- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 26,305
- Reaction score
- 7,236
It had to be done.
My grandpa did the same thing to a dog we had when I was like 5 for snapping at me . . .
It had to be done.
Probably one of the worst ways to go, being someone else's food, and six years old at that SMH. Alot of people these days worship thier pets and love dogs more than people, you hear their comments often: " Dogs only know unconditional love" " Dogs are gods angels sent from heaven" blah, blah, blah.
Stop personifying the fucking animal. Its panting, not smiling or laughing. Dogs like people are capable of many emotions: sadness, love, anger, hate, etc. They are not "pure' they are not ' Gods angels' or any other BS, just because its cute and it amuses you in a selfish way it doesn't mean it isn't what it is: an animal, a carnivore.
You take an animal away from its brothers/sisters/mother, mutilate their genitals so they can't reproduce and put a leash on it and all of a sudden you act altruistic and condemning of cultures that eat the animal, yet having ownership of an animal for your own entertainment is not any less immoral? BS.
And yes Pitbulls are often more dangerous due to Human interference, we created the problem so we must fix it and theres an humane way to do it, limit breeding of the breed and let the ones around die off and kill off the ones that are too far gone.
Actually true APBT's have more purpose and function than 90% of the designer dogs we see all over Instagram accounts today. They are a working breed, by definition they are far from pointless.What a pointless breed of dog.
Probably one of the worst ways to go, being some animals food, and six years old at that SMH. Alot of people these days worship thier pets and love dogs more than people, you hear their comments often: " Dogs only know unconditional love" " Dogs are gods angels sent from heaven" blah, blah, blah.
Stop personifying the fucking animal. Its panting, not smiling or laughing. Dogs like people are capable of many emotions: sadness, love, anger, hate, etc. They are not "pure' they are not ' Gods angels' or any other BS, just because its cute and it amuses you in a selfish way it doesn't mean it isn't what it is: an animal, a carnivore.
You take an animal away from its brothers/sisters/mother, mutilate their genitals so they can't reproduce and put a leash on it and all of a sudden you act altruistic and condemning of cultures that eat the animal, yet having ownership of an animal for your own entertainment is not any less immoral? BS.
And yes Pitbulls are often more dangerous due to Human interference, we created the problem so we must fix it and theres an humane way to do it, limit breeding of the breed and let the ones around die off and kill off the ones that are too far gone.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/6-year-old-girl-dies-in-dog-attack-dog-in-quarantine
Dogs of peace strike again. Pit bull terrier “likely to be euthanized” after the incident. It’s not the breed guys, remember, a gang of Dachshunds killed a woman!
1)dog fighting creates killer dogs
2)pit rescues try to home these dogs irresponsibly(at times) this leads to "family" dogs that are just killers in waiting.
3) if you raise a dog from a pup correctly, it doesnt matter what breed it is, it wont bite you
4) Banning a dog breed is just as moronic as banning one specific type of rifle(AK47s are BAD!). If you are scared of dogs stay away from them.
I would support laws that punish dog owners for there actions in most situations. I absolutely advocate for anyone involved with dogfighting to spend a lifetime in prison. It does nothing but endanger our society for the entertainment of heartless criminals.
Its not the breed, its how they are raised. If you cant understand that you are an idiot. And statistics are pointless because they will always be skewed by the idiots involed with dogfighting and the by products that come from that environment.
Millions of pitbulls dont harm anyone.
It's not the breed. It's the fact that there's significantly more pitbulls and mutts that look enough like pitbulls to be claimed as pits. They take up literally around 15% of the dog population. The next most popular breed is the golden retriever at just 1% of the dog population.
So if you account for that incredibly large gap in populations then pitbulls aren't really responsible for a larger percentage of attacks. If any other breed of a similar size was in place of pitbulls you would be talking shit about that one and how it's a "Dog of Peace".
If you take the publicly available data, you can do the math yourself and see that pitbulls aren't anymore likely to attack than any other dog breed. They're just the most popular dog in the United States by far. Plus they are incredibly cheap compared to other breeds like mastiffs, dobermans, et cetera so they are more likely to be kept by poor trash who can't afford to properly train and keep their dogs. So you wind up with tons of high energy dogs that don't get treated right and don't ever get exercised and properly socialized that wind up going psycho.
It's not the dog, it's the culture. If there were tons of Cane Corsos (my dog) running around instead of pitbulls and pitbull mixes, there would be just as many attacks and fatalities.
Can you please give me some citation to back up the claim that pit bulls are the most common dog in the United States? Because everything I’ve read disagrees with your assessment and puts the number closer to around 5% of US dogs are Pitts. Making their attack numbers and caused deaths a shockingly disproportionate number.
I'm not sure where you even got 5% because a simple Google search points this out at 20%, which is higher than I'm even using for my stats. You might be using the lower figure of "purebred" American Pitbull Terrier. Since this is a breed that's barely recognized officially, and the majority are actually just mutts that are identified as pitbulls because of their features. Since they never call a pitbull mutts a mutt, and they only blame the pitbull in that figure it's important to ensure you include those in your population figures. When you do combine those statistics to get a final figure you'll see that it's roughly 10% to 25% of the total dog population. If you take the medium of those figures, it's a solid 15%.
So yes, pitbulls are responsible for a substantial number of attacks and fatalities but that figure is also clearly proportional to their total relative population. If you replaced all those pitbulls with mastiffs that you could get for free on every corner, it would be mastiffs that you're hating instead. If you replaced all those pitbulls with dobermans that you could get for free on every corner, it would be dobermans that you're hating instead.
Or a gun tbh.Not a reason to kill a dog and you should probably never have a pet again.
I'm not going to keep repeating myself.It is my contention that this rhetoric is dangerous and misleading. Why dogs attack are because something sets off their prey drive or defensive instincts. This isn't complicated stuff and it's not different for the pit bull.
What's the confusion with the how of pitbulls attacking?
This is why it's hard to take you seriously. There are dogs that are much more efficient at taking people out and the statistics are so heavily distorted its next to impossible to quantify a true number for the APBT.
Prey drive + gameness+ inbreeding + terrible ownership + stupid parenting = the pitbull issue.
You going on about its innate desire to kill is not only stupid but harmful.
This is a very awkward paragraph.
You are scared of the sensationalized highly distorted stats made up of 3 or more breeds including mutts. Yes I get it it's frightening to look at those numbers.
We can do without the "killing machine" speech.
Agreed. There are many dogs that are currently horrible for the average owner.
No the question is what's the solution? Banning them is ineffective as has been shown in ontario so what do you suggest to lower the attack/fatality rates?
I spend at least an hour every day working and training my dog. I get the distinct impression that other people who I see with dogs don't put in a fraction of that time. I hear people all the time speak full english sentences at their dogs. That's a sure sign they've not done any training. To a dog, the command "Come" and the phrase "Hey, come on over here" are two completely different things. The dog doesn't understand language or words. It knows sounds.
My anecdotal point is that it scares me how many people don't actively train/socialize their dogs. I was at the river with my pup a few months ago and this guy had his pitbull tied to the back of his truck, but this little bastard was going nuts. I carry one of these in my truck, so I had it unfolded and stuck in the ground next to me just incase he got loose (one of those times when I wish I carried in my vehicle):
What kind of dog do you have?
I wouldn't have any dog that ever showed aggression towards me or my family. I had a lab once that growled at me when I walked by his food bowl. 00 buckshot to the head gave him his attitude adjustment swiftly.
You are tripping over your own argument. I've already recognized the gameness and prey drive that has been bred into these dogs. You just can't read, not my fault.I'm not going to keep repeating myself.
Your initial paragraph is incomplete as you leave out 'selective breeding across decades' as a reason for why they attack. Temperament breeding is the main reason Golden Retriever attack humans less than Pit Bulls. That is not an unimportant factor.
and the solution is license the owners and do not allow the dogs to domiciled within dense city borders.