Dog ownership, and new laws associated therein.

Want to rant about something? Or see me go on about something stupid? This is the place.
Locked
Pete McGiveris
Ancient Moderator
Posts: 394
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:13 am

Dog ownership, and new laws associated therein.

Post by Pete McGiveris »

OK, so I was hanging out with a buddy of mine the other day, and our conversation turned to dogs, as we're both dog lovers, and he's a dog owner (I know what you're thinking, you love a dog but don't own one? Well, my wife and I both work long hours, so I really don't feel it'd be fair to the dog). I brought up that my wife and I were talking about what breeds of dogs we'd like, if we were to get a pure breed (which we probably wouldn't), if we were to get a dog. I mentioned that I could maybe leave the dog with my Mom during the working day, and that the breeds we seamed to like were Mastiffs, either a bull or english, a rottweilder, or the wife is quite partial to either red nosed or blue nosed pitbulls. This prompted my buddy, out of concern for my well being to inform me that all of those breeds of dogs were breed for no other purpose than to kill, and that espically with the pittbull I'd be sitting on a ticking time bomb that would just be waiting for the chance to kill or maime me. I didn't really want to start a huge argument with him, but I did inform him that the only dog who was breed to kill of those breeds I mentioned was the English Mastiff, that Khangis Khan had 5000 of them as war dogs, but that trait was breed out of them, and a dog is what you as an owner make of it.
It got me kind of angry though. In Ontario Canada, pitbulls as a breed are banned. This is wrong on a few different levels. A good hard look should be taken at who's buying the dogs, nevermind it's another bit of our personal freedom down the drain. Where does that end? What breed are they going to tell us are banned next? I've read that in some parts of the States (and maybe this isn't true, I'm not sure) that Bull Mastiffs are banned. Anyone who has ever been around a breed of mastiff will tell you that they are natrually a pretty docile breed, so you'd have to go out of your way to make these big guys mean.
But, of all these breeds mentioned, the pitbull definately catches the most flak, which is something I find incredibly odd. Never before had a breed of dog been so demonized. They have the most powerful bite of any breed, the jaws lock, they're incredibly strong and can't be restrained. Most of these nuggets of pure uncut febreeze come from the owners of pitbulls themselves. Most people I know who own pitbulls probably shouldn't own a house cat, never mind a dog. And they take great pride in spouting these facts out, which if you had half a smurf brain in your head, you wouldn't be repeating to someone when trying to convince someone that you're dog is awesome. A dog whose jaws lock all the time? Oh man, where do I get one of these? I really want my dog to die when eating his supper, because his jaws are locked and there's nothing on earth that can get them apart.
In fact, here in Saint John not too long ago, two Cane Corso which is an Italian Mastiff mauled two people, and the news reports announed them as a "Pitbull-like breed". What? Did you just get done smoking your morning crack? The mastiff has nothing to do with a pitbull. And instead of reporting the breed at all, why not mention the fact that these 150 lbs.-plus dogs were owned by a drug dealer. Sort of makes the breed of the dog seam a little less relevant, doesn't it?
All the febreeze we as humans promote, and it's the dogs who suffer because of it.
And I said "Baby you're lookin' good",
That's when I noticed her legs were wood...
Wesley
GOD
Posts: 10406
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Dog ownership, and new laws associated therein.

Post by Wesley »

I agree with you that it is not the dog, it is the owner. If I may, I would like to share a story:

A couple of years ago I was visiting a friend of mine. He had a big old Rottweiler and a Yellow Lab. The Lab was a rescue dog, as in they rescued it from the pound. The Rott they had from a puppy. Charlie had both dogs in the basement, which had a sliding glass door out to the back yard. The Lab started getting a little nosy, shoving his nose in my crotch or my bottom, and I had to shoo him away more than once. A minute or so later, the Lab nipped at my bottom and I shoved him away, then he came right back and bit my calf hard enough to rip my jeans and break the skin. I was ready to wallop the dog, but before I got the chance, the Rottweiler got between us and herded the Lab to the back door and out into the yard. Yeah, the scary big mean old Rottweiler saw that the Lab was being a princess sophia, and escorted him outside. Oh wait, the Rott was not scary at all, liked people, was friendly and playful like a puppy, and smart enough to step in during a potentially rough situation.

People can train their dogs to be whatever they want them to be. The fact that some low lifes train their pit bulls to be mean fight dogs does not mean the breed is inherently bad. And Pete, I really respect that you don't want a dog because you would not be able to give it the attention it needs. More dog owners should be like you. I hate driving through a neighborhood and seeing the family dog sitting outside, alone on a leash tied to the fence because the family cannot be bothered to pay enough attention to it.

They should outlaw the bad dog owners, not the dogs.
"Work hard, be humble and stay positive."

~ Donnie Yen ~
Eff
Demimod
Posts: 6338
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:54 am
Location: banned by bells

Re: Dog ownership, and new laws associated therein.

Post by Eff »

GreatZot wrote:
They should outlaw the bad dog owners, not the dogs.
yeah that.
Image
Dowster wrote:This one time - also know as last Wednesday
Locked