Facts really seem to bother you. So lets continue. I've owned quite the assortment of assault weapons since I was very young. I was raised by ignorant assholes. I sold off 3 stainless Ruger Mini-14's for $1,500 each because the 2 dipshits I sold them to thought they were going to be banned the following month. I remember the exact year/summer this started and it made me some money. I continued to make fun of the guy that bought two of them for many years after that.

The introduction of bans on assault weapons came into being during the crack/cocaine epidemic and the growth of gangs and gang violence in cities. It happened because innocent people were getting killed in their beds at night while they slept by stray bullets. It happened because people were using 30-50 round mags full of ammo that was going through police kevlar/cars/homes/buildings and children that were 1/2 a mile away playing in the street. The list of reasons why are long. It had to do with the specifics of those weapons and the specific problem those weapons presented. Much like the specific problem of pitbulls that you are in so much denial about.

:2 cents:

Vendzilla, I know you're really saving up to drop the final nuclear bomb of arguments... "people drown, so should we outlaw water". Please PM me when you do so i can try to tackle that well reasoned piece of brilliance.

Facts are , I really don't give a shit, I'm done, too many ignorant people about dogs in this thread, go ahead, jump my fence, my dog will kill you and all your babies you leave on the ground for him to eat.

You want to start killing a breed because of your ignorance, go ahead. I'll shoot anyone that comes near mine, ban or not

I still can't keep the idea of the movie deliverance when I see your name, do you have purdy lips?

Please show us where all the many times that has happened moron. How many times have cops been attacked by assault weapons versus 22 pistols?

Funny, i did imagine you being a hillbilly running around the kentucky hills trying to rape and kill wandering campers with your friendly pitbull.

I bet you are a fantastic banjo player!

And no, forget about my lips. I'm not into dudes. I'm just not. Thanks for the interest however.

must suck to live in fear to think people are always trying to kill and attack you. so much you need to barricade yourself in your home with guns and violent dogs.

god forbid some kid in the neighborhood hops your fence to get his baseball. sad really.

he came without facts, he left without facts.

but everyone else was ignorant.

I thought that was your bath house name?

I came out with facts, but you listened to the media, go figure

cool story bro

I actually don't think its safe to assume that. You ever see your typical June Cleaver type suburbanite owning a Pit Bull?

I love how with all I wrote, it was your homophobic sence that you needed to defend the most, not the bull shit you wrote

I guess he's not done. This guy is about as emotional and irrational as a pitbull.

this many posts about pitbulls.. ha. I agree though Oystein, it's ridiculous.

He fails to comprehend basic psychology, if you want a guard dog thats going to scare people out of your property, would you get a poodle?

http://us.cdn3.123rf.com/168nwm/xala...huahua-dog.jpg

here's the truth why he wants Pit Bulls banned, so his fi fi won't be brutalized by the Pit Bulls of the world.

You guys want to baby proof the world, the meek shall inherent the earth, but by then, no one will want it

Still haven't answered the question Bath House boy!

What more can be said to the guy who writes incessantly that he dog is the most innocent and beautiful and peaceful creature on earth because of its own wonderful owner and then who later says his pitbull will eat people and even their children/babies (owner is apparently a violent asshole?)?

I have a problem with idiots that judge the many for the actions of the few.

Breed ban laws simply don't work. Anybody arguing otherwise is doing so purely out of emotion. Those are the facts, period.

What does work well are breed neutral aggressive dog laws. If you really want to reduce the number of people being hurt by dogs, you would address the underlying issues and not just a symptom.

You were raised by assholes, bath house boy, wheres the answer to the question dip shit?

don't throw facts in here, they won't listen, they won't even answer the questions posed them.

The Squealer was traumatized by poodles at a young age and will jump on the band wagon to kill all breeds, facts or not

what you wrote makes no sence. :2 cents:

I don't think any dogs should be killed. I don't think any breed should be killed. I never said anything like that. I was simply pointing out there is a legitimate problem. Rather than confront that like a mature adult and propose workable solutions like a mature adult, you spend your time saying "everyone wants to murder our dogs", which is retarded.

You have to be a woman. I can't think of another man that i've seen on this board that was so irrational and that made so little sense.

its his favorite theme

Hey ... don't count out poodles, they were originally bred to hunt wild boar, and I've seen a few do aggression work. Hell I once saw an Afgan Hound doing aggression work, It was rather funny, but it is capable of doing the job. But that having been said, I think the Pit Bull represents to many what it was originally bred to do. Until you can get that out of the minds of the many Assholes that own/breed them, and that don't adequately know how to train/control them, you are going to have continued reports of attacks, and the breed is going to suffer the consequences. I think that the key here is that the breed has more potential to go wrong than many others.

So is the goal to stop the number of people hurt or killed by pittbulls or to stop the number of people hurt or killed by dogs?

Breed ban legislation will decrease the number of people hurt or killed by pittbulls but no evidence suggests it will decrease the number of people hurt or killed by dogs in general.

Breeed-neutral aggressive dog legisation will decrease the number of people hurt or killed by dogs in general.

So which goal is it you're interested in?

I dont have a goal. I believe there is a problem with Pitts and Rotts. I know you have one. I know you love your dog. I also know you're rational and not like Vendzilla who is acting like he's a menopausal junkie looking for a fix.

However, I haven't heard anyone propose a solution other than "blame the owners". It really doesn't matter after the fact if the owner is to blame or not.

It seems to me there are 3 basic options

1) do nothing
2) do something with owners BEFORE they own one and make them accountable, licensed dog, trained etc.
3) ban breeds

Seems to me there is a reasonable answer in dealing with owners... licensing, training etc for Pits, rotts etc.

But the argument should never be "get rid of them all" or "there is no problem". Both are retarded views in my opinion.

When it comes to legislation, either you have a great solution, or you have no solution. It's the "no solution" part, that leads to breed specific legislation.

Well there is a solution that works much better than BSL, and that's breed-neutral aggressive dog legislation.

Here's a short list of organizations that support that position: CDC, ASACP, Humane Society, American Veterinary Medical Association.

Here's a short list of scientific studies (alas not conducted on GFY) that support the position that breed ban legislation is not effective: Klaassen et al., 1996; Ott et al., 2007; Rosado, 2007

Here's a scientific study that supports the position that breed-neutral aggressive dog legislation does work: Bradley, 2006

I whole-heartidly support breed-neutral aggressive dog legislation. Nobody should have to suffer being bitten, maimed or killed by anybody else's pet. I'm fine with restrictive licensing requirements and severe criminal and civil penalties for the owners of aggressive dogs of all types, Pittbulls included. Shouldn't you be?

In short, let's work to reduce the number of aggressive dogs period and not just the number of aggressive Pittbulls. Surely you can see the benefit of persuing the first course rather than the second?

550 cuddly pets that wouldn't hurt a fly.

Does the guy in the middle of that picture to the left look like a woman, are you that gender confused?

You can't even answer the question I posed about your statement, even thoguh I asked several times, you just kept insulting me, and you think I have problems? Banning of any breed is killing, call a dog shelter, they will tell you exactly that, but again, you won't listen, you're too fucking stupid to do that

The OG Poodles are great hunting dogs, then the french got a hold of them and well, we have the toy poodles.


I give up because the mob rules, doesn't matter if they are right or wrong. Thats what's wrong with our government, everyone is so set on left and right, they fail to see neither is the answer.

I didn't realize how much like Paul Markham you are. Someone poses facts, you respond with questions which are irrelevant to those facts, then pose an analogy or comparison or rhetorical question which is neither relevant to the facts or questions but intended to deflect attention away from your ignorance and the fact that you were beaten. Then you keep harping on and on about "that question" as if you don't look stupid every time you type something.

more pit bull horror today.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/archive...0-081228-g.jpg

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews...30-081228.html

I wonder how long it will be till porno jew realizes I put him on ignore?

your facts were,"my dog is friendly"
my facts where actual reports of deaths by pitbull. :winkwink:

LOL, ignorance? I have a pit bull in my house, do you? So you're an expert? Not very bright are you!

One thing is for sure, Pit Bulls will never be banned as a race in itself... so we win. :pimp

Nice name, I'd say either stage name, or Drag Queen.