If your in England just pull out your fingernail clipper or pocket knife and clip it to death or something. ::lol::

(12-12-2009, 08:44 AM)D Wrote: The criminals get their hands on automatic weapons anyways. The "law" has failed.

And on that Syber, you're wrong. I'm going to assume you're talking about something like an M-16 or an Uzi when you say "machine gun" that you've seen in local stores or what not.

No, I'm talking about a radio ad I've heard, as well as a sign outside of the shop saying "We sell machine guns!".

I've never actually been in there to see what they look like.

I sure am glad Frank's repeatedly explained that dogs aren't inanimate objects, otherwise none of us would've known.

Thanks, Frank!

(12-13-2009, 10:05 PM)SyberBitch Wrote:

(12-12-2009, 08:44 AM)D Wrote: The criminals get their hands on automatic weapons anyways. The "law" has failed.

And on that Syber, you're wrong. I'm going to assume you're talking about something like an M-16 or an Uzi when you say "machine gun" that you've seen in local stores or what not.

No, I'm talking about a radio ad I've heard, as well as a sign outside of the shop saying "We sell machine guns!".

I've never actually been in there to see what they look like.

its not illegal to own full automatic weapons in this country, but the process and tax stamp can take a very long time to obtain.

but as far as buying and selling machine guns its not illegal.
for selling it requires a different dealers license and to buy them the tax stamp and approved back ground investigation are required.

I've read the arguments against Frank's wording, and I think it's kind of silly to get all riled up about semantics. It's obvious that he simply meant that, unlike guns, a dog is able to go about without a human handler, and due to whatever circumstance, could injure or kill a human.

I do not think that validates the idea that gun control laws do not need to be in place.

I have spent most of my life defending the position that banning certain breeds would be both unfair and useless, and I used the same arguments that Ant and others are using to defend the breeds, primarily that it's not the 'breed' so much as the owner which should be controlled. I consider myself to be a 'professional' in the dog world, since I spent at least 10-20 years supplementing my income through private dog training - primarily basic obedience and behavioral problem elimination. I know dogs as well as most 'professional' people in the field and I have held my own against other professionals both in competition and in practice.

I am now coming to the conclusion that the position I formerly held was incorrect.

The vast majority of serious and fatal maulings are the responsibility of certain breeds by a large margin.

The idea that breeds like 'Pit Bulls' (or whatever the AKC wants to call them) are no more dangerous than other breeds is simply incorrect. Despite the fact that many, many pit bulls are gentle, loving creatures, they still suffer from selective breeding which was specifically designed to enhance their ability and desire to be aggressive. Unfortunately, it is not only their aggression which comes into play, but their ability to more easily seriously maim or kill. Much in the same way that a Border Collie can be trained to ignore the urge to herd, Pit Bulls can be raised to control their aggression. Often, it never even surfaces, but far too many people own these dogs simply to take advantage of the aggressive nature.

Yes, it's true that all terriers have aggression issues (as a breed, not necessarily individually), but it certainly isn't true that all terriers have the ability to so easily kill or seriously injure people.

No one 'needs' a Pit Bull. No one 'needs' a machine gun. Creating laws which outlawed the breeding of certain dangerous breeds, and restricted ownership of others, would effectively dramatically reduce the number of those dangerous breeds without actually killing any of them. Of course there would always be people who owned them illegally, but that number would continue to decline.

I simply have a hard time seeing a valid argument against these ideas.

(12-13-2009, 10:22 PM)LuMPyPussy Wrote: I sure am glad Frank's repeatedly explained that dogs aren't inanimate objects, otherwise none of us would've known.

Thanks, Frank!

You mean like the retarded, unimportant, off-point, and repeated attempts to make a big deal about my wording I was simply responding to?

(12-14-2009, 01:09 AM)Middle Finger Wrote:

(12-13-2009, 10:22 PM)LuMPyPussy Wrote: I sure am glad Frank's repeatedly explained that dogs aren't inanimate objects, otherwise none of us would've known.

Thanks, Frank!

You mean like the retarded wording in my reply that Ant was simply responding to?

Yes.

(12-14-2009, 07:59 AM)LuMPyPussy Wrote:

(12-14-2009, 01:09 AM)Middle Finger Wrote:

(12-13-2009, 10:22 PM)LuMPyPussy Wrote: I sure am glad Frank's repeatedly explained that dogs aren't inanimate objects, otherwise none of us would've known.

Thanks, Frank!

You mean like the retarded wording in my reply that Ant was simply responding to?

Yes.

Good, glad you were glad about it all then. Thanks for commenting. :;crazy::

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statisti...kelytobite

http://www.badrap.org/rescue/

http://www.nyx.net/~mbur/apbt.html

Some links regarding dogs with particularly dangerous hard to remove bites, genetically bred to fight and kill (pitbulls):

#1:

"The off-property statistical data about pit bulls shows just how dangerous they are." She noted that six senior citizens were killed under these circumstances: "Two were killed while standing in their own backyard," she said. "Four others were killed while taking a morning walk or getting the mail."

http://www.dogsbite.org/newsroom-release...042209.htm


#2:

"Among the deadliest and most vicious of all dog breeds with killer instincts, originally bred to fight and kill other dogs ..."

http://www.dog-bite-law-center.com/pgs/stats.html

I'll give one valid reason. We have no right to play god and exterminate a species by disallowing their breeding. Period Fucking Dot.

Don't exterminate them or disallow their breeding. Just keep them the fuck away from my neighborhood. Period Fucking Dot, with extra Dots and Periods.

My first link is the least biased link on all the links posted Frank.

Your first link is so one sided and full of fear mongering it's crazy. My link does not pretend these dogs are angels nor does it candy coat or the breed. But your link (as far as i've read so far) is totally one sided and I would say they bloat the facts to make their point.

You can post all your favorite links and put down others all you like - it doesn't matter. It's reasonable for parents to not want an animal with that breeding and ability near their residences.

(12-14-2009, 10:33 AM)Middle Finger Wrote: Don't exterminate them or disallow their breeding. Just keep them the fuck away from my neighborhood. Period Fucking Dot, with extra Dots and Periods.

Again, I've said it several times in this thread and in the one that got locked over at 24 - maybe you would pay attention now?

These dogs are not for everyone.
These dogs should be restricted to some degree but breed specific banning does not work.
Anyone owning these kinds of dogs - and not just pits - should be required to prove they can provide a safe environment, able to handle and train such dogs to be good citizens and require the AKC good citizen test and pass it.
Breeders should be under a special watch committee.

The video in your link where it shows the cop that got attacked by the drunken woman's pit - that was amusing to say the least because the COP got control of the dog when she ordered the dog to attack and the dog was all too happy to obey the cop.

There are way too many irresponisble people owning these dogs and more that have them that shouldn't even keep any sort of pet. But the fact remains that breed specific banning just does not work. Your link proved that.

But please, make your case out of fear of a specific breed and when you see any other breed do the same and kill a child or adult - will you then advocate to eliminate that one? Will "you" go down the list of breeds as the cases come about?

(12-14-2009, 10:33 AM)Middle Finger Wrote: Don't exterminate them or disallow their breeding. Just keep them the fuck away from my neighborhood. Period Fucking Dot, with extra Dots and Periods.

Would you kick me out of your neighborhood if I moved in with my pit bull? She's the most unfortunate looking pit bull I've ever seen

She's adorable Sally. She's not the ill bred type but the original too.

Did you know the dog on top of the RCA building in NYC is a pit bull? The original dog for the company was a pit but in recent years they changed it to a JRT to be politically correct. The sitting JRT used now looks like the old style pit it still is on the roof.

[attachment=766] My lil' puddin'

(12-14-2009, 11:05 AM)sally Wrote:

(12-14-2009, 10:33 AM)Middle Finger Wrote: Don't exterminate them or disallow their breeding. Just keep them the fuck away from my neighborhood. Period Fucking Dot, with extra Dots and Periods.

Would you kick me out of your neighborhood if I moved in with my pit bull? She's the most unfortunate looking pit bull I've ever seen

Only if I can move in with my Monkey. I was just reading an old magazine from 1966 and you could have bought a pet Monkey for 18.97 shipped alive from Fla. or your money back. Imagine the fun sending someone a pet monkey. Nevermind the mailmans face when he shakes the box.

(12-14-2009, 10:55 AM)The Antagonist Wrote:

(12-14-2009, 10:33 AM)Middle Finger Wrote: Don't exterminate them or disallow their breeding. Just keep them the fuck away from my neighborhood. Period Fucking Dot, with extra Dots and Periods.

Again, I've said it several times in this thread and in the one that got locked over at 24 - maybe you would pay attention now?

These dogs are not for everyone.
These dogs should be restricted to some degree but breed specific banning does not work.
Anyone owning these kinds of dogs - and not just pits - should be required to prove they can provide a safe environment, able to handle and train such dogs to be good citizens and require the AKC good citizen test and pass it.
Breeders should be under a special watch committee.

The video in your link where it shows the cop that got attacked by the drunken woman's pit - that was amusing to say the least because the COP got control of the dog when she ordered the dog to attack and the dog was all too happy to obey the cop.

There are way too many irresponisble people owning these dogs and more that have them that shouldn't even keep any sort of pet. But the fact remains that breed specific banning just does not work. Your link proved that.

But please, make your case out of fear of a specific breed and when you see any other breed do the same and kill a child or adult - will you then advocate to eliminate that one? Will "you" go down the list of breeds as the cases come about?

Pay attention: Keep animals that were bred to kill the fuck away from my neighborhood.

(12-14-2009, 11:05 AM)sally Wrote:

(12-14-2009, 10:33 AM)Middle Finger Wrote: Don't exterminate them or disallow their breeding. Just keep them the fuck away from my neighborhood. Period Fucking Dot, with extra Dots and Periods.

Would you kick me out of your neighborhood if I moved in with my pit bull? She's the most unfortunate looking pit bull I've ever seen

I'd kick you out of my neighborhood just for the pig pen you've created outside your house due to the overflowing beer garbage you've admitted to creating. I think you said "fuck'em" in regard to your neighbors caring about your mess, so it is no surprise that you continue that philosophy housing an animal bred to kill.