[rob666]

Originally Posted by CrunchyCripple ↗

Need to? Yes. Does everyone who has a gun do those requirements? Absolutely not.

Mechanical objects do not have a brain, so they do not make choices, but they are not 100% predictable. They can and do malfunction. They also harm and kill waaaay more people a year than all deaths by animals combined.

Cars also have the requirement of classes and licensing, but they also kill waaaay more people than animals do. They are also not 100% predictable. Nothing is.

That's life

To legally own a gun in canada you need to do a safety course, and a background check.
It's not optional.
The people that don't do this are breaking the law, usually for criminal purposes.


Give me a break
My gun won't kill anyone unless I allow it too. If it's pointed in a safe direction, even if it does go off nobody would get hurt.
If it's unloaded, you can't get shot.
If it's locked up, nobody will get shot.
My gun poses no threat to any errant creature or person that comes near, unless I choose to unlock it, load it, aim it and pull the trigger.


You need to pass a course to obtain a drivers licence too, and insurance in case your car hurts someone.

If you are a responsible dog owner, and you think certain breeds get a bad rap, then what's wrong with screening out the owners that allow that to happen?

It's not "just life".
It's predicting future behaviour based on past behaviour, like if your dog has already killed 7 cats and other animals ( that we know of ) chances are it will do it again.
If I had as little control over my gun as you do over your dog, I'd have no gun and probably be facing a judge........

[CuriousCanadian]

Originally Posted by mr black ↗

Try not to cop bash so much and stay on topic.

Ontario's pit bull ban has been 100 percent effective. Dog bites in general have be on a decline ever since the ban was passed in 2005. From 1982 to 2013, pit bulls or close mixes were responsible for 1,777 maimings, for 64 per cent of all such injuries in Canada and the United States. Fifty-one per cent of dog-related deaths (275) have been attributed to the breed, as have 67 per cent of attacks doing bodily harm (2,990).

Don't get me wrong, Pits should NOT be banned just because of my personal experience. It's because hundreds of people have been killed by a breed that is responsible for a majority of attacks, despite making up a minority of the dog population.

Funny, cuz the Toronto Humane Society says it hasn't worked:

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/...dog_bites.html

[rob666]

Originally Posted by mr black ↗

Accidents happen all the time. Just a few days ago Kentucky Police Officer Darryl Jouett mistakenly shot himself in the stomach. Fuck he could have just as easily killed that woman.

He's an idiot.

Only a complete idiot would do that.

He is 100% responsible for that.

Mandatory training and screening has been proven to cut the amount of this idiocy dramatically.

[Illusion]

Originally Posted by CuriousCanadian ↗

Funny, cuz the Toronto Humane Society says it hasn't worked:

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/...dog_bites.html

The Dog Legislation Council of Canada say it does.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014...e_the_ban.html

[rob666]

Originally Posted by mr black ↗

The Dog Legislation Council of Canada say it does.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014...e_the_ban.html

When I looked into it before pits and Rottweilers accounted for around 70% of fatal attacks

[CuriousCanadian]

Originally Posted by Mr Poo ↗

/thread.

And I will add in my research too:

So, what’s the problem with all these vicious dogs we hear about in the media lately?

One answer is found in the National Canine Research Council’s report released in 2009:

“The overwhelming majority of these dog incidents involved resident dogs, not family pets. Owners maintain the dogs we call resident dogs exclusively outside of regular human interaction: on a chain, in a kennel, in an isolated portion of the home such as a basement or garage, or in the yard. Some owners acquire the dogs for negative purposes, such as guarding, intimidation, protection, fighting, or negligent breeding. These owners only rarely permit the dogs to associate with people and other animals in positive, humane ways. They cannot be expected to exhibit the same behaviors and level of sociability as family dogs afforded the opportunity to learn appropriate behaviors through positive and humane interaction with people on a regular basis.”

Read their full report here:

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil...t-FINAL-11.pdf

Don’t believe in it? Go back and look at all the reports in the media in the last few years. The very traits that make certain breeds dangerous also appeal to a “certain class of dog owner” and these are the types who keep ‘resident’ dogs. Publicizing there potentially hazardous nature has also tended to increase these breeds' popularity as well.

WHAT ABOUT THE STATISTICS and STUDIES?

Addressing the issue of severe and fatal dog attacks as a breed specific problem is akin to treating the symptom and not the disease.

1) CDC (Center for Disease Control):

Commonly accepted sources of information about canine homicides are the CDC (Merritt Clifton), and Karen Delise (author of Fatal Dog Attacks). However, none of their figures agree. This is largely because of the difficulties involved in gathering dog bite statistics. The CDC/Clifton's study includes both the USA and Canada, and is derived from newspaper accounts. However, when Delise did her study, she included all homicides, which were confirmed in other reliable ways, such as by interviews and police files, and arrived at a figure that was 100 deaths higher than the CDC. Karen Delise illustrates the problem in the following graphic way in her book: Fatal Dog Attacks: The Stories Behind the Statistics, 2002:

Consider five fatal attacks included in the CDC statistics:

-A man was bitten in the forearm by a Pit bull. The bite was not serious but introduced into the wound was a virulent and fast spreading bacterium. The man died 4 days later from this virulent bacterial infection.

-A teenage girl give birth to an infant, distraught and frightened, she tossed the hours-old infant into a neighboring-junk-strewn yard where two Pit bulls resided. The dogs killed the newborn.

-A German shepherd mixed breed dog went into a bedroom lifted a newborn out of a crib and carried the infant (by the head) into the living room where the adults were seated.

-A man restrains his girlfriend, while ordering his Pit bull to repeatedly attack her. He is eventually convicted of murder and is serving a 20-year sentence.

-An elderly man attempts to stop his German Shepherd dog from fence fighting with his neighbor's dog, the dog turns on his owner, severely mauling him, inflicting fatal head and neck wounds. 



The CDC was right, in that five people died as a result of a dog bite. But were all these bites the result of aggression? Were they the same type or level of aggression? Which behaviors initiated the attack, human or canine? So the number of deaths by dogs (as per the CDC) cannot be used to define aggression, or the aggression of certain breeds, as aggression is not defined or qualified.

2) American Temperament Test Society (www.atts.org)

There are statistics done on every dog each year that shows which dogs have better temperaments than others. Are you ready? Don't believe me - look it up. The higher the better:

Dalmatian 81.8%, Husky 86.6%, German Shepard 83.5%, Rottie
82.6%, Mastiff 83.9%, American Pit Bull Terrier 84.3%, American Staffordshire 83.4%, Staffordshire Bull Terrier 85.3%, and Boxer
84.3%.

Now the beloved little dogs:

Collie 53.3%, Bichon Frise 79.3%, Chihuahua 70.3%, Dachshund 70.2%, Setter75%, Schnauzer 75.5%

I think we can all see that the little ones are far more aggressive than the big ones. Wake up and do your research before you judge!

WHAT ABOUT BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION?

Breed specific legislation DOES-NOT-WORK!

HERE’S THE PROOF from ONTARIO:

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/...-cut-dog-bites

HERE’S THE PROOF from the USA:

The State of Ohio ruled in 2006 that a pair of breed-based dangerous dog laws was unconstitutional. City of Toledo v. Tellings, 5th Dist. No. L-04-1224, 2006-Ohio-975 (Ohio App. 2006). The supreme court of the state accepted this case for review in August 2006 (110 Ohio St.3d 1435). The court of appeals began its analysis by noting:

[Breed-specific laws were enacted because, in the past, courts and legislatures considered it to be a "well-known fact" that pit bulls are "unpredictable," "vicious" creatures owned only by "drug dealers, dog fighters, gang members," or other undesirable members of society. [Citing State v. Anderson (1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 168.] ... As scientific information advances and becomes available, courts have a duty to reconsider issues and make decisions, which are supported by the actual evidence presented, instead of relying on "common knowledge" and opinion generated by newspaper sensationalism and hearsay, rather than accurate, scientific evidence. [Par.] As the evidence presented in this case demonstrates, previous cases involving "vicious dog" laws, especially from the late 1980's and early 1990's, relied on what is now outdated information, which perpetuated a stereotypical image of pit bulls.


Stop with the animal racism already, THERE ARE NO BAD DOGS – JUST BAD OWNERS!

[rob666]

Right, so what's wrong with screening and licensing owners?

I'm not as concerned as a poodle biting me as a Rottweiler.
I don't care if a poodle scores lower on a temperament scale, because it's not capable of killing me.

This is why guns are available only for trained people that pass a background check, and BB guns are not.
A BB gun isn't as capable.

[Illusion]

Originally Posted by CuriousCanadian ↗

Funny, cuz the Toronto Humane Society says it hasn't worked:

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/...dog_bites.html

Your link from the toronto star is outdated from 2009 and the statistics did not record the breed of the dogs involved. So there could have been 500 poodle bites recorded in 09 which in my opinion are far better than 500 bit bull attacks.

[Pit Bull]

Deaths by sled dogs far exceed pit bulls in Canada.....There hasn't been a death by a pit bull in Canada in 20 years.

[Pit Bull]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

A BB gun isn't as capable.

I have a Quackenbush pellet rifle that will bring down a buffalo.