Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
drummindiver

Punish the Deed-Not the Breed?

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I don't know.  If they are as dangerous as Pit Bulls, I'd support a ban.  However, what I want to see is a breed extinction through sterilization and a ban on breeding.

So, get rid of all dogs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, poochy said:

Its almost like people believe a dog, of any breed, can't be dangerous.  The 170lb lab/shepherd/who knows that I got from a shelter as a puppy could have easily killed people if it was trained to do so.  Therefore, because you cant trust owners to do the right thing that mustn't be allowed.  Perhaps you can outline exactly what sort of dog people can own, what breeds, what size, all those things.  Pits of course, Rottweiler's, German shepherds, Dobermans, well they are all out, lets see, how about anything over 20 lbs?  Then again a 20 lbs dog could do awful damage to the face of a child.

I love the myths people still believe from MSN trying to sell papers.  Locking jaws, highest bite strength. What rubbish.

Edited by drummindiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I don't know.  If they are as dangerous as Pit Bulls, I'd support a ban.  However, what I want to see is a breed extinction through sterilization and a ban on breeding.

Golden Retrievers equal banned breeds in temperament tests. Do we ban the most popular dog in America?

http://atts.org/breed-statistics/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Perfectly fine dogs. We've had one in the family for years and she's as sweet and good-natured a pet as I've ever seen. 

I've met many  CCS and thought they were beautiful. That's also how I feel about my pitties. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, drummindiver said:

I'm glad you feel it ok for the law to enter without a warrant.  What if it was because they thought a muslim terrorist lived there. What if they had an inklung a  drug dealer lived there? What if you pissed off a snowflake and she  reported you to the cop on the street?

What's worse is you didn't read the post. Under exigent circumstances a peace offier. ..think dog catcher,   mailman,  you or I. ..could go in and seize a dog because of the way it looks.

Sorry, I didn't realize what a peace officer was.  Yes, I am ok with it whether it's a dog or a terrorist if there is an imminent thread.  Generally I agree with BCSapper on this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Sorry, I didn't realize what a peace officer was.  Yes, I am ok with it whether it's a dog or a terrorist if there is an imminent thread.  Generally I agree with BCSapper on this one.

Right. Except it's not allowed with a terrorist or a drug dealer. Just a dog owner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, drummindiver said:

I love the myths people still believe from MSN trying to sell papers.  Locking jaws, highest bite strength. What rubbish.

Why doesn't the MSM ever report on the Labs that attack, or kill people? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Why doesn't the MSM ever report on the Labs that attack, or 

I took my last link down as I wasn't familiar with all info. This is an opinion piece,  but an opinion many share.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/fetch/2010/07/18/the-media-takes-its-lumps-over-reporting-about-pit-bulls/1387/

Edited by drummindiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, drummindiver said:

Make sure you read down to the part about the lab. Btw, thus is a pro dog site,   not a pro pittie sit. 

http://www.thedogpress.com/Columns/Media-Bias-DogBites-067.asp

 

Fair enough, but how do you account for the CDC study I quoted, and the data I posted from Wiki in the same post.  Are they just getting the breed wrong?  The name Pit Bull comes up an awful lot in the recent years I looked at.

I understand that Pit Bull owners will be defensive.  It's like guns.  I'd hate not be able to have a shotgun for trapshooting.  I understand why I'm not allowed an AK47.  In my hands, both would be very safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Fair enough, but how do you account for the CDC study I quoted, and the data I posted from Wiki in the same post.  Are they just getting the breed wrong?  The name Pit Bull comes up an awful lot.

There are several infamous sites who have severe bias and people quote them as fact, including media.  

https://ethicsalarms.com/2015/10/20/unethical-website-of-the-month-dogsbite-org/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Why doesn't the MSM ever report on the Labs that attack, or kill people? 

If it's not described as a pit-bull, the media is less likely to care and report on it.   I was listening to a radio talk show about this same topic, and guy phoned in about a dog that attacked him; when it happened, the media showed up with the cops, but when they found out it was a retriever mix, they left.  Not a pit-bull, not a story.   

Also, people misidentify dogs all the time.   You'd be surprised what gets called a pit-bill; people think they know, but not even vets and shelter workers can identify a dog's breed from sight more than 50% of the time.   Even the dog who started the whole ban thing in Montreal may not have been a pit-bull, according to police.    There is no news story about what DNA testing identified for this dog, but it was registered as a Boxer.   

So, there's a combination of disinterest by the media in other breeds who attack, and misidentifying the dog involved in the attack that makes it seem as if pits are more dangerous.

   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

If it's not described as a pit-bull, the media is less likely to care and report on it.   I was listening to a radio talk show about this same topic, and guy phoned in about a dog that attacked him; when it happened, the media showed up with the cops, but when they found out it was a retriever mix, they left.  Not a pit-bull, not a story.   

Also, people misidentify dogs all the time.   You'd be surprised what gets called a pit-bill; people think they know, but not even vets and shelter workers can identify a dog's breed from sight more than 50% of the time.   Even the dog who started the whole ban thing in Montreal may not have been a pit-bull, according to police.    There is no news story about what DNA testing identified for this dog, but it was registered as a Boxer.   

So, there's a combination of disinterest by the media in other breeds who attack, and misidentifying the dog involved in the attack that makes it seem as if pits are more dangerous.

   

 

 

I understand, but again I would direct you to the CDC quote and the Wiki article I posted.  I freely admit my suggestion for the eradication of Pit Bulls through sterilization is one borne by MSM articles and anecdotes.  It never occurred to me to actually look for data until this thread.  The data seems contradictory.  I, personally, would still like to see the breed gone.  I understand if those who have the breed as a pet find my views distasteful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@drummindiver.  That was an intense video, but those dogs were having a good time. :)   My BF has a Rottie, and so does a friend.  They are sweet dogs; the 140 lb guy is so laid back he reminds me of a stoner - but intimidating for sure.   The smaller girl isn't laid back like but she's absolutely convinced that people are to be loved and mugged for treats.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Mixed breeds would be a problem, for sure, but once all the Pit Bull genes are gone, there would be no more mixed breeds.

'Pit bull genes' are present in every. single. dog.   You can't get rid of them.   What you can do is breed for other gene-driven traits to be *more likely* to show up in each succeeding generation and the gene-driven traits you don't want less likely to show up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I understand, but again I would direct you to the CDC quote and the Wiki article I posted.  I freely admit my suggestion for the eradication of Pit Bulls through sterilization is one borne by MSM articles and anecdotes.  It never occurred to me to actually look for data until this thread.  The data seems contradictory. 

The CDC essentially supports what I've been saying in it's qualification before listing all the numbers:

 

Quote

The report concluded that relying on media coverage of dog-bite-related fatalities presents a biased view of the dogs involved. They stated that media reports are likely to only cover about 74% of the actual incidents and that dog attacks involving certain breeds may be more likely to receive media coverage. They also reported that since breed identification is difficult and subjective, attacks may be more likely to be "ascribed to breeds with a reputation for aggression".

 

Quote

I, personally, would still like to see the breed gone.  I understand if those who have the breed as a pet find my views distasteful.

Having the breed "gone" doesn't solve the problem of dogs biting/attacking/killing.   It just moves the issue on to a new breed of dog.   Ban pit bulls, and the next 'image' dog becomes known for aggression.    The real solution, which has been pointed out to you, is what Calgary has done.   But rather than look for ways to actually solve the problem, you opt for a short-term feel-good solution that ultimately does nothing.   What kind of a solution is that?

You are obviously unwilling to accept anything that contradicts the media-hype you've swallowed so I've concluded that you just don't like dogs and that's ok.   I'll just move on.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dialamah said:

The CDC essentially supports what I've been saying in it's qualification before listing all the numbers:

 

 

Having the breed "gone" doesn't solve the problem of dogs biting/attacking/killing.   It just moves the issue on to a new breed of dog.   Ban pit bulls, and the next 'image' dog becomes known for aggression.    The real solution, which has been pointed out to you, is what Calgary has done.   But rather than look for ways to actually solve the problem, you opt for a short-term feel-good solution that ultimately does nothing.   What kind of a solution is that?

You are obviously unwilling to accept anything that contradicts the media-hype you've swallowed so I've concluded that you just don't like dogs and that's ok.   I'll just move on.

 

 

 

 

Love dogs.  Don't like Pit Bulls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, drummindiver said:

Why?

Because you've bought into msm hyperbole and canine discrimination? 

I do go by what I read in the news, yes.

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Yet, you'd get rid of all dogs.   Don't lie.

Okay, I won't.  No, I wouldn't.  Australian Shepherds and English Sheepdog/Border Collie crosses would be exempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I do go by what I read in the news, yes.

 

Yeah, cause accepting news media stories without question is absolutely the best way to decide on issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Yeah, cause accepting news media stories without question is absolutely the best way to decide on issues.

It is with the media I use.  Which media do you get your news from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, bcsapper said:

It is with the media I use.  Which media do you get your news from?

You've also pointed out that statistics prove different than what msm have written and myself and others have pointed out that msm have a self serving interest in writing these stories. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-12-12 at 9:32 AM, bcsapper said:

Why doesn't the MSM ever report on the Labs that attack, or kill people? 

I posted a link showing the fact Golden Retrievers and American Pitbull Terriers have the same score in temperament testing. 

Thus is true,  yet we have this issue. It proves imo it is a people problem  not a dog problem. Almost every expert states this.

Edited by drummindiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...