[Sliver]

Originally Posted by AFireInside

I'll try and clear it up for you.

You stated nothing you own makes noise etc. Etc.. I stated your children make noise etc and I deal with it because it's part of society. I don't have kids, I don't want them running around spreading germs, crying, throwing rocks, making messes anywhere near me. But I deal with it because it's part of society. (Clearly I'm being sarcastic here, just pointing out that there are aspects of our society that bother us, and you learn to deal with it).

I realize you are being somewhat tongue-in-cheek with the children comparison and not to pick on you as the comparison has come up multiple times in this thread and others, but it is terrible. I'm not responding to it anymore as it's been addressed numerous times other than to say kids are not equal to dogs.

Originally Posted by AFireInside

As for your idea that dog owners should go to a compound outside of town. Dogs are apart of society, deal with it. If you are too afraid you should get a compound for yourself.

I was simply stating that your compound idea was is silly, and that your over the top reactions to dogs makes you sound like a maniac in a tinfoil hat.

You guys continue to twist my ideas then argue against your own version of what I said. I respect you a lot as a poster so I'm surprised at you in particular for doing this. I didn't say dog owners should go to a compound. I was saying non-muzzled pit bulls shouldn't be allowed in public. If your pit bull needs socialization sans muzzle, you should take it outside of Calgary. This is in the context of there being a muzzle law in response to somebody saying dogs wearing muzzles can't socialize properly (which may or may not even be true - no evidence was cited). This would be no different than having to ride your horse at a ranch outside of town as I'm pretty sure - though I could be wrong - that you aren't allowed to ride your horse anywhere you want in the city.

Originally Posted by AFireInside

You make it sound like your life is in danger when you leave the house and it definitely isn't. Try to be rational in your debate and you will will get a better reception.

There is nothing irrational about my arguments. Just because we're seeing a lot of group think on the pro-dog side of the debate doesn't make it the right side.

Originally Posted by AFireInside

Dog attacks are rare. In 2010 there were 102 dog bites reported in Calgary. So 0.01% of the population? (rough estimation). Now if half of those attacks take place in the owners house or property then assuming you don't go around dogs the percentage drops to what, 0.005%? Even lower since you don't frequent dog parks.

Now compare that to the number of assaults in just the past 6 months here in Calgary, 2103. You should be much more worried about people. Your fear of dogs is making you irrational.

I doubt anybody here would entertain the notion for one second that anywhere near the amount of dog bites that actually happen are reported. That's a bit of a side step on my part as I obviously can't back that up with any proof, but I would think that would be a basic assumption we would all have.

Feel free to start a thread about assaults in Calgary as I'm sure there are legitimate concerns out there. I started this thread on dog attacks, which is what I wanted to discuss here. Just because there are human-on-human assaults doesn't mean we can't talk about the rash of dog violence.

Originally Posted by AFireInside

I've said repeatedly that there are solutions to the pit bull issue but compounds outside of town, exterminating the breed, or dogs of a certain size is just over the top.

Yes, and as I've said I never supported banning dogs over a certain size. That's your mistake to think it is my position and I've clarified it in this thread already.

Originally Posted by AFireInside

I've pointed out repeatedly that there are other breeds that are more dangerous on a per dog basis, yet it keeps coming back to pit bulls.

Yes, and when you said that I said we should look at banning those other dangerous breeds as well. It keeps coming back to pit bulls because they're in the news for attacking somebody every second day in Calgary lately. If rottweilers were attacking people right now I'd be using that breed as my example.

Originally Posted by AFireInside

The term pit bull encompasses many breeds, so thats going to lead to inflated stats and you aren't getting the whole picture. Stats show that on a per dog basis other dogs are more deadly and dangerous.

There has been a study called the "Calgary model" it focused in bad owners increasing fines for bite offenses which lead to a 25 year low in dog bites. Clearly that approach can work.

Well if we are at a 25-year low that's fantastic. I don't see why we can't keep improving that and the recent attacks to me suggest attacks are on the rise. Even reading through this thread and looking at all the attacks there have been since I started it (relatively recently) it only bolsters my position that something more needs to be done to protect people from these unnecessary attacks.