Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
44 user(s) are online (27 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 44

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 2 (3) 4 5 »


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#76
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

I_heart_JC wrote:
Quote:

AMo wrote:
Just like blood hounds were bred to smell, pits were bred to fight. As nice as many pits are, if they're badly reared or just snap, they can do incalculable damage to both humans and other dogs. Play tug of war with a pit as I've done. It'll pull your arm out of its joint. They are that muscular. In Jersey City, where many are acquired for protection or sport, and not to be loving house pets, we have a problem. I would support mandatory licensing for pits and other "fighting" breeds. It would be illegal to own one unless you receive training and have insurance. It's the humane thing to do.


what a lot of people don't understand is how easy it is to change a breed's characteristics over a relatively short period of time.

I keep hearing, "Petey from the Little Rascals was a pit!" "they used to be called Nanny Dogs!" yes, and that was EIGHTY years ago. do you know how many dog generations that is? look up a picture of a regular bulldog from the early 20th century. it's a completely different dog.

had people spent the last near-century breeding pits for their sweet disposition, we wouldn't be having this conversation. but no. a lot of irresponsible asshats have bred for very specific negative characteristics that have tainted a once-great breed.


A bunch of the dogs you see around you are bred for some bloody purpose, whether hunting, guarding or yes, fighting. The very concept of breeding dogs to cuddle at your feet is a fairly new concept as for most of human history fresh meat was not something that could easily be spared without some gain in return. So if you say "oh, well now pit bulls are bred to guard" I have to ask - what about any other number of large guarding breeds out there? Same with fighting.

Anyway, I'll just leave these here since they do a better job of explaining than I do:

http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/b ... -no-basis-in-science.html

http://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-p ... ition-statement-pit-bulls


Posted on: 2016/10/6 16:19
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#75
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/11/15 16:43
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 650
Offline
Quote:

AMo wrote:
Just like blood hounds were bred to smell, pits were bred to fight. As nice as many pits are, if they're badly reared or just snap, they can do incalculable damage to both humans and other dogs. Play tug of war with a pit as I've done. It'll pull your arm out of its joint. They are that muscular. In Jersey City, where many are acquired for protection or sport, and not to be loving house pets, we have a problem. I would support mandatory licensing for pits and other "fighting" breeds. It would be illegal to own one unless you receive training and have insurance. It's the humane thing to do.


what a lot of people don't understand is how easy it is to change a breed's characteristics over a relatively short period of time.

I keep hearing, "Petey from the Little Rascals was a pit!" "they used to be called Nanny Dogs!" yes, and that was EIGHTY years ago. do you know how many dog generations that is? look up a picture of a regular bulldog from the early 20th century. it's a completely different dog.

had people spent the last near-century breeding pits for their sweet disposition, we wouldn't be having this conversation. but no. a lot of irresponsible asshats have bred for very specific negative characteristics that have tainted a once-great breed.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 16:05
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#74
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:

I don't know how you were raised, but when I grew up the phrase "you're more likely to be killed by lightening than to have X happen" meant that X pretty much never happens. Or to put it another way, there are more Powerball lotto winners annually than there are people who die from dog attacks.


I know what you're trying to say but I trust you won't fault me for playing devil's advocate.

Lightning scares the crap out people for obvious reasons, drives us indoors against our wishes, and is responsible for billions of dollars in damages every year. If the ASPCA was looking for an argument to support their case, comparing dogs to lightning probably wouldn't be a marketable contender.

But never mind that. I simply don't have enough information at my disposal to have a particularly meaningful opinion, and I don't think anyone else in this thread does either.

How many people in the US are bitten by dogs every year? Where do the incidents occur? What are the circumstances? Which breeds? Who are the victims? What are their relationships to the dogs' owners? How many bites require visits to the emergency department? How many hospital stays? At what cost? With what lasting effects? There are too many questions with potentially troubling answers to be so utterly dismissive of the risk.


The point is rarity of death, which is what we're talking about. In terms of injury, obviously there are many more injuries from lightening than deaths. Or if you prefer the lawnmower analogy, 75k injuries per year. Point is on the list of problems in this country, this doesn't make the top 1000. In reality, a couple of whiny ninnies in our community, including you, are scared of big scary dogs and want them banned. After pit bulls are banned ghetto rats will switch to other dogs who you'll also want banned. Eventually, it will become clear that as a society our option is either your nanny state where every large dog is banned or we start growing a backbone and ignoring you.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 15:52
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#73
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3944
Offline
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
As people here rationalize attacks by pit bulls, tomorrow - somewhere a parent will be pushing a baby carriage and a pit bull will lash out at bite perhaps kill the child. Don't compare accidents by lawn mowers which has been improved through the years. Pit bulls violently snap and launch at people for no reason at all.


Yvonne, you truly have no idea what you're talking about, which should shock no one. There's always a reason, even if the people don't understand it. Which, of course, is why pit bull attacks pretty much never happen in nice places - people feed/treat their pit bulls (and other large dogs) well, so they don't snap. No, they happen in the ghetto where you get some trash barely off their high blathering about how they didn't know nuthin' hoping they won't be in trouble with their parole officer.

When the next death comes in I will absolutely "callously" shrug, just like I will do with the next freak accident that happens tomorrow, like a lawnmower accident. As to "improvements to lawnmowers" - what do you know about lawnmowers? Serious q. For one, even if they were somehow magically improved a bunch of people still use old ones. For another, many accidents happen from user error/kids playing with them/rocks flying and seriously hurting/killing someone. There is always going to be risk of serious injury or death when you have a large machine with a huge blade powered by a powerful engine out in the open with other people around. Yet I have yet to hear anyone attempt to call for banning them.


You are wrong, I do know what I am talking about. I have seen dogs at Van Vorst Park go after people especially children who walk by. Luckily, the owners were strong enough to pull back these dogs. So sorry, I did not have a video going when I saw these dogs go wild.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 15:34
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#72
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 7:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 716
Offline
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:

I don't know how you were raised, but when I grew up the phrase "you're more likely to be killed by lightening than to have X happen" meant that X pretty much never happens. Or to put it another way, there are more Powerball lotto winners annually than there are people who die from dog attacks.


I know what you're trying to say but I trust you won't fault me for playing devil's advocate.

Lightning scares the crap out people for obvious reasons, drives us indoors against our wishes, and is responsible for billions of dollars in damages every year. If the ASPCA was looking for an argument to support their case, comparing dogs to lightning probably wouldn't be a marketable contender.

But never mind that. I simply don't have enough information at my disposal to have a particularly meaningful opinion, and I don't think anyone else in this thread does either.

How many people in the US are bitten by dogs every year? Where do the incidents occur? What are the circumstances? Which breeds? Who are the victims? What are their relationships to the dogs' owners? How many bites require visits to the emergency department? How many hospital stays? At what cost? With what lasting effects? There are too many questions with potentially troubling answers to be so utterly dismissive of the risk.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 15:22
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#71
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
As people here rationalize attacks by pit bulls, tomorrow - somewhere a parent will be pushing a baby carriage and a pit bull will lash out at bite perhaps kill the child. Don't compare accidents by lawn mowers which has been improved through the years. Pit bulls violently snap and launch at people for no reason at all.


Yvonne, you truly have no idea what you're talking about, which should shock no one. There's always a reason, even if the people don't understand it. Which, of course, is why pit bull attacks pretty much never happen in nice places - people feed/treat their pit bulls (and other large dogs) well, so they don't snap. No, they happen in the ghetto where you get some trash barely off their high blathering about how they didn't know nuthin' hoping they won't be in trouble with their parole officer.

When the next death comes in I will absolutely "callously" shrug, just like I will do with the next freak accident that happens tomorrow, like a lawnmower accident. As to "improvements to lawnmowers" - what do you know about lawnmowers? Serious q. For one, even if they were somehow magically improved a bunch of people still use old ones. For another, many accidents happen from user error/kids playing with them/rocks flying and seriously hurting/killing someone. There is always going to be risk of serious injury or death when you have a large machine with a huge blade powered by a powerful engine out in the open with other people around. Yet I have yet to hear anyone attempt to call for banning them.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 14:46
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#70
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3944
Offline
As people here rationalize attacks by pit bulls, tomorrow - somewhere a parent will be pushing a baby carriage and a pit bull will lash out at bite perhaps kill the child. Don't compare accidents by lawn mowers which has been improved through the years. Pit bulls violently snap and launch at people for no reason at all.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 14:36
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#69
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline

Posted on: 2016/10/6 14:14
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#68
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

Yay, some good news finally.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 14:00
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#67
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Insurance companies tend to deny coverage for the first four breeds on this list most often, experts say.

But as a general rule, insurance companies tend to resist covering these 11 types of dogs — or any mix of these breeds:

Pit Bulls & Staffordshire Terriers
Doberman Pinschers
Rottweilers
German Shepherds
Chows
Great Danes
Presa Canarios
Akitas
Alaskan Malamutes
Siberian Huskies
Wolf-hybrids

http://www.forbes.com/sites/cateyhill ... and-renters/#1db5099826ec


Sure, and that's why I use State Farm, which doesn't do that.

Incidentally, man does this board depress me about my neighbors. So many dumb, weak people afraid of absolutely everything. Guns, dogs, cars - you name it, you'll see people TERRIFIED that there will be something posing a danger to them and desperately looking to regulate everything. Which, of course, there always will be.

You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.

Add in black people and Muslims and you something I've said numerous times on here.

I'm sorry, but that there are only 232 deaths across all of America says that this isn't a problem.


It is a problem for 232 people, their families and perhaps any future generations that might have come from those 232 people. If that was an airplane crash, there would be an investigation on how to avoid the next crash. But according to you "this isn't a problem." How callous.


Except, these wouldn't be the only deaths nationally over a large period of time. The number of deaths over whatever time period is pretty important when gauging risk. 232 people over a long period of time is actually nothing.

I keep throwing out stats to drive the point home but here's another one: http://munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2007/0419-lawn-mowers.php ("Each year, more than 75 people die in lawn mower accidents. Many lawn mowing accidents involve children, Casady said. He advises parents to not allow children under the age of 12 to use a push mower and to keep children under the age of 16 off riding lawn mowers."). The serious injury numbers of even more crazy. Tens of thousands, including 10k children. So riddle me this - based on the above, do you support banning lawnmowers? They kill TWICE the number of people every year as dogs. Explain to my why lawnmowers should be legal but pit bulls not.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 13:57
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#66
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
...while less than 40 people per year die on average from dog attacks, around 50 people per year on average die from lightening strikes. So we should CLEARLY ban people from being outside in thunderstorms. Think of the children!


Dogs are only about as deadly as lightning?? Which side of the issue are you on?


I don't know how you were raised, but when I grew up the phrase "you're more likely to be killed by lightening than to have X happen" meant that X pretty much never happens. Or to put it another way, there are more Powerball lotto winners annually than there are people who die from dog attacks.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 13:53
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#65
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 7:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 716
Offline
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
...while less than 40 people per year die on average from dog attacks, around 50 people per year on average die from lightening strikes. So we should CLEARLY ban people from being outside in thunderstorms. Think of the children!


Dogs are only about as deadly as lightning?? Which side of the issue are you on?

Posted on: 2016/10/6 13:32
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#64
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3944
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Insurance companies tend to deny coverage for the first four breeds on this list most often, experts say.

But as a general rule, insurance companies tend to resist covering these 11 types of dogs — or any mix of these breeds:

Pit Bulls & Staffordshire Terriers
Doberman Pinschers
Rottweilers
German Shepherds
Chows
Great Danes
Presa Canarios
Akitas
Alaskan Malamutes
Siberian Huskies
Wolf-hybrids

http://www.forbes.com/sites/cateyhill ... and-renters/#1db5099826ec


Sure, and that's why I use State Farm, which doesn't do that.

Incidentally, man does this board depress me about my neighbors. So many dumb, weak people afraid of absolutely everything. Guns, dogs, cars - you name it, you'll see people TERRIFIED that there will be something posing a danger to them and desperately looking to regulate everything. Which, of course, there always will be.

You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.

Add in black people and Muslims and you something I've said numerous times on here.

I'm sorry, but that there are only 232 deaths across all of America says that this isn't a problem.


It is a problem for 232 people, their families and perhaps any future generations that might have come from those 232 people. If that was an airplane crash, there would be an investigation on how to avoid the next crash. But according to you "this isn't a problem." How callous.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 10:30
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#63
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/12/28 12:08
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 751
Offline

Posted on: 2016/10/6 9:21
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#62
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 17:43
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1832
Offline
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Insurance companies tend to deny coverage for the first four breeds on this list most often, experts say.

But as a general rule, insurance companies tend to resist covering these 11 types of dogs — or any mix of these breeds:

Pit Bulls & Staffordshire Terriers
Doberman Pinschers
Rottweilers
German Shepherds
Chows
Great Danes
Presa Canarios
Akitas
Alaskan Malamutes
Siberian Huskies
Wolf-hybrids

http://www.forbes.com/sites/cateyhill ... and-renters/#1db5099826ec


Sure, and that's why I use State Farm, which doesn't do that.

Incidentally, man does this board depress me about my neighbors. So many dumb, weak people afraid of absolutely everything. Guns, dogs, cars - you name it, you'll see people TERRIFIED that there will be something posing a danger to them and desperately looking to regulate everything. Which, of course, there always will be.

You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.

Add in black people and Muslims and you something I've said numerous times on here.

I'm sorry, but that there are only 232 deaths across all of America says that this isn't a problem.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 7:31
Dos A Cero
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#61
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/9/15 15:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 8894
Offline

Posted on: 2016/10/6 4:14
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#60
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/16 21:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2974
Offline
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
..
Why the (irrational) fear of dogs?


My take. You [GrovePath] are struggling to validate your own phobia. It's ok. Chances are - you'll get killed by a hot dog - and not a real dog.

Posted on: 2016/10/6 3:13
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#59
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/16 21:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2974
Offline
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.


Or more than likely -- you'll soon have to take your pit and move out to the sticks. Enjoy the trailer.

Resized Image


I'm laughing at you, mostly because this sounds like another one of your futile crusades, like trying to get dogs banned from running off leash in Colgate. How did that one work out?


You got the wrong person - not that it matters.


You, me, DA and others have been regulars on this board for quite a few years. In that time, we have had relatively few real-life JC dog-on-human and dog-on-dog incidents discussed. We had the nutter owners with the mastiffs, and the alleged HP dachshund incident. That's 2 in almost a decade. No bloody trail of dead bodies and ripped up kids in JC.

Why the (irrational) fear of dogs?

Posted on: 2016/10/6 2:53
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/9/15 15:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 8894
Offline
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.


Or more than likely -- you'll soon have to take your pit and move out to the sticks. Enjoy the trailer.

Resized Image


I'm laughing at you, mostly because this sounds like another one of your futile crusades, like trying to get dogs banned from running off leash in Colgate. How did that one work out?


You got the wrong person - not that it matters.

Posted on: 2016/10/5 19:32
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.


Or more than likely -- you'll soon have to take your pit and move out to the sticks. Enjoy the trailer.

Resized Image


A) Don't own a pit bull, but own large dogs.

B) Nevertheless, I know many pit bulls that are fantastic dogs.

C) You make it sound like large, American cities generally ban pit bulls. The opposite is true, and the only places in the US with pit bull bans are trashy secondary cities (Denver, Miami). NYC, LA, SF, Chicago, etc. - none ban pit bulls.

D) I'm laughing at you, mostly because this sounds like another one of your futile crusades, like trying to get dogs banned from running off leash in Colgate. How did that one work out?

Posted on: 2016/10/5 19:20
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#56
Newbie
Newbie


Hide User information
Joined:
2016/10/5 18:42
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3
Offline
When governing a large number of people, statistics are important. The emotional aspects sometimes need to take a back seat. If X% of attacks are committed by a certain type of anything, you have to respond.

Killing innocent pittbulls seems extreme. Maybe some sort of licensing program would work better.

The problem is, many people buy pittbulls as weapons.

Posted on: 2016/10/5 19:00
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/9/15 15:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 8894
Offline

Posted on: 2016/10/5 18:52
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#54
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/16 21:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2974
Offline
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.


Or more than likely -- you'll soon have to take your pit and move out to the sticks. Enjoy the trailer.

Resized Image


Trailer? Could get a ranch in Texas with the equity on most properties downtown.

http://www.landandfarm.com/search/Texas/Farm-for-sale/

Posted on: 2016/10/5 18:33
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 575
Offline
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.


Or more than likely -- you'll soon have to take your pit and move out to the sticks. Enjoy the trailer.

Resized Image


Most people are not in love with pitbull. They are providing a home for an animal that was more then likely mistreated. Instead you should be angry at the people who bred them or the liberal laws that make it feasible!

Michael Vick alone was responsible for belreeding hundreds of dogs. He served what 6 mo. for his crimes?

Posted on: 2016/10/5 18:23
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/9/15 15:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 8894
Offline
Quote:

devilsadvocate wrote:
You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.


Or more than likely -- you'll soon have to take your pit and move out to the sticks. Enjoy the trailer.

Resized Image

Posted on: 2016/10/5 17:27
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#51
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/11/13 13:42
From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4133
Offline
If it bothers people so much, immigrate to Canada and live in Montreal so you can voice and lobby change ... Dogs are eaten in China and the Cow is a sacred animal in India (imagine what Indian's think of us slaughtering millions of cows each year).

Posted on: 2016/10/5 17:18
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Insurance companies tend to deny coverage for the first four breeds on this list most often, experts say.

But as a general rule, insurance companies tend to resist covering these 11 types of dogs — or any mix of these breeds:

Pit Bulls & Staffordshire Terriers
Doberman Pinschers
Rottweilers
German Shepherds
Chows
Great Danes
Presa Canarios
Akitas
Alaskan Malamutes
Siberian Huskies
Wolf-hybrids

http://www.forbes.com/sites/cateyhill ... and-renters/#1db5099826ec


The vast majority of dog owners own a mutt. Good to see they're not on the list.

http://www.animalfarmfoundation.org/pages/Multimedia-Infographics


Actually, pretty much all laws/insurance requirements include the language "or any mix including the listed breeds."

Posted on: 2016/10/5 15:20
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/3/4 17:31
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 789
Offline
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Insurance companies tend to deny coverage for the first four breeds on this list most often, experts say.

But as a general rule, insurance companies tend to resist covering these 11 types of dogs — or any mix of these breeds:

Pit Bulls & Staffordshire Terriers
Doberman Pinschers
Rottweilers
German Shepherds
Chows
Great Danes
Presa Canarios
Akitas
Alaskan Malamutes
Siberian Huskies
Wolf-hybrids

http://www.forbes.com/sites/cateyhill ... and-renters/#1db5099826ec


Sure, and that's why I use State Farm, which doesn't do that.

Incidentally, man does this board depress me about my neighbors. So many dumb, weak people afraid of absolutely everything. Guns, dogs, cars - you name it, you'll see people TERRIFIED that there will be something posing a danger to them and desperately looking to regulate everything. Which, of course, there always will be.

You guys should probably move to a gated community somewhere. You can ban all large dogs and a bunch of other things. As a bonus those of us that are normal will never have to see you again or hear you whine.

Posted on: 2016/10/5 15:19
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/11/30 7:46
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1739
Offline
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

AMo wrote:
Just like blood hounds were bred to smell, pits were bred to fight. As nice as many pits are, if they're badly reared or just snap, they can do incalculable damage to both humans and other dogs. Play tug of war with a pit as I've done. It'll pull your arm out of its joint. They are that muscular. In Jersey City, where many are acquired for protection or sport, and not to be loving house pets, we have a problem. I would support mandatory licensing for pits and other "fighting" breeds. It would be illegal to own one unless you receive training and have insurance. It's the humane thing to do.


Training, licensing and insurance seems reasonable. Outright banning a breed does not.


Resized Image


Is this supposed to be an argument? You're not helping yourself.

Posted on: 2016/10/5 12:37
Print Top


Re: Montreal Bans New Pit Bull Ownership After Deadly Mauling
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/16 21:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2974
Offline
Think we should organize a jclist barbeque to discuss. I'll bring the hot dogs.

Posted on: 2016/10/5 12:05
Print Top




« 1 2 (3) 4 5 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

remember me

Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017