Stupid Government

[janvanvurpa]

Folks give up. This is another one of those stupid arguments that somehow is clear to some major portion of the world and a few people hold a contrarian view no matter how many people are hurt--or in other arguments, killed---no matter how absolutely predictable the whole course of events..

"Dogs (bred to attack and crush the thick skulls of other dogs) do kill people, people kill people"

"Guns don't kill people, people (with guns) kill people (Real easily even if the are subnormal in intelligence, drunk on drugs, or suffering horrible delusions)"

We've all heard the same boilerplate platitudes from those who seem incapable of empathy or imagination every time a pitbull or whatever---who was such a geeeeeeennntle pooochie-poo---rips the face to pieces of some little girl.
It's always "a tragedy" but to barrow a phrase from them "You can take my pitbull when you pry it from my cold dead hands"

Their whims in everything is supreme...

They are the major roadblock to America being a true First World Country.

[Mark]

But on this, he's right.

[schmenke]

I don’t doubt that pit bull terriers can be docile dogs and make great pets, not unlike other breeds, but they sadly suffer from a stigma that attracts them to a type of owner who exploits and perhaps encourages the aggressive temperament thereby perpetuating their reputation.

Should pit bulls be banned? Yes, but IMO because of the disposition of a typical owner, not the traits of the dog itself.

[janvanvurpa]

Just curious, is it possible for you to comment on anything without trying to turn it into a political argument?

It's not political whatever your name is.
Its a social and cultural trait

Just curious, (not really, I know what your opinions are because they are always the same thing only the nouns and pronouns are changed) is it possible for you to comment on anything without thinking everything is a personal attack?

THAT, what you just did, is the problem, the inability of some to think or the lack of imagination to think of the broader consequences of their personal whims particularly around a range of things that even to a student of Psychology 101 are all symbolic weenie extenders, stand ins for power. A short review of one's own experience should be able to confirm that.
Who is vehement about "my guns' and "my giant SUV, Pick up, Chevell, or whatever", "my doberman/pit bull/whatever"?

Sure seems to be a lot of cross over in those groups from what I've seen coast to coast.

Part of one unfortunate syndrome...

[janvanvurpa]

I don’t doubt that pit bull terriers can be docile dogs and make great pets, not unlike other breeds, but they sadly suffer from a stigma that attracts them to a type of owner who exploits and perhaps encourages the aggressive temperament thereby perpetuating their reputation.

Should pit bulls be banned? Yes, but IMO because of the disposition of a typical owner, not the traits of the dog itself.

But how do we ban mindless stupidity?

[schmenke]

Mindless stupidity can’t be banned, but regulations can be enforced to prevent potential harm caused by actions from irresponsible people.
Ownership of items that have the potential to cause public harm in the hands of a few negligent people needs to be balanced with the right to own the same items by the greater number of responsible citizens.
If society judges that the potential for serious harm caused by the few outweighs the right of ownership by the many, then laws need to be considered to restrict possession by all.

[Roamy]

Roamy, you're stupid. I've been a caretaker for pitbulls and they're very gentle creatures. The idea of pitbulls being vicious dogs has been caused by "Mr. Vick's Dogfight Shows." The media just sensationalized the story and made pitbulls seem like the villain, when in actuality it had more to do with irresponsible breeders and owners.

Pitbulls have proven to be very good babysitters in American history. I really don't expect you to know this because I'm sure the extent of your knowledge when it comes to U.S. history is what you see on cable television. A pitbulls innate instinct is to protect its master and their kin with deep affection, and if necessary aggression against any harm.

I really hate being dragged into your mud-slinging fights, but this time I need to school you on some history and common (f)ucking sense. Get your facts straight and quit spouting your nonsense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SEEuTcc3XQ

hey idiot - the facts are the facts - and you are a full blown idiot. Soon these dogs will be banned or laws such as the one posted by Rollo will be enacted.

[ioan]

Unadulterated BS. Pit bulls are wonderful dogs. It's the owners who are to blame. Those who train their dogs to be vicious. The same of german shepherds and dobermans in days past, who were also considered to be vicious dogs. There is a pit bull of my acquaintance who is the most gentle and affectionate dog you could ask for. True that some breeds have tendencies in certain directions - that's why they are called breeds - but the final behaviors are determined by the owners.

Are you mixing a smart dog like the German shepherd with nasty dobermans and pit bulls?!

[ioan]

Roamy, you're stupid. I've been a caretaker for pitbulls and they're very gentle creatures. The idea of pitbulls being vicious dogs has been caused by "Mr. Vick's Dogfight Shows." The media just sensationalized the story and made pitbulls seem like the villain, when in actuality it had more to do with irresponsible breeders and owners.

Never seen that show nor did I read about it in the media and yet I am pretty sure based on what I've seen with my own eyes that pit bulls are not gentle creatures, not according to what the dictionary would define as such.

[ioan]

Mindless stupidity can’t be banned, but regulations can be enforced to prevent potential harm caused by actions from irresponsible people.
Ownership of items that have the potential to cause public harm in the hands of a few negligent people needs to be balanced with the right to own the same items by the greater number of responsible citizens.
If society judges that the potential for serious harm caused by the few outweighs the right of ownership by the many, then laws need to be considered to restrict possession by all.

That is certainly the way to do it, just that it is difficult to implement it in a society where driving a car is a right (and every idi0t is allowed to do it after passing a laughable test), where owning a gun is a test (after passing another laughable test) which are much more dangerous then a dog when improperly handled? What if the uneducated majority wants to keep those rights no matter what?