Author Topic: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls  (Read 63771 times)

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #100 on: July 11, 2006, 06:56:41 AM »
They probably would even though they would be in the wrong. 

One time some idiot tried to tell me that I would face a fine if I did not muzzle my pitbull.

I explained to him it was an American Bulldog and he was just a puppy. He said "same thing" when I stated he was an Ab. I said no not same thing. If this was a pitbull he would act the same way. He would act like a regular dog. To many of these fools think these breeds are born monsters.

I do not give a shit what breed you have. If some ignorant tough guy own a dog and does not socialize, train it, or treat it the right way it will  be aggressive. Pitbull or golden retriever.

I am going to have a laugh in ten years when the meatheads switch through a few different breeds. Same shit different day.

German Shepards are statistically more dangerous than pits. They rank in the top three of most "dangerous dogs". If that breed is so out of control and dangerous why do they use them for police work? A k9 must show restraint. It must be highly trained. It must have the ability to attack the bad but be timid with the good.

where is the Doberman, Rotty, Mastiff, GS,bans?

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #101 on: July 11, 2006, 06:59:19 AM »
Yes,I understand that.What I meant was if it is one person's word against another's..and someone had to make the call on which dog was the aggressor,the bull dog would be the most likely choice for most people .

Sad but true. Would the courts stand for a white jury convicting a black man over a white man if it was his word against the white man's with no deciding evidence? I think not. Not as serious but you guys get the jist of it.

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #102 on: July 11, 2006, 07:01:02 AM »
correct.

idiots ruin it for everyone.  people who let aggressive dogs run wild around others are right up there with racists and car thiefs.  should be kneecapped upon arrest, no questions asked.

240 you are a big advocate for gun control. This is the same idea to a lesser extent.

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #103 on: July 11, 2006, 07:04:51 AM »
I can understand why a person would be intimidated by a pit. When I was growing up I was scared by a neighbors rottweiler. Facts is tho, people need to understand not everything the see in the news is how things are. The fucking news makes it out to be that there is pitbull attacks and deaths every 30 seconds. The statistic for total dog deaths with all breeds per year is 17. So lets give half that to Pits for sake of argument. 8.5 deadly pit attack per year in the US. If 1000 people die from lighting strikes each year and only 7 from pitbull attacks why is lighting not the scariest thing in the world. There should be a "study" of how many little kids died due to there "parents" leaving them alone with dogs.

Even the bite statistics alone with pits is  lower than your chances to be in a car accident.

FOOLS!


PS, Ron can you put the word "rottwieler" in the spell check lol?

Diesel1

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6261
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #104 on: July 11, 2006, 07:10:41 AM »
Interesting article which proofs my point about morons and 'dangerous' dogs.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article1163649.ece

How did the Staffordshire terrier fall in with the wrong crowd?

The Staffordshire terrier is fast becoming the weapon of choice for urban thugs. Malcolm Macalister Hall reports
Published: 09 July 2006


It looks moody, tough and mean, and it loves a scrap: stocky, muscular, big head, strong jaws, and short, no-nonsense coat. Put a heavy studded collar on it, clip on a chromed chain-link lead, and it's the street-accessory of choice on estates across Britain. The Staffordshire bull terrier looks the part: uncompromisingly urban, hard as nails.

And now, 15 years after pit bull terriers were banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act, reports from all sorts of sources - from dog-walkers to politicians - are warning that Staffordshires, mastiffs and other pugnacious dog breeds are once again becoming the accessory - and occasionally the weapon - of choice on Britain's urban streets. Typical new breed of owner: young lad, aged 15-22. Typical purpose for having the dog: to gain respect, to intimidate, to use as a form of protection, and sometimes for crime.

It's the Staffordshire's misfortune that, of all breeds, it most closely resembles the fearsome pit bulls which, in the 1980s, were the favoured side-arm of drug dealers, hard men and general riff-raff alike. And, though if treated kindly and properly trained, Staffordshires are good with young children, they are feared.

"A lot of people look at them horrified, like you've got Satan himself on the end of your lead," says Marian Waller of Dulwich, south London, owner of a Staffordshire bull terrier named Teddy. "They look at you like you're taking the Hound of the Baskervilles for a walk." She adds, "They'll cross the road to get away. I don't know why, because they're great with people. But they're not too good with other male dogs. They do like to fight them."

Like everyone else, she says the problem is not with the dogs but with some of the owners. "It depends who's got them," she says. "They might be naff owners who bait them, which is a bit frightening when you see young lads holding them. And some idiots only want to fight them..."

Across town, in Wandsworth, the council's senior dog control officer, Mark Callis, says that he and his five staff have been getting increasing reports of informal dog fights staged in playgrounds, tennis courts and football pitches, often between dogs owned by rival gangs from Wandsworth and Peckham estates.

"This kind of fighting is known as 'rolling' - and it's not like the prizefighting where you bet on which dog's going to win. This is just a macho thing: it's a case of 'my dog's better than yours', 'OK, let's see....'"

Callis continues: "We've heard that it also occurs in lifts in tower blocks , where they put two dogs in at the top floor, press the ground floor button and leave them to fight it out and see who's the winner when they get to the bottom. It's barbaric."

The apparent sudden increase in young lads toting aggressive-looking dogs was first noted by Cindy Butts, deputy chairwoman of the Metropolitan Police Authority, at its meeting in April. This was just days after a terrifying incident in west London, when a 39-year-old man was bitten in the street by two dogs - a Great Dane and a Staffordshire bull terrier - and was then attacked with a meat cleaver after he had remonstrated with the two (omega) male owners about the dogs not being on leads. He lost three fingers, and his arm was almost severed in the attack.

Butts says she raised the issue because of this incident, and because she had noticed more young people with intimidating-looking dogs in her home area of Shepherds Bush. She agrees that having a tough dog could be regarded as a perfectly legal equivalent of carrying a knife.

"I think it's partly to do with fashion, and partly to do with the fact that the rules of engagement for young people have changed on the street," she says. "I think the stakes are higher now, with more young people carrying knives, and more people carrying or having access to firearms than ever before.

"Now, it seems to be about 'tooling themselves up', in a way that I don't think existed before. It's not in preparation for a fight; it's tooling yourself up as you go about your daily business. That says something about our society, doesn't it? That young people feel the need to do that? I think it's partly a status thing, and partly about using dogs for protection." She warns, too, that this may in some cases morph into using the dog as a tool to commit crime.

While there is growing evidence that owning hard-looking dogs is a big buzz among urban youth - and that it may be seen by many adults as intimidating - that doesn't necessarily mean it's a crimewave. After Butts had raised the issue, Metropolitan Police research showed that in the 12 months to the end of March this year, there were 24 reports of dogs being actively used in crime in the London area (mostly robbery and actual bodily harm). All but one offence involved a dog being used either to threaten or attack the victim. Where there was a description of the dog, the majority were Staffordshire bull terriers.

But many incidents will, of course, be unreported, and Liberal Democrat London Assembly member Graham Tope says he is seriously concerned. "There's been a noticeable rise over the last few years in the ownership of certain types of intimidating dogs, and we are seeing a worrying pattern develop across London, involving dogs as weapons of anti-social behaviour," says Lord Tope, the Lib Dems' London Assembly policing spokesman. "Clearly there is a problem here, and this is the time for action to be taken before it gets out of hand. We're rightly concerned about guns and knives being used, and we're seeing people using dogs as weapons - not yet, thank goodness, on the scale of knife crime. And the excuse often given for carrying a knife is: it's for my own protection - and everybody recognises where that leads . It seems as if the use of dogs is starting to go the same way."

Back in Wandsworth, where the council's six-strong dog control team is one of the largest of any local authority in Britain, Mark Callis agrees that dogs have now become an element in anti-social behaviour. "We have a culture at the moment where youths are obtaining mainly Staffordshire bull terriers - but sometimes bull mastiffs, and occasionally English bull terriers - and they're using them like a status symbol; and on occasions they will use these dogs to intimidate people," he says. In the last two years, he adds, reports from residents concerned about groups of youths with dogs have increased.

"If you've got a group of lads with their dogs all wearing body harnesses or big gold chains, pulling at the leash, and you couple that with the kids perhaps wearing hoodies, then the problem becomes a fear of crime," says Callis. "People only have to see these lads out and they're on the phone to us: 'There's somebody out here with a dangerous dog: I'm scared to let my kids out...'"

The popularity of Staffordshires has, he says, led to indiscriminate breeding. "I've seen adverts for them in Quiksave: Staffordshire bull terrier puppies for sale, £150. Go to a breeder and a decent puppy will set you back £500. There's a number of ways some people will try to toughen them up - and some are downright horrible. Sometimes they're kicked and beaten into submission - that's usually the way - or I've heard stories where people will ask friends to call on them at home and attack the dog, so that it learns to go for anyone who comes near the owner. That's usually when the owner is perhaps going to be carrying drugs. But the sad thing is that, treated right, Staffordshire bull terriers are lovely dogs. But it's the potential damage that they can cause which makes them attractive to thugs - they do have jaws that will lock. If a bull terrier bites your finger and doesn't want to let go, you're probably going to lose it."

Despite the ban on pit bulls under the Dangerous Dogs Act 15 years ago, there are reports that some still change hands in London. Last week police seized a group of nine dogs, which they suspect may be pit bulls. And Mike Butcher, chief inspector of the RSPCA's special operations unit, says it has had increasing calls about large, mastiff-like Canary dogs. "They're the new sexy breed at the moment," he says. "But if you've got a dog and you want to get some status from it, the chances are you're going to train it to do what it shouldn't be doing. Therefore you're going to get issues of it attacking other dogs and people."

But it's Staffordshires that are top of the league. They are the most-stolen dogs in London. Thefts of dogs in the capital in 2005-2006 jumped by 74 per cent on the previous year, to 511. And ahead by a mile at the top of the list were Staffordshires - 284 dogs stolen, 56 per cent of the total. (Next were Rottweilers at just five per cent). And last year Battersea Dogs Home took in a total of 1,192 Staffordshires - more than any other type of dog, including even mongrels. Despite the best efforts of staff to socialise and retrain these dogs, a proportion have been so brutalised or trained to attack or fight that they are impossible to rehome. The Dogs Home says that a "very small percentage" have to be put down.

Among the recent victims of London's "hard dog" culture are legal advocate Rocky Fernandez, 42, and drama voice coach Victoria Fairbrother, 61, who were attacked by two dogs - one of which they believe was an American pit bull - as they walked their German Shepherds on a Saturday morning last month on Wormwood Scrubs. In a lengthy attack - about which, they say, the owner and his female companion seemed unconcerned - Fernandez's dog was savaged, and, after she tripped and fell during the attack, one of the dogs bit through and ripped Ms Fairbrother's ear. She underwent an operation later that day.

Ms Fairbrother says that the dogs' owner responded to Fernandez's plight by hurling abuse at him. After she had taken refuge by crouching in the corner of a children's play area behind some railings, with blood dripping from her ear, the dog's owner had shouted to her, trying to claim that his dog had been muzzled. 'Then I took my hand away from my ear and the woman who was with him said: 'Hold on, her ear's flapping about...' and they then both scarpered to the car park."

Fernandez describes the attack as "absolutely horrifying". And Fairbrother says she will no longer walk her dog on Wormwood Scrubs. She had seen the man there before. "He would be brutalising the dogs for no reason at all, hitting them with a strap, and kicking them. I kept well away from him."

She says she has noticed many more aggressive-looking dogs in the area. "I thought the fashion for Staffs among youngsters would disappear. But it hasn't. It's got worse, actually - it really has. It's sudddenly increased again, and it's very threatening.

"Even puppies of eight or 10 weeks, they're trying to rile them and make them go for each other. It's incredibly sad, for the dogs, because the way they do it is quite a torture-like process, where they starve the dogs and taunt them. I've seen them now and again in the street, pushing the dogs to fight. My neighbour and I are always trying to stop them. And Wormwood Scrubs is a lovely area for dog-walking. But I won't go back there again."

At the time of going to press, police were still searching for the dogs' owner.

Down, boy Six hard-biting, street-fighting canines with criminal cachet

Staffordshire bull terrier

Height: up to 16in

Weight: up to 40lbs

Originally bred in Staffordshire for bull- and bear-baiting, by crossing bulldogs and terriers. Intelligent, brave and loyal. If properly trained, good with people and children (and thus nicknamed Nanny Dog) but instinct is to attack other male bull terriers. Very strong jaws.

Canary dog

Height: up to 25in

Weight: up to 100lbs

Bred in the Canary Islands in the 19th century for dogfighting. Strong, powerful heavyweights, they may be dangerous in unskilled hands. Will repel intruders.

Mastiff

Height: around 30in Weight: up to 200lbs

Used by the Romans for gladiatorial contests; later for hunting, guarding livestock, and bull- and bear-baiting. Fearless and highly loyal and protective. Requires experienced owner.

American Staffordshire terrier

Height: up to 20in

Weight: up to 70lbs

Bred in the US from English Staffordshires; said to be closely related to the American pit bull. Very protective. Makes good guard dog.

American pit bull terrier

Height: around 22in

Weight: most up to 60lbs

Among the strongest and toughest dogs of all - and the one with the worst press. Originally bred in the US from bulldogs and terriers for pit-fighting. Desperate to please its master, it will fight to the death. Although banned in Britain in 1991 by the Dangerous Dogs Act, there remains a thriving black market in the breed.

Japanese Tosa

Height: around 25in

Weight: up to 200lbs

Massive and very strong; originally bred for dogfighting in Japan. Can be aggressive and unpredictable with strangers and other dogs. Banned in 1991, a handful are still kept illegally.

gtbro1

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6893
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #105 on: July 11, 2006, 07:13:38 AM »
One time some idiot tried to tell me that I would face a fine if I did not muzzle my pitbull.

I explained to him it was an American Bulldog and he was just a puppy. He said "same thing" when I stated he was an Ab. I said no not same thing. If this was a pitbull he would act the same way. He would act like a regular dog. To many of these fools think these breeds are born monsters.

I do not give a shit what breed you have. If some ignorant tough guy own a dog and does not socialize, train it, or treat it the right way it will  be aggressive. Pitbull or golden retriever.

I am going to have a laugh in ten years when the meatheads switch through a few different breeds. Same shit different day.

German Shepards are statistically more dangerous than pits. They rank in the top three of most "dangerous dogs". If that breed is so out of control and dangerous why do they use them for police work? A k9 must show restraint. It must be highly trained. It must have the ability to attack the bad but be timid with the good.

where is the Doberman, Rotty, Mastiff, GS,bans?

  My mother has  two Lahsa Apso.  One male and one female.I bought the male  for her in 1992.He has never been mistreated at all, but let me tell you that little peckerhead will bite your face off if you get down in his face.( women are horrible about this...they always want to try and kiss him on the nose because he is cute...).He only weighs 18 lbs,but he thinks he is the "big tough dog" He isn't mean but he just doesn't like to be messed with.and NEVER wants to be picked up.He is also very protective of my mom. When I go to visit,he will not allow me(or anyone else) to touch or kiss my mom.One time she was sick and was lying on her couch and I went to kiss her bye and he came after me.The female ,however,will jump up on a complete strangers lap and lick their face and just love them to death...same breed,just different personalities.I think dogs are like people..some are friendly and nice and others are ass holes.I don't think it matters much what kind of dog it is ,they will all have their own personality.

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #106 on: July 11, 2006, 07:17:24 AM »
That is very true. My grandfather had a small chiwowa named "chip". My grandfather was an Italian immigrant. He had no clue on how to speak English let alone raise a dog. That little bastard was the meanest thing in the world. Bite my entire family. he only liked my Granfather and Grandmother.

jmt1

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1590
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #107 on: July 11, 2006, 07:24:21 AM »
Are Pit Bulls Dangerous Dogs?

Fact: Out of the estimated 53 million dogs in the United States 92 fatal attacks are contributed to Pit Bulls or Pit Bull Mixes (2 were from American Staffordshire Terriers) from 1965-2001.

Source: Fatal Dog Attacks by Karen Delise

Imagine that. 53 million dogs. 92 fatal attacks out of 431 that span a 37 year period (1965-2001). Now I ask you, after looking at the numbers do we have a dangerous dog problem?

During that time period for my state of Kentucky there were 9 fatal dog attacks. Only one was a Pit Bull "type" dog.

Another attack during that time frame for my state was a Dachshund that killed a 14 day old baby after jumping in his crib.

Do we have a dangerous dog problem or is it being sensationalized to sell newspapers and create panic?

Fatal dog attacks by dangerous dogs are almost non-existent. 20 a year out of millions of dogs. The percentages are estimated to be somewhere around .0000004% of dog attacks are fatal.

If Pit Bulls Are Not Dangerous Dogs Why Do We have a Pit Bull Problem?

Personally I think the Pit Bull problem has more to do with people having a problem with Pit Bulls not the other way around.

Pit Bulls are outstanding dogs, like any dog that is well loved, trained, exercised, and cared for properly can be.

However, Pit Bulls are different. They are infectious with their energy and their wiliness to suffer the abuses of society and come back with a big goofy grin and a tongue lying in wait to lick the first face that gets close enough.

I have rescued dogs and I have seen dogs that were abused and neglected hop in my lap, look deep into my eyes and plant a smack of a lick right on my forehead.

Pit Bulls are different for sure. They expose humans for the cruel and inhumane beasts we are and we don't like it.

Pit Bulls are not dangerous dogs. They are however, abused, sold to irresponsible owners, the favorite dogs of drug dealers, and street gangs and this is by far the most damaging part of the problem.

Even with these record numbers of dogs these days the fatal attacks caused by Pit Bulls is nothing compared to the inhumanity we face on a daily basis. We are talking about 20 fatal attacks by dogs a year, most of which are not Pit Bulls, this is not a Pit Bull problem folks.

CDC Stats are out dated

The Center for Disease Control statistics are outdated and often misused in situations like creating a breed specific law.

The problem is not breed specific but people specific. As I mentioned, irresponsible owners, gang members, dog fighters, and others who use the breed to boost their own macho attitudes and cruel intentions are the problem.

However, regulating them would be near impossible or too costly, at least that is the governments excuse for not doing anything other than banning or restricting the breed.

God forbid if we expected people to have to take responsibility for their actions.

CDC stats are outdated and this contributes to the problem as well. Pro-BSL people like PETA and other groups of fanatics use them to skew the picture into the picture they want the public to see.

Uneducated government officials believe these groups and the general public eats their BS with a giant spoon.

As Pit Bull owners around the world suffer from unrealistic expectations and BSL these groups sit on their all knowing thrones and laugh and feel powerful.

New statistics are in order for sure, but figuring out the exact population of dogs is as impossible a task if there ever was one.


body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #108 on: July 11, 2006, 07:27:46 AM »
Its funny because we can come up with credible scientific studies and facts to support our argument.

Yet the other side cannot come up with anything more than  isolated incident,myths,propaganda or just plain nonsense ::)

jmt1

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1590
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #109 on: July 11, 2006, 07:33:47 AM »
Its funny because we can come up with credible scientific studies and facts to support our argument.

Yet the other side cannot come up with anything more than  isolated incident,myths,propaganda or just plain nonsense ::)

they will keep coming up with new bullshit....they wont stop no matter how hard the truth hits them in the face.

ieffinhatecardio

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5202
  • More proof God is a man.
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #110 on: July 11, 2006, 07:59:25 AM »
Its funny because we can come up with credible scientific studies and facts to support our argument.

Yet the other side cannot come up with anything more than  isolated incident,myths,propaganda or just plain nonsense ::)

I didn't read that whole article jmt1 posted, just the first few paragraphs.

Are you trying to imply that there isn't a problem with Pitbull attacks? Since you're a fellow Boston guy I don't want to misinterpret what you're saying before I rebut your post.  ;D

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #111 on: July 11, 2006, 08:07:25 AM »
I didn't read that whole article jmt1 posted, just the first few paragraphs.

Are you trying to imply that there isn't a problem with Pitbull attacks? Since you're a fellow Boston guy I don't want to misinterpret what you're saying before I rebut your post.  ;D

There is not in my opinion a problem with pitbull attacks. It is no more a problem than rottwiler attacks when they where more popular than pitbulls. Now that breed is on the back burner.Seems the public must have thought all those problem rottys went away when the pits started coming around.There is however a problem with convicted fellons,crack dealers and gang bangers owning these dogs.

I am willing to bet right now 98 percent of all these attacks have happened in low income areas (high crime areas) or with inexperienced or negligent owners.

I used to live in savin hill before I moved. At the time pits where not the big thing. it was rottys. Let me tell you all the attacks that happened where results from the fools who owned them.

Let me clarify my stance. I am not against some form of fair solution. Both sides have points and also rights. But lets face the facts. how many pit attacks would there be if the owners where responsible and did the right thing? I am totally against banning any type of breed. People have no right to do that.

How would this country be if that is how things where solved. Higher crime rate with blacks? Ban em all to Africa?

liberty

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 2875
  • Getbig!
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #112 on: July 11, 2006, 08:42:58 AM »
I think in the future you should have to apply to have a dog period.
The MSPCA or any other humane society would go to the persons residence who's applying for the dog permit. Certan criteria should have to be met.
In a city near me (lawrence) every idiot owns a pit...
The cops just busted a bunch of puerto ricans for running a house where they trained them to fight.
They even found a pit skull in the yard of the residence.
They lost in court though because they couldn't prove it and couldn't get a search warrant for the house .
When the cops went to check out the house they got the door slammed on them.
One cops arm was cut by a broken pane of glass in the door and required 6 stitches.
All of the people at the house including the female owner were arrested for assault and battery on a police officer,resisting arrest andd mayhem...
Nice folks.....think they owned 3 pits besides the ones they were training.
So I think having to apply to have a pet is a good idea.
If you live in a 1 room apartment you can't have a dog
If you don't have a job so you can afford good care for your dog you can't have one ...etc....etc
Its always about the owners so its time to check them out and then decide if they're a responsible
candidate to own a pet.

ieffinhatecardio

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5202
  • More proof God is a man.
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #113 on: July 11, 2006, 10:29:11 AM »
There is not in my opinion a problem with pitbull attacks. It is no more a problem than rottwiler attacks when they where more popular than pitbulls. Now that breed is on the back burner.Seems the public must have thought all those problem rottys went away when the pits started coming around.There is however a problem with convicted fellons,crack dealers and gang bangers owning these dogs.

I am willing to bet right now 98 percent of all these attacks have happened in low income areas (high crime areas) or with inexperienced or negligent owners.

I used to live in savin hill before I moved. At the time pits where not the big thing. it was rottys. Let me tell you all the attacks that happened where results from the fools who owned them.

Let me clarify my stance. I am not against some form of fair solution. Both sides have points and also rights. But lets face the facts. how many pit attacks would there be if the owners where responsible and did the right thing? I am totally against banning any type of breed. People have no right to do that.

How would this country be if that is how things where solved. Higher crime rate with blacks? Ban em all to Africa?

I think you're losing sight of the forest for the trees. It doesn't matter if Rotties used to be a problem. It also doesn't matter if unscrupulous owners are the problem because the owners don't commit the actual attacks.

In my opinion anyone that feeds gun powder to a dog should be shot. The world doesn't need anymore sadistic scumbags but since those fools can't be shot then the tools they use to create harm (ie Pit Bulls) need to be controlled somehow. Fines don't work, policing by the cities and towns doesn't work. So what is the next logical step?

The problem that Pit Bulls face is that they are still used for fighting. Until we can eliminate dog fights completely this problem will persist.

It's really a simple equation, we can't control the bad owners so then the dogs must be controlled and the only way to control them completely is via banning.

I don't agree with banning but I can see how certain people do. As always, a few bad apples are ruining it for everyone else and in this case a whole breed of animal.

Camel Jockey

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16711
  • Mel Gibson and Bob Sly World Domination
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #114 on: July 11, 2006, 10:33:58 AM »
Kids and people in general should not be put in danger so you can have your beloved breed of dog.

I don't care if you're a good and responsible owner, the point is that a lot of people aren't responsible.

I'm in NY and I've heard many stories and seen lots of people, especially kids being mauled by these vicious breeds. You're selfish when you endanger the lives of others just so you can raise some dog that you love.

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #115 on: July 11, 2006, 10:38:54 AM »
Effin your argument is sound. I can understand your feelings. But that is not the way to control a problem. When you ban the pits they will move onto another breed. Ban that breed and the same thing will happen. Until the source of the problem is controlled tools will be found to create these debates. Wether it be handguns, pitbulls, rottys or any other tool to cause another human harm.

As a whole pitbull statistics prove my point. The majority of pitbulls are great animals. Even those who are owned by idiots rarely attack and kill people. Under 100 deaths in over 30 years! There are vicious pitbulls. But there are viscous golden retrievers.

Boston has a big problem with gun violence and escalating gang wars. These fools are worried about pitbulls ::)

I would be willing to muzzle my dog at all times in public to shut all the myth freaks up. I would be willing to muzzle my animal that did NOTHING wrong to be flexible.

But it is never enough for these clowns. If they found that pitbull sympathy would get them votes it would be the city's mascot.

Oh and by the way Boston is so obsessed with terriers. Funny how they want to ban a form of it :o

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #116 on: July 11, 2006, 10:41:40 AM »
Kids and people in general should not be put in danger so you can have your beloved breed of dog.

I don't care if you're a good and responsible owner, the point is that a lot of people aren't responsible.

I'm in NY and I've heard many stories and seen lots of people, especially kids being mauled by these vicious breeds. You're selfish when you endanger the lives of others just so you can raise some dog that you love.


Your full of shit. You haven't seen many people being mauled.Post 10 articles from NY papers about 10 different maulings this year. I mean this year. not in the last 500 years. I bet you a hundred dollars every one of those pitbulls is owned by some low life scumbag.

I see your handle is camel jockey. I bet you are a fair non discriminant type of guy ::)

liberty

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 2875
  • Getbig!
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #117 on: July 11, 2006, 10:46:03 AM »
'Boston has a big problem with gun violence and escalating gang wars'

Don't forget collapsing 14 billion dollar tunnels that kill people !

ieffinhatecardio

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5202
  • More proof God is a man.
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #118 on: July 11, 2006, 10:57:52 AM »
'Boston has a big problem with gun violence and escalating gang wars'

Don't forget collapsing 14 billion dollar tunnels that kill people !

Can't wait to hear Matt Amorello spin that one. The crap should be flying for weeks over this one.

Romney vs. Amorello, get your ringside seats now.

ieffinhatecardio

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5202
  • More proof God is a man.
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #119 on: July 11, 2006, 10:59:43 AM »
Effin your argument is sound. I can understand your feelings. But that is not the way to control a problem. When you ban the pits they will move onto another breed. Ban that breed and the same thing will happen. Until the source of the problem is controlled tools will be found to create these debates. Wether it be handguns, pitbulls, rottys or any other tool to cause another human harm.

As a whole pitbull statistics prove my point. The majority of pitbulls are great animals. Even those who are owned by idiots rarely attack and kill people. Under 100 deaths in over 30 years! There are vicious pitbulls. But there are viscous golden retrievers.

Boston has a big problem with gun violence and escalating gang wars. These fools are worried about pitbulls ::)

I would be willing to muzzle my dog at all times in public to shut all the myth freaks up. I would be willing to muzzle my animal that did NOTHING wrong to be flexible.

But it is never enough for these clowns. If they found that pitbull sympathy would get them votes it would be the city's mascot.

Oh and by the way Boston is so obsessed with terriers. Funny how they want to ban a form of it :o

Body, do you think these moron owners would have Pit Bulls as pets if they weren't still used as fighting dogs? Isn't one of the appeals of a Pit Bull to a thug/gangsta that these dogs fight to the death?

I think if you stop the fighting the dogs won't have as much appeal to the dirtbags. Of course stopping the fights would be next to impossible.

TrapsMcLats

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2801
  • Lift Heavy. Lift Hard.
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #120 on: July 11, 2006, 11:20:11 AM »
Time for me to chime in on this, being a pit bull owner and proponent of the breed.  As many of you know, i adopted a pitbull with bad back legs from my girl's work      (spca).
There is one telling tidbit that i would like to impart to all of you.  Like i said, my girlfriend works at the SPCA, and many (i'd say 8 of ten) of the admin/higher up people have pit bulls, these are highly trained dog and animal experts and they have pit bulls.  And why you ask?  They all give the same answer "they are the best breed."  Now, why the news/media aren't talking to these people i have no idea.  I guess a reliable source is never as entertaining as speculation and mythology.

My dog really looks like a killer, huh:

Cavalier22

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3309
  • Citizens! The Fatherland is in Danger
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #121 on: July 11, 2006, 11:30:25 AM »
i tihkn we shold just stop people with a below average IQ or below 21 own a pit
Valhalla awaits.

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #122 on: July 11, 2006, 11:36:08 AM »
Body, do you think these moron owners would have Pit Bulls as pets if they weren't still used as fighting dogs? Isn't one of the appeals of a Pit Bull to a thug/gangsta that these dogs fight to the death?

I think if you stop the fighting the dogs won't have as much appeal to the dirtbags. Of course stopping the fights would be next to impossible.

no doubt that is a huge part of the appeal. I also think the musculare stature and loyalty of the breed by nature are a huge draw. Notice how popular the breed is on a bodybuilding website!

I can see where the argument is made from the other side of this issue. But my point is when you ban the pits what will all the tough guys and thugs get to replace them? Pretty soon you will ban all dogs. That is not fair.

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #123 on: July 11, 2006, 11:36:40 AM »
i tihkn we shold just stop people with a below average IQ or below 21 own a pit


A convicted felon cannot buy a gun. Why can they own a pit? There should be a screening for those with a wrap sheet  found to have or want to own a pit. If you are a felon and prove you can own an animal responsibly fine. BUt if you are some tough scum bag maggot found in possesion of pits there should be a probation violation.

body88

  • Guest
Re: California law to ban/exterminate Pit Bulls
« Reply #124 on: July 11, 2006, 11:38:45 AM »
Time for me to chime in on this, being a pit bull owner and proponent of the breed.  As many of you know, i adopted a pitbull with bad back legs from my girl's work      (spca).
There is one telling tidbit that i would like to impart to all of you.  Like i said, my girlfriend works at the SPCA, and many (i'd say 8 of ten) of the admin/higher up people have pit bulls, these are highly trained dog and animal experts and they have pit bulls.  And why you ask?  They all give the same answer "they are the best breed."  Now, why the news/media aren't talking to these people i have no idea.  I guess a reliable source is never as entertaining as speculation and mythology.

My dog really looks like a killer, huh:



Sensationalism my friend. All those baised shitbags are after.