namelesstavern.net

My dog wins the cute.

Zanchief wrote:

Lyion wrote:Why do we need Pit Bulls? Would you be ok with disallowing ALL future Pit Bull pets, but allowing people to keep their current ones and just spaying and neutering all current ones?

I mentioned this in our last dance about pit bulls and Gypsy went nuts since her friend works for some militant Pit bull advocacy group.

er, no, that's not really what happened. yes, I have a friend who works for a pit rescue and advocacy group, but that's not where my argument stems from, nor was my stance any different before I met her in 2008.

My argument stems from the fact that there are 30+ breeds that look like pits that get lumped into the pit bull category of pit bull type dogs, thereby substantiating a self fulfilling prophecy that all pits are evil when in fact there's no actual evidence that the breed in question is, in fact, that breed.

"911 operator how can I help you?" "A pit attacked me!" "Oh, okay -- we'll add that to the list of pit bull attacks and add it to the mountain of unsubstantiated 'proof' of pit bull demeanor."

You flat out ignored any discussion retorting your "evidence" because it didn't align with your preconceived notions. The evidence you provided yourself listed multiple different individual breeds and then lumped miscellaneous breeds of a certain appearance into a 'type', and that's your irrefutable source: basically the equivalent of a list of office products broken down into tiny subcategories like staples, paper clips, scissors, thumb tacks, and then simply "writing types" to include highlighters, pens, pencils, dry erase markers, etc. One massive category lumped into a list of subcategories. Shelter vets don't even bother to verify breed, they call it whatever they think it looks like. What makes you think the average person can certify a breed?

And again, why does your bizarre logic on pit bulls not apply to people? You're the quintessential anti-racist, but I could provide you mounds of evidence substantiating the statistics for an overwhelming ratio of crime in regards to race. Since people have the free will to know the difference between good and bad and dogs don't, doesn't it stand to reason that if one race is overwhelmingly responsible for a certain type of crime and they choose to keep committing them, then they must also be inherently evil? And since you could make the same argument in regards to education and employment, does that also make one race inherently lazy or stupid? I don't think so, but I'm also cognizant of the effect of environmental influence in relation to behavior. You are too, but apparently only when it suits your argument.

Why do we need pit bulls? Sorry, Lyion, but that's kind of a silly question. Why do we need any breed of dog? Why does Leah want a corgi? Why does Tossica want his french bulldog with the delightfully adorable bottom? Why do I want my shiba inu? The answer to all of them is personal preference in regard to the appearance, trainability, and demeanor of the breed and how it fits in with your family dynamic.

My girlfriend's dog, Zeus.

He's awesomesauce.

You flat out ignored any discussion retorting your "evidence" because it didn't align with your preconceived notions.

Ummm, this is what you're doing, too.

I think I even called out specifically how it's done in my post right before you did it lol

Gypsiyee wrote:Why do we need pit bulls? Sorry, Lyion, but that's kind of a silly question. Why do we need any breed of dog? Why does Leah want a corgi? Why does Tossica want his french bulldog with the delightfully adorable bottom? Why do I want my shiba inu? The answer to all of them is personal preference in regard to the appearance, trainability, and demeanor of the breed and how it fits in with your family dynamic.

Bulldogs, Corgi's and Bassets generally do not eat pregnant women and maul babies. Ever. I can find stories of pits in the news doing that recently.

The proper question is should Pits and dangerous dogs be illegal. I'm sure their owners love them. That does not matter.

I'm sure since you support so many personal freedoms you are in favor of total gun rights and the freedom to bear any sort of arms whatsoever, correct? Especially since if there's a Pit nearby, one might need heavy artillery, especially if one is in proximity to a pregnant woman.

I didn't read your post because I was specifically responding to Zanchief's post mentioning me, but:

I don't think anyone is saying that there are any number of statistics that call out pit bull attacks. I don't think anyone ever said there aren't pit bull attacks, or that even in the event that they were accurate and were specific to the actual breed that the pit bull breed may still account for more attacks than other breeds. That's something that could only be discussed in theory, though, because the substantiating proof out there now simply doesn't narrow pit bull attacks to the actual pit bull breed, and there's no denying that it's currently the most highly abused and manipulated breed.

Mistreated animals will always account for a higher percentage of attacks no matter what the breed is, and there's sadly a high population of mistreated pit bulls. That doesn't equate to the breed being bad is what I'm saying. The problem is not the breed. It's not the breed that's evil, it's the unfortunate circumstance of the number of them that are owned by assholes that create the stigma. The reputation has been developed by people over time. Pits as a breed have no different demeanor today than they did in the early to mid 20th century when they were revered.

But...the Pit Bull that murdered the pregnant woman was not abused in any regard. It was highly spoiled and treated well. How do you argue against that?

If that guy had a lab or Basset, his wife and unborn child would still be alive as there aren't any kills from those breeds in the recent statistics at all.

Gypsiyee wrote:My argument stems from the fact that there are 30+ breeds that look like pits that get lumped into the pit bull category of pit bull type dogs, thereby substantiating a self fulfilling prophecy that all pits are evil when in fact there's no actual evidence that the breed in question is, in fact, that breed.

"911 operator how can I help you?" "A pit attacked me!" "Oh, okay -- we'll add that to the list of pit bull attacks and add it to the mountain of unsubstantiated 'proof' of pit bull demeanor."

You flat out ignored any discussion retorting your "evidence" because it didn't align with your preconceived notions. The evidence you provided yourself listed multiple different individual breeds and then lumped miscellaneous breeds of a certain appearance into a 'type', and that's your irrefutable source: basically the equivalent of a list of office products broken down into tiny subcategories like staples, paper clips, scissors, thumb tacks, and then simply "writing types" to include highlighters, pens, pencils, dry erase markers, etc. One massive category lumped into a list of subcategories. Shelter vets don't even bother to verify breed, they call it whatever they think it looks like. What makes you think the average person can certify a breed?

Again with your global media conspiracy. People reporting on these things don’t have to adhere to eye witness testimony since in most cases they can do research after the act has transgressed and could easily establish breed. You’re accusing journalists all over the world of misrepresenting the facts even though you don’t show one shred of evidence as to how or why.

Gypsiyee wrote:And again, why does your bizarre logic on pit bulls not apply to people? You're the quintessential anti-racist, but I could provide you mounds of evidence substantiating the statistics for an overwhelming ratio of crime in regards to race. Since people have the free will to know the difference between good and bad and dogs don't, doesn't it stand to reason that if one race is overwhelmingly responsible for a certain type of crime and they choose to keep committing them, then they must also be inherently evil? And since you could make the same argument in regards to education and employment, does that also make one race inherently lazy or stupid? I don't think so, but I'm also cognizant of the effect of environmental influence in relation to behavior. You are too, but apparently only when it suits your argument.

Do you really want to equate the genetic difference between a white human and a black human to a pitbull and a corgi? Why not compare a bear and a beaver? That’s some good science.

Gypsiyee wrote:And again, why does your bizarre logic on pit bulls not apply to people? You're the quintessential anti-racist, but I could provide you mounds of evidence substantiating the statistics for an overwhelming ratio of crime in regards to race. Since people have the free will to know the difference between good and bad and dogs don't, doesn't it stand to reason that if one race is overwhelmingly responsible for a certain type of crime and they choose to keep committing them, then they must also be inherently evil? And since you could make the same argument in regards to education and employment, does that also make one race inherently lazy or stupid? I don't think so, but I'm also cognizant of the effect of environmental influence in relation to behavior. You are too, but apparently only when it suits your argument.

I'll bite.

Actually, we have. Most recently Somolia, remember the "Black Hawk Down" movie? I believe we were there for a reason about crimes against humanity? Remember Yugoslavia breaking apart since the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union? Something happened there developed with Croatia and before that I believe was some German dude in the 30's and 40's who tried really hard and ultimately failed.

Although we shouldn't compare apples to oranges. Since dogs are just that, dogs. Pitbulls should be outlawed as pets, but I don't agree with exterminating a whole species either.

Lyion wrote:

Gypsiyee wrote:Why do we need pit bulls? Sorry, Lyion, but that's kind of a silly question. Why do we need any breed of dog? Why does Leah want a corgi? Why does Tossica want his french bulldog with the delightfully adorable bottom? Why do I want my shiba inu? The answer to all of them is personal preference in regard to the appearance, trainability, and demeanor of the breed and how it fits in with your family dynamic.

Bulldogs, Corgi's and Bassets generally do not eat pregnant women and maul babies. Ever. I can find stories of pits in the news doing that recently.

I'm sure since you support so many personal freedoms you are in favor of total gun rights and the freedom to bear any sort of arms whatsoever, correct? Especially since if there's a Pit nearby, one might need heavy artillery, especially if one is in proximity to a pregnant woman.

uh, considering a dog is a living and breathing being that provides companionship just like any other dog does and a gun is an inanimate object that serves only the purpose of injuring or harming its target, that's a pretty stupid point. But if you look back a few pages, you'll see that this argument has already been brought up and I've already said that I'm all for regulating who should be allowed to own any pet.

Bulldogs aren't involved in attacks...? Are you off your rocker? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sour ... 0&aql=&oq=

Not to mention that various breeds of bulldogs include those that look like pit bulls and get lumped into the pit bull type category, and that pit bulls are direct descendents of bulldogs...

Ill repeat myself since you misse dmy point. 22 people is sad for them but that isnt shit more people are killed by just about everything.

The pit has to be the most abused dog out there by far. With so many people and pits and a numer like 22 that means it rarely happens as is. The only reason we are even talking about this is because if a pit bites someone it makes the news.

From what I can tellt his pit wasnt being treated properly all dogs not just pits are known tho lose it when they arent fixed and theres a female around.

Do the math how many people in our country? How many pits? It means that its a rarity not the norm. The emotional part of your brain is overriding your logic.


Im totally serious when I ask this If pits kill 22 people a year and that is enough for you to want a full on ban how do you feel about stiars swimming pools bike rides or any thing that puts humans in contact with horses. If your for banning pit bulls but not any of this other shit that kills way more people your opinion is with a whole lot at all. Your not about safety your opinion is based off of fear.

Links are nice, but stats are better:

The stats are here:

http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-study-deaths-maimings.htm

Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to June 25, 2010
By compiling U.S. and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2010,1 Merritt Clifton, editor of ANIMAL PEOPLE, shows the breeds most responsible for serious injury and death.

Read full study »
Study highlights
The combination of pit bulls, rottweilers, presa canarios, and their mixes:

80% of attacks that induce bodily harm
70% of attacks to children
83% of attack to adults
69% of attacks that result in fatalities
75% that result in maiming

Here are fatalities for last year. Most previous years are similar with the Pitts/Rotts always leading the pack despite being far fewer in number.



22 was LAST year. There are many more deaths and the Pit is the protagonist from the dog world.

Lyion wrote:Bulldogs, Corgi's and Bassets generally do not eat pregnant women and maul babies. Ever. I can find stories of pits in the news doing that recently.

we had a corgi who bit children (and adults, and other dogs) viciously.

Zanchief wrote:Again with your global media conspiracy. People reporting on these things don’t have to adhere to eye witness testimony since in most cases they can do research after the act has transgressed and could easily establish breed. You’re accusing journalists all over the world of misrepresenting the facts even though you don’t show one shred of evidence as to how or why.

Journalists misrepresenting facts? Oh heavens no, that never happens. And the fault doesn't just lie with media; DNA evidence isn't required in dog attacks nor is registration tracing the dog's lineage; the dog breed is determined by sight which is highly fallible when there are so many breeds that look like pits.

http://www.aspca.org/about-us/policy-po ... ion-1.aspx

The CDC strongly recommends against breed-specific laws in its oft-cited study of fatal dog attacks, noting that data collection related to bite by breed is fraught with potential sources of error (Sacks et al., 2000). Specifically, the authors of this and other studies cite the inherent difficulties in breed identification (especially among mixed-breed dogs) and in calculating a breed's bite rate given the lack of consistent data on breed population and the actual number of bites occurring in a community, especially when the injury is not deemed serious enough to require treatment in an emergency room (Sacks et al., 2000; AVMA, 2001; Collier, 2006). Supporting the concern regarding identification, a recent study noted a significant discrepancy between visual determination of breed and DNA determination of breed (Voith et al., 2009).

Do you really want to equate the genetic difference between a white human and a black human to a pitbull and a corgi? Why not compare a bear and a beaver? That’s some good science.

uh, yes, considering different breeds of dogs are the equivalent of different races of people? but no, your argument likening it to the comparison of two totally different species of animal including an herbivore 1/5 the size of an average human and carnivore 8x the size of an average human makes total sense.

leah wrote:we had a corgi who bit children (and adults, and other dogs) viciously.

My mistake. Add Corgis to the list of killer animals and rabid attack dogs!

Please add this ferocious beast in with all the Pit Bulls for future euthanizating. Sorry Leah.



p.s. Every dog can bite. Any abused animal can be especially dangerous. However, take a good look at the history of Pit Bull attacks. There's no real comparison.

Correct me if im wrong but that says 22 people no ? That isnt shit. Like I keep repeating people die of just about everything more than that. A swimming pool is a bigger danger to your child than all dogs combined that is a fact.

Those are real nice percentages that add up to very low numbers.

The bottom line is that 22 people a year is an extremely low number and that means while the idea of getting mauled by a giant dog is scary it isnt something that you really need to worry about.

Lyion wrote:Links are nice, but stats are better:

The stats are here:

http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-study-deaths-maimings.htm

Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to June 25, 2010
By compiling U.S. and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2010,1 Merritt Clifton, editor of ANIMAL PEOPLE, shows the breeds most responsible for serious injury and death.

Read full study »
Study highlights
The combination of pit bulls, rottweilers, presa canarios, and their mixes:

80% of attacks that induce bodily harm
70% of attacks to children
83% of attack to adults
69% of attacks that result in fatalities
75% that result in maiming

Here are fatalities for last year. Most previous years are similar with the Pitts/Rotts always leading the pack despite being far fewer in number.



22 was LAST year. There are many more deaths and the Pit is the protagonist from the dog world.

When you start using stats from a site that's the equivalent of quoting Glenn Beck and calling it unbiased news, I stop listening. And even using that site, you yourself bolded the very statement where they're including multiple breeds and counting it as a pit. Presa Canarios, rottweilers, "and their mixes" aren't pits, you realize. Lumping them into the same category and calling it a pit bull attack is laughable and showcases exactly what I'm saying. So, thanks for substantiating my entire argument for me?

Different breeds of dogs aren't like different races of people. I think anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of biology could tell you that. You're comment is just silly hyperbole, as was mine (I win though because I knew I was being ridiculous).

As for your first argument pointing out that it's difficult to determine dog breeds is well and good, but you'll have to determine why these errors wouldn't be random but instead be part of some vast anti-pitt conspiracy. It seems people just don't like their pregnant women being eaten alive.

Speaking of perspective, since you brought it up a number of times, don't you think it's weird that after hearing that a pittbull brutally mauled a pregnant woman you blamed the owners for having a dog near a pregnant woman (I still can't believe it). That doesn't strike you a bit like you're riding this pony no matter the evidence?

These dogs a bad. Even when taking into account alleged environmental and media backlash those stats would still say the same thing. These stats aren’t close at all.

Pit Bulls are .041 of the dog population and are responsible for almost all dog attack deaths and thousands of serious attacks and maiming incidents.

As I've repeated, I personally do not want one anywhere near my kids. I get they can be great family pets, but one child's life is enough for me to want the breed outlawed, and there have been many this year and hundreds of children seriously hurt by them.

Lyion wrote:

leah wrote:we had a corgi who bit children (and adults, and other dogs) viciously.

My mistake. Add Corgis to the list of killer animals and rabid attack dogs!

Please add this ferocious beast in with all the Pit Bulls for future euthanizating. Sorry Leah.



p.s. Every dog can bite. Any abused animal can be especially dangerous. However, take a good look at the history of Pit Bull attacks. There's no real comparison.

i would just like to take a second to state that my dog was not abused. just for the record. he was just crazy in the head. :\

If a dog is going to go crazy around me, I prefer it be a size I can punt across the room if necessary.

Imagine if your crazy dog was built like this, Leah, instead of like an oompa loompa:





Hey, how would your Corgi do against a horse?



Here's my big issue, child attacks from this breed.



Here's another pregnant girl and her dog



I've had dogs all my life and I'm a big lover of them. This breed I just feel isn't worth the risk, however small. It's why I'm for outlawing them.

Hey, now I know whey Spazz likes Pits... They hate the Fuzz, too...

Zanchief wrote:Different breeds of dogs aren't like different races of people. I think anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of biology could tell you that. You're comment is just silly hyperbole, as was mine (I win though because I knew I was being ridiculous).

Okay, Dr. Zanchief. Can't get much more rudimentary than wikipedia, no? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_breed

In biology, subspecies, race and breed are equivalent terms. Breed is usually applied to domestic animals; species and subspecies, to wild animals and to plants; and race, to humans

As for your first argument pointing out that it's difficult to determine dog breeds is well and good, but you'll have to determine why these errors wouldn't be random but instead be part of some vast anti-pitt conspiracy. It seems people just don't like their pregnant women being eaten alive.

Stop taking me out of context. The errors aren't random because there are so many breeds that look like pits, and pits being the most popular and well known, that's going to be what people defer to.

Speaking of perspective, since you brought it up a number of times, don't you think it's weird that after hearing that a pittbull brutally mauled a pregnant woman you blamed the owners for having a dog near a pregnant woman (I still can't believe it). That doesn't strike you a bit like you're riding this pony no matter the evidence?

I didn't blame the owners, I said it was fucking stupid and irresponsible to keep an unneutered pet near a woman who's inevitably going to emit hormones. Shit, unspayed female dogs go nuts humping the legs of women on their period. It's surprising to you that a young male dog would go nuts over a pregnant woman? Do you know what transpired at that house? Do you know whether he was just lying there cuddling and all the sudden massive pit attack or if he started humping her as unneutered male dogs do and after smacking him down and screaming at him 50 times he flipped shit? If you do know exactly what transpired, you should probably call and tell someone. I'm sure her husband would like to know.

These dogs a bad. Even when taking into account alleged environmental and media backlash those stats would still say the same thing. These stats aren’t close at all.

That's an assumption based on speculation and opinion. Funny thing about speculation and opinion.. they don't constitute fact.

Pit Bulls are .041 of the dog population and are responsible for almost all dog attack deaths and thousands of serious attacks and maiming incidents.

Oh, really? Care to cite your source? And is that .41% including only actual pit bulls or is it also counting the other breeds that conveniently make their way into the stats of pit bull attacks? My guess is that you're taking the stats from those registered as American Pit Bull Terriers with the AKC or CKC and applying them to the total US population of dogs, which would not only be virtually impossible to calculate, but it's also not an accurate standard of measurement considering those numbers aren't reflective of the dog attacks reported which will more often than not be unregistered animals.

Look I can play this game too


[youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYuFGla- ... re=related [/youtube]

Seriously it doesnt matter weather its pits or poodles it just doesnt happen all that often.

Lyion explain to me why your ok with all this other dangerous shit that kills way more people but pits gotta go please.


I dont know why that wont link right but go ahead and see the horror of your favorite breed,

Gyps your going about this argument all wrong. Large breeds do bite people this is true. Look at how few people though. Thats where the bs is in lyion and chiefs argument.