyone else’s distress - human, wildlife or other people’s pets, as long as the fireworks aren’t near you.

Great logical argument 🤔🙄

No, that's absolutely not what I am saying at all. I've been at pains to point out the distress caused by fireworks to humans, livestock and pets. Our current dog isn't at all bothered by them, so it's not all about me, contrary to what you have assumed. It's a much wider issue and I've yet to see any logical argument about how the 'benefits' of fireworks outweigh the harm and distress they cause to so many - both humans and animals. Ask the emergency services, veterans' charities, animal welfare organisations and you'd soon see the wider picture.

But, as Galaxy says, many more and much greater injuries are caused by people’s pets each year, than are caused by fireworks.

So if we are concerned about injuries to people and other animals and the involvement of emergency services, especially hospitals it is you that is refusing to look at the wider picture.
Just look at what the RSPB says about pets and the damage to wildlife.

All the reasons you have stated for banning and controlling fireworks, also apply to cats and dogs as pets.
If the reasons are valid for fireworks and they are banned, the the same reasons can be applied for the banning of pets.

Sure - ban fireworks if you also ban boy racers in modified cars, incessantly barking dogs, screaming children/teenagers and inconsiderately loud neighbours. And enforce those bans equally.