You are right. Pitbulls are responsible for hundreds of murders every year. Once a pitbull attacks it can't be stopped from killing dozens of people. Luckily swat teams are equipped with proper pitbull training.
In terms of reconciling a rights-based approach with minimizing public risk, they are analogous. You have to look beyond the actual objects (guns, dogs) to see it though.
Yeah that happened in Boca Raton, and there were a few other attacks there. I was photographing one in the 'Glades (Loxahatchee Wildlife refuge which is just north of Boca) and he did not attack me but came out of the water and hissed. After he went back in, I continued trying to get get some shots. He came back out and hissed again. I backed off. A few minutes later he came out onto the leveee and just started rolling around acting cute. He saw me but let me alone and then took off in the other direction. I thought I'd eventually have a weird encounter with a gator, not one of these guys.
As for dogs on the mail route- I had a female pit crunch down on y right hand. I just stood perfectly still while her owner came out and whacked her on the head with a cast iron pan. Serious. 37 stitches. In the same neighborhood, a few years later, 2 adults and one kid killed by pits. My other 3 bites were from sheperds--22 stitches total from those.
But I now some realy sweet pits, so I dont know what to think here.
Until they're not, and then people get seriously messed up or die.
What's the definition of dog related incidents? It sounds like a pretty broad definition that probably includes every little thing, so of course pit bull specific incidents wouldn't be a big percentage. who cares?...other than pit bull attack victims.
by dog related incidents i mean biting other dogs and people. Well if they were such a threat wouldn't the stats show it?
german sheps, and rotti's are involved in more incidents than pitbulls.
You're right, it's a silly comparison, about as silly as all the people that try to make their point by humanizing dogs. I guess it's easier to make these silly comparisons than actually talk about the real issues.
You keep trying to get me to defend Sliver. I don't know why. I may hate dogs and despise dog owners as much as he does, but we are not the same person.
You keep trying to get me to defend Sliver. I don't know why. I may hate dogs and despise dog owners as much as he does, but we are not the same person.
Lol...no, you replied to a post of mine a while back and said you had the same viewpoint on dogs as Sliver. I'm just trying to show you that you don't.
Also you seem to be implying it's only the pro-dog crowd that compares them to people...well it's not.
ANOTHER pitbull attack yesterday. Poor husky! This is getting ridiculous
She said Cumberland was about to cross the road at 78th Avenue and Huntwick Way N.E. when he slipped and fell, attracting the attention of a pit bull cross across the street. “The dog came at our husky, grabbing him by the throat at first,” Price said, adding the dog had no leash or collar. The dog sunk its teeth into Jasper’s side, causing the husky to yelp, Price said. A man who showed up to the scene claimed he wasn’t the owner but was caring for the pit bull cross. He and the dog then left the scene.
I've stayed out of this conversation cause I don't really know how I feel about it but I'm starting to lean more and more to the side that Pitbulls need to be banned. There are too many irresponsible owners to have them as an available choice of dog breed. I'm not specifically blaming the dogs here, I think it's just too easy to get such a potentially dangerous breed of dog.
ANOTHER pitbull attack yesterday. Poor husky! This is getting ridiculous
She said Cumberland was about to cross the road at 78th Avenue and Huntwick Way N.E. when he slipped and fell, attracting the attention of a pit bull cross across the street. “The dog came at our husky, grabbing him by the throat at first,” Price said, adding the dog had no leash or collar. The dog sunk its teeth into Jasper’s side, causing the husky to yelp, Price said. A man who showed up to the scene claimed he wasn’t the owner but was caring for the pit bull cross. He and the dog then left the scene.
“I don’t think they need to be banned. It’s the owner and the way the dogs are brought up,” she said. “It doesn’t matter if it’s a pit bull. Point-blank, a husky could be aggressive too. It doesn’t matter the type of dog.”i
I'm so sick and tired of hearing this line.
Yes, any dog "can" be aggressive, but a dog's physical capabilities and disposition vary by breed. Not all dogs are as likely to behave badly and cause so much damage. Pit bulls certainly have a smaller margin of error when it comes to training compared to many other breeds (including huskies which while potentially dangerous, have been bred for discipline).
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
It is blatantly obvious the breed needs to be banned. I can't believe the City isn't considering it. If I get time over the next little bit I'll draft a letter and post it on here that we can print off and all send to our MLAs to try to get this on the table. It's absolutely ridiculous they need prompting to take the natural step on this issue.
It is blatantly obvious the breed needs to be banned. I can't believe the City isn't considering it. If I get time over the next little bit I'll draft a letter and post it on here that we can print off and all send to our MLAs to try to get this on the table. It's absolutely ridiculous they need prompting to take the natural step on this issue.
Why don't you try and solve the problem in a less extreme way. Instead of pushing for a ban push for regulation, increased penalties, and mandatory training.
You come across as a spaz. The owner of the Husky attacked doesn't even feel that the breed needs to be banned.
The problem here is that the owner had the damn dog running around without a leash and he's clearly a dirtbag as he just left the scene.
Dog experts don't feel that breed needs to be banned, so I find it funny that people who know nothing about dogs (you) want to ban them.
Want to decrease the number of dirtbag owners? Increase the cost of owning one of these animals. Cost both in dollars, and their time.
I think pushing for increased penalties and tougher regulation has a much better chance of getting through.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to AFireInside For This Useful Post:
How about adding steeper fees for registration all dogs, and adding mandatory testing for both dog and owner before the dog can be registered. I am guessing it wouldn't be practical each and every year but I could see something like year 1 and 2, then year 5 or something similar.
As the owner of a large dog, I would gladly go along with this. I am expected to know how to operate a vehicle before I drive, it should be the same for a dog.
The only issue I see is that D.B. owners would likely not even bother registering the dog anyway. Enforcement would be key to success.
Basically it is impossible to create enough bylaws to deal with d-bag owners, who will ignore those by-laws anyways. That's why that approach won't work.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to JiriHrdina For This Useful Post:
Basically it is impossible to create enough bylaws to deal with d-bag owners, who will ignore those by-laws anyways. That's why that approach won't work.
Banning a breed which can cause catastrophic damage when it goes off the rails is a lot more sensible and practical as a solution than sending morons to school and hoping they'll see the light.
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cowperson For This Useful Post:
Why don't you try and solve the problem in a less extreme way. Instead of pushing for a ban push for regulation, increased penalties, and mandatory training.
You come across as a spaz. The owner of the Husky attacked doesn't even feel that the breed needs to be banned.
The problem here is that the owner had the damn dog running around without a leash and he's clearly a dirtbag as he just left the scene.
Dog experts don't feel that breed needs to be banned, so I find it funny that people who know nothing about dogs (you) want to ban them.
Want to decrease the number of dirtbag owners? Increase the cost of owning one of these animals. Cost both in dollars, and their time.
I think pushing for increased penalties and tougher regulation has a much better chance of getting through.
Because the typical person that buys these dogs will never follow through with any of these things. They have better things to spend their money on, like tribal tattoos, Affliction T-shirts, truck nutz, and white Oakley sunglasses for the back of their head. I mean c'mon, those UFC PPV's aint gonna pay for themselves. It sounds like hyperbole, but virtually every single one of these Pitbull attacks, the owner of the animal fits the above description to a tee, with a smoke behind his ear, sunken in cheeks, twitchy movements, a face tattoo and a grade 6 vocabulary in his inevitable global interview.
Banning a breed of dog, isn't like banning Siberian White Tigers or something. These breeds have been developed in most cases over a couple hundred or thousand years of inbreeding mutant copies of Canis lupus familiaris. How do you think dogs like sharpeis, pugs, or wiener dogs exist. I have read if humans disappeared tomorrow, toy breeds would be gone within a couple years, and within 5 or 6 generations, we would pretty much be back at simple 'dog' again. These breeds are strictly for the vanity of humans, and in reality, all dog breeds except for wolves are deformed mutants to an extent. So what is the big deal if we stop breeding the ones that pose a significant risk?
This whole argument of "It's the owners, not the animals." Is so much like the US gun debate, just to a lesser extent. Americans have access to whatever weapons they want, and look where that has got them. Nothing good can come of giving loser, unpredictable, bottom rung humans with a chip on their shoulder, access to dangerous fighting machine dogs, that are bred with the sole purpose of killing in the most efficient manner possible.
Until it is proven Pit Bulls tears are a hidden cure for cancer, the breed needs to be banned.
The Following User Says Thank You to pylon For This Useful Post:
