Quote:
Originally Posted by jgd85
Actually many dogs just bark and growl, or they just bite and dont bite to kill. There is a reason this says "VICIOUS animals" and includes pit bulls.
|
Yeah, and that reason is misconception. It would be like an article saying Mexicans are more prone to doing gang related crimes. It doesn't mean we should ban Mexicans, it means we should put them in jail for impeding the rights of others. Likewise, we shouldn't ban pit bulls, we should create a situation in which they can exist without impeding the rights of others. My solution from earlier still sounds reasonable. Pitbll breeder's licenses would ensure that those who are fit to raise a pitbull can still do so peacefully and those who don't want to or are incapable of it won't or can't. However, if someone wants a pitbull on their property that is quite frankly none of your business unless you don't want to be around it in which case don't go where pitbulls will be. Though I still think thats an overblown course of action and the law should be left as is.
Quote:
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) published a study concerning deaths from canine attacks in 2000. [34] According to the study, between 1979 and 1998, one-third of all fatal dog attacks were caused by Pit Bull type dogs. The highest number of attacks (118) were by Pit Bull type dogs, the next highest being Rottweilers at 67.
You are really beating this to death.
|
Did this take into consideration who raised them, how they were raised, and how other dogs were raised? I think if the research were deeper than you'd see that nurturing has far more to do with behavior than nature does. Not that nature wouldn't be a factor, but that they could be bred to not be killers.
Also, you don't have much room talking about having things banned considering you'd ban humans. You do realize we humans own the country, not you vegetables, right?