Anonymous wrote:Can I just mention that some of these pitbulls do not "attack" or "bite". They maul, won't let go unless they themselves die (nothing else stops them usually), and sometimes they actually EAT their victims. No, that is not an animal trait that I think should be legal. Not ever.

Other dogs also maul

https://www.2keller.com/library/the-top-10-most-dangerous-dog-breeds.cfm

Anonymous wrote:I had a rescue pit pre-kids. He was the sweetest, happiest, most lovable pet I've ever had and I miss him every day (he has passed).

I wouldn't get another, though. Too risky.

Similarly, I've fostered multiple pits pre-kids. They're really very lovely, snuggly great dogs. Until they're not.

I can't risk that with children.

Anonymous wrote:Can I just mention that some of these pitbulls do not "attack" or "bite". They maul, won't let go unless they themselves die (nothing else stops them usually), and sometimes they actually EAT their victims. No, that is not an animal trait that I think should be legal. Not ever.

Yeah, that’s what’s really weird about them. Other dogs bite for a reason but I’ve never really heard of other dogs mauling someone to death like this. It’s like a tiger. I have friends that are Pittbull mixes — I do let my kids go there but I am cautious. And I wouldn’t get one myself. It does seem that the ones that go wacky always look like pitts whereas the ones that look like other dogs but have some degree of Pitt DNA (like 20% or under) seem fine.

Can u number these threads? It is confusing.

Anonymous wrote:Can I just mention that some of these pitbulls do not "attack" or "bite". They maul, won't let go unless they themselves die (nothing else stops them usually), and sometimes they actually EAT their victims. No, that is not an animal trait that I think should be legal. Not ever.

The woman in Virginia who was killed by her own pitbulls was eaten by them.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/deputies-watched-dogs-eating-rib-cage-of-virginia-woman-22-during-mauling-sheriff-says.amp

Can I just mention that some of these pitbulls do not "attack" or "bite". They maul, won't let go unless they themselves die (nothing else stops them usually), and sometimes they actually EAT their victims. No, that is not an animal trait that I think should be legal. Not ever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My idiot redneck neighbors just installed an electric fence for their rescue pitty.

It's one of those XL ugly ones (kind of like my neighbor and his wife.)

Now I have to carry a bat around to protect my kids. I'm actually quite looking forward to getting the opportunity to bludgeon it. I'd rather not do it in front of my children, but I'll not hesitate a second.

If it is a proper electric fence, wired, not a radio fence, those are pretty effective Radio fences aren't nearly as effective. What's your beef with the dog, though? Has it actually done anything out of line, or do you just hate the way it looks?

Who’d want to have to be vigilant 24/7 because there’s a potential killer just over their property line?

The 'bat' PP sounds psychotic, so, no I would not be happy living next door to her. The XL bulldogs are genetic disasters crippled by their anatomy, but they don't scare me.

I had a rescue pit pre-kids. He was the sweetest, happiest, most lovable pet I've ever had and I miss him every day (he has passed).

I wouldn't get another, though. Too risky.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One million pit bulls are killed each year by humans and yet it is the pit bulls that are the problem?

False equivalence.

Human life has more value than dog life. Its just reality.

Well humans don't value human lives either. I totally disagree with you as well. Why do you suppose human lives are more important than any other living creature?

I cannot believe I am having to explain this to you. You're being obtuse or you're intellectually deficient. Either way here's your answer - Because a dog cannot build a house, engineer a bridge, write a novel, treat cancers or even live for much beyond 10 years. Their purpose is to be joyful and companion-like, to bark at strangers approaching the house and roll on their backs for scratches with family, which when they do well, they do very well.

Well I can't believe I have to explain it to you. Who created the atomic bomb? HUMANS? Who kill each other for fancy shoes? HUMANS? Who start wars where children and women are killed and raped? HUMANS! Who bred these dogs ( long time ago) to fight and kill other dogs/animals HUMANS. Who continue to mistreat these and other dogs? HUMANS. And we wonder why dogs attack when they aren't given the basics of food, water, shelter, training, companionship and love?

It sounds like you're saying that since some humans kill each other and have committed crimes against each other, we should allow anything else on earth to also kill us.

No I am not saying that. I am saying that punishing the dogs is the wrong way to approach the problem. If humans were held accountable and treated their dogs right in the first place than they wouldn't maul anyone.

This is wishful thinking. It obviously doesn’t work that way in our society - that’s why gun violence is the leading cause of death in kids. We do have laws that hold people accountable if they shoot someone, but the problem is that even the threat of imprisonment or a death sentence isn’t enough to deter people. Which is also why other countries have combatted gun violence not by passing stronger laws to hold people accountable, but by severely restricting guns. I disagree that restricting pit bull ownership is punishing the breed, just as restricting guns is not punishing guns. Similarly, banning tigers or alligators as pets is not punishing those animals - it’s curtailing people’s freedom for irresponsible ownership.