Pit bulls attack 6 year old and rips her jaw off...

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.
 
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.

kids are also loud, have weird energy (elevated, hyper, "up") and move unpredictably (suddenly start jumping or running or skipping or falling).
 
my god this is as bad a "bait thread" as they come...
 
How about if we can't ban pitbulls we just require every pitbull owner to buy one game cat for each of their neighbors as a defensive shield around their home.
 
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.
 
So you're going to make a sweeping generalization about a breed based on a handful of dogs you've met personally?

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?
 
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?

So you think people should only be allowed tiny dogs? Almost all dogs over 40-50 pounds are capable of mauling children.
 
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?

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.

So you think people should only be allowed tiny dogs? Almost all dogs over 40-50 pounds are capable of mauling children.

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?
 
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 can't most dogs over 50 pounds kill a child?
 
I don't know what any of this means but I still don't think this story is humorous or intelligent.

Raise7.gif
 
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.

A lot of thuggish "youths"(blinks) seem to like pittbulls. Perhaps, besides Cesar Milan, pittbulls tend to attract a certain kind of individual. Very few rough males seem to own poodles or that rat-looking creature Paris Hilton walks around with.
 
one species that I wouldn't care if it was extinct.

Great. Some dog whisperer can manage to apparently make it seem like a normal dog. Too bad 99% of the time it's just waiting for the chance to rip some unsuspecting persons face off.
 
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?

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
 
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.

Nah. It loved kids before this happened. It must have been provoked. Nothing like this has ever happened before.
 
But can't most dogs over 50 pounds kill a child?

They probably could, but pits are just wired to fuck shit up. If you don't believe that I don't know what to tell you.

Sometimes it's the owners, sometimes it's just the fact that its a FUCKING PIT BULL.
 
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

No one is saying they're the only dogs who can bite.

However statistics (you know, numbers grounded in fact) support the claim that the Pit breed is commonly known for aggression and attacks. Meaning its a risky dog to own not only for yourself but for those around you as well.

To me it just seems like an unnecessary risk, and for what?

To have a breed you like?
 
Whats up with the usernames with dashes in them?

-example- "-AsianGuy-" and "-dirtywhiteboy-"
 
Back
Top