Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 09-18-2018, 12:57 PM
Remps17 Remps17 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thing View Post
I have nothing against pit bulls and I do agree that it is the owner to a certain extent. But if that same "bad" owner owns another breed of dog. Their dog is less likely to injure someone or something...why?.....because its not a pit bull!!

Drunk driving is the sole responsibility of the driver...no question. But there is a difference between a drunk guy walking over to his car vs that same drunk guy walking over to his pedal bike.

I also don't understand why someone would want to own a pit bull?

This past summer at Pets in the Park at Hawrelak. A guy had a pit bull, beautiful dog. He wasn't muzzled, under control, no reason to be alarmed. Obviously a well trained dog and a "good" owner.

As he and his dog walked through the crowd of hundreds of people with hundreds of dogs he carved out an instant path. Everyone split, letting him walk through. It was blatantly obvious that most people were intimated by the dog and as a result, the owner. Is this the only logical reason someone would want to own a pit bill? To intimidate, show off, intentionally cause stress to others?...I don't know.
I am curious about the motives of owning a pit bull, other then their looks. I have seen some absolutely stunning pit bulls before but I am not sure if that is the only reason for owning one.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 09-18-2018, 05:16 PM
mattthegorby mattthegorby is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 735
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brendan's dad View Post
Relax, I have 21 years experience and training in dealing with mental health.
Lol, first thing I learned in training regarding mental illness is never tell someone you want to relax to relax. But then, I am not part of this 5% you speak of so I guess it is OK.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 09-18-2018, 07:07 PM
markg markg is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Calgary Area
Posts: 2,377
Default Post of the Day

"Hey buddy wanna buy some meth a handgun or a Pit bull"[/QUOTE]

That right there wins post of the day in my book.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 09-18-2018, 08:11 PM
^v^Tinda wolf^v^ ^v^Tinda wolf^v^ is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 4,134
Default

My condolences to the friends father and family of this tragedy.
Getting killed by your own dog is something a person probably doesn’t consider often. As I write this my GWP has my whole fore arm in his mouth. Amazing how far they can open their mouths, my whole face would fit in there
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 09-19-2018, 06:11 PM
1899b's Avatar
1899b 1899b is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sherwood Park Ab
Posts: 6,279
Default

__________________
An awful lot of big game was killed with the .30-06 including the big bears before everyone became affluent enough to own a rifle for every species of game they might hunt.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 09-19-2018, 09:01 PM
Tactical Lever Tactical Lever is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fox Creek
Posts: 3,315
Default

https://www.si.com/more-sports/2008/12/23/vick-dogs
__________________
Profanity and name calling are poor substitutes for education and logic.

Survivor of the dread covid
Pureblood!
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 09-19-2018, 09:31 PM
nelsonob1's Avatar
nelsonob1 nelsonob1 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson BC
Posts: 2,031
Default

According to dogbight.org, pitbulls account for 66% of all dog bite fatalities in the last 13 years in N.America. In the last 5, they account for 72%. Rottweilers are second place at 10%.

Of those killed by pitbus, 56% were family members living in the household and approximately half of the fatalities were 9 years or younger.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 09-19-2018, 10:25 PM
Ken07AOVette's Avatar
Ken07AOVette Ken07AOVette is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 24,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1899b View Post
Putting a face to the thread sure makes it real.
__________________
Only dead fish go with the flow. The rest use their brains in life.


Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck
I wasn't thinking far enough ahead for an outcome, I was ranting. By definition, a rant doesn't imply much forethought.....
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 09-20-2018, 08:04 AM
1899b's Avatar
1899b 1899b is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sherwood Park Ab
Posts: 6,279
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken07AOVette View Post
Putting a face to the thread sure makes it real.
The newscast last night was very telling. Family members all admitted that dog never once showed any violent tendencies ever and always slept nose to nose with those in the family. This just drives home my thoughts and feelings. I have pics of my rottie nose to nose with my 6 month old daughter at the time. Now I feel that was irresponsible no matter how cute the pic is.

I’m a big strong dude. If a cocker spaniel turns on me I like my chances. If one of the large working breeds does however, I hope I have a bat and big lunch to get through it.

That lady is an absolute hero...
__________________
An awful lot of big game was killed with the .30-06 including the big bears before everyone became affluent enough to own a rifle for every species of game they might hunt.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 09-20-2018, 09:21 AM
silver lab's Avatar
silver lab silver lab is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Stuck between wmu 110, 302 & 305
Posts: 1,023
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1899b View Post

That lady is an absolute hero...


Well said.
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:05 PM
mchris44 mchris44 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Halifax NS
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1899b View Post
The major reason I won't ever own a pitbull. So many sad news at the end
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:20 PM
whiteout whiteout is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brendan's dad View Post
I think that pitbulls and such, have established enough of a documented history that because of the inaction of some owners, unfortunately all owners of this breed should be subject to regulations and mandatory training.
I’m sure you have the Canadian stats to back this belief up?
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:22 PM
1899b's Avatar
1899b 1899b is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sherwood Park Ab
Posts: 6,279
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteout View Post
I’m sure you have the Canadian stats to back this belief up?
You just crawl out from under a rock you were under for the past 30 years?
__________________
An awful lot of big game was killed with the .30-06 including the big bears before everyone became affluent enough to own a rifle for every species of game they might hunt.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:40 PM
EZM's Avatar
EZM EZM is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 11,851
Default

It's amazing to me how many intelligent people here pound their fist standing behind meaningless statistics using frequency as the "proof" or "evidence" when they are clueless as to how to properly interpret reality.

There is a distinction between frequency and rate as it relates to a population (or (classification within a sample group) (if that statement didn't make sense to you, stay out of arguments where you cite statistics).

A sample of exactly what I'm saying ....

2 people in Townsville, USA were attacked by a pit bull.

4 people, in that same town were attacked by a shepherd.

There are 10 pit bulls and 1000 shepherds living in Townville.

Which breed of dog represents a higher risk (genetic disposition) toward attacking people.

These threads are merry-go-rounds.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:47 PM
Ricki Bobby Ricki Bobby is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 447
Default

Is it just me or what? All I ever hear about as far as humans being actually killed by a dog is that its always a PITBULL or PITBULL cross. The only other times I hear of when a human is KILLED by a dog is when its a pack of dogs.
All dogs can attack and bite. Not all dogs will bite or attack until death. JMO
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:52 PM
1899b's Avatar
1899b 1899b is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sherwood Park Ab
Posts: 6,279
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EZM View Post
It's amazing to me how many intelligent people here pound their fist standing behind meaningless statistics using frequency as the "proof" or "evidence" when they are clueless as to how to properly interpret reality.

There is a distinction between frequency and rate as it relates to a population (or (classification within a sample group) (if that statement didn't make sense to you, stay out of arguments where you cite statistics).

A sample of exactly what I'm saying ....

2 people in Townsville, USA were attacked by a pit bull.

4 people, in that same town were attacked by a shepherd.

There are 10 pit bulls and 1000 shepherds living in Townville.

Which breed of dog represents a higher risk (genetic disposition) toward attacking people.

These threads are merry-go-rounds.


https://dogbitelaw.com/dog-bite-stat...likely-to-kill

Opening statement from the above article states:

As of May 25, 2013, the USA death count from dogs in 2013 is 14. Of these, 13 people were killed by pit bulls. In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers:

"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities." (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)
__________________
An awful lot of big game was killed with the .30-06 including the big bears before everyone became affluent enough to own a rifle for every species of game they might hunt.
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:53 PM
whiteout whiteout is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1899b View Post
You just crawl out from under a rock you were under for the past 30 years?
Apparently so. Maybe you could enlighten me? I’m willing to look at whatever information relevant to Canada that is out there
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:56 PM
1899b's Avatar
1899b 1899b is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sherwood Park Ab
Posts: 6,279
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteout View Post
Apparently so. Maybe you could enlighten me? I’m willing to look at whatever information relevant to Canada that is out there
When a pitbull locks on your done. I dont care if your north or south of the 49th..
__________________
An awful lot of big game was killed with the .30-06 including the big bears before everyone became affluent enough to own a rifle for every species of game they might hunt.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 09-20-2018, 01:02 PM
whiteout whiteout is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1899b View Post
When a pitbull locks on your done. I dont care if your north or south of the 49th..
Do you not believe that if we are thinking about enacting legislation in Canada, the supporting evidence for that legislation should be Canadian as well?
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 09-20-2018, 01:15 PM
1899b's Avatar
1899b 1899b is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sherwood Park Ab
Posts: 6,279
Default

Pit bulls are worst offenders in fatal dog-on-dog attacks, Edmonton stats show


Specifically, American Staffordshire terriers responsible for 23 of the 81 fatal attacks reported since 2013


CBC News · Posted: Oct 10, 2017 1:45 PM MT | Last Updated: October 10, 2017



Pit bull-type dogs were responsible for nearly 30 per cent of the fatal pet-on-pet attacks in Edmonton over the past five years. (Graham Hughes/Canadian Press)

Sara Ward says she has the proof in black and white that pit bulls should be muzzled in Edmonton.


Statistics collected by the City of Edmonton reveal that American Staffordshire terriers — one of several breeds that are commonly known as pit bulls — were responsible for nearly 30 per cent of all reported fatal dog-on-dog attacks in the city between January 2013 and September 2017.



The Edmonton woman used freedom of information legislation to gain access to the records after her tiny teacup Chihuahua, Lola, was killed by another dog in a southwest Edmonton park this summer.

'We have a breed-specific issue on our hands'


Ward wants the city to bring back breed-specific legislation to put restrictions on pit bulls.


"I do believe that we have a breed-specific issue on our hands, and I know it's a controversial, touchy subject and people get very heated about it, but we need to go on data," Ward said in an interview with CBC Radio's Edmonton AM.
•Dog attacks on pets at five-year high in Edmonton


"For legislation to be repealed or implemented based on emotion, or on an individual or group's personal agenda, it shouldn't happen. It should be based on the data and statistics that are collected in our city."


City statistics show that American Staffordshire terriers were responsible for 23 of the 81 fatal attacks reported in the past five years, while a variety of more than a dozen other breeds were responsible for the rest.

Finding root causes


Keith Scott, co-ordinator of animal control for the City of Edmonton, said he doesn't know why the numbers for fatal attacks changed so dramatically, but he said the city is monitoring the trend.

"I hope that going through the data and analyzing it will help provide a reason for the increase in dog attacks overall," Scott said in a statement to CBC News.

"It appears there are a number of breeds that have been involved in severe attacks ... and we would like to find some root causes before making any assumptions."
•Pit Bulls Unleashed: Should They Be Banned?

According to the city, there are approximately 1,848 dogs licensed as either American Staffordshire terrier or Staffordshire bull terrier, which equates to three per cent of the city's dog population.

"Staffordshire terriers are a small per cent of our population, so it's a very disproportionate number," Ward said.


"We shouldn't see them killing more than double the next highest breed, when there are so few of them in the city."


Of the nine fatal dog-on-dog attacks reported to date in 2017, American Staffordshire terriers were blamed for six.


A German shepherd, Rottweiler and Alaskan malamute were responsible for the three other altercations.
•'I just lost my dog violently': Pet owners struggle with grief, trauma after dog attacks


Of the 31 fatal dog attacks reported in 2016, American Staffordshire terriers were listed as the worst offenders with nine fatal attacks, followed by unknown breeds at six and huskies at five.


Huskies, Rottweilers, German shepherds, a lab and a bulldog were also included in the tally for 2016.


Huskies were blamed for the most attacks in 2015. There were a total of 13 fatal attacks that year, of which huskies were responsible for three. American Staffordshire terriers were responsible for two, and Labrador retrievers were blamed for two.

The year represented the beginning of a significant spike in the number of fatal attacks in the capital region.



Attacks in Edmonton are now at a five-year high, and resulted in the deaths of 30 pets in 2016, according to statistics obtained by the CBC.


In total, 813 attacks on pets were reported last year — a dramatic rise from the previous three-year average of 600 attacks, and more than double the number that occurred in 2012.


The number of attacks that resulted in the death of another pet has been rising.
•2012 - 0
•2013 - 7
•2014 - 21
•2015 - 15
•2016 - 30

The city classifies attacks into six levels. A level-one attack encompasses aggressive behaviour but no physical contact, while a level-six classification is reserved for fatalities.

Ward said the numbers spiked because restrictions on pit bulls in Edmonton were repealed in 2012.

"I do believe in animal rights but I don't know how you can say you're an animal advocate and strongly advocate for pit bulls because they are the very things that are killing so many pets," Ward said.

"I simply want our city put back legislation that restricted these dogs and put them on muzzles, and data shows that it works."

'No matter the breed'

Previously, the city required mixed-breed American Staffordshire and Staffordshire bull terriers — more commonly known as pit bulls — to be muzzled on public property and tethered on private property.


Scott dismissed any suggestion that the city re-introduce breed-specific legislation to address the problem.


Instead, Scott is hopeful awareness campaigns will ensure pet owners are better educated about how to socialize their dogs, and be proactive about aggressive animals.


"City administration is not considering reintroducing breed-specific legislation but we are hoping that the dog a​ttack ​reduction strategy being developed will address dog attacks and ways to lower them, no matter the breed," he said.


If a dog attacks another dog, the owner can be issued fines or tickets under Edmonton's animal licensing and control bylaw, with a maximum fine of $2,500.

In some cases, restrictions could be put on the dog, or investigators may require the animal be euthanized.


CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices
Report Typo or Error|Send Feedback
__________________
An awful lot of big game was killed with the .30-06 including the big bears before everyone became affluent enough to own a rifle for every species of game they might hunt.
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 09-20-2018, 01:53 PM
bat119's Avatar
bat119 bat119 is online now
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: On the border in Lloydminster
Posts: 8,342
Default

Ok I don't own a pit bull so let's ban them.
How's this going to work?
Do we get everybody that owns a pit or pit cross (in this case it was a pit/boxer) to register them for pick up and extermination ?
Open season shoot on sight?
trucks of men in black to round them up for the gas chamber?
Grandfather the owners and anybody caught letting the dogs breed goes to jail?
The word ban gets thrown around a lot with no real plan.
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 09-20-2018, 02:18 PM
1899b's Avatar
1899b 1899b is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sherwood Park Ab
Posts: 6,279
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bat119 View Post
Ok I don't own a pit bull so let's ban them.
How's this going to work?
Do we get everybody that owns a pit or pit cross (in this case it was a pit/boxer) to register them for pick up and extermination ?
Open season shoot on sight?
trucks of men in black to round them up for the gas chamber?
Grandfather the owners and anybody caught letting the dogs breed goes to jail?
The word ban gets thrown around a lot with no real plan.
I absolutely agree with you. Slippery slope. Their track record speaks for itself however.
__________________
An awful lot of big game was killed with the .30-06 including the big bears before everyone became affluent enough to own a rifle for every species of game they might hunt.
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 09-20-2018, 02:45 PM
EZM's Avatar
EZM EZM is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 11,851
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1899b View Post
https://dogbitelaw.com/dog-bite-stat...likely-to-kill

Opening statement from the above article states:

As of May 25, 2013, the USA death count from dogs in 2013 is 14. Of these, 13 people were killed by pit bulls. In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers:

"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities." (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)
Precisely to my point - the article you cited includes both frequency and rate which effectively (and soundly) articulates the reality of this issue.

The evidence clearly shows that certain breeds will remain a higher risk to public safety. Any argument to the contrary is simply, without a doubt, incorrect and/or misguided.
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 09-20-2018, 05:29 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

I think you all are missing the forest for one tree.

What a golden opportunity to get laws changed that many of you don't like.

What better reason to carry a handgun then to protect one's loved ones and oneself from all those big bad pit bull type man killers.

Yeah I've had a few run in's with vicious dogs and I've even had a bear or two try to take me out.
I'm also keenly aware that I have ten times (or more) chance of dying in a motor vehicle accident then I do of loosing any blood to a pit bull or grizzly bear.

So some dame with a dog gets killed by that dog, yup that's a tragedy.
I wonder how many folks died on Alberta's highways this week?

Where's the chorus of calls to ban all motor vehicles?

Fact is cars are a greater threat to human life then the meanest dog ever born.

Last I heard non of us will live forever. There are hundreds of thousands of ways to die.
I refuse to go through life worrying about something that most likely will never happen to me, or to 99.9 percent of the population, when the results if it should happen, are the same as much more likely scenarios and one way or another, are inevitable anyway, sooner or later.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 09-20-2018, 06:40 PM
Ken07AOVette's Avatar
Ken07AOVette Ken07AOVette is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 24,072
Default

Keg (all due respect) when I start riding a pitbull to work I will go along with your analogy.

A vehicle is necessary. Let's call it a necessary evil to fit your rationale.

A pitbull is a non necessity. Absolute the least of what is required in life.

When someone else's non necessity tears the face off my loved one because they look at it I will let loose on the non-necessity and then very likely the owner.

As for vehicles that is why we have insurance and cages around us, I am willing to take that risk.

I say ban the breed. Better yet eradicate it.


Also, I have never heard of a pitbull killing a man. They go for nice soft babies and women.
__________________
Only dead fish go with the flow. The rest use their brains in life.


Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck
I wasn't thinking far enough ahead for an outcome, I was ranting. By definition, a rant doesn't imply much forethought.....
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 09-20-2018, 06:52 PM
C.Noble C.Noble is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lloydminster
Posts: 359
Default

So very tired of people telling me I can't have my chosen breed of dog. Whatever opinion you have, fine, but to say I should get rid of my family dog, while all of you get to keep yours is a load of horse s@#&. That is all I'm going to say on this one
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 09-20-2018, 06:58 PM
bat119's Avatar
bat119 bat119 is online now
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: On the border in Lloydminster
Posts: 8,342
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken07AOVette View Post
I say ban the breed. Better yet eradicate it.
Can you ban mosquitos too I hate those things and they kill more people than pit bulls
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 09-20-2018, 07:16 PM
Ken07AOVette's Avatar
Ken07AOVette Ken07AOVette is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 24,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bat119 View Post
Can you ban mosquitos too I hate those things and they kill more people than pit bulls
I say gas them!!
__________________
Only dead fish go with the flow. The rest use their brains in life.


Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck
I wasn't thinking far enough ahead for an outcome, I was ranting. By definition, a rant doesn't imply much forethought.....
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 09-20-2018, 07:16 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken07AOVette View Post
Keg (all due respect) when I start riding a pitbull to work I will go along with your analogy.

A vehicle is necessary. Let's call it a necessary evil to fit your rationale.

A pitbull is a non necessity. Absolute the least of what is required in life.

When someone else's non necessity tears the face off my loved one because they look at it I will let loose on the non-necessity and then very likely the owner.

As for vehicles that is why we have insurance and cages around us, I am willing to take that risk.

I say ban the breed. Better yet eradicate it.


Also, I have never heard of a pitbull killing a man. They go for nice soft babies and women.

You completely miss my point.

I'm not arguing for or against. I'm saying there are a lot more imminent dangers that very few seem to acknowledge.

And BTW motor vehicles are not a necissity for life. For our chosen way of life they may be, but this country was explored and settled without the benefit of roads or motor vehicles. Millions of people in other countries live without the use of motor vehicles.

We choose to accept the risks of motor vehicle use because to us, there is a net benefit in our opinion.

Every choice people make is based on a cost benefit balance. If there is net benefit we chose for, if not we choose against.

What I find amazing here is we are talking about something that most likely will not happen to anyone here.
As opposed to something many of us will encounter in our life time.

Tell me how this argument against pit bulls is any different then the arguments against gun ownership. Aside from one being an about an animal doing the damage as opposed to an animal (Humans are mammals) with a tool doing the damage.

You may not agree but I think this argument is a very slippery slope for gun owners to get involved in.

And I think it amounts to tilting at windmills. I thought hunters were braver souls then that.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 09-20-2018, 07:31 PM
Bushrat's Avatar
Bushrat Bushrat is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteout View Post
Do you not believe that if we are thinking about enacting legislation in Canada, the supporting evidence for that legislation should be Canadian as well?
Sometimes it's better to learn a lesson from others experiences rather than find out for ourselves the hard way.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.