[sinkspur]

Agressive dogs need time and expertise to be uised properly, so do guns.

You act as if these dogs are nothing but machines.

The fact that a normally-placid pit will, frequently, snap and start mauling anything and anybody in its vicinity is proof that, no matter how much training you provide, these beasts will revert to their genetic breeding traits eventually.

Comparing them to a gun, which will do what I want it to do, every single time I want it to do it, is ridiculous.

[Wristpin]

Not only that, but like I said earlier...if I shoot your kid, I'm going to jail. If my Bull baiting dog rips your kid's arm off, I may be protected from criminal and civil liability by "vicious dog laws". In some states the dog has to be declared dangerous before criminal and civil penalties kick in.

That's why the dog lobby fights these laws fiercely. If certains breeds are designated as "known dangerous" or "require special handling", the liability umbrella extends to breeders and even the registering organizations pushing them on the public. They've managed to push the loving Pit Bull is everyman's dog story, keep the money rolling in and stay above the liability fray.

We've gone well past the point of expecting them to police themselves.

[Feiny]

I figured you would be here as it seems to be your life's mission to post on all "pitbull" attack threads.

We have posted to one another ad infinitum with no results so I won't continue with you anymore. We disagree on this issue in a major way, but I still like you.

You are correct, the gun analogy is stupid. You are incorrect about the genetic traits of these dogs. I have sent you plenty of links relating to their history & true nature, but you willfully ignore them.

All respectable ABPT breeders cull for human aggression as it is an aberration in the breed. They were bred to fight bears & bulls, but never to attack people.

I cannot stay & play "let's bash pitbulls & their owners" today as I am off to the range for some shooting time.

[Candor7]

Comparing them to a gun, which will do what I want it to do, every single time I want it to do it, is ridiculous.>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Both result in deadly force. The law sees it that way, not just me. It takes more training to properly control the deadly force which can come from an animal, as compared to a gun.

The law allows for people to own dogs that can manifest deasdly force, and owners should be responsible for that force when it is misapplied, but I do not see how Liberty is maintained by banning any dog that is properly controlled. Its just that we have a culture which romanticizes the animal kingdom, including dogs.

Aggressive dog breeders who sell their dogs to people who are not competent to handle them should also be held responsible. That way, people would get the training they need and would not purchase such a dog unless they could have the proper conditions for it.

I see no reason to ban any breed of domestic dog but the ownership of WILD Animals, such as WOlf DOg hybrids perhaps should be banned.