Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are a bunch of articles stating that a pit bull killed an 11 month old upstate...if you dig around and look at some of the comments in those articles (comments from the victim's family and friends), you'll see that the breed is being incorrectly reported in an effort to sensationalize the recent pit bull craze. It's also corrected in one of their gofundme pages.
It's too bad they had to call someone with a gun to stop the attack. If someone at that home had a shotgun they could have ended it quickly; maybe in time to save the kid.
When seconds count the police are only minutes away.
Facts? What facts? There were 27 pit bull related deaths last year out of several million currently living in homes. Do you realize how ridiculously insignificant a number that is? Or care? You've drank the Kool-aid poured by the media and don't even seem to realize it.
You want to eliminate a deadly animal people tend to keep around you should go after horses. Roughly 100 people die each year from horse related accidents, including being kicked in the head, trampled or thrown.
You are actually comparing kids getting mauled to death by a Pit Bull to some aristocrat falling off a horse?
Right, and in this case, every single news source is wrong and you're correct, but it has nothing to do with your bias right? Get a GD clue.
What bias?
Nowhere did I say a pit bull is not dangerous.
YOU still seem to (incorrectly) believe that pit bulls have the tendency to maul young children ingrained in their DNA. That sure seems like a biased opinion to me.
This recent incident has been mis-reported. That's all I'm saying. You need to get a clue yourself. Reading is fundamental.
Buenos noches.
Last edited by Schlubzilla; 11-17-2015 at 11:52 PM..
YOU still seem to (incorrectly) believe that pit bulls have the tendency to maul young children ingrained in their DNA. That sure seems like a biased opinion to me.
This recent incident has been mis-reported. That's all I'm saying. You need to get a clue yourself. Reading is fundamental.
Buenos noches.
Why don't you show one piece of evidence that it was not a pit bull and prove the 100 Newspapers who said it was wrong.
What the pathological Pit Bull crowd seems immune to understand is that in almost every instance the owner says this is the "first time" the dog ever snapped and it was a kind and loving dog. They are ALL ticking time bombs, just because most of them don't attack people doesn't mean the pose a very dangerous threat to the public.
Of course, the way the dog is brought up by its owner matters but nobody can be 100% sure that their pit bull won't snap as well.
How many times have they attacked people and even the owner can't stop them?
Unlike most other dogs, once these things decide to attack it is almost impossible to get them to stop.
There are 100's of less dangerous dog breeds to own. Quit trying to be a tough guy or compensate for your own personal defects by owning these dogs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
