Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: BJungNan
In the Yukon territories and Alaska, where men and women still must depend on dogs for their survival, you would last about 20 minutes in arguing with them like you are here, and Huskies can chew up a child faster than a pitt bull and do far worse injury. As a matter of fact the picture of the child you posted showed a single bite injury where a dog had grabbed the child. A huskie would tear out a persons throat. Yet they are not banned.

But why do so many thousands of people, including Indians and Eskimos cultivate and use huskies in their daily lives. Why don't these northerners ban their dogs . Becuase when one goes wild they realize that it is not generallly the dogs fault, but the owners.

Take your single incident driven mentality with which you would end the good ownership of dogs by good handlers, by far the majority,and take it on over to MOVE ON.ORG. Such thinking does not work here. Its a conservative forum, and your thinking on the issue is not conservative. Its the same thinking that brought us the Brady Bill and gun control.

197 posted on 05/28/2006 11:47:21 PM PDT by Candor7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies ]


To: Candor7
In the Yukon territories and Alaska, where men and women still must depend on dogs for their survival...

There you go. In the Alaskan wild, let them have all the pitbulls they want. In my neighborhood - or any neighborhood where there are children, either ban 'em or make it legal to shoot them if they are out of someone's yard off a leash.

As a matter of fact the picture of the child you posted showed a single bite injury where a dog had grabbed the child.

Your are sick - literally - if you look at that childs face and minimize her injuries as you have.

A huskie would...

We are not talking about Huskies (we are not talking about SUV's or about guns). You are completely incapable of sticking to the sujbect, pitbulls in residential neighborhoods.

Take your single incident driven mentality...

I'm guilty on that one. It is the many incidents of pitbulls viciously attacking or simply terrorizing neighborhoods that has me (and many others) wanting to ban pitbulls.

...with which you would end the good ownership of dogs by good handlers...

I've seen an incident where the pitbull of a good owner attacked a child. He could not believe it. He had years of experience with dogs and sounded just like you before that incident. Now he says no one should own the things anywhere that children can be exposed to them. That is full experience talking.

Add to that the irresponsible, incapable and the punks that want a pitbull and now you have real trouble. Yet, you will not even propose that an owner of a pitbull must prove they are, as you say, good handlers before they can own one. Do you propose even that much?

take it on over to MOVE ON.ORG. Such thinking does not work here.

Shall we put it to a vote of FR? Help me work out the poll questions and the answers and we will put your assertion to the test. My suggested poll question and answer would be as follows:

Should pitbulls be allowed in residential neighborhoods?
- Yes, anyone should be allowed to own one.
- Yes, but they must prove they can handle pitbulls.
- No, they should be banned.
-No, the breed should be made extinct.

198 posted on 05/29/2006 8:47:32 AM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson