Woman hangs dog after burning it because it chewed her Bible...

[myke]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/01/25/article-1350313-0054737E00000578-73_468x306.jpg

A US woman has been charged with animal cruelty after allegedly hanging her nephew's pit bull from a tree with an electrical cord and burning its body after it chewed on her Bible.
Animal control officers said that 65-year-old Miriam Smith told them she killed a female dog named Diamond because it was a 'devil dog' and she worried it could harm neighbourhood children.
Smith's nephew left the one-year-old animal at the home he shared with his aunt during the recent winter weather while he went away.
When he returned, he could find no trace of the dog and assumed she had broken the chain where she was usually tied at the front porch of the house.
An environmental enforcement officer came across the dog's body under a mound of dried grass, stinking of kerosene.
The dog had an orange extension cord wrapped tightly around its neck and its body was partially burned.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350313/Miriam-Smith-hangs-devil-dog-burning-it-chewed-Bible.html#ixzz1C5UgCkDT

---

It makes me feel sick :( it's really sad!

[Jordan]

I can't read the full story, it's awful... I feel so sad now

[Muct]

I hope they hang this woman from a thee and burn her :)

[Jordy]

I can't see her case standing up in court, she could of just had it put down at the Vets far more humanely.

"She faces 180 days to five years in prison if convicted." - She's in for a decent sentence at least ;)

[GommeInc]

What a silly woman. It was only one year old, they're still in that annoying chewing stage at that age. She's going to Hell on a pogo stick for that, seeing as it's just a book - any true Christian would know this as the teachings are worth more than ink on paper. and her actions are completely unjustified. She'll ironically be getting the same treatment where she's going, assuming there is such thing as an afterlife and a Hell :P

[Chris]

That is truly awful, she deserved everything she gets. Poor dog.

[Conservative,]

Honestly - I hate dogs. I've got bad memories of them and whenever something like this comes up a little voice in the back of my head says "good" but the majority of my brain says "aww, poor thing - how awful". I have mixed feelings over this. Dogs like that - the one pictured anyway - shouldn't be allowed - however hanging it and burning it is obviously unlawful and absolutely disgraceful.

[Muct]

Honestly - I hate dogs. I've got bad memories of them and whenever something like this comes up a little voice in the back of my head says "good" but the majority of my brain says "aww, poor thing - how awful". I have mixed feelings over this. Dogs like that - the one pictured anyway - shouldn't be allowed - however hanging it and burning it is obviously unlawful and absolutely disgraceful.

Really? How can you just say dogs like that shouldn't be allowed.. it's the owner, not the dog, I know a hella lot of pitbulls from when I take my little poodle out for walks and the majority of them are actually really nice - plus, you can't just outcast a whole.. species? of dog because a few of them like to chew books or are vicious.

[Neversoft]

Dogs like that - the one pictured anyway - shouldn't be allowed

Why exactly? The dog has done nothing wrong. Not all pit bulls are vicious killing machines.

[Technologic]

A true Christian at heart

[Conservative,]

Really? How can you just say dogs like that shouldn't be allowed.. it's the owner, not the dog, I know a hella lot of pitbulls from when I take my little poodle out for walks and the majority of them are actually really nice - plus, you can't just outcast a whole.. species? of dog because a few of them like to chew books or are vicious.


Why exactly? The dog has done nothing wrong.

From personal experience I know they can be very violent and scary. Most dogs I am fine with, but certain types are just...ugh.

And yes it's the owners, but if the owners couldn't get dangerous dogs in the first place and train them to attack there wouldn't be a problem.

[Muct]

From personal experience I know they can be very violent and scary. Most dogs I am fine with, but certain types are just...ugh.

And yes it's the owners, but if the owners couldn't get dangerous dogs in the first place and train them to attack there wouldn't be a problem.
Yes, they CAN be very violent - that depends on the owners discipline on the dog though - saying all of them are violent and vicious is just stupid & prejudice.

[GommeInc]

From personal experience I know they can be very violent and scary. Most dogs I am fine with, but certain types are just...ugh.

And yes it's the owners, but if the owners couldn't get dangerous dogs in the first place and train them to attack there wouldn't be a problem.
All dogs have the potential to be dangerous. You shouldn't believe everything the media says about pit bulls, many out there are just as gentle as labradors or other "gentle" canine breeds. It's a media trait to perceive these dogs out to be dangerous, because many violent dog related attacks include these types of dogs. It's like saying all chihuahua are prissy little weedy beggars, but you can train them up to be vicious, or get one that is born vicious, as with any other type of animal with varying personality traits :)

[Conservative,]

Yes, they CAN be very violent - that depends on the owners discipline on the dog though - saying all of them are violent and vicious is just stupid & prejudice.


All dogs have the potential to be dangerous. You shouldn't believe everything the media says about pit bulls, many out there are just as gentle as labradors or other "gentle" canine breeds. It's a media trait to perceive these dogs out to be dangerous, because many violent dog related attacks include these types of dogs.

Which is my point. I've never seen on the news "Boy mauled by poodle!" "Girl, 5, attacked by Chihuahua" it's the same 2 or 3 breeds (in various combinations) again and again. As I said - I'm not a dog hater - burn all dogs or w/e, but I just don't think that these types of dogs should be legal (and some aren't in the UK) because of the potential threat they pose to the public - and from personal experience I know what it feels like to be on the receiving end of a dog attack.

[Neversoft]

From personal experience I know they can be very violent and scary. Most dogs I am fine with, but certain types are just...ugh.

And yes it's the owners, but if the owners couldn't get dangerous dogs in the first place and train them to attack there wouldn't be a problem.

Way to stereotype. Pit bulls aren't born evil. A dangerous dog will only be so because of the result of a human.

[HotelUser]

I have never had a dog as a pet so I don't really like being around dogs, bigger ones mostly although this woman was disgusting in what she did.

[Jordan]

As Neversoft said, its down to us how it reacts. I don't care what dog it is, I love all dogs and what happened is awful and it really hurts like as if it was my own D:


Honestly - I hate dogs. I've got bad memories of them and whenever something like this comes up a little voice in the back of my head says "good" but the majority of my brain says "aww, poor thing - how awful". I have mixed feelings over this. Dogs like that - the one pictured anyway - shouldn't be allowed - however hanging it and burning it is obviously unlawful and absolutely disgraceful.

in your head saying good? **** you... as I said above, If a dog attacks someone it must of been brought up wrong or shaken or bullied in some way to make it want to attack someone. Can't believe what you said there :l

[Conservative,]

Way to stereotype. Pit bulls aren't born evil. A dangerous dog will only be so because of the result of a human.

I don't stereotype, I give with experience and knowledge - from what I've experienced and what I know, pitbulls are dangerous - not all, but certainly more than most people would be comfortable with.

[Jordan]

I don't care about your experience and your knowledge tbh... all dogs are born good and they get changed by us.

[Special]

OTT much, just buy a new one they all say the same thing

[Muct]

Which is my point. I've never seen on the news "Boy mauled by poodle!" "Girl, 5, attacked by Chihuahua" it's the same 2 or 3 breeds (in various combinations) again and again. As I said - I'm not a dog hater - burn all dogs or w/e, but I just don't think that these types of dogs should be legal (and some aren't in the UK) because of the potential threat they pose to the public - and from personal experience I know what it feels like to be on the receiving end of a dog attack.

http://www.wboc.com/global/story.asp?S=10769319
http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080617/LOCAL07/806170302
http://petshub.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48689
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10652469/ns/us_news-weird_news/
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081108130248AAuoFhQ

enough babes?x

[Conservative,]

I don't care about your experience and your knowledge tbh... all dogs are born good and they get changed by us.

"All dogs are born good.." So wild dogs are good...yeah? Even when you're camping and they attack you? Ok.. :l

I'm not saying ALL dogs are evil - far from it. This is probably an awful comparison but it's like Muslims and terrorists - it's only a TINY minority that are actually bad.

[Muct]

"All dogs are born good.." So wild dogs are good...yeah? Even when you're camping and they attack you? Ok.. :l

I'm not saying ALL dogs are evil - far from it. This is probably an awful comparison but it's like Muslims and terrorists - it's only a TINY minority that are actually bad.

A TINY minority and you're saying they shouldn't be allowed!
That's like saying - OK, well, 3 muslims just made a terrorist attack on the UK, lets just ban every single muslim from entering the UK!
Seriously, urghh.. ;LL

[Conservative,]

http://www.wboc.com/global/story.asp?S=10769319
http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080617/LOCAL07/806170302
http://petshub.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48689
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10652469/ns/us_news-weird_news/
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081108130248AAuoFhQ

enough babes?x

Fair enough, you've proved me wrong...I have never seen those before haha. I know any breed can be dangerous but my main point is certain breeds have MORE potential to be dangerous - because of their strength, size, teeth etc. And that's why they should be illegal...but anyway isn't this thread about the woman being arrested, not what type of dogs should be illegal?

In which case, I agree with the woman being arrested, animal cruelty should be treated seriously, no matter what animal and breed it was.

[e5]

Could never, ever do that to an animal :( I love dogs.

[Muct]

Fair enough, you've proved me wrong...I have never seen those before haha. I know any breed can be dangerous but my main point is certain breeds have MORE potential to be dangerous - because of their strength, size, teeth etc. And that's why they should be illegal...but anyway isn't this thread about the woman being arrested, not what type of dogs should be illegal?

In which case, I agree with the woman being arrested, animal cruelty should be treated seriously, no matter what animal and breed it was.
Topics move on.
And now you're saying they should be illegal because they're strong and have big teeth!?!
WTF.

[Conservative,]

A TINY minority and you're saying they shouldn't be allowed!
That's like saying - OK, well, 3 muslims just made a terrorist attack on the UK, lets just ban every single muslim from entering the UK!
Seriously, urghh.. ;LL

I'm just going with the current laws - certain breeds, no idea which ones because I have no interest in dogs...are banned because they're labelled "dangerous".

[Muct]

I'm just going with the current laws - certain breeds, no idea which ones because I have no interest in dogs...are banned because they're labelled "dangerous".

You're the one labelling pitbulls dangerous though..

[Conservative,]

You're the one labelling pitbulls dangerous though..

because they're proven to be, both to me and in the news etc. Ok maybe my first statement (ban all of them) was OTT, but if dangerous dogs are found they should be put down that's my view..

[Muct]

because they're proven to be, both to me and in the news etc. Ok maybe my first statement (ban all of them) was OTT, but if dangerous dogs are found they should be put down that's my view..

No, a small minority of them are proven to be, not the whole breed, so why should they become illegal to own?
&If dangerous dogs are found usually they are put down..

[Jordy]

Whilst I agree "Conservative" has made some rather outlandish and general remarks he isn't totally wrong, dogs aren't totally innocent. Lions and Snakes are "born good" but it doesn't mean that anyone should own one. It's in the nature of certain animals (including some breeds of dogs) to kill things and be very aggressive, in some cases they're virtually impossible to tame.

Thus the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, certain breeds are illegal in the UK so it's not ridiculous at all;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_Dogs_Act_1991
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/InYourHome/AnimalsAndPets/DG_180098

[Stephen]

Wow anyone who thinks "Good" even a little bit is an idiot. *REMOVED*

Edited by HotelUser (Forum Super Moderator): Please don't be rude to other users.

[Conservative,]

Whilst I agree "Conservative" has made some rather outlandish and general remarks he isn't totally wrong, dogs aren't totally innocent. Lions and Snakes are "born good" but it doesn't mean that anyone should own one. It's in the nature of certain animals (including some breeds of dogs) to kill things and be very aggressive, in some cases they're virtually impossible to tame.

Thus the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, certain breeds are illegal in the UK so it's not ridiculous at all;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_Dogs_Act_1991
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/InYourHome/AnimalsAndPets/DG_180098

Yeah some of my remarks, looking back, we're a bit outlandish and I do actually go against my self in a few ways, you pretty much put my view across :)

[Muct]

Yeah some of my remarks, looking back, we're a bit outlandish and I do actually go against my self in a few ways, you pretty much put my view across :)

So what are you actually trying to suggest to solve this MASSSSSSIVE problem we apparently have with certain breeds of dogs?

[Conservative,]

So what are you actually trying to suggest to solve this MASSSSSSIVE problem we apparently have with certain breeds of dogs?

I don't know...can't really explain it...I'm no vet, nor dog owner, but probably regular check-ups on the dogs behaviour and to see if the owner is treating it properly - if it is thought to be a danger to the public, the owners or itself it should be taken away.

[Muct]

I don't know...can't really explain it...I'm no vet, nor dog owner, but probably regular check-ups on the dogs behaviour and to see if the owner is treating it properly - if it is thought to be a danger to the public, the owners or itself it should be taken away.

What exactly do you mean by taken away?
I can understand taking the dog away to be taught how to behave better - it's not exactly the dogs fault the owner treated it badly - such as beating it or something?

[Conservative,]

What exactly do you mean by taken away?
I can understand taking the dog away to be taught how to behave better - it's not exactly the dogs fault the owner treated it badly - such as beating it or something?

Taken away, maybe trained, but if it's clearly not fit for being a pet - possibly destroyed (although that's last resort), or put to better use like guide-dogs? Who knows...

[Muct]

Taken away, maybe trained, but if it's clearly not fit for being a pet - possibly destroyed (although that's last resort), or put to better use like guide-dogs? Who knows...

I don't see how putting a vicous, dangerous dog on a leesh for a blind person will help, probably isn't that usually the disciplined, trained dogs?
But meh, I guess I'll have to agree that last resort would have to be putting it down... D:

[Jordy]

Muct I don't see what you're arguing about? Certain breeds are illegal and if a dog of any breed attacks a human, it'll most likely be put down (and the owner also charged with an inability to look after the dog). It might not be the dogs fault that it's been brought up in such a way but once it's been shown to attack people it's too late to "re-train" it and should rightly be put down. Not that this has anything to do with the topic on hand anymore.

[cocaine]

Which is my point. I've never seen on the news "Boy mauled by poodle!" "Girl, 5, attacked by Chihuahua" it's the same 2 or 3 breeds (in various combinations) again and again. As I said - I'm not a dog hater - burn all dogs or w/e, but I just don't think that these types of dogs should be legal (and some aren't in the UK) because of the potential threat they pose to the public - and from personal experience I know what it feels like to be on the receiving end of a dog attack.

so because the man in the shiny suit on BBC news reported that there was a pitbull (one of out thousands or more pitbulls in the country) incident means all of them are savage creatures?

[myke]

Honestly - I hate dogs. I've got bad memories of them and whenever something like this comes up a little voice in the back of my head says "good" but the majority of my brain says "aww, poor thing - how awful". I have mixed feelings over this. Dogs like that - the one pictured anyway - shouldn't be allowed - however hanging it and burning it is obviously unlawful and absolutely disgraceful.

Don't judge a book by it's cover. My neighbour used to have a Rottweiler and they're renown for their 'viciousness', it was one of the nicest dogs I've ever been with. A jack russel can be violent too yanno.


I don't stereotype, I give with experience and knowledge - from what I've experienced and what I know, pitbulls are dangerous - not all, but certainly more than most people would be comfortable with.

Just because you experienced something doesn't make it right. A dog is born with no vicious tendencies, a human teaches it that. The same way a human is born non-aggressive but LEARNS to be aggressive by being taught.

[Jordy]

Just because you experienced something doesn't make it right. A dog is born with no vicious tendencies, a human teaches it that. The same way a human is born non-aggressive but LEARNS to be aggressive by being taught.That's simply not true, most dogs are born with vicious tendencies and so are humans. It's how things in the wild survive and how we survived in the past. Vicious tendencies and aggression come naturally to most omnivores and carnivores, survival of the fittest and all that. Quite simple really, humans and dogs are taught to be non-aggressive if anything.

For instance if you just put a dog in the wild, of course it will be vicious without being taught.

[Muct]

That's simply not true, most dogs are born with vicious tendencies and so are humans. It's how things in the wild survive and how we survived in the past. Vicious tendencies and aggression come naturally to most omnivores and carnivores, survival of the fittest and all that. Quite simple really, humans and dogs are taught to be non-aggressive if anything.

For instance if you just put a dog in the wild, of course it will be vicious without being taught.
Eh, that was and is survival, I'm sure anyone would do anything to survive, right?

[Jordy]

Eh, that was and is survival, I'm sure anyone would do anything to survive, right?Survival is exactly what is "natural".

[Muct]

Survival is exactly what is "natural".

I'm sure being petted on the head by your owner and being chased by wild lions or something are two different types of survival.

[Jordy]

I'm sure being petted on the head by your owner and being chased by wild lions or something are two different types of survival.Well yes but they're linked. Dogs are naturally aggressive in order to survive in the wild I'm sure we'll agree by now. They have to be trained to be non-aggressive however they can never be fully trained. Hence why patting a dog on the head will be seem as a challenge to the dog and make it feel threatened, hence why it will attack you. I swear I was making a point at some point but now I just seem to be going round in circles :P

[Muct]

Well yes but they're linked. Dogs are naturally aggressive in order to survive in the wild I'm sure we'll agree by now. They have to be trained to be non-aggressive however they can never be fully trained. Hence why patting a dog on the head will be seem as a challenge to the dog and make it feel threatened, hence why it will attack you. I swear I was making a point at some point but now I just seem to be going round in circles :P
No, I don't agree that dogs are naturally aggressive, OK - I'll accept that maybe the odd dog could be different and the other way round, born bad and needs to be taught to be good - but dogs in general? No. I don't even agree that pitbutts or any other breed in general are born aggressive.

[The Don]

Conservative, a part of you thought that it was good that a one year old puppy was tortured and murdered for NO reason? You are completly in the wrong, dangerous dogs aside, all this puppy did was nibble on a bible as it was probably teething, it didn't deserve to be set alight in flames and hung. That's like saying you accidently bump into me so i go to your house and kill your family... it's not right is it?

[Nemo]

No, I don't agree that dogs are naturally aggressive, OK - I'll accept that maybe the odd dog could be different and the other way round, born bad and needs to be taught to be good - but dogs in general? No. I don't even agree that pitbutts or any other breed in general are born aggressive.
Then you would be wrong. Its instinct is to defend itself and survive. If it feels threatened, then it becomes aggressive. Thus born aggressive.

[Jordy]

No, I don't agree that dogs are naturally aggressive, OK - I'll accept that maybe the odd dog could be different and the other way round, born bad and needs to be taught to be good - but dogs in general? No. I don't even agree that pitbutts or any other breed in general are born aggressive.I'm talking about stuff which can't really be disputed here, they are born aggressive, and that is natural sorry. Dogs or anything else can't be born "bad", this isn't Harry Potter, everything is born with a neutral mindset and depending on the environment it is brought up in will be either "good" or "bad", at birth though every animal is as good/bad as each other.

[Muct]

I'm talking about stuff which can't really be disputed here, they are born aggressive, and that is natural sorry. Dogs or anything else can't be born "bad", this isn't Harry Potter, everything is born with a neutral mindset and depending on the environment it is brought up in will be either "good" or "bad", at birth though every animal is as good/bad as each other.

Yes, they are as good/bad as each other at birth, and you just said they were born with no either good/bad intentions, as in with a neutral mindset. So you just really backed my point up saying that dogs in general aren't born bad... I never said they were born perfectly good, but if they're born with a neutral mindset, then mk. (:

[Nemo]

Yes, they are as good/bad as each other at birth, and you just said they were born with no either good/bad intentions, as in with a neutral mindset. So you just really backed my point up saying that dogs in general aren't born bad... I never said they were born perfectly good, but if they're born with a neutral mindset, then mk. (:
I dont get what your point was

[Muct]

I dont get what your point was

Basically what he said, that dogs aren't actually born bad, but with a neutral mindset, they're the words that I was looking for but I couldn't find, xD

[GommeInc]

"All dogs are born good.." So wild dogs are good...yeah? Even when you're camping and they attack you? Ok.. :l

I'm not saying ALL dogs are evil - far from it. This is probably an awful comparison but it's like Muslims and terrorists - it's only a TINY minority that are actually bad.
Domestic and non-domestic dogs are completely different. One is born with the understand that man is a friend and the other is born into a world of fear where they need to be extra careful to survive. Pit Bulls tend to be born into the former, and are of the understanding that man is good.

[Nemo]

Basically what he said, that dogs aren't actually born bad, but with a neutral mindset, they're the words that I was looking for but I couldn't find, xD
Isnt that incredibly obvious since it is insticts that create aggression (as i said before), so as long it does feel threatened, if it hasnt been swayed either way then itll obv be in a neutral mindset

god this thread is dumb

[Muct]

Isnt that incredibly obvious since it is insticts that create aggression (as i said before), so as long it does feel threatened, if it hasnt been swayed either way then itll obv be in a neutral mindset

god this thread is dumb

All my point was saying was that dogs aren't born bad, so do people finally agree with that, and dogs actually born with a neutral mindset?

NOW LETS MOVE ONTO CATS !! XD
-endjoke.

[GommeInc]

IF dogs are born vicious, I must of met a lot of crappy puppies in my life time. My dog was cuddly when he was born, as were my kittens. Infact, most animals are born to be weak, fragile and dependent, rather than vicious. If they were born vicious, they wouldn't be dependent on their mothers for support. Adding to that, lion cubs are born taken whatever they see as feeding them as the "good guy", so this "born vicious theology" is entirely inaccurate. Snakes and lizards I believe are also born dependent on whatever is feeding them and keeping them warm, you just have to worry when snakes grow old because they take any finger movements as an instinctive sign for "prey" and may bite :/

[Jordy]

Yes, they are as good/bad as each other at birth, and you just said they were born with no either good/bad intentions, as in with a neutral mindset. So you just really backed my point up saying that dogs in general aren't born bad... I never said they were born perfectly good, but if they're born with a neutral mindset, then mk. (:No I am not backing up your point what-so-ever.

Dogs are born with aggression, that is natural. That does not mean they are good or bad, that's just how they are and they're all the same, some breeds will have different degrees of aggression of course. They will either continue to be aggressive or become non-aggressive, this depends in the environment they are brought up (In the wild maybe or by some dog fighting specialists or a loving family?). Whether they are good or bad is a matter of your opinion but they are all born the same. Adolf Hitler was not born a bad person, he grew up to be a bad person.


god this thread is dumbTo be perfectly honest I'm losing the will to live.

Edit: Muct you've pretty much had a complete U-Turn on what you were saying earlier so it's now as if you are seemingly agreeing with me :/

[Muct]

No I am not backing up your point what-so-ever.

Dogs are born with aggression, that is natural. That does not mean they are good or bad, that's just how they are and they're all the same, some breeds will have different degrees of aggression of course. They will either continue to be aggressive or become non-aggressive, this depends in the environment they are brought up (In the wild maybe or by some dog fighting specialists or a loving family?). Whether they are good or bad is a matter of your opinion but they are all born the same. Adolf Hitler was not born a bad person, he grew up to be a bad person.


You said they were born with a neutral mindset.
That means no intentions of being good OR bad.
I said they weren't born bad.
You said they were born neutral and it depended on their enviroment.
Backed up opinion. Thanks.
&That Hitler example just backs up my opinion even stronger, btw.

[GommeInc]

No I am not backing up your point what-so-ever.

Dogs are born with aggression, that is natural. That does not mean they are good or bad, that's just how they are and they're all the same, some breeds will have different degrees of aggression of course. They will either continue to be aggressive or become non-aggressive, this depends in the environment they are brought up (In the wild maybe or by some dog fighting specialists or a loving family?). Whether they are good or bad is a matter of your opinion but they are all born the same. Adolf Hitler was not born a bad person, he grew up to be a bad person.
See my above post. They're so not born aggressive :P I've seen hundreds of puppies in my life time and you rarely get any aggressive dogs. If anything, it's the same with humans - different personalities that start from birth. Most baby animals are dependent, not vicious - if they were vicious (biting the hand that feeds you) then they're dooming themselves to death. It all depends on upbringing, and a Rottweiler or a Pit Bull is only vicious if brought up badly.

Someone mentioned man being vicious from the start. I've never seen a baby being put down for causing GBH, attempting to stab someone, biting with the intent to cause serious harm - play biting is popular amongst all of God's/Buddha's creatures, lion cubs play bite and immediately know they've done wrong if you react. it's part of training, if they witness pain then they know they've done wrong.

[Muct]

Edit: Muct you've pretty much had a complete U-Turn on what you were saying earlier so it's now as if you are seemingly agreeing with me :/
I'm agreeing with you because you're backing up my opinion and you don't even know it, so 'tis all good.

[Jordy]

You said they were born with a neutral mindset.
That means no intentions of being good OR bad.
I said they weren't born bad.
You said they were born neutral and it depended on their enviroment.
Backed up opinion. Thanks.
&That Hitler example just backs up my opinion even stronger, btw.Well earlier you were saying they could be born bad..?


No, I don't agree that dogs are naturally aggressive, OK - I'll accept that maybe the odd dog could be different and the other way round, born bad and needs to be taught to be good - but dogs in general? No. I don't even agree that pitbutts or any other breed in general are born aggressive.

You're just changing what you're saying to make yourself look like you agree with me and others (the people who are right) when infact you were saying the complete opposite not long ago. Frankly this is messing with my head now and I cannot be doing with you. You could of just admitted you were wrong or just left the thread as it was but you opt to go round in circles and slowly change what you're saying so it doesn't look like you've "lost" an argument, which is frankly pathetic behaviour.

[Muct]

Well earlier you were saying they could be born bad..?



You're just changing what you're saying to make yourself look like you agree with me and others (the people who are right) when infact you were saying the complete opposite not long ago. Frankly this is messing with my head now and I cannot be doing with you. You could of just admitted you were wrong or just left the thread as it was but you opt to go round in circles and slowly change what you're saying so it doesn't look like you've "lost" an argument, which is frankly pathetic behaviour.

I said the odd rare one could be born bad, and that's true, some dogs could have disabilities maybe?
And I think you will find that the 'others' are like 1 or 2 more people, more people agree that dogs aren't born bad than with what you said ORIGINALLY said about them being born bad. If anybody is changing their opinion it's you..

[Jordy]

See my above post. They're so not born aggressive :P I've seen hundreds of puppies in my life time and you rarely get any aggressive dogs. If anything, it's the same with humans - different personalities that start from birth. Most baby animals are dependent, not vicious - if they were vicious (biting the hand that feeds you) then they're dooming themselves to death. It all depends on upbringing, and a Rottweiler or a Pit Bull is only vicious if brought up badly.

Someone mentioned man being vicious from the start. I've never seen a baby being put down for causing GBH, attempting to stab someone, biting with the intent to cause serious harm - play biting is popular amongst all of God's/Buddha's creatures, lion cubs play bite and immediately know they've done wrong if you react. it's part of training, if they witness pain then they know they've done wrong.That's because the dogs and babies you've known have been brought up in lovings environment where they would not be aggressive. You don't have to look back far in history to see that dogs and humans are naturally aggressive creatures designed to kill in order to survive, we have not lost this instinct and we're all born with it. Babies naturally bite (part of the aggression i'm talking about), obviously it doesn't cause "serious harm" or "GBH" at this stage because frankly they're pathetic and not strong enough to harm anyone. They're told off for doing this and when they grow older don't bite or hurt people as they were taught as babies it's wrong. The same applies to dogs and any other animals.

Everything is naturally aggressive in order to survive. Things cannot be born good or bad. Judging by the environment they are brought up in, they will either continue to be aggressive, and therefore "bad" or non-aggressive and therefore "good". This is not determined at birth however.

[Muct]

That's because the dogs and babies you've known have been brought up in lovings environment where they would not be aggressive. You don't have to look back far in history to see that dogs and humans are naturally aggressive creatures designed to kill in order to survive, we have not lost this instinct and we're all born with it. Babies naturally bite (part of the aggression i'm talking about), obviously it doesn't cause "serious harm" or "GBH" at this stage because frankly they're pathetic and not strong enough to harm anyone. They're told off for doing this and when they grow older don't bite or hurt people as they were taught as babies it's wrong. The same applies to dogs and any other animals.

Everything is naturally aggressive in order to survive. Things cannot be born good or bad. Judging by the environment they are brought up in, they will either continue to be aggressive, and therefore "bad" or non-aggressive and therefore "good". This is not determined at birth however.
Curiousity. Teething.
There are explanations about the babies biting at random times, you know.

[Jordy]

I said the odd rare one could be born bad, and that's true, some dogs could have disabilities maybe?
And I think you will find that the 'others' are like 1 or 2 more people, more people agree that dogs aren't born bad than with what you said ORIGINALLY said about them being born bad. If anybody is changing their opinion it's you..Now you're just clutching at straws. I am the person who is saying dogs aren't born bad, I have said all along they are born neutral (unlike some!).

Find me a post where I said dogs are born bad or any other post where I've changed my opinion during this thread?

[The Don]

Good and bad is an opinion, and animals are born neutral, however they can be agressive in certain cirumstances and obviously all dogs are different so some can become agressive in the smallest circumstances such as an owner patting it on the head, others may become agressive after being beaten. However dogs aren't bad or good, they simply follow their natuarl instincts. Some breeds of dogs, such as the pitball, or staff can be agressive and not suitable for homes which is the same with breeds such as poodles and dolmations, it all comes down to the enviroment the dogs are brought up in, however SOME breeds such as rotteweilers and staffs and pitt's are more capable of doing damage because of the size of their teeth, body and claws, and therefore maybe shouldn't be allowed. (Btw, completly neutral here, i own a staff btw :L)

[Muct]

Now you're just clutching at straws. I am the person who is saying dogs aren't born bad, I have said all along they are born neutral (unlike some!).

Find me a post where I said dogs are born bad or any other post where I've changed my opinion during this thread?
Holdddddddddddd on... You came in like 2 pages ago - I've been saying dogs aren't born bad all the way through this..

[Jordy]

Holdddddddddddd on... You came in like 2 pages ago - I've been saying dogs aren't born bad all the way through this..Well then don't accuse me of saying I've changed my opinion or said something I haven't.

The Don has also said exactly what I've been saying throughout this thread, thank-you.

[Zak]

Just because it chewed a book that makes no sense at all, unless you believe in miracles that is.

What a physco, dogs have rights too. :(

[Nick]

Wow i feel sorry for that dog :'(

[Jsoh]

What the actual hell this is utterly disgusting. The woman obviously holds her bible very close to her heart and appreciates it, but surely that would mean that she would be following the ways of it and not KILLING animals. This story actually makes me sad, as the woman is clearly mentally deranged and the dog shouldn't be treated like that. :((

[Mikey]

A bit over the top to be honest. The woman must have no common sense at all because obviously it's going to chew on things and unfortunately for her it was her bible. She could of easy bought a new bible and put it out of reach of the dog next time. Cruel, cruel woman.

[Slowpoke]

She faces 180 days to five years in prison if convicted

Now that is good. It's very rare you see people get a prison sentence for animal cruelty. This is how it should always be

[ifuseekamy]

All animals are born with instincts, what is good and bad is human logic and doesn't apply to the natural world. That aside, the dog was chewing on a book not a baby's head, the woman is just typically bat****.

[Shockwave.2CC]

Why the *Removed* would anyone do this a living animal :(

Dogs are like the best

Edited by Catzsy (Forum Super Moderator):
Please do not avoid the filter

[.Shaun,,]

At least she getting sentenced, not just a slap on the wrist.

[GommeInc]

That's because the dogs and babies you've known have been brought up in lovings environment where they would not be aggressive. You don't have to look back far in history to see that dogs and humans are naturally aggressive creatures designed to kill in order to survive, we have not lost this instinct and we're all born with it. Babies naturally bite (part of the aggression i'm talking about), obviously it doesn't cause "serious harm" or "GBH" at this stage because frankly they're pathetic and not strong enough to harm anyone. They're told off for doing this and when they grow older don't bite or hurt people as they were taught as babies it's wrong. The same applies to dogs and any other animals.

Everything is naturally aggressive in order to survive. Things cannot be born good or bad. Judging by the environment they are brought up in, they will either continue to be aggressive, and therefore "bad" or non-aggressive and therefore "good". This is not determined at birth however.
Just picking up a small point which is I believe why Muct is getting confused with the arguments. One of your original posts you claimed animals are "born good".


Lions and Snakes are "born good" but it doesn't mean that anyone should own one. It's in the nature of certain animals (including some breeds of dogs) to kill things and be very aggressive, in some cases they're virtually impossible to tame.

You therefore believe non-domestic or "wild" animals should not be owned (or indeed, unownable/tabeable), but are "born good", as with most animals - non-aggressive, they do not have immediate desires to attack. Aggression tends to be linked with violent or expected violent behaviour, which is a negative, therefore bad and therefore suggests that they are born bad. Linking back to domesticated animals such as dogs - dogs tend to be born into the word neutral or more precise, "good-neutral" where they play bite and use their mouths to learn from their environment - children do it all the time afterall, even though they are not bad or aggressive. It's part of the growing up process to use teeth and so forth, so in this debate how animals are born is somewhat irrelevant as all animals play bite in the growing up stages - herbivores too (which lack any desire for meat).

However, in saying that, I do completely agree with you that that how they turn out in adult life is down to how they are treated and brought up in the all important baby, child and "juvenile" years where they learn not to bite or be aggressive (or as aggressive, as they like all animals can defend themselves). Pit Bulls have the capability or being "good" in adult life as with all domesticated animals - domesticated suggesting they're tame or tameable.

In short, we've managed to go completely away from the pit bull discussion and turn it into the psychology of man and beast in a domesticated and wild environment :P

[party]

This is horrible. If I'm honest that woman should get fined because that dog did nothing to deserve that.

[GommeInc]

This is horrible. If I'm honest that woman should get fined because that dog did nothing to deserve that.
She deserves more than a fine, poor thing didn't do anything wrong and her actions are a bit worrying, considering how she killed the animal. I'd be worried about being near her incase I used her Bible as bog roll :P

[Catzsy]

See my above post. They're so not born aggressive :P I've seen hundreds of puppies in my life time and you rarely get any aggressive dogs. If anything, it's the same with humans - different personalities that start from birth. Most baby animals are dependent, not vicious - if they were vicious (biting the hand that feeds you) then they're dooming themselves to death. It all depends on upbringing, and a Rottweiler or a Pit Bull is only vicious if brought up badly.

Someone mentioned man being vicious from the start. I've never seen a baby being put down for causing GBH, attempting to stab someone, biting with the intent to cause serious harm - play biting is popular amongst all of God's/Buddha's creatures, lion cubs play bite and immediately know they've done wrong if you react. it's part of training, if they witness pain then they know they've done wrong.


You may have a point here but they are a 'prohibited' breed here so I think nature as well as nurture has a lot to do with it. To own one of these dogs you have to get an exemption order :

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/pets/dangerous/

[RedStratocas]

And yes it's the owners, but if the owners couldn't get dangerous dogs in the first place and train them to attack there wouldn't be a problem.

"Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak because a baby can't chew it" ~ mark twain.

pit bulls are actually some of the nicest dogs i've ever met. they're just very strong, thus sometimes trained to be attack dogs. if pitt bulls were banned, people who train dogs to be vicious would just use the next strongest dog, it wouldn't solve a single thing.

if this was a muslim woman and the dog chewed her koran, i'm sure this thread would have been a lot different.

[GommeInc]

You may have a point here but they are a 'prohibited' breed here so I think nature as well as nurture has a lot to do with it. To own one of these dogs you have to get an exemption order :

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/pets/dangerous/
Indeed, I remember when they were added to the list. It was a very strange year last year for pit bull terriers, hundreds of children were being attacked and killed, as well as members of the public, yet they were kinda unheard before it. I think the legislation was put through because of the increase of "dangerous dog" incidents that involved them. However, to get an exemption order isn't too difficult anyway. The main problem is breeding them and having to put up with knowing that there are people out there that would strongly believe this type of dog is dangerous because it appeared in the newspaper and on TV a handful of times, even thought a handful of dogs is nothing compared to the huge majority that are perfectly good animals.

EDIT: Oh, just seen the date of the Act. I'm sure there were more recent changes to the Act. Maybe they were just ideas to put forward towards a change :/

[Jessicrawrr]

for a book? Surely putting the dog down would be better than burning it, then hanging it?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Why do people keep telling one another that pitbulls are nice? yes of course they are most of the time, as are most animals - it is when they become aggressive and certains animals and breeds will reach the end of their tether/simply flip much faster than others; for example a Poodle is less aggressive than a Pitbull.

That said, I'm not sure I really believe in the banning of animals at all - but thats another debate.

[Catzsy]

Indeed, I remember when they were added to the list. It was a very strange year last year for pit bull terriers, hundreds of children were being attacked and killed, as well as members of the public, yet they were kinda unheard before it. I think the legislation was put through because of the increase of "dangerous dog" incidents that involved them. However, to get an exemption order isn't too difficult anyway. The main problem is breeding them and having to put up with knowing that there are people out there that would strongly believe this type of dog is dangerous because it appeared in the newspaper and on TV a handful of times, even thought a handful of dogs is nothing compared to the huge majority that are perfectly good animals.

EDIT: Oh, just seen the date of the Act. I'm sure there were more recent changes to the Act. Maybe they were just ideas to put forward towards a change :/

There are two acts mentioned there the 1991 and 1997. Have there been any changes since?

I don't condone what the woman did though - that is rediculous having a moral outrage because the dog chewed a bible. Perhaps she thought the dog could read? :P

[Jacob]

That is absolutely ridiculous! How can anyone burn a dog? She doesn't read the bible enough.

[GommeInc]

There are two acts mentioned there the 1991 and 1997. Have there been any changes since?

I don't condone what the woman did though - that is rediculous having a moral outrage because the dog chewed a bible. Perhaps she thought the dog could read? :P
There may have been proposed changes since the group of dog related incidents last year/year before, but that may have just be a coincidence and shed light on an area of the law that wasn't being watched. Not entirely sure. The attacks that happened last year were the first time I've seen so many attacks at least, is that the same for anyone else?

May have done, there are so many things wrong with her actions, last time I checked there was nothing in the Bible about how you should treat animals who don't know what they are doing when it comes to religion :P


Why do people keep telling one another that pitbulls are nice? yes of course they are most of the time, as are most animals - it is when they become aggressive and certains animals and breeds will reach the end of their tether/simply flip much faster than others; for example a Poodle is less aggressive than a Pitbull.

That said, I'm not sure I really believe in the banning of animals at all - but thats another debate.
You missed the arguments flung back and forth about dog behaviour ;)

[Ajthedragon]

How odd. Poor dog. :(

[AgnesIO]

Honestly - I hate dogs. I've got bad memories of them and whenever something like this comes up a little voice in the back of my head says "good" but the majority of my brain says "aww, poor thing - how awful". I have mixed feelings over this. Dogs like that - the one pictured anyway - shouldn't be allowed - however hanging it and burning it is obviously unlawful and absolutely disgraceful.

No person who is straight in the head would think 'good' about anything being killed like this - especially when the living thing did not harm ANYONE.

I shall now announce that I have a Rottweiler. He is the most soppy dog I have ever come across, has never bitten or attacked ANYTHING and just wants to be stroked.

Should my Rottweiler be banned?

[RedStratocas]

Why do people keep telling one another that pitbulls are nice? yes of course they are most of the time, as are most animals - it is when they become aggressive and certains animals and breeds will reach the end of their tether/simply flip much faster than others; for example a Poodle is less aggressive than a Pitbull.

actually most animals aren't "nice" most of the time. but i guess that depends on what your definition of "nice" is. and actually poodles are quite nasty a lot of the time, people just assume they're the sweetest dogs because they're always groomed and look silly. just like how people assume that since pit bulls are big and strong that they must be aggressive an unpredictable.

so it goes.

[-:Undertaker:-]

actually most animals aren't "nice" most of the time. but i guess that depends on what your definition of "nice" is. and actually poodles are quite nasty a lot of the time, people just assume they're the sweetest dogs because they're always groomed and look silly. just like how people assume that since pit bulls are big and strong that they must be aggressive an unpredictable.

so it goes.

But bring physical power into it and you will see, I know I would rather be faced with an aggressive Poodle than a Pitbull.

[AgnesIO]

But bring physical power into it and you will see, I know I would rather be faced with an aggressive Poodle than a Pitbull.

Both are normally easy to calm - unless you did something to disturb them..

[-:Undertaker:-]

Both are normally easy to calm - unless you did something to disturb them..

An owner may sometimes know how to calm one, a little child will not and cannot fight against the animal which is stronger than they are. To add to that, often animals who suddenly 'flip' often have a strange almost robotic reaction when attacking where they will attack and attack no matter what damage they themselves think.

Think of two power bears or two dogs (dog fighting for example) going at one another, they behave in a robotic manner until the other is dead.

[AgnesIO]

An owner may sometimes know how to calm one, a little child will not and cannot fight against the animal which is stronger than they are. To add to that, often animals who suddenly 'flip' often have a strange almost robotic reaction when attacking where they will attack and attack no matter what damage they themselves think.

Think of two power bears or two dogs (dog fighting for example) going at one another, they behave in a robotic manner until the other is dead.

Because that is what they are taught to do.

Nature vs Nurture.

[Steee]

Thats like totally Sick..

[-:Undertaker:-]

Because that is what they are taught to do.

Nature vs Nurture.

No, that is instinct - look at polar bears for prime example along with dogs, often sometimes the weaker one will try to walk away from the conflict but the stronger one will simply keep on attacking the other and the weaker is then forced to defend itself and so it goes on. I'm not proposing banning anything, i'm just pointing out the reality which is that pitbulls have a violent streak (like most animals) but as they are stronger that streak often results in death (see all the attacks that have been reported concerning Pitbulls).

Why do scally lads often have dogs such as pitbulls? because they show strength because they are a strong breed.

[AgnesIO]

No, that is instinct - look at polar bears for prime example along with dogs, often sometimes the weaker one will try to walk away from the conflict but the stronger one will simply keep on attacking the other and the weaker is then forced to defend itself and so it goes on. I'm not proposing banning anything, i'm just pointing out the reality which is that pitbulls have a violent streak (like most animals) but as they are stronger that streak often results in death (see all the attacks that have been reported concerning Pitbulls).

Why do scally lads often have dogs such as pitbulls? because they show strength because they are a strong breed.

"dog fighting"

They are taught to fight.

[-:Undertaker:-]

"dog fighting"

They are taught to fight.

Dogs fight regardless and always have done, it is nature - for example when two dogs sometimes walk past one another and owners have to seperate them because they get into a scuffle, which if left alone could escalate. I'm stumped that you seem to think Pitbulls are animals which wouldn't harm a fly - most animals have that streak in them, and as I said above Pitbulls are stronger and more powerful hence do more damage.

Why do people put pitbulls against one another in dog fights? because they are naturally aggressive and physically stronger.

[AgnesIO]

Dogs fight regardless and always have done, it is nature - for example when two dogs sometimes walk past one another and owners have to seperate them because they get into a scuffle, which if left alone could escalate. I'm stumped that you seem to think Pitbulls are animals which wouldn't harm a fly - most animals have that streak in them, and as I said above Pitbulls are stronger and more powerful hence do more damage.

Why do people put pitbulls against one another in dog fights? because they are naturally aggressive and physically stronger.

I didn't say they wouldn't harm a fly.

Not even humans don't harm other animals.

Check my post on page nine though.

[GommeInc]

Dogs fight regardless and always have done, it is nature - for example when two dogs sometimes walk past one another and owners have to seperate them because they get into a scuffle, which if left alone could escalate. I'm stumped that you seem to think Pitbulls are animals which wouldn't harm a fly - most animals have that streak in them, and as I said above Pitbulls are stronger and more powerful hence do more damage.

Why do people put pitbulls against one another in dog fights? because they are naturally aggressive and physically stronger.
Main difference is not all pitbulls are brought up to attack. Some do not have the ability to hurt flies, so to speak, while others are trained to be violent and thus you get the cases where murder or harm are involved.

In short, pitbulls aren't bad, unless made to be. They should be legal to have as pets provided they're not violent, as with any other domesticated animal.

[Jordy]

Main difference is not all pitbulls are brought up to attack. Some do not have the ability to hurt flies, so to speak, while others are trained to be violent and thus you get the cases where murder or harm are involved.

In short, pitbulls aren't bad, unless made to be. They should be legal to have as pets provided they're not violent, as with any other domesticated animal.They all have the ability to hurt flies. Regardless of how it was brought up, if a child runs in, stares it in the face and pats it on the head, the child is as good as dead. You cannot entirely tame anything, if it feels threatened it will always use it's instinct which is to attack. You can train a dog as much as you like but you can't stop that.

[GommeInc]

They all have the ability to hurt flies. Regardless of how it was brought up, if a child runs in, stares it in the face and pats it on the head, the child is as good as dead. You cannot entirely tame anything, if it feels threatened it will always use it's instinct which is to attack. You can train a dog as much as you like but you can't stop that.
Generalising again. Not all pitbulls will attack a child, some may be born not to immediately attack or trained not to attack. You get labradors who will attack children, cats and loads of other animals. In fact, when adopting a dog it is advised that ANY dog you adopt be introduced quitely to one, and never left with the animal alone unless it is completely harmless, which can be for any dog breed, including a pitbull.

[Jordy]

Generalising again. Not all pitbulls will attack a child, some may be born not to immediately attack or trained not to attack. You get labradors who will attack children, cats and loads of other animals. In fact, when adopting a dog it is advised that ANY dog you adopt be introduced quitely to one, and never left with the animal alone unless it is completely harmless, which can be for any dog breed, including a pitbull.Indeed they should not be left alone with children but unfortunately it does seem to happen, hence the laws to protect people from particularly dangerous breeds.

A pitbull will attack a child if it feels at all threatened by it, you absolutely cannot tame a dog to put up with feeling threatened. It will kick out and become violent even if it's never done so before and been brought up well, it's in their nature and there's nothing that can be done about it. It's also unlikely some breeds of dog and cats could do serious harm to a baby, which is more than can be said for certain types of dogs.

[GommeInc]

Not all dogs feel threatened by nature, any breed of dog can be born with the ability to be calm. So no, not all Pitbulls will attack if it feels threatened. Pitbulls are capable of being calm throughout their life time without batting an eyelid or feeling threatened, while of course some naturally can't. Assuming they can attack at any moment at random is paranoia and fear mongering.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssL0XPtbFcU&feature=related
^ Oh noes! A pitbull eating a man's face! By your theory and understanding, the above video must be fake, because a dog like a pitbull cannot and is not capable of licking a persons face. Heck, the dominant position it is in would suggest that the dog is more likely to attack him, but he seems rather calm for a dog that can attack at any given moment - especially when they cannot be "trained" to do the above.

Also, any dog is capable of attacking children - not just dangerous breeds. If you are going into adopting a dog, you are always advised to never leave it in the same room. Some breeds are more likely to attack than others (pitbulls, rottweilers) than others, but to blanket cover all breeds as dangerous is fear mongering, unacceptable and rediculous. Bringing back the poodle argument, they're vicious buggars - I remember walking my labrador and it started getting grumpy. Not had a problem with a pitbull I walked into with my dog.

[Jordy]

Not all dogs feel threatened by nature, any breed of dog can be born with the ability to be calm. So no, not all Pitbulls will attack if it feels threatened. Pitbulls are capable of being calm throughout their life time without batting an eyelid or feeling threatened, while of course some naturally can't. Assuming they can attack at any moment at random is paranoia and fear mongering.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssL0XPtbFcU&feature=related
^ Oh noes! A pitbull eating a man's face! By your theory and understanding, the above video must be fake, because a dog like a pitbull cannot and is not capable of licking a persons face. Heck, the dominant position it is in would suggest that the dog is more likely to attack him, but he seems rather calm for a dog that can attack at any given moment - especially when they cannot be "trained" to do the above.

Also, any dog is capable of attacking children - not just dangerous breeds. If you are going into adopting a dog, you are always advised to never leave it in the same room. Some breeds are more likely to attack than others (pitbulls, rottweilers) than others, but to blanket cover all breeds as dangerous is fear mongering, unacceptable and rediculous. Bringing back the poodle argument, they're vicious buggars - I remember walking my labrador and it started getting grumpy. Not had a problem with a pitbull I walked into with my dog.First of all that video is disgusting :L You wouldn't lick a toilet seat so why you'd practically get off with a dog is beyond me. He's also not doing anything at all to threaten the dog and he's most likely the owner so the dog is relaxed around him anyway. This is a particularly poor example and doesn't prove anything. I'm not doubting that they can be trained and be nice dogs, I'm just saying they're naturally aggressive, far more aggressive than other dogs, potentially deadly and cannot be totally tamed.

I have agreed they can be trained, but you cannot train them to ignore being threatened or intimidated. I really do not see what you're getting at, it's really beginning to get on my **** to be perfectly honest with you as this entire thread goes around in circles. I have not once called for certain breeds to be made illegal or anything along those lines, simply pointed out that dogs can be aggressive and always will be as it's in their nature.

[GommeInc]

First of all that video is disgusting :L You wouldn't lick a toilet seat so why you'd practically get off with a dog is beyond me. He's also not doing anything at all to threaten the dog and he's most likely the owner so the dog is relaxed around him anyway. This is a particularly poor example and doesn't prove anything. I'm not doubting that they can be trained and be nice dogs, I'm just saying they're naturally aggressive, far more aggressive than other dogs, potentially deadly and cannot be totally tamed.

I have agreed they can be trained, but you cannot train them to ignore being threatened or intimidated. I really do not see what you're getting at, it's really beginning to get on my **** to be perfectly honest with you as this entire thread goes around in circles. I have not once called for certain breeds to be made illegal or anything along those lines, simply pointed out that dogs can be aggressive and always will be as it's in their nature.
Because you say they "will" attack when you have no evidence. They will not all attack in every instance, nor feel threatened - it's a sweeping generalisation and shows lack of knowledge.
Not all pitbulls will "kick off" and become "violent", even when they have never shown signs of doing so. I'm merely pointing out your accusations show a lack of evidence and knowledge in the dog owning field, and are generalisations.
They may be more likely, but they're not ALL violent baby killers as you suggest that can attack, and will attack, at any given moment. I'm just going by what you've said :P

[The Don]

Because you say they "will" attack when you have no evidence. They will not all attack in every instance, nor feel threatened - it's a sweeping generalisation and shows lack of knowledge.
Not all pitbulls will "kick off" and become "violent", even when they have never shown signs of doing so. I'm merely pointing out your accusations show a lack of evidence and knowledge in the dog owning field, and are generalisations.
They may be more likely, but they're not ALL violent baby killers as you suggest that can attack, and will attack, at any given moment. I'm just going by what you've said :P

No, but they are more capable of killing humans than other dogs and because they are GENERALLY more agressive than other breeds, hence why they are chosen for illegal dog fights.

A dog cannot be controlled 100% by a human, think about it, dogs have been wild animals longer than they have been domesticated and will have natural agression even if you donn't like to admit it even poodles have natural agression.

I have a huge south african mastif and also a staff and I wouldn't expect them to hurt anyone, they are some of the kindest dogs i've owned. But that doesn't mean i'm going to leave my young nephew in a room with them on his own. ALL ANIMALS are capable of attacking humans but if brought up in a loving home, it only makes this LESS likely to happen, it's still possible.

[RedStratocas]

No, but they are more capable of killing humans than other dogs and because they are GENERALLY more agressive than other breeds, hence why they are chosen for illegal dog fights.

i'd like to see someone actually back up this accusation with evidence, cause i havent seen any.

[-:Undertaker:-]

i'd like to see someone actually back up this accusation with evidence, cause i havent seen any.

Well firstly because of the fact dogs such as pitbulls are used for dog fights as opposed to dogs such as Poodles and Yorkshire Terriers because they have a more aggressive streak and thus provide a better 'show' for dog fights. Second of all, pitbull attacks are pretty widespread and heres a large list of the attacks; *Removed* thirdly its rather obvious to anyone with a pair of eyes that dogs such as pitbulls are stronger and more dangerous when aggressive than a small dog such as a Yorkshire terrier will be. Its like arguing that a elephant is more dangerous than a mouse, yes both can flip - but which is more dangerous? the elephant.

I do wish dog lovers would stop arguing with the bleeding obvious, I mean I could also ask;

Is an angry crocodile more dangerous than an angry pitbull? yes it is.
Is a irritated shark more dangerous than a irritated clown fish? yes it is.
Is an angry elephant more dangerous than an angry zebra? yes it is.

Quite clearly, breeds such as pitbulls have a more-so aggressive streak and the damage resulting is much more worse than that of a poodle.

Edited by Catzsy (Forum Super Moderator):
Please do not post links to content that is not appropriate to the forum even with a warning.

[karter]

A true Christian at heart

LMFAO.

I think this was sick , after all it was just an animal!

[GommeInc]

No, but they are more capable of killing humans than other dogs and because they are GENERALLY more agressive than other breeds, hence why they are chosen for illegal dog fights.

A dog cannot be controlled 100% by a human, think about it, dogs have been wild animals longer than they have been domesticated and will have natural agression even if you donn't like to admit it even poodles have natural agression.

I have a huge south african mastif and also a staff and I wouldn't expect them to hurt anyone, they are some of the kindest dogs i've owned. But that doesn't mean i'm going to leave my young nephew in a room with them on his own. ALL ANIMALS are capable of attacking humans but if brought up in a loving home, it only makes this LESS likely to happen, it's still possible.
Exactly what I've been saying. To say they will attack is nonsense, not all pitbull terriers and other breeds will attack for no reason, some are more tame than others. You get labradors, which are suggested to be the best animal for families, can be born aggressive and trained to be aggressive - you can get them as security dogs afterall :P They are more capable of causing damage and attacking, that's obvious, but they're not all violent as other people have suggested. To say that is incredibly silly.