[Temptation]

Originally Posted by Steve. ↗

That's no reason to leave, myself and Scott will never get on I don't like hypocritical lying fucks with arrogance thrown in, but I guess I know other things which said wanker doesn't want to surface, but hey man don't fucking leave over our bullshit.

Don't you just love when internet users say things like "I know stuff about <insert said person> but don't want to say.

Then fucking don't say stuff like that either. Pointless.

[Oswald2001]

Originally Posted by xstunt1ngx ↗

Thing is, Hippo's are wild animals, Pit bulls are domesticated.

Thing is, here is where your dishonesty really comes out.

Pit Hippos are wild.

Pit Bulls are wild too. Pit Bulls are not fully domesticated.

The wild has not been bred out of them and that is the problem.

(This is not rocket science.)



You know it but keep blathering on anyway. Okay.

So more people and animals will continue to be injured, maimed or killed because of a**hole owners.


Humphrey "The Friendly" Pit Hippo's now deceased owner had the same lame pathetic kind of things to say before his pit hippo tore him apart.


In a perfect world, the pit bull owners themselves would be the only ones that are injured, maimed and killed by their still wild animals.



So, how many of you irresponsible owners have named your pit bull/hippo "Humphrey"?

Show of hands?

[johnleeknoefler]

Originally Posted by uswdkb42 ↗

It doesn't matter what breed of dog this was. The owner of the dog is probably oblivious too. The dog was smart enough to get away with murder. Blame the dog food companies for using horse meat in their food.

Obviously Johnlee, the only reason you bothered to hazzard a "guess" about the breed was because of your own personal prejudice. That's fine though. We all have prejudices. That's just human nature. I know there's nothing I can say to change your mind. If I could go back in time, I could have tried in vain to convince Hitler that all Jews aren't bad.

But since we're just making guesses here, I would guess that for every "vicious PIT BULL attack" you hear about in the media, there are twice as many "Pit Bull saves family from fire, pit bull rescue is now a therapy dog, Pit Bull goes from the fighting ring, to get K9 Good Citizenship, and is now a Breed Ambassador."

Fact is though, that for every one that makes headlines, good and bad, there are thousands that don't. I'm pretty sure that if my house caught on fire, Sam would save me. If someone invaded my home, he wouldn't do shit unless I was there. He's just like your dog. He loves ME, he doesn't give a shit about my "stuff."

You want "proof" that this dog wasn't a Pit Bull? I want proof that it was. If it wasn't, so what? You're still going to to Google anti-pitbull propaganda; and if it was, I'm still going to Google pro-pitbull propaganda.

Obviously Johnlee, the only reason you bothered to hazzard a "guess" about the breed was because of your own personal prejudice. That's fine though. We all have prejudices. That's just human nature. I know there's nothing I can say to change your mind. If I could go back in time, I could have tried in vain to convince Hitler that all Jews aren't bad.

I wondered how long it would take you to compare me with Hitler.

Reductio ad Hitlerum

also argumentum ad Hitlerum, (Latin for "reduction to" and "argument to" and dog Latin for "Hitler" respectively) is an ad hominem or ad misericordiam argument whereby an opponent's view is compared to a view that would be held by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party. It is a fallacy of irrelevance, in which a conclusion is suggested based solely on something's or someone's origin rather than its current meaning. The suggested logic is one of guilt by association.

While an ad Hitlerum is often used to directly compare a statement to a view held by Hitler, it can be used informally to compare any thing to any other thing. The term ad Hitlerum can be used to describe most association fallacies

Reductio ad Hitlerum is no more than guilt by association, a form of association fallacy.

Since you wish to stoop to such a low level of argument regardless of facts, please allow me to at least try to insert some facts here.

Adolf Hitler was a hater of hunting and cared for the company of animals more than of people. He had many dogs for companions over the years. His final hours were spent in the company of his favorite dog, "Blondi". Hitler definitely loved animals, especially dogs. Under his dictatorship, animal experimentation was limited by laws against vivsection.
Hitler was also a disciplined person who never smoked and seldom drank alcoholic beverages.

But Adolf is not the only animal lover in the Nazi heirarchy. Goebbels , the Minister of Propaganda once said famously, "The only real friend one has in the end is the dog. . .The more I get to know the human species, the more I care for my Benno." Goebbels also agreed with Hitler that "meat eating is a perversion in our human nature," and that Christianity was a "symptom of decay," since it did not urge vegetarianism. Rudolf Hess was another affectionate pet owner.

Nazi leaders harboured affection towards animals but antipathy to humans. Hitler was given films by a maharaja which displayed animals killing people. The Fuehrer reportedly watched with equanimity. Another film showed humans killing animals. Hitler covered his eyes and begged to be told when the slaughter was over.

It doesn't bother me that Hitler loved dogs. More, it bothers me that he hated people so much. To kill millions of people for being Jewish, or Polish or Christian who had done him no harm and yet abhore the killing of animals is what bothers me.

At least I showed the case history that Pit Bull types are responsible for the majority of deaths in this country and at least one other case where pitbulls killed horses.

[johnleeknoefler]

Originally Posted by Oswald2001 ↗

Thing is, here is where your dishonesty really comes out.

Pit Hippos are wild.

Pit Bulls are wild too. Pit Bulls are not fully domesticated.

The wild has not been bred out of them and that is the problem.

(This is not rocket science.)



You know it but keep blathering on anyway. Okay.

So more people and animals will continue to be injured, maimed or killed because of a**hole owners.


Humphrey "The Friendly" Pit Hippo's now deceased owner had the same lame pathetic kind of things to say before his pit hippo tore him apart.


In a perfect world, the pit bull owners themselves would be the only ones that are injured, maimed and killed by their still wild animals.



So, how many of you irresponsible owners have named your pit bull/hippo "Humphrey"?

Show of hands?

They like to call me the copy paste king. The fact is... If I didn't know the stuff was there in the first place I couldn't find it. I know from my reading that Pit Bulls are responsible for the majority of deaths and attacks in the country. That is just reality. These Nazi type bozos just lie and lie and then when I post the facts they complain that I copy pasted it. If I just make statements like they do then they want proof. If I just post a link they refuse to go and look. They complain that I will never change my mind. Oh, sure I will change my mind. When I never see another PitBull attack story in the news I will realize that at long last Pit Bulls are now sweet and loving family dogs. I even show a case history with names of the victims and links to the news articles and they still insist that Pit Bulls don't kill full grown horses. Even with proof. To hell with them Nasty dog lickers.

[xstunt1ngx]

Originally Posted by Oswald2001 ↗

Thing is, here is where your dishonesty really comes out.

Pit Hippos are wild.

Pit Bulls are wild too. Pit Bulls are not fully domesticated.

The wild has not been bred out of them and that is the problem.

(This is not rocket science.)



You know it but keep blathering on anyway. Okay.

So more people and animals will continue to be injured, maimed or killed because of a**hole owners.


Humphrey "The Friendly" Pit Hippo's now deceased owner had the same lame pathetic kind of things to say before his pit hippo tore him apart.


In a perfect world, the pit bull owners themselves would be the only ones that are injured, maimed and killed by their still wild animals.



So, how many of you irresponsible owners have named your pit bull/hippo "Humphrey"?

Show of hands?

I won't comment anymore on your comparison, it just shows how little you know. You will keep thinking Pit bulls are wild animals and I will keep knowing that they aren't. Just like religion, someone always has an opinion on it. No point in arguing with people.

Just days after the Victorian government ended its amnesty on unregistered restricted-breed dogs, Point Cook veterinarian Karen Davies did something that hurt her more than anything else in her career. She put down a healthy and seemingly well-adjusted dog because of the way it looked.

Those arguing against banning selective breeds, and that comprises many animal welfare associations including the RSPCA, say a more effective and humane approach is to implement a system of education and training of dogs enforced by policing with fines and jail for irresponsible owners. They say a dog should be deemed irredeemably dangerous on the basis of its temperament not the way it looks.

”Because I am six foot two and a half, and have freckles, it’s like banning every six foot two-plus, freckled person because 10 of them did something wrong over a period of five years,” says Brad Griggs, from the National Dog Trainers Federation.

”It is the equivalent of racism.”

Griggs is concerned that a ban would push owners of pit bulls away.

”If these people are likely to have these dogs seized or be discriminated against, it’s hardly going to bring them into the dog training community fold, and encourage them to train their dogs and raise them properly,” he says.

Griggs says that, internationally, educated dog trainers don’t have a bias against the breed. Genetics are only part of the picture. ”Genetics are the potential a dog has to live into,” he says, arguing that nurture, as opposed to nature, is extremely important.

”All dogs should be heavily socialised and habituated and that is the key point. The majority of dogs that have these issues to attack like this have had a poor critical socialisation period, up to about 16 or 20 weeks of age.”

Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) spokeswoman Kersti Seksel says, “It’s understandable that people are now calling for the banning of some breeds, however all the good evidence available shows that this doesn’t work.”

“Unfortunately, we believe the banning and over-regulation of dogs in our communities could be part of the problem as this leads to poor socialisation and increased risk of attacks.”

The AVA is instead calling for the government to increase funding for education and socialisation programs for dogs, their owners and young children. Its statistics show that the most likely victims of dog attacks are children aged under 10, usually by their own dogs at their homes.

“We’re never going to be able to prevent every incident, but a really good way to help prevent bites and attack is through socialisation of puppies with people and other dogs at a young age, and teaching our children how to be safe around animals.”

In 2001, an American Veterinary Medical Association taskforce investigating canine aggression reported it had found no statistical, biological or behavioural evidence that any breed of dog was more vicious or more dangerous than others.

Statistics provided by Monash University's Victorian Injury Surveillance Unit show the number of hospital admissions because of dog-related injuries - not just bites - almost doubled from 451 in 2000-01 to 717 last year. This is despite the introduction of breed-specific legislation a decade ago. There were 5180 reported injuries over the past 10 years.

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*

The Victorian government dedicates more than 800 words and uses 41 images to define the breed standard for the restricted American pit bull terrier. The problem? There is no such breed. Experts say that ''pit bull'' is actually a generic term for a type of dog, much like ''hound'' or ''terrier''. ''I don't know that anyone can categorically say what a pit bull is because there is no genetic profile,'' said Dr Susan Maastricht, Victorian president of the Australian Veterinary Association.

''What we have now in our legislation is a standard, but in fact it's a standard for a type of dog.'' The American Kennel Club, the leading pure-bred dog authority in the US, said the term ''pit bull'' comes from the early 19th century, when bulldog-terrier crosses were used for bull baiting and dog fighting. The three breeds that emerged are the bull terrier, the Staffordshire bull terrier and the American Staffordshire terrier. All three are considered pit bull-type dogs.

''There is a lot of similarity, which means, from a veterinary point of view, it is difficult to differentiate from the two in a meaningful way,'' Dr Maastricht said. Allie Jalbert, manager of animal shelters at RSPCA Victoria, has similar problems. ''It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to determine what breed a dog is simply by appearance,'' she said.

Not even all branches of government can agree on that point. Last year a Queensland court ruled that for the purposes of restricted breed legislation, the Staffie and the American pit bull are the same breed.

One owner told The Age her dog, which she rescued from a shelter 18 months ago, had been registered as a Staffordshire bull terrier but could meet some of the visual guidelines and she feared it could be declared a restricted breed.

"He's an absolute gorgeous dog and very sweet," she says. "The breed-specific legislation makes you feel very nervous and worried that someone could potentially take my dog off me or class him as a dangerous dog even though he has never menaced anyone or anything.

"The council rangers aren't breed-identification experts by a long shot and they're the ones deciding the fates of these amazing dogs."

Linda Watson, who is doing a PhD degree on ”dog-bite injury and the effect of regulation”, said the term ”pit bull” had become a generic one, to include dogs such as Staffordshire terriers, English bull terriers, bulldogs, even boxers.

The term pit bull had come to mean ”any small- to middle-sized, short-haired, muscular dog”, she said, which was most misleading and most unfair. ”I don’t believe any breed is dangerous,” she said. ”It is how the dog is treated and the circumstances in which it finds itself in when it may happen to bite.”

”Knee-jerk reactions by governments do not tend to create good public policy. We do not need any more laws or restrictions that are doomed to failure from the onset. We need a strategy based on the best research evidence that we have to hand.

Breed bans simply do not address other recurrent patterns associated with dog attacks such as irresponsible or uneducated dog ownership.

Measures taken need to address human ownership practices, as dogs of many breeds and crosses feature in dog attacks. No single, or even group of breeds, have been shown to account for the majority of dog attacks in Australia.”

*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*

This system used in the Canadian city of Calgary is being held up as a successful way to effectively reduce dog attacks.

Bill Bruce, Calgary's director of animal and bylaw services, oversees the program. "If you come to Calgary you rarely see a dog roaming loose in the street, you don't see a lot of aggressive dogs, you don't see dogs left tied up outside a bar while someone goes in for hours on end, and you don't see dogs in open-back pick-up trucks. You don't see a lot of animal issues a lot of other people are facing because it's taken us 25 years to get to this point."

Bruce says the city investigated breed-specific legislation but found it didn't work. "As we've learnt from our study, if [irresponsible owners] have pit bulls and we ban them, then they'll get German shepherds or they'll get mastiffs or they'll get rottweilers, any number of dogs they can create a monster out of," Bruce says.

The city then decided to create a culture of responsible pet ownership. Bruce believes it is the owner who must be trained to recognise early signs of aggression and to properly handle their pets.

He says cases of dog aggression had dropped from more than 2000 in 1985 to 300 last year, of which 102 were bites, most of which were minor. He concedes bite numbers last year almost doubled from 2009's figure of 58, but he attributes this to a public awareness campaign run by the city about reporting incidents that occur within the home.

Keep ignoring professionals FACTS. Close minded people.

[xstunt1ngx]

It is scientifically impossible to prove that certain dog breeds are genetically "dangerous." When countries, states, and cities, impose Breed Specific Legislation, they base it on that certain dog breeds are dangerous.

As for statistics used to support the idea that some breeds are more dangerous, the numbers are misleading. There's a problem getting records. "Golden retrievers bite, Labrador retrievers bite, but don't get reported." (Dr. Pobderscek).

Who will report a labrador bite? no one, why? because it doesn't sound as menacing as a pit bull "ATTACKING" you, lmao.

"Valuable scientific studies showing significant differences in jaw strength among breeds does not exist"

"The classification of dog breeds with respect to their relative danger to humans makes no sense, as both, the complex ancedent conditions in which aggressive behavior occurs, and its ramifying consequences in the individual dog's ecological and social environment are not considered" (Dr. Fedderson-Peterson, 2001).

"The genetic differences between a Chihuahua, a German shepherd and even a timber wolf are virtually non-existent and the behavioral differences in breeds has more to do with training than breeding" (DN 2001).

Although they look different, dog breeds have no more scientific basis than do races among humans" (Dr. Serpell 2001).

"There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of "locking mechanism" unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier" (Dr. Brisbin).

My Uncle's Friend's Wife's step-brother said that APBT's are born mean and can't be trusted. Is this true?

No, this couldn't be further from the truth. Most people who think or say that "Pit Bulls" are inherently mean have most likely never met one and rely on the inaccurate media portryal of "Pit Bulls" as the basis for their opinions. Like any other breed of dog, the key areas of focus for ensuring a happy, well adjusted American Pit Bull Terrier as a pet are: owner education, propervbreeding, socialization, and training. A break down in any one or more of these areas could lead to problems down the road.

The APBT is, contrary to popular belief, very human-friendly and will not naturally be aggressive towards humans. The APBT is, however, very loyal and eager to please, so that if an owner wants a dog to be aggressive toward humans and reinforces this behaviour from an early age, the dog will most likely be aggressive towards humans as an adult.

One of the most enduring urban legends involving dogs is the one about Doberman Pinscher's supposed tendency to suddenly "turn on" their loving owners. This violent change in behavior is said to be precipitated by a natural swelling of the dog's brain at a certain age (the exact age differs according to the retelling). Of course this legend has no basis at all in fact. The "pit bull" has replaced the Doberman Pinscher as the stereotypical "vicious breed," but the same human ignorance and credulity is behind the persistence of such legends.

[BlueNosePit]

no point in trying to educate these people stunting.
there is no cure for stupidity.

[Billthegravedigger]

Originally Posted by BlueNosePit ↗

no point in trying to educate these people stunting.
there is no cure for stupidity.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8suVjclu8Zo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[xstunt1ngx]

Originally Posted by BlueNosePit ↗

no point in trying to educate these people stunting.
there is no cure for stupidity.

I used to be like them, I used to believe the media and the hype, and then I started getting around pit bulls and noticed that they are no different than other strong breeds, I used to be afraid of them because of what the media said, and then I became informed and educated on the APBT and my fears went away. Every pit bull I see at the dog park would much rather play fetch than attack other dogs.

[SeaGrave]

If that dog had an owner, that owner is a piece of shit for running.