#1 Opinions? Pit-bulls? Your Neighbor Has 2.11-26-2016, 10:41 PM
Opinions? Pit-bulls? Your Neighbor Has 2. One (female) runs unattended through the neighborhood, the other (male) is chained up in the backyard. Do you allow your young child to spend time in their yard with their young child?Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
11-26-2016, 11:13 PMSocialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
11-26-2016, 11:55 PM
There is reason he's on a chain, regrettably you have no idea if the problem is with him or the owner.
I concur - NO. Invite the neighbor kid to play in your yard.It's not how old you are, it's how you got here.
It's been a long road and not all of it was paved.
A man is but a product of his thoughts. What he thinks, he becomes. Gandhi
11-27-2016, 12:34 AM
This one is easy.
May the FORCE be with you!
11-27-2016, 12:50 AM
No children around dogs they aren't around normally.... period.
Pitbulls are a special no no.... especially around kids. The male may take rough housing ( between the kids seriously) and .... not a good ideaGovernment is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. That would be unfair to drunken sailors, they're spending their OWN money.
11-27-2016, 01:23 AM
A former neighbor in Palm Harbor had a pit bull named Valentine. She was the sweetest dog I've ever seen, good with other dogs, very submissive to adults, wonderful with their new baby. But would I trust one that I didn't know around my kid? NO!!
Actually I'd be very careful with leaving any kid unattended around a dog. You never know what might happen. Our Bella, the greyhound, is the world's sweetest dog, but I'd still be more comfortable if I were around, especially until I know that the kid is safe with the dog, doesn't tease or pull the tail, etc.
Would I leave a child playing with any chained dog? NEVER IN THIS LIFETIME!!!!!
" To the world you are just one more person, but to a rescued pet, you are the world."
"A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves!"
11-27-2016, 02:15 AM
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
No, but it has zero to do with the breed.
American Staffordshire terriers, much like great danes, instinctively protect children. Either of those breeds, assuming that they have not been trained to the contrary, will instinctively place themselves between any child and any threat that they perceive to that child's safety. They will do this without training and, if need be, without concern to their own safety. More than a few have been maimed or killed doing exactly this. Protecting children is bred into American Staffordshire terriers, just as it is with great danes and several other breeds (border collies will do this, but they are herding/working dogs first and foremost, so they more instinctively protect herds/packs first; malamutes are similar, though they tend to specifically protect their owners rather than just any child; several other breeds fall into this category). Despite the propaganda to the contrary, they are not a "vicious breed." That's just BS.
Here's what actually happens out in the real world:
1.) Some shitbag abuses and mistreats a pitbull (or, more frequently, several pitbulls) until they are so paranoid that they'll bite anything that comes near them. This happens for a variety of reasons: needle-dick thinks that it's cool to have a "tough dog," or he's fighting the dogs (or hopes to), or he foolishly thinks that the only way to have a "guard dog" is to abuse that dog from birth because he thinks that's the only way the dog will defend the house/family, or he's just an asshole who likes to assert his dominance through cruelty. Here's the catch: that can happen with ANY breed. There are plenty of cases of German shepherds, border collies, poodles, dachshunds, chihuahuas, and even (sorry, SLW and SR) greyhounds doing the exact same thing. Granted, most smaller breeds can't do as much damage at once as a Staffordshire terrier, but they can and do manage to do a shit-ton of damage, and in the media world, a bite is a bite: a small bite that barely breaks the skin is immediately hyped up into a dog fully dismembering an eight-year-old and putting a little boy's head on a pike.
2.) The child "victim" has abused the dog mercilessly, almost always for a long period of time. Every single parent of every single child who does this invariably denies this to the hilt, and every single one of them is lying. It's exactly the same as those who claim that sweet, innocent Trayvon was "such a good boy" or that their angelic son was a "gentle giant" who just happened to strong-arm convenience store owners. They're in denial, at the very least, and these are parents who were not watching their kids. That's harsh, and that sucks for those parents as well as the kids, but this is an undeniable fact that winds up getting uncovered every. time. there is an allegedly un-provoked attack from a "vicious dog." That's tough to hear for a lot of people, but believe me, having been personally involved in having to put down these allegedly "vicious dogs," I guarandamntee that this is the case. Headlines shout "Vicious breed!!!" at the time, and then when it eventually comes out two weeks later that in fact little Timmy had been poking the dog with a stick for six weeks prior to the "attack," it doesn't even warrant half an inch of ink in the paper.
So, why "no" in this case? Because that owner is pretty apparently not a responsible owner, based upon the description. Chaining up one dog and letting one run free in the neighborhood is not responsible dog ownership. I'm not physically there to see the situation, but in most cases, there should be a fenced-in yard, or a reasonable "dog run" for both dogs, or if it's the sort of neighborhood where dogs roam free, then both dogs should be well-trained enough to roam without bringing concern to the neighbors. Your neighbor is almost certainly not responsible enough to take care of his/her dogs. If they aren't responsible enough for that, do you really want that person to be the one to watch over your child? I wouldn't.Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
11-28-2016, 11:54 AM
My Jack Russell Terrier spent a good part of Saturday on my mom's balcony because she lunged at my cousins' children. I spent part of a day last week with a family and their new 4-month old pit bull puppy, who sat at my feet for most of the time, and followed the kids around like they were her peers . I'm not sure what my dog's deal is with kids, she likes them once they are teens. She's a rescue dog, so maybe some kids hurt her before she came to the shelter? She was pretty young when I adopted her, though. Next time, I'm just muzzling her.
It's all about the owners and how responsible they are about their dogs.-this family is not responsible if one of the dogs roams the neighborhood.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|