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
My personal view is the UK got it right regarding certain breeds, however there are still these breeds around in the UK.
https://www.lancs.live/news/lancashire-news/dog-breeds-banned-uk-what-24241056
Also just baning the sale and breeding of them in Ireland is highly unlikely to massively effect numbers world wide.
But why do we have to keep the breed "alive"?
Edit: and to be very clear, I'm not talking about exterminating any extant dogs.
most dogs period in common ownership are already neutered...
We could neuter all pitbulls in common ownership and only allow breeding for small number of select approved kennels. Keeps the breed alive but takes them out of the hands of the masses.
Then I cannot help you.
Presumably you're in the UK?
I kinda agree humans shouldn't reproduce as much. ;)
Dog breeds are a human invention, remember? Quite recently, in the last few 100 years only. We created all these breeds, bred those traits into them. This isn't an endangered natural creature, all dogs are created by us selectively breeding for traits. This isn't a panda whose bamboo habitat was removed. This is a genetically engineered creature.
How you think those hyperallergenic cockerpoo puppies come about? A poodle and a cocker spaniel aren't falling deeply in love and starting a family together...
As we have artificially created an animal which by it's nature rips the face and belly off a 9 year old child, I think we should take some responsibility, as humans. Take a step back and say, hey, you know what, maybe this one wasn't a super good idea.
That reply to my question doesn't make any sense, nor does it make any sense as a stand-alone post.
'Farmers are fully entitled to shoot dogs when they are out of control, in either a public or private land, under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.'
Fully within my rights
I agree to a point - dangerous breeds should be muzzled. But I think that some breeds are so dangerous that their ownership should be severely restricted. I can't understand why anyone would keep a pitbull as a pet. Other than perhaps for intimidation purposes.
You literally asked what's inhumane about exterminating 18 million dogs, though? And you don't see the connection? Oh, you don't want to see it. You see it as "jumping the shark" got it.
🙄 Ding ding ding, we have a winner folks.
I did wonder how this thread would jump the shark into total lunacy - here we have it. Vets putting down animals, or even animal culls (routinely done all over the world, incl. here in Ireland) is somehow comparable to the Holocaust. Wew
Spaying and neutering of pets is already commonplace and shelters already perform this as a matter of policy, in that regard there's no special enhancement available to 'neuter pit bulls twice' or something. As a result, if you eliminate all dog-fighting breeding, I think you'd still find pit bull in the dog gene pool.
What the actual hell overheal?
I'm aware you're just trying to 'win' an argument here, but that kind of language is not really necessary .
Are you against the general practice of neutering and spaying pets?
Simply not allowing the dogs to reproduce, say by neutering, is not "human experimentation on other sentient animals". You seem to have gone off on some weird tangent in your head that isn't grounded in reality.
There are 18 million pit bulls adopted in the United States today. What do we do with them when this ban comes into force? Are they euthanized en masse?
A ban on owning them and breeding them, strict penalties for those found in breach of that.
Demand will quickly fall away, and so will birthrates of pits. Those currently as household pets will have to be put down. What is inhumane about any of that?
"Vastly decrease" how, in what artful way are we excusing ourselves to repeat the same mistakes? Forced sterilization? Forced interbreeding? Culling? This isn't a rosemary bush we are talking about.
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.
That can occur naturally, though, not as a matter of humans engineering it to be. Stop breeding them, especially for fighting purposes, and these traits wont prevail.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Ah yes google results are the ultimate authority on all things dog
Tell me, what single dog breed causes highest % of human deaths?
It's no morally better though is it!
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 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...
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.
Remember it's not gangsta as long as you shout "Castle Doctrine!" first.
