Your vote is needed

Should "dangerous" dogs be banned?

http://ninemsn.com.au/

 

The actual question is "Should dangerous dog breeds be banned?" Well, lol, what is the logical answer to that? How slanted can ya get? No mention of which breeds are "dangerous" like maybe Presa Canario's or something?

 

Nothing gets past Suki. I voted long ago and it just doesnt seem to get any better.

 

I voted no. need about 47,000 more no's. I think some people should be banned though. Or at least neutered and spayed, some euthanized whe every one in a prison should be euthanized. Help save taxes. So we can have better roads and schools

 

i voted no but it doesnt seem like the right question. i mean i dont like people aggressive dogs. i geuss you have to vote no because everyone will just take it out on the Pitbull.

 

i couldnt find it all that i could see was do i text messege.

 

I can't find the place to vote either.

 

Define "Dangerous"

 

Can't find it here either?????

 

THANK YOU!!!!!


A dog can only be deemed dangerous by his actions, not by his breed, as we all know. So its a loaded friggin question.
This whole thing can be solved with common sense. If a dog poses a danger because he continually bites everyone in the house and took off the mailman's pinky- then DUH! Put him down, ban it to an island, whatever. Pekingnese or Pit Bull.
There is no quibble about "dangerous humans"- they are rounded up and dealt with accordingly- but they have to commit a certain caliber of crime first to be deemed "dangerous".
The word "ban" is getting thrown around so much now, it's ridiculous. I'm racking my brain and I can't think of any other government legislation specifically "banning" -and actually enforcing a ban on- anything except dogs. If a government "bans" a dog, then they should lawfully be required to "ban" everything else deemed illegal in that area. "Ban" all roaming dogs, "Ban" unvaccinated animals, "Ban" dope dealers...

If governments urged local police forces put as much effort into eradicating crime as they do profiling "dangerous" dogs, they might be good for something.

It seems to me these "breed bans" are nothing more than a diversion tactic to fool citizens into believing their governments are protecting them. Mayors who pass Breed Bans should be required to address their cities publicly with this statement:
"We got our asses kicked by the street gangs and the dope cookers, but we sure showed those pit bulls who's boss."

 

Jesus....AMEN to THAT!!! This is over half of the breeds problem anyways!

 

Oh My...another very true statement!! You are an a roll tonight!!

 

That question is a formal logical fallacy. Its like asking someone "are you still beating your dog"?



It presumes there are inherently dangerous breeds. Damned if you answer yes, damned if you answer no.

 

Probably more than half, and more than half of all of societies problems. Even the ex president Clinton did them and I know for a fact the ugly SOB had not stopped before or durning being President. That is one cane snorting fool there. Boy has more frequent flyer miles to south america than any one I have ever seen. We would shut them down and the Task force would pack the stuff up. Very seldom was it burned like our SOP stated. However someone made sure the chemical used to make it burn faster was put to it. I hope it rotts their damn brains out. I hate drugs. And users. If that offend some one then good quit using the crap. Laus Deo!

 

Dangerous= The way that Attila Magyar's mind works.

 

Nice post!

 

very well put,now you got my mind thinking what if someone lit a match to close to their nose,lol