Another week another Pit Bull attack

Fandango · 03-04-2013 3:18am

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I know many rugby schools that this statement would fit perfectly!!

Arawn · 03-04-2013 3:20am

Smidge wrote: »

I'm sorry you are mistaken.
That's a staffie that was nick named a "nanny" not a pitbull

A staffie bull terrier. Which is a "pitbull"

Ave Sodalis · 03-04-2013 3:21am

youtube! wrote: »

You make some sense especially when you say pitbulls are prone to fight and be aggressive . That's e ough for me to want them eradicated. They are inherently dangerous more so than other breeds!

You could also make the point that German Shepards are territorial and get attached to their owners, therefore more likely to attack strangers (an intruders). Should they be eradicated?
St. Bernards, due to their weight, could crush a child and have the potential to inadvertently injure an adult. Should they be eradicated?
Dobermans have the reputation to be vicious. Heck, they were bred as protectors and war dogs. Should be get rid of them too?
Ah feck it lads, why do we even have dogs? They can all kill! Get rid of the whole lot! In fact, get rid of all shark, lions, wolves, bears and anything that could kill us. We, as humans, should be superior and animals should have to always adapt to us... right?

The truth of the matter is; some dogs are family pets, some are not. Some dogs are bred to do one thing, some are bred to do another thing. It's when uneducated humans get involved, that things take a turn for the worst.

BillyMitchel · 03-04-2013 3:26am

Arawn wrote: »

A staffie bull terrier. Which is a "pitbull"

It was the Staffordshire bull terrier that was called the nanny dog.

Pit bull is a term generally used to decribe the American Pit Bull Terrier.

Smidge · 03-04-2013 3:29am

Arawn wrote: »

A staffie bull terrier. Which is a "pitbull"

They essentially share the same lineage but are 2 different breeds.
They have been breed for different purposes.

Also what most people own pit bull wise are "watered" down breeds.

Sponge Bob · 03-04-2013 3:32am

All Pit Bulls should be exterminated immediately. I am minded to let Staffies live but GOD!!!! they are UGLY!!!! and oddly I find that most Staffie owners seem to look like their dogs.

But i am minded to show Staffies ( and their owners) mercy as long as they are not tall Staffies in which case they are evidently Pit Bulls.

TheChizler · 03-04-2013 3:35am

BillyMitchel wrote: »

It was the Staffordshire bull terrier that was called the nanny dog.

Pit bull is a term generally used to decribe the American Pit Bull Terrier.

Aren't there like 4 distinct breeds that 'pit bill' generally describes? Am. Pit Bull Terrier, Amstaff, English Staffie and one other I can't remember?

Smidge · 03-04-2013 3:38am

TheChizler wrote: »

Aren't there like 4 distinct breeds that 'pit bill' generally describes? Am. Pit Bull Terrier, Amstaff, English Staffie and one other I can't remember?

Lots of different breeds within the clasification:)

BillyMitchel · 03-04-2013 3:45am

TheChizler wrote: »

Aren't there like 4 distinct breeds that 'pit bill' generally describes? Am. Pit Bull Terrier, Amstaff, English Staffie and one other I can't remember?

No, not really.

No Staffordshire bull terrier owner would call their dog a pit bull (maybe some gimp on the street would) and no pit bull owner would look at a Stafford and say look at that pit bull.

The Am Staff came when two clubs in America changed direction. Started off same dogs but eventually the Am Staff became watered down as it became more a show dog while the pit bull was still bred for its working abilities rather than looks.

The other you're looking for is Bull Terrier. Started off as a ratting dog, was pretty useless in the pit so it became an English gentlemans dog. Today it's just a loving pet and couldn't be further away in looks and function than what it was originally bred for.

Media do use the term pit bull for them all but that's when everyone gets confused and just calls anything a pit bull!

TheChizler · 03-04-2013 4:13am

BillyMitchel wrote: »

The Am Staff came when two clubs in America changed direction.

American Kennel Club and the Kennel Club of America? Splitters!

BillyMitchel · 03-04-2013 4:33am

TheChizler wrote: »

American Kennel Club and the Kennel Club of America? Splitters!

99% it's the AKC and the UKC but even then the UKC which is the APBT one has more splinter organisations.

IKC recognises both the SBT and the AmStaff but not the APBT. Not many countries do to be honest.

Enough dogs for me, well for another 4 hours anyway.

dodderangler · 03-04-2013 4:55am

BillyMitchel wrote: »

No, not really.

No Staffordshire bull terrier owner would call their dog a pit bull (maybe some gimp on the street would) and no pit bull owner would look at a Stafford and say look at that pit bull.

The Am Staff came when two clubs in America changed direction. Started off same dogs but eventually the Am Staff became watered down as it became more a show dog while the pit bull was still bred for its working abilities rather than looks.

The other you're looking for is Bull Terrier. Started off as a ratting dog, was pretty useless in the pit so it became an English gentlemans dog. Today it's just a loving pet and couldn't be further away in looks and function than what it was originally bred for.

Media do use the term pit bull for them all but that's when everyone gets confused and just calls anything a pit bull!

V good post mate and I agree with it all
It's a fact nowadays its hard to come across a pure bred pit bull
Problem with these dogs is that they are owned by wrong people
Complete muppets and a dog will do as told by its owner and a lot are trained to be aggressive but very few will turn against their owner as its instinct to follow commands by the alpha leader ie owner and if the owner has a family the dog feels its in a rank
Alpha male is owner
A female would be wife or gf
And it develops its rank then between children most times Nd this can result in child being attacked as the dog feels it wants higher command and I fully believe this as its same way with wolves
In a pack the pups form ranks as they grow up and a lot of time the weakest is killed by a more dominant wolf that wishes to assume a higher rank
I could go on but at 4:50am and only home from work I'm tired but I seen this thread and knew what some will comment so just pointing a few facts as I also have a dog that is on dangerous dogs list

12gauge dave · 03-04-2013 4:56am

The only solution to the problem is either make the these dogs illegall or make owning one alot harder for instance no one with a criminal record should be allowed one, no one under 21 allowed one or a training course with the dog by professional dog trainers.

I have friends with them and some are as soft and loving as ive ever seen a dog others are very jittery and untrusworthy so im on the fence about the breed but one thing for sure is humans should not be getting killed by dogs

arybvtcw0eolkf · 03-04-2013 9:20am

Smidge wrote: »

All due respect Mak, all of these dogs may be terrier breeds but are completely different from a pitbull.

The above terriers are(and were) generally used as "Fetch" dogs used in hunting. Nowadays, they are less used for this but still retain their intrinsic desire to carry out their in-built desire for this.
Which is why they can be energetic pets, their need for this, if neglected can result in some serious household destruction!!!!

On the other hand, bull terriers are in general a cross breed that has been cross breed over many centuries.
Bulldogs crossed with terriers and so on.

What you get with a "Pit Bull Terrier" is exactly that.
It is a bulldog crossed with a terrier but crossed for a specific purpose.
And this is where they get the "Pit" part of their name.

They were crossed and breed for fighting in a pit.

Now I see you are a terrier owner and I respect your choice.
I also acknowledge that the vast majority of bull or pit breeds are clowns who know nothing about the breed except that it makes them look tough and have NO idea of the dogs needs.

But you cannot deny a dogs heritage and natural instinct.
Pit bull terriers were breed and born to fight and this is their instinct.

They are not family pets imo but should only be owned by capable and qualified owners.

Good post, and to the ignorant it would be accurate but I suspect you know you're not telling the complete story.

I suspect you know that while the name 'pitbull' came from dogs fighting in 'the pit and the dogs who were successful became legendary for their fighting prowess and their tenacity.. And I suspect you know that any dogs which showed human aggression were culled and taken out of the line, I mean ~ who wants to go into a pit after a human killer eh?.. You know the answer.

I'm sure you also know that Whittens, Patterdales etc are still used as working dogs ~ ie hunting, catching, fighting and killing badgers and foxes.

Do you know people are now breeding Pitbulls with Greyhounds for bringing down deer?.. Should we ban greyhounds too?.

I agree with a lot of people here who say the wrong type of person goes after a pitbull, scangers in council estates ~ lets be honest about it.

They also drive their Honda civics like pricks, will be ban the Honda Civic or punish the dangerous driver?.

Looking macho, I'm not blowing my own trumpet here but I don't have the need to look 'macho'

How did I come to own a pitbull and a staffordshire?.. I wanted a dog a few years ago, the kids had grown up and I had the time to put into a dog. I got a phonecall from a volunteer in Ashtown pound to tell me that a ten week old pitbull was about to be put to sleep ~ Ashtown have a kill policy on bull breeds and won't rehome them unless they're being sent out of the country.

So I got the dog out, I'd to sneak it out because the pound manager wanted the dog (to kill it).

I had him for 18 months and through owning a pitbull I became more aware of the benefits of owning a bully.. Then I was told about a Staffordshire who's parents were working dogs who needed homing, so I bought 'Ruby ~ Yes Darced Ruby is a Staffordshire and not a pitbull :eek:

Owning a bull breed is hugely rewarding, the big downside is ignorance of the breed and hearing opinions expressed by stupid people.

Whats funny is that a Garda asked me about ''those Pitbulls'' one morning, I told him the red & white was a staffy and the brindle & white was a Jack Russell who'd grown fat and tall.. The stupid cop gave me dietary advice for my Jack Russell lol.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 03-04-2013 9:21am

Arawn wrote: »

A staffie bull terrier. Which is a "pitbull"

:pac:

03-04-2013 9:29am

dodderangler wrote: »

and I fully believe this as its same way with wolves

One guy threw a bunch of strange wolves together once and did a "study" which may have said that
Wolves do not go around killing each other for lols

Nodin · 03-04-2013 9:32am

I'll have to update the list of "usual suspects" to include an animal section now.....

Sofiztikated · 03-04-2013 9:42am

Nodin wrote: »

I'll have to update the list of "usual suspects" to include an animal section now.....

Oh good, you and Mak are up. I've kept watch during the night. The turrets are armed, and napalm is ready, in case a terrier walks past, and it needs to be violently, senselessly butchered.

danbrosnan · 03-04-2013 9:50am

I have kept pitbulls, staffs and bum terriers all my life, they should not be kept in a family home under no circumstances. Dogs had a purpose before people came along and made them pets. Pitbulls are breed for fighting but the dog is the owners responsibilty at all times

arybvtcw0eolkf · 03-04-2013 9:51am

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Oh good, you and Mak are up. I've kept watch during the night. The turrets are armed, and napalm is ready, in case a terrier walks past, and it needs to be violently, senselessly butchered.

I only stayed up late because some people were wrong on the internet I have a day in lieu this morning

And no matter how I try, sleep in's just don't happen for me.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 03-04-2013 9:52am

danbrosnan wrote: »

I have kept pitbulls, staffs and bum terriers all my life

You're sh*tting me man?.

Nodin · 03-04-2013 10:01am

danbrosnan wrote: »

I have kept pitbulls, staffs and bum terriers all my life, they should not be kept in a family home under no circumstances. Dogs had a purpose before people came along and made them pets. Pitbulls are breed for fighting but the dog is the owners responsibilty at all times

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmcdLEnhSi8

arybvtcw0eolkf · 03-04-2013 10:06am

Noddy I wasn't going to stop listening to Leonard Cohen for that, but I did and its funny

Wibbs · 03-04-2013 10:24am

woodoo wrote: »

If you were enter a garden and get attacked by a jack russell or a pit bull which would scare you the most. There is a massive difference between a bite from a jack russell and a bite from a pitt

"pitbulls" and similar have actually an average bite. A German Shepherd would be higher as would a Doberman and a Rotweiller. Something like an Irish Wolfhound would be much higher. It's down to basic biomechanics of the jaw and head. Those breeds would also have bigger teeth too.

bluewolf wrote: »

One guy threw a bunch of strange wolves together once and did a "study" which may have said that
Wolves do not go around killing each other for lols

+1. The initial Alpha stuff was based on captive packs, often made up of unrelated adolescents. It would be akin to putting a bunch of unsupervised teenagers together and suggesting that's how human society works. The researcher who came up with the original study has backed away from it and is very vocal about how wrong he was. In the wild, it's incredibly rare for wolves to kill pack members. For a good reason, the pack is an extended family. The "alphas" are the parents and it's not about "dominance" it's about deference. No doubt there are blokes reading this who could kick the crap out of their dad, doesn't mean they do. The kids can squabble among themselves alright, but it rarely ends up in injury and usually other family members dive in to break the crap up. The canine equivalent of "ahhhh leave it oooot lads FFS".

I would however agree that kids and dogs can be a bad mix at times, because of such squabbles. The dog can cause more damage than it may intend. Hell even a really friendly spaniel could hurt a child just by jumping on them playfully. Plus dogs can generally read each other, many humans can't read dog and few kids could so mistakes in communication can lead to problems. EG kids going to hug a dog. Big no no. To a dog a hug is very uncomfortable. You'll see them lick their lips or yawn which are signals of this. Ignore them and you might get a warning bite. Ditto for leaning over and getting face to face with a dog. It's really uncomfortable to them. I dunno like standing in a queue and the bloke behind is brushing his crotch against your back uncomfortable. Hell even patting a dog on the head is not so good. Again it's not comfortable for them especially from a stranger.

TBH I'm very surprised more people aren't attacked or killed by dogs more often. They're remarkably reluctant to kick off aggression given they are an apex predator that is 99.9% wolf. Try hugging a tame human socialised wolf and it would let you know you're being a bit previous, yet you see people hugging dogs all the time. I mean look at cats. Great yokes altogether, but if a cat is uncomfortable with something you're doing you'll usually know about it with scratches and bites. Dead right too. Horses can be similar and being so big can seriously ruin your day. Yet no one would be quick to suggest we put them down, yet one warning nip from a dog and the Maud Flanders bedwetting handwringers are out in force "thinking about the children" and leeching themselves onto any tragedy with almost autoerotic vigour.

Dyr · 03-04-2013 10:31am

Lisa Broad Door wrote: »

You're sh*tting me man?.

Makes sense, terriers were bred for fearlessly going into holes

Dyr · 03-04-2013 10:32am

Wibbs wrote: »

"pitbulls" and similar have actually an average bite. A German Shepherd would be higher as would a Doberman and a Rotweiller. Something like an Irish Wolfhound would be much higher. It's down to basic biomechanics of the jaw and head. Those breeds would also have bigger teeth too.

It's not abut the bite, pits have big heads and massive necks, which makes them quite the challenge when they latch onto something and start shaking it

meoklmrk91 · 03-04-2013 10:37am

OP let me tell you a story about a pitbull I used to know, he also killed his owners other dog. From the time he was a puppy he was brought up as a fighting dog, when they were blooding him they, believing the myth that pitbulls have locking jaws, used a metal bar to pry his jaws open resulting in him having most of his teeth broken and some missing. He has scars all over his body from being fought against other dogs, what he was TRAINED to do. Then when they were done with him they were going to shoot him but a guy I know took him instead.

He was completely incapable of dealing with this poor dog, but then I think most people would be. They had him for a couple of years and ended up getting another dog,a small terrier, and they lived together without incident until one day they came back to find the JRT dead. It was their fault, they knew the background of this dog and still left the other In harms way, he was trained to do this from a pup, it was all he ever knew.

Now what is to say that your neighbours dog didn't have the same experience before she got him, she does not know his backround. It is not these poor dogs that a mentally unhinged it is the sub human creeps that treat them with the most unimaginable cruelty.

I have known dogs of all breeds who could be trusted around other dogs, some sight hounds are like this especially at first as all they have ever known about smaller animals was to give chase. I also once saw a St. Bernard bite and pick a staffie up by its head and could very easily have killed him if someone had not intervened, this was without any provocation. What about dogs who will kill a cat? Are they mentally unhinged too? Talk about humanising animals, your neighbour who has been around dogs all their lives should educate themselves.

starlings · 03-04-2013 10:43am

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH I'm very surprised more people aren't attacked or killed by dogs more often. They're remarkably reluctant to kick off aggression given they are an apex predator that is 99.9% wolf. Try hugging a tame human socialised wolf and it would let you know you're being a bit previous, yet you see people hugging dogs all the time. I mean look at cats. Great yokes altogether, but if a cat is uncomfortable with something you're doing you'll usually know about it with scratches and bites. Dead right too. Horses can be similar and being so big can seriously ruin your day. Yet no one would be quick to suggest we put them down, yet one warning nip from a dog and the Maud Flanders bedwetting handwringers are out in force "thinking about the children" and leeching themselves onto any tragedy with almost autoerotic vigour.

you were being so reasonable up till the last sentence. The thread was started about an attack that caused serious injury, and follows one from last week about a girl who died after suffering an attack by several dogs.

That does tend to bring out the violent fantasies in people - you see they're empathising with the people in these reports, not the misunderstood, mishandled dogs.

I see the same thing from the animal-lovers on a facebook page for a local shelter: any time a photo or report is posted about an abused animal there is a torrent of violence wished upon the people who harmed the animal.

it's an over-reaction in both cases, but to dismiss where it's coming from isn't helping much. As far as I can see there is a consensus on the need for better, enforced controls on dog ownership. But no, why do that when we can spend all night splitting hairs about breed types and sniping at anyone who disagrees about lovely Fido.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 03-04-2013 10:55am

Meo that reminds me of the day I got Ruby, my Staffy.

She comes from a very old and well known working dog line, her mother for example couldn't be kept with another animal because she'd kill it.

When the breeder (he's a mate I was training with at the time) was giving me Ruby he warned me "M.. be very careful, she'll be super around children but its in her breeding to kill another animals and she'll kill your cat inside a year''.

I told him she'd never see a moments aggression in her life, and she hasn't. She's the sweetest example of any dog you'll ever meet.. the only thing he got right is that she'll be a poor guard dog because she won't be a barker, apparently a good working dog is also a quiet dog ~ there's rarely a whisper from her.

My Pit is like any male dog. He's very alfa male, and protective of the home and territorial.. I have absolutely no doubt if anyone ~ man, woman, child or animal came onto the premises uninvited he'd got through them.. But thats what I'd expect most dogs to do.

Do I trust either dog alone in the company of a child?.. No on your Nelly, I wouldn't trust any kind of dog to be left alone with a child regardless the breed or how placid I thought it was.

I'd said it before, the only reason a dog doesn't bite is because it doesn't want to. But running away or biting are a dogs only defence so given the right circumstances and all dogs will attack.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 03-04-2013 11:04am

starlings wrote: »

As far as I can see there is a consensus on the need for better, enforced controls on dog ownership.

And how do you do that?.

Responsible owners of any breed are the one's who socialize their dogs, license them, get their regular health checks done and act in a responsible manner.

Do you think Anto, Pado, John'er & Deano hanging around the shops and fields give a tuppenny's fook about any of that?.

dark crystal · 03-04-2013 11:06am

starlings wrote: »

you were being so reasonable up till the last sentence. The thread was started about an attack that caused serious injury, and follows one from last week about a girl who died after suffering an attack by several dogs.

it's an over-reaction in both cases, but to dismiss where it's coming from isn't helping much. As far as I can see there is a consensus on the need for better, enforced controls on dog ownership. But no, why do that when we can spend all night splitting hairs about breed types and sniping at anyone who disagrees about lovely Fido.

The amount of sympathy and empathy for the 'poor dogs' on this thread also far outweighs any sympathy expressed for the actual victim of the attack.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 03-04-2013 11:14am

dark crystal wrote: »

The amount of sympathy and empathy for the 'poor dogs' on this thread also far outweighs any sympathy expressed for the actual victim of the attack.

The OP never asked for sympathy for the child, he just went on a knee jerk rant and called for the culling of an entire breed of dog.

The entire thread, including your post lacks any sympathy for the victim because thats not what the thread is about.

starlings · 03-04-2013 11:17am

Lisa Broad Door wrote: »

And how do you do that?.

Responsible owners of any breed are the one's who socialize their dogs, license them, get their regular health checks done and act in a responsible manner.

Do you think Anto, Pado, John'er & Deano hanging around the shops and fields give a tuppenny's fook about any of that?.

well now, this is the right question, IMO, not whether a particular dog breed is more aggressive than another.

Anyone adopting a dog from the shelter near me gets a home visit to make sure they have the right amount of space, and a chat to see if they know what they're doing. If not, no dog.

We have dog wardens who could do the same thing as part of the application for licenses. They should be following up on the lads hanging around the shops and fields, but they're not. I have no idea how they plan to enforce the new microchipping laws, but it will provide a good database.

I don't think Anto & co. care, but you and the other responsible dog owners do - especially when there's a call to ban the breeds you love - so I would support any efforts made by responsible owners to enforce controls and to share their expertise in further legislation.

Melion · 03-04-2013 11:18am

Wow what a bunch of absolute cretins in this thread

Gringo180 · 03-04-2013 11:18am

You can argue in favour of the pitbull till your blue in the face, but the facts are that this breed is responsible for the most human fatalities than any other breed, killing nearly double the amount of the rottweiler who comes second on the list.

Real Life · 03-04-2013 11:20am

As far as i know more humans have killed other humans than dogs have. I think there should be a ban on humans. you never know what they are capable of. The sooner the better our species is extinct.

TeddyTedson · 03-04-2013 11:20am

They shouldn't be banned, that's too extreme. They haven't killed that many kids yet. How about rebranding them, that's worked twice now with FAS. There's no reason why it can't be applied to a wide varying degree of world problems.

starlings · 03-04-2013 11:21am

Melion wrote: »

Wow what a bunch of absolute cretins in this thread

that's really helpful, thanks.

Melion · 03-04-2013 11:23am

Gringo180 wrote: »

You can argue in favour of the pitbull till your blue in the face, but the facts are that this breed is responsible for the most human fatalities than any other breed, killing nearly double the amount of the rottweiler who comes second on the list.

Should I tell my 3yr old that we are putting her dog to sleep because she is too dangerous simply because she is a staffie? That she can no longer cuddle beside her, can no longer take her for walks, can't feed or play with her anymore just because of a few clueless idiots with no experience of the breed say so?

Melion · 03-04-2013 11:23am

starlings wrote: »

that's really helpful, thanks.

About as helpful as people saying to exterminate an entire breed of dog because of a small few incidents.

Gringo180 · 03-04-2013 11:28am

Melion wrote: »

Should I tell my 3yr old that we are putting her dog to sleep because she is too dangerous simply because she is a staffie? That she can no longer cuddle beside her, can no longer take her for walks, can't feed or play with her anymore just because of a few clueless idiots with no experience of the breed say so?

I never said that they should be put asleep

Melion · 03-04-2013 11:29am

Gringo180 wrote: »

I never said that they should be put asleep

The op wants the breed exterminated

Gringo180 · 03-04-2013 11:36am

Melion wrote: »

The op wants the breed exterminated

I can see why people are calling for that but I wouldnt go that far myself, maybe they should have there sharpest teeth extracted when there fully matured if they are to be kept as a pet as I do believe this would lesson the injuries inflicted on a person or dog if they were to attack.

Melion · 03-04-2013 11:37am

Gringo180 wrote: »

I can see why people are calling for that but I wouldnt go that far myself, maybe they should have there sharpest teeth extracted when there fully matured if they are to be kept as a pet as I do believe this would lesson the injuries inflicted on a person or dog if they were to attack.

Ridiculous

Gringo180 · 03-04-2013 11:39am

Melion wrote: »

Ridiculous

What would you suggest so?

anncoates · 03-04-2013 11:41am

I wouldn't be one of those hysterical types that thinks all such dogs are killers (I know responsible owners with so called restricted breeds) but I think the amount of smug blame the owners types that sarcastically derail these threads are a little disingenuous for dodging the issue.

It's analogous to any rational discussion on speed control on roads being hijacked by smug drivers who are always at pains to assert that they are superior drivers therefore discussion of speed limits are an irrelevance.

Obviously these kind of dogs are grand when properly trained and bred but the fact is that many of them are not and they are more physically equipped than a lot of other breeds to be severely dangerous animals.

Fact is that it's not really about good or bad owners - no more than road fatalities being disproportionately clustered around certain demographics is about who is a good or bad driver: it's about the fact that accidents are happening and is your right to own a certain size of a dog (or to drive at a certain speed) more important that dodging the thorny issue of enforcing training, restrictions and whatnot.

Melion · 03-04-2013 11:42am

Gringo180 wrote: »

What would you suggest so?

Responsibility on the part of the owners!!!! It's not rocket science, I have a staffie and a boxer(2 bitches) , have never had a single incident between them. I have a 3yr old daughter who has never been bitten by either of my dogs. She gets bitten on a near daily basis by the Westie in her grandmothers house.

03-04-2013 11:54am

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Sofiztikated wrote: »

You should be fúcking muzzled in public.

banned

That was a ruff read.

Another week another Pit Bull attack

Comments