Perhaps I should get a digital camera and post pictures of what the typical URBAN pitbull owner looks and acts like. 90% of them are ghetto rats strutting (or being pulled) down the street by their four legged penis extensions, barely under control at the end of a flimsy leash-while people have to cross the street to avoid them.
I have no doubt that they try to make the beasts more “bad ass” by taunting them and other means while home in their “cribs”.
These are where the majority of the attacks originate. They will also inbreed them in order to make money-do you think they go looking for “reputable” breeders when it comes to making money?
Perhaps even people with good intentions end up with these crossbred dogs and thats where the “good dog gone bad” stories come from.
If I'm not mistaken, you're the guy who had the altercation with the black bear a few years back with your dog, and like many here-you can count me in as an admirer.
I don't blame chet99 for the stigma surrounding these incidents,(that belongs to the unresponsible owners) the stories are news after all. And they are far more indicative of a real,physical danger than anything Perez Hilton splurts out.
>Perhaps I should get a digital camera and post pictures of what the typical URBAN pitbull owner looks and acts like. 90% of them are ghetto rats strutting (or being pulled) down the street by their four legged penis extensions, barely under control at the end of a flimsy leash-while people have to cross the street to avoid them.<
No doubt most on these lists will agree with you. This is why the stories abound.
As long as we have a segment of society, regardless of ethnicity, who value a dog not for it’s love and devotion, but for its ability to “kick your dog’s butt”, and to kick your butt, we’ll have this situation.
These people, who you aptly point out should not own a guinea pig, don’t look at dogs the way the average pet owner does. They celebrate the death of other people’s animals and only care about their ego when their animal is injured or killed.
Most of the conservatives on these posts advocated laws that harshly punish these people when their dog injures another. Blanket breed bans, that encompass law-abiding people’s animals, many which are simply mistaken for the type dog in question, are a huge violation of our constitutional rights. It is this violation that spurs the conservatives on these threads, because we realize that it could be our breed next and we value our freedoms.
I think, though, it is important to have solutions for any individual situations
that are consistent with conservative principles.
Emphasis has to be placed on individual responsibility and accountability.
Folks have the right to enjoy their property, in this case dogs,
but their enjoyment must not be at the expense of others’ right
to reasonable enjoyment of their property or ability to safely walk the streets.
Shotgun approaches, solutions that punish the law-abiding responsible owner
as well as the unlawful irresponsible owner
aren't consistent with conservative principles in my view.
A statist solution would be based on the principle
that the people can't be trusted to behave responsibly
and therefore in the name of the greater good, all must be denied freedom
and control of their lives ceded to the wise men of government.
Safety is very important but it can not supplant freedom,
individual responsibility and accountability as the basis of a healthy society.
What can be done then?
I'd like to attempt to answer that but I've some things that must be done.
I'll try and get back to you later with some ideas.