05/31/2026
This comment is a perfect example of passive aggressive, biased, reason-free arguments against e-collars.
Someone claims to remember watching purpose-bred working dogs, selected for a highly specific job, handled by highly skilled people, in a highly specific environment, 50 years ago — and then tries to leverage that narrow anecdotal memory as some kind of sweeping argument against e-collars… and we all know it’s in bad faith.
A sheepdog trial in Wales is not the modern pet dog world.
It’s not a reactive dog in suburbia. It’s not a nervous rescue melting down on a city sidewalk. It’s not a powerful adolescent dog dragging its owner. It’s not aggression, resource guarding, fence fighting, car chaos, leash insanity, bad genetics, weak nerves, poor raising, or an owner with no timing, no clarity, no confidence, and no leverage.
This is what happens when people confuse anecdote, nostalgia, and personal memory with actual evidence… and it’s rarely an “innocent” mistake.
They take one emotionally appealing example, strip away all the context, ignore the genetics, ignore the selection process, ignore the handler skill, ignore the environment, ignore the massive difference between working-dog culture and pet-dog chaos — and then use the whole thing as if it refutes an entire tool, an entire methodology, and an entire world of dogs and owners they’re conveniently ignoring.
Kindergarten reasoning, logic, and wisdom — or just very conscious propaganda — dressed up as moral superiority.
PS, remember, they ain’t trying to help you or your dog, they only want to continue to nurture their delusional beliefs. Consume these messages with appropriate caution, and healthy derision.