elzar
Red Belt
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 8,475
- Reaction score
- 0
Well this certainly fits the "light-hearted humour" motto of the Mayberry...
qft War Room ------------------->
Well this certainly fits the "light-hearted humour" motto of the Mayberry...
I've known some extremely friendly pit's but they still tended to be less friendly to kids and that probably has a great deal to do with them not being afraid of someone so small.
If you're a parent and you allow a pit next to a child you should be put down along with the dog when they attack.
So you're going to make a sweeping generalization about a breed based on a handful of dogs you've met personally?
This is why I can't stand people who own Pitbulls. It's such an asinine debate.
"Uhh why are you discriminating against Bengal Tigers? It's all how you raise them! Err herp!!"
If a poodle goes ballistic, it can't rip off someone's jaw. Why the stupid macho bullshit? Why do people need a pitbull?
But it's cool to make a sweeping generalization about a breed based on the handful of news reports we see about aggressive/dangerous pits?
So you think people should only be allowed tiny dogs? Almost all dogs over 40-50 pounds are capable of mauling children.
Pit bulls are scary animals that can't be physically controlled by most owners if they snap. You shouldn't be able to own an animal that can kill a child if left unsupervised. Fuck the apologists.
But it's cool to make a sweeping generalization about a breed based on the handful of news reports we see about aggressive/dangerous pits?
I don't know what any of this means but I still don't think this story is humorous or intelligent.
Why is it always pit bulls?
I doubt its just because their owners are shit, I think a little has to do with the breed itself.
Sorry, it's the truth.
http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-quick-statistics.php
Over a 9 year period from 05-13 Pits and Rottweilers accounted for 74% of all dog attacks resulting in fatality. First stat on the page.
That's an interesting point. So, then why is it that only Pits and Rotties are accounting for the vast majority of the fatalities when so many other breeds are capable of the same, hmmm?
Why is it always pit bulls?
I doubt its just because their owners are shit, I think a little has to do with the breed itself.
But can't most dogs over 50 pounds kill a child?
Are they? They do have a higher rate of attacks, but it is silly to say they are the only dogs who bite. Either way, the point was poodles cannot maul children so why own any dog who can. Therefore, it would seem the point was you should not own a dog capable of harming children