Maybe not a thread, but here's a song for you:
(Chet, you need a shave?)
Posted on 04/12/2009 10:58:48 PM PDT by Chet 99
Sane Post Of The Night.
Perhaps there is a “Tony Soprano” type in the neighborhood that can arrange for the dog’s owners to be destroyed as well...or at least beaten to the point of hospitalization, not that I have any doubt as to who would end up paying for the hospitalization.
You get the nail on the head award...
(Chet, you need a shave?)
I know. It's so ignorant to generalize that Australian Shepherds always want to herd everything from hens to kids, and that spaniels and retreivers love water and like to fetch stuff -- just extreme ignorance very much like racism, and so fitting because really, dogs are people, too, you know?
Hey, in case you haven't noticed -- and judging by your lack of common sense you haven't -- this woman and her daugher were simply enjoying their property, just like the old lady gardening in her own yard who was killed by a pit bull a few years ago, or like the guy who lives in a town near me who stepped outside for a smoke and was killed by his son's pit bull, or the mail carrier in So Cal whose leg was permanently maimed by a pit bull ambushed her from between two parked cars, or the guy who was changing the tire on his car was attacked by the neighbor's pit bull, a dog he knew well and had often petted over the years -- these people were minding their own business and they didn't just get bit, they got killed or maimed.
You didn't specifiy, but if you got bit because you were grooming the animals -- by a cat or a Yorky or a ferret because you're handling the critter and invading its personal territory -- AND YOU HAVE THE STUPIDITY TO COMPARE IT TO A PIT BULL MAULING OF A WOMAN AND A 2-YEAR-OLD MINDING THEIR OWN BUSINESS IN THEIR FRONT YARD? -- well, you should go sit in the corner with a pointy hat on your head for a few days, dear. You need to think a little more about reality and a little less about your ego as a dog "authority" because you groom pets.
I don't think people want to accept that they indeed DO have to have their rights infringed on when we live in a free society--it's the plain, perfectly legit idea of "My right to swing my fist ends at your nose." If I keep swinging, I go to jail--that can indeed be characterized as "infringing on my freedom."
In this case, curtailing the "freedom" of the owner is perfectly justifiable when we're talking about an object that can't be controlled. I find it very difficult to believe that if people don't have pit bulls, they won't be able to protect their homes.
The attempt to draw a parallel with gun ownership because pit bulls are used as home protection is ridiculous. A gun can't leap a fence or take itself out of a drawer.
Great/Sad post,,,
Ain’t nothin’ wrong with a pit-bull,,,
That a .44 won’t fix,,,
P.S. :
I’ll have to guard the plumber tomorrow because the
thug/turd lets 2 loose in the front(where the work is)...
Yep, what you said. The emphasis is that innocent people on their own property or on public property were attacked and brutally maimed or killed in hundreds or thousands of incidents.
To those who are so dense that they don’t “get it”, about how wrong it is for some child to be innocently playing in their yard and some irresponsible owners dog rips its face off, I can only pray that if there MUST be another little kid victim, if the choice comes down to the innocent party’s child or the child of the irresponsible dog owner - that it will be the irresponsible owners own child that is on the receiving end rather than some innocent person. Like I said, if the scenario was you had to make a choice of one or the other.
Maybe then they will finally “get it” and finally start to believe in personal responsibility and the vengeance that is due to the innocent victims and their families.
Again - want to own killer dog breeds? Great. More power to you. Just accept the consequences that come with it if you fail to be 100% responsible 100% of the time - no excuses.
The problem is, many people want to “play” at owning dangerous attack breeds, imbibe in drugs and alcohol but not bear any responsibility or be irresponsible with their own personal finances. They want ZERO personal responsibility for anything they do in life when it comes right down to it.
Cats can inflict nasty infectious bites, however lets get real. They do not go around attacking, maiming and killing like the attack dog breeds do.
Again, I am pro-attack dog breed - only if one can handle a full on Draconian responsibility that comes with it. But if your dog unjustly kills or maims - you should be killed or maimed.
Few people truly want true personal responsibility. They only want to pretend they do or act like it until the moment of reality hits. Most people want to wiggle out of it, suddenly decide they don’t want the responsibility after all (after its too late) or make mealy mouthed excuses.
So you missed the part where I got bit in the face by a Rottweiler? An hows a bout a true identification of the dogs? Do you have that? I don’t defend any dog biting a person or another animal. I do however want to see facts before I hysterically want a certain breed of dog be banned. All I see on these “pit bites another person” threads is condemnation of Pits Without even the certainty that the dog is a Pit. A story says Pit and everybody climbs on. And Finny the worst attack I’ve ever experienced was by an Afghan Hound when I was 8. I still have scars and I don’t want all Afghan Hounds dead. You used a really stupid example with Aussies. They are a herding breed and they nip (or as in all pit stories bite) to accomplish Their goal, herding. So If I get bit grooming it’s OK? And I notice you didn’t address the cat issue. A person in my town had to under go rabies shots because a feral cat attacked her and then couldn’t be found. Not all dogs are good. Not all people are good. Any breed of dog can hurt you. I judge each animal on it’s behaviour. BTW I specialize in rehabilitating dogs that have been hurt or have hurt other groomers.
Have you ever heard of Cocker rage or Springer Spaniel rage? You might want to look that up.
I applaud your clearly-described position for responsibility, but you know the punishment you call for will never, ever happen. Whatever the merits of your position, we're simply never going to see dog owners fed to their dogs, and so forth. So with this in mind, what is the do-able alternative to your desired punishment?
Finally! Someone who can attest to just how nasty Afghan Hounds can be.
(Yeah, I got bitten by one of those temperamental buggers.)
So you both missed the “bit in the face by a Rottie”? response? I was just toweling his neck dry. I’ll say this once more very slowly, it’s not the breed. Have you seen the stories where a ferret has killed a baby? I have. How about where a “pet” rat killed a baby? I don’t want vicious animals to run loose. I don’t want tame animals to run loose. This is about human responsibility not about a dog breed. The fact that I work with dogs doesn’t give them any more right to bite me than to bite anyone else. It just gives me more insight.
(snips)
“The deadliest dogs
Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, has conducted an unusually detailed study of dog bites from 1982 to the present. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.) The Clifton study show the number of serious canine-inflicted injuries by breed. The author’s observations about the breeds and generally how to deal with the dangerous dog problem are enlightening.
According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question. Clifton states:
If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed—and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.
Clifton’s opinions are as interesting as his statistics. For example, he says, “Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all.”
“In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers:
“Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities.” (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)
The Clifton study of attacks from 1982 through 2006 produced similar results. According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.)”
~~~
Wise Up!!!
There are plenty of nice breeds of dogs. All types of dogs, with every conceivable characteristic. I think pit bull owners have pit bulls for an entirely different reason than their love of dogs or the pit bull character.
I think they own pit bulls because of the danger and the vicarious aggression. I went to court for a restraining order against the dirtball landscape guy who brought his pit bull on rounds with him, locked up in the truck (sort of), and growling and barking for every minute the guy was there. Little kids playing on the sidewalk only a few yards away from the angry dog. Once a week.
It was either that or toss a antifreeze soaked piece of meat through the partially open truck window while the dirtball was in the rear yard. In hindsight, I probably should have fed him the antifreeze. I only solved my street’s problem.
BTW your post 12 isn’t particularity indicative of a Pit. Might be a mix but not small enough or stocky enough to be a true Pit. Sorry I don’t have pictures of the Afghan attack on me or the Huskey attack on me. They were bloody too. I was 8 the first time and 19 the next. Yup I still have scars. I’m still not advocating the demise of either breed. I guess I am just not very bright.
As a matter of fact, I argue with my husband often -- he'd like to see them banned, and I find the idea of banning dog breeds abhorent. What I would like to see is people like you, if you really want to prevent these dogs from being banned, to start being realistic and taking responsiblity by coming down hard on dog-owning peers who are irresponsible. The more you stupidly and senslessly defend the dogs and pretend that the problem doesn't exist, the more likely the end result will be that the dogs are banned, and that's not good for anybody. You are these dogs' worst friend.
You stay that it's ignorant and akin to racism to generalize breeds ... then you turn around and point out characteristics of Aussies (my dad had them as working cattle dogs on his ranch and they were so smart and useful they often made the difference between profit and loss -- you're not the only person around here who knows about dogs, though it appears you think you are), or prattle on about "Cocker rage" or "Spaniel rage" -- how is that any different than generalizing against pit bulls, presa canarios, and Rottweilers -- war dogs?
I notice that nowhere in your post do you address the essential point -- that the huge majority of the victims are minding their own business on their own or public property. Groomers get bit because they're intentionally invading the animal's territory. These people get mauled or killed doing nothing but minding their own business.
Did I miss the part where you respond to that? You're a dog groomer -- risk of dog bites is part of your business. If you really loved these dogs and wanted to prevent them from being banned, instead of coming down on those of us sick and tired of not being able to safely enjoy our own property or neighborhoods because of idiots who think like you, why don't you come down hard on idiots who you know full well have no business having these dogs?
I had some friends of the family who had horses and a hobby-type ranch and had owned many dogs over the years, and they were always very good dogs, well behaved, fine to have around. These people got a Rottweiler, raised it from a puppy. I knew these people well and know that they were good and responsible with animals. They went on vactation for a few weeks, and my SIL, who has raised and bred dogs -- specifically German Shepherds -- and is also very good with animals, took care of the Rott while they were gone. At the time, it was the only dog they owned.
About a week into the dog's care, the dog started snarling and growling at my SIL. It made her pretty nervous. She mentioned it to the friends when they returned, and they laughed it off. Eventually, however, the Rott became so aggressive even to them that they (stupidly) gave it to a family on a nearby ranch. These friends moved out of state shortly afterward ... and about a year later, my SIL read a news story about a family in the area whose little girl had had her hand permanently maimed (nearly torn off) by the family's pet Rottweiler. We've never known for sure whether or not it was the same dog, but if I was a gambler, I'd lay odds that it was. My SIL would have put the dog down, sadly, but wisely; these friends thought the thing could be "rehabilitated," apparently.
People like you who emotionally blame the symptom instead of the cause, are doing more to make breed banning a reality than anyone. Fans of these war dogs should be the ones spearheading efforts to ensure that these very special and valuable dogs are treasured and owned by folks like Kanawa, who understands and respects what the dogs are and can do. Peer pressure would go a mighty long way -- if you are a Pit or Rott or Presa lover and you see one behind a short fence or running loose, you ought to come down mighty hard on the owner, aggressively and with organized effort. THEN you would be doing something to keep the dogs from being banned, and may save a human life or two while you're at it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.