Every owner of a pit bull euthanized after attacking another pet or person
SWEARS that their little pooky bear was an angel until the incident happened.
People that don't believe in breed-specific behaviors have not owned very many
dogs. Humans have spent hundreds (or in a few cases thousands) of years
selectively breeding to get certain attributes from each breed. Do you actually
think that physical appearance is the only outcome of that?
Ah, the professional dog owner argument. Sure, I would have no problem with
legislation that limited pit bull ownership to those who took classes both for
the owner and with their dog and required that both pass an examination of
aptitude after same.
Of course when bad things happened under those conditions I would expect the
owner to be jailed for reckless endangerment since they had obviously cheated or
produced fraudulent proof of having taken the classes (since no one that had
taken the classes could possibly have an incident right?).
The current REAL problem is that any ordinary asshole can acquire these dogs and
not all of them are going to spend the time and effort to provide anything
beyond rudimentary training.
Is it your position that when Joe Average acquires and does NOT train his dog
extensively that the dog's danger to society is the same regardless of breed?
That breed doesn't enter into the equation at all?
Nope, not me. Don't even own a dog currently. I've met quite a
few very friendly Pit Bulls, and particularly Rotties. It *can* be
done. Just don't torture the thing and you're a long way down the
I'm against any legislation that singles out a particular breed.
It won't work for the same reason that laws against "designer
I'd have no problem with that for any dog that seriously injures
Assholes can drive cars too.
No, it's my position that if the dog (any breed) is dangerous, the
owner be held responsible.
Correct. The dog cannot be responsible, rather the owner/ If
insurance companies want to limit breeds they'll insure, I really
don't have much to say though. Contract, and all...
People that believe certain breeds are overtly dangerous do NOT take the
position that these breeds walk around 100% of the time snarling and snapping at
things (that would actually make them easier to outlaw).
What IS true is that these breeds can be sweet, obedient pets for years and then
without obvious provocation attack a person or other animal. Compounding that
is the fact that they are not easily subdued. There are many attack stories
where neighbors with baseball bats or similar were not able to get these dogs to
release their hold. Policemen have often had to put multiple rounds into these
dogs before they go down. The canine jaw is one of the most powerful in nature
and these dogs have much more powerful jaws than your average lab or shepard.
Non-sequitor. Laws concerning drugs have nothing to do with the issue.
And when certain breeds are known time and again to be involved in these cases
the legislators are just supposed to sit back and act AFTER every incident?
And driving cars is heavily regulated. Thanks for making my point.
But only and always after the fact, right?
This isn't about holding the dog responsible. Municipalities restrict the
ownership of more types of animals than those that are allowed, usually for far
less serious reasons than safety. If one can be prevented from having a cow in
their back yard just because of the smell then I see no reason not to disallow a
dangerous breed of dog.
Neither is rabid St. Benard. So? If they're out of control, shoot
them, then charge the owners with criminal mischief, or some such.
There were *no* warnings? The dogs had never bitten nor snapped
before? I'm sure you can find one example.
You really should try it again with an open mind. Let me go a
little slower and see if that helps. You ban one breed and it
morfs into another or you get mixes. Any such laws have more holes
in them than a screen door.
Perhaps because they get attention of the press? Perhaps because
they're the dog of choice of miscreants and beat to shit, either on
purpose or because that's the only thing they understand? Perhaps
because the moon _is_ made of green cheese. Your (lack of) stats
"Heavily regulated", my ass. Any 86 year-old can get a license and
run down a dozen people. Assholes can still turn and kill on a
There is a difference between a private contract and a law. I can
choose to go without insurance or find another company. I can't
disobey the force of law.
All dogs are the same species. That species is also used for
companionship and work. It's easy to write regulations banning
horses or donkeys, not so with a subset of dogs that you think is
inherently more dangerous than another.
Until the dog infringes on my rights it can stay. The cow has
merely by existing. I bet you want to banish all blacks because
statistically they cause more crime than non-blacks too.
Not from my observation. I know multiple people who have well trained
pit bulls that seem like complete pussy cats and will lick you to death
but as soon as they spot another dog the primitive traits kick in and
they want to kill it.
No, I don't harm animals but I've read about enough people being killed
by dogs that it is alarming to see owners who do not adequately secure
their animals. Family pets can bite if they are injured, threatened or
protecting their food. I grabbed a chicken bone from our pet once, and
he didn't like it. My fault of course that he got food he should not
have, but it is natural animal behavior that I was referring to.
I've also had the sad experience of having an injured cat crawl into the
yard .. one with a large abcessed wound on it's head. Cat's don't
belong on city streets. We kept ours indoors and took good care of him
.. one of the sweetest animals I have known.
My daughter's dog came out of nowhere once when I bent over to tuck in
and kiss my grandson goodnight .. she got between me and my grandson.
She is very protective of her owners, and I don't know what it would
take for her to attack, but she has also taken a protective stance to
protect me. She is amazing, and people often stop to ask about her when
we go for walks. The dog will get between me and the stranger, put her
body against mine. Can't hear her growl but can feel it.
I used to visit a neighbor's Doberman to give it water. It spent years
tied to a tree in the back yard, wearing a path around the tree. His
water bowl was often empty. His food bowl was attracting rats.
Took care of an older lady in the hospital once who was mauled by her
own Doberman. She was preparing it's food, went to put the bowl down
and he mauled her arms badly. She lost a couple of fingers in the deal.
Have the dog de-clawed. He can't dig with stubs.
People do that to cats all the time thereby saving their precious furniture
at the expense of the cat's primary defensive and offensive weapon.
Dogs don't use their claws/nails for anything except digging. No harm there.
Agree, don't get the dog declawed.
I have a golden retriever who tried the same thing.
I initially buried some chickenwire, that didn't work he just tore it
A couple of inches of quickcrete under a layer of dirt directly under
the fence solved the issue.
Bullshit. A cat's primary weapon is it's rear claws. The fronts
are merely a warning of things to come.
Again, bullshit. Our cats barely knew they were declawed. It was
dune at the same time as neutering. By the time the anesthetic
fully wore off they were running all over the house. No harm no
foul. If the cat is in serious pain after declawing you took them
to a butcher.
Cats without front claws become 'chew toys' for the dogs in the neighborhood.
If they are indoor cats it's even worse. When they get out an indoor cat's
instinct when threatened is to climb high and howl for rescue. A declawed cat
can't climb well so they run and they keep running and are often never seen
They are also subject to abuse from children and sadistic adults.
Hogwash! I've seen a cat rip a dog five times its size to shreds
using only the back claws. A friend saw a cat take a fox, no front
claws used in the disembowelment. Cats climb using their back
claws and are perfectly able to climb with only backs.
Our cats have never been outside. They don't have a real interest
in the outside, other than as a giant TV set.
Responsible cat owners don't let them outside, unless they have a kennel
type cage to keep them in so they can sun themselves etc. Too many cats
flattened in the streets, taken by dogs etc., then the owner is crying
about the loss of "fluffy," as if it isn't their fault for subjecting
the poor cat to all the hazards in the first place.
Finally some sense here, though you forgot disease. Cats spread
feline leukemia like wildfire. Cats kept away from others and cars
live a very long life (we had one tabby 22 years).
Just give the cats a toy box stuffed full of their favorite toys
and play with them when they want.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.