geordiebloke

Personally I agree with this also, but I also understand that some people enjoy shooting guns for sport and others enjoy having larger vehicles, 4x4's etc.

Same with dogs really, some prefer larger, some prefer smaller, as long as your responsible with both then I don't see a problem.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

"Death is a part of life. Shit happens" Again, tell that to the people involved in those stories.

Asprilla has done the work for me in this thread.

Your attempts to equate dangerous dogs with forces of nature, sharks, crocs, airline travel, butter knives, cars and anything else you could possible think of has just made you look silly.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Once again the point goes whooshing over your head.

You can be as responsible as you like, it might not prevent your pitbull attacking someone, and that when it does the results are likely to be worse than your average mutt. That's why American Pitbulls were banned in the first place.... but heigh ho, I'm sure you have another view.

Deancm_MKII

It's unfortunate and sometimes unfortunate things happen. If it wasn't Pitbulls it'd be something else. That's life, deal with it.

I didn't bring butter knives into the thread.

And you look like you have a completely irrrational fear of something that will never even affect you.

Deancm_MKII

American Pitbulls were banned because of idiots with irrational fears like you.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

You've lost it mate.

Just by repeating over and over that my 'fear' as you put it, is irrational won't help your case. I don't actually have an irrational fear of being attacked by a pitbull, I'm just rationalizing that they are an unnecessary risk in the urban environment, particularly to children it would seem, and should be banned. You seem quite happy to have kids ripped to bits by something which could be eradicated with no loss to society. There are other dogs. Nobody NEEDS a pitbull.

I might add, that should you ever find yourself in the position of walking down a street in the UK and find yourself faced by some knuckle dragging moron proudly displaying his banned pitbull, any fears you might have at that point would be VERY rational.

Deancm_MKII

I've lost it? Get real, you're the one who's lost it with your uneducated opinion on this issue.

How many pitbulls have you seen in an urban environment?

How many pitbulls have you ever met?

What real steps have you taken to really understand the breed?

You have never owned one, you don't know anything about the breed and you don't even know what one looks like, yet you believe they should be eradicated from the face of the Earth based on anecdote, hype and sensational reporting.

With your lack of knowledge about the breed you're not even in a position to have a valid opinion.

If you don't like pitbulls then that's your prerogative; don't own one. Simple!

It's people like you that are going to end up getting Staffies banned.

"(about Pitbulls) it's not the breed, it's the human behind the dog. Aggression is a state of mind, not a breed thing." - Cesar Milan - The Dog Whisperer

iamthecreaturefromuranus

http://www.wlbt.com/global/story.asp?s=11977371
http://www.momlogic.com/2009/04/baby...led_by_pit.php
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local...-99037214.html
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=11989209
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6939442.ece
http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=59271

Those guess these six kids all died because of "anecdote, hype and sensational reporting" then.

Deancm_MKII

1) http://www.wlbt.com/global/story.asp?s=11977371

Dogs were kept in the woods. Says a lot about the owner. No direct evidence that the dogs were actually pitbulls; it's anecdotal and hearsay.

2) http://www.momlogic.com/2009/04/baby...led_by_pit.php

Bullshit blog article with no evidence whatsoever. For all we know it could be fiction.

3) http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local...-99037214.html

Again no evidence that they were actually pitbulls.

4) http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=11989209

Again no evidence that the dog is a pitbull and the article contradicts itself leaving one to wonder about the accuracy of reporting.

5) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6939442.ece

"pitbull terrier-type", "illegal type of dog" What the F does that mean? Is it a Staffy? A Mastiff? Who knows and neither does the article. The owner was a criminal, illegally breeding dogs and "pitbull" is alleged by the reporter.

6) http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=59271

Another bullshit article. Could be fiction for all we know. Where's the EVIDENCE!

Do you believe everything you read on the internet and in the papers? I thought you were a bit smarter than that.

It's also important to bear in mind that there is a very active propaganda campaign against pitbulls so any article could be rubbish to further their cause.

LouiseR

Same type of "Bullshit Blog Article" you quoted below about Viszla's. Can't be one rule for you and one Iam...

And if you read further on in that article you quoted you'd see that the owner blamed the Viszlas behaviour on their handling of the dog.

Deancm_MKII

Actually I quoted a Viszla owners forum, not a blog or newspaper article.

Of course, the owner was inexperienced handling dogs. It all comes back to the owner.

LouiseR

But the fact remains it's one persons word - same as a blog, there's no evidence, there's no fact, could be a crazy person making stuff up, could be you for all anyone knows!

Deancm_MKII

Actually there's a bit of a difference. On the owners forum they are talking about their personal experience whereas the articles are reporting about others' experiences. One is admissible in court, the other is hearsay.

Then again they could both be works of fiction.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Your only acceptable piece of evidence seems to be to have the dog DNA tested. I'm guessing that if it only came out as 95% pitbull then that in your view would be enough to excuse it. That's idiotic.

The fact that people are dying as a result of attacks by pitbulls (or anything else you choose to call them) seems to be an irrelevance to you. Just so long as you can keep your dog.

Deancm_MKII

Photos, admisssions are other forms of evidence. People are being accused of owning pitbuls when after DNA testing there is no pitbull genes in them.

That is not a fact. There is no evidence to support it.

My dog is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, not a Pitbull. In fact there is no actual breed of dog recognised by the Kennel Councils called a Pitbull.