Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Princess L on October 23, 2012, 12:38:29 PM
-
Milwaukee spa shooting: Wife told court shooter terrorized her
MILWAUKEE - A Wisconsin man terrorized his wife for years, threatening to throw acid on her face, dousing her car with tomato juice and slashing her vehicle's tires before finally going to the spa where she worked, opening fire and killing her and two others.
The shooting spree stunned the middle- to upper-class Milwaukee suburb where it happened, but court records show the conflict between Radcliffe Haughton and his wife had been escalating for years.
The 45-year-old former car salesman ultimately shot seven women at the spa before turning the gun on himself. Three remained hospitalized Monday.
Haughton, of Brown Deer, was charged with disorderly conduct last year after police officers responding to a 911 call saw Haughton point what appeared to be a gun at his wife, Zina, from a window at their home. Officers took cover, and a 90-minute standoff ensued.
Brown Deer police said Monday the standoff ended peacefully, and they were never able to confirm a gun was involved because Zina Haughton wouldn't allow them into the couple's home. The charge against Radcliffe Haughton was dropped when a police officer failed to appear in court.
According to court records, Zina Haughton told police when she called 911 that her husband had thrown her clothes and bedding into the yard and poured tomato juice on her car.
Ernest J. Polk, who lives across the street from the Haughtons' home, said they were friendly to him but he saw signs of turmoil.
"There was always confrontation over there, but I never thought it would come to this," he said. "... It was mostly verbal. I didn't see anything physical."
Zina Haughton told police last year that her husband didn't own any guns, but she was concerned enough about her safety to get a police escort when she went to the house earlier this month to pick up a few items.
Zina Haughton wrote in restraining order request filed Oct. 8 that her husband had threatened to kill her if she ever left him. He also, at various times, threatened to throw acid on her face and burn her and her family with gas.
"His threats terrorize my every waking moment," Zina Haughton wrote.
She said when she drove to work after picking up items from her home, she found her husband waiting for her in a car outside the spa. He leaned out of the vehicle and, in front of her and two co-workers, slashed her vehicle's tires. He was later arrested.
Radcliffe Haughton appeared in court Thursday, when a judge issued a four-year restraining order and told him to turn in all firearms to a county sheriff. It's not clear whether he turned in any weapons.
He bought the .40-caliber semiautomatic handgun used in the shootings on Saturday, Brown Deer police said in a statement.
People who buy handguns from gun dealers must wait 48 hours after they have cleared a background check from the Department of Justice to pick up their firearm. There is no such waiting period or background check required in Wisconsin for people who purchase handguns from private individuals, which police say Radcliffe Haughton did.
Two Democratic state lawmakers said Monday that they'll re-introduce a bill designed to ensure that perpetrators of domestic violence comply with judges' orders to surrender their weapons.
The shooting spree also killed Cary Robuck, a 35-year-old nail technician from Racine, and Maelyn Lind, 38, of Oconomowoc.
Shawn Scheffler, who had lived with Robuck for six years, described her as a "bright personality" who loved her part-time job at the spa.
"She was my world," Scheffler said. "That was the woman I was going to spend the rest of my life with, and she was taken from me just like that."
Kathy Sieja, a spokeswoman at the hospital where the survivors were taken, said one woman was released from the hospital Monday afternoon and the others were in satisfactory condition.
The shooting spree that happened about 11 a.m. Sunday triggered chaos in the commercial area around the spa. Believing Haughton had fled, police began a massive, six-hour search that locked down a nearby mall, country club and hospital.
The police chief in Brookfield, where the spa is located, said later that a fire Haughton set in the building, the discovery of a propane tank initially believed to be an improvised explosive device and the layout of the facility, with many small rooms and locked areas, all slowed officers' search and delayed the discovery of the gunman's body.
It was the second mass shooting in Wisconsin this year. Wade Michael Page, a 40-year-old Army veteran and white supremacist, killed six people and injured three others before fatally shooting himself Aug. 5 at a Sikh temple south of Milwaukee.
Sunday's shooting took place less than a mile from where seven people were killed and four wounded on March 12, 2005, when a gunman opened fire at a Living Church of God service held at a hotel.
Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/national/radcliffe-haughton-milwaukee-spa-shooting-wife-told-court-shooter-terrorized-her#ixzz2A9WKVLjA
-
Princess L in the unlikely event you want someone restrained let me know and I'll batter them on your behalf
-
I'm thinking about concealed carry. Not sure if it's a good idea (for me), but maybe a tazer/stun gun ???
Some idiots out there are blaming the shooting (or at least insinuating) this happened because of our new concealed carry law. ::)
-
Restraining orders generally work against sane individuals, people who have something to lose, or face embarrassment.
A person is going to do what they want to do. In the event a person violates an order, charges can be issued or the person can be arrested. In many states, violating a restraining order (a civil order) is a criminal offense.
Now, this woman was suffering from abuse for yrs. Her husband had the mentality that he was going to what he wanted to do, and no piece of paper could tell him otherwise.
Her getting the order in the first place was a good sign, because she finally stood up to him. Many times the women who need it are too scared to get them, the ones who want to abuse the system are the main ones who get them.
I think she should have gotten a gun---better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
-
(http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_Radcliffe_Haughton_nt_121022_wg.jpg)
(http://www.gadailynews.com/thumbnail.php?file=assets-2012/Gunman_Radcliffe_Haughton_shot_3_dead_including_wife_Zina_Haughton_before_turning_gun_on_himself_669273612.jpg&size=article_large)
-
Restraining orders only increase the MANS RAGE and likelihood of them attacking you. They just see it is another attack on themselves, you can rest assure behind every restraining order is a MASSIVE COLOSSAL BITCH who is using the system to get one-up on her man. Not a smart move on a womans behalf, if she truly fears for the life of her children and herself, she will do whatever it takes to get away from him, Leave her job, leave the city, leave the country, but in my experience good women don't attract bad men, like attracts like. If a wan is taking out a restraining order on her partner and then stays with him they deserve one another.
Nice points E-Kul you seem to know alot about the topic, I'm sure you've had the odd restraining order lodged against you
-
I really feel kinda wothless today...
-
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/orange_county&id=8389385
-
Restraining orders only increase the MANS RAGE and likelihood of them attacking you. They just see it is another attack on themselves, you can rest assure behind every restraining order is a MASSIVE COLOSSAL BITCH who is using the system to get one-up on her man. Not a smart move on a womans behalf, if she truly fears for the life of her children and herself, she will do whatever it takes to get away from him, Leave her job, leave the city, leave the country, but in my experience good women don't attract bad men, like attracts like. If a wan is taking out a restraining order on her partner and then stays with him they deserve one another.
Actually, that is the way abused women think. They think that they don't want to get the abuser into trouble because it will make them mad. So they rather deal with the abuse. Becoming victimized over and over again, and lettig their children (if they have any) witness said abuse.
Many orders are done by women trying to eff over the dude, or trying to get that man out of the house, and a new one in (for the weekend) or tit for tat. And then drop them. But, the women (and MEN) who REALLY
NEED THEM, are either too scared or embarrassed to come get them---sometimes it takes a buildup of courage to do it.
-
I'm thinking about concealed carry. Not sure if it's a good idea (for me), but maybe a tazer/stun gun ???
Some idiots out there are blaming the shooting (or at least insinuating) this happened because of our new concealed carry law. ::)
I just wanted to talk :(
-
Restraining orders generally work against sane individuals, people who have something to lose, or face embarrassment.
You're so right on this part. It depends what the individual has a steak. I saw a guy leave the state to get away from his bitch after she slapped him with a RO and piece bond, because his business and family started to get caught up in it.
-
HA HA I Have actually, one was by an ex about 15 years ago, after we broke up I sent her a nasty text calling her poisonous and venomous and I mistakenly wrote one of my favourite quotes "Beware the fury of a patient man" as I actually consider myself a patient man, on reflection I could see how that could be considered a veiled threat, but for me revenge doesn't always have to be physical, anyway, she really pissed me off. Anyway, long story short, she kept the texts, applied for an intervention, which i contested by the way, the whole thing was a joke, the judge copped one look at her tits that she proudly had on display, watched her every crocodile tear flow from her eyes while she recounted every terrible thing I'd ever done in my life to convince the judge I was a dangerous felon. Long story short, the Judge granted the order, gave me the evil eye, puffed his chest out like some chivalrous mangina and I never saw that EVIL BITCH again and nor did i want too after that. She did it for spite, because I served up some home truths during the break up and she wanted to teach me a new school feminist lesson. Last I heard she was broke, obese, single, unemployed and still living with her mother and stepfather. Stupid Bitch!
tell us about the rest of your restraining orders now
-
This is truly a sad story, especially with more and more background information becoming available.
Listen to this:
It's chilling :'(
http://www.620wtmj.com/podcasts/news/newstogo/175441311.html
start min. 25 - HE is the one doing the interrogation
Also, min. 29~30 and on :'( >:( :'( >:(
-
Restraining orders only increase the MANS RAGE and likelihood of them attacking you. They just see it is another attack on themselves, you can rest assure behind every restraining order is a MASSIVE COLOSSAL BITCH who is using the system to get one-up on her man. Not a smart move on a womans behalf, if she truly fears for the life of her children and herself, she will do whatever it takes to get away from him, Leave her job, leave the city, leave the country, but in my experience good women don't attract bad men, like attracts like. If a wan is taking out a restraining order on her partner and then stays with him they deserve one another.
Restraining orders and gun laws work with law-abiding citizens. Two people I knew had ROs against their spouses, yet both were murdered by their spouses anyway.
-
lawyers are pieces of shits as well , but we all know that as well
-
The only good lawyer...
-
lawyers are pieces of shits as well , but we all know that as well
If you're referring to the audio clip and the male voice (sounding like an asshole lawyer); it's her husband acting on his own behalf.
-
cost 2 other woman their lives as well
(http://localtvwiti.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/shooting-victims.jpg?w=400)
-
mission in life have a restraing order on a man. awesome life awesome mission. worthless dna
-
"Two Democratic state lawmakers said Monday that they'll re-introduce a bill designed to ensure that perpetrators of domestic violence comply with judges' orders to surrender their weapons."
Yeah...that'l fix it... f*ing morons..
-
OH i see, what a fucking asshole Indeed , no wonder he was getting over ruled after every question , stupid fuck
If you're referring to the audio clip and the male voice (sounding like an asshole lawyer); it's her husband acting on his own behalf.
-
I'm thinking about concealed carry. Not sure if it's a good idea (for me), but maybe a tazer/stun gun ???
Some idiots out there are blaming the shooting (or at least insinuating) this happened because of our new concealed carry law. ::)
Those folks do not have the capacity to reason. A crazy person, a determined person, some felons, could care less how many laws are passed. They will still find a way to acquire a gun, a gallon of gas, a vehicle ( ramming speed), a pointed stick or what ever to do the deed they decide to do.
-
police are to blame
for making woman think they are SAFE with a court stamped piece of paper
A real restraining order should be granted along with Self protection Gun Classes
-
Milwaukee spa shooting: Wife told court shooter terrorized her
MILWAUKEE - A Wisconsin man terrorized his wife for years, threatening to throw acid on her face, dousing her car with tomato juice and slashing her vehicle's tires before finally going to the spa where she worked, opening fire and killing her and two others.
The shooting spree stunned the middle- to upper-class Milwaukee suburb where it happened, but court records show the conflict between Radcliffe Haughton and his wife had been escalating for years.
The 45-year-old former car salesman ultimately shot seven women at the spa before turning the gun on himself. Three remained hospitalized Monday.
Haughton, of Brown Deer, was charged with disorderly conduct last year after police officers responding to a 911 call saw Haughton point what appeared to be a gun at his wife, Zina, from a window at their home. Officers took cover, and a 90-minute standoff ensued.
Brown Deer police said Monday the standoff ended peacefully, and they were never able to confirm a gun was involved because Zina Haughton wouldn't allow them into the couple's home. The charge against Radcliffe Haughton was dropped when a police officer failed to appear in court.
According to court records, Zina Haughton told police when she called 911 that her husband had thrown her clothes and bedding into the yard and poured tomato juice on her car.
Ernest J. Polk, who lives across the street from the Haughtons' home, said they were friendly to him but he saw signs of turmoil.
"There was always confrontation over there, but I never thought it would come to this," he said. "... It was mostly verbal. I didn't see anything physical."
Zina Haughton told police last year that her husband didn't own any guns, but she was concerned enough about her safety to get a police escort when she went to the house earlier this month to pick up a few items.
Zina Haughton wrote in restraining order request filed Oct. 8 that her husband had threatened to kill her if she ever left him. He also, at various times, threatened to throw acid on her face and burn her and her family with gas.
"His threats terrorize my every waking moment," Zina Haughton wrote.
She said when she drove to work after picking up items from her home, she found her husband waiting for her in a car outside the spa. He leaned out of the vehicle and, in front of her and two co-workers, slashed her vehicle's tires. He was later arrested.
Radcliffe Haughton appeared in court Thursday, when a judge issued a four-year restraining order and told him to turn in all firearms to a county sheriff. It's not clear whether he turned in any weapons.
He bought the .40-caliber semiautomatic handgun used in the shootings on Saturday, Brown Deer police said in a statement.
People who buy handguns from gun dealers must wait 48 hours after they have cleared a background check from the Department of Justice to pick up their firearm. There is no such waiting period or background check required in Wisconsin for people who purchase handguns from private individuals, which police say Radcliffe Haughton did.
Two Democratic state lawmakers said Monday that they'll re-introduce a bill designed to ensure that perpetrators of domestic violence comply with judges' orders to surrender their weapons.
The shooting spree also killed Cary Robuck, a 35-year-old nail technician from Racine, and Maelyn Lind, 38, of Oconomowoc.
Shawn Scheffler, who had lived with Robuck for six years, described her as a "bright personality" who loved her part-time job at the spa.
"She was my world," Scheffler said. "That was the woman I was going to spend the rest of my life with, and she was taken from me just like that."
Kathy Sieja, a spokeswoman at the hospital where the survivors were taken, said one woman was released from the hospital Monday afternoon and the others were in satisfactory condition.
The shooting spree that happened about 11 a.m. Sunday triggered chaos in the commercial area around the spa. Believing Haughton had fled, police began a massive, six-hour search that locked down a nearby mall, country club and hospital.
The police chief in Brookfield, where the spa is located, said later that a fire Haughton set in the building, the discovery of a propane tank initially believed to be an improvised explosive device and the layout of the facility, with many small rooms and locked areas, all slowed officers' search and delayed the discovery of the gunman's body.
It was the second mass shooting in Wisconsin this year. Wade Michael Page, a 40-year-old Army veteran and white supremacist, killed six people and injured three others before fatally shooting himself Aug. 5 at a Sikh temple south of Milwaukee.
Sunday's shooting took place less than a mile from where seven people were killed and four wounded on March 12, 2005, when a gunman opened fire at a Living Church of God service held at a hotel.
Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/national/radcliffe-haughton-milwaukee-spa-shooting-wife-told-court-shooter-terrorized-her#ixzz2A9WKVLjA
happens all the time 17 miles from where i live. well we're living here in allentown and there closing all the factories down out in bethlehem .......... you know the rest.billy joel.
-
I'm thinking about concealed carry. Not sure if it's a good idea (for me), but maybe a tazer/stun gun ???
Some idiots out there are blaming the shooting (or at least insinuating) this happened because of our new concealed carry law. ::)
Out of curiosity why wouldn't be a good idea for you?
And anti-gun people are opportunistic and will swoop down any chance to blame the gun instead on the one wielding it. This guy would have killed her regardless if he owned a gun or not.
-
Out of curiosity why wouldn't be a good idea for you?
I don't think I'd be good in a panic situation like that. I'd probably be second guessing myself on whether to shoot or not and all the possible repercussions. At least with a tazer, the outcome isn't potentially fatal.
-
Did she have kids?
-
Na, the other one was taken out by the police for my girlfriend, one time we had an argument and I was pretty loud, the neighbours called the police and against my girlfriends wishes they took out an intervention, only because of her daughter who was ten years old at the time. (She's 18 now and sitting here asking me if her boyfriend can stay over tonight, interrupting my posting flow on GETBIG). This one was because I do have priors and I tend to give the Police heaps of shit whenever they stick their nose into my business. My partner actually wanted nothing to do with it (she started the fight), but I actually cracked the shits after this and my girlfriend and I didn't live together for a while after that. The restraining orders I have had against me were BS, nothing ever come of them, as I am not that type of Guy, I just don't take shit from women, and because I am a big guy with a criminal record women see me as an easy target when it comes to reporting me to the police.
You are the type that would violate orders, as you don't care, "nobody can tell me what to do" types, just by your statements, "they don't do anything", and "she started it", taken the blame off of you, never accepting responsibility. The type that would talk a woman out (make her feel guilty) of an order, or continually violating an order, just because you to "stick it to the man".
-
Did she have kids?
Yes, a 12 year old daughter I believe. She said in the audio clip (in court to get restraining order) that she didn't want to have her daughter see her father getting arrested, so that's one of the reasons she didn't press charges previously.
-
Yes, a 12 year old daughter I believe. She said in the audio clip (in court to get restraining order) that she didn't want to have her daughter see her father getting arrested, so that's one of the reasons she didn't press charges previously.
She should have pressed charges. To hell with not wanting her daughter seeing her father gettig arrested. What she was showing her daughter was to put up with the abuse. And the girl learns that and seeks or is drawn to abusive men. Hopefully, this tradegy will help the girl to stay away from abusive relationships, and protect yourself. Don't put up with some abusive person, who feeds off you being beaten down and weak.
-
HA HA I Have actually, one was by an ex about 15 years ago, after we broke up I sent her a nasty text calling her poisonous and venomous and I mistakenly wrote one of my favourite quotes "Beware the fury of a patient man" as I actually consider myself a patient man, on reflection I could see how that could be considered a veiled threat, but for me revenge doesn't always have to be physical, anyway, she really pissed me off. Anyway, long story short, she kept the texts, applied for an intervention, which i contested by the way, the whole thing was a joke, the judge copped one look at her tits that she proudly had on display, watched her every crocodile tear flow from her eyes while she recounted every terrible thing I'd ever done in my life to convince the judge I was a dangerous felon. Long story short, the Judge granted the order, gave me the evil eye, puffed his chest out like some chivalrous mangina and I never saw that EVIL BITCH again and nor did i want too after that. She did it for spite, because I served up some home truths during the break up and she wanted to teach me a new school feminist lesson. Last I heard she was broke, obese, single, unemployed and still living with her mother and stepfather. Stupid Bitch!
She posts here ? :D
-
She posts here ? :D
didnt booty put a E-straining order on you willie?
-
didnt booty put a E-straining order on you willie?
Yes on the V but then she told me on the phone she was fantasizing about me fucking her and started sending me sexually explicit texts saying how she was playing with her self thinking about this - then the romantic holidays plus loads loads more all during and after her outburst on the thread that's on the V
-
Yes on the V but then she told me on the phone she was fantasizing about me fucking her and started sending me sexually explicit texts saying how she was playing with her self thinking about this - then the romantic holidays plus loads loads more all during and after her outburst on the thread that's on the V
i will have to search for these txt messages on the V i see
V- for Verga
-
i will have to search for these txt messages on the V i see
V- for Verga
Sorry V "Board" ;D
-
You're so right on this part. It depends what the individual has a steak.
Porterhouse or Chateaubriand usually does it.
-
My question is, what did the woman do to push him to this point?
Women are very spiteful and vindictive creatures. I have heard/read horror stories, from men who were divorced... their ex-wives (enabled by unfair divorce court rulings and sympathetic judges) ruined their lives, their finances and their future.
If pushed to the limit, an enraged man will fuck your ass up... doesn't matter what the consequences are. The fuse burns until it hits the explosive, then look out... the rage is overwhelming and blinding.
Women, you had better think long and hard about putting a restraining order on any man. You could pay for it with your life. You're better off carrying a gun, tazer and/or taking self defense course to defend yourself.
-
Pretty much anyone who needs a restraining order has brought it upon themselves and deserves what they get.
-
I agree with parker, the only times these restraining orders work is when the individual is a sane person who has something to lose AKA actually has a life.
It does nothing 99% of the time when the women is in actual danger because the guy is just a mental case.
Only thing they are useful for is to be abused by women.
In the first place a sane man would just divorce you and get on with life, but when their whole life is based around abusing his own wife/gf/kids than it isnt of much use. Actually wouldnt even need one done in the first place.
The mental cases dont care what happens to them as long as they make life more diffucult for you
I wonder what uberman has to say about this
-
My question is, what did the woman do to push him to this point?
Women are very spiteful and vindictive creatures. I have heard/read horror stories, from men who were divorced... their ex-wives (enabled by unfair divorce court rulings and sympathetic judges) ruined their lives, their finances and their future.
If pushed to the limit, an enraged man will fuck your ass up... doesn't matter what the consequences are. The fuse burns until it hits the explosive, then look out... the rage is overwhelming and blinding.
Women, you had better think long and hard about putting a restraining order on any man. You could pay for it with your life. You're better off carrying a gun, tazer and/or taking self defense course to defend yourself.
You have a point, but we would need to look at this case first of all, did she even take anythign of his ?
I mean he is probably just another headcase who gets off on abusing others
EDIT: one of hte reason i never want to get married is because there always seems to be one partner who is batshit insane, i see it all around me, where the women is just bat shyt crazy and jelous and acts like a total spastic or where the husband doesnt even talk to "his" wife for 3 years never works a day in his life and is surprised when she leaves him.. shyt i even saw a man who you would think is a normal person look at a 1 day old gil and say " look at her, shes going to be working a corner in 20 years" ..lol
-
You sound like a new age Mangina whose masculinity has been so damaged by your feminist belief system that in an attempt to recover your manhood you stalk and rape women during the night and then pretends they are a righteous pious individual who cares about women deeply. I hope for everyone's sake you are caught soon.
And why would I admit to anything if I had ever violated an order or was in anyway embarrassed or ashamed by it, Restraining orders are very common and often used by women to win an argument. They have nothing do do with crime or criminality, they are a civil action of one person against another, judges like to err on the side of caution in the woman's favour. They prove nothing and to an innocent man, they mean nothing. It wasn't me claiming my girlfriend started it, these are her words. I have no problem admitting when I have started something, but due to my size and prior convictions I lay very low. Your assumptions that I believe nobody can tell me what to do is absurd, I value respect and decent behaviour highly, and regularly take a stand against those who trample other people's rights. Like I said, I'm not a mangina, and don't take shit from anyone including women. You obviously have trouble with your reading comprehension, the Police took out the restraining order on behalf of my partner who didn't want anything to do with it, she even went to court and told them as much. I am still with the same woman a decade on.
I have great relationships with women, and your attempts to make a big deal about a restraining order that never amounted to anything shows your insecure masculinity and your mangina agenda, I can tell you now, a woman respects a man who stands his ground a lot more than a new age feminist mangina who allows his woman to walk all over him. If it was something I was ashamed of or embarrassed by I would never mention it, but anybody can get a restraining order, I could turn up to court tomorrow and apply and get one for just about anything, nobody takes them seriously, like I said, it's not an allegation of crime, it's a civil matter. The difference between you and I, is that I am prepared to stand up for what I believe in, and this sometimes gets you in trouble. You can project your fantasies onto me as much as you like, it doesn't make it true.
Don't be so hard on the lil fella, he just haven't had any encounters with women in a while, thus his bitterness and resentment.
-
Don't be so hard on the lil fella, he just haven't had any encounters with women in a while, thus his bitterness and resentment.
It sounds like it! Men and women fight, often the Man comes off looking the bad guy, I'm not saying some dudes flip out and most definitely should be kept away from someone, but the majority of restraining order are BS and never amount to anything, the Courts hand them out like candy.
-
She posts here ? :D
HA HA My Girlfriend thinks GETBIG is perverted and doesn't understand why I spend any-time here, sometimes I show her some funny animated gif or the like and she scowls at me like I'm an idiot teenager. My girlfriend is very conservative and works for the government, she could probably be described as serious, uptight and she needs to relax and laugh more. She was a single mother from a young age, and before I met her, she had been raising her daughter on her own single handled. Her daughter is 18 now, and is starting to become quite independent, and I think my partner has trouble letting go and relaxing, she tends to stay in the serious Mother mode too long and not focus on herself more and relax and unwind..
-
HA HA My Girlfriend thinks GETBIG is perverted and doesn't understand why I spend any-time here, sometimes I show her some funny animated gif or the like and she scowls at me like I'm an idiot teenager. My girlfriend is very conservative and works for the government, she could probably be described as serious, uptight and she needs to relax and laugh more. She was a single mother from a young age, and before I met her, she had been raising her daughter on her own single handled. Her daughter is 18 now, and is starting to become quite independent, and I think my partner has trouble letting go and relaxing, she tends to stay in the serious Mother mode too long and not focus on herself more and relax and unwind..
Show her all the pics of Tbombz in the mirror and the photoshops of Goodrum as a turd in the toilet and then see what she thinks / says.
Let's hear her honest comment what she thinks about Getbig and the members :D
-
only true way to restrain a potential perp is to smear shit all over yourself. true story.
-
Don't be so hard on the lil fella, he just haven't had any encounters with women in a while, thus his bitterness and resentment.
I'm not the one who women filed restraining orders on...not am I resentful or bitter...
This dude exhibits classic abuser mentality---never his fault. Abusive men and abused women tend to attract one another. And then the cycle starts. Look up the cycle of abuse.
A clue to how I know alot of this stuff, is as I said before, I deal
with it. I deal wth dudes like E-Kul, the girlfriends, etc. It's sad when you see someone with a black eye, and the boyfriend says
that she is responsible because "she made me angry". Just like E-Kul said "she started it."
It's also sad to see it whe the woman abuses the man, and he doesn't want to report it, because he feels embarassed.
What I write is the truth, and not because I'm bitter or resentful---people just want to swallow the bitter pill that the truth is.
-
Your perception of reality is so skewed that you think Pit bulls should be rounded up and killed. Just like the folks that went killing all the wolves in the US...
Get a clue dude, it's you that's the problem.
And I don't come from a family that fights or hits.
I try to help many of you on here from making the same mistakes that i see people make day in and day out. But, I see that many of you just want to come here and whine, and change your lives. You are the mangina. You say anything to get what you want, try to be manipulative, which is feminine trait. Blame everybody else for your actions, but want everybody to hear your story of how you were "persecuted".
You already showed your true colors with the restraining order comments. Can they be misused, yes. But your comment about how, "nothing happens with them", speaks volumes. If you did what you supposed to do and kept it moving (ie, not dealing with the woman when you saw trouble) you wouldn't have had a restraining order. Stop being a whiny ass victim about things
Please...the same dudes like you get arrested for weed, and try to act hard like he killed somebody, and get
punked in jail. Funny how in your posts to me, you are acting like the Pit bulls that you so hate.
-
E-kul I am not saying all women are angels.
But men tend to be alot more abusive in relationships than women in my experience.
What tends to happen though also is that a normal enough guy ends up with a phsyco bitch and an abusive guy tends to end up with nice women who respect them, funny how that works
-
I don't think I'd be good in a panic situation like that. I'd probably be second guessing myself on whether to shoot or not and all the possible repercussions. At least with a tazer, the outcome isn't potentially fatal.
If you're really considering getting a CCW and CHL, you need to take an afternoon, and go to your local range. Rent a 9mm and get a range officer to give you a one on one lesson. Try to find an outdoor range, it's much less intimidating and less loud compared to an indoor range. Most first time shooters are intimidated by guns at first, but after one good range session, they leave with a competitive mentality, and want to get more proficient and accurate.
As far as thinking you wouldn't be good in a panic situation, that's entirely up to you. If you buy a CCW, and only practice with it a couple of time a year, then you're probably right, you won't do good in a panic situtation. If however, you practice every 2-4 weeks, become comfortable and proficient with your CCW, then you will have to problem in a panic situtation. It becomes second nature.
As for the tazer, you'd be better off with pepper spray. Pepper spray is just as effective as a tazer, and there is much less room for error.
-
E-kul I am not saying all women are angels.
But men tend to be alot more abusive in relationships than women in my experience.
What tends to happen though also is that a normal enough guy ends up with a phsyco bitch and an abusive guy tends to end up with nice women who respect them, funny how that works
I believe that, I consider myself a nice guy, and in no way feel the need to beat up a woman to prove myself, if anything it's the opposite, since I was about 17 I have been 6'2 and over 100KG, I trained boxing as a young man and lifted weights on and off most of my life. I am very conscious of how others perceive me and I used to get annoyed about people commenting on my size (you're a big boy aren't you etc etc), People just openly come out and comment on it, I have been known to walk around at 125KG and people say things like "I won't pick a fight with you", it gets on my nerves, like just because I am a big guy I automatically am some UFC champion, it's absurd.
But anyway, in my dealings with women, and I have had a few women who I have argued with and they have physically come at me, I have had to restrain them, depending on how mad they are at the time, sometimes I have had to put some muscle into it, but always an attempted bear hug or wrist control or something to that effect. And herein lies the problem, I am damned if I do, and damned if I don't. I can either let a woman wail away on me and potentially get injured or I can defend myself and expect her to bitch about me the next day and paint me in a bad light to others. I would NEVER initiate physical aggression with a woman, and I believe women sense this and target guys like me, do you really think a woman would target a 120KG plus guy if they knew he would beat the absolute living shit out of them.
I grew up with two sisters, no different, they would regularly pull the trick of giving me a whack when the parents weren't looking, and being a kid I would give them a whack back, but they would time it so I would get caught and my father would punish me. females are master manipulators, ironically, my younger sister was bullied relentlessly at high school for years and my sister or my mother (they encouraged me too) stand over the group of bitches that bullied her to put a stop to it. I am under no illusions how the opposite sex work, but to me, respect is something that is earned, not freely given because you were born with a vagina.
-
Ah HA,I knew, it your a Pitbull Nutter, I knew you were carrying a grudge and looking to find a way to push your twisted agenda. Since we last spoke about pitbulls, over 20 people have been brutally killed and many more seriously maimed. I will never back down from my stance on BSL and Pitbulls, and it is those that advocate for the breed while people are being regularly killed by them and pretending as if their isn't an issue is socipathic and pathological in the extreme. I have never met a Pitbull Nutter who I would consider a decent human being, they are always insecure, anti-social and inferior personalities, hence the reason they choose a fighting breed of dog to prop up their deficient personalities.
I never said all Pitbulls should be rounded up and killed, but they should be sterilised and grandfathered out of existence. In one 85-day period from July to September 2008, pit bulls were involved in 127 dog attacks, 57% of which occurred off the owner’s property. In these attacks, 158 people were injured, 63% of them severely; 10% of the victims suffered severed body parts; and 6 victims were killed. 12 In the same period, 128 dangerous pit bulls had to be shot to death by police officers or citizens. A closer look at these figures indicates that 1 person is killed by a pit bull every 14 days, a person loses a body part to a pit bull attack every 5.4 days, 2 persons are injured by pit bulls each day, and 1.5 pit bulls are shot to death each day. Why anybody would want to own such a dog is proof positive of their distorted sociopathic personality. As to responding to the other points in your post, I won't bother, once I realise someone is a Pitbull Nutter, I know more than enough to know they are full of shit and spend most of their time spreading lies and nonsense.
Interesting stats. Can you share your source on those? Comedic conclusions on the "personality-typing" which, I'd say you're probably quite accurate. I, however, think they are good looking, loyal dogs, and their short hair makes for less maintenance.
-
Interesting stats. Can you share your source on those? Comedic conclusions on the "personality-typing" which, I'd say you're probably quite accurate. I, however, think they are good looking, loyal dogs, and their short hair makes for less maintenance.
Those stats are from the study Mortality, Mauling, and Maiming by Vicious Dogs 2011 -
John K. Bini, MD, Stephen M. Cohn, MD, Shirley M. Acosta, RN, BSN, Marilyn J. McFarland, RN, MS,bMark T. Muir, MD, and Joel E. Michalek, PhD; for the TRISAT Clinical Trials Group
Here are some more quotes from the study, I have been a BSL advocate ever since I was attacked and seriously injured by two Pitbulls three years ago.
Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score, a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale* score of 8 or lower, higher median hospital charges , and a higher risk of death
* GCS is used to assess level of consciousness after head injury, The scale is composed of three tests: eye, verbal and motor responses. The three values separately as well as their sum are considered. The lowest possible GCS (the sum) is 3 (deep coma or death), while the highest is 15 (fully awake person).
Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites.
As pit bulls have become more popular and their numbers have increased, so have the numbers of deaths attributable to their attacks. They now are the single breed responsible for the vast majority of deaths due to dog attacks. In 2007, 33 fatal cases of dog mauling were reported in 17 states. Texas led the nation with 7 deaths, 6 of which were caused by pit bulls. In 2008 there were 23 fatal dog attacks, and pit bulls were responsible for 65% of these attacks and for all but 1 death due to dog attacks against persons aged more than 3 years.
Pit bulls not only are notorious for their indiscriminate attack pattern but also are well known for the tenacity with which they continue with an attack. The case fatality reported above involved an infant that was mauled by 2 pit bulls. These dogs had previously bitten an 8-year-old relative in the face. When the dog’s owner attempted to stop the attack on the infant by stabbing the dogs with a knife, she became a victim herself, and police officers had to shoot (kill) the dogs at the scene. It is not uncommon to hear of witnessed attacks in which the pit bulls could not be stopped from attacking
The inbred tenacity of pit bulls, the unrelenting manner in which they initiate and continue their attacks, and the damage they cause are the result of both genetics and environment. Therefore, this breed of dog is inherently dangerous
Over a recent 3-year period from January 2006 to March 30, 2009, a total of 98 dog bite fatalities involving 179 dogs occurred; 60% of the deaths were caused by pit bulls, and 76% were caused by pit bulls and Rottweilers. A total of 113 pit bulls were involved in these deaths, and they accounted for 63% of the dogs involved in fatal attacks. If the risk of fatal attack is normalized to Labrador Retrievers and Labrador-mix breeds (the most common registered dog in the United States), the relative risk of death related to pit bull attacks is more than 2500 times higher.
Dog bite ordinances vary widely across the United States. Seventeen states have “one bite” laws that do not hold the dog owner accountable for the actions of a dangerous dog until after the dog has caused harm, at which point it can be considered potentially dangerous or vicious. Twelve states have laws that specifically forbid municipalities to enact breed-specific laws or rdinances. Currently, 250 cities in the United States have breed-specific ordinances, even though some of these cities are in states that prohibit breed-specific laws. Texas, the state that leads the nation in dog bite fatalities, is a “one bite” state that prohibits breed-specific laws.
Dog bites are a serious public health concern in the United States and across the world. They result in substantial emotional and physical trauma and in a substantial economic cost to the victims and to society. Fortunately, fatal dog attacks are rare, but there seems to be a distinct relationship between the severity and lethality of an attack and the breed of dog responsible. The unacceptable actuarial risk associated with certain breeds of dogs (specifically, pit bulls) must be addressed. These breeds should be regulated in the same way in which other dangerous species, such as leopards.
Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada September 1982 to December 22, 2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Temperament is not the issue, nor is it even relevant. What is relevant is actuarial risk. 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.
There is a persistent allegation by pit bull terrier advocates that pit bulls are overrepresented because of misidentifications or because “pit bull” is, according to them, a generic term covering several similar types of dog. However, the frequency of pit bull attacks among these worst-in-10,000 cases is so disproportionate that even if half of the attacks in the pit bull category were misattributed, or even if the pit bull category was split three ways, attacks by pit bulls and their closest relatives would still outnumber attacks by any other breed.
There is a persistent allegation by pit bull terrier advocates that the use of media accounts as a data source is somehow suspect. Reality is that media coverage incorporates information from police reports, animal control reports, witness accounts, victim accounts in many instances, and hospital reports. Media coverage is, in short, multi-sourced, unlike reports from any single source.
Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity to be listed, pit bull terriers and their close mixes make up only about 3.3% of the total U.S. dog population, according to my frequent surveys of regionally balanced samples of classified ads of dogs for sale, but they constitute 29% of the dog population in U.S. animal shelters at any given time, according to my 2011 singleday shelter inventory survey, which followed up similar surveys producing similar results done in 2004, 2008, and 2010.
Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity to be listed, pit bull terriers and their close mixes make up only about 5% of the total U.S. dog population, according to my frequent surveys of regionally balanced samples of classified ads of dogs for sale, but they constitute more than 20% of the dog population in U.S. animal shelters at any given time
Pit bulls are noteworthy on the chart above for attacking adults almost as frequently as children. This is a very rare pattern: children are normally at greatest risk from dogbite because they play with dogs more often, have less experience in reading dog behavior, are more likely to engage in activity that alarms or stimulates a dog, and are less able to defend themselves when a dog becomes aggressive. Pit bulls seem to differ behaviorally from other dogs in having far less inhibition about attacking people who are larger than they are.
Pitbulls are also notorious for attacking seemingly without warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking pit bulls’ tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized. Thus the adult victim of a pit bull attack may have had little or no opportunity to read the warning signals that would avert an attack from any other dog.
The traditional approach to dangerous dog legislation is to allow “one free bite,” at which point the owner is warned. On second bite, the dog is killed. The traditional approach, however, patently does not apply in addressing the threats from pit bull terriers, Rottweilers, and wolf hybrids. In more than two-thirds of the cases I have logged, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question. Children and elderly people were almost always the victims.
Any law strong enough and directed enough to prevent the majority of lifethreatening dog attacks must discriminate heavily against pit bulls, Rottweilers, wolf hybrids, and perhaps Akitas and chows, who are not common breeds but do seem to be involved in disproportionate numbers of life-threatening attacks.
One might hope that educating the public against the acquisition of dangerous dogs would help; but the very traits that make certain breeds dangerous also appeal to a certain class of dog owner. Thus publicizing their potentially hazardous nature has tended to increase these breeds’ popularity.
Meanwhile, because the humane community has demonstrated a profound unwillingness to recognize, accept, and respond to the need for some sort of strong breed-specific regulation to deal with pit bulls and Rottweilers, the insurance industry is doing the regulating instead, by means which include refusing to insure new shelters which accept and place pit bulls. That means a mandatory death sentence for most pitbulls, regardless of why they come to shelters.
The humane community does not try to encourage the adoption of pumas in the same manner that we encourage the adoption of felis catus (domestic cat), because even though a puma can also be box-trained and otherwise exhibits much the same indoor behavior, it is clearly understood that accidents with a puma are frequently fatal. For the same reason, it is sheer foolishness to encourage people to regard pit bull terriers and Rottweilers as just dogs like any other, no matter how much they may behave like other dogs under ordinary circumstances.
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.
-
Gary Wilkes is a respected dog trainer and behaviourist, his grandfather also fought Pit bulls all across the South, the man knows pitbulls, ironically the DOGMEN are far more honest about the breed than the average working/middle class Pitbull onwer. Dogmen would have never kept a pitbull as a house-pet, they knew they were dangerous. Sadly, it's the do-gooders who have tried to breed the gameness out of them to make a buck selling to all the wanna be tough guys or bleeding heart animal nuts that have made the situation dangerous.
Everyone was safer when DOGMEN who used Pitbulls for Fighting were the only ones who owned such dogs. They were aware of the Genetic history of the breed, it's bloodlines full of Game. They kept their dogs well away from the Public for fear of their hobby of dogfighting being discovered. Their was no confusion, Pitbulls were killers alright, and none of the DOGMEN would be foolish enough to keep one as a house-pet. Enter the Breeders, the profiteers and the bleeding heart Animal activists, all with their own agenda, some trying to preserve the game blood line, some trying to breed it out, some trying to rescue a dog no matter how much danger it poses to the general public.
Back in the day, it was easy to tell a dangerous Pitbull, it was every Pitbull you saw, for the DOGMEN did away with dogs that weren't GAME, they had no purpose for them. Now, everybody knows that any moment now, a Pitbull is going to either maim, maul or kill someone, as it has been doing for decades now, but no-one can tell which one it is, The breed has been too interfered with, the DOGMEN couldn't contain their wilder-beast, and those who had no purpose with such a breed got a hold of it. Pitbulls were bred for the sole purpose of being a game fighting dog, never to be a house-pet, and those who have tried to breed the game out of them have only made it worse for everyone, more unpredictable and more dangerous. This is why we hear regularly now of family pit bulls scalping or killing the baby, and the naive owner expressing their disbelief and just last night the pitbull was snuggled up next to the child licking their face.
-
More .....
-
Those stats are from the study Mortality, Mauling, and Maiming by Vicious Dogs 2011 -
John K. Bini, MD, Stephen M. Cohn, MD, Shirley M. Acosta, RN, BSN, Marilyn J. McFarland, RN, MS,bMark T. Muir, MD, and Joel E. Michalek, PhD; for the TRISAT Clinical Trials Group
Here are some more quotes from the study, I have been a BSL advocate ever since I was attacked and seriously injured by two Pitbulls three years ago.
Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score, a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale* score of 8 or lower, higher median hospital charges , and a higher risk of death
* GCS is used to assess level of consciousness after head injury, The scale is composed of three tests: eye, verbal and motor responses. The three values separately as well as their sum are considered. The lowest possible GCS (the sum) is 3 (deep coma or death), while the highest is 15 (fully awake person).
Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites.
As pit bulls have become more popular and their numbers have increased, so have the numbers of deaths attributable to their attacks. They now are the single breed responsible for the vast majority of deaths due to dog attacks. In 2007, 33 fatal cases of dog mauling were reported in 17 states. Texas led the nation with 7 deaths, 6 of which were caused by pit bulls. In 2008 there were 23 fatal dog attacks, and pit bulls were responsible for 65% of these attacks and for all but 1 death due to dog attacks against persons aged more than 3 years.
Pit bulls not only are notorious for their indiscriminate attack pattern but also are well known for the tenacity with which they continue with an attack. The case fatality reported above involved an infant that was mauled by 2 pit bulls. These dogs had previously bitten an 8-year-old relative in the face. When the dog’s owner attempted to stop the attack on the infant by stabbing the dogs with a knife, she became a victim herself, and police officers had to shoot (kill) the dogs at the scene. It is not uncommon to hear of witnessed attacks in which the pit bulls could not be stopped from attacking
The inbred tenacity of pit bulls, the unrelenting manner in which they initiate and continue their attacks, and the damage they cause are the result of both genetics and environment. Therefore, this breed of dog is inherently dangerous
Over a recent 3-year period from January 2006 to March 30, 2009, a total of 98 dog bite fatalities involving 179 dogs occurred; 60% of the deaths were caused by pit bulls, and 76% were caused by pit bulls and Rottweilers. A total of 113 pit bulls were involved in these deaths, and they accounted for 63% of the dogs involved in fatal attacks. If the risk of fatal attack is normalized to Labrador Retrievers and Labrador-mix breeds (the most common registered dog in the United States), the relative risk of death related to pit bull attacks is more than 2500 times higher.
Dog bite ordinances vary widely across the United States. Seventeen states have “one bite” laws that do not hold the dog owner accountable for the actions of a dangerous dog until after the dog has caused harm, at which point it can be considered potentially dangerous or vicious. Twelve states have laws that specifically forbid municipalities to enact breed-specific laws or rdinances. Currently, 250 cities in the United States have breed-specific ordinances, even though some of these cities are in states that prohibit breed-specific laws. Texas, the state that leads the nation in dog bite fatalities, is a “one bite” state that prohibits breed-specific laws.
Dog bites are a serious public health concern in the United States and across the world. They result in substantial emotional and physical trauma and in a substantial economic cost to the victims and to society. Fortunately, fatal dog attacks are rare, but there seems to be a distinct relationship between the severity and lethality of an attack and the breed of dog responsible. The unacceptable actuarial risk associated with certain breeds of dogs (specifically, pit bulls) must be addressed. These breeds should be regulated in the same way in which other dangerous species, such as leopards.
Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada September 1982 to December 22, 2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Temperament is not the issue, nor is it even relevant. What is relevant is actuarial risk. 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.
There is a persistent allegation by pit bull terrier advocates that pit bulls are overrepresented because of misidentifications or because “pit bull” is, according to them, a generic term covering several similar types of dog. However, the frequency of pit bull attacks among these worst-in-10,000 cases is so disproportionate that even if half of the attacks in the pit bull category were misattributed, or even if the pit bull category was split three ways, attacks by pit bulls and their closest relatives would still outnumber attacks by any other breed.
There is a persistent allegation by pit bull terrier advocates that the use of media accounts as a data source is somehow suspect. Reality is that media coverage incorporates information from police reports, animal control reports, witness accounts, victim accounts in many instances, and hospital reports. Media coverage is, in short, multi-sourced, unlike reports from any single source.
Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity to be listed, pit bull terriers and their close mixes make up only about 3.3% of the total U.S. dog population, according to my frequent surveys of regionally balanced samples of classified ads of dogs for sale, but they constitute 29% of the dog population in U.S. animal shelters at any given time, according to my 2011 singleday shelter inventory survey, which followed up similar surveys producing similar results done in 2004, 2008, and 2010.
Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity to be listed, pit bull terriers and their close mixes make up only about 5% of the total U.S. dog population, according to my frequent surveys of regionally balanced samples of classified ads of dogs for sale, but they constitute more than 20% of the dog population in U.S. animal shelters at any given time
Pit bulls are noteworthy on the chart above for attacking adults almost as frequently as children. This is a very rare pattern: children are normally at greatest risk from dogbite because they play with dogs more often, have less experience in reading dog behavior, are more likely to engage in activity that alarms or stimulates a dog, and are less able to defend themselves when a dog becomes aggressive. Pit bulls seem to differ behaviorally from other dogs in having far less inhibition about attacking people who are larger than they are.
Pitbulls are also notorious for attacking seemingly without warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking pit bulls’ tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized. Thus the adult victim of a pit bull attack may have had little or no opportunity to read the warning signals that would avert an attack from any other dog.
The traditional approach to dangerous dog legislation is to allow “one free bite,” at which point the owner is warned. On second bite, the dog is killed. The traditional approach, however, patently does not apply in addressing the threats from pit bull terriers, Rottweilers, and wolf hybrids. In more than two-thirds of the cases I have logged, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question. Children and elderly people were almost always the victims.
Any law strong enough and directed enough to prevent the majority of lifethreatening dog attacks must discriminate heavily against pit bulls, Rottweilers, wolf hybrids, and perhaps Akitas and chows, who are not common breeds but do seem to be involved in disproportionate numbers of life-threatening attacks.
One might hope that educating the public against the acquisition of dangerous dogs would help; but the very traits that make certain breeds dangerous also appeal to a certain class of dog owner. Thus publicizing their potentially hazardous nature has tended to increase these breeds’ popularity.
Meanwhile, because the humane community has demonstrated a profound unwillingness to recognize, accept, and respond to the need for some sort of strong breed-specific regulation to deal with pit bulls and Rottweilers, the insurance industry is doing the regulating instead, by means which include refusing to insure new shelters which accept and place pit bulls. That means a mandatory death sentence for most pitbulls, regardless of why they come to shelters.
The humane community does not try to encourage the adoption of pumas in the same manner that we encourage the adoption of felis catus (domestic cat), because even though a puma can also be box-trained and otherwise exhibits much the same indoor behavior, it is clearly understood that accidents with a puma are frequently fatal. For the same reason, it is sheer foolishness to encourage people to regard pit bull terriers and Rottweilers as just dogs like any other, no matter how much they may behave like other dogs under ordinary circumstances.
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.
Good post. I love how the pit bull nut huggers are always the first ones to cry foul when their beloved friends are ridiculed. Bottome line, ALL DOGS WILL BITE IF PROVOKED ENOUGH. If you get attacked by chihuahuas are probably the most aggressive little fuckers there are, and account for many many bites and attacks. However, when was the last time you heard of a chihuahua killing someone. Fact, your 80lb pit bull is very capable of killing if he ever decides to bite.
-
Interesting stats. Can you share your source on those? Comedic conclusions on the "personality-typing" which, I'd say you're probably quite accurate. I, however, think they are good looking, loyal dogs, and their short hair makes for less maintenance.
A recent British Study found that the strongest predictor for choosing a dog associated with aggression was to have a personality which was "lower in agreeableness". This meant they were more likely to have traits such as being less interested in the well-being of others, being more suspicious, unfriendly and competitive.
-
If you're really considering getting a CCW and CHL, you need to take an afternoon, and go to your local range. Rent a 9mm and get a range officer to give you a one on one lesson. Try to find an outdoor range, it's much less intimidating and less loud compared to an indoor range. Most first time shooters are intimidated by guns at first, but after one good range session, they leave with a competitive mentality, and want to get more proficient and accurate.
As far as thinking you wouldn't be good in a panic situation, that's entirely up to you. If you buy a CCW, and only practice with it a couple of time a year, then you're probably right, you won't do good in a panic situtation. If however, you practice every 2-4 weeks, become comfortable and proficient with your CCW, then you will have to problem in a panic situtation. It becomes second nature.
As for the tazer, you'd be better off with pepper spray. Pepper spray is just as effective as a tazer, and there is much less room for error.
Hasn't been my experience
-
If you're really considering getting a CCW and CHL, you need to take an afternoon, and go to your local range. Rent a 9mm and get a range officer to give you a one on one lesson. Try to find an outdoor range, it's much less intimidating and less loud compared to an indoor range. Most first time shooters are intimidated by guns at first, but after one good range session, they leave with a competitive mentality, and want to get more proficient and accurate.
As far as thinking you wouldn't be good in a panic situation, that's entirely up to you. If you buy a CCW, and only practice with it a couple of time a year, then you're probably right, you won't do good in a panic situtation. If however, you practice every 2-4 weeks, become comfortable and proficient with your CCW, then you will have to problem in a panic situtation. It becomes second nature.
As for the tazer, you'd be better off with pepper spray. Pepper spray is just as effective as a tazer, and there is much less room for error.
This is good advice. My wife is a 110 pounds. I took her to buy a pistol for home defense when I was traveling so much. The dealer tried to sell her on "girl" guns like 38 snubbies and sub-compact 380s. Instead I had my wife choose the gun that jumped out at her and fit her hand and shooting posture the best. She choose a Glock23 40 caliber (a full size handgun). She got determined to use correctly, took a couple of lessons, learned how to dismantle and clean her weapon, and goes to the range at least twice a month. She found herself coincidentally running into the same guy on her lunch walk and determined that he was a potential threat. This prompted her to get her CCW license and then a small 9mm (Kahr cw9) pistol that fit what she wears everyday. She now can outshoot me with it (no homo?) It's a tool and she cow-girled up and learned how to master it. Now she wants to take more advanced shooting classes (weak hand shooting, moving targets, multiple targets, clearing a house, etc). I encourage this because it made her from a "victim" to being in charge and feeling confident in new situations.
There's no guarantee in life but you should at least be competent in as much as you can be. That competence will help other areas of your life.
-
This is good advice. My wife is a 110 pounds. I took her to buy a pistol for home defense when I was traveling so much. The dealer tried to sell her on "girl" guns like 38 snubbies and sub-compact 380s. Instead I had my wife choose the gun that jumped out at her and fit her hand and shooting posture the best. She choose a Glock23 40 caliber (a full size handgun). She got determined to use correctly, took a couple of lessons, learned how to dismantle and clean her weapon, and goes to the range at least twice a month. She found herself coincidentally running into the same guy on her lunch walk and determined that he was a potential threat. This prompted her to get her CCW license and then a small 9mm (Kahr cw9) pistol that fit what she wears everyday. She now can outshoot me with it (no homo?) It's a tool and she cow-girled up and learned how to master it. Now she wants to take more advanced shooting classes (weak hand shooting, moving targets, multiple targets, clearing a house, etc). I encourage this because it made her from a "victim" to being in charge and feeling confident in new situations.
There's no guarantee in life but you should at least be competent in as much as you can be. That competence will help other areas of your life.
That's cool. I got to the "clearing a house" part and just gotta say, if she is in a position she feels she would need to clear a house with a gun.. probably time to call 911 and wait barracaded till they get there. Now if you meant "cleaning a house" then my bad..
-
That's cool. I got to the "clearing a house" part and just gotta say, if she is in a position she feels she would need to clear a house with a gun.. probably time to call 911 and wait barracaded till they get there. Now if you meant "cleaning a house" then my bad..
she could definitely use a class on cleaning a house! ;D :'(
-
This is good advice. My wife is a 110 pounds. I took her to buy a pistol for home defense when I was traveling so much. The dealer tried to sell her on "girl" guns like 38 snubbies and sub-compact 380s. Instead I had my wife choose the gun that jumped out at her and fit her hand and shooting posture the best. She choose a Glock23 40 caliber (a full size handgun). She got determined to use correctly, took a couple of lessons, learned how to dismantle and clean her weapon, and goes to the range at least twice a month. She found herself coincidentally running into the same guy on her lunch walk and determined that he was a potential threat. This prompted her to get her CCW license and then a small 9mm (Kahr cw9) pistol that fit what she wears everyday. She now can outshoot me with it (no homo?) It's a tool and she cow-girled up and learned how to master it. Now she wants to take more advanced shooting classes (weak hand shooting, moving targets, multiple targets, clearing a house, etc). I encourage this because it made her from a "victim" to being in charge and feeling confident in new situations.
There's no guarantee in life but you should at least be competent in as much as you can be. That competence will help other areas of your life.
Great post
A day at the range makes a nice date once in a while