Florida Cop executes family dog

[dmcowen674]

10-20-2015

Graphic video shows Florida officer knock on door, shoot dog 3 times


A family claims surveillance video shows the graphic, fatal shooting of their beloved pet by a police officer.
Gillian Palacios, the dog’s owner, said her dog Duchess ran out of the front door when an officer knocked on it.

Palacios said the two-year-old, 40-pound bull terrier mix ran outside and was fatally shot three times in the head by the officer.

The officer reportedly knocked on the door to let the family know their car door was open.  Palacios can be seen opening the door and the dog runs outside.

“Before I could even do anything, the officer had his gun out and shot her three times in the head,” she said.

The officer has been placed on administrative leave as officials investigate.

Florida City police spokesman Officer Ken Armenteros defended the officer’s actions.

“We don’t have the luxury of hind sight,” Armenteros told WPLG. “We have to use the information that is given to us in a split second. So, the officer has to make that decision with the information that he has available.”

[dmcowen674]

He's that scared of dogs he should not be a cop.

[SteelCrysis]

Bull terrier mix = another name for pit bull.  I don't blame him for shooting first and asking questions later.

[RolloTheGreat]

Bull terrier mix = another name for pit bull.  I don't blame him for shooting first and asking questions later.

ALL pit bulls should be shot by cops. The breed is outlawed in several countries, but here they eat about 20 people a year.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/te...-1.2403782

These fugly mutts are about 5% of the dog population and account for 62% of the dog related deaths.

http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statist...lities.php

[BoFox]

It could've been any dog like a young playful terrier dashing to lick the shoes - cop already had his gun ready to shoot before he even saw the dog. That's why he was relieved of his duty.

Cops should be trained to be more taser-gun-ready than pistol-ready in a "hey neighbor your car door's open" scenario. Plus it wouldn't be too difficult for a man his size and training to kick a small dog or bash it with his fists, or use a baton (if any of this was necessary, lol).

[RolloTheGreat]

It could've been any dog like a young playful terrier dashing to lick the shoes - cop already had his gun ready to shoot before he even saw the dog.  That's why he was relieved of his duty.  

Cops should be trained to be more taser-gun-ready than pistol-ready in a "hey neighbor your car door's open" scenario.  Plus it wouldn't be too difficult for a man his size and training to kick a small dog or bash it with his fists, or use a baton (if any of this was necessary, lol).

If you watch that video, the cop is obviously backing up from the door and drawing his gun because he hears the dog on the other side barking and trying to get at him.

When the door is opened the dog comes running out at the cop.

This isn't a "playful terrier", he wouldn't have shot that. He shot a full grown pit bull that could have seriously maimed him.

It's one thing to let a lab or spaniel charge you like that, another altogether with a pit bull or rottweiller. The officer acted properly to defend life and limb.

If the owner did not want the pit bull shot, they should have not let it out on the cop.

I would have done the same thing the cop did, and think these dogs should be illegal to own.

[BoFox]

The cop wasn't wearing his uniform, and his badge could've been a fake.

Ok, I watched the video VERY closely this time.

Now, I can see that if the dog was really angry, the dog would've already jumped at him. The dog was running out of the door at only about 1/4th of its capacity - it was more of a curious greeting. The cop was already shooting the dog before the cop even had time to look at the dog's feature to determine if it was in fact a pitbull.

I've seen pitbulls bigger than that one. Well, you're right that pitbulls have a bad rep - largely due to most drug dealers in city neighborhoods training their own pitbulls to defend their homes from strangers especially cops.

But then, cats are evil too, since jealous cats are known to smother infants on purpose. So, let's kill them all - pitbulls and cats!! Hahahaha

[BoFox]

One of the Youtube comments hit the nail on the head:

Cops kill hundreds, if not thousands, of dogs each year. Mailmen, UPS, FEDEX, pizza delivery, etc, on the other hand, who deal with these situations regularly, kill zero. Funny how that works. Also note that there has never been a single recorded incident of a dog ever killing a cop in this country. Ever. The problem isn't with the the dogs, the problem is the poorly-trained, trigger-happy cowards. Ignorance and cowardice is a pretty piss-poor reason to execute a family pet.

The cop probably did it before for the thrill of his life - just this time a camera caught him doing it.

[RolloTheGreat]

The dog thing is easy to argue:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_...ted_States

Look at all the years between 1887 and 2000. Not many people getting killed by dogs, a couple a year. Mysteriously, after people start buying pit bulls, the number goes up by a factor of 10+.

There's not some weird coincidence here, it's just a fact that the way these dogs attack makes them more likely to maim or kill. Cops don't have any responsibility to wait until these fugly mutts latch on and perhaps lose use of a hand or gain a limp to "be sure not to harm a lovable pet". If some idiot has a tiger for a pet and lets it loose toward a cop they should shoot it, same applies here.

[BoFox]

Hey, I do agree with you that pit bulls should be banned and outlawed. From wiki:
" A 1991 study found that 94% of attacks on children by pit bulls were unprovoked, compared to 43% for other breeds, and that 67% involved freely roaming animals."
Many military bases in the US have banned pit bulls for all residences.  They're out-right banned in England and Wales, and Australia as well.  

Interesting, good point, Rollo.  I never liked pit bulls - these dogs are the hardest to trust.  My brother had a rottweiler - the breed with the most deadly bite of all dogs, but it was very tame and disciplined.  Pitbulls need to be taken outside everyday, for a long walk (hours of exercise) each day to be happy and at ease - they just have way too much testosterone.  

But what about a taser gun?  A stun baton would work wonders, especially if trained with how to use a baton against dogs.  Even if it was a small muscular bulldog that could jump 7 feet high, it would be zapped by 50,000+ volts of electricity before it could get close enough to bite. 

[RolloTheGreat]

Hey, I do agree with you that pit bulls should be banned and outlawed. From wiki:
" A 1991 study found that 94% of attacks on children by pit bulls were unprovoked, compared to 43% for other breeds, and that 67% involved freely roaming animals."
Many military bases in the US have banned pit bulls for all residences.  They're out-right banned in England and Wales, and Australia as well.  

Interesting, good point, Rollo.  I never liked pit bulls - these dogs are the hardest to trust.  My brother had a rottweiler - the breed with the most deadly bite of all dogs, but it was very tame and disciplined.  Pitbulls need to be taken outside everyday, for a long walk (hours of exercise) each day to be happy and at ease - they just have way too much testosterone.  

But what about a taser gun?  A stun baton would work wonders, especially if trained with how to use a baton against dogs.  Even if it was a small muscular bulldog that could jump 7 feet high, it would be zapped by 50,000+ volts of electricity before it could get close enough to bite. 

Personally I think on a Rottweiler (or pitbull) like the one in the video they should just shoot. If that dog is breaking free to get at people, most of the people won't have a taser or a gun. So you have a dog that is known to break free to get at people, has the strongest jaws of any dog, and policy is not to harm the dog until it harms or kills someone? If I was that cop, that dog would be dead. All he had to do was walk by and it broke loose and attacked him.

I also think that if you buy one of these dogs, you should be held liable for it's crimes. If that mutt eats some old lady walking by on the street the owner should be tried for murder.

We'd have a lot less people owning them if they couldn't be insured and people were held accountable for the damage they cause.

[BoFox]

testing to see if post works

[BoFox]

Weird, post didn't work before, resulting in an error.  I didn't have anything weird with the syntax.  

Starting over...  
Rollo, you right about the above video - dogs attacking people on the street should be shot by cops, no problem.

Still, I don't think the pit bull was gonna bite that plains clothed cop.  But again, I agree that pit bulls should be outlawed in the US, due to high number of stray attacks.

My brother's Rottweiler was almost a pure breed, with red fur with the same markings as a fox - white chest, pawns and a white-tipped tail.  The physical features were just like a Rottweiler in every way except for the fur.  It was an exotic cross breed (worth many thousands of dollars), and one of the most loyal dogs I've ever seen, more than willing to defend your life from anybody who tried to harm you.  See the video that shows how wonderful Rottweilers really are:


Cesar Millan, the Dog Whisperer (there was a TV show series, documentary-style like Nanny 911 that was really cool), has an article about certain breeds being trained to attack, and that's why we're seeing deaths associated with Rottweilers.  There are probably over 20,000 of these dogs in the nation, but only about 20 of them have ever killed anybody in the last 10+ years.

https://www.cesarsway.com/cesar-millan/c...gerous-dog

[SteelCrysis]

I've only ever met one Rottweiler, and she was a calm dog.

[RolloTheGreat]

We pretty much agree on this topic BoFox.

The only thing I have against the Rottweillers is they are the other dog that eats people these days, though not as often.

[SteelCrysis]

I remember a wave of dog attacks in the Twin Cities when I was a kid. Roughly 13 pitbull attacks, and 1 Rottweiler "attack" that consisted of the Rottweiler running up to a kid and tugging his sleeve. That says it all about Rottweilers.

[ocre]

The dog thing is easy to argue:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_...ted_States

Look at all the years between 1887 and 2000. Not many people getting killed by dogs, a couple a year. Mysteriously, after people start buying pit bulls, the number goes up by a factor of 10+.

There's not some weird coincidence here, it's just a fact that the way these dogs attack makes them more likely to maim or kill. Cops don't have any responsibility to wait until these fugly mutts latch on and perhaps lose use of a hand or gain a limp to "be sure not to harm a lovable pet". If some idiot has a tiger for a pet and lets it loose toward a cop they should shoot it, same applies here.

You failed to mention (possibility-you really dont know) how unreliable your data is. You are basing all of your ideas on incomplete and flawed data. The further you go back, the more unreliable. These arent records of incidents collected as they happen, no one was doing that. Its not even a collection of police reports or death reports. This data comes from looking back thru newspapers.........such a scientific method, huh?
Problem is that we dont have every newspaper ever written, we dont even have proof that every newspaper still in existence was sifted thru when they tried to put together this "study". Perhaps the dog attacks they do claim have some merit but even with those you have to realize the that media reports and facts dont always go together.

If you want to take and run with a 100% flawed "study", that is on you. But do i need to list examples of how unreliable newspapers have been over the years? How about reported flying saucers, there are thousands of them in old newspapers. Probably ten times or more of those reported than dog attacks. So what say ye to that?

Newspapers have been a reflection of our culture and an extension of social trends. Flying saucers were a hot topic and heavily reported in newspapers across the country........do you see where i am going with this? I personally question the validity of nearly every flying saucer reported in newspapers throughout the last century. But even if you take newspapers as the gospel, you dont have to look any further than the very link you posted to see some huge red flags.

Nevertheless, the reader should bear in mind that data from news investigations is generally less reliable than information from published scholarly studies, and that where specific breeds listed, they are rarely based on conclusive proof of ancestry.

this one, i want to highlight:

The second part of this article consists of an annotated list of individual U.S. dog-attack fatalities compiled primarily from new reports. The list is not meant to be exhaustive nor conclusive. For example, there were at least 26 fatal dog bites in 2000, of which this Wikipedia article lists only 5.

Do you see now what is clearly in front of your face? Lets say that modern news and media have more regard and try to be more accurate these days, that doesnt change the fact that media reports what they think will sale. Do you see the huge gaping hole in front of you. Your link, you posted, tells you right in the fifth sentence---
while there were at least 26 fatal dog attacks in 2000 ----- we only have 5 on the list.

Do the math......
where your opinion comes from. (This is the source of these "studies"):
-the earlier data comes from going thru old newspapers = terrible
-even recent sources, we see that most dog bites/attacks are not reported by the media
---we are talking 80-90% of dog attack fatalities not even counted here.

Do you see the problems?

if you are having issues let me help, this is a completely flawed, a worthless source and method. I have already spoke on this very subject but apparently you didnt pay attention. All of this is a result of social trends. Pit bulls have been around for a very long time before they became the notorious villain they are today. In the 80s we seen a resurgence in fog fighting, pit bulls were a favorite in the underground seen. Pit bulls then became associated guard dogs to drug dealers and gang members, this directly stemmed from the popularity of underground dog fighting. These dogs became a cultural symbol further promoted by rappers and then demonized by the media. The popularity of pit bulls sky rocketed across the nation, most importantly in urban areas. Eventually, the pit bull becomes the poster of tough and mean killer dog. This is the image of a pit bull and many people are nervous just walking past one. But this is a very recent image for the bread, which originated from drug dealers and gangsters then propelled by the media.

See, wiki tells you that 5 out of at least 26 fatal dog attacks are on the list. The media are much more incline to report a demonized pit bull attack, surely you can see that much. But even those reported are fuzzy, its really really that boggling......

the CDC has this to say about studies relating to dog bite fatalities
- records of dog attack fatalities may have been biased by the propensity of media to report attacks by certain breeds over others;
- it is not always straightforward to identify a dog's breed, and records may be biased towards reporting 'known' aggressive breeds; and
- it was not clear how to count mixed breeds.
- such breeds have traditionally been used in dog fighting at a far higher percentage than others. Thus, the disparity of docility versus aggressiveness tends to rank very highly in Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs when compared to other breeds, with human training playing the primary role.


There is a real issue here and we really dont have clear or reliable data. FLAWED in every single way. A collection of what the media reports is not a way to do a real study, unless you are studying the bias and failure of the media....


A real and true study:

In a peer-reviewed literature review of 66 dog bite risk studies, the American Veterinary Medical Association determined that "breed is a poor sole predictor of dog bites. Controlled studies reveal no increased risk for the group blamed most often for dog bites, ‘pit bull-type’ dogs. Accordingly, targeting this breed or any another as a basis for dog bite prevention is unfounded. As stated by the National Animal Control Association: “Dangerous and/or vicious animals should be labeled as such as a result of their actions or behavior and not because of their breed.”

This is not some group that is soft on pit bulls, it is a true scientific study on the matter. But if you want to continue with basing your ideas on such a poor source, then i cant stop you.

[RolloTheGreat]

Ocre, I see pit bull attacks in the news almost every month. I don't think I've ever seen "Renegade schnauzer kills old lady".

I get Wiki isn't the best source of info, but you don't have to look hard for pit bull attacks in the news. Don't really care if they're purebred.

Many countries and cities have already banned them, and many insurance companies won't insure owners.

These things aren't just "some wacky coincidence".

[ocre]

Okay, since you don't really take the time to read what I post

-the pit bull is an extremely popular dog these days.
-Dog bites/attacks get identified as pit bulls regardless, many aren't even close
-media picks up on any bite/attack that will be considered a pit bull, dog bites from other breeds aren't as interesting.
-I just posted real scientific and controlled studies do not at all support the idea that pit bulls attack more frequently than other breeds.

If you don't understand how media will gravitate towards stories that have demonized villains then you don't understand how this world really works.

From your last sentence, it is clear you aren't even paying attention anyway....

[RolloTheGreat]

Okay, since you don't really take the time to read what I post

-the pit bull is an extremely popular dog these days.
-Dog bites/attacks get identified as pit bulls regardless, many aren't even close
-media picks up on any bite/attack that will be considered a pit bull, dog bites from other breeds aren't as interesting.
-I just posted real scientific and controlled studies do not at all support the idea that pit bulls attack more frequently than other breeds.

If you don't understand how media will gravitate towards stories that have demonized villains then you don't understand how this world really works.

From your last sentence, it is clear you aren't even paying attention anyway....

I read your post, and have read the CDC info before.

Frankly, I don't believe it.

If an Irish Setter ate a child, it would be news, same as a pitbull.

The fact they aren't purebred is irrelevant to me.

I don't think pit bulls attack more than other dogs, I think the way they attack is more likely to cause injury.

We don't have to agree on this - I want them banned like they are in some countries.

[BoFox]

Okay, since you don't really take the time to read what I post

-the pit bull is an extremely popular dog these days.
-Dog bites/attacks get identified as pit bulls regardless, many aren't even close
-media picks up on any bite/attack that will be considered a pit bull, dog bites from other breeds aren't as interesting.
-I just posted real scientific and controlled studies do not at all support the idea that pit bulls attack more frequently than other breeds.

If you don't understand how media will gravitate towards stories that have demonized villains then you don't understand how this world really works.

From your last sentence, it is clear you aren't even paying attention anyway....

Wolf cross-breeds are banned in most parts of the world, but apparently, wolves are the parent breed of all dogs.  I had a Siberian Husky that looked just like a wolf (probably a bit of a cross-breed), and geez, was he powerful!  He was extremely virile - he'd rip up any female dog on the street, down there (you know what I mean)!

Still, I'd never let a pit bull around my kids.  The head is shaped like a viper, and would be strangled by my arms before it ever gets within a foot of my boys.  One (not really sure if it was a pitbull) actually attacked my brother on the street when he was like 9 years old.

[RolloTheGreat]

http://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=29388

12 countries have made pit bulls illegal.

http://www.dogsbite.org/legislating-dang...-state.php

Over 700 US cities have banned them.

https://www.esurance.com/info/homeowners...-pit-bulls

Insurance companies don't want to insure them.

I'm sure there are nice pit bulls, I'm sure there are good owners, I'm sure there are breeds far more likely to bite.

None of that really matters to me because Cocker Spaniels aren't killing people randomly like these fugly mutts.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/te...-1.2403782

[RolloTheGreat]

Another one that needs to be executed:

http://www.channel3000.com/baby-mauled-b...s/36166326

[ocre]

httphttp://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/German-Shepherd-Attacks-Central-Texas-Toddler-303006621.html://abc30.com/news/german-sheperd-awaiting-its-fate-after-attacking-8-year-old-boy/1060492/
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/dog-pu...k7cva.html
http://www.sgvtribune.com/general-news/2...e-them-off
http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/features/top-...jekWLerSUk

and on and on and on

We've all been guilty of this at one point. We see a negative news story published about a pit bull, or an attack that was supposedly done by a pit bull, and we click on the article. We read the article, looking for pictures of the actual dog involved in the attack, or legitimate scientific research quoted. Instead we find a stock photo of a snarling dog, and the report cites DBO (dogsbitedotorg)

This cycle of picking one particular breed of dog to disparage, and attempt to exterminate has been been happening for decades. Those of us that are old enough remember the vilification of the Doberman, the German Shepherd, and the Rottweiler. All of those trends lasted for about ten years each. Why has the trend lasted for over a decade with pit bulls? We have more science proving these arcane theories about pit bulls to be patently false than all of those other breeds combined. Yet, it persists.

My understanding changed when I started learning internet marketing. There are certain facets to internet marketing that most people know very little about. However, these facets are, in my opinion, why the media continues to publish negative stories about pit bulls more than they do any other breed of dog. Back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s the internet either didn't exist, or was in its infancy. The same rules didn't apply to Dobermans, German Shepherds, and Rottweilers. News operated in an old school fashion. Papers or television, those were your choices. There was no comment section. There was no clicking a "like" button. You read it in the paper, or you saw it on television, and perhaps talked about it the next day at work or school.

News is big business now. News companies are giant corporations that operate in print and online, and giant corporations need money to operate. They get the money they need from advertisers; and they get advertisers to spend massive amounts of money by proving how many people visit their site during a specific period of time (be it daily, weekly, or monthly). They prove this to their advertisers by using two key piece of information: click rate, and comments.

This is why pit bulls are vilified in the media. Money. That's it. Stories about pit bulls attacking make news corporations money. They make money because people click on the articles, and comment. The news corporations don't care if they're helping contribute to misinformation. They want numbers/money; and as long as people continue to click and comment on these stories, they will continue to be published. The cycle will never end.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-whit...35130.html


Last, in direct response to your ad-hominem

http://www.orangeleader.com/2015/10/28/b...l-attacks/

“Breed-specific” legislation (BSL) is the blanket term for laws that either regulate or ban certain breeds completely in the hopes of reducing dog attacks. Some city/municipal governments have enacted breed-specific laws. However, the problem of dangerous dogs will not be remedied by the “quick fix” of breed-specific laws—or, as they should truly be called, breed-discriminatory laws.

It is worth noting that in some areas, regulated breeds include not just American Pit Bull terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, English Bull Terriers and Rottweilers, but also a variety of other dogs, including American Bulldogs, Mastiffs, Dalmatians, Chow Chows, German Shepherds, Doberman Pinschers, or any mix of these breeds—and dogs who simply resemble these breeds.

Just to note (besides the point): Pit Bulls arent the only dog breed banned......Being the expert you seem to think you are, I would suspect you know this yet conveniently left this all important fact out. hmmmm

Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) decided not to support BSL. The CDC cited, among other problems, the inaccuracy of dog bite data and the difficulty in identifying dog breeds, especially true of mixed-breed dogs. The CDC also noted the likelihood that as certain breeds are regulated, those who exploit dogs by making them aggressive will replace them with other, unregulated breeds.

In the aforementioned study, the CDC noted that many other factors beyond breed may affect a dog’s tendency toward aggression—things such as heredity, sex, early experience, reproductive status, socialization and training. These last two concerns are well-founded, given that:

More than 70 percent of all dog bite cases involve unneutered male dogs.
An unneutered male dog is 2.6 times more likely to bite than is a neutered dog.
A chained or tethered dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than a dog who is not chained or tethered.
97 percent of dogs involved in fatal dog attacks in 2006 were not spayed/neutered:
78 percent were maintained not as pets, but rather for guarding, image enhancement, fighting or breeding.
84 percent were maintained by reckless owners—these dogs were abused or neglected, not humanely controlled or contained, or allowed to interact with children unsupervised.

so where does this take us? Ironically, just about back to one of your more rational thoughts on the matter.

Recognizing that the problem of dangerous dogs requires serious attention, the ASPCA seeks effective enforcement of breed-neutral laws that hold dog owners accountable for the actions of their animals.

Hold the dog dog owners responsible? hmmmm...... seems like i just heard someone talking about that?????

Chew on that some.....

Unless you were just talking about holding only pit bull owners responsible for what their dogs do, which i would find extremely bizarre (but you never know).

[BoFox]

Ocre, is all of this because you have a pit bull yourself?  Just wondering, since pit bull owners tend to be extremely defensive of the pit bull image.  

It's just that America has been breeding so many pit bulls as fighting dogs or as guardians for drug dealers, etc.  for decades.  As such, many are born with unpredictable tendency to attack - it's in the genes.  

A comment from Rollo's link:

Pictured are the two most deadly dog breeds in America: pit bull terriers and rottweilers. Research from DogsBite.org shows that during the 10-year period from 2005 to 2014, these two dog breeds accounted for 74% of the total recorded fatal human attacks.1 By compiling U.S. and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2014, a report by Animals 24-7 shows that pit bulls (307) and rottweilers (89) and their mixes contributed to 67% of the attacks resulting in human death.2

It is important to point out that fatal dog attacks committed by pit bulls and their mixes more than doubles the attacks inflicted by rottweilers. It is well documented by experts3 and humane groups4 that pit bulls pose a substantial danger due to their selective breeding for dogfighting. Unlike other dog breeds, pit bulls frequently fail to communicate intention prior to an attack (surprise attacks); possess a lethal bite style (hold and shake) and a ruinous manner of attack (gameness).

The same applies for some Rottweilers.  Some are just born that way - as puppies, they cannot stop biting everything around them, even if it makes your hands bleed as you try to pick them up.  Many professional breeders who sell pure-breed Rottweilers for $6000+ each have these puppies undergo extensive testing for temperament along with other qualities like obedience, etc. (temperament is usually the first thing that buyers look for).  These breeders are very careful to use selective breeding so that they get the puppies with all of the desirable qualities, with ideal temperament traits. 

Of course, these dogs need training more than any other breeds, except for maybe German Shepherds who love to attack smaller dogs and animals.  They need PLENTY of exercise to be happy, and they need to be taught who the pack leader is (the owner(s)).

[RolloTheGreat]

Ocre,

What do you think about making laws that hold the owners responsible for the damage the dog does? E.G. Your son or daughter is walking by on the sidewalk, Joe Dirt's pit bull runs out and eats your child, Joe Dirt stands trial for negligent homicide with almost guaranteed conviction and prison time.

Or

Your son/daughter walks by the McYuppies and their Schauzer runs out and does it's best to eat your child, ends up ruining their socks, Kid can't stop laughing, does not ask you to press charges.

Or are you one of those guys that thinks your right to own a dangerous animal supersedes the public's right to safety, and if the public is harmed by your animal "that's just some crazy accident" that you have no liability for. It's the dog's fault, dog should be punished not you.

[SteelCrysis]

For the pit bull conspiracy theorists: http://www.border-wars.com/2012/06/now-o...lters.html

The burden of proof lies with those making claims against the evidence. The extraordinary claim is that there is a massive conspiracy against pit bulls and that shelter after shelter are committing fraud. You also have to believe that the bully landrace is massive, extraordinarily massive and that they are not being killed beyond their representation in the populace. Not one of those ideas has any proof. The least supportable notion is that shelter entry dogs are a random sampling of all dogs and that the factors which drive them there are not correlated with their breeds.

Pointing out that there are a few other breeds that look similar in some respects to pit bulls in photos (mind you the SIZE component is entirely removed here… there are ugly JRTs that sort of look like pit bulls), provides no convincing evidence against the documentation of shelter killings. Nor is the observation that there are strains and other very similar breeds evidence against the problems in pit bulls either! That entire meme is a product of anti-BSL thinking. It does not speak to pit bull culture at all. None of this post is in support of BSL.

The argument goes like this: Only one breed is banned but supposedly highly related other breeds, which are also targets for assholes, fighters, etc. are not being picked on. This isn’t FAIR!! wah wah wah. Animal control can’t even tell the difference between a Pit Bull and a ____ (insert other breed here, mostly harmless or crap like a Pressa Canario, etc.) so it’s not fair and other breeds that are also trained to fight and bite and savage are not being covered. And it’s not fair to the look alike breeds that have supposedly had their gameness bred out!

This is a problem with legislation and enforcement, it has nothing to do with the very free market of who brings dogs to shelters for disposal.

The truth is that many of the breeds that are similar to pit bulls are very rare. The idea that all of these breeds together are simply being mis-labeled and thus hugely inflating the poor pit bull’s numbers has no basis in any sort of accounting of the number of dogs in these breeds.

There’s also the problem that many of the closest looking dogs are just as problematic as pit bulls. If we had more Pressa Canarios here, it’s likely they’d be just as culpable in getting dumped in shelters and being used as horrible status symbols to thugs.

The other problem you have is the age these dogs are coming in at and being killed at. They are not 12 year old sick dogs that come in when Grandma goes to a nursing home, they are too often very young, under 2 years and entirely healthy. They are the byproducts of an industry/culture that doesn’t care about them as pets, only as entertainment and image and blood sport.

Breeds are not all the same, there is not a massive conspiracy to lie to people and make a problem where none exists, and to deny the reality of where these dogs are coming from and why and in what numbers does nothing but extend the travesty.

[RolloTheGreat]

There isn't any "conspiracy".

Those dogs are a minority of dogs owned and commit a majority of the damage to people.

If one tried to gnaw on anyone in my family, it wouldn't need to worry about the dog catcher.

Note: A Lab actually DID bite wife in the leg, looked like Dracula chomped her. We asked the owners to pay our medical deductible and called it a day. If it had been one of these fugly mutts, she'd be scarred for life and I would have had to spend a night in jail most likely. (and probably lost one of my shotguns)

[happy medium]

There isn't any "conspiracy".

Those dogs are a minority of dogs owned and commit a majority of the damage to people.

If one tried to gnaw on anyone in my family, it wouldn't need to worry about the dog catcher.

Note: A Lab actually DID bite wife in the leg, looked like Dracula chomped her. We asked the owners to pay our medical deductible and called it a day. If it had been one of these fugly mutts, she'd be scarred for life and I would have had to spend a night in jail most likely. (and probably lost one of my shotguns)

Pitbulls = Niggers.

Even if you treat them right, bring them around your friends, dress them for the part, they are still pitbull/niggers and will rob and bite you in the end.

Why because of their owners/parents raise them that way.

and the ones you get from the pound/group homes are even more untrustworthy.

[SteelCrysis]

Dude, WTF with the racial slurs?

[RolloTheGreat]

Dude, WTF with the racial slurs?

He's obviously trying to draw some far fetched parallel between ignorant, unlawful racism and reasonable fear of dangerous animals.

We have all kinds of deer, squirrels, and chipmunks running around in Wisconsin- no one cares because they would have a hard time hurting people. If we were reading about them eating women and children every month, a lot of us would shoot them on sight.

We leave criminals for the police, unless they break into our homes or accost us in public.

[SickBeast]

Oh man!

[RolloTheGreat]

Oh man!

Beagles can be nasty dogs that bite, but no one much cares because beagle bites aren't very dangerous.

Pitbulls are eating women and children alive, at a rate of one every 17 days.

http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statist...s-2015.php

Now you may think that one child being eaten alive by these fugly mutts is just the price we have to pay for the wonderful privilege of owning these fugly mutts. Maybe if one ate one of your kids, you are Christian enough to think, "everything happens for a reason".

Not me.

I think the "reason" is some dumbass wanted to own a dangerous animal and said dumbasses should be made to pay for the dog's crimes the same as if they committed them.

If I move in next door to you, think it would be cool to have a Bengal Tiger and buy one, it jumps the fence and eats your family, it's not the tigers fault it acted like the dangerous animal it is. It's MY fault because I brought the dangerous animal into your neighborhood.

Same logic applies.

[SickBeast]

No no. That's not why I said that. I said that because of what Happy Medium said.

[RolloTheGreat]

No no.  That's not why I said that.  I said that because of what Happy Medium said.

His position is a common debate gambit in internet memes, and the logical fallacy of false analogy.

People love to try and tie anything and everything to racism, no matter how far fetched. You see it all the time on FB.

[happy medium]

No no.  That's not why I said that.  I said that because of what Happy Medium said.

His position is a common debate gambit in internet memes, and the logical fallacy of false analogy.

People love to try and tie anything and everything to racism, no matter how far fetched. You see it all the time on FB.

Rollo, if the word nigger makes you automatically think of racism, that's a problem in itself.

Replace "nigger" with the word scumbag and it tells the same story.

It just so happens where I'm from dog fighting with pitbulls is mostly done by the niggers of our city.
They are raised to kill, fight or to just be downright nasty.

These same animals raise their kids the same way, and what do they do? kill each other every single day on our streets, in fact 2 this weekend alone.

I think of it this way....put a gun in a niggers hand chances are its not for protection, its to put to your wifes head while he rapes her. Is it the guns fault? I say its the owners fault and the parents that raised said owner.

Put a pitbull on a niggers leash, chances are its not for protection, its to mame , kill, or terrorize.
Amimals like this think its cool and its likely how their parents raised them.

When I watch that video I see a neighborhood that's more than likely filled with thugs that walk down the street with dangerous dogs, guns, and high crime. The cop comes to the door to help out and to tell the residents that the car door was left open. The law states "you must be in control of your leashed dog at all times".

WHo is the blame? the dog owners! They know the their dog is labeled a dangerous dog, I would bet on it.
If it was a Chiwawa , my guess it would still be alive.

Racism? na, more like accurate experienced stereotyping.
If the shoe fits wear it.

Notice I never mentioned a persons color?
SHame on you Rollo, seems to me mabe you are the racist.
And for the record, I'm Indian.

[SteelCrysis]

Uhhhhhhhhhhh. Also, I'm pretty sure pit bulls are alive, while guns are not alive.

[happy medium]

Uhhhhhhhhhhh. Also, I'm pretty sure pit bulls are alive, while guns are not alive.

the point was guns and dogs are a product of their owners and the people who raised them..

[SickBeast]

I still don't understand the use of the N-word. That's a racist and derogatory term and it has no place in anyone's vocabulary IMO.

[SteelCrysis]

the point was guns and dogs are a product of their owners and the people who raised them..

A gun doesn't have behavior, it cannot be programmed.