'21 kilograms of cocaine'

Binance’s BNB token pushed to a new all-time high of $1,370 on October 13, defying a market-wide collapse that liquidated $19 billion from traders. This stark outperformance wasn’t just luck. The real question is what allowed BNB to rally when other major assets were in a downturn. Its strength comes from three core areas: a […]

A new round of Obamacare enrollment begins on Nov. 1 against the backdrop of an ongoing partial government shutdown that revolves around a debate over Democrats’ demands to expand the controversial 2010 law.  Then-President Barack Obama and other Democrats made numerous promises about the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare.  The following are four broken promises from the Obamacare law.  1. ‘Your Premiums Will Go Down’ In July 2012, when campaigning for reelection, Obama repeated his assertion that—once implemented—the Affordable Care Act would reduce prices.  Running for his first term in 2008, then-Sen. Obama said he would sign a health care bill in his first term as president “that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.” In 2012, he spoke similarly about the law that had passed—with no Republican votes in Congress—but had not yet gone into effect.  “You should know that once we have fully implemented, you’re going to be able to buy insurance through a pool so that you can get the same good rates as a group that if you’re an employee at a big company you can get right now, which means your premiums will go down,” Obama said, when speaking in Cincinnati campaigning for a second term.  In 2013, when implementation of the Affordable Care Act began, the average premium paid by consumers in the individual market was $244 per month. By 2022, that cost had soared to $568 per month, an increase of 133%, noted a Heritage Foundation report from August 2024, “Key Health Care Trends: Nationally and in Each of the States.”  “The average deductibles for bronze-level plans sold on the exchanges increased by 40 percent between 2014 and 2024,” the Heritage report explains. “For self-only coverage, the average deductible was $5,094 in 2014, but is $7,144 in 2024, while the average deductible for family coverage has increased from $10,278 in 2014 to $14,310 in 2024.” In recent years, 15 states have obtained federal waivers from some Obamacare provisions, which enabled insurers in the waivered states to reduce premiums. The per-capita average monthly cost of individual market coverage had more than doubled in 40 states. In Missouri, costs had risen by 213%; in Alabama, by 309%; and in West Virginia, up 323%, according to the August 2024 Heritage Foundation report.   2. ‘Competition Where There Wasn’t Competition’ Obama asserted in October 2013 that the Affordable Care Act would create a more competitive insurance marketplace. “What we’ve done is essentially create a competition where there wasn’t competition before,” Obama said. “We created these big group plans, and now insurers are really interested in getting your business. And so, insurers have created new health care plans with more choices to be made available through these marketplaces.”  But two-thirds of states, or 34 states, and the District of Columbia, had fewer insurers offering exchange coverage in 2024 than a decade earlier before the Affordable Care Act was implemented.  On the slight upside, eight states had more insurers offering plans on the Healthcare.gov exchanges in 2024 than they had before the Obamacare law was passed, while eight others have the same number.  For 2026, some 183 qualified health plans are available on the Obamacare exchanges, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced Wednesday. Of the 30 states using HealthCare.gov, 19 have more plans than the previous year, according to CMS. That’s still substantially less than before Obamacare was implemented. In 2013, almost 400 insurers were offering coverage in individual markets at the state level before the ACA was implemented. Eight states had only one insurer providing insurance.  In 2026, 95% of enrollees will have access to three or more qualified health plan issuers. That’s down marginally from 96% in 2025, but an improvement from 68% in 2020, according to CMS. Fewer than 1% of 2026 enrollees have only one available issuer on the exchanges.  “Any potential benefits of competition were offset, or more than offset, by a subsidy design that really insulates enrollees from a lot of the cost, because the subsidies go up as premiums go up. That’s part of why you have seen the increase,” Ed Haislmaier, a senior research fellow with the DeVos Center for Human Flourishing at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. 3. Not ‘One Dime to Our Deficits’ Obama said in September 2009, “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits, either now or in the future.” The initial score by the Congressional Budget Office in 2010 estimated the legislation would reduce the federal deficit. However, the cost of Medicaid expansion was higher than projected, as was the cost of subsidies, which was exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The expansion of the COVID-19 era subsidies were passed as part of the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act and extended as part of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. The COVID-19 emergency formally ended 2-1/2 years ago. The CBO found in 2024 that extending the COVID-era subsidies permanently would result in a $380 billion cost increase to taxpayers over the next 10 years. It would also likely mean 6.9 million individuals would be added to the Obamacare exchanges—receiving an average subsidy of $5,370 each. But of that 6.9 million, at least 3.5 million would be shifting from existing insurance plans such as employer plans, according CBO.  Before the COVID-19 subsidies, Obamacare enrollment was stable. In 2019, 13.7 million individuals drew a subsidy. By just the first quarter of 2025, that reached 26.7 million—nearly double. “Obamacare is not affordable, and has narrowed network plans to exclude certain doctors and hospitals,” Brian Blase, president of Paragon Health Institute, a health care think tank, told The Daily Signal. “The only people purchasing are for the most part getting giant subsidies. It’s good for the health insurance companies. There used to be a guaranteed customer base with the individual mandate, which was eliminated. But it’s still a heavily regulated market, which decreases competition, and they receive massive subsidies.” 4. ‘Savings’ From Medicaid Expansion “The insurance reforms rest on everybody having access to coverage, and you also don’t do anything about the fact that taxpayers currently end up subsidizing the uninsured when they’re forced to go to the emergency room for care, to the tune of about a thousand bucks per family,” Obama said in March 2010. “You can’t get those savings if those people are still going to the emergency room.”   Almost 20 million newly eligible able-bodied adults enrolled in Medicaid from 2013 to 2023. That’s compared with Medicaid enrollment for children that increased by just 2.5 million, and for the elderly that increased by 1.2 million over the same 10-year span. The number of disabled enrollees over that period declined by 400,000, the Heritage Foundation report from August 2024 says.  Emergency room visits from the new Medicaid enrollees have increased, the Paragon Health Institute noted in a report last October.  “As a result of expansion, existing Medicaid enrollees have had more challenges obtaining doctor appointments,” the Paragon report says. “According to a 2019 meta-analysis, prior to expansion, Medicaid enrollees were half as likely as those with private insurance to get appointments, while they were only one-third as likely after expansion—a decline by one-third.” From 2013 to 2023, Medicaid enrollment, as well as enrollment in the Children’s Health Insurance Program, soared overall from 61.1 million to 85.4 million. Medicaid enrollment more than doubled over those 10 years in Alaska, Virginia, Oregon, and Nevada. The post 4 Broken Obamacare Promises appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos. Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. The Democrats are in a quandary. The old guard of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Rep. Nancy Pelosi are very worried about this young group of more radical, Jacobin, younger people who want to shut down the government. That was the impetus behind the shutdown: “Do not cooperate whatsoever with President Donald Trump. And then, take the House and the Senate.” The problem that these people have is they are not in the mainstream of American politics. And so, they have said things in their past before they were candidates—sometimes during—that are incompatible with the majority of Americans’ views on what denotes proper behavior and conduct of a politician or an official. For example, Graham Platner in Maine, who wants to be the Democratic nominee for the Maine Senate and run against incumbent Sen. Susan Collins, has said some really atrocious things. He’s castigated black people. He says that, stereotypically, they don’t tip. He said that white rural people are racist. He’s in a lot of trouble, though, because when he was in the Marine Corps, he went to a tattoo parlor and got a skull and crossbones tattoo. Now, he would like us to believe that this was no big thing, that it was just, I don’t know, a skull. And young people do stupid things, he said. But it was a long time ago. He’s had, I don’t know, 17, 18 years to get rid of it if it was something more than skull and crossbones. And it was something more than skull and crossbones because it was not just skull and crossbones. It was the exact replica, facsimile of the Totenkopf, death’s head, emblem of the 3rd SS-Waffen Division in World War II, a division that was made up of, at least in its 1939-41 inception, former death camp guards and special Einsatzgruppen group killers of Jews. And so, when he went to this parlor, he put on the official logo of the 3rd Waffen-SS Panzer Division. And he has had it on his chest, and he’s referred to it himself as a Totenkopf, death’s head, the German word. So, he knew what he was doing. You can say, “Well, Victor, do you really believe he is a Nazi?” And I’m gonna say, I don’t know what I believe. But from what he said and what is tattooed on his body, I think he’s reckless, indiscriminate, and can’t tell the truth. It’s kind of ironic because no one in the Democratic Party, who’s afraid of this base that he represents, has really criticized him and said, “You should drop out of the race.” Remember when Elon Musk did this and this, they said he was a Nazi until we found pictures of everybody from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to former President Barack Obama doing this. And I think even Sen. Elizabeth Warren did this, just to salute. So, we know that they were sensitive to it. But the problem is deeper. And that is, if you’re going to go to your base to get statewide candidates or national candidates, or your old guard is going to emulate the ethos of the base, then you have certain, I don’t know, background checks. We have Jay Jones, remember, who’s running for attorney general in Virginia. And it’s not that he just happened to say, I would like my Republican opponent to be killed, or I would like to go to his funeral. When he was chastised in a text by a Republican counterpart not to say that, he doubled down. And he said: Oh, I would not only like him dead, I would like his children dead, and want them to be dead in his wife’s arms. And he hasn’t really explained. He says that’s not him. But he didn’t really come forward until it was exposed, in the way that Mr. Platner didn’t come forward until it was exposed. And then they can’t give adequate explanations of why they said it or why he was tattooed. And they seemingly embarrass the old guard of Democrats, but they don’t because the act—the reply of the old guard is to ignore it because they’re terrified of them. I think this goes beyond ignoring it. California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently said that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was going to have a bad day. Thank you, America. What is that? An implied threat? That if she came into California with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, something bad would happen to her? He said that he wanted to hit Donald Trump in the mouth. If a private citizen put that on social media, the FBI would be knocking on his door. He also said he wanted to hit them in the mouth, his Republican opponents that were engaged, as he is, in redistricting congressional districts. And so, we’ve had Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, who’s warned that he’s gonna go after ICE agents, if, in his view, he feels that they’re breaking the law—in his view. I don’t know if that means he’s going to arrest them or the state government is gonna investigate them and indict them. But it’s actually a violation of Article VI of the Constitution. So, what am I getting at? The new Democratic Party is drawing on a base that is way out of the mainstream. And they’re out of the mainstream on the issues of crime, on the border, on illegal immigration, on foreign policy, on energy, radical abortion on demand, transgendered males competing in female sports. But more importantly, the way that they’re out of touch is one that’s on the record—their language, their threats, their promises of violence. And that’s not gonna go away. And the problem that we’re having now is this rhetoric is escalating, escalating, escalating. And the more that they are shut out of official power in the House, the Senate, the White House, the Supreme Court, and the more they realize that they have to double down in language and heat because they have no light on the issues, in other words, the more they accept that the people do not want what they want to offer, the angrier they get. And so, they are controlling this new Democratic Party, the primary system and the base of the party. And the angrier and more violent they get, the more the old guard, who’s on the way out, but does not wanna go on the way out, will itself either tolerate it or double down on it. Where does this lead? At best it leads to 20 years of the wilderness. That period, I don’t know, comparable to Sen. George McGovern’s catastrophic left-wing defeat, 1972, in which the Democratic Party committed suicide. They had a little four-year blip with President Jimmy Carter that only reminded people how bad they were until President Bill Clinton in 1992 came back for eight years. He never won the popular vote over 50%, but he acted as a moderate, and he was able to win 49%, 43% in the Electoral College on two occasions. And he saved the Democratic Party. That would be the best scenario for them. The worst scenario is they take their rhetoric seriously, and they really do want to escalate to violence and use state authority, such as they have, to challenge the federal government. That’s uncharted territory. But we know one thing: It’s not going to end well. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post The Fresh, New ‘Jacobin’ Faces of the Democrat Party appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Even before the federal government shutdown started almost a month ago, Republicans united around the label of a “Schumer shutdown,” and such blame is sticking. Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, joined the Americans for Prosperity Ohio chapter for a tele town hall this week, with a focus on Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. Husted has referred to the “Schumer shutdown” early on, as he did during his interview with The Daily Signal last month, over a week before the shutdown began. The focus this time was no different. “Why is Sen. Schumer holding government hostage? Why aren’t we getting this done?” Donovan O’Neil, the chapter’s state director, asked Husted during the event. “It’s a clean continuing resolution, no deals, no carve outs, no special interest here. What is it that you’re hearing and seeing out there that’s causing this shutdown to linger as long as it has?” Husted brought up past comments from the minority leader. “As Chuck Schumer said in the past, what he wouldn’t do, he said, ‘I will not let my opponents hold me hostage in return for opening the government.’ Well, we want him to live up to the thing he asked us to do all those years as Republicans, and he needs to reopen the government so we can begin some of those conversations,” Husted shared. As a way to “play it straight,” Husted also addressed what Republicans have consistently brought up, which is Democrats’ focus on providing health care for illegal immigrants paid for by taxpayer dollars. “I will say that what they claim that they want is the resolution that they offered, which would have added $1.5 trillion in new spending that’s not paid for, and it would have allowed for legal immigrants to receive health care to be paid for through the Medicaid program, that would allow Medicaid to reimburse hospitals and healthcare providers for services that people who are not in this country illegally [sic], so that I something that I can’t be for,” Husted explained. This narrative has come up before, Husted reminded. “We ran an election, we wanted only people in this country who are American citizens to be receiving medical care paid for by the American taxpayer. And so that’s one of the things.” Another concern Husted brought up includes what Democrats want to cut. He mentioned how the Democrats’ plan “even though it increased spending that wasn’t paid for by $1.5 trillion, it cut 50 million from rural hospitals, something that the Republican team put in the budget reconciliation package.” These issues, Husted said, present “kind of a non-starter.” Husted also brought “the political tune” into the conversation. “Let’s be honest. I think that the radical left, led by [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] and others really put a lot of pressure on [Schumer] to stand up to President [Donald] Trump. More and more and more, he just is capitulating to that group,” Husted offered. “He wants the government shutdown to prove that he can stand up to President Trump, and that’s all fine and dandy, except for the fact that this hurts the American people. And Chuck Schumer has said every day that this shutdown goes on, it’s good for us. What he meant is good for Democrats politically, but I disagree with him, because it’s bad for the American people.” “This is indeed the Schumer Shutdown.” – U.S. Senator Jon Husted from OhioListen to what @SenJonHusted has to say about what’s REALLY going on in Washington. ? pic.twitter.com/DNW4DvvinG— AFPOhio (@AfpOhio) October 28, 2025 Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., whom Husted mentioned in the exchange with O’Neil, has become a prolific influence in the Democratic Party. There’s also speculation that she may primary Schumer in 2028. In March, Schumer caved and voted to advance a continuing resolution, which ultimately passed. He had previously claimed that Democrats were united in denying Republicans enough votes for their CR. Not only had Schumer caved, but he also earned the ire from Ocasio-Cortez and other Democrats. A press release from the Ohio chapter also referenced support from Americans for Prosperity for the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act, described as “a bill that would require Congress to remain in session until it passes the bills necessary to fund the government, ensuring stability in the government and eliminating shutdowns as a political weapon.” That bill is sponsored by Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., whose office provided a statement for The Daily Signal. “The Senator is grateful for AFP’s support of the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act. We need to stop the cycle of government shutdowns, and that’s exactly what this bill would do,” said a Lankford spokesman. Leverage. That’s what Democrats call the pain caused by this shutdown. Four weeks in, and Chuck Schumer says “every day gets better for us.” Using Americans’ suffering for politics is unacceptable. It’s time to reopen the government and pass a clean CR.#GovernmentShutdown pic.twitter.com/iLZodsi0N0— Clayton Rasche ?? (@clayforfreedom) October 29, 2025 Americans for Prosperity Ohio’s chapter has been posting and reposting to X continuously about the shutdown, including how Democrats see it as leverage. Week four of the government shutdown and Democrats are still using it as political leverage. Twelve times they’ve voted against reopening our government against paying our troops, funding the Coast Guard, supporting low-income families, and keeping critical services running. This… pic.twitter.com/wHbUbfUZja— kentstrang (@kentstrang) October 28, 2025 Rep. Katherine Clark, D-Mass., who is the minority whip, and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., have openly admitted that they see the shutdown as “a leverage” or “lever.” Democrats have blocked SNAP food assistance for 42 million Americans 13 times. On Saturday, funding runs out completely, and families nationwide will go hungry.In their words, they did it to increase their political “leverage.” pic.twitter.com/utXcrzE8sF— Senate Republicans (@SenateGOP) October 28, 2025 As November approaches, concerns pile up with regards to government assistance programs, which Husted has posted about. About 1.4 million Ohioans rely on SNAP to put food on the table. Five Senate Democrats could end this shutdown today by joining us to reopen the government and fund SNAP benefits. But for now, Ohio families shouldn't have to pay the price for Democrats’ political games.… pic.twitter.com/IdNDmqaSuG— Senator Jon Husted (@SenJonHusted) October 28, 2025 Democrats may no longer be so united in their strategy. “Democrats wobble as pressure to end shutdown ramps up,” The Hill reported on Wednesday morning. While Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate, they do not have 60 Senate members to overcome a filibuster. Democrats like Sens. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada have voted to fund the government, as has Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, who caucuses with Democrats. Five more are needed, as Husted noted. I just voted for the 13th time to reopen the government. We need 5 more Senate Democrats to get the government open and serving Americans the way they deserve. pic.twitter.com/4rtAW2cSKL— Senator Jon Husted (@SenJonHusted) October 28, 2025 The post Husted Continues to Slam ‘Schumer Shutdown’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Australia is preparing to enforce a broad new restriction on online activity, ordering major social media platforms to block anyone under 16 from using their services starting December 10. The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 will apply to Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, and possibly even apps such as WhatsApp and Roblox. The measure, touted by the government as a way to protect children from online harm, is being met with unease from the very companies expected to carry it out. Both Meta and TikTok say they will follow the law, but have questioned how such a ban can be realistically implemented. At a Senate hearing, TikTok’s Australia policy lead, Ella Woods-Joyce, stated, “Put simply, TikTok will comply with the law and meet our legislative obligations.” She also issued a warning about the unintended fallout, saying, “Experts believe a ban will push younger people into darker corners of the Internet where protections don’t exist.” Meta’s policy director Mia Garlick echoed those concerns, acknowledging that her company faces “numerous challenges” as it works to meet the December deadline. She said Meta would attempt to remove “hundreds of thousands” of users under 16, but admitted that doing so raises “significant new engineering and age assurance challenges.” The law is one of the most stringent of its kind anywhere in the world. Yet with its start date fast approaching, key details about enforcement remain unclear. Authorities have said companies will not be required to verify every user’s age, but must take “reasonable steps” to identify and deactivate underage accounts, meaning that they will have to verify ages to comply fully with the law. Failure to comply could lead to penalties of up to Aus$49.5 million (US$32 million). The law effectively incentivizes widespread identity checks and data collection, creating new systems of surveillance that erode online privacy for everyone, not just minors. Technology firms have expressed rare unity in their objections, calling the new mandate “vague”, “rushed,” and “problematic.” YouTube’s Australian representative, Rachel Lord, argued that while the government’s intentions might be positive, the policy itself is misguided. “The legislation will not only be extremely difficult to enforce, but it also does not fulfil its promise of making kids safer online,” she said. Regulators have hinted that the ban could extend beyond traditional social media to include streaming platforms and gaming networks. That potential expansion has deepened concerns that the law may push younger users off regulated sites and into less visible corners of the internet, where little oversight exists. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Tech Giants Pledge Compliance but Warn of Major Challenges as Australia Introduces Online Verification Law appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Google is preparing for a new era of digital age checks as state-level rules in Texas, Utah, and Louisiana begin to reshape how app stores operate. To get ahead of these requirements, the company has introduced the Play Signals API in beta, a system built to help developers adapt to laws that will soon mandate age-based controls. Starting in early 2026, each of the three states will enforce its own version of the App Store Accountability Act. Texas’s law takes effect first, followed by Utah and Louisiana a few months later. Each statute requires app marketplaces to confirm the age range of their users through “commercially reasonable” verification methods. Developers will be responsible for interpreting those signals and tailoring their apps accordingly. In some regions, they will also have to inform Google Play if a product update could require new parental consent. For testing purposes, the company is providing a FakeAgeSignalsManager so that developers can simulate data before the laws officially apply. Google’s rollout of its new Play Signals API is part of a broader shift toward a verified internet, one where digital access is increasingly tied to proof of identity. The company’s beta API is being framed as a neutral compliance tool, but its function sets the stage for a more monitored web. While the stated purpose is child safety and regulatory compliance, the architecture being built threatens to erode one of the internet’s core principles, pseudonymity. The data points that determine whether someone is over 13 or over 18 can easily evolve into a persistent set of identifiers, linking activity across apps, accounts, and even devices. Once these signals are standardized, nothing prevents them from being combined with advertising, analytics, or behavioral tracking systems. The result could be a world where age verification quietly becomes identity verification, and where “commercially reasonable” checks amount to permanent user profiling. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Google Adds Age Checks as Texas, Utah, and Louisiana Enforce Digital ID Laws appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Dog leash safety protects both you and your furry companion during every outdoor adventure. Poor leash choices and handling mistakes lead to injuries, escapes, and stressful walks. We at DogingtonPost know that the right equipment and techniques transform chaotic walks into enjoyable experiences. This guide covers everything from selecting the perfect leash to mastering safe walking practices. What Leash Should You Choose for Your Dog Your dog’s size determines your leash requirements more than any other factor. Dogs that weigh over 50 pounds need leashes with at least ½-inch width and heavy-duty hardware to prevent breakage when they pull suddenly. Small dogs under 20 pounds can use lightweight 1/2-inch leashes, but avoid thin cord-style options that snap under pressure. Medium-sized dogs between 20-50 pounds perform best with 3/4-inch width leashes that balance control with comfort. Material Matters for Daily Use Nylon leashes offer the best combination of durability and affordability, and they last 5-8 years with regular use. Leather leashes cost more but provide superior grip and can last 5+ years when you maintain them properly. Chain leashes work for heavy pullers but cause hand injuries and should only be used for training sessions (never for daily walks). Avoid cotton rope leashes entirely – they absorb moisture, harbor bacteria, and lose strength after you wash them. Reflective nylon leashes improve visibility during evening walks and cost only $3-5 more than standard options. Standard Six-Foot Length Works Best The American Kennel Club recommends 6-foot leashes as the optimal length for most walking situations. This length provides adequate control while it allows dogs reasonable exploration space. Retractable leashes cause more accidents than any other type, with emergency veterinarians reporting increased injuries from sudden stops and tangled lines. Four-foot leashes work well in crowded urban areas where you need close control (especially near busy intersections). Never use leashes longer than 8 feet in public spaces – they create safety hazards for pedestrians and other dogs while they make it impossible to maintain proper control when unexpected situations arise. Once you select the right leash, proper handling techniques become your next priority for safe walks. How Do You Walk Safely With Your Dog Proper leash control starts with the thumb lock technique, which gives you instant control when your dog changes direction unexpectedly. Wrap the leash around your thumb and grip it with your remaining fingers to create a secure hold that releases quickly under pressure. Keep your leash hand at hip level with your arm relaxed – tension in your arm transfers directly to your dog and increases their stress. Dog leash injuries have increased, especially in women over 65, with common causes including dog-pulling, tripping, and tangling. Maintain a U-shape in your leash throughout the walk, which indicates proper slack and prevents your dog from feeling trapped or restricted. Stay Alert to Your Environment Phone distraction causes accidents during dog walks, with injuries increasing sharply from 2001 to 2020 among people who walked dogs on leashes. Keep your phone in your pocket and scan continuously for approaching dogs, cyclists, and children who might startle your pet. Position yourself between your dog and potential threats like busy streets or aggressive animals. Watch for environmental hazards including broken glass, food scraps, and other dogs’ waste that could harm your pet. Weather conditions change your safety priorities – wet pavement reduces your grip strength while hot asphalt burns paw pads when temperatures exceed 85 degrees Fahrenheit. If you walk in low-light conditions, invest in reflective gear for both you and your dog to significantly increase visibility and safety. Master Essential Commands for Control The wait command stops door dash attempts and prevents your dog from bolting into dangerous situations. Practice this command daily – drop treats in front of your dog before you open doors, which keeps their attention focused on you instead of the exciting world outside. Teach your dog to walk consistently on one side of your body (left side works best because it keeps them away from traffic). The heel command becomes essential when you encounter other dogs or need to navigate crowded sidewalks safely. Dogs that respond reliably to sit and stay commands avoid more conflicts with other pets during walks compared to untrained dogs. Even with perfect technique and commands, certain mistakes can still compromise your safety and create dangerous situations. What Leash Safety Mistakes Put Your Dog at Risk Damaged equipment causes more walk accidents than poor technique. Check your leash hardware every two weeks for stress fractures in clips, worn stitches at connection points, and frayed sections along the length. Metal clips fail suddenly when hairline cracks develop from repeated stress – replacement costs $15 but prevents emergency veterinary bills that average $800 per escape incident. Leather leashes crack when they dry out, while nylon develops weak spots where it rubs against rough surfaces. Replace any leash that shows visible wear immediately rather than wait for complete failure. Wrong Tension Creates Dangerous Situations Tight leashes trigger defensive behaviors in dogs according to animal behaviorists, while excessive slack eliminates your control when threats appear suddenly. Maintain exactly one inch of slack in your leash during normal walks – this prevents your dog from feeling trapped while it keeps them within your immediate control zone. Dogs with tight leashes show increased cortisol levels and aggressive responses to other animals. Loose leashes beyond six inches of slack allow dogs to build momentum before you react (which makes sudden direction changes impossible to manage safely). Stress Signals That Owners Miss Dogs telegraph their discomfort through specific body language that most owners ignore until problems escalate. Panting when temperatures stay below 70 degrees indicates anxiety rather than heat exhaustion. Tail position below the spine shows stress that precedes aggressive or flight responses. Dogs that freeze mid-walk, refuse forward movement, or repeatedly look backward signal environmental concerns you must address immediately. Excessive paw lifts, lip licks, and yawns during walks indicate stress levels that lead to unpredictable behavior. Stop walks when you notice these signs and redirect your dog’s attention with treats while you move away from the stressor. Owners who ignore these warnings face bite incidents, escape attempts, and traumatic experiences that require weeks of retraining to overcome (especially in reactive dogs). Final Thoughts Dog leash safety transforms every walk into a secure experience when you apply these proven techniques consistently. The six-foot nylon leash with proper thumb lock grip gives you optimal control while your dog enjoys reasonable freedom to explore safely. Weekly equipment inspections prevent 90% of leash failures that lead to emergency situations. Check metal clips for stress fractures and replace worn leashes before they snap during critical moments. Your investment in quality equipment pays dividends through years of reliable performance. Dogs that master basic commands like wait, heel, and stay avoid conflicts with other pets and navigate crowded areas without stress. Watch for stress signals that include excessive panting below 70 degrees, tail positions below the spine, and mid-walk freezing (these warning signs precede aggressive responses or escape attempts). These behaviors create dangerous situations for everyone involved. We at DogingtonPost provide comprehensive resources to help you become a more confident dog owner with expert advice on training, health, and responsible pet ownership.

Civil Trial Begins in Case of Teacher Shot by 6-Year-Old

The Anti-Communist Film Festival: Soviet Propaganda Cartoons