| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 78978 | 2007-05-04 08:29:00 | Poll - banning pitbulls | qazwsxokmijn (102) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 547010 | 2007-05-13 11:16:00 | And don't forget the attack of the Killer Tomatoes. Killer Tomatoes? (photo.ringo.com) |
bob_doe_nz (92) | ||
| 547011 | 2007-05-14 00:45:00 | I hope you're joking in that post... Anyways, I feel it's best to keep pitbulls legal, but there must be very heavy repercussions if an owner neglects their pitbulls and/or irresponsibly own pitbulls. Because as I see it, if one owns a pet, one must take full responsibility of it and teach it to abide to necessary rules. Dogs that attack humans are in most cases neglected and/or were in irresponsible hands. And there must be heavy repercussions for that. Hey...people don't even take responsibility for their kids...let alone dogs! |
SurferJoe46 (51) | ||
| 547012 | 2007-05-14 01:33:00 | . . . missed the edit time loop again . . . My thoughts are that a child should be able to take the food out of any dogs mouth while it is eating . If it growls or gets uppity, then the dog has to go . Children cannot gather the thoughts of "responses to consequences" in any situation . . after all . . didn't we all "test" to see if fire really burns? I figger that if a dog shows any aggressive tendencies at all . . that it has no place in my home . . even though I don't have any children at present living here . I DO have the itinerant grandchild coming sometimes . . . so the test would be the same . We raised boxers when I was young . . and any kid could take food away from them . . . poke them in the eye or "accidentally" kick one of them and the worst thing the dog might do would be to shake the kid off them as they stood up and looked for another place to recline . If you knocked at the door however, you'd get greeted by loud barking and a ferocious show of that mottled black and red mouth with teeth that seemed ready to bite and devour whomever got in . These days I have a chow/golden retriever mix that is SO STOOOPID that she growls at the rising moon/stars and thinks the garbage men are stealing valuables from us every week . She takes commands to play dead, (sleep) or eat or bark without any formal training at all . But I can see in her breed . . at least the chow side of it that she doesn't want kids around her . She's uncomfortable with them underfoot and tries to get away from them . So, as I say . . there are differences in dog types . Ya gotta be careful . |
SurferJoe46 (51) | ||
| 547013 | 2007-05-14 06:28:00 | My thoughts are that a child should be able to take the food out of any dogs mouth while it is eating. If it growls or gets uppity, then the dog has to go. If that was law, you won't be able to find many dogs in the world. You have to take into account the dogs' natural instincts, Surfer. It won't be fair of us to expect them to defy their natural instinct like that. ;) Of course, there are friendly breeds that would allow random children do just that - Golden Retrievers would be one example. But in general, a dog would be pretty annoyed if some random kid takes its food away. Much like us - we wouldn't really tolerate some random kid's hand that had been playing with mud, and god knows what be in our mouth and extracting half-chewed food, would we? :p |
qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 547014 | 2007-05-14 06:30:00 | Many a child would bite if you tried to remove food from its mouth. | Graham L (2) | ||
| 547015 | 2007-05-14 11:43:00 | All predators will retain their killer instincts to some extent however they are trained. Cats will kill rodents and birds but are generally harmless to humans. Dogs however can be a threat to human life and as such must be treated with care. Breeds can be difficult to define and people are of course extremely protective of their pets. What would people think about compulsory sterilisation of aggressive breeds, identified by genetic criteria when in doubt to avoid observer bias? | TGoddard (7263) | ||
| 547016 | 2007-05-14 22:22:00 | What would people think about compulsory sterilisation of aggressive breeds, identified by genetic criteria when in doubt to avoid observer bias? Except for the probable difficulties with the Race Relations Conciliator, I would tend to support this bit. ;) |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 547017 | 2007-05-14 22:50:00 | What would people think about compulsory sterilisation of aggressive breeds, identified by genetic criteria when in doubt to avoid observer bias?Except for the probable difficulties with the Race Relations Conciliator, I would tend to support this bit. ;)Well, eugenics (en.wikipedia.org) IS a touchy subject... :D | johcar (6283) | ||
| 547018 | 2007-05-15 07:47:00 | OK . . . so maybe it boils down to the owner's realization of their own dog . I personally like the dumb dog we have as she is a pretty good barker, although I doubt I'd have to bury belt buckles and shoe soles from people she's eaten if they hopped over our fence . Also, knowing the limitations of a dog . . and each is fairly different I agree, is primary to having a safe and sane pet anyway . Just as I wouldn't allow a mountain lion to sleep with me or my child, there are others who swear that it works out OK for them . Make the owners responsible, that's the answer . BTW: most insurance companies here in the states won't sell an insurance policy to those who own aggressive breeds . . . . homeowners insurance, I mean . If you keep a dastardly type, then you can't get liability or medical insurance for your home and guests . |
SurferJoe46 (51) | ||
| 547019 | 2007-05-15 11:07:00 | Well all i know is that i was bought up proper . I was guided to understand what was expected of me, and while that didn't include stupid tricks on command which impress some humans, it did include knowing to go outside to pee, and eating gently out of the hand of those who feed me . I've also learnt to train humans to scratch and fuss over me by being cute and gentle, and some even to feed me . I got so good at it that my human didn't even feed me for 3 whole years, i'd sneak out and visit all my friends in the neighborhood, and no-one would mind because they all knew me, and we made friends . Humans are often easily trained . :) What bugs me though is humans who keep a dog to kick and scare to the point where the dog is constantly insecure, and trys to hide it's fear through being a total dickhead . What the sub60IQ humans don't realise is that all this shows is how termanally scared the vicous dogs humans are, after all, having a dog that is ready to nut off at the slightest thing is like having a loaded gun in your pocket . . it may well blow your own balls off! Some humans are very silly, and while i am a bit of a racist when it comes to pitbulls and the breeds that were bred for killing, i still say that the owners have far more blame for how they set the dogs up . . . Really if someone can only train a dog to be an dangerous, beaten, insecure idiot, that human shouldn't be allowed dogs . . . . that simple . . What you do with the dogs that become problems, i don't know, but what must be done with the humans who set the dogs up to be problems is clear . Hope the bitches perspective helps this debate :) Woof! |
Pugwash (12210) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 | |||||