[quote]michael2507 wrote:
makkun wrote:
Dweezil,
Dweezil wrote:
[…]My dick is huge, by the way.
Ha ha, I thought exactly the same, but didn’t write it. 
Makkun
You thought Dweezil’s dick is huge?
;)[/quote]
Makkun is both sensual and unafraid to explore new sexual horizons.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
SBT wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Study stuff
I do know that the majority of owners for that breed, mixed breed, assumed to be aggressive dog, are the type of owners that want that dog to be mean and want them to attack.
[/quote]
You KNOW this?
You state this as if it were a fact.
See? This is the problem with a sweeping generalization like yours.
In the numerous “pitbull owner” threads that have come up on this site, what you “KNOW” is contradicted by a bunch of people with families, and hands on application and experience with this breed of dogs.
You don’t actualy KNOW anything. You have read a few things, and believed them.
If you actualy KNEW something FROM EXPERIENCE on this topic, you wouldn’tbe spewing the ignorant garbage disguised as KNOWING SOMETHING that you have been.
Have you ever even considered the idea that what you KNOW is WRONG?
I could copy and paste a bunch of articles and writing, but as Heavythrower knows, a picture is worth a thousand words.
I would love to see included in the stats of pit bull and rottweiler bite fatalities where the dogs were raised and the income level of the owners. I live in Newark right now. I see a lot of kids (some quite young)with pits and quite a few with rotties and it’s not because they want a dog to play fetch.
Many of them treat the dogs like crap. They don’t feed them properly or have any clue about how to train and socialize a dog. I have seen many dogs tied up or penned up surrounded by their feces. They sometimes are left to wander around loose to pick through garbage. These dogs are timebombs.
People who own their own homes and have jobs need to be aware that if their dog bites someone they will get sued and they have something to lose. Poor people do not worry about lawsuits so they don’t worry about their dogs being vicious.
I have owned rotties and currently own a rottie. I usd to live in a suburb in CT and there were many dog owners and I never saw the irresponsibility (and cruelty)I see in the inner city. Whenever it was reported on the news that a pit had bitten someone the reports were always from one of the cities like New Haven or Hartford. I’m not saying poor people shouldn’t own dogs but I do believe that there is a relationship between poverty, ignorance, and improper dog ownership.
If you can’t feed your family or raise your kids to not be criminals then how are you supposed to have the tools to raise a healthy dog? It gets me pissed that I have to suffer as a rottie owner because of the ignorance of others.
BTW, I used to deliver newspapers and I was attacked by poodles, retrievers, mutts, you name it. I was even bitten by a little old mutt that had no teeth. The owner thought it was funny. In my experience, as far as behavior goes, it’s the little dogs who exhibit the most aggressive tendencies. They tolerate nothing. One pitbull bite is bigger news than 100 poodle bites.
[quote]Dweezil wrote:
michael2507 wrote:
makkun wrote:
Dweezil,
Dweezil wrote:
[…]My dick is huge, by the way.
Ha ha, I thought exactly the same, but didn’t write it.
Makkun
You thought Dweezil’s dick is huge?
Makkun is both sensual and unafraid to explore new sexual horizons.[/quote]
I was thinking sensitive and fearless.
Guess I set myself up for that one…
Makkun
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
In the numerous “pitbull owner” threads that have come up on this site, what you “KNOW” is contradicted by a bunch of people with families, and hands on application and experience with this breed of dogs.[/quote]
I don’t have the information to prove or disprove the statement about the average pitbull owner. These posts you mention don’t prove anything either, though, other than the fact that there seems to be a certain amount of people on this site capable of providing the ‘right’ environment for their dogs. It definitely is a pity when it is they (or the dogs) who have to deal with a mess others (a minority?) are responsible for.
By the way, nice pictures, heavythrower.
Here is a picture of my vicious dog! We should ban her too because I only “bred” her to kill.
I cannot stand when people make sweeping generalizations. Maybe it makes them feel more civilized to not allow bull terriers or gives them a certain sense of superiority. But to characterize an entire breed of dogs, no matter who the “expert” is, reeks of stupidity and tells me that the person has alterior motives for saying what they say.
I find it funny, but in several personal experiences, I find the same people who cry about the “violence” of these dogs are the same ones which will condone or participate in certain moral and sexual practices that have killed more people than any breed of dog that ever walked the face of the earth.
This society seems to be moving into a pussy wimp state. That is why we see the opposite extreme reaction against that pussy wimp state with kids nowadays being obsessed with violence. Fear of these dogs seems to be a more appropriate response these days versus actually learning about the dogs, treating them and their owners as indivduals, and learning to act properly around these dogs.
[quote]michael2507 wrote:
SkyzykS wrote:
In the numerous “pitbull owner” threads that have come up on this site, what you “KNOW” is contradicted by a bunch of people with families, and hands on application and experience with this breed of dogs.
I don’t have the information to prove or disprove the statement about the average pitbull owner. These posts you mention don’t prove anything either, though, other than the fact that there seems to be a certain amount of people on this site capable of providing the ‘right’ environment for their dogs. It definitely is a pity when it is they (or the dogs) who have to deal with a mess others (a minority?) are responsible for.
By the way, nice pictures, heavythrower. [/quote]
What this post speaks to is that you have a person with no hands on application claiming to “Know” the motives of a very large number of people.
What it proves is that she doesn’t actualy “know” anything, but this doesn’t stop her from spouting forth a bunch of fear based garbage.
She has read a few articles, and formed an opinion without consideration for the fact that she doesn’t actualy “know” anything.
I’ve had a shitload of experience with pitbulls since I was very young. When I met a woman who has a packrat type of disorder with keeping live animals, I was given an opportunity to rescue a dog that was being neglected.
That dog is in the picture I posted. A pitbull/lab mix. I had no hesitation in taking that poor dog in and giving it a good home, because I knew that in the right environment, it would be a great companion.
The dog was not a “gun of choice”. It was a suffering, neglected animal.
She is now a loyal, gentle, companion.
There are a lot of people who realize the potential of pitbulls as a family pet. Not everybody that gets one is looking for the fear based description of an animal, with the motives for having one that Octobergirl has portrayed.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Do you not even want to consider the other side that maybe there is a reason people fear the dogs?
[/quote]
A reason to fear these dogs and a LEGITIMATE reason to fear these dogs are two very different things.
Here’s about a thousand acres of woods, and a rarely occuring, very edible, and very expensive mushroom.
But never mind their ability to track.
People like me just want a dog that can maul babies.
I’ve often heard tell of chihuahuas’ nasty predisposition (strangely, always by those who do not own one); they’re territorial, untrainable, blah, blah, blah…
This is my daughter (roughly 11 weeks old in this pic) with my 4 chihuahuas. They largely ignore/avoid her, as she hasn’t quite yet mastered the art of petting, but even when we hold one of the males for her to pet, they never growl or otherwise complain when she twists their ears, muzzles, eyelids, or handfuls of fur/skin.
As much as I love my dogs, they would be out on their asses in a heart beat if I even thought they posed a threat to my daughter, but despite popular opinion, they clearly are not, so my family will remain intact.
[quote]Dweezil wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
Listen.
You are the professional equivalent of little man’s syndrome.
For me to argue with you would be akin to me taking on one of my administrative assistants. You are a secretary (paralegal) who wishes she were an attorney (CEO).
My point is you are obviously good at research (details), but are lacking in practical application.
I suspect you had an assignment which lead you to conduct research parallel to your post.
That’s OK. However, don’t come on this forum and try to make a play at anything beyond a superficial level of knowledge because your post clearly proves otherwise.
Tell you what. Just admit you made a stupid fucking post and go away.
Per my recollection, this is the first time our paths have crossed and will likely be the last.
You are not all that memorable, anyway. I suspect I will have forgotten about this by tomorrow am.
I’d love to know how your claim of being the “CEO of three different companies” (which means nothing) directly applies to an argument about animals. Are you, infact, the CEO of Petsmart? Because if you are, I’ve got a hell of a product pitch.
Listen, it’s an advanced external imaging device, and what you do is you put it around the collar of your dog and if it’s a pitbull and you’re living in an area where they’re banned and someone walks by it creates the illusion that your dog is a bichon frise. Tell me if you’re interested, the patent is already in the works.
Judging by the level of self-validation you feel as if you have to provide without request in an attempt to legitimize yourself in a conversation about dogs on an internet forum for weightlifting I’m pretty surprised you haven’t torn a rotator cuff patting yourself on the back yet.
I too believe that breed is irrelevant and that pitbulls are directly targeted by this because they have an intimidating aesthetic appearance, and I think any laws banning the animals will only make the assholes that train dogs to fight find another breed to utilize.
I’d just thought I’d throw my hat in the ring since I like octobergirl, and while she may be a lowly paralegal wading through the seedy depths of obscurity with a below 7 figure income while you sit upon high in a throne made of gold and diamonds eating fine caviar and getting blown by SI cover models I am not a researcher, and I am an owner of a company. Only one, though. I guess I’ll have to create two other companies and get the paperwork filed to compete with you. After I’m done with that, we’re going to have a race to see who can go into as many threads as possible and talk about little man’s syndrome while speaking on the topic of how spectacular we are.
My dick is huge, by the way.[/quote]
Lighten up, Francis.
She questioned my ability to articulate myself in spoken format. I felt she was incorrect in that assumption and pointed out something which I thought provided evidence to the contrary.
I am sure she appreciates your support but I stand by what I said.
She did a little research and now thinks she has enough horsepower to come on a thread that was meant to bolster a maligned breed and be taken seriously. In this she failed miserably.
You could ignore my posts all together and still come to this same conclusion.
I used her chosen career as an analogy. I thought after I wrote it that it was more condescending than I would have liked, and for that I apologize.
Having spent the majority of my life around the “bully breeds,” currently having children rasied around Am Staffs, and having spent considerable time trying to educate people in some of the communities we have lived in as to the virtues of these breeds, I am deeply offended when someone posts a thread meant to bolster a maligned breed and it is met with this level of ignorance.
There are too many posts for me to answer individually, so for those who have responded to me, here goes.
On a side note, here in San Diego ferrets are banned as pets. Those owners are just as upset. In Burbank, cats can’t run loose and must be leashed. Pet legislation is not new.
I don’t have to have met the majority of owners. That is just a ridiculous statement, “have you met the majority of owners.” I have read the statistics, I have researched cases. I can’t do that just on a whim and my opinion or imagination.
I don’t own the breed but that doesn’t mean I haven’t come into contact with them.
I will not share the same perspective as those who champion the dogs so we aren’t going to agree.
As I have stated time and again based on bad owners these dogs are raised to attack. Deny it but it won’t make it less true.
Because I do not agree with you does not make me ignorant. Maybe that is a weapon of last resort for some.
I posted portions of the link because as Digital said, “he is tooooo lazy” to get the information that is available.
Congratulations to all of you responsible pet owners. You are the type of owner that I wish owned all of those dogs.
The car analogy is stupid. I have explained it wont get loose and go on a rampage.
The other problem with legislation is laws are for the law-abiding. The type of people who want this dog to be an attack dog, for dog fights, to scare people, to protect drugs, are the same type of people who won’t conform to the law. So this does take a lot of the effectiveness out of the law.
I don’t know what the solution is. I like that Malonted had to go through some hoops but again, would people who regularly break the law do that?
So what is the solution?
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
I don’t have to have met the majority of owners. That is just a ridiculous statement, “have you met the majority of owners.” I have read the statistics, I have researched cases. I can’t do that just on a whim and my opinion or imagination.
[/quote]
Sorry, but no, it’s not. Not when you open with claiming that the majority of owners want these dogs for attack purposes. Unless you can proove such an outlandlish claim, please back off from the judgement, okay? You don’t know me nor my dog.
Helen Keller had an American Pit Bull Terrier. I just know they must have terrorized the neighborhood, right?
Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.
And by attack some small children, I mean watch basketball on the couch.
[quote]SBT wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
I don’t have to have met the majority of owners. That is just a ridiculous statement, “have you met the majority of owners.” I have read the statistics, I have researched cases. I can’t do that just on a whim and my opinion or imagination.
Sorry, but no, it’s not. Not when you open with claiming that the majority of owners want these dogs for attack purposes. Unless you can proove such an outlandlish claim, please back off from the judgement, okay? You don’t know me nor my dog.
Helen Keller had an American Pit Bull Terrier. I just know they must have terrorized the neighborhood, right?
Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.
And by attack some small children, I mean watch basketball on the couch.
[/quote]
http://www.49abcnews.com/news/2006/jul/27/women_dies_pitbull_attack/
because pitbulls don’t attack people?
the statement, “Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.” What was that supposed to prove? The cavalier attitude of pitbull owners?
I hope all pitbull owners are responsible but not all of them are.
What kind of owner are you?
I wonder how many people that believe genetics make the animal would also argue that black people are genetically inclined to commit crime. I mean the statistics show that African-Americans have a higher per capita crime rate that other races in the USA. It has nothing to do with culture or environment, right?
[quote]Nick H wrote:
I wonder how many people that believe genetics make the animal would also argue that black people are genetically inclined to commit crime. I mean the statistics show that African-Americans have a higher per capita crime rate that other races in the USA. It has nothing to do with culture or enviroment, right?[/quote]
wow now there is post that should bring up some good discussion.
There are some race, ethnic, cultural, economic, and geographic propensities. It’s used in marketing, profiling, advertising, and legislation.
But does anyone want to propose a solution for the dog problem?
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
http://www.49abcnews.com/news/2006/jul/27/women_dies_pitbull_attack/
because pitbulls don’t attack people?
the statement, “Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.” What was that supposed to prove? The cavalier attitude of pitbull owners?
I hope all pitbull owners are responsible but not all of them are.
What kind of owner are you?
[/quote]
Let’s try something a little more recent:
http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=86572
.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
http://www.49abcnews.com/news/2006/jul/27/women_dies_pitbull_attack/
because pitbulls don’t attack people?
[/quote]
I still don’t see how that shows that MOST pitbull owners get them for the reasons you stated.
I can show you a video of someone hunting just for the fun of torturing deer, but that doesn’t mean most hunters do it just to torture deer.
You did say “most” (meaning more than half). I just don’t see how it’s possible to assume that without a prejudice about them. If you have statistics about the intent of most of the purchasers of pitbulls, I think you should ask yourself how they made those statistics.
[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
I’ll add my tuppence worth because this is something I feel strongly about. I have a 4 yr old black Staffordshire bull terrier. We Have had him for about 18 months, from his previous owner (a good guy) who ‘used’ him as a stud dog. As a result ‘Thorn’ has his ‘twig and berrys’ intact. Generally he is the sweetest temperament animal you could ever meet, and I have no hesitation letting him trap my lower lip or tongue between his teeth, and try and gently lead me around - I do the same to him at times.
Anyway, despite all this, and despite me and my GF being mature, responsible owners, who are not scared of disciplining/training our beloved dog when needed, ‘Thorn’ has a darker side. He has a predeliction for fighting, although only with dogs that are larger than him. If he sees another staffie, we have to be very firm with him, and keep him away. Other staffies seem just as keen to ‘have a go’ at him. In fact, I thought it was quite well known that you should be very wary about 2 strange staffies meeting up.
Anyway, the other aspect of Thorns character that is mildly concerning is that if I discipline him physically, he will growl at me. This worried me the first time, but now I respect it for what it is, ie “I’ve got my pride, and you are knocking it” Kind of thing.
ANYWAY, my whole point is that like it or not, the breed does exhibit certain undesirable characteristics, and that if you then couple this with the kind of owner who wants his dog/bitch as more of a status symbol (unfortunately, in the UK, this is quite common, amongst ‘Chav’ culture), you end up with the potential for disaster.
This is my major bugbear and the whole point of my rant: VET THE POTENTIAL OWNER FOR SUITABILITY to the breed. Yes, the breed has certain characteristics that, in the wrong hands, can be fatal. Overall though, they have more potential to be one of the most loyal, and loving of family pets. It burns me up when I see what could have been a lovely example of the breed, distorted into a hostile, aggressive beast by bad/indifferent ownership and mishandling.[/quote]
Sorry but I disagree. It sounds like you’re trying to do the right thing. However, if your dog is agressive towards other dogs and towards you, it is misbehaving, and that’s a result of YOU making mistakes. This can be corrected - see a good dog trainer and let them help you.
I can’t say that I’m doing everything perfectly. My girlfriend works as a dog trainer on the side, and she’s constantly pointing out all the mistaked I’m making.