Double Agent

Another Pit Bull Attack

Recommended Posts

Actually he was pointing out, quite coherently I might add, that many of the decisions that we make in our day to day lives COULD have fatal consequences to our children.

 

I also award you no points.

 

In case you didn't catch it, I was quoting one of the best movies of all time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Though that's a really cute post, it has absolutely nothing to do with the argument at hand. But if you want to play it that way fine:

 

Any parent who leaves his child with a nanny, a babysitter, friend or a relative is an absolute moron.

 

These people have the free will to rape your son or daughter.

 

And I am sure that child abuse, especially by someone close to the family, happens a lot more than pitbull attacks.

 

I beleive that that is game, set, match on that counterargument. If you would like to address the original argument be my guest

Well, yours is not only not cute but f'ing inane.

 

We don't have a choice as to whether we will subject our children to other people. That is part of being alive. There is no predictors of who might abuse a child. Hell, should one parent never leave their kids with the other? Maybe that parent is the rapist that will abuse their child someday. There are certain things one can't control. At some point, a parent will have to trust their kids with somebody. Be it a teacher, babysitter, nanny, or another family member. All they can do is check it out before they do. Would you leave your kids with a roided up dude who's family has a history of beating and raping kids? I mean, this guy hasn't done anything wrong but it would be hard to pick him over somebody with less baggage.

 

Ditto with a car, as now two of you dumbasses have bothered to bring up. You pretty much need to put your kids in a car at some point. Now, are you going to put them in a car with bad brakes and no seat belt or are you going to put them in a well serviced and safe auto? That's the correlation. I know you'd love the correlation to be a mini-van vs a ferrari and remind us that a ferrari can be driven every bit as safely as any other car, but mine is more accurate. Like a dog, you don't know when your brakes are going to fail you. You do know, that certain cars (ie those that have been poorly taken care of) are more likely than others. Similarly, you never know when you're going to need a seat belt. You can be careful but you may get hit. Thus, your chances of them working when you need them go way up if, in fact, you actually have them. This is the difference between owning a dog that is bred to be a great attack dog and one that is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fixed :D

:wacko: That's just on one cup...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sac, that's not game set and match. There is not comparison as to how human relative/friend will act and how a dog will conduct itself. Your point is downright silly.

 

 

I'll walk you through this one slowly:

 

1) someone points out that a lot of human behaviour that is deemed acceptable is really dangerous to children (albeit he made is point in a slightly exagerated fashion) so perhaps one should think of owning a pitbull as human behavior that while having some intrinsic risk to it, it is no greater than much bahavior that we fully accept. So perhaps calling parents who own dogs morons is probably unfair.

 

2) he is assailed and totally dismissed for making that argument ("the most insanely idiotic thing I have ever heard")

 

3) I find the retort to be totally out of whack with what is being said, especially since this is an interesting argument that probably doesn't deserve the dismissive response it got. I bring up all of the things that we do for our own convenience that have inherent risks for our children pointing out that if you think dogownership with a child is irresponsible than you also need to look at all of the other things we do that pose risks to our children

 

4) your reply is totally dismissive ("why this is dumb") and bring in free will and soul. Which has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the argument. Remember the point being made is that if parents are considered irresponsible for owning pitbulls, they should be comsidered irresponsible for all of the other activities that have an inherent risk to their children's well being

 

5) I post back that since you think the argument is about things that we let into our household that have free will and can be dangerous to our children (it's not) than any parent who lets in a relative, nanny etc.. into their house is irresponsible as there is a long history of abuse happening at the hands of these people.

 

So once again, if you would like to debate the original point, by all means, but calling things "dumb" and "silly" especially when you brought some weak stuff to the table is not really good arguing.

 

 

 

 

As to the original point of the thread (4 pages ago), I do think that pitbulls are more dangerous than other breeds of dog. I do think that they pose a risk to young children. I think it's a very very small risk, and I'm willing to live with it. In the same way I am willing to let my mother take care of my son (which has a small risk to it) or that I still drink hot coffee (which has a small risk of burning my child), or that I leave my child with a nanny 4 hours a day (which has a small risk to it) etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So once again, if you would like to debate the original point, by all means, but calling things "dumb" and "silly" especially when you brought some weak stuff to the table is not really good arguing.

 

I think what you are missing is that you brought the weak stuff to the table. Stuff like plastic bags.

 

Pitbulls eat faces off of children. Plastic bags pretty much sit there. Unless someone picks them up. Or unless there is wind. When there is wind, plastic bags really get their "doing stuff" on. ETA: But I still don't think the wind makes them eat faces off of children.

Edited by Caveman_Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think what you are missing is that you brought the weak stuff to the table. Stuff like plastic bags.

 

Pitbulls eat faces off of children. Plastic bags pretty much sit there. Unless someone picks them up. Or unless there is wind. When there is wind, plastic bags really get their "doing stuff" on.

Plastic bags in the wind inspire pot heads with nazi fathers to film them. This never ends up good as somebody ends up getting shot. Bad example Nick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll walk you through this one slowly:

 

1) someone points out that a lot of human behaviour that is deemed acceptable is really dangerous to children (albeit he made is point in a slightly exagerated fashion) so perhaps one should think of owning a pitbull as human behavior that while having some intrinsic risk to it, it is no greater than much bahavior that we fully accept. So perhaps calling parents who own dogs morons is probably unfair.

 

2) he is assailed and totally dismissed for making that argument ("the most insanely idiotic thing I have ever heard")

 

3) I find the retort to be totally out of whack with what is being said, especially since this is an interesting argument that probably doesn't deserve the dismissive response it got. I bring up all of the things that we do for our own convenience that have inherent risks for our children pointing out that if you think dogownership with a child is irresponsible than you also need to look at all of the other things we do that pose risks to our children

 

4) your reply is totally dismissive ("why this is dumb") and bring in free will and soul. Which has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the argument. Remember the point being made is that if parents are considered irresponsible for owning pitbulls, they should be comsidered irresponsible for all of the other activities that have an inherent risk to their children's well being

 

5) I post back that since you think the argument is about things that we let into our household that have free will and can be dangerous to our children (it's not) than any parent who lets in a relative, nanny etc.. into their house is irresponsible as there is a long history of abuse happening at the hands of these people.

 

So once again, if you would like to debate the original point, by all means, but calling things "dumb" and "silly" especially when you brought some weak stuff to the table is not really good arguing.

 

 

 

 

As to the original point of the thread (4 pages ago), I do think that pitbulls are more dangerous than other breeds of dog. I do think that they pose a risk to young children. I think it's a very very small risk, and I'm willing to live with it. In the same way I am willing to let my mother take care of my son (which has a small risk to it) or that I still drink hot coffee (which has a small risk of burning my child), or that I leave my child with a nanny 4 hours a day (which has a small risk to it) etc...

 

That is where you are being an irresponsible parent if you ask me. You have conceded that you do believe that pits are more dangerous than other dogs. With the wide variety of breeds that are available why take the dog at the top of the dangerous breed list? Why would you take even the smallest risk in this regard to your children when you can find an equally lovable dog of another breed that will not be the same risk to your child? Attempting to equate this behavior to allowing your mother to watch your child are drinking hot coffee is ludicrous (at best).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Plastic bags in the wind inspire pot heads with nazi fathers to film them. This never ends up good as somebody ends up getting shot. Bad example Nick.

 

:wacko:

 

Well, there was men kissing in that movie. And Sac is French and all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because it appears that you're on record as saying that pits are a victim of media witch hunts. Yet, you find it laughable that somebody would take issue with an entire city's fans being painted with a broad brush and yet are prepared to ignore data that supports the fact that pits are among the most dangerous breeds.

 

Sorry, but I stopped reading here.

 

I would not be comfortable with pits around my kids.

 

I think my stance is pretty clear about if I think they're dangerous or not based on my quote above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Though that's a really cute post, it has absolutely nothing to do with the argument at hand. But if you want to play it that way fine:

 

Any parent who leaves his child with a nanny, a babysitter, friend or a relative is an absolute moron.

 

These people have the free will to rape your son or daughter.

 

And I am sure that child abuse, especially by someone close to the family, happens a lot more than pitbull attacks.

 

I beleive that that is game, set, match on that counterargument. If you would like to address the original argument be my guest

 

:wacko: one of the weaker rationalizations of a bad decision I can remember.

 

when you hire a babysitter, do you print out the local sex offenders registry and start going down the list to see who's available? because that is pretty much a true equivalent. having a bottle of windex under the sink? not so much.

 

I ain't gonna bust your balls any more than that, but, dude, I hope you take every imaginable precaution with the dog and the tyke, and never EVER leave them alone together for even a second before the kid is in his late teens and understands how to control dogs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an austrailian shepherd/lab mix. I have trained her to kill with only a thought. My children know this and they don't fk with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you really arguing that because children are exposed to a variety of other risks that this some how mitigates the risk they face when they are around pit bulls? Is that what you are saying?

 

All the "dangers" you mentioned I can control.

 

As to the baby sitter, nanny, etc ... that is why you don't leave your child with somebody you don't know or for whom you have excellent references.

 

 

It sounds to me like you aren't a parent either.

 

Only someone who suffers from a god complex really beleives that they can control their environm.... Oh, hey grits, I didn't realize it was you :D

 

And no, I did not say that having other risks mitigates this risk. The argument, one more time, is that those who are dismissive of parents with pitbulls should look at all the other behavior we find acceptable but that in fact are intrinsically dangerous.

 

And as to sitters nannys. You have got to be kidding me. Yeah references are what filters out abuserse :wacko: oh and a VAST majority of abuse w children happens at the hands of realtives or close friends of the family.

 

And lastly, if you had read my posts you would realize that I am par.....Oh shoot, I forgot, this is Grits you never read the whole threads :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but I stopped reading here.

color me surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have an austrailian shepherd/lab mix. I have trained her to kill with only a thought. My children know this and they don't fk with me.

sage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have an austrailian shepherd/lab mix. I have trained her to kill with only a thought. My children know this and they don't fk with me.

 

 

Your dog is very fair and arbitrary. She usually gives due process before she bites someone on the ass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only someone who suffers from a god complex really beleives that they can control their environm.... Oh, hey grits, I didn't realize it was you :D

 

And no, I did not say that having other risks mitigates this risk. The argument, one more time, is that those who are dismissive of parents with pitbulls should look at all the other behavior we find acceptable but that in fact are intrinsically dangerous.

 

And as to sitters nannys. You have got to be kidding me. Yeah references are what filters out abuserse :wacko: oh and a VAST majority of abuse w children happens at the hands of realtives or close friends of the family.

 

And lastly, if you had read my posts you would realize that I am par.....Oh shoot, I forgot, this is Grits you never read the whole threads :D

 

Fine ... you take the risk of putting your child with a pit bull. I'll take the risk of having my child in the car with me, or having cleaner in the house.

 

Do you let your kids play with fire too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
color me surprised.

 

That's it, huh? You try to come off as cute and clever at my expense and when I show you that your wrong you insult me. Nice. Duly noted. I used to enjoy arguing with you, it's unfortunate that you've decided to challenge Bronco Billy and Az for leader of the condescending pricks this morning.

 

Oh well, carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only someone who suffers from a god complex really beleives that they can control their environm.... Oh, hey grits, I didn't realize it was you :D

 

And no, I did not say that having other risks mitigates this risk. The argument, one more time, is that those who are dismissive of parents with pitbulls should look at all the other behavior we find acceptable but that in fact are intrinsically dangerous.

 

And as to sitters nannys. You have got to be kidding me. Yeah references are what filters out abuserse :wacko: oh and a VAST majority of abuse w children happens at the hands of realtives or close friends of the family.

 

And lastly, if you had read my posts you would realize that I am par.....Oh shoot, I forgot, this is Grits you never read the whole threads :D

What you are missing is that we aren't saying that having a dog if you have kids is a bad idea. Rather that choosing a specific breed that is selected for it's ability to rip your head off is the part we're not on board with. You're correct, you can't protect your kids from everything. But we don't have to specifically choose to subject them to the most dangerous versions of things. That is the issue at hand. Grits might have gone overboard on the whole control thing but I don't think that was his point. Well, it's not mine. My issue with pits is not that they're less controllable and more inclined to confuse their role in the family. Rather that, the consequences of that inevitable confusion is much more grave. Hell, it's not like I can get my dogs to do whatever I want whenever I want them to, but it doesn't matter that much. Nobody's going to end up without a face as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets just end this discussion and kill all the pit bulls in the world make them extinct because people are irresponsible.

 

Thats the solution most want...makes me ill to be honest.

 

Forget about how many families in this world DO have Pits and are very happy...let just kill them all because there have been known attacks. Lets ban alcohol too. It is dangereous and I dont want my kids playing with that so instead of being a responsible parent I want it banned.

 

Lets not stop there what else can we get rid of to make this a safe planet?

\

Lets ban full contact football....way to dangereous. What if my kid wants to play in highschool and something happens.

Edited by MrTed46

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I own dogs. I have kids. I believe pits get a bad rap from the media, and inbreeding by the Mike Vick's of the world doesn't help. I would not be comfortable with pits around my kids.

Well gee Hugh, I guess I'm just guilty of taking you on your word. My bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well gee Hugh, I guess I'm just guilty of taking you on your word. My bad.

 

You honestly don't think that pitbulls get a bad rap from the media?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You honestly don't think that pitbulls get a bad rap from the media?

 

 

The media does that? :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well gee Hugh, I guess I'm just guilty of taking you on your word. My bad.

 

Did you somehow skip the very next sentence in your own quote, though?

 

:wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only someone who suffers from a god complex really beleives that they can control their environm.... Oh, hey grits, I didn't realize it was you :D

 

And no, I did not say that having other risks mitigates this risk. The argument, one more time, is that those who are dismissive of parents with pitbulls should look at all the other behavior we find acceptable but that in fact are intrinsically dangerous.

 

And as to sitters nannys. You have got to be kidding me. Yeah references are what filters out abuserse :wacko: oh and a VAST majority of abuse w children happens at the hands of realtives or close friends of the family.

 

And lastly, if you had read my posts you would realize that I am par.....Oh shoot, I forgot, this is Grits you never read the whole threads :D

 

I think you're missing the fact that although our word does have other intrinsic dangers, those other dangers we consciously put ourselves in are somewhat predictable and controllable. A hot cup of coffee will remain a hot cup of coffee, an inanimate bottle of 409 will remain that way. However, a "lovable" pit bull, may not always remain that way. If I were to watch my child every second that he is awake, I would be able make sure he doesn't drink 409 or touch the hot cup of coffee. But even if I were to sit a few feet away while he was near a pit bull (or any other dog for that matter), there's no way I could out race a dog to my son's face.

 

Dogs can be very unpredictable. Even more so than a nanny or your mother. While a nanny and your mother are both "animals" like your pit, they know the difference between right and wrong. If your baby tugs at grandma's dress, she's not going to react like a dog would when it gets its ears or tail pulled. Dogs react with what they have... paws and teeth. They don't really have higher cognitive abilities like a human.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ya know sac, the more I think about this, I think you are right. because like with my 6 month old in the car, she doesn't like sitting in the back seat not being able to see anyone. so I just put her in the front seat in her bumbo so she can look out the window and stuff. I keep hearing that this is dangerous, especially with no seat belt (it just rubs on her face) and the passenger airbag active (I cna't figure out how to turn the damn thing off); but I know that I am an excellent driver, fully able to avoid accidents. so there's no problem. sometimes people criticize me for putting my kid in danger, but I ask them, do you have cleaner in your house? have you ever left your kid with a babysitter? well that shuts them right up, I tell you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.