lol, man u are making every imaginable effort to defend pitbulls: it is for the safety of the public and obviously children, this seems to be lost on u. life is precious, reducing everything to pure statistics without considering the implications is absurd.
poeple can chose not to go in places where smoking is allowed. there's a reason why now smoking is banned in public spaces in almost every country. responsible adults can and usually do avoid to smoke near their children. how do u stop a pitbull on the lose? u have no much choice if u get attacked by a pitbull do u? what do u do? avoid the dog by running away?
lol.....see...im not trying to defend pitbulls here.....im trying to defend a philosophy. You want to ban pitbulls because they are dangerous which is proven by the fact that they kill 4 people a year on average. So then are we gonna ban everything that kills 4 people a year on average for the safety of the public? the answer is no....so why are we banning pitbulls. It makes no sense. In your earlier post you said swimming isnt dangerous but freak accidents happen. So when 4000 people die from drowning a year and 5 die from pitbulls why the hell would you want to ban pitbulls and not swimming? its not my logic that is flawed its all you people that want to ban pitbulls. Where is it gonna end?
Bitstream, This guy is incapable of appreciating the fact that pit bull attacks are predictable and preventable, just like car accidents due to drinking and reckless driving are preventable, but unlike car accidents where unforseen mechanical failure or unforseen other reasons are the cause. Drinking and driving has been BANNED by law. He also cannot appreciate the fact that smoking has been BANNED in many public places in NY because of its well known nefarious effects for both smokers and non smokers. Yet, he is unable to extend the same logic to the very real danger that pit bulls represent. It's not worth responding to him because he reeks of intellectual dishonesty. An increasing number of counties/countries are banning the dog, let's hope more follow suit.
I really don't know. I was addicted to cigarettes for 2 decades, I would have been tremendously happier if I was not allowed to have them in the first place. Talk about a product without an upside..... So maybe we can introduce a tobacco product for pit bulls and keep them buzzed all the time so they can't attack, or they might attack but get it all wrong and entirely miss the leg and grab a tree branch instead and be unable to let go, then we could get a laugh out of them and the whole problem is gone...we might have stumbled onto something, right here in Chit Chat at ET central.
This is pure bs, a total crock of shit. There are several breeds of dog that will be perfect around kids of any age unless the animal contracts some sort of disease that affects its behaviour.
why is it that 100% of the pitbull owners i have known have been complete garbage? can we just ban these people? what are the statistics for mangling people for life?? does this statistic get reported? killing other pets.... do they report this too???
Lol, i have to agree for the most part. "Ma-ah d-awgs 'a tuff'er 'an'a yo-ah d-awg!" Let me get this right; In most places, owning an even mildly venomous snake , spiders etc are strictly regulated with 100% secure inclosures. As a rule, you wouldn't be allowed to own bobcats, wolves, wolverines, komodo dragons, big cats or bears , certainly not tied to a bit of rope or light chain in a backyard. But something perfectly capable of ripping out a sheeps throat in a fraction of a second, is perfectly acceptable to just roam around the streets with practically non existent enforcement. To me, theres something wrong with that picture.
Yeah, I just don't get why someone voluntarily gets a pit bull as a pet. A pit bull is the blue-collar, "compulsive-lottery-ticket-buyer" of the canine-world. If you assume that an owner knows about the reputation that these dogs have, and yet still chooses this breed, you have to wonder about what kind of person this is. If I can flip open a Psych 101 textbook to chapter 1, I'd probably guess that someone buys a pit bull because they would like to think of themselves as wild or uncontrollable by "the man." The sort of people who live their lives on permanent defense. They think that they can identify with the stigma that the dog has in society...scrappy, unliked, a "bad boy." Either that, or they want to be able to try and tame something supposedly uncontrollable...maybe because they themselves were oppressed by someone. In other words, you don't buy a pit bull because you had a lot of presents around the Christmas tree as a kid. And you don't gravitate towards a notorious loose cannon because you're really really secure with yourself. If you were raised on cigarettes and hootch, and were repeatedly fingerbanged by your alcoholic step-father in his Camaro, then you probably think pit bulls are the way to roll. So you can think about banning pit bulls, or going out and smoking them for sport...but it's just addressing a symptom of yet another stereotypical way that shit people desperately try to impose themselves on the world.
That was the first post in some time that actually put a smile on my face. LMAO... Couldn't of said it better myself. Thanks