[sagar]

“It is as unfair to blame them for the actions of other peoples’ dogs as it is to blame innocent gun owners for the acts of criminals who use guns.”

A case of classic faulty comparison fallacy.

It might be a bit hard for you to understand, but pitbulls are living things that act on instinct, which is to kill. Guns do not have any instinct, since they are considered inanimate objects, aka non-living things. I know, pretty complex stuff.

[Axenolith]

In both instances, responsible owners of objects/life forms that were not guilty or caused anything are the eventual victims of the “solutions” proposed by hand wringing busybodies to solve problems caused by irresponsible idiots.

What we really need here for a proper crusade filled with legislative passion is to collect all the fatalities from dog bites, bucket drownings, self inflicted fork wounds, Slinky entanglements, and as many other low probability means of shuffling off this mortal coil as we can gather and pass a comprehensive ban on statistically insignificant causes of death.

[South40]

Apparently you fail to understand that there are millions of pit bull dogs in American homes and yards that have never hurt anyone and likely never will. Some people want to take guns from innocent gun owners because of the actions of others. That is wrong. And some people, possibly/apparently you, want to take those innocent dogs from their owners because of the actions of others. That is wrong also.

Guns, dogs and the illogical arguments employed by those who want to ban them renders the comparison valid. You may get that or you may not...I really don't care. Either way, you are making the same illogical argument liberals do when they want to ban guns. Good show.