A pit bull dog below in Wexford the latest episode of a child been savaged . Are these dogs suitable for pets .
PS The only people with Pitbulls or similar in our town are involved in drug dealing and or general criminality.
Threadbanned Posters:
xhomelezz
Anyone that needs a pitbull to protect their home must have nefarious activity going on. The irony most of those wannabe gangstas don't even leave their damn homes.
Sure a yappy bichon or Jack Russell is just as effective at deterring intruders with their barking, and at least aren't capable of ripping your throat out.
No, it's not. You can't just bend laws to suit situations.
We don't "need" many breeds, are you going to suggest we take steps to eradicate any other breed without specific purposes too? Or just this one?
Every dog, indeed every animal, has fighting instincts, some have more than others. It's called survival. Some species that could kill you with one swipe of a paw are being bred in captivity to prevent their decline and extinction, yet here people want to wipe out an entire breed of dog as they see it as having "no purpose".
Humans are the most vicious animals of all. Maybe it's unethical for us to keep having babies.
I'll leave it there, as I can see this is going nowhere.
Thats a load of waffle if ever I've seen it. Lab's are not just as likely to bite people as any breed, your obviously spouting on about something you have no clue about.
Labs make some of the best service dogs precisely because of their even temper and ability withstand a lot more abuse than other breeds of dogs.
Sorry to hear that - wonderful dogs that only Ireland, Ukraine and I believe Bermuda have classified as restricted. 5 months and 2 years since we said bye bye to Scaramanga. Not a day goes by without him being thought of.
A private individual has no business owing a pitbull as a pet. At least not without a specialist license. Collies are bred to herd animals, as a German Shepherds. Both are large dogs who could cause damage in an attack but they're not specifically bred to do so. Pitbulls were bred to fight and kill. They don't really have a purpose in modern Ireland. Especially not as pets. I grew up with all kinds of dogs, pets, working dogs and gun dogs. None of the breeds were ever bred to kill like a pitbull is. Worst I ever got was a nip from the dogs. Why, because they're not bred killers. In this incident the pitbull was beaten off the child by a grown man with a bat, he'd have been killed only for it. I can't see how anyone could justify owning a pitbull, what is the logic there?
Bull dogs were. Bull Terriers came later when the good Dr. Hinks (from Mullingar) bred specific ones with specific English white terriers, known for it's speed & hunting skills with a bit of Dalmation & greyhound thrown in for balance & agility... This amazing fast resulting, forced hybrid vigour that the victorians were so fond of resulted in the first (of many future breeds) of bull terriers. These were used to fight each other in a pit. Hence the name. They inexplicably made good pets for humans and kept vermin at bay.
These little scrappers are a far cry from the XL over muscled giants coming from Stateside and should only be owned by experienced dog owners that know how to treat a dog correctly. However, as I stated before, the big XL ones are being snapped up by post pubescent boys that walk around with their hands in their tracksuit pants & rely on their parents to raise their unplanned children. In most cases the dogs are more powerful than the owner when they're half grown.
They're cluelessness in life supersedes their cluelessness of dog ownership, yet they're buying the biggest, most powerful breeds ever developed.
Who's talking about bending the law. You walk around with a knife or a gun threatening people, that is an offence under this https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1990/act/12/enacted/en/print.html
You walk around with a dangerous breed like a pit bull and intimidate people and you say it's not?
Conviction under Section 3 ("Assault Causing Harm") of that Act can carry a sentence of 5 years in prison. Conviction under Section 4 ("Causing Serious Harm") of that Act can carry a sentence of life imprisonment.
The dog-owner was arrested under Section 4.
He won't get life obviously, but I'd be surprised and disappointed if it's just a slap on the wrist.
Neither do I, but pit bulls are not guard dogs, they are attack dogs.
So, if you want a dog to protect your home get another breed.
I have a lurcher - she does a great job.
We need to eradicate all breeds that were created for fighting.
Simple.
Any dangerous animal coming onto my land is fair game for shooting.
So that’s more eugenics then.
That’s also practicing eugenics.
A terrible injury inflicted on this poor young lad.The dogd owner must face some penalty.
obviously, no. its is not
Eugenics - Wikipedia
So you will essentially shoot any animal you see on your property?!
Yeah, it really is, just by any other name, on another living thing with sentience we've excused ourselves to play God on.
If the was muzzled as the law in Ireland is ,the young lad would not have suffered such terrible life changing injuries.The authorities are too lax in enforcing the dangerous dog rules in Ireland.Every day I see people walking Alsations,Pit Bulls without muzzles in my town.
Did you shoot a man in Reno just to watch him die?
Remember it's not gangsta as long as you shout "Castle Doctrine!" first.
I am saying this as a person who does not like these dogs on any level.
But, all the talk of banning and criminalising a breed is pure nonsense. It would never actually work in reality because there are way too many people who would breed and sell them at a premium on the black market and in horrible conditions worse than what they do already. I fully understand the anger, but euthanising a breed for being a certain type is not ethical behaviour either to be fair.
The owners need to bear the full consequences when they do harm to anyone such that it is them actually doing the harm. The owner of this animal should face lengthy prison sentence. And if it has'nt been legislated for then we need to correct that in a big way.
A special permit required for owning a dangerous breed with a large fine for not having one if found with a dog like this in your possession.
It's funny when you google if pit bulls are a good guard dog most all of the results say no, because they are too friendly around people...
The existence of various domestic animal breeds in the first place is due to selective breeding practices, ending the propagation of an artificial breed isn't morally worse.
It's no morally better though is it!
Ah yes google results are the ultimate authority on all things dog
Tell me, what single dog breed causes highest % of human deaths?
I didn't say it was an authority, I said it was funny.
We've all been reading the thread, get off your soap box.
It is. Choosing not to continue artificially breeding a particular breed of dog to reduce the risk of attack on innocent people is a morally positive action.
Thorough stats in the US for the basis of discussion in that regard:
It's one thing to end selective breeding practices it's another to continue selective-breeding to wipe them out of the gene pool. That seems like something that should be allowed to occur naturally through normal course, not through human experimentation on other sentient animals.
The only soapboxing is yourself on about eugenics 😂
Technically all animal and plant rearing across the history of man has been eugenics in action - why is it so bad to vastly decrease the numbers of a proven dangerous breed of domestic dog?
There is no such thing as "normal" when it comes to human pets - most breeds were created to target some desirable characteristics, and plenty of breeds have died out in the past too as a result. The fact that humans have moved on from archaic practices like pit fighting dogs is plenty of reason to see pitbulls start to disappear from the gene pool.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d5a8197d7274f92eab37915a6d9f12a1.svg)
