[American Thinker] A short time ago, a well-meaning but foolish young couple in my town adopted a "rescue" dog from New Jersey. It was a heavy (60-80 lbs) two-year-old Pit Bull. Scary, but they had attended several training sessions learning how to bond with the animal and overcame their fright by telling themselves they were doing a good thing.
By "rescuing" it.
I suspect that the dog needed to be "rescued" because it had previously attacked people and so was in danger of being put down, but I don't know that. Regardless, this couple seemed not to have even inquired; instead, they completed their final bonding session and took him home. But from the first night alone with the animal, they were terrified by its foreboding presence. The thing seemed to stalking them from room to room inside their home.
Beyond frantic, the couple called the woman at the private shelter who had managed the adoption and asked her to take the dog back. She refused and instead offered them some advice about how to break through and made contact with the dog's inner happy puppy.
Well, that night, the Pit Bull did some breaking through on his own and severely mauled the man, who, without the timely arrival of deputy sheriffs and the local Fire Department, would have died a horrible death.
Just another Pit Bull story. My wife was severely bitten in the face by a Pit Bull while sitting at a client's kitchen table. Her offense? She made eye contact with the thing. My grandson was attacked and was luckily wearing clothing heavy enough to prevent injury before the Pit Bull was taken off him. A renter in a building next door would let his Pit Bull get out from time to time, and the thing would run onto my property, anxious to kill my Golden Retriever, Sparky, the friendliest dog in the world. Tired of talking to the local dog warden about the threat, I shot the Pit Bull in the butt with a .410 shotgun ‐ my mistake being that it wasn't a 12-gauge, because the thing managed to run off.
My experiences are all of a piece with the spread of these "pets."
#1
Pit bulls are a menace, I have had put down a couple of them for killing cattle, had 3 170 lbs calves killed in one night alone, owners refused to take responsibility for their animals.
#3
The big problem is of course is the owners. Pit Bulls along with certain other breeds seem to attract a certain type of owner. You know the type. The guy who wants the meanest nastiest dog he can get and trains the dog to be that. That said the Pit has a structual problem in its jaws from what I understand that do not allow it to open its jaws once it starts the bite. It must close them to open them. To the best of my knowledge own one and your home owners insurance takes a big hit
#4
I suspect that the dog needed to be "rescued" because it had previously attacked people and so was in danger of being put down, but I don't know that. Regardless, this couple seemed not to have even inquired...
I call that "culpable ignorance". Some dog lovers set up these situations by their stupidity & then act oh so innocent after the disaster that anyone with common sense could have foreseen.
I have cared for many dog bite victims in the ER, none from pit bull attacks. The last words the victims usually heard before the teeth set in were most often "s/he won't bite". Then s/he DID bite.
I've met some pit bulls that are sweethearts. If they are used to guard crack or dope houses, usually the pit bulls are not too friendly; the owners are not either.
There was a vid on Rantburg a few years ago back where a couple of pit bulls destroyed the front end of a Ford--chewed it off.
#8
Oh Jesus Christ. The vicious dog doesn't bite you because it knows you! For fucks sake! It's these other people it doesn't know, those are the ones it's going to bite!
Of course he's the most gentle dog because you are the people he knows. The rest of us aren't safe. Pit bulls are dogs specifically bred for fighting. Now that we don't have dog fighting any more outside of Mexico, pit bulls can be safely retired as a distinct breed.
#12
Harcourt Angoluting9366, he's that way with everybody. He will try to get in the lap of a total stranger. He doesn't have a mean bone in his body. He likes everybody he meets. We go to dog parades and to parks. He's great and yes, he is big at 110 pounds but he won't bite you.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
05/03/2017 11:33 Comments ||
Top||
#13
No Second Amendment for pit bulls. And the blood line will never end -- virtually every animal shelter mutt is part pit.
Posted by: regular joe ||
05/03/2017 12:04 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Besoeker, thank you from south Tucson. Your article is flawless. Except owners MEBBE having homeowners insurance - a big BWAHAHA to that.
#15
Good fences make good neighbors. Bad fences make dead dogs.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
05/03/2017 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Horrible breed owned (largely) by horrible people. If you own one of these bullshit animals and claim its lovey-dovey all of the time, you only have to be wrong ONCE before somebody gets horribly maimed or killed. That's not so with virtually any other breed (other than Rots and those equally horrible large Mastiffs).
I don't care to split hairs as to whether its the owner or its the dog--its the dog we're discussing in this thread.
#20
... other than Rots and those equally horrible large Mastiffs ....
Had a few Rotties including a couple of allegedly problem dogs from a rescue. Great companions every one. The rescues took a little work but nothing unusual, just socialization and being trained that they're not the alpha.
Handling & training Rotties, Pit Bulls, Mastiffs or other large dogs is no different than training Jack Russells, Chihuahuas, Dachshunds or the like. Given the same traning (dog & owner) the former group are usually less likely to bite than the latter. But as per usual a few bad owners ruin it for the rest of us who are responsible.
#21
Handling & training Rotties, Pit Bulls, Mastiffs or other large dogs is no different than training Jack Russells, Chihuahuas, Dachshunds or the like. Given the same traning (dog & owner) the former group are usually less likely to bite than the latter.
That's a bullshit logic train. "Less likely to bite" isn't the issue. Disfigurement and/or death when biting is.
#22
Oi vey, for obvious reasons, we never had a gun/anti-gun thread in 'Burg. So, now, we're going to have a dog/anti-dog one?
Disclosure: I'm a cat person, myself.
#24
Bred dogs for a while. Trained a bunch of 'em.
Temperament is about 75% inherited genetically. Most of the rest is due to experience up through 12 weeks of age. In nature that would be the litter and the mother interacting.
Training affects behavior at the margins, not at the core, in dogs.
Excerpt: [War On The Rocks] No other weapon shaped the battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan like the IED. It required that troops charged with enhancing population security confine themselves to massive, armored vehicles and travel at high rates of speed or plow through farmers’ fields to avoid roads entirely. It slowed dismounted troops forced to sweep with metal detectors and divert around empty intersections. It partitioned Baghdad with 12-foot high concrete walls and caused a fertilizer shortage for farmers in Afghanistan. It was the only insurgent weapon that could cause mass civilian casualties, undermining local governance, the credibility of counter-insurgent efforts, and ensuring a steady stream of atrocities -- of the horrors of intervention -- could be broadcast globally.
Whether you measure in blood or treasure, the IED also proved the costliest feature of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for American forces. 60 percent of all American fatalities in Iraq and half of all American fatalities in Afghanistan, more than 3,500 in total, were caused by IEDs. The same proportion holds for Americans who were wounded, totaling more than 30,000 service members. When history looks back on these wars, the dominant images will be of the aftermath of these improvised bombs, of their devastating effects on a Baghdad market or of veteran and Afghan amputees.
#1
Whether you call it a IED or booby trap or whatever, probably the single most effective land weapon in world is probably the land mine.
When you care enough to leave the very best.
Posted by: ed in texas ||
05/03/2017 8:45 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Mines and booby traps are always going to be some of the deadliest things an insurgent army can use.
That said, there are ways to get around them, if you don't mind getting rid of half the country side. In WWII we simply blew up a lot of the minefields with artillery and damn the villages near them. We didn't have that strategy in the boxes as we were trying to "save" the country and win hearts and minds.
#3
When history looks back on these wars, the dominant images will be of the aftermath of these improvised bombs, of their devastating effects on a Baghdad market or of veteran and Afghan amputees.
[Rush Limbaugh Show] RUSH: We welcome back to the program the vice president of the United States, Mike Pence. Welcome back, sir. Great to have you here with us today.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Rush Limbaugh, it is an honor to be with you always. Thanks for having me on.
RUSH: If this is what happens, Mr. Vice President, why vote Republican? What is the point of voting Republican if the Democrats are gonna continue to win practically 95% of their objectives, such as in this last budget deal?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, look, respectfully, Rush, I actually think this was, as the president said a little a while ago, I think this was actually a clear win for the American people. Look, you’ve had Washington, D.C., that has been, you know, paralyzed by gridlock and partisan infighting for many years, and in this new president you have someone who was able to bring people together and make a $21 billion increase in defense spending at a time of great challenge for America’s interests around the world. And that’s a -- you know, he spoke about that today, surrounded by a lot of great members of the United States Air Force. And it was also a piece for years, Democrats in Washington insisted that any increase in defense spending would be matched with an increase in domestic spending. Lengthy interview.
#2
So the dems wanted money and held the weak repubs hostage about being able to increase military spending, especially in the light of Iran and Norks.
And Congress has a bunker to hang out till the fallout diminishes why we get to see the action at ground zero.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
05/03/2017 16:45 Comments ||
Top||
[TRIBUNEINDIA] WITHIN a few months of taking over, Mighty Pak Army chiefs feel the need to send sharp messages to their country’s politicianship that they will not allow the dignity of the institution they lead to be trifled with. They also send signals both to their own elected government as well as to Delhi that the buck stops with them in the making of Pakistain’s India policy. Gen Qamar Bajwa who took over as the army chief five months ago has not been an exception. He has delivered messages on both fronts.
Last October, the Dawn newspaper reported that at a top level meeting where PM Nawaz Sharif ... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf... was present his brother, the powerful chief minister of Punjab, Shahbaz Sharif
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
05/03/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[15 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
A cat person you say ? 
