Where is that pit bull thread when I need it?

[gregbroncs]

Now you know who not to vote for. What a moron. I think I'll go buy a couple of purebred wolves, buy a house next to a preschool, and leave my gates open full time.

As responsible adults, we can choose to drink alcohol if we want -- any kind -- but as soon as it affects other people, we go to jail. Pitbulls are the drunk driver version of K9's.

So he is a moron for protecting people's rights? Why should some stupid *** city be able to infringe on the rights of people to own the dog they want. Just because a few people don't like it. Should not have had to make this law in the 1st place. It should have been unnecessary.

 

[LogGrad98]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/...-save-phoenix-pit-bull-who-mauled-4-year-old/

Interesting read.

Kevin was hospitalized at Maricopa Medical Center with a broken eye socket, cheek bone and lower jaw bone, according to doctors.

Dr. Salvatore Lettieri, a Mayo Clinic physician and chief of cosmetic surgery at Maricopa Medical Center, said he was able to fix the broken bones and reattach the muscles that allow Kevin to open and close his eye.

"He still can't open his eye. We'll need to fix the tear duct drainage system — that is if he makes tears," Lettieri said.

Apparently the dog owner's rights to own a dangerous dog outweighed the child's rights to not be mauled and mutilated. Makes sense, right?

That is an interesting thing about the discussion around rights in cases like this, and even gun control and other topics. For one person to exercise their unfettered right it can put others' rights at risk. I guess the question is, how much are you willing to risk to maintain that right?

 

[Jazz Spazz]

People are pretty smart and use extreme caution and forethought before doing anything dangerous or owning anything that could be dangerous.
We need to trust people to make the right decisions.

Link

 

[infection]

Haven't been following this thread. Anyway, we've got a 4.5 month old Doberman. They look mean, but they're actually in the average side as far as aggression goes.

 

[Harambe]

Apparently the dog owner's rights to own a dangerous dog outweighed the child's rights to not be mauled and mutilated. Makes sense, right?

That is a blatantly ignorant and one sided review of the situation, and I know you're smart enough to see that.

That is an interesting thing about the discussion around rights in cases like this, and even gun control and other topics. For one person to exercise their unfettered right it can put others' rights at risk. I guess the question is, how much are you willing to risk to maintain that right?

The quick answer; Yes. That's the cost of the "freedom" that is envisioned. Yes, I'm aware that statement, too, is blatantly ignorant and one sided.

Are we sure it's genetic and not a social problem? African American males and 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white person than blacks against a than a white person.********** As such, should we ban African American males? Should their unfettered human rights put the rest of our society in danger?

**********

 

[Stoked]

That is a blatantly ignorant and one sided review of the situation, and I know you're smart enough to see that.



The quick answer; Yes. That's the cost of the "freedom" that is envisioned. Yes, I'm aware that statement, too, is blatantly ignorant and one sided.

Are we sure it's genetic and not a social problem? African American males and 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime than a white male.********** As such, should we ban African American males? Should their unfettered human rights put the rest of our society in danger?

**********

grabs popcorn

Also the link is filtered? haha

 

[Harambe]

grabs popcorn

Also the link is filtered? haha

Did it on purpose to make sure someone see's it.

 

[franklin]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/...-save-phoenix-pit-bull-who-mauled-4-year-old/

Interesting read.



Apparently the dog owner's rights to own a dangerous dog outweighed the child's rights to not be mauled and mutilated. Makes sense, right?

That is an interesting thing about the discussion around rights in cases like this, and even gun control and other topics. For one person to exercise their unfettered right it can put others' rights at risk. I guess the question is, how much are you willing to risk to maintain that right?

I've noticed that everyone in favor of owning terrorist dogs are young adult boys without children, the same makeup we find in Afghani al qaeda cells. Aller ackbar.

 

[Harambe]

I've noticed that everyone in favor of owning terrorist dogs are young adult boys without children, the same makeup we find in Afghani al qaeda cells. Aller ackbar.

Fetch... rollover... speak!

You gotta admit, blowing up a building in the name of allah is like the mother of all dog tricks.

 

[TroutBum]

So he is a moron for protecting people's rights? Why should some stupid *** city be able to infringe on the rights of people to own the dog they want. Just because a few people don't like it. Should not have had to make this law in the 1st place. It should have been unnecessary.

Seriously? Have you given this any serious thought past the "Trout is dumb, lol!"? Would you be ok with people owning tigers? Maybe lions? How about gorillas? No, you wouldn't, and there is a reason you can't own an animal like that (outside of insane circumstances). A city has the authority to tax, have a police force, fire, snow removal, etc., so why is it all of a sudden you are bitching about a city's authority to control an animal; one that has a serious violent history? You're happier with the big gov telling people that it doesn't matter if they're worried about the safety of their family, because "insert some idiotic constitutional quote that is completely out of context*. What about your neighbor that has six huge dogs that bark all day, **** all over - to the point that neighbors smell it, and doesn't care about it? I guess it's HIS RIGHT to own six dogs. Hooray 'Murica! Except most cities don't allow people to have six dogs, again, unless there are odd circumstances. Why aren't you bitching about that? Multiple dogs are banned for superficial reasons, and you're fine with that. Even if you don't agree that Pitbulls are dangerous, why are you against letting a city, who votes their own leaders in, decide for themselves?

Why am I bothering with an explanation when I know you have no desire to think this through?

 

[Stoked]

Lol, at all the random connecting of dots on subjects not even discussed.

 

[One Brow]

Are we sure it's genetic and not a social problem? African American males and 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white person than blacks against a than a white person.********** As such, should we ban African American males? Should their unfettered human rights put the rest of our society in danger?

Comparison of the right of black people with the rights of dogs? Check.
Quote of out-of-context statistics? Check.
Link to a site known for hateful, racist rhetoric? Check.

Too much in one post. It must be a troll.