Menu
What's new
Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

BAN GODDAMN PIT BULLS ALREADY!!

Big Dick McGee said:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4469753.html

Jesus fucking Christ, how many people have to be killed by these damned vicious animals before they're banned?

The Police said, "It's just an unfortunate accident". BULLSHIT. Pit Bull Terriers are inherently viscious, you can't "train" it out of them. Just fucking ban 'em already.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. There have been too many cases to ignore the visious streak these animals possess..
 
Are you MAD!! :shock:

We need Pit Bulls to keep down overpopulation. If we didn't let them kill, just think of what would happen to the uncontrolled growing masses..not to mention the economy. :huh:
 
Next we can ban german shepherds and cocker spaniels. They've been known to bite people too.
 
It's always the stupid people who raise their dogs to be mean, not the dog. I've had Chihuahuas that would bite a finger poked at it by some stupid child. I've also had Dobermans who were sweet and even tempered. I have a pit bull mix and she's not at all vicious and loves people. Most of these attacks are made by animals that had really dumb macho type humans who raised the dog without training and proper canine discipline and boundaries. If you banned a breed of dog, then by the same token you must ban all human beings because so many of them engage in criminal behavior. . .say, that's not a bad idea.
 
Ban hip-hop, "gangsta" rap and anything associated with them. (While we're on this little side street, fine music labels for every album wherein the "artist" has substituted "a" for "er", misspelled a word by dropping unnecessary repetition of consonants into it, or used "z" for "s.")

And legalize beatings on anyone who can't wear a baseball cap properly. Sick of that shit.
 
Enkephalen said:
It's always the stupid people who raise their dogs to be mean, not the dog. I've had Chihuahuas that would bite a finger poked at it by some stupid child. I've also had Dobermans who were sweet and even tempered. I have a pit bull mix and she's not at all vicious and loves people. Most of these attacks are made by animals that had really dumb macho type humans who raised the dog without training and proper canine discipline and boundaries. If you banned a breed of dog, then by the same token you must ban all human beings because so many of them engage in criminal behavior. . .say, that's not a bad idea.
Click to expand...

Fuck the Dobermans. I still bear upon the back of my right index finger a long scar where one sank his fucking fang. The fucking animal was lucky I did not kill it for I flew into a goddamn rage and grabbed a nearby hockey stick. I had been ready to jump the face into his owner's yard to beat the living snot out of it when its owner, a 12 year old girl, saw me and begged me not to hurt her dog. I told this little angel her fucking Doberman actually lunged at an 3 year old child which was standing near the fence. That freaked me out so my hand shot out to ensure it did not consider jumping the fence to eat the kid. The pain I experienced from the bite was excruciating. The dog is lucky its master came out because I guarantee it would be dead otherwise. I knew the girl who owned it. Beautiful, sweet little thing. I could not bring myself to attack her dog. Fuck but I wish she had not been home. I would have taken great pleasure in killing her dog. Of that you may all be certain.

As for pit bulls, they are illegal here in Toronto.

500 dogs killed in pit bull ban's wake
Humane Society says city's too quick in putting down dogs


The city has put down 500 pit bulls and other similar dogs since the province targeted the canines in a tougher provincial law that took affect 16 months ago.

Toronto animal control officials report a 13% increase in the number of pit bulls -- and other dogs of similar breeds -- that have been destroyed when comparing the 16-month periods following and prior to the changes to the Dog Owners' Liability Act on Aug. 29, 2005.

The city euthanized 441 pit bull-type canines -- 59 fewer -- during the 16 months before the law took affect.

"It's significant enough -- certainly to those 59 dogs," said Eletta Purdy, manager of Toronto Animal Services.

She added yesterday that the increase is likely due to provisions that prevent animal officials from putting up banned pit bulls for adoption.

The legislation bans ownership of pit bull terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and any other dog that possesses characteristics of those singled out on the list.

However, exemptions are granted if someone in Ontario owned one of the targeted dogs at the time the law was enacted. Animal control officials cannot put dogs up for adoption if they do not qualify for an exemption to an ownership ban.

Purdy said she doesn't know whether the legislation's anti-pit bull provisions have made Toronto a safer place.

"I don't know that pit bulls, per se, were the main issue as far as dealing with dog bites and attacks," she said. "I think the issue was mainly having to do with specific dogs and their behaviour as opposed to a breed group."

Animal control is now determining the number of pit bull attacks on humans that have occurred since the legislation came into force.

Purdy said the law does have measures that allow animal control to better deal with menacing dogs in general.

Lee Oliver, of the Toronto Humane Society, which opposes the breed-specific ban, said he believes those enforcing the legislation in Ontario are too quick to put down the dogs.

"If people will slow down and pay attention, we don't have to be euthanizing all these dogs," he added.

Oliver said that when there's doubt, animal control officials are destroying pit bulls instead of asking questions.

Of the 122 dogs up for adoption at the Toronto Humane Society yesterday, 50 of the pit bulls had had owners.

FACTS SINCE THE LEGISLATION TOOK EFFECT

City animal control officials have euthanized 500 pit bulls and other similar dogs since new provincial legislation kicked in August 2005:

- 122 of the euthanized animals were put down at the request of an owner.

- Concerns about temperament or behaviour prompted the euthanization of 107 of the animals.

- The courts ordered eight to be destroyed.

- Another 195 were put down because they were banned -- no evidence someone owned them prior to the implementation of the law.

- 26 for health reasons.

- 42 were euthanized for other reasons.

- The city estimates there are 250,000 dogs in Toronto. Dog owners have purchased licences for 24,267 pets. Of that total, 1,185 of the licences are for pit bulls and dogs of similar breeds.

- Animal control officers have laid 137 charges against owners since the new legislation came into force in connection with 93 pit bull-related complaints.

- Changes to the Dog Owners' Liability Act ban people from owning pit bulls, Straffordshire bull terriers, American pit bull terriers or any other dog that has the characteristics of those.

- Those who continue to own pit bulls must abide by regulations that require they be sterilized and leashed and muzzled in public.

Toronto Sun
Click to expand...
 
I've known some pit-bulls, when raised by a Responsible person, they are usually sweet dogs. As for the "ingrained" aggression, they are dog-aggressive, not people aggressive.
The dogs should not be banned, just as fire-arms should not be banned, but a regulation to ensure that a person has had the training to raise a powerful animal (much like firearms training) may be prudent. To back it up, a provision requiring a bond, or maybe additional insurance to own a pit-bull may be in order too. If you take care of your dog and raise it right, you'll be fine. If not, then it's negligence and should have penalties just like if you drive recklessly or fire a gun in city limits.

My two cents. It's so difficult to legislate common sense and responsibility.
 
Sadistic Bastard said:
I've known some pit-bulls, when raised by a Responsible person, they are usually sweet dogs. As for the "ingrained" aggression, they are dog-aggressive, not people aggressive.
The dogs should not be banned, just as fire-arms should not be banned, but a regulation to ensure that a person has had the training to raise a powerful animal (much like firearms training) may be prudent. To back it up, a provision requiring a bond, or maybe additional insurance to own a pit-bull may be in order too. If you take care of your dog and raise it right, you'll be fine. If not, then it's negligence and should have penalties just like if you drive recklessly or fire a gun in city limits.

My two cents. It's so difficult to legislate common sense and responsibility.
Click to expand...

You are too stupid to know what you are talking about. Do you even have a clue as to the history of pit bulls? Why not find out WHY they are called 'pit bulls' you dumb shit? Comparing pit bulls to handguns? What a fucking moron. I didn't know handguns are capable of thinking.
 
Pit-bulls as a breed were developed for dog-fighting, asshat.

Dogs submit to authority figures. If You are that authority figure, you can aim a dog much like you can aim a gun. In both cases, it is the human's hand on the "trigger". Guns and dogs don't go off on thier own (at least with respect to attacking people, a pit-bull will go after another dog without direction).
 
Sadistic Bastard said:
Pit-bulls as a breed were developed for dog-fighting, asshat.

Dogs submit to authority figures. If You are that authority figure, you can aim a dog much like you can aim a gun. In both cases, it is the human's hand on the "trigger". Guns and dogs don't go off on thier own (at least with respect to attacking people, a pit-bull will go after another dog without direction).
Click to expand...

Pit-bulls as a breed were developed for dog-fighting, asshat.
Click to expand...

BINGO!! We have a winner here! Yet you wish to blame the owners and have THEM trained in the handling of the dogs. These dogs are unpredictable. I live in the city which banned them you idiot. They cannot be trained. How does one train a dog that was bred to be vicious motherfuckers? It's in their fucking DNA you dumb cunt.

I guess you never heard about the OWNERS of pitbulls in my city who had been savaged by their beloved 'pets'? What a fucking moron you are.
 
Dogs are also "hard wired" as social, pack-oriented animals. This instinct is SO prevalent that they'll form packs out of other species, mainly humans. If You, the owner, are able to be the "Alpha" in the pack, they will accept the role as "beta" or even lower (in fact, they should be "lower" in the order to all human members of the pack, including the children). Dog's LOVE knowing their place, even if that place is not in the lead, but they will take the Alpha role if no one else does. If they think they run the pack, they'll do what they want. If they know that YOU are the alpha, then they'll obey. This requires attention, intelligence, and time on the owner's part to establish this "pack order", something that many people are unable or unwilling to commit to. Hence, if you own a physically powerful dog, then it's your responsibility to have it in heal. And obedience is in their DNA too.

You've had your ration of attention today, dear.
 
Sadistic Bastard said:
Dogs are also "hard wired" as social, pack-oriented animals. This instinct is SO prevalent that they'll form packs out of other species, mainly humans. If You, the owner, are able to be the "Alpha" in the pack, they will accept the role as "beta" or even lower (in fact, they should be "lower" in the order to all human members of the pack, including the children). Dog's LOVE knowing their place, even if that place is not in the lead, but they will take the Alpha role if no one else does. If they think they run the pack, they'll do what they want. If they know that YOU are the alpha, then they'll obey. This requires attention, intelligence, and time on the owner's part to establish this "pack order", something that many people are unable or unwilling to commit to. Hence, if you own a physically powerful dog, then it's your responsibility to have it in heal. And obedience is in their DNA too.

You've had your ration of attention today, dear.
Click to expand...

I guess it is time to teach.

Banning of Pit Bulls

This table shows places where Pit Bulls have been banned or where bans were proposed.
Place Ban Status
Royal City, Washington[1] Active: 12 Jan, 2007
Denver, Colorado [2] Active: Banned on 9 May, 2005 (first banned in 1980's)
Ontario, Canada[3] Active: Banned on 15 October, 2004
Winnipeg, Canada[4] Active: Banned in 1990
Prince George's County, Maryland[5] Active: 1996
Shelbyville, California[6] Proposed: 18 November, 2006
New York City, NY[7] Proposed: 28 December 2006
Aurora, Colorado[8] Proposed: 27 September, 2005
Oklahoma [9] Proposed 21 June, 2005
Youngstown, Ohio[10] Proposed: 10 January, 1999
Richland, Washington[1] Proposed: 21 December, 2006
Tupelo, Mississippi[11] Proposed: 28 September, 2006
Parker, Colorado[12] Proposed: 17 January, 2006
Chicago, Illinois[13] Proposed: 17 November, 2005
Independence , Missouri [14] Proposed: 19 June, 2006
France[15] Active: April 30, 1999; Ownership restricted; non-pure-breed animals resembling pit-bulls are to be surgically neutered
United Kingdom[16] Active: 12 August, 1991 (Banned in public places, under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991)
Click to expand...

If the solution was so simple as you claim (rotflmao @ a great owner), they is there something you know that the cities above do not oh great one? Christ, but I hate it when people go out of their way to prove their stupidity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top