PDA

View Full Version : Uh Oh....look for news about Silverback soon



D Rock
05-21-2009, 08:35 PM
Harrison lives mighty close to me. I saw some cops go by with lights and sirens earlier. Now a friend of mine who lives in the same neighborhood as Harrison said he saw 2 ambulances and a bunch of cops outside his place.


Maybe James should have gone to meet the President???

Eddie Spaghetti
05-21-2009, 08:45 PM
that doesn't sound like it's gonna be good for anybdy.

stlrz d
05-21-2009, 09:08 PM
Harrison lives mighty close to me. I saw some cops go by with lights and sirens earlier. Now a friend of mine who lives in the same neighborhood as Harrison said he saw 2 ambulances and a bunch of cops outside his place.


Maybe James should have gone to meet the President???

Is it anywhere near where this took place 2 1/2 hours ago?

http://kdka.com/local/North.side.beating.2.1016317.html

birtikidis
05-21-2009, 09:13 PM
I don't know, but i think that silverback probably lives in a nicer place then that apartment from the picture...

stlrz d
05-21-2009, 09:15 PM
I don't know, but i think that silverback probably lives in a nicer place then that apartment from the picture...

That would be my guess too, but in a lot of cities things really change in just a block or two. Perhaps the commotion was really a couple of blocks away?

birtikidis
05-21-2009, 09:18 PM
good point. hopefully that is the case.

stlrz d
05-21-2009, 09:37 PM
I keep refreshing the KDKA page but so far nothing about Harrison.

steelz09
05-21-2009, 09:59 PM
Maybe he body slammed another Browns fan?

birtikidis
05-21-2009, 10:01 PM
Maybe he body slammed another Browns fan?
we could only hope

feltdizz
05-21-2009, 10:46 PM
Harrison lives close to me? C'mon :moon

this had to be a joke.

steelers43
05-22-2009, 11:47 AM
Maybe he hit another woman? I hear he has a baptism this weekend so no worries.

RussBII
05-22-2009, 11:50 AM
Maybe he hit another woman? I hear he has a baptism this weekend so no worries.

Oooooo ouch. Maybe it's first holy communion?

stlrz d
05-22-2009, 12:13 PM
Maybe he hit another woman? I hear he has a baptism this weekend so no worries.

People make mistakes. Humans are fallible by nature.

Except for you of course. :roll:

steelers43
05-22-2009, 12:14 PM
Latest News and Rumors James Harrison’s Dog Attacks His Son
Posted by Mike Florio on May 22, 2009, 12:06 p.m.
The son of Steelers linebacker James Harrison has been attacked by Harrison’s dog, according to WTAE-TV in Pittsburgh.

Per Ari Hait of WTAE, Harrison’s son was transported to Children’s Hospital in Pittsburgh with “severe” dog bite injuries. The injuries reportedly are not life threatening.

A Steelers spokesman told Hait that the team is aware of the situation.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to Harrison’s son for a full, complete, and rapid recovery.

UPDATE: The on-air version of the story did not mention the type of the dog. The online version indicates that the dog is a pit bull.

Another moron owning a pit bull.

Djfan
05-22-2009, 12:15 PM
Sad. That's all.

stlrz d
05-22-2009, 12:20 PM
Sad. That's all.

True.

Pet owners and children of pet owners are attacked by their own animals all the time...even if they aren't pit bull owners.

steelers43
05-22-2009, 12:37 PM
Sad. That's all.

True.

Pet owners and children of pet owners are attacked by their own animals all the time...even if they aren't pit bull owners.

If you have kids and a pit bull, you are an idiot. It's really that simple. I don't know the stats but they have to be far worse for pit bulls than other animals.

I would never own one of those dogs and I am a huge dog lover.

stlrz d
05-22-2009, 12:42 PM
Good for you Mr. Holier-than-thou.

phillyesq
05-22-2009, 01:08 PM
Shame. I hope his son is alright.

What is it with the ROLB position and pit bulls? Couldn't Harrison have just trained his to snack on miniature horses?

RuthlessBurgher
05-22-2009, 01:11 PM
Shame. I hope his son is alright.

What is it with the ROLB position and pit bulls? Couldn't Harrison have just trained his to snack on miniature horses?

James invited Casey Hampton over for a barbeque last weekend, and Big Snack devoured all of the miniature horses in Harrison's neighborhood (and most of the full-sized horses as well).

frankthetank1
05-22-2009, 04:57 PM
Sad. That's all.

True.

Pet owners and children of pet owners are attacked by their own animals all the time...even if they aren't pit bull owners.

If you have kids and a pit bull, you are an idiot. It's really that simple. I don't know the stats but they have to be far worse for pit bulls than other animals.

I would never own one of those dogs and I am a huge dog lover.

i agree some what. i wouldnt chance it but people who have both pits and kids are not idiots. its all how you raise a dog. some of the nicest dogs i have known have been pits. what about guns? are people who own guns and have kids idiots too? i dont think so. as long as your smart about it

feltdizz
05-22-2009, 05:04 PM
Sad. That's all.

True.

Pet owners and children of pet owners are attacked by their own animals all the time...even if they aren't pit bull owners.

If you have kids and a pit bull, you are an idiot. It's really that simple. I don't know the stats but they have to be far worse for pit bulls than other animals.

I would never own one of those dogs and I am a huge dog lover.

i agree some what. i wouldnt chance it but people who have both pits and kids are not idiots. its all how you raise a dog. some of the nicest dogs i have known have been pits. what about guns? are people who own guns and have kids idiots too? i dont think so. as long as your smart about it

that's pit bull... everyone knows anytime a kid is attacked 9 times out of 10 it is by a pit. They are prone o snap at any time...

Eddie Spaghetti
05-22-2009, 05:15 PM
any update on his son?

i can guess what happened to the dog.

steelers43
05-22-2009, 06:15 PM
Sad. That's all.

True.

Pet owners and children of pet owners are attacked by their own animals all the time...even if they aren't pit bull owners.

If you have kids and a pit bull, you are an idiot. It's really that simple. I don't know the stats but they have to be far worse for pit bulls than other animals.

I would never own one of those dogs and I am a huge dog lover.

i agree some what. i wouldnt chance it but people who have both pits and kids are not idiots. its all how you raise a dog. some of the nicest dogs i have known have been pits. what about guns? are people who own guns and have kids idiots too? i dont think so. as long as your smart about it

I don't agree at all with that. Pit Bulls are a bad breed imo. They snap all the time. Sure there will be nice one's but whenever you hear of this, it is typically a Pit Bull. Guns? I have guns and hunt. My kid knows how to shoot them and be safe with them. I don't worry about my guns jumping out of a locked gun case and attacking my daughter.

If you have kids and a Pit Bull, you may not be an idiot but you are definitely not the sharpest tool in the shed.

stlrz d
05-22-2009, 10:51 PM
Sad. That's all.

True.

Pet owners and children of pet owners are attacked by their own animals all the time...even if they aren't pit bull owners.

If you have kids and a pit bull, you are an idiot. It's really that simple. I don't know the stats but they have to be far worse for pit bulls than other animals.

I would never own one of those dogs and I am a huge dog lover.

i agree some what. i wouldnt chance it but people who have both pits and kids are not idiots. its all how you raise a dog. some of the nicest dogs i have known have been pits. what about guns? are people who own guns and have kids idiots too? i dont think so. as long as your smart about it

that's pit bull... everyone knows anytime a kid is attacked 9 times out of 10 it is by a pit. They are prone o snap at any time...

Got something that backs that?

Steel Life
05-22-2009, 11:40 PM
any update on his son?

i can guess what happened to the dog.
Goes into quarantine for 10 days I think, more than likely it'll be put down afterwards.

It's too bad this happens on the heels of his lampooning by the national media, I'm sure some idiots will try to draw some strained corollary between the two & paint James out to be some "hood".

isonator07
05-23-2009, 10:10 AM
I say after the 10 day hold, the dog should be immediately turned over to Michael Vick.
Seriously though I hope our future LB is doing well. Injuries "Not Life Threatining" sounds like he should be alright.

JUST-PLAIN-NASTY
05-23-2009, 10:41 AM
Asside from the arguments...
Let's just hope Harrison's child will fully recover with no permanent injuries or scars. That is really the only thing that matters.
As far as a dog attacking a child regardless of breed...Depending on circumstances...The dog may have to be put down. Honestly, I'm a country boy and crude in some beliefs, if the dog was not provoked and attacked my children...It would be destroyed immediately. The "means" would not be acceptable to many but that is my beliefs and how I was brought up.

....And to let you know...I am a dog lover!

rpmpit
05-23-2009, 11:28 AM
Here we go again. I remember making this argument when talking about Vick's dogs. I don't own pit bulls, but my best friend (Godfather to Armpit Jr. and father of my Godson) owns two of them. They are two of the sweetest, most well behaved dogs I know. I own a Rotti and she is equally as sweet and well behaved (she's actually much better :D )

Here's the deal. You can have a mean, nasty miniature poodle or chihuahua and its funny. If you have a mean, nasty pit or rotti, its dangerous. These are powerful breeds and must be respected and properly socialized and trained. My dog (as well as my friend's pits) were trained by a former military K9 handler. We made the decision to do this when my wife was pregnant. He taught us how to properly introduce our dog to the baby and what to look for, as far as signs of aggression, jealousy, etc. Just taking a guess here, but I doubt Harrison's dogs were trained properly. That seems to be the biggest factor in these terrible cases - not the breed of the dog.

stlrz d
05-23-2009, 12:19 PM
Here we go again. I remember making this argument when talking about Vick's dogs. I don't own pit bulls, but my best friend (Godfather to Armpit Jr. and father of my Godson) owns two of them. They are two of the sweetest, most well behaved dogs I know. I own a Rotti and she is equally as sweet and well behaved (she's actually much better :D )

Here's the deal. You can have a mean, nasty miniature poodle or chihuahua and its funny. If you have a mean, nasty pit or rotti, its dangerous. These are powerful breeds and must be respected and properly socialized and trained. My dog (as well as my friend's pits) were trained by a former military K9 handler. We made the decision to do this when my wife was pregnant. He taught us how to properly introduce our dog to the baby and what to look for, as far as signs of aggression, jealousy, etc. Just taking a guess here, but I doubt Harrison's dogs were trained properly. That seems to be the biggest factor in these terrible cases - not the breed of the dog.

Agreed man. If the American Staffordshire Terrier (Pit Bull) receives an abundance of fond care and attention from its owners then it can be an excellent pet as well as a fierce guardian of the household. I suspect NFL players don't have the time to spend with this breed to ensure that it behaves like a family pet.

They're fiercely affectionate, fiercely loyal and fiercely protective. All are good things as long as the owner does it right.

The only thing I blame Harrison for is (probably) not doing his research and learning that if you don't have a lot of time to spend with this breed than it is a mistake to become an owner of one.

From Animal Planet's dog breed selector on their website:


AKC Ranking: 64
Family: terrier, mastiff (bull)
Area of Origin: United States
Date of Origin: 1800s
Original Function: bullbaiting, dog fighting
Today's Function: companion
Avg Size of male: Height: 18-19 Weight: 57-67
Avg Size of Female: Height: 17-18 Weight: 57-67
Other Name: none

History
The American Staffordshire terrier and the Staffordshire bull terrier descended from the same lines. The prototype originally sprang from crossing the old type of bulldog with some old terrier types, probably the English sooth terrier. The result was aptly called the "bull and terrier," later to be dubbed the Staffordshire bull terrier. The dogs gained fame among fanciers of dog fighting, a popular sport despite its having been declared illegal. Their fighting ability gained them passage to America in the late 1800s, where they dominated the fighting "pits." Here they became known as the pit bull terrier, American bull terrier and even Yankee terrier. Americans favored a slightly bigger dog than the English preferred, and with time the two strains diverged. In 1936, the AKC recognized the breed as the Staffordshire terrier (the name was changed in 1972 to American Staffordshire terrier). Docility and tractability have always been vital traits in a powerful dog that must be handled even in the midst of a dog fight; therefore, the Am Staff evolved to have a sweet and trustworthy disposition around people. Unfortunately, this game dog has too often appealed to people seeking it for its fighting rather than its loving abilities. Often in the midst of controversy, beginning in the 1980s, it sometimes found itself the target of breed-specific laws aimed at banning or controlling certain types of dogs. Despite this, the Am Staff is currently enjoying one of its most popular periods among people wanting a people- and fun-loving dog.

Temperament
Typically docile and playful with its family, the American Staffordshire terrier is also generally friendly toward strangers as long as its owners are present. It is generally very good with children. It is a protective breed and can be aggressive toward other dogs — especially those that challenge it. It is stubborn, tenacious and fearless. For all of its tough persona, the most important thing in life to this breed is its owner's fond attention.

Upkeep
The Staff needs a daily outlet for its energy, preferably in the form of a long walk on leash or a vigorous game in the yard. Though it can live outdoors in temperate climates, this breed is far better suited temperamentally to sharing its family's home. Coat care is minimal. As one of the breeds popularly considered a "pit bull," public acceptance may sometimes be low.

Health
• Major concerns: CHD
• Minor concerns: none
• Occasionally seen: PDA
• Suggested tests: OFA, (cardiac)
• Life span: 12 – 14 years
• Note: The high pain threshold may mask problems

Form and Function
This stocky dog should be muscular, giving the impression not only of great strength for its size but also of grace and agility. Its gait is springy. Its low center of gravity helped it stay on its feet in a fight, and its nimbleness helped it avoid its opponent's teeth. Its own jaws are strong with great power. Its coat is short, close and glossy.

Clicking the link will show you how they rank in several categories like friendliness, tolerance of climate, etc.: http://animal.discovery.com/breedselect ... do?id=1870 (http://animal.discovery.com/breedselector/dogprofile.do?id=1870)

Djfan
05-23-2009, 12:23 PM
You can train a dog to be violent, or train it to be sweet. I doubt it's the breed.

A big problem here is that the people who get PBs or Rottis often want them to look like a bad a$$. They turn them into threats because they have a need for the image. It's compensating.

THE point is his boy. You can bet Deebo took care of the dog's future.

My advice? Don't accept an invite to his BBQ next week unless you like Vietnamese food.

RuthlessBurgher
05-23-2009, 02:43 PM
Update: Harrison's son 'doing well' after dog bite

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4201418


Updated: May 23, 2009, 1:57 PM ET
Harrison's son to remain in hospital
Associated Press

PITTSBURGH -- The agent of Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison said the player's toddler son is "doing well" at a Pittsburgh hospital following an attack by a pit bull.

Harrison's agent, William Parise, says 2-year-old James Harrison III was bitten on the thigh after his mother let the dog out of its pen Thursday afternoon.

Parise said Saturday he was with the boy at UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, and the boy was expected to remain there for another day or two.

Parise said the child's mother and the player's massage therapist also were hurt trying to help James III, and the therapist needed three stitches.

A hospital spokesman declined comment Saturday, saying the family has asked that no information be released.

Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press

steelers43
05-23-2009, 03:16 PM
Here we go again. I remember making this argument when talking about Vick's dogs. I don't own pit bulls, but my best friend (Godfather to Armpit Jr. and father of my Godson) owns two of them. They are two of the sweetest, most well behaved dogs I know. I own a Rotti and she is equally as sweet and well behaved (she's actually much better :D )

Here's the deal. You can have a mean, nasty miniature poodle or chihuahua and its funny. If you have a mean, nasty pit or rotti, its dangerous. These are powerful breeds and must be respected and properly socialized and trained. My dog (as well as my friend's pits) were trained by a former military K9 handler. We made the decision to do this when my wife was pregnant. He taught us how to properly introduce our dog to the baby and what to look for, as far as signs of aggression, jealousy, etc. Just taking a guess here, but I doubt Harrison's dogs were trained properly. That seems to be the biggest factor in these terrible cases - not the breed of the dog.

They are all sweet, until they snap.

steelers43
05-23-2009, 03:23 PM
Women save toddler from pit-bull attack

By: WILLIAM FINN BENNETT - Staff Writer

LAKE ELSINORE ---- Jennifer Ruckel never saw it coming, she said on a recent afternoon. One minute she was sitting on her bed talking to her sister Robin, laughing and watching her 18-month-old son Taylor dance on the rug at their feet ---- the next, their 30 seconds of terror began.

With no provocation or warning, the family's 5-year-old pit bull, Molly, suddenly lunged across the room and grabbed Taylor's head in its jaws and began shaking the boy like a rag doll.

"The dog just snapped; it changed from a protective, loving dog to a beast within a second," Jennifer said of the March 31 attack.

Robin threw a cup of hot coffee on the dog. Jennifer began pounding on the animal from behind, desperately trying to get her to let go, the woman said. The dog's lower jaw was clamped on the back of the boy's head, its upper jaw locked onto his face next to his ear and neck and it continued to shake the boy.

Finally, the dog loosened her grip for a split second, letting go of Taylor, and Jennifer threw herself on top of the toddler as the dog continued to lunge and dig beneath her body to get at the child.

The whole incident lasted perhaps 30 seconds, Robin said. "But it seemed like 30 years."

Another sister, Lindsey, came running into the room and helped Jennifer pick up the child. Robin said she grabbed Molly by her choke collar and held her off long enough for Jennifer to get out of the room with Taylor.

As she pulled the dog outside the Lake Elsinore home, Lindsey called 911, but no one answered, Robin said.

Adding to their panic, Taylor was bleeding profusely. "Jennifer was covered in blood and I thought we could lose this little guy," Robin said.

When they couldn't get a response from 911, the women jumped in the car and rushed the child to Inland Valley Medical Center's emergency room in Wildomar.

Doctors gave Taylor a strong sedative before applying 30 stitches to his face and neck and using four staples to patch his torn scalp, Jennifer said. Doctors said that one of the wounds was just fractions of an inch from the boy's jugular vein.

Animal-control officers later took Molly to Animal Friends of the Valleys shelter in Lake Elsinore, where she is to be euthanized after a 10-day quarantine period, Jennifer said


By Brent Jones | Sun reporter
October 23, 2007
The dog rarely barked. He never growled, and his teeth - until a vicious attack Saturday night - had been reserved for chewing food, his owners say.
Chocolate - a caramel-colored pit bull a little more than a year old - was one of the most tranquil dogs Kenneth and Melissa Garrison had until, unprovoked, he snapped and nearly bit the nose off the couple's 1-year-old son.
Two days after the attack, sitting in the living room where their child's blood stained the carpet, the Garrisons were at a loss to explain Chocolate's actions, which left their son hospitalized for a night. Half of Jadyn Garrison's face was covered in a red scab yesterday, but doctors predict he will make a full recovery and not need surgery, the family said

steelers43
05-23-2009, 03:34 PM
Got something that backs that?

Look up dog bit fatalities. What you'll find is that most are related to Pit Bulls and Rotts.

You clearly want to ignore it but it is true.

Most people I know who own Pits are insecure. Like the 50 year old man who works a desk job but drives a diesel truck with duel tires and not one scratch on the bed from work.

rpmpit
05-23-2009, 05:28 PM
Here we go again. I remember making this argument when talking about Vick's dogs. I don't own pit bulls, but my best friend (Godfather to Armpit Jr. and father of my Godson) owns two of them. They are two of the sweetest, most well behaved dogs I know. I own a Rotti and she is equally as sweet and well behaved (she's actually much better :D )

Here's the deal. You can have a mean, nasty miniature poodle or chihuahua and its funny. If you have a mean, nasty pit or rotti, its dangerous. These are powerful breeds and must be respected and properly socialized and trained. My dog (as well as my friend's pits) were trained by a former military K9 handler. We made the decision to do this when my wife was pregnant. He taught us how to properly introduce our dog to the baby and what to look for, as far as signs of aggression, jealousy, etc. Just taking a guess here, but I doubt Harrison's dogs were trained properly. That seems to be the biggest factor in these terrible cases - not the breed of the dog.

Agreed man. If the American Staffordshire Terrier (Pit Bull) receives an abundance of fond care and attention from its owners then it can be an excellent pet as well as a fierce guardian of the household. I suspect NFL players don't have the time to spend with this breed to ensure that it behaves like a family pet.

They're fiercely affectionate, fiercely loyal and fiercely protective. All are good things as long as the owner does it right.

The only thing I blame Harrison for is (probably) not doing his research and learning that if you don't have a lot of time to spend with this breed than it is a mistake to become an owner of one.

From Animal Planet's dog breed selector on their website:


AKC Ranking: 64
Family: terrier, mastiff (bull)
Area of Origin: United States
Date of Origin: 1800s
Original Function: bullbaiting, dog fighting
Today's Function: companion
Avg Size of male: Height: 18-19 Weight: 57-67
Avg Size of Female: Height: 17-18 Weight: 57-67
Other Name: none

History
The American Staffordshire terrier and the Staffordshire bull terrier descended from the same lines. The prototype originally sprang from crossing the old type of bulldog with some old terrier types, probably the English sooth terrier. The result was aptly called the "bull and terrier," later to be dubbed the Staffordshire bull terrier. The dogs gained fame among fanciers of dog fighting, a popular sport despite its having been declared illegal. Their fighting ability gained them passage to America in the late 1800s, where they dominated the fighting "pits." Here they became known as the pit bull terrier, American bull terrier and even Yankee terrier. Americans favored a slightly bigger dog than the English preferred, and with time the two strains diverged. In 1936, the AKC recognized the breed as the Staffordshire terrier (the name was changed in 1972 to American Staffordshire terrier). Docility and tractability have always been vital traits in a powerful dog that must be handled even in the midst of a dog fight; therefore, the Am Staff evolved to have a sweet and trustworthy disposition around people. Unfortunately, this game dog has too often appealed to people seeking it for its fighting rather than its loving abilities. Often in the midst of controversy, beginning in the 1980s, it sometimes found itself the target of breed-specific laws aimed at banning or controlling certain types of dogs. Despite this, the Am Staff is currently enjoying one of its most popular periods among people wanting a people- and fun-loving dog.

Temperament
Typically docile and playful with its family, the American Staffordshire terrier is also generally friendly toward strangers as long as its owners are present. It is generally very good with children. It is a protective breed and can be aggressive toward other dogs — especially those that challenge it. It is stubborn, tenacious and fearless. For all of its tough persona, the most important thing in life to this breed is its owner's fond attention.

Upkeep
The Staff needs a daily outlet for its energy, preferably in the form of a long walk on leash or a vigorous game in the yard. Though it can live outdoors in temperate climates, this breed is far better suited temperamentally to sharing its family's home. Coat care is minimal. As one of the breeds popularly considered a "pit bull," public acceptance may sometimes be low.

Health
• Major concerns: CHD
• Minor concerns: none
• Occasionally seen: PDA
• Suggested tests: OFA, (cardiac)
• Life span: 12 – 14 years
• Note: The high pain threshold may mask problems

Form and Function
This stocky dog should be muscular, giving the impression not only of great strength for its size but also of grace and agility. Its gait is springy. Its low center of gravity helped it stay on its feet in a fight, and its nimbleness helped it avoid its opponent's teeth. Its own jaws are strong with great power. Its coat is short, close and glossy.

Clicking the link will show you how they rank in several categories like friendliness, tolerance of climate, etc.: http://animal.discovery.com/breedselect ... do?id=1870 (http://animal.discovery.com/breedselector/dogprofile.do?id=1870)

Great info, d. One other thing I forgot to mention. If a Golden Retriever attacks a person or a child, do you think it makes the evening news?? Now if its a Rotti or Pit Bull, it will be one of the top stories. The dogs get a bad rap and unfortunate incidents like this only increase the bias against them.

stlrz d
05-24-2009, 01:26 AM
Got something that backs that?

Look up dog bit fatalities. What you'll find is that most are related to Pit Bulls and Rotts.

You clearly want to ignore it but it is true.

Most people I know who own Pits are insecure. Like the 50 year old man who works a desk job but drives a diesel truck with dual tires and not one scratch on the bed from work.

I don't see anything that backs the 9 out of 10 times assertion that you just threw out there.

rpmpit - to further your point on the Golden Retriever.

http://caveat.blogware.com/blog/_archiv ... 05154.html (http://caveat.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2007/3/14/2805154.html)


GOLDEN RETRIEVER SENDS TODDLER TO HOSPITAL
by Selma on Wed 14 Mar 2007 12:22 PM EDT

Like my headline?

Yesterday, there were two reports of an incident in Oshawa (just east of Toronto). A little girl was bitten by a Golden Retriever and may need plastic surgery to rebuild her face.

Here are the two reports:

City TV: Three Year Old Child Mauled by Dog

Toronto Sun: Girl, 3, Bitten by Golden Retriever

Both of these media outlets have been sensible about the whole dog issue all along. I wouldn't say they've really understood the issue but at least they have stepped up and voiced concerns over the Ontario dog breed ownership ban.

Still, I'm not satisfied with their reports because of the misinformation and the lost opportunity to educate the public.

The City report opens like this:

It's usually the perfect combination - a loving youngster and a gentle dog.

But something went horribly wrong at an Oshawa home Tuesday and now a three-year-old girl is facing the possibility of having plastic surgery.

Well, what went wrong is that the dog was just staying with the neighbours and the little kid was obviously bugging the dog somehow, maybe in an unsupervised situation.

Police say the youngster was being cared for by neighbours at 506 Lanlark Drive just after 1pm, and was petting a normally friendly Golden Retriever.

<snip>

The dog has been seized by animal control and those who know the creature are baffled. Golden Retrievers are generally among the most gentle of dogs and are usually excellent with children.

<snip>

I wonder who they consulted for this bizarre opinion on 'gentle' dogs who are 'excellent' with children? It wouldn't be anyone I know. It almost sounds like the type of thing self-styled expert Stanley Coren might spout - after all, he is unaware of how often dogs from the retriever group bite kids.

Dogs which are gentle and excellent with children are dogs who have been trained to be quiet and who have been exposed to children from puppyhood. As usual, breed is irrelevant.

I note that the neighbour's son was away on a March break holiday and that he is the owner of the dog. If he's down south, then he's likely a student which means he's busy and he's young.

You can bet that if the dog had been a DOLA dog, this report would have been written very differently. We wouldn't have heard how the number one family pet in the US, the American Pit Bull terrier, a breed with a remarkable record as a child's companion, 'baffled' everyone by reacting violently to the unwanted advances of a little child. Oh no, it would have been quite a different report.

Anyway, you can read, so let's move on to the Sun report.

A three-year-old Oshawa girl was transported to The Hospital For Sick Children Tuesday afternoon after a Golden Retriever bit her in the cheek.

The girl was at a neighbour's home in the Rossland Rd. W and Thornton Rd. area when the dog attacked her around the noon hour. The neighbour did not own the dog, but was looking after the Retriever.

The girl's injuries are not life-threatening.

"It wasn't a big 'pit bull' type of attack or anything, but it was one bite and the child ended up with some serious damage," Durham police Staff-Sgt. Bruce Covack said. "It's a nasty gash."

<snip>

I don't know where they dug up Staff Sergeant Covack but he sounds like a bit of a twit. Obviously, it wasn't a 'pit bull' attack, it was a Golden Retriever attack. Talk about stating the obvious. I guess SS Covack is unaware that there have been a tiny handful of attacks on children by DOLA dogs in Ontario but that bites by retrievers, shepherds, collies, spaniels, and other so-called friendly types have always been quite high.

I just wonder why they either make things up or quote people who are not well informed when they have a whole group of mavens whom they could consult. They know who the mavens are because they write in to correct errors on a regular basis

The important message that this story conveys has been lost.

Don't leave tiny children alone with dogs, even your own dog, unless someone is there to supervise them. This protects both the dog and the child - the last thing you want is for your dog to have a negative experience with a child - keep it positive for everybody.

Teach them to let dogs come to them. Show them the proper way to introduce themselves to a dog. Insist that they treat all animals with respect. Never make assumptions about dogs. Explain to them that a wagging tail doesn't mean a dog is friendly - it depends on how that tail is being wagged. Don't let them approach a strange dog unless the owner is present and gives permission. If the owner seems a bit odd or the dog looks anxious, don't encourage your child to interact with that dog - there's always another one.

There are no friendly breeds or unfriendly breeds. There are dogs who have been managed properly and dogs who haven't.

steelers43
05-24-2009, 12:06 PM
[quote="stlrz d":2r5ed0pw]
Got something that backs that?

Look up dog bit fatalities. What you'll find is that most are related to Pit Bulls and Rotts.

You clearly want to ignore it but it is true.

Most people I know who own Pits are insecure. Like the 50 year old man who works a desk job but drives a diesel truck with dual tires and not one scratch on the bed from work.

I don't see anything that backs the 9 out of 10 times assertion that you just threw out there.[/quote:2r5ed0pw]

9 out of 10? Is that what you took from me saying most?

MOST bit fatalities(meaning over 50%) are related to Pits or Rotts.

You clearly love the animal. Hopefully you don't have kids.

Slapstick
05-24-2009, 02:36 PM
While Pit Bulls and Rottweilers may not necessarily be more prone to attacking people, the reason that such attacks make the headlines is the fact that Pit Bulls and Rottweilers are large, powerful dogs that attack viciously when provoked and are capable of causing a lot of damage...the fact that they are large and powerful dog are the very reason that people like Harrison and Joey Porter own them...

Yes, you can have a vicious Poodle, as another poster mentioned...but an attack by a poodle will not cause damage on the same scale as a Pit Bull or Rotti...

Even the Golden Retriever attack quoted didn't cause life threatening injuries...

I also don't buy that the owners are entirely at fault for the attacks...while I acknowledge that the likelihood is there, I also know that dogs, while domesticated, are still animals...no matter how well trained or friendly, an animal can just go off...it's true...it doesn't make the animal bad...nor does it guarantee that it will ever happen again...but, the possibility is there...

A devoted cat can scratch you...a favorite pet bird can peck you...even a hamster can bite you for no apparent reason...

Pit Bulls and Rottis just do more damage...

Mister Pittsburgh
05-24-2009, 06:13 PM
If you have children, and let them near pitbulls, let alone own one as a pet....you are stupid. :2c

Snatch98
05-24-2009, 06:15 PM
Sad. That's all.

True.

Pet owners and children of pet owners are attacked by their own animals all the time...even if they aren't pit bull owners.

If you have kids and a pit bull, you are an idiot. It's really that simple. I don't know the stats but they have to be far worse for pit bulls than other animals.

I would never own one of those dogs and I am a huge dog lover.


Fatalities yes, dog bites no and the statistics are ridiculously skewed and honestly unfair. The problem with Pit Bulls is the thug culture that attaches themselves to the breed. I've had at least one my entire life and the first my family got when I was 7. He was actually a rescue and 12 weeks old. My great aunt found him in her garden in Unity on the outskirts of plum. My dad initially didn't want anything to do with him because of the stereotype but my sister and I were in love and my dad broke down and went for the idea. Now it's all he chooses to own even though my family currently has a Boston Terrier.

Great, GREAT dogs with a horrible stereotype. You're either a responsible pet owner or you aren't and the irresponsible owners are the ones that encounter problems. I was just back in town this past week and had to bring my two dogs along. I have a 11 month old Doberman male and a almost 2 year old Chocolate lab that showed up at our front door last thanksgiving 30 pounds underweight. He's also a male. It was my two dogs, my parents 2 year old male Pit Bull, 11 year old female and the just over 1 Boston Terrier also male. No issues for a entire week and they aren't around each other often. It's not the breeds fault but rather the negligent owners. Blame the deed, not the breed. PERIOD.

Snatch98
05-24-2009, 06:18 PM
Sad. That's all.

True.

Pet owners and children of pet owners are attacked by their own animals all the time...even if they aren't pit bull owners.

If you have kids and a pit bull, you are an idiot. It's really that simple. I don't know the stats but they have to be far worse for pit bulls than other animals.

I would never own one of those dogs and I am a huge dog lover.

i agree some what. i wouldnt chance it but people who have both pits and kids are not idiots. its all how you raise a dog. some of the nicest dogs i have known have been pits. what about guns? are people who own guns and have kids idiots too? i dont think so. as long as your smart about it

I don't agree at all with that. Pit Bulls are a bad breed imo. They snap all the time. Sure there will be nice one's but whenever you hear of this, it is typically a Pit Bull. Guns? I have guns and hunt. My kid knows how to shoot them and be safe with them. I don't worry about my guns jumping out of a locked gun case and attacking my daughter.

If you have kids and a Pit Bull, you may not be an idiot but you are definitely not the sharpest tool in the shed.

They don't snap all the time. Christ I could really go off right now and make this thread 40 pages long but I'm not going to waste my time. It's a owner problem, not a breed problem and there are rescue groups all over Pittsburgh that dedicate their time SPECIFICALLY to the betterment of the breed. The Pittsburgh Humane society and Animal Friends to name two in the greater Pittsburgh area. Don't run your mouth if you don't know a thing about the breed besides what you read in the newspaper. You routinely became obnoxious on the old Pittsburgh live site, I'm not surprised to see you back to your obnoxious ways on this site. I was legitimately bummed that you made your way over here. You give me a headache.

Chadman
05-24-2009, 09:35 PM
The important message that this story conveys has been lost.

Don't leave tiny children alone with dogs, even your own dog, unless someone is there to supervise them. This protects both the dog and the child - the last thing you want is for your dog to have a negative experience with a child - keep it positive for everybody.

Teach them to let dogs come to them. Show them the proper way to introduce themselves to a dog. Insist that they treat all animals with respect. Never make assumptions about dogs. Explain to them that a wagging tail doesn't mean a dog is friendly - it depends on how that tail is being wagged. Don't let them approach a strange dog unless the owner is present and gives permission. If the owner seems a bit odd or the dog looks anxious, don't encourage your child to interact with that dog - there's always another one.

There are no friendly breeds or unfriendly breeds. There are dogs who have been managed properly and dogs who haven't.

Ok, I'll drop the 3rd person for this topic as it is one close to my heart.

I'm a dog owner- have 3- Golden Retriever, Lab & Jack Russell.

My wife & I expect our first child to be born this week or next.

I recently ran for local government (and lost- but I gave it a run) with "Responsible Pet Ownership" as one of my key issues.

As a responsible pet owner, I don't let friends or family kids alone with my dogs. I'll generally be the one that goes outside with the kids to play with the dogs.
My dogs have never (well, the Jack Russell did bite my finger as a 6 month old) shown any aggression towards anybody. But I still won't leave children or small adults alone with them, simply because situations can turn ugly at any time.

While on the campaign trail I was attacked by two cross breed rotti/staffordshire bull terriers- had my arm cut open & a bite on my leg. Now, most people think dog attacks on polititians are funny- they must have good taste these dogs, right? But I took the attack as calmly as I could, helped the owners gather the animals back up, and then explained to them what, in my opinion, is their responsibilities. They were angry with the dogs.

I wasn't.

You can't 'reason' with dogs. You can't 'explain' things to dogs. You can with humans & children. Pet owners need to take the responsibility that comes with animal ownership seriously- don't allow the animals to be placed in a situation that could potentially turn sour. Parents also have a responsibility- pet owners or not- to not allow their children to be left in a potentially dangerous situation.

All dogs can bite. All dogs can harm. In my opinion though- no dog is, by nature, dangerous. It's only as dangerous as you, the human, allow it to be.

Don't leave kids alone with dogs. Don't let dogs wander the streets. Don't allow strangers to walk into your yard without warning them of your animal.

You follow those procedures, you reduce the instances of animal attacks.

As for the destruction of the animal after the attack- what a terrible waste of life. After all, it was the human that allowed the situation to transpire. And the animal is only doing what it would do naturally. It's like setting up a posse to round up a crocodile (aligator for you lot) or a shark after an attack- to what purpose? As a warning to other crocs & sharks? Does anyone think they understand?

If a dog bites a child once- is it a 'dangerous' animal? It's hardly a pattern of violence- a one off attack.

Sorry- it might all sound a bit jumbled. As you can imagine, with Carrie ready to pop, my mind is a little....occupied. But don't simply blame dogs. They can't be held solely responsible.

But Silverback's dog will be destroyed, and the Harrisons will be free to get another pet.

Where is the justice in that?

stlrz d
05-24-2009, 10:01 PM
[quote="stlrz d":1lg2yzn9]
Got something that backs that?

Look up dog bit fatalities. What you'll find is that most are related to Pit Bulls and Rotts.

You clearly want to ignore it but it is true.

Most people I know who own Pits are insecure. Like the 50 year old man who works a desk job but drives a diesel truck with dual tires and not one scratch on the bed from work.

I don't see anything that backs the 9 out of 10 times assertion that you just threw out there.

9 out of 10? Is that what you took from me saying most?

MOST bit fatalities(meaning over 50%) are related to Pits or Rotts.

You clearly love the animal. Hopefully you don't have kids.[/quote:1lg2yzn9]

You didn't say most. Your words were 9 out of 10.

I don't own any type of dog. It's got nothing to me owning a dog.

I have a problem with people spreading misinformation and presenting "facts" that are not facts.

Jooser
05-24-2009, 10:53 PM
I have to weigh in on this discussion. I don't own a PB, but I do own a couple of dogs that put the 'Bull' into 'Pitbull'. Some here know I raise and show English Bulldogs. I also happen to have 3 kids. Now, while you don't hear about EB's attacking or mauling kids, they are still a powerful breed with an incredibly hard, bone-crunching bite. They are game dogs like PBs and they are very competitive. But, they absolutely adore my children and don't know a stranger. My point here is this, the breed is what you make it. Dogs don't just snap. Most times there's something there physically or psychologically that you don't always know about. I once read a study about the PB breed that stated they were prone to brain tumors. That alone could explain some of the errant behavior that's seen in them. But, that's a little too simple. I think their negative stereotype is just bad publicity. Given the amount of PBs that are owned by Americans, PB attacks are VERY rare. One is more likely to be bitten by the family German Shephard or Golden Retriever. The only problem is that those dogs aren't gamey and tend to bite and retreat. I think that those people that want to cast a dark image on the breed are narrow minded and do not see the full spectrum of characteristics that the breed has to offer. PBs are an American original, I've known several of whom that have belonged to friends and they have all been admirable family pets. I guess I'm stupid for supporting them, but that's the way I feel about it. -Joos

steelers43
05-25-2009, 04:04 AM
[quote=steelers43][quote="stlrz d":3tvtuefx]
Got something that backs that?

Look up dog bit fatalities. What you'll find is that most are related to Pit Bulls and Rotts.

You clearly want to ignore it but it is true.

Most people I know who own Pits are insecure. Like the 50 year old man who works a desk job but drives a diesel truck with dual tires and not one scratch on the bed from work.

I don't see anything that backs the 9 out of 10 times assertion that you just threw out there.

9 out of 10? Is that what you took from me saying most?

MOST bit fatalities(meaning over 50%) are related to Pits or Rotts.

You clearly love the animal. Hopefully you don't have kids.[/quote:3tvtuefx]

You didn't say most. Your words were 9 out of 10.

I don't own any type of dog. It's got nothing to me owning a dog.

I have a problem with people spreading misinformation and presenting "facts" that are not facts.[/quote:3tvtuefx]
where did I say that? I don't see it and don't care to read the entire thread to see if I did in deed say it.

steelers43
05-25-2009, 04:09 AM
I have to weigh in on this discussion. I don't own a PB, but I do own a couple of dogs that put the 'Bull' into 'Pitbull'. Some here know I raise and show English Bulldogs. I also happen to have 3 kids. Now, while you don't hear about EB's attacking or mauling kids, they are still a powerful breed with an incredibly hard, bone-crunching bite. They are game dogs like PBs and they are very competitive. But, they absolutely adore my children and don't know a stranger. My point here is this, the breed is what you make it. Dogs don't just snap. Most times there's something there physically or psychologically that you don't always know about. I once read a study about the PB breed that stated they were prone to brain tumors. That alone could explain some of the errant behavior that's seen in them. But, that's a little too simple. I think their negative stereotype is just bad publicity. Given the amount of PBs that are owned by Americans, PB attacks are VERY rare. One is more likely to be bitten by the family German Shephard or Golden Retriever. The only problem is that those dogs aren't gamey and tend to bite and retreat. I think that those people that want to cast a dark image on the breed are narrow minded and do not see the full spectrum of characteristics that the breed has to offer. PBs are an American original, I've known several of whom that have belonged to friends and they have all been admirable family pets. I guess I'm stupid for supporting them, but that's the way I feel about it. -Joos

65% of all dog bite fatalites due to Pit or Rott's so the stats don't back up your theory. They do just snap and yes it is many reasons. As you said tumors and I have also heard overbreeding has led to their brains outgrowing their skulls causing a constant headache effect. Who knows. Bottomline, if you have a pit and kids, you're retarded or a complete idiot.

NorthCoast
05-25-2009, 08:38 AM
It may be the case the PBs bite humans no more often than other breeds. But the problem is the type of biting that occurs. PBs are relentless when they attack....very much like killer bees. They won't release and their jaws are more powerful than the average dog breed. This is why they do not belong in households with children. Most other breeds bite and release (unless trained to do otherwise). I scratch my head and wonder if owning a PB is some strange 'status' symbol, there are so many other breeds without these problems.

RuthlessBurgher
05-25-2009, 10:02 AM
We might as well take these 4 pages of dog discussion and turn them into an SAT analogy question.

A chihuahua bite is to a pit bull bite as:

a) my cat's scratch is to Siegfried and Roy's cat's scratch
b) a Deion Sanders hit is to a Ryan Clark hit
c) a Randy Moss block is to a Hines Ward block
d) all of the above

stlrz d
05-25-2009, 10:02 AM
Millions of people have these animals as family pets and have zero incidents.

What's "stupid" or "retarded" or "ignorant" or "insert derogatory adjective here" is people insisting that they are right that people with kids shouldn't have Pit Bulls as pets.

If you've got enough time to spend with the animal to make sure it's trained and socialized properly there shouldn't be any problems...just like with any other breed.

And in this case, we're talking about a 2 year old. Any medium to large sized dog is capable of killing a child of that age.

Snatch98
05-25-2009, 01:55 PM
I have to weigh in on this discussion. I don't own a PB, but I do own a couple of dogs that put the 'Bull' into 'Pitbull'. Some here know I raise and show English Bulldogs. I also happen to have 3 kids. Now, while you don't hear about EB's attacking or mauling kids, they are still a powerful breed with an incredibly hard, bone-crunching bite. They are game dogs like PBs and they are very competitive. But, they absolutely adore my children and don't know a stranger. My point here is this, the breed is what you make it. Dogs don't just snap. Most times there's something there physically or psychologically that you don't always know about. I once read a study about the PB breed that stated they were prone to brain tumors. That alone could explain some of the errant behavior that's seen in them. But, that's a little too simple. I think their negative stereotype is just bad publicity. Given the amount of PBs that are owned by Americans, PB attacks are VERY rare. One is more likely to be bitten by the family German Shephard or Golden Retriever. The only problem is that those dogs aren't gamey and tend to bite and retreat. I think that those people that want to cast a dark image on the breed are narrow minded and do not see the full spectrum of characteristics that the breed has to offer. PBs are an American original, I've known several of whom that have belonged to friends and they have all been admirable family pets. I guess I'm stupid for supporting them, but that's the way I feel about it. -Joos

65% of all dog bite fatalites due to Pit or Rott's so the stats don't back up your theory. They do just snap and yes it is many reasons. As you said tumors and I have also heard overbreeding has led to their brains outgrowing their skulls causing a constant headache effect. Who knows. Bottomline, if you have a pit and kids, you're retarded or a complete idiot.


43,

Wow. Tumors in their brains? Constant headaches? Brains outgrowing their skulls? Do you realize the Pit Bull is one of the oldest and most storied breeds in American History? Go back and read about the breed during the WWII era and the amount of work the breed put in dedication to the human race. If the breed had those sort of genetic problems it would be no more. How the hell can a brain outgrow a skull without the animal in question dieing or at the very least experiencing complete paralysis?

Going a different way why do Pit Bulls or more specifically the American Staffordshire Terrier (Pit Bull) routinely outscore Golden Retrievers when testing for temperament? You're in this thread spewing random B.S because you can and I guess that's fine but by basing your argument off of skewed bite fatality statistics and completely ridiculous wives tales is bordering the ridiculous. Do you realize just how many breeds are mistaken for Pit Bulls? when those bite statistics are reported it's something like 20 different breeds being lumped in to the Pit Bull heading, ultimately because any dog with any sort of muscle mass and a larger head is deemed a pit bull.

Here is a test specifically highlighting that fact.

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

Either way don't roll up on this message board spewing a bunch of unfounded BS unless you can back it up and based on your previous response you can't back it up. The Pit Bull has one problem and it's a OWNER PROBLEM. It's not the breeds fault the thug culture has attached it's self to one of the most beloved dogs in American History and made it in to some sort of fabled oversized brain death machine (off base by the way)

One negligent owner + a very strong, head strong canine + abuse and neglect = one angry dog. AND even then most can be rehabilitated. You're an idiot and this thread showcases it for everyone. Although this isn't some sort of new development with you. We were all very aware of your lack of intelligence before you decided to migrate from Pittsburgh live.

Snatch98
05-25-2009, 02:00 PM
It may be the case the PBs bite humans no more often than other breeds. But the problem is the type of biting that occurs. PBs are relentless when they attack....very much like killer bees. They won't release and their jaws are more powerful than the average dog breed. This is why they do not belong in households with children. Most other breeds bite and release (unless trained to do otherwise). I scratch my head and wonder if owning a PB is some strange 'status' symbol, there are so many other breeds without these problems.


A properly treated Pit Bull is one of the best pets anyone could ever own. Their high pain tolerance actually makes them a perfect pet for small children because a poke, pull, prod isn't going to set them off like it may a smaller, less tolerant breed. Go read the breed profile, research temperament testing and you'll see just how off base your assessment really is...all of this isn't anything new. We as Americans have been judging things we don't understand since the beginning of time. I don't expect it to be any different with Pit Bulls. Ignorance breeds ignorance and unfortunately there are a few very ignorant individuals in this thread. No skin off my a$$ either way. I will always own at least one and will certainly raise my children when I have them with at least one. Great, great dogs.

steelers43
05-25-2009, 02:17 PM
Millions of people have these animals as family pets and have zero incidents.

What's "stupid" or "retarded" or "ignorant" or "insert derogatory adjective here" is people insisting that they are right that people with kids shouldn't have Pit Bulls as pets.

If you've got enough time to spend with the animal to make sure it's trained and socialized properly there shouldn't be any problems...just like with any other breed.

And in this case, we're talking about a 2 year old. Any medium to large sized dog is capable of killing a child of that age.

As a parent, you typically find their safety as the number one priority in your life. Of course, today there are all kinds of parents that don't care or put this as their priority.

Any good parent would not have an animal around them such as a Pit who could go off and kill them at anytime. It's bad parenting in my opinion. You may disagree and if you have kids I hope nothing every happens but remember, it only takes once and you're visiting your kids grave the rest of your life. Not something I would want to have to live with just because I had the need for a "macho" dog.

Snatch98
05-25-2009, 02:29 PM
Millions of people have these animals as family pets and have zero incidents.

What's "stupid" or "retarded" or "ignorant" or "insert derogatory adjective here" is people insisting that they are right that people with kids shouldn't have Pit Bulls as pets.

If you've got enough time to spend with the animal to make sure it's trained and socialized properly there shouldn't be any problems...just like with any other breed.

And in this case, we're talking about a 2 year old. Any medium to large sized dog is capable of killing a child of that age.

As a parent, you typically find their safety as the number one priority in your life. Of course, today there are all kinds of parents that don't care or put this as their priority.

Any good parent would not have an animal around them such as a Pit who could go off and kill them at anytime. It's bad parenting in my opinion. You may disagree and if you have kids I hope nothing every happens but remember, it only takes once and your visiting your kids grave the rest of your life. Not something I would want to have to live with just because I had the need for a "macho" dog.

You aren't reading a thing I'm typing are you? or are you really this dense? Either way I'm done with the thread. I said before my first post I wasn't going to get caught up so before I do I'm going to bow out. You are absolutely clueless when it comes to this subject just like a vast majority of the population that thinks they understand the breed. Oh wait their brains are to big for their skulls and they get headaches that send them on killing sprees lol. Thanks for the laugh with that one. I'll be in and out of the thread until at dies to at least read your mindless psycho babble.

EDIT:

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g30/Daburgh/HPIM0336.jpg

One of my families mindless baby killers at 6 months old outside Pet Co. in Monroeville. My parents had just picked him up from the Pittsburgh Humane society hence the makeshift leash. My mom forgot to bring one along. He mauled a few small children and a midget immediately after leaving the vehicle. HIDE YOUR KIDS!!!!!!!!!!!!

steelers43
05-25-2009, 02:42 PM
Think what you want. I hope if you have this type of dog and a child, you never have an episode of snapping. Seems most of them happen when a kid starts crying. I wouldn't want the worry as a parent and find the dogs to be untrustworthy. Many think it's cool to have this type of dog. I'm not one of them and would NEVER own one.

I wouldn't want to have to constantly worry if my kid starts crying that the dog is going to tear it's face apart or kill my kid but that's just me.

And no, I don't read anyone's words that are here to defend Pits. It's proven, they snap, they kill. If you want to risk that on your mind, go for it.

I prefer living life without worry and hardships, not adding to my worries and I don't need a big dog to make me feel tougher.

Snatch98
05-25-2009, 03:19 PM
Think what you want. I hope if you have this type of dog and a child, you never have an episode of snapping. Seems most of them happen when a kid starts crying. I wouldn't want the worry as a parent and find the dogs to be untrustworthy. Many think it's cool to have this type of dog. I'm not one of them and would NEVER own one.

I wouldn't want to have to constantly worry if my kid starts crying that the dog is going to tear it's face apart or kill my kid but that's just me.

And no, I don't read anyone's words that are here to defend Pits. It's proven, they snap, they kill. If you want to risk that on your mind, go for it.

I prefer living life without worry and hardships, not adding to my worries and I don't need a big dog to make me feel tougher.


Ignorance is bliss and your as ignorant as they come. I'll send you a months supply of tin foil so you can make some new hats for yourself and the rest of your immediate family. I'll worry for your children if and when you have some because they will no doubt be the most sheltered kids in the neighborhood. Don't discuss what you don't understand. Now Pit bulls snap when kids cry lol. My dad just called me from Pittsburgh the Pit Bull pictured above Conan (Conan O'Brien) is in the basement constructing a doomsday device made of mutilated baby parts and C4. He's also currently developing a plan to overthrow the state governments up and down the east coast in a attempt to secede from the United States and develop a safe haven for child maulings.

steelers43
05-25-2009, 03:27 PM
Think what you want. I hope if you have this type of dog and a child, you never have an episode of snapping. Seems most of them happen when a kid starts crying. I wouldn't want the worry as a parent and find the dogs to be untrustworthy. Many think it's cool to have this type of dog. I'm not one of them and would NEVER own one.

I wouldn't want to have to constantly worry if my kid starts crying that the dog is going to tear it's face apart or kill my kid but that's just me.

And no, I don't read anyone's words that are here to defend Pits. It's proven, they snap, they kill. If you want to risk that on your mind, go for it.

I prefer living life without worry and hardships, not adding to my worries and I don't need a big dog to make me feel tougher.


Ignorance is bliss and your as ignorant as they come. I'll send you a months supply of tin foil so you can make some new hats for yourself and the rest of your immediate family. I'll worry for your children if and when you have some because they will no doubt be the most sheltered kids in the neighborhood. Don't discuss what you don't understand. Now Pit bulls snap when kids cry lol. My dad just called me from Pittsburgh the Pit Bull pictured above Conan (Conan O'Brien) is in the basement constructing a doomsday device made of mutilated baby parts and C4. He's also currently developing a plan to overthrow the state governments up and down the east coast in a attempt to secede from the United States and develop a safe haven for child maulings.


If you want to get defensive and call me ignorant, at least know the proper use of "your" and "you're."

Best of luck with your dog. I can see the wealth of knowledge the dog has awarded you.

steelers43
05-25-2009, 03:32 PM
2008 U.S. Dog Bite Fatality Statistics
Fatal Dog Attack Statistics
DogsBite.org recorded 23 fatal dog attacks in 2008. The last year the CDC recorded dog bite fatalities by breed was 2001. Due to pressures from animal advocacy groups, dog fancying groups and pit bull special interest groups, the CDC stopped recording these deaths by dog breed. The only other known entity that continues to track this vital information is Animal People News. DogsBite.org has joined in this effort.

2008 Dog Bite Fatalities

23 U.S. fatal dog attacks occurred in 2008. Pit bull type dogs were responsible for 65% (15). Pit bulls make up approximately 2-9% of the U.S. dog population.
In 2008, only one U.S. citizen over the age of 3 was killed by a breed other than a pit bull. 74-year old Lorraine May was fatally mauled by her two dogs: an Australian shepherd-mix and a golden retriever-mix.
70% of the attacks occurred to children (11 years and under) and 30% occurred to adults (21 years and older). Of the children, half (8) occurred to ages 1 and younger.
39% of fatal attacks in 2008 involved multiple dogs; 9% involved chained dogs.
78% of the attacks occurred on owner property and 22% off owner property. All off property attacks (5) that resulted in death were attributed to pit bulls.
61% of the victims were male; 39% of the victims were female. Of the male victims, over half (8) were 3 years and younger.
In at least three fatal attacks, a grandmother was watching a child aged 2 and younger. Two of these attacks occurred in Las Vegas; both involved pet pit bulls.

http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2009/01/20 ... stics.html (http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2009/01/2008-us-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html)

Also, if you go and read on attacks of children, you'll find many of them start with the child crying, the dog hearing it and snapping.

You were right on one thing, ignorance is bliss.

You then find people like this still defending the dog.

http://www.pitbulllovers.com/pitbull-at ... eadly.html (http://www.pitbulllovers.com/pitbull-attacks-deadly.html)

So we shoud not blame the dog, start information groups, not allow our children around the dogs alone, etc. but there is nothing wrong with the dogs?

These types of people should be made sterile. They are not good for the betterment of the future of this planet.

Djfan
05-25-2009, 04:45 PM
So, how is the kid? Harrison? The mom?

Think we're well off track here.

SteelCzar76
05-25-2009, 07:21 PM
American Pit Bull terriers are game with a very high prey drive as a product of genetic manipulation by the very same people whom demonize them now. But how often do you hear of them attacking adult owners whom have raised them since pups ? The truth is that they are some of the most loving, affectionate and intelligent breeds of dogs in existence.

The is no such thing as a "bad breed" of Dog. Just simply reckless, misguided, insecure and or irresponsible owners. Stat people,...do your homework,..APBT/AMSTAFF'S do not attack people any more often then many of the other so called "wholesome" breeds. It's just that because of the inherent power of the breed they do the most damage when it happens,...and thus get all of the "headlines".

Most adult dogs in general have to be supervised around young children with whom they were not puppies around. It's a matter of pack hierarchy in the canine mind. They often view children as equals to be challenged and or overcome in terms of "pack" status.

Bottom line,...one should educate themselves about animal nature via study and experience before they own any type of creature as a pet,......

steelers43
05-25-2009, 07:51 PM
Why anyone with a child around would want to have such stringent training to their pet so they don't have to worry about their child being killed is beyond me.

stlrz d
05-25-2009, 09:39 PM
If you want to get defensive and call me ignorant, at least know the proper use of "your" and "you're."

Best of luck with your dog. I can see the wealth of knowledge the dog has awarded you.

Say what?




As a parent, you typically find their safety as the number one priority in your life. Of course, today there are all kinds of parents that don't care or put this as their priority.

Any good parent would not have an animal around them such as a Pit who could go off and kill them at anytime. It's bad parenting in my opinion. You may disagree and if you have kids I hope nothing every happens but remember, it only takes once and your visiting your kids grave the rest of your life. Not something I would want to have to live with just because I had the need for a "macho" dog.

:lol:

snatch98 - Thanks for the lol's! That was some good stuff there...building tinfoil hats out of mutilated baby parts and C4! :D

Looks like someone else is just begging for me to break out the Holiday Inn Express sign again. ;)

Snatch98
05-25-2009, 09:54 PM
Think what you want. I hope if you have this type of dog and a child, you never have an episode of snapping. Seems most of them happen when a kid starts crying. I wouldn't want the worry as a parent and find the dogs to be untrustworthy. Many think it's cool to have this type of dog. I'm not one of them and would NEVER own one.

I wouldn't want to have to constantly worry if my kid starts crying that the dog is going to tear it's face apart or kill my kid but that's just me.

And no, I don't read anyone's words that are here to defend Pits. It's proven, they snap, they kill. If you want to risk that on your mind, go for it.

I prefer living life without worry and hardships, not adding to my worries and I don't need a big dog to make me feel tougher.


Ignorance is bliss and your as ignorant as they come. I'll send you a months supply of tin foil so you can make some new hats for yourself and the rest of your immediate family. I'll worry for your children if and when you have some because they will no doubt be the most sheltered kids in the neighborhood. Don't discuss what you don't understand. Now Pit bulls snap when kids cry lol. My dad just called me from Pittsburgh the Pit Bull pictured above Conan (Conan O'Brien) is in the basement constructing a doomsday device made of mutilated baby parts and C4. He's also currently developing a plan to overthrow the state governments up and down the east coast in a attempt to secede from the United States and develop a safe haven for child maulings.


If you want to get defensive and call me ignorant, at least know the proper use of "your" and "you're."

Best of luck with your dog. I can see the wealth of knowledge the dog has awarded you.

A classic argument deflection typically used by the cowardly that don't have the means upstairs to defend their position. Congrats on the you're police. Yes thank you I know the difference. Now as far as my wealth of knowledge it's obvious you are absolutely clueless and turned this thread in to your <---- Correct use "bitter bobby" soap box. The brain tumor bit along with the skulls growing larger than the brain theory may be two of the least intelligent things I've read when this argument often arises. I really will send you a months supply of tin foil so you and your <---- Correct use family can make doomsday hats and prepare for the Pit Bull invasion. Are you even a dog owner? if so what breed of do do you own?

In the end you're <--- correct use still going to be the same idiot that often stumbles on to a subject he/she has zero business arguing about. Mention to your <---correct use vet if you have one the tumor/brain theory and see if he/she doesn't laugh you right out of their office. Oh and I have ocean front property in Idaho I want to sell you.

Snatch98
05-25-2009, 10:00 PM
Why anyone with a child around would want to have such stringent training to their pet so they don't have to worry about their child being killed is beyond me.

Stringent training isn't required, simply responsible pet ownership which unfortunately isn't something a lot of dog owners stick too. Socializing your dog from a early age with as much as possible, making sure he or she is supervised and out of trouble and has a pretty firm understanding of right and wrong. You're either a responsible pet owner or you aren't and the irresponsible pet owners of the world think all they need to do to have a well mannered pet is feed them, let them outside and pet them every once in a while. It doesn't work that way.

EDIT: And Stlrz D anytime lol.

steelers43
05-25-2009, 10:16 PM
A classic argument deflection typically used by the cowardly that don't have the means upstairs to defend their position. Congrats on the you're police. Yes thank you I know the difference. Now as far as my wealth of knowledge it's obvious you are absolutely clueless and turned this thread in to your <---- Correct use "bitter bobby" soap box. The brain tumor bit along with the skulls growing larger than the brain theory may be two of the least intelligent things I've read when this argument often arises. I really will send you a months supply of tin foil so you and your <---- Correct use family can make doomsday hats and prepare for the Pit Bull invasion. Are you even a dog owner? if so what breed of do do you own?

In the end you're <--- correct use still going to be the same idiot that often stumbles on to a subject he/she has zero business arguing about. Mention to your <---correct use vet if you have one the tumor/brain theory and see if he/she doesn't laugh you right out of their office. Oh and I have ocean front property in Idaho I want to sell you.

anytime.

And I'm ignorant? Who is the one ignoring facts? Not me.

And to suggest the training required and/or if you will ever feel comfortable with kids around is simply moronic, at best.

I guess the best way to describe them, according to you, is to say they are great pets, providing you train them, monitor them and hope like crazy they never snap.

Yep, that's just what I want my kids around. LOL. Hopefully, you don't have kids.

Snatch98
05-25-2009, 10:19 PM
A classic argument deflection typically used by the cowardly that don't have the means upstairs to defend their position. Congrats on the you're police. Yes thank you I know the difference. Now as far as my wealth of knowledge it's obvious you are absolutely clueless and turned this thread in to your <---- Correct use "bitter bobby" soap box. The brain tumor bit along with the skulls growing larger than the brain theory may be two of the least intelligent things I've read when this argument often arises. I really will send you a months supply of tin foil so you and your <---- Correct use family can make doomsday hats and prepare for the Pit Bull invasion. Are you even a dog owner? if so what breed of do do you own?

In the end you're <--- correct use still going to be the same idiot that often stumbles on to a subject he/she has zero business arguing about. Mention to your <---correct use vet if you have one the tumor/brain theory and see if he/she doesn't laugh you right out of their office. Oh and I have ocean front property in Idaho I want to sell you.

anytime.

And I'm ignorant? Who is the one ignoring facts? Not me.

And to suggest the training required and/or if you will ever feel comfortable with kids around is simply moronic, at best.

who said anything about required training? All DOGS REQUIRE TRAINING, PERIOD. It's no different for Pit Bulls. I've also refuted your ridiculous facts on more than one occasion but you chose to ignore my initial posts. I'm not the one to argue this with because I'll bury you under so much information damning to your argument you won't know whether to sh.it or go blind. Give it a rest.

steelers43
05-25-2009, 10:22 PM
A classic argument deflection typically used by the cowardly that don't have the means upstairs to defend their position. Congrats on the you're police. Yes thank you I know the difference. Now as far as my wealth of knowledge it's obvious you are absolutely clueless and turned this thread in to your <---- Correct use "bitter bobby" soap box. The brain tumor bit along with the skulls growing larger than the brain theory may be two of the least intelligent things I've read when this argument often arises. I really will send you a months supply of tin foil so you and your <---- Correct use family can make doomsday hats and prepare for the Pit Bull invasion. Are you even a dog owner? if so what breed of do do you own?

In the end you're <--- correct use still going to be the same idiot that often stumbles on to a subject he/she has zero business arguing about. Mention to your <---correct use vet if you have one the tumor/brain theory and see if he/she doesn't laugh you right out of their office. Oh and I have ocean front property in Idaho I want to sell you.

anytime.

And I'm ignorant? Who is the one ignoring facts? Not me.

And to suggest the training required and/or if you will ever feel comfortable with kids around is simply moronic, at best.

who said anything about required training? All DOGS REQUIRE TRAINING, PERIOD. It's no different for Pit Bulls. I've also refuted your ridiculous facts on more than one occasion but you chose to ignore my initial posts. I'm not the one to argue this with because I'll bury you under so much information damning to your argument you won't know whether to sh.it or go blind. Give it a rest.

It's no different for pitbulls? Yeah, I am so sure people buy beagles and worry about them ripping the face off of their child.

Hilarious the pure lies some will say just to try and have a debate or should I say think they do?

Housing developments and HOA's are banning these dogs for a reason. People like you are exactly why. I wouldn't want someone as clueless as you as a neighbor.

Snatch98
05-25-2009, 10:30 PM
A classic argument deflection typically used by the cowardly that don't have the means upstairs to defend their position. Congrats on the you're police. Yes thank you I know the difference. Now as far as my wealth of knowledge it's obvious you are absolutely clueless and turned this thread in to your <---- Correct use "bitter bobby" soap box. The brain tumor bit along with the skulls growing larger than the brain theory may be two of the least intelligent things I've read when this argument often arises. I really will send you a months supply of tin foil so you and your <---- Correct use family can make doomsday hats and prepare for the Pit Bull invasion. Are you even a dog owner? if so what breed of do do you own?

In the end you're <--- correct use still going to be the same idiot that often stumbles on to a subject he/she has zero business arguing about. Mention to your <---correct use vet if you have one the tumor/brain theory and see if he/she doesn't laugh you right out of their office. Oh and I have ocean front property in Idaho I want to sell you.

anytime.

And I'm ignorant? Who is the one ignoring facts? Not me.

And to suggest the training required and/or if you will ever feel comfortable with kids around is simply moronic, at best.

who said anything about required training? All DOGS REQUIRE TRAINING, PERIOD. It's no different for Pit Bulls. I've also refuted your ridiculous facts on more than one occasion but you chose to ignore my initial posts. I'm not the one to argue this with because I'll bury you under so much information damning to your argument you won't know whether to sh.it or go blind. Give it a rest.

It's no different for pitbulls? Yeah, I am so sure people buy beagles and worry about them ripping the face off of their child.

Hilarious the pure lies some will say just to try and have a debate or should I say think they do?

Housing developments and HOA's are banning these dogs for a reason. People like you are exactly why. I wouldn't want someone as clueless as you as a neighbor.

A responsible dog owner doesn't worry about his/her dog ripping the face of another human being because their dogs are under control, trained and socialized. You're the clueless one in this and Breed Specific Legislation is BS. THE ONLY TIME I've ever been bitten was by a yellow lab and I've owned a Pit Bull for over 20 years. You're an idiot. Thanks for stopping by.

stlrz d
05-25-2009, 10:32 PM
A classic argument deflection typically used by the cowardly that don't have the means upstairs to defend their position. Congrats on the you're police. Yes thank you I know the difference. Now as far as my wealth of knowledge it's obvious you are absolutely clueless and turned this thread in to your <---- Correct use "bitter bobby" soap box. The brain tumor bit along with the skulls growing larger than the brain theory may be two of the least intelligent things I've read when this argument often arises. I really will send you a months supply of tin foil so you and your <---- Correct use family can make doomsday hats and prepare for the Pit Bull invasion. Are you even a dog owner? if so what breed of do do you own?

In the end you're <--- correct use still going to be the same idiot that often stumbles on to a subject he/she has zero business arguing about. Mention to your <---correct use vet if you have one the tumor/brain theory and see if he/she doesn't laugh you right out of their office. Oh and I have ocean front property in Idaho I want to sell you.

anytime.

And I'm ignorant? Who is the one ignoring facts? Not me.

And to suggest the training required and/or if you will ever feel comfortable with kids around is simply moronic, at best.

who said anything about required training? All DOGS REQUIRE TRAINING, PERIOD. It's no different for Pit Bulls. I've also refuted your ridiculous facts on more than one occasion but you chose to ignore my initial posts. I'm not the one to argue this with because I'll bury you under so much information damning to your argument you won't know whether to sh.it or go blind. Give it a rest.

It's no different for pitbulls? Yeah, I am so sure people buy beagles and worry about them ripping the face off of their child.

Hilarious the pure lies some will say just to try and have a debate or should I say think they do?

Housing developments and HOA's are banning these dogs for a reason. People like you are exactly why. I wouldn't want someone as clueless as you as a neighbor.

A responsible dog owner doesn't worry about his/her dog ripping the face of another human being because their dogs are under control, trained and socialized. You're the clueless one in this and Breed Specific Legislation is BS. THE ONLY TIME I've ever been bitten was by a yellow lab and I've owned a Pit Bull for over 20 years. You're an idiot. Thanks for stopping by.

Correct use! :lol:

ANPSTEEL
05-25-2009, 10:44 PM
Looks like someone else is just begging for me to break out the Holiday Inn Express sign again. ;)


all time classic-

steelers43
05-26-2009, 12:09 AM
A responsible dog owner doesn't worry about his/her dog ripping the face of another human being because their dogs are under control, trained and socialized. You're the clueless one in this and Breed Specific Legislation is BS. THE ONLY TIME I've ever been bitten was by a yellow lab and I've owned a Pit Bull for over 20 years. You're an idiot. Thanks for stopping by.

I figured that much. Any person who doesn't worry about pitbulls around their or other kids is truly a moron, plain and simple. A moron who should not be allowed to have or be around kids.

And if you think HOA's and other housing communities are not banning this type of dog, you would be completely wrong yet again.

flippy
05-26-2009, 09:41 AM
People should be accountable for the actions of their pets.

If you own a Pit Bull that attacks someone, you should go to jail just as you would if you personally attacked someone. If people are capable of training and handling Pit Bulls or Rottis, that's fine, but they should also be personally accountable for their actions. If your dog snaps, it's on you.

The problem is there's no accountability for the people that own these dogs. Could you imagine how scary it would be to be JH III? Your dad beats your mom and owns a dog that could kill you. Is anyone protecting the safety of this kid?


You could make the argument that the right type of person could train a grizzly bear.

Why not bring grizzly bears into our homes and teach them to love our children?

Surely most people could take the right precautions to create a loving environment to raise a grizzly.

I would especially trust the people that didn't see the problem with bringing a grizzly into their home.

Those would be the most responsible people that would most likely take the best precautions.

SteelCzar76
05-26-2009, 12:43 PM
APBT'S/AMSTAFFS are not Bears, Wolves, Mountain lions or any other wild animal that would naturally consider humans enemies. The truth is...the proliferation of attacks by any specific breed of domestic dog are a by product of poor ownership and popularity of specific breeds in the eyes of these said type of owners during specific time periods.

Ie: In the 70's Dobies became the popular "tough" dog and henceforth a rise in Doberman attacks followed because of the increase in numbers of the dogs in the hands of idiots. This became the case for APBT/AMSTAFF'S IN THE 80'S and Rottweilers in the 90's.(which is sad in the case of APBT because throughout the early part of American history, especially the early 19th century,..APBT'S epitomized American courage, intelligence, spirit, loyalty and patriotism.)

Bottom line,..it's a powerful breed,..but with proper ownership is no more a problem than any other. Breed specific laws are bullsh#t,....much like most gun laws that restrict ownership by stand up citizens whom are not criminals nor have any desire whatsoever to engage in criminal activity.

flippy
05-26-2009, 01:06 PM
APBT'S/AMSTAFFS are not Bears, Wolves, Mountain lions or any other wild animal that would naturally consider humans enemies. The truth is...the proliferation of attacks by any specific breed of domestic dog are a by product of poor ownership and popularity of specific breeds in the eyes of these said type of owners during specific time periods.

Ie: In the 70's Dobies became the popular "tough" dog and henceforth a rise in Doberman attacks followed because of the increase in numbers of the dogs in the hands of idiots. This became the case for APBT/AMSTAFF'S IN THE 80'S and Rottweilers in the 90's.(which is sad in the case of APBT because throughout the early part of American history, especially the early 19th century,..APBT'S epitomized American courage, intelligence, spirit, loyalty and patriotism.)

Bottom line,..it's a powerful breed,..but with proper ownership is no more a problem than any other. Breed specific laws are bullsh#t,....much like most gun laws that restrict ownership by stand up citizens whom are not criminals nor have desire whatsoever to engage in criminal activity.

owners should be accountable for their animals regardless of breed.

saying there's no difference between a toy dog and a pit bull is the same as saying there's no difference between a grizzly and a rotty with proper ownership.

just like if you shot someone with your gun, you'd be accountable and would likely go to prison. same should go for your dog. if your dog attacks someone, you should expect the same.

afterall it's never the dog's fault. there are no bad dogs, only bad owners.

those owners should be accountable.

the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.

SteelCzar76
05-26-2009, 02:02 PM
APBT'S/AMSTAFFS are not Bears, Wolves, Mountain lions or any other wild animal that would naturally consider humans enemies. The truth is...the proliferation of attacks by any specific breed of domestic dog are a by product of poor ownership and popularity of specific breeds in the eyes of these said type of owners during specific time periods.

Ie: In the 70's Dobies became the popular "tough" dog and henceforth a rise in Doberman attacks followed because of the increase in numbers of the dogs in the hands of idiots. This became the case for APBT/AMSTAFF'S IN THE 80'S and Rottweilers in the 90's.(which is sad in the case of APBT because throughout the early part of American history, especially the early 19th century,..APBT'S epitomized American courage, intelligence, spirit, loyalty and patriotism.)

Bottom line,..it's a powerful breed,..but with proper ownership is no more a problem than any other. Breed specific laws are bullsh#t,....much like most gun laws that restrict ownership by stand up citizens whom are not criminals nor have desire whatsoever to engage in criminal activity.

owners should be accountable for their animals regardless of breed.

saying there's no difference between a toy dog and a pit bull is the same as saying there's no difference between a grizzly and a rotty with proper ownership.

just like if you shot someone with your gun, you'd be accountable and would likely go to prison. same should go for your dog. if your dog attacks someone, you should expect the same.

afterall it's never the dog's fault. there are no bad dogs, only bad owners.

those owners should be accountable.

the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.


I agree with you Flip in terms of owner accountability. However i disagree with you in terms of owning a powerful breed. Because in truth,....any large breed and or mongrel has the size and strength to kill a small child. It's not just APBT's or Rottweilers,.. though these breeds will always garner the most headlines due to the media's need and or desire for the sensational stories about dogs that they feel they have sufficiently programmed the public into believing to be "almost supernatural canine villans".

Again,.... i think it's unfair that some breeds (APBT/AMSTAFF's in particular) are vilified because they are not any more of a monster or unstable demon than any other breed just simply because they are capable of greater feats of strength, endurance, biting power and athleticism. Especially in light of the fact though many other breeds are less physically and mentally gifted,..they are in actuality far more aggressive towards human beings. (Labradors, Cocker Spaniels, Dalmatians, Sheperd mixes)

Again,...i just would like to see people whom have no actual experience with the breed stop attempting to demonize them.

steelers43
05-26-2009, 02:04 PM
APBT'S/AMSTAFFS are not Bears, Wolves, Mountain lions or any other wild animal that would naturally consider humans enemies. The truth is...the proliferation of attacks by any specific breed of domestic dog are a by product of poor ownership and popularity of specific breeds in the eyes of these said type of owners during specific time periods.

Ie: In the 70's Dobies became the popular "tough" dog and henceforth a rise in Doberman attacks followed because of the increase in numbers of the dogs in the hands of idiots. This became the case for APBT/AMSTAFF'S IN THE 80'S and Rottweilers in the 90's.(which is sad in the case of APBT because throughout the early part of American history, especially the early 19th century,..APBT'S epitomized American courage, intelligence, spirit, loyalty and patriotism.)

Bottom line,..it's a powerful breed,..but with proper ownership is no more a problem than any other. Breed specific laws are bullsh#t,....much like most gun laws that restrict ownership by stand up citizens whom are not criminals nor have desire whatsoever to engage in criminal activity.

owners should be accountable for their animals regardless of breed.

saying there's no difference between a toy dog and a pit bull is the same as saying there's no difference between a grizzly and a rotty with proper ownership.

just like if you shot someone with your gun, you'd be accountable and would likely go to prison. same should go for your dog. if your dog attacks someone, you should expect the same.

afterall it's never the dog's fault. there are no bad dogs, only bad owners.

those owners should be accountable.

the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.


I agree with you Flip in terms of owner accountability. However i disagree with you in terms of owning a powerful breed. Because in truth,....any large breed and or mongrel has the size and strength to kill a small child. It's not just APBT's or Rottweilers,.. though these breeds will always garner the most headlines due to the media's need and or desire for the sensational stories about dogs that they feel they have sufficiently programmed the public into believing to be "almost supernatural canine villans".

Again,.... i think it's unfair that some breeds (APBT/AMSTAFF's in particular) are vilified because they are not any more of a monster or unstable demon than any other breed just simply because they are capable of greater feats of strength, endurance, biting power and athleticism. Especially in light of the fact though many other breeds are less physically and mentally gifted,..they are in actuality far more aggressive towards human beings. (Labradors, Cocker Spaniels, Dalmatians, Sheperd mixes)

Again,...i just would like to see people whom have no actual experience with the breed stop attempting to demonize them.

No experience? I know a kid with a ton of stitches in his face(years ago) and that was, again another friendly pitbull. That is, until one day he snapped and wasn't so friendly.

Yep, great dogs. Until they aren't.

steelers43
05-26-2009, 02:07 PM
the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.

I'm assuming most of these guys defending the dog are single with no children. They have their macho dog though.

SteelCzar76
05-26-2009, 02:17 PM
APBT'S/AMSTAFFS are not Bears, Wolves, Mountain lions or any other wild animal that would naturally consider humans enemies. The truth is...the proliferation of attacks by any specific breed of domestic dog are a by product of poor ownership and popularity of specific breeds in the eyes of these said type of owners during specific time periods.

Ie: In the 70's Dobies became the popular "tough" dog and henceforth a rise in Doberman attacks followed because of the increase in numbers of the dogs in the hands of idiots. This became the case for APBT/AMSTAFF'S IN THE 80'S and Rottweilers in the 90's.(which is sad in the case of APBT because throughout the early part of American history, especially the early 19th century,..APBT'S epitomized American courage, intelligence, spirit, loyalty and patriotism.)

Bottom line,..it's a powerful breed,..but with proper ownership is no more a problem than any other. Breed specific laws are bullsh#t,....much like most gun laws that restrict ownership by stand up citizens whom are not criminals nor have desire whatsoever to engage in criminal activity.

owners should be accountable for their animals regardless of breed.

saying there's no difference between a toy dog and a pit bull is the same as saying there's no difference between a grizzly and a rotty with proper ownership.

just like if you shot someone with your gun, you'd be accountable and would likely go to prison. same should go for your dog. if your dog attacks someone, you should expect the same.

afterall it's never the dog's fault. there are no bad dogs, only bad owners.

those owners should be accountable.

the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.


I agree with you Flip in terms of owner accountability. However i disagree with you in terms of owning a powerful breed. Because in truth,....any large breed and or mongrel has the size and strength to kill a small child. It's not just APBT's or Rottweilers,.. though these breeds will always garner the most headlines due to the media's need and or desire for the sensational stories about dogs that they feel they have sufficiently programmed the public into believing to be "almost supernatural canine villans".

Again,.... i think it's unfair that some breeds (APBT/AMSTAFF's in particular) are vilified because they are not any more of a monster or unstable demon than any other breed just simply because they are capable of greater feats of strength, endurance, biting power and athleticism. Especially in light of the fact though many other breeds are less physically and mentally gifted,..they are in actuality far more aggressive towards human beings. (Labradors, Cocker Spaniels, Dalmatians, Sheperd mixes)

Again,...i just would like to see people whom have no actual experience with the breed stop attempting to demonize them.

No experience? I know a kid with a ton of stitches in his face(years ago) and that was, again another friendly pitbull. That is, until one day he snapped and wasn't so friendly.

Yep, great dogs. Until they aren't.


And that is indeed tragic. However, i think that you are missing my point,....ALL dogs,..especially ANY breed large and or strong enough to be capable of inflicting great damage should be closely, and responsibly monitored around small children.

The whole "boogey man" breed propaganda against any specific breed is nonsense,.. when the bottom line is the understanding or lack thereof of Canine/animal nature.

Snatch98
05-26-2009, 02:23 PM
the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.

I'm assuming most of these guys defending the dog are single with no children. They have their macho dog though.


Czar great stuff. I agree 100%.

43 I was raised with one from age 7. I'll be 27 this coming September and my family has owned at least one ever since. My parents currently have two and both are wonderful dogs. My first Rocky that lived to be 17 was ALWAYS around kids, the entire neighborhood was in love with him and for good reason. He was a great dog. Now as far as experience is concerned Czar is talking actual ownership experience not "oh i knew someone that got attacked" which should have been obvious when initially mentioned. However you're apparently to dense or stubborn to acknowledge the fact you're absolutely clueless on the subject and just like every other idiot with no breed experience screaming about the breed.

I also don't have one to call my own. I have a 11 month old Doberman named Goose with natural ears and 2 days after thanksgiving had a abandoned chocolate lab show up on my front door 30 pounds underweight. If Guinness the Chocolate lab hadn't showed up at my front door I'd have a Pit Bull to call my own. Now I have to wait because I currently don't have the room or the means for 3 dogs. I will also own at least one when I do decide to have children.

NC Steeler Fan
05-26-2009, 02:30 PM
You know, as long as the only kids or persons being mauled or killed
by some dude's pit bull or ANY OTHER breed of dog are in in his immediate
family, while I would "feel" for the victim, I could otherwise care less.

People put their own loved ones in harms way all the time these days.

However, you let that S.O.B. dog come after anyone else in the general
public which could include me and/or my loved ones and I'd put a
9mm hollow point into Fido's head in a heart beat and dare the owner
to take me to court.

Yeah, uh-huh, be tough guy all you want before the chit goes down...

papillon
05-26-2009, 02:44 PM
People should be accountable for the actions of their pets.

If you own a Pit Bull that attacks someone, you should go to jail just as you would if you personally attacked someone. If people are capable of training and handling Pit Bulls or Rottis, that's fine, but they should also be personally accountable for their actions. If your dog snaps, it's on you.

The problem is there's no accountability for the people that own these dogs. Could you imagine how scary it would be to be JH III? Your dad beats your mom and owns a dog that could kill you. Is anyone protecting the safety of this kid?


You could make the argument that the right type of person could train a grizzly bear.

Why not bring grizzly bears into our homes and teach them to love our children?

Surely most people could take the right precautions to create a loving environment to raise a grizzly.

I would especially trust the people that didn't see the problem with bringing a grizzly into their home.

Those would be the most responsible people that would most likely take the best precautions.

Flippy,

Are you comparing a wild animal (Grizzly bear) to a domesticated animal (dog)? This is an apples to oranges argument concerning the Pitbull breed.

Pappy

SteelCzar76
05-26-2009, 03:05 PM
the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.

I'm assuming most of these guys defending the dog are single with no children. They have their macho dog though.


Czar great stuff. I agree 100%.

43 I was raised with one from age 7. I'll be 27 this coming September and my family has owned at least one ever since. My parents currently have two and both are wonderful dogs. My first Rocky that lived to be 17 was ALWAYS around kids, the entire neighborhood was in love with him and for good reason. He was a great dog. Now as far as experience is concerned Czar is talking actual ownership experience not "oh i knew someone that got attacked" which should have been obvious when initially mentioned. However you're apparently to dense or stubborn to acknowledge the fact you're absolutely clueless on the subject and just like every other idiot with no breed experience screaming about the breed.

I also don't have one to call my own. I have a 11 month old Doberman named Goose with natural ears and 2 days after thanksgiving had a abandoned chocolate lab show up on my front door 30 pounds underweight. If Guinness the Chocolate lab hadn't showed up at my front door I'd have a Pit Bull to call my own. Now I have to wait because I currently don't have the room or the means for 3 dogs. I will also own at least one when I do decide to have children.


Great post 98. I too have childhood experience with my first APBT and my second one (a beautiful old family red nose named Jada) just passed two years ago. Both of which were very dedicated, loving and loyal to me my family despite their power.

Though Jada,..for as prissy as she was,..was very dog aggressive she like my first Diesel was not aggressive towards humans let alone children unprovoked.(ie i or someone in the family had to be in trouble)

I learned that the breed requires a loving but firm and responsible hand from day one as pups,..but this instills within them obedience as they are very eager to please their owners.

Yes,..they are powerful, but based upon my personal experience,...i've known them get along very well with children, as well as being highly intelligent and veritable "clowns" in a sense of playfulness.

For me the bottom line is as such,....a gun in a good mans hands is not a problem at all. But that same gun in the hands of the wrong man can be very destructive. And for me this is true for not only APBT/AMSTAFF's but any breed of canine with any measure of physical ability to injure a human,.. especially children.

But it's easier for some people just to blame an animal for animal behavior,...turn their back on our role in any nonsense and say destroy an entire life form because they may not have any particular attraction and or appreciation for that said life form. It's easy to be callous, cold towards and disregard something that you are not particularly fond of,...whether it's fair or not,..because of indifference.

But i wonder would this be the case for these people if it was a breed that they were in fact advocates of and or devoted to ? I doubt it would be as simple as just stating that "Oh,..they ,...'Snap'. They're monsters that shouldn't be allowed to exist!",..when there is absolutely no scientific evidence to prove that the breed is any more of a 'loose cannon' than any other.

And in fact,..all dogs are inherently simply that,..dogs. And subject to the same behavior as dictated by proper training or lack thereof.

papillon
05-26-2009, 03:08 PM
I wonder why is it that those who disagree with owning a Pitbull and having children believe the adults to be ignorant, retarded or stupid? Couldn't the same be said for a parent who enjoys skydiving? riding motorcycles? quads? downhill skiing? hunting? shooting for sport? rock climbing? mountain climbing?

All hazardous recreational activities, but, extremely enjoyable, one and all. I wouldn't label a parent stupid or retarded simply because he/she enjoys jumping out of an airplane or any of the other activities listed. You may believe that a parent that doesn't partake in any of these activities is more responsible to his/her duties as a parent than someone who doesn't do these things, but, calling them all stupid or retarded carte blanche is well, shortsighted and a bit ignorant in itself.

Owning a Pitbull and having it attack a child can't be more common than jumping from a plane to your death and leaving behind a family without a husband or father. I don't know the fatalities associated with skydiving or Pitbull attacks, but, they seem to have about the possibility of occurring.

People get to make choices in life and because you don't agree with those made by another individual doesn't make them stupid or retarded, only different, be a bit more tolerant.

Debate the downside to owning a Pitbull and having children with a Pitbull owner if you must, but, ridiculing the owner because you don't like the breed or believe it is too dangerous for domestic ownership is irresponsible. Particularly, if you're basing your argument on a few articles pulled form the internet and hearsay rather than experience with the breed.

Pappy

flippy
05-26-2009, 03:21 PM
APBT'S/AMSTAFFS are not Bears, Wolves, Mountain lions or any other wild animal that would naturally consider humans enemies. The truth is...the proliferation of attacks by any specific breed of domestic dog are a by product of poor ownership and popularity of specific breeds in the eyes of these said type of owners during specific time periods.

Ie: In the 70's Dobies became the popular "tough" dog and henceforth a rise in Doberman attacks followed because of the increase in numbers of the dogs in the hands of idiots. This became the case for APBT/AMSTAFF'S IN THE 80'S and Rottweilers in the 90's.(which is sad in the case of APBT because throughout the early part of American history, especially the early 19th century,..APBT'S epitomized American courage, intelligence, spirit, loyalty and patriotism.)

Bottom line,..it's a powerful breed,..but with proper ownership is no more a problem than any other. Breed specific laws are bullsh#t,....much like most gun laws that restrict ownership by stand up citizens whom are not criminals nor have desire whatsoever to engage in criminal activity.

owners should be accountable for their animals regardless of breed.

saying there's no difference between a toy dog and a pit bull is the same as saying there's no difference between a grizzly and a rotty with proper ownership.

just like if you shot someone with your gun, you'd be accountable and would likely go to prison. same should go for your dog. if your dog attacks someone, you should expect the same.

afterall it's never the dog's fault. there are no bad dogs, only bad owners.

those owners should be accountable.

the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.


I agree with you Flip in terms of owner accountability. However i disagree with you in terms of owning a powerful breed. Because in truth,....any large breed and or mongrel has the size and strength to kill a small child. It's not just APBT's or Rottweilers,.. though these breeds will always garner the most headlines due to the media's need and or desire for the sensational stories about dogs that they feel they have sufficiently programmed the public into believing to be "almost supernatural canine villans".

Again,.... i think it's unfair that some breeds (APBT/AMSTAFF's in particular) are vilified because they are not any more of a monster or unstable demon than any other breed just simply because they are capable of greater feats of strength, endurance, biting power and athleticism. Especially in light of the fact though many other breeds are less physically and mentally gifted,..they are in actuality far more aggressive towards human beings. (Labradors, Cocker Spaniels, Dalmatians, Sheperd mixes)

Again,...i just would like to see people whom have no actual experience with the breed stop attempting to demonize them.

i don't trust any animal around children really. nor do i trust children around animals. heck the kids might even be less trustworthy ;)

i've personally been attacked by a lab/shepard mix as a kid (the dog wasn't mistreated nor did I do anything wrong to it). that probably shapes much of my mistrust in animals.

but at the same time i believe in freedom. so people can have the dogs they want. but if they were accountable, it would weed out the bad owners.

just not a big fan of mixing kids and dogs.

flippy
05-26-2009, 03:38 PM
People should be accountable for the actions of their pets.

If you own a Pit Bull that attacks someone, you should go to jail just as you would if you personally attacked someone. If people are capable of training and handling Pit Bulls or Rottis, that's fine, but they should also be personally accountable for their actions. If your dog snaps, it's on you.

The problem is there's no accountability for the people that own these dogs. Could you imagine how scary it would be to be JH III? Your dad beats your mom and owns a dog that could kill you. Is anyone protecting the safety of this kid?


You could make the argument that the right type of person could train a grizzly bear.

Why not bring grizzly bears into our homes and teach them to love our children?

Surely most people could take the right precautions to create a loving environment to raise a grizzly.

I would especially trust the people that didn't see the problem with bringing a grizzly into their home.

Those would be the most responsible people that would most likely take the best precautions.

Flippy,

Are you comparing a wild animal (Grizzly bear) to a domesticated animal (dog)? This is an apples to oranges argument concerning the Pitbull breed.

Pappy

Dogs were once wild before being domesticated. No reason to think bears couldn't be domesticated as well.

Sure it's apple to oranges. Just like comparing many other breeds to pitbulls is an apples to oranges.

steelers43
05-26-2009, 03:50 PM
the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.

I'm assuming most of these guys defending the dog are single with no children. They have their macho dog though.


Czar great stuff. I agree 100%.

43 I was raised with one from age 7. I'll be 27 this coming September and my family has owned at least one ever since. My parents currently have two and both are wonderful dogs. My first Rocky that lived to be 17 was ALWAYS around kids, the entire neighborhood was in love with him and for good reason. He was a great dog. Now as far as experience is concerned Czar is talking actual ownership experience not "oh i knew someone that got attacked" which should have been obvious when initially mentioned. However you're apparently to dense or stubborn to acknowledge the fact you're absolutely clueless on the subject and just like every other idiot with no breed experience screaming about the breed.

I also don't have one to call my own. I have a 11 month old Doberman named Goose with natural ears and 2 days after thanksgiving had a abandoned chocolate lab show up on my front door 30 pounds underweight. If Guinness the Chocolate lab hadn't showed up at my front door I'd have a Pit Bull to call my own. Now I have to wait because I currently don't have the room or the means for 3 dogs. I will also own at least one when I do decide to have children.

Stats and facts tend to back me up but we'll disregard them if you like.

My opinion. You are a moron to have kids around pits. You may disagree and I hope you never suffer from that decision if you have kids. It's certainly not something I would want to live with for the rest of my life. It only takes once and you have a lifetime of regret.

steelers43
05-26-2009, 03:52 PM
APBT'S/AMSTAFFS are not Bears, Wolves, Mountain lions or any other wild animal that would naturally consider humans enemies. The truth is...the proliferation of attacks by any specific breed of domestic dog are a by product of poor ownership and popularity of specific breeds in the eyes of these said type of owners during specific time periods.

Ie: In the 70's Dobies became the popular "tough" dog and henceforth a rise in Doberman attacks followed because of the increase in numbers of the dogs in the hands of idiots. This became the case for APBT/AMSTAFF'S IN THE 80'S and Rottweilers in the 90's.(which is sad in the case of APBT because throughout the early part of American history, especially the early 19th century,..APBT'S epitomized American courage, intelligence, spirit, loyalty and patriotism.)

Bottom line,..it's a powerful breed,..but with proper ownership is no more a problem than any other. Breed specific laws are bullsh#t,....much like most gun laws that restrict ownership by stand up citizens whom are not criminals nor have desire whatsoever to engage in criminal activity.

owners should be accountable for their animals regardless of breed.

saying there's no difference between a toy dog and a pit bull is the same as saying there's no difference between a grizzly and a rotty with proper ownership.

just like if you shot someone with your gun, you'd be accountable and would likely go to prison. same should go for your dog. if your dog attacks someone, you should expect the same.

afterall it's never the dog's fault. there are no bad dogs, only bad owners.

those owners should be accountable.

the logic of having a dog powerful enough to kill one of my kids is lost on me. i just don't get it at all.


I agree with you Flip in terms of owner accountability. However i disagree with you in terms of owning a powerful breed. Because in truth,....any large breed and or mongrel has the size and strength to kill a small child. It's not just APBT's or Rottweilers,.. though these breeds will always garner the most headlines due to the media's need and or desire for the sensational stories about dogs that they feel they have sufficiently programmed the public into believing to be "almost supernatural canine villans".

Again,.... i think it's unfair that some breeds (APBT/AMSTAFF's in particular) are vilified because they are not any more of a monster or unstable demon than any other breed just simply because they are capable of greater feats of strength, endurance, biting power and athleticism. Especially in light of the fact though many other breeds are less physically and mentally gifted,..they are in actuality far more aggressive towards human beings. (Labradors, Cocker Spaniels, Dalmatians, Sheperd mixes)

Again,...i just would like to see people whom have no actual experience with the breed stop attempting to demonize them.

No experience? I know a kid with a ton of stitches in his face(years ago) and that was, again another friendly pitbull. That is, until one day he snapped and wasn't so friendly.

Yep, great dogs. Until they aren't.


And that is indeed tragic. However, i think that you are missing my point,....ALL dogs,..especially ANY breed large and or strong enough to be capable of inflicting great damage should be closely, and responsibly monitored around small children.

The whole "boogey man" breed propaganda against any specific breed is nonsense,.. when the bottom line is the understanding or lack thereof of Canine/animal nature.

Yeah, my puppy bit me once playing with him. It caused like a paper cut, not reconstructive face surgery or death. Guess that's why you lose me when you say they are all alike but you appear to ignore facts, so we'll just go with it.

My daughter was also snapped at a few times when she was little and playing with the dogs. Difference again is, she cried and got upset, not even cut. With a Pit, she may be looking at a coffin over the same incident.

Difference is why you own an animal. I bought mine for my daughter to play with, dress up, take for walks, etc. I don't have to ever worry about one of them snapping and killing her.

Again, good luck.

flippy
05-26-2009, 03:54 PM
I wonder why is it that those who disagree with owning a Pitbull and having children believe the adults to be ignorant, retarded or stupid? Couldn't the same be said for a parent who enjoys skydiving? riding motorcycles? quads? downhill skiing? hunting? shooting for sport? rock climbing? mountain climbing?

All hazardous recreational activities, but, extremely enjoyable, one and all. I wouldn't label a parent stupid or retarded simply because he/she enjoys jumping out of an airplane or any of the other activities listed. You may believe that a parent that doesn't partake in any of these activities is more responsible to his/her duties as a parent than someone who doesn't do these things, but, calling them all stupid or retarded carte blanche is well, shortsighted and a bit ignorant in itself.

Owning a Pitbull and having it attack a child can't be more common than jumping from a plane to your death and leaving behind a family without a husband or father. I don't know the fatalities associated with skydiving or Pitbull attacks, but, they seem to have about the possibility of occurring.

People get to make choices in life and because you don't agree with those made by another individual doesn't make them stupid or retarded, only different, be a bit more tolerant.

Debate the downside to owning a Pitbull and having children with a Pitbull owner if you must, but, ridiculing the owner because you don't like the breed or believe it is too dangerous for domestic ownership is irresponsible. Particularly, if you're basing your argument on a few articles pulled form the internet and hearsay rather than experience with the breed.

Pappy

we're all a bunch of stupid, ignorant, knuckle dragging meat heads. none more so than me.

once we can get past that, we can actually enjoy discussing the things that make us different.

in general we're harsher on ourselves and for some strange reason tend to hold others accountable to the standards we have for ourselves.

so insults and ridicule are only really insecurity. which we all have to some degree.

and it would be nice if no one ever noticed my insecurity and people would just overlook it.

taking this to it's logical conclusion leads me to -

i'm an idiot - contantly - please don't notice - and i'll try not to notice you being an idiot either.

we're all fools....all the time...

we usually just don't realize it.

papillon
05-26-2009, 04:06 PM
I wonder why is it that those who disagree with owning a Pitbull and having children believe the adults to be ignorant, retarded or stupid? Couldn't the same be said for a parent who enjoys skydiving? riding motorcycles? quads? downhill skiing? hunting? shooting for sport? rock climbing? mountain climbing?

All hazardous recreational activities, but, extremely enjoyable, one and all. I wouldn't label a parent stupid or retarded simply because he/she enjoys jumping out of an airplane or any of the other activities listed. You may believe that a parent that doesn't partake in any of these activities is more responsible to his/her duties as a parent than someone who doesn't do these things, but, calling them all stupid or retarded carte blanche is well, shortsighted and a bit ignorant in itself.

Owning a Pitbull and having it attack a child can't be more common than jumping from a plane to your death and leaving behind a family without a husband or father. I don't know the fatalities associated with skydiving or Pitbull attacks, but, they seem to have about the possibility of occurring.

People get to make choices in life and because you don't agree with those made by another individual doesn't make them stupid or retarded, only different, be a bit more tolerant.

Debate the downside to owning a Pitbull and having children with a Pitbull owner if you must, but, ridiculing the owner because you don't like the breed or believe it is too dangerous for domestic ownership is irresponsible. Particularly, if you're basing your argument on a few articles pulled form the internet and hearsay rather than experience with the breed.

Pappy

we're all a bunch of stupid, ignorant, knuckle dragging meat heads. none more so than me.

once we can get past that, we can actually enjoy discussing the things that make us different.

in general we're harsher on ourselves and for some strange reason tend to hold others accountable to the standards we have for ourselves.

so insults and ridicule are only really insecurity. which we all have to some degree.

and it would be nice if no one ever noticed my insecurity and people would just overlook it.

taking this to it's logical conclusion leads me to -

i'm an idiot - contantly - please don't notice - and i'll try not to notice you being an idiot either.

we're all fools....all the time...

we usually just don't realize it.

Huh? I don't think you're an idiot or a fool. You may or may not be insecure and that's your business. It's still no reason to denigrate those who think differently, act differently or view the world in a different fashion than you do. I'm more than happy to discuss anything that anyone wants to discuss and I can assure that I can do it without calling my antagonist a name. I may not be able to understand their position on a subject, but, that doesn't make it invalid or wrong.

Pappy

stlrz d
05-26-2009, 04:15 PM
I wonder why is it that those who disagree with owning a Pitbull and having children believe the adults to be ignorant, retarded or stupid? Couldn't the same be said for a parent who enjoys skydiving? riding motorcycles? quads? downhill skiing? hunting? shooting for sport? rock climbing? mountain climbing?

All hazardous recreational activities, but, extremely enjoyable, one and all. I wouldn't label a parent stupid or retarded simply because he/she enjoys jumping out of an airplane or any of the other activities listed. You may believe that a parent that doesn't partake in any of these activities is more responsible to his/her duties as a parent than someone who doesn't do these things, but, calling them all stupid or retarded carte blanche is well, shortsighted and a bit ignorant in itself.

Owning a Pitbull and having it attack a child can't be more common than jumping from a plane to your death and leaving behind a family without a husband or father. I don't know the fatalities associated with skydiving or Pitbull attacks, but, they seem to have about the possibility of occurring.

People get to make choices in life and because you don't agree with those made by another individual doesn't make them stupid or retarded, only different, be a bit more tolerant.

Debate the downside to owning a Pitbull and having children with a Pitbull owner if you must, but, ridiculing the owner because you don't like the breed or believe it is too dangerous for domestic ownership is irresponsible. Particularly, if you're basing your argument on a few articles pulled form the internet and hearsay rather than experience with the breed.

Pappy

Nice post Pap!

I wonder why those who disagree with those who have children and choose to own pit bulls would call that stupid, retarded, moronic, etc...yet they poses and partake in illegal drugs while having a family?

That's something that could most certainly lead to undesirable consequences as well, yes?

Flippy - like you I was attacked by a dog when I was around 6 or 7. However, it was totally my fault. I, along with a couple of friends, scaled a fence to see what was on the other side. Turned out to be a large, gravel bus lot...guarded by a full grown Great Dane. My friends saw the dog coming and got out of there...I didn't make it all the way up the fence and the dog got me. It dragged me the full 3 acres in order to get me back to the house where the lot owner lived. I looked like someone who had been stranded on a desert island...clothes ripped to shreds and a huge gash in my leg (8 stitches). It took me many years to get over my fear of dogs. But I long since have. That incident is a thing of the distant past and again, was totally my fault.

Of course had there been a "guard dog warning" sign I never would have climbed that fence. :(

flippy
05-26-2009, 04:31 PM
I wonder why is it that those who disagree with owning a Pitbull and having children believe the adults to be ignorant, retarded or stupid? Couldn't the same be said for a parent who enjoys skydiving? riding motorcycles? quads? downhill skiing? hunting? shooting for sport? rock climbing? mountain climbing?

All hazardous recreational activities, but, extremely enjoyable, one and all. I wouldn't label a parent stupid or retarded simply because he/she enjoys jumping out of an airplane or any of the other activities listed. You may believe that a parent that doesn't partake in any of these activities is more responsible to his/her duties as a parent than someone who doesn't do these things, but, calling them all stupid or retarded carte blanche is well, shortsighted and a bit ignorant in itself.

Owning a Pitbull and having it attack a child can't be more common than jumping from a plane to your death and leaving behind a family without a husband or father. I don't know the fatalities associated with skydiving or Pitbull attacks, but, they seem to have about the possibility of occurring.

People get to make choices in life and because you don't agree with those made by another individual doesn't make them stupid or retarded, only different, be a bit more tolerant.

Debate the downside to owning a Pitbull and having children with a Pitbull owner if you must, but, ridiculing the owner because you don't like the breed or believe it is too dangerous for domestic ownership is irresponsible. Particularly, if you're basing your argument on a few articles pulled form the internet and hearsay rather than experience with the breed.

Pappy

we're all a bunch of stupid, ignorant, knuckle dragging meat heads. none more so than me.

once we can get past that, we can actually enjoy discussing the things that make us different.

in general we're harsher on ourselves and for some strange reason tend to hold others accountable to the standards we have for ourselves.

so insults and ridicule are only really insecurity. which we all have to some degree.

and it would be nice if no one ever noticed my insecurity and people would just overlook it.

taking this to it's logical conclusion leads me to -

i'm an idiot - contantly - please don't notice - and i'll try not to notice you being an idiot either.

we're all fools....all the time...

we usually just don't realize it.

Huh? I don't think you're an idiot or a fool. You may or may not be insecure and that's your business. It's still no reason to denigrate those who think differently, act differently or view the world in a different fashion than you do. I'm more than happy to discuss anything that anyone wants to discuss and I can assure that I can do it without calling my antagonist a name. I may not be able to understand their position on a subject, but, that doesn't make it invalid or wrong.

Pappy

i do think i'm a fool. and i didn't think you were referring to me. just making a comment.

flippy
05-26-2009, 04:35 PM
Flippy - like you I was attacked by a dog when I was around 6 or 7. However, it was totally my fault. I, along with a couple of friends, scaled a fence to see what was on the other side. Turned out to be a large, gravel bus lot...guarded by a full grown Great Dane. My friends saw the dog coming and got out of there...I didn't make it all the way up the fence and the dog got me. It dragged me the full 3 acres in order to get me back to the house where the lot owner lived. I looked like someone who had been stranded on a desert island...clothes ripped to shreds and a huge gash in my leg (8 stitches). It took me many years to get over my fear of dogs. But I long since have. That incident is a thing of the distant past and again, was totally my fault.

Of course had there been a "guard dog warning" sign I never would have climbed that fence. :(

mine was my friends dog and was complete unprovoked. we were playing and the dog went nutso on me out of nowhere.

i like dogs, but am uneasy even around tiny toy dogs i don't know.

people think it's funny cause i'm a big guy.

RuthlessBurgher
05-26-2009, 07:27 PM
I wonder why is it that those who disagree with owning a Pitbull and having children believe the adults to be ignorant, retarded or stupid? Couldn't the same be said for a parent who enjoys skydiving? riding motorcycles? quads? downhill skiing? hunting? shooting for sport? rock climbing? mountain climbing?

All hazardous recreational activities, but, extremely enjoyable, one and all. I wouldn't label a parent stupid or retarded simply because he/she enjoys jumping out of an airplane or any of the other activities listed. You may believe that a parent that doesn't partake in any of these activities is more responsible to his/her duties as a parent than someone who doesn't do these things, but, calling them all stupid or retarded carte blanche is well, shortsighted and a bit ignorant in itself.

Owning a Pitbull and having it attack a child can't be more common than jumping from a plane to your death and leaving behind a family without a husband or father. I don't know the fatalities associated with skydiving or Pitbull attacks, but, they seem to have about the possibility of occurring.

People get to make choices in life and because you don't agree with those made by another individual doesn't make them stupid or retarded, only different, be a bit more tolerant.

Debate the downside to owning a Pitbull and having children with a Pitbull owner if you must, but, ridiculing the owner because you don't like the breed or believe it is too dangerous for domestic ownership is irresponsible. Particularly, if you're basing your argument on a few articles pulled form the internet and hearsay rather than experience with the breed.

Pappy

Nice post Pap!

I wonder why those who disagree with those who have children and choose to own pit bulls would call that stupid, retarded, moronic, etc...yet they poses and partake in illegal drugs while having a family?

That's something that could most certainly lead to undesirable consequences as well, yes?

Flippy - like you I was attacked by a dog when I was around 6 or 7. However, it was totally my fault. I, along with a couple of friends, scaled a fence to see what was on the other side. Turned out to be a large, gravel bus lot...guarded by a full grown Great Dane. My friends saw the dog coming and got out of there...I didn't make it all the way up the fence and the dog got me. It dragged me the full 3 acres in order to get me back to the house where the lot owner lived. I looked like someone who had been stranded on a desert island...clothes ripped to shreds and a huge gash in my leg (8 stitches). It took me many years to get over my fear of dogs. But I long since have. That incident is a thing of the distant past and again, was totally my fault.

Of course had there been a "guard dog warning" sign I never would have climbed that fence. :(

Wow...a real life "Chopper...Sick B@lls!" story! I bet those 3 acres felt like 300 miles. You mean to tell me all Great Danes aren't friendly like Marmaduke?

steelers43
05-26-2009, 08:08 PM
I wonder why is it that those who disagree with owning a Pitbull and having children believe the adults to be ignorant, retarded or stupid? Couldn't the same be said for a parent who enjoys skydiving? riding motorcycles? quads? downhill skiing? hunting? shooting for sport? rock climbing? mountain climbing?

All hazardous recreational activities, but, extremely enjoyable, one and all. I wouldn't label a parent stupid or retarded simply because he/she enjoys jumping out of an airplane or any of the other activities listed. You may believe that a parent that doesn't partake in any of these activities is more responsible to his/her duties as a parent than someone who doesn't do these things, but, calling them all stupid or retarded carte blanche is well, shortsighted and a bit ignorant in itself.

Owning a Pitbull and having it attack a child can't be more common than jumping from a plane to your death and leaving behind a family without a husband or father. I don't know the fatalities associated with skydiving or Pitbull attacks, but, they seem to have about the possibility of occurring.

People get to make choices in life and because you don't agree with those made by another individual doesn't make them stupid or retarded, only different, be a bit more tolerant.

Debate the downside to owning a Pitbull and having children with a Pitbull owner if you must, but, ridiculing the owner because you don't like the breed or believe it is too dangerous for domestic ownership is irresponsible. Particularly, if you're basing your argument on a few articles pulled form the internet and hearsay rather than experience with the breed.

Pappy

Nice post Pap!

I wonder why those who disagree with those who have children and choose to own pit bulls would call that stupid, retarded, moronic, etc...yet they poses and partake in illegal drugs while having a family?

That's something that could most certainly lead to undesirable consequences as well, yes?


Good to know I was correct on who I thought would throw this out there.

Let me ask you a few questions since you are clearly a arsewhole either completely clueless or just being an arsewhole.

1. Do you think my daughter has the slightest clue I smoke?

2. Do you think I smoke at the dinner table or something? In front of her, ever?

3. Do you think I smoke it constantly?

4. Were you born this stupid or did you have to grow into this big of an arsewhole?

Jooser
05-26-2009, 09:30 PM
http://i715.photobucket.com/albums/ww152/lanemojo/pitbullsavethepit.png

Flip, I heard that dog bit you because it heard you tasted like chicken.... :wink:

steelers43
05-27-2009, 11:08 AM
Did Harrison go to a baptism to abolish his moronic behavior, yet again?

Seriously, we all know Harrison is a moron but it seems the only people that pay for his stupidity is his women and children.

SteelCzar76
05-27-2009, 11:26 AM
Steelers star considers letting his pit bull live
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
By Lillian Thomas, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Bob Donaldson/Post-Gazette
Patron, the pit bull owned by Steelers linebacker James Harrison, is under quarantine at Triangle Pet Control Service in McKees Rocks after biting Harrison's 2-year-old son.

Now that James Harrison III is up and walking, his father is seeking a way to avoid putting down the dog that bit the 2-year-old.

Patron, the pit bull owned by Steelers linebacker James Harrison, became agitated when the toddler began crying last Wednesday at their Franklin Park home and bit the child. James III was released from Children's Hospital of UPMC and is now home. The child's mother, Beth Tibbott, and a friend also were injured as they tried to separate dog and boy. Both women have recovered. Mr. Harrison was not at home during the attack.

The dog was taken to Animal Control of McKees Rocks, and Mr. Harrison said he would have him put down after a 10-day quarantine.

A number of people responded to the planned euthanization by saying there were organizations that might take the dog. Mr. Harrison's agent, Bill Parise, said yesterday that they were seeking an alternative for Patron.

"I'm a dog lover, and I don't know what I'd do if I lost [my dog]," Mr. Parise said. "James was that close with Patron. One of the things James and I talked about was that this was a real tragedy -- the injury to his baby, and the baby's mother, and the loss of the dog. It's hard."

The responsibility to the family obviously had to come first, Mr. Parise said, and there was the issue of whether Patron could ever be trusted with people.

But with James III's improvement -- "the baby was actually walking [Monday], there is no muscle or nerve damage, no infection," Mr Parise said -- Mr. Harrison wanted to see whether there was a way to avoid putting Patron down.

"I just got done talking to James," he said yesterday afternoon, "and he would love to find a home for him, but only if it was a home that would provide maximum security. This decision is not being made lightly, and it would have to be in the best interest of the welfare of the animal as well as of people."

It won't be an easy task. Many shelters won't take dogs that have bitten people.

"No reputable rescue organization will take a dog that has bitten a person," said Daisy Balawejder of Hello Bully, a local group that rehabilitates and places pit bulls.

"When a dog is in the media, everyone wants to save that dog," she said. But her organizations and many like it are overloaded with dogs that are well-socialized and have no problems with people, she said.

Best Friends, the organization that has taken in former Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick's fighting pit bulls, said space is severely limited.

"Some dogs can be rehabilitated with training," said Ledy VanKavage, legislative analyst for Best Friends. "But so many healthy dogs are being put down. If we had room, we would [take dogs that bite people], but we're pretty full. Unfortunately there aren't enough sanctuaries out there."

A spokeswoman for Animal Friends in Ohio Township said her organization considers animals on a case-by-case basis.

"That's such a sad story, especially since pit bulls are always getting such a bad reputation," said Jolene Miklas, director of communications.

Some dogs might have a particular problem related to their background, she said.

"It may be a dog has been a stray and is now aggressive around food. In that case, that might be something that can be managed. We might say this dog is not good for a household where little kids might grab during feeding time."

If Patron were brought to the shelter, she said, he would work with the behavior team. If the group didn't believe there was any way to find a home for him, it would be one of the "sad instances in which we do consider euthanasia."

All of the shelter representatives contacted yesterday said breed-specific rules don't make sense.

"Any dog can bite," said Ms. VanKavage of Best Friends. "We had a woman killed by dachshunds in Florida, a child killed by a Pomeranian. Any dog can bite and kill."

Mr. Harrison hopes his dog will get a second chance, his agent said.

"This dog -- it's first time in his life he ever did attack," said Mr. Parise. "It's hard. I think what happens, when you try to get away from emotion, which is almost impossible, you have to weigh your responsibilities."

steelers43
05-27-2009, 11:44 AM
Breed specific rules don't make sense?

How many die from Pomeranian bites? Dachshund bites? Pitbull attacks?

People who say they are the same might just as well state they are full blown retard.

SteelCzar76
05-27-2009, 11:56 AM
Breed specific rules don't make sense?

How many die from Pomeranian bites? Dachshund bites? Pitbull attacks?

People who say they are the same might just as well state they are full blown retard.


No one is saying that all breeds are the "same" as opposed to simply stating this truth,.....humans,...especially small children,.... without weapons are physically not equipped to generally hold their own against most animals on this planet. Especially the ones equipped by nature with the physical attributes to kill. (ie fangs, claws, talons, size and or pound for pound strength that exceeds our own)

And canines, even though long domesticated and genetically manipulated by our own hands are not exceptions to this rule even though because of as much they are less likely than their wild brethren to have the desire to act against us.

ikestops85
05-27-2009, 12:22 PM
Breed specific rules don't make sense?

How many die from Pomeranian bites? Dachshund bites? Pitbull attacks?

People who say they are the same might just as well state they are full blown retard.

That's not the point ... your whole argument is it's stupid for people with children to own pitt bulls since they have been involved in fatal attacks. Since Pomeranians can also kill then the logical assumption for you to make is it's stupid for people with children to own ANY dog. I mean if there is just one person killed by a breed then you are putting your child at risk. That is what you are saying. Taking that further means YOU are stupid ... well, at least according to your own logic. I don't really think you're stupid but then my views differ from yours on this subject.

RuthlessBurgher
05-27-2009, 01:21 PM
Good news about Harrison's kid.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4209028


Updated: May 27, 2009, 12:50 PM ET

Harrison's son released
ESPN.com news services

PITTSBURGH -- The son of Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison has been released from a hospital following an attack by the player's pit bull, according to the player's agent.

Harrison's agent, William Parise, says 2-year-old James Harrison III was released late Tuesday afternoon. He says the boy is doing fine and that his father is missing practice Wednesday to be with the boy.

The boy was bitten on the thigh after his mother let the dog out of its pen Thursday afternoon. Also hurt were the woman and the player's massage therapist, who needed three stitches.

Parise says he's trying to find a place for the dog so it doesn't have to be euthanized.

"[Harrison] would love to find a home for him, but only if it was a home that would provide maximum security," Parise said, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. "This decision is not being made lightly, and it would have to be in the best interest of the welfare of the animal as well as of people."

Harrison has said the dog, named Patron, will have to be put down after a 10-day quarantine. But there are organizations that might take the dog and prevent it from being euthanized, and Harrison is considering those options, Parise said, according to the report.

"I'm a dog lover, and I don't know what I'd do if I lost [my dog]," Parise said, according to the Post-Gazette. "James was that close with Patron. One of the things James and I talked about was that this was a real tragedy -- the injury to his baby, and the baby's mother, and the loss of the dog. It's hard."

Parise said Harrison's dog had never bitten before, according to the report. But it can be very difficult to find shelters that will take a dog that has bitten people.

Best Friends, the organization that took in pit bulls formerly owned by Michael Vick, said it has little room to take in another dog, according to the report.

"Some dogs can be rehabilitated with training," Ledy VanKavage, a legislative analyst for Best Friends, said according to the report. "But so many healthy dogs are being put down. If we had room, we would [take dogs that bite people], but we're pretty full. Unfortunately there aren't enough sanctuaries out there."

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

Memo to everyone who is engaging in this rampant verbal sparring: Please review the Code of Conduct regarding personal attacks. Disagreements are certainly allowed and understandable. But, hopefully we are all able to state our dissenting opinions in a rational manner without resorting to the "You are a retard" defense. Thank you.

Jooser
05-27-2009, 01:46 PM
Good news about Harrison's kid.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4209028


Updated: May 27, 2009, 12:50 PM ET

Harrison's son released
ESPN.com news services

PITTSBURGH -- The son of Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison has been released from a hospital following an attack by the player's pit bull, according to the player's agent.

Harrison's agent, William Parise, says 2-year-old James Harrison III was released late Tuesday afternoon. He says the boy is doing fine and that his father is missing practice Wednesday to be with the boy.

The boy was bitten on the thigh after his mother let the dog out of its pen Thursday afternoon. Also hurt were the woman and the player's massage therapist, who needed three stitches.

Parise says he's trying to find a place for the dog so it doesn't have to be euthanized.

"[Harrison] would love to find a home for him, but only if it was a home that would provide maximum security," Parise said, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. "This decision is not being made lightly, and it would have to be in the best interest of the welfare of the animal as well as of people."

Harrison has said the dog, named Patron, will have to be put down after a 10-day quarantine. But there are organizations that might take the dog and prevent it from being euthanized, and Harrison is considering those options, Parise said, according to the report.

"I'm a dog lover, and I don't know what I'd do if I lost [my dog]," Parise said, according to the Post-Gazette. "James was that close with Patron. One of the things James and I talked about was that this was a real tragedy -- the injury to his baby, and the baby's mother, and the loss of the dog. It's hard."

Parise said Harrison's dog had never bitten before, according to the report. But it can be very difficult to find shelters that will take a dog that has bitten people.

Best Friends, the organization that took in pit bulls formerly owned by Michael Vick, said it has little room to take in another dog, according to the report.

"Some dogs can be rehabilitated with training," Ledy VanKavage, a legislative analyst for Best Friends, said according to the report. "But so many healthy dogs are being put down. If we had room, we would [take dogs that bite people], but we're pretty full. Unfortunately there aren't enough sanctuaries out there."

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

Memo to everyone who is engaging in this rampant verbal sparring: Please review the Code of Conduct regarding personal attacks. Disagreements are certainly allowed and understandable. But, hopefully we are all able to state our dissenting opinions in a rational manner without resorting to the "You are a retard" defense. Thank you.

Thanks RB, I was gonna point that out myself. I don't appreciate being referred to as stupid or retarded and I'd like for the name calling to stop. 43, you are obviously not going to win this argument with canine lovers, and you are just inflaming a lot of folks here with the 'retard' talk. Some folks around here have children with legitimate learning disablilities or other medical conditions that I am sure do not approve of this childishness.

P.S. Sorry I said you taste like chicken, Flippy. :D

NC Steeler Fan
05-27-2009, 03:49 PM
Why isn't Harrison taking his dog back?

flippy
05-27-2009, 04:14 PM
http://i715.photobucket.com/albums/ww152/lanemojo/pitbullsavethepit.png

Flip, I heard that dog bit you because it heard you tasted like chicken.... :wink:

lol

flippy
05-27-2009, 04:15 PM
Good news about Harrison's kid.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4209028


Updated: May 27, 2009, 12:50 PM ET

Harrison's son released
ESPN.com news services

PITTSBURGH -- The son of Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison has been released from a hospital following an attack by the player's pit bull, according to the player's agent.

Harrison's agent, William Parise, says 2-year-old James Harrison III was released late Tuesday afternoon. He says the boy is doing fine and that his father is missing practice Wednesday to be with the boy.

The boy was bitten on the thigh after his mother let the dog out of its pen Thursday afternoon. Also hurt were the woman and the player's massage therapist, who needed three stitches.

Parise says he's trying to find a place for the dog so it doesn't have to be euthanized.

"[Harrison] would love to find a home for him, but only if it was a home that would provide maximum security," Parise said, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. "This decision is not being made lightly, and it would have to be in the best interest of the welfare of the animal as well as of people."

Harrison has said the dog, named Patron, will have to be put down after a 10-day quarantine. But there are organizations that might take the dog and prevent it from being euthanized, and Harrison is considering those options, Parise said, according to the report.

"I'm a dog lover, and I don't know what I'd do if I lost [my dog]," Parise said, according to the Post-Gazette. "James was that close with Patron. One of the things James and I talked about was that this was a real tragedy -- the injury to his baby, and the baby's mother, and the loss of the dog. It's hard."

Parise said Harrison's dog had never bitten before, according to the report. But it can be very difficult to find shelters that will take a dog that has bitten people.

Best Friends, the organization that took in pit bulls formerly owned by Michael Vick, said it has little room to take in another dog, according to the report.

"Some dogs can be rehabilitated with training," Ledy VanKavage, a legislative analyst for Best Friends, said according to the report. "But so many healthy dogs are being put down. If we had room, we would [take dogs that bite people], but we're pretty full. Unfortunately there aren't enough sanctuaries out there."

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

Memo to everyone who is engaging in this rampant verbal sparring: Please review the Code of Conduct regarding personal attacks. Disagreements are certainly allowed and understandable. But, hopefully we are all able to state our dissenting opinions in a rational manner without resorting to the "You are a retard" defense. Thank you.

What if I agree with you and still think you are retarded :P

Djfan
05-27-2009, 04:23 PM
Flippy, Flippy, Flippy. :?

steelers43
05-28-2009, 02:43 AM
Breed specific rules don't make sense?

How many die from Pomeranian bites? Dachshund bites? Pitbull attacks?

People who say they are the same might just as well state they are full blown retard.

That's not the point ... your whole argument is it's stupid for people with children to own pitt bulls since they have been involved in fatal attacks. Since Pomeranians can also kill then the logical assumption for you to make is it's stupid for people with children to own ANY dog. I mean if there is just one person killed by a breed then you are putting your child at risk. That is what you are saying. Taking that further means YOU are stupid ... well, at least according to your own logic. I don't really think you're stupid but then my views differ from yours on this subject.
Of course it isn't the point because it goes completely against your point.

They are not the same. One is known for severely maming or killing when they snap. The others are proven to snap less and with much less damage possible. Saying a Pit is no different from any dog is a completely ignorant statement.

No, my whole point is anyone who has young children around animals capable and known for snapping and causing most death's by dog bites is simply ignorant and borderline child endangerment.

Jooser
05-28-2009, 01:09 PM
Breed specific rules don't make sense?

How many die from Pomeranian bites? Dachshund bites? Pitbull attacks?

People who say they are the same might just as well state they are full blown retard.

That's not the point ... your whole argument is it's stupid for people with children to own pitt bulls since they have been involved in fatal attacks. Since Pomeranians can also kill then the logical assumption for you to make is it's stupid for people with children to own ANY dog. I mean if there is just one person killed by a breed then you are putting your child at risk. That is what you are saying. Taking that further means YOU are stupid ... well, at least according to your own logic. I don't really think you're stupid but then my views differ from yours on this subject.
Of course it isn't the point because it goes completely against your point.

They are not the same. One is known for severely maming or killing when they snap. The others are proven to snap less and with much less damage possible. Saying a Pit is no different from any dog is a completely ignorant statement.

No, my whole point is anyone who has young children around animals capable and known for snapping and causing most death's by dog bites is simply ignorant and borderline child endangerment.


You also called those people "stupid and RETARDED". Grow up.

ikestops85
05-28-2009, 01:57 PM
Breed specific rules don't make sense?

How many die from Pomeranian bites? Dachshund bites? Pitbull attacks?

People who say they are the same might just as well state they are full blown retard.

That's not the point ... your whole argument is it's stupid for people with children to own pitt bulls since they have been involved in fatal attacks. Since Pomeranians can also kill then the logical assumption for you to make is it's stupid for people with children to own ANY dog. I mean if there is just one person killed by a breed then you are putting your child at risk. That is what you are saying. Taking that further means YOU are stupid ... well, at least according to your own logic. I don't really think you're stupid but then my views differ from yours on this subject.
Of course it isn't the point because it goes completely against your point.

They are not the same. One is known for severely maming or killing when they snap. The others are proven to snap less and with much less damage possible. Saying a Pit is no different from any dog is a completely ignorant statement.

No, my whole point is anyone who has young children around animals capable and known for snapping and causing most death's by dog bites is simply ignorant and borderline child endangerment.

I have to disagree because there are many more breeds prone to snap and bite more often than Pit Bulls. Obviously smaller dogs cause less damage when they do but the point remains that ANY dog can kill. Poodles and Chiuauas are known to be high strung and often bite or nip.

Since you 1) Have a child
2) Own a dog
3) Think parents who own animals that could kill their children are retards (your word)


Then the only possible conclusion is you are calling yourself a retard. Again, this is your opinion -- not mine.

How would you feel if your dog bit your child and took off their nose or one of their eyes. Horrible I'm sure. Now if you are saying the odds of your child being seriously injured are a little higher with a pit bull compared to a chiuaua then I would have to agree. The same way I agree that a child is more likely to get seriously injured when riding in a chevy that has an accident as opposed to a volvo or mercedes.

Now let's look at the flip side of the argument. Which breed of dog is more likely to protect your child if someone tries to harm them. Pit Bulls are know to be fiercely protective. Chiuauas --- not so much. So now let's through the odds together. While the odds of a Pit Bull seriously injuring your child are slightly higher than smaller breeds the odds of a Pit Bull protecting your child in a dangerous situation are better. So maybe you ought to find out if there are more child kidnappings per year than there are child injuries from pit bull attacks. If that's the case then it might be advantageous to own a pit bull.

One other thing I'd like to throw into the mix. Did you know your child has more of a chance of being attacked if they go to school in a lower socioeconomic school district than they do if they attend school in a higher one? Nine out of ten attacks occur in the lower socioeconomic category. Okay, I made that up but it might be true. Also, kids that play piano or chess are less likely to get injured than those that play outside with their friends. So where do you draw the line. We all want to protect our children but unless you put them in a bubble and feed them through a tube sh!t happens. If you want to let your child experience the love of a pet then pit bulls are a loving breed. Certainly not something that could be considered child endangerment. Getting behind the wheel of a car that you child is in after having drinks or shall I say toking up is a far greater crime in my mind.

Just some food for thought.

SteelCzar76
05-28-2009, 02:38 PM
Breed specific rules don't make sense?

How many die from Pomeranian bites? Dachshund bites? Pitbull attacks?

People who say they are the same might just as well state they are full blown retard.

That's not the point ... your whole argument is it's stupid for people with children to own pitt bulls since they have been involved in fatal attacks. Since Pomeranians can also kill then the logical assumption for you to make is it's stupid for people with children to own ANY dog. I mean if there is just one person killed by a breed then you are putting your child at risk. That is what you are saying. Taking that further means YOU are stupid ... well, at least according to your own logic. I don't really think you're stupid but then my views differ from yours on this subject.
Of course it isn't the point because it goes completely against your point.

They are not the same. One is known for severely maming or killing when they snap. The others are proven to snap less and with much less damage possible. Saying a Pit is no different from any dog is a completely ignorant statement.

No, my whole point is anyone who has young children around animals capable and known for snapping and causing most death's by dog bites is simply ignorant and borderline child endangerment.

I have to disagree because there are many more breeds prone to snap and bite more often than Pit Bulls. Obviously smaller dogs cause less damage when they do but the point remains that ANY dog can kill. Poodles and Chiuauas are known to be high strung and often bite or nip.

Since you 1) Have a child
2) Own a dog
3) Think parents who own animals that could kill their children are retards (your word)


Then the only possible conclusion is you are calling yourself a retard. Again, this is your opinion -- not mine.

How would you feel if your dog bit your child and took off their nose or one of their eyes. Horrible I'm sure. Now if you are saying the odds of your child being seriously injured are a little higher with a pit bull compared to a chiuaua then I would have to agree. The same way I agree that a child is more likely to get seriously injured when riding in a chevy that has an accident as opposed to a volvo or mercedes.

Now let's look at the flip side of the argument. Which breed of dog is more likely to protect your child if someone tries to harm them. Pit Bulls are know to be fiercely protective. Chiuauas --- not so much. So now let's through the odds together. While the odds of a Pit Bull seriously injuring your child are slightly higher than smaller breeds the odds of a Pit Bull protecting your child in a dangerous situation are better. So maybe you ought to find out if there are more child kidnappings per year than there are child injuries from pit bull attacks. If that's the case then it might be advantageous to own a pit bull.

One other thing I'd like to throw into the mix. Did you know your child has more of a chance of being attacked if they go to school in a lower socioeconomic school district than they do if they attend school in a higher one? Nine out of ten attacks occur in the lower socioeconomic category. Okay, I made that up but it might be true. Also, kids that play piano or chess are less likely to get injured than those that play outside with their friends. So where do you draw the line. We all want to protect our children but unless you put them in a bubble and feed them through a tube sh!t happens. If you want to let your child experience the love of a pet then pit bulls are a loving breed. Certainly not something that could be considered child endangerment. Getting behind the wheel of a car that you child is in after having drinks or shall I say toking up is a far greater crime in my mind.

Just some food for thought.


You sir,...as Hannibal just posted the battle of Cannae as a rebuttal. :Clap

RuthlessBurgher
05-28-2009, 02:56 PM
Picture of Patron from Post-Gazette's website:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/images/200905/20090527rad_harrison_dog_330.jpg

SteelCzar76
05-28-2009, 03:05 PM
Picture of Patron from Post-Gazette's website:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/images/200905/20090527rad_harrison_dog_330.jpg


Good looking dog. Looks as though it's Bully with some OFRN in it's lineage at some point though. But then again that's not always a true marker, as the red trait can 'pop up' at times in other lines that are not Old Family at all.

Jooser
05-28-2009, 05:45 PM
Another Planet patron....
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p262/jooser73/SDC10876.jpg

Pucker up!

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p262/jooser73/SDC10182-Copy.jpg

Bubba warming up before going for one of my kids legs. :lol:

Rorboton
06-01-2010, 04:18 PM
Latest News and Rumors James Harrison’s Dog Attacks His Son
Posted by Mike Florio on May 22, 2009, 12:06 p.m.
The son of Steelers linebacker James Harrison has been attacked by Harrison’s dog, according to WTAE-TV in Pittsburgh.

Per Ari Hait of WTAE, Harrison’s son was transported to Children’s Hospital in Pittsburgh with “severe” dog bite injuries. The injuries reportedly are not life threatening.

A Steelers spokesman told Hait that the team is aware of the situation.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to Harrison’s son for a full, complete, and rapid recovery.

UPDATE: The on-air version of the story did not mention the type of the dog. The online version indicates that the dog is a pit bull.


Another moron owning a pit bull.


Just another squeeler getting owned by a Dawg!

RuthlessBurgher
06-01-2010, 04:22 PM
Latest News and Rumors James Harrison’s Dog Attacks His Son
Posted by Mike Florio on May 22, 2009, 12:06 p.m.
The son of Steelers linebacker James Harrison has been attacked by Harrison’s dog, according to WTAE-TV in Pittsburgh.

Per Ari Hait of WTAE, Harrison’s son was transported to Children’s Hospital in Pittsburgh with “severe” dog bite injuries. The injuries reportedly are not life threatening.

A Steelers spokesman told Hait that the team is aware of the situation.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to Harrison’s son for a full, complete, and rapid recovery.

UPDATE: The on-air version of the story did not mention the type of the dog. The online version indicates that the dog is a pit bull.


Another moron owning a pit bull.


Just another squeeler getting owned by a Dawg!

A Cleveland troll makes his first post by digging up a thread that is now over a year old?

That's certainly a unique way to start out. Ugh...

http://www.post-gazette.com/images3/20051225mf_fbn_fan_takedownPJ_450.jpg

:brownssuck

flippy
06-01-2010, 04:58 PM
Geez, I thought he did something new. I saw the May dates, but missed the 2009 instead of 2010 until I saw RB's post.

Would it be ok if I call this stains fan a name?

hawaiiansteel
06-01-2010, 05:02 PM
Just another squeeler getting owned by a Dawg!


hey Rorboton, thought you might enjoy these:




Cleveland Browns Jokes:


Q: What do you call 47 millionaires around a TV watching the Super Bowl?
A: The Cleveland Browns.

Q: What do the Cleveland Browns and the Pope have in common?
A: They both can make 70,000 people stand up and yell "Jesus Christ."

Q: How do you keep a Cleveland Brown out of your yard?
A: Put up goal posts.

Q: Where do you go in Ohio in case of a tornado?
A: To the Mistake By The Lake - you never see a touchdown there.

Q: What do you call a Cleveland Brown with a Super Bowl ring?
A: A thief.

Q: Why doesn't Columbus, Ohio have a professional football team?
A: Because then Cleveland would want one.

Q: What's the difference between the Browns and a dollar bill?
A: You can still get four quarters out of a dollar bill.

Q: How many Browns does it take to win a Super Bowl?
A: Nobody knows and we may never find out.

SteelAbility
06-01-2010, 05:08 PM
Just another squeeler getting owned by a Dawg!


hey Rorboton, thought you might enjoy these:




Cleveland Browns Jokes:


Q: What do you call 47 millionaires around a TV watching the Super Bowl?
A: The Cleveland Browns.

Q: What do the Cleveland Browns and the Pope have in common?
A: They both can make 70,000 people stand up and yell "Jesus Christ."

Q: How do you keep a Cleveland Brown out of your yard?
A: Put up goal posts.

Q: Where do you go in Ohio in case of a tornado?
A: To the Mistake By The Lake - you never see a touchdown there.

Q: What do you call a Cleveland Brown with a Super Bowl ring?
A: A thief.

Q: Why doesn't Columbus, Ohio have a professional football team?
A: Because then Cleveland would want one.

Q: What's the difference between the Browns and a dollar bill?
A: You can still get four quarters out of a dollar bill.

Q: How many Browns does it take to win a Super Bowl?
A: Nobody knows and we may never find out.


Q: What is it so hard for Browns fans to go to their home stadium?
A: The Drive is too painful.

Q: How come the Broncos so easily beat the Browns?
A: They had The Drive for it.

Discipline of Steel
06-01-2010, 06:25 PM
Just another squeeler getting owned by a Dawg!


hey Rorboton, thought you might enjoy these:




Cleveland Browns Jokes:


Q: What do you call 47 millionaires around a TV watching the Super Bowl?
A: The Cleveland Browns.

Q: What do the Cleveland Browns and the Pope have in common?
A: They both can make 70,000 people stand up and yell "Jesus Christ."

Q: How do you keep a Cleveland Brown out of your yard?
A: Put up goal posts.

Q: Where do you go in Ohio in case of a tornado?
A: To the Mistake By The Lake - you never see a touchdown there.

Q: What do you call a Cleveland Brown with a Super Bowl ring?
A: A thief.

Q: Why doesn't Columbus, Ohio have a professional football team?
A: Because then Cleveland would want one.

Q: What's the difference between the Browns and a dollar bill?
A: You can still get four quarters out of a dollar bill.

Q: How many Browns does it take to win a Super Bowl?
A: Nobody knows and we may never find out.

I like #3 and #6 the best! :P

JTP53609
06-02-2010, 11:01 AM
i dropped the browns in the super bowl this morning, it was pretty nasty, gave it two flushes

flippy
06-02-2010, 11:39 AM
i dropped the browns in the super bowl this morning, it was pretty nasty, gave it two flushes

Some of the big boys musta missed the SuperBowl cause my pool was filled with Browns this morning. I dropped them off around 7.

Snatch98
06-02-2010, 12:00 PM
lol you can blame this one on me. I post pretty regularly on a browns board. I don't troll but post over there occasionally just for some inter-division news so to speak. I do occasionally rip the occasional dip sh.it a new ******* but for the most part the guys that actually know what they are talking about respect my opinion. I apparently really pissed one of the simple minded bottom feeders off yesterday because he also went to my youtube profile which I almost never use. Rorbotron is a name I use in a few other places. I guess this guy thinks he's going to "get to me" by posting here. I'm not surprised he dug up a ridiculously old thread.

http://www.thebrownsboard.com is the other board and I believe this guy posts under speedyd900rr.

He's just a simple guy so if the spirit moves you go easy on him. I want want him taking the browns to the super bowl in his dockers.

EDIT: His simple nature is actually on full blast. He couldn't even copy my other sn correctly. Rorboton and RorbotRON. Poor guy.

flippy
06-02-2010, 02:25 PM
lol you can blame this one on me. I post pretty regularly on a browns board. I don't troll but post over there occasionally just for some inter-division news so to speak. I do occasionally rip the occasional dip sh.it a new bad word but for the most part the guys that actually know what they are talking about respect my opinion. I apparently really pissed one of the simple minded bottom feeders off yesterday because he also went to my youtube profile which I almost never use. Rorbotron is a name I use in a few other places. I guess this guy thinks he's going to "get to me" by posting here. I'm not surprised he dug up a ridiculously old thread.

http://www.thebrownsboard.com is the other board and I believe this guy posts under speedyd900rr.

He's just a simple guy so if the spirit moves you go easy on him. I want want him taking the browns to the super bowl in his dockers.

EDIT: His simple nature is actually on full blast. He couldn't even copy my other sn correctly. Rorboton and RorbotRON. Poor guy.

ok, i blame you. now go unleash hell on that board for me.

remember, if it's brown, flush it down....