If You’re Going To Own Pit Bulls
- Thread starter 918v
- Start date
A person should have no more responsibility for what a thief does with a stolen gun as a stolen car.
Explaining how useless prohibitions are, is never a red hearing. Attempting to justify them for safety is.
You and I can agree to disagree.
There is such a thing as being a responsible gun owner.
The vast majority of the firearms thefts here are from folks leaving guns in unlocked cars.
One of those nearly resulted in a school shooting. (kid had been at our school with the stolen gun, went to a neighboring jurisdiction to look for his ex-girlfriend, met an officer that happened to be a firearms instructor and pointed the gun at him)
I don't think they had live broadcast tv then, but no doubt the rest of the story is from unimpeachable sources.
No. Not at all.
I'm suggesting when something happens we punish the owner. Just like if you shoot some random walking down the street we'd want to punish you not the gun.
If you leave your gun out in your front yard and your wife trips over it and it shoots her or someone else, is the gun to blame? Is your wife to blame for walking through your yard?
No. It's the irresponsible owner who left it in the yard.
No matter the breed of dog, it's the owner that chose it, the owner that brought it home or to the park, it's the owner that allowed the situation where it could attack someone, and the owner, not the dog who should ultimately pay. Not every other person who responsibly owns that type of dog.
If you leave your potentially viscous dog in the yard with no fence and a kid walks by and gets mauled that's your fault - not the dog. You choose the dog and you let it sit in the yard.
I don't see what you're not getting.
You can't ban all of one type of dog because you think it's too dangerous without also supporting gun bans.
Ok, I'm good with that. So by your same argument fentanyl should be legal and people only punished if they use it then harm someone. Fair is fair. I'm good with that. Or people should be able to drink a quart of bourbon, drive, and only punished if they harm someone?
I have no problem with Pits, Rotties, Mastiffs, Dobermans, nor any other aggressive breeds, but it's intellectually dishonest to compare an inanimate object like a gun, to a living thing like a dog.
Strong athletic dog breeds have a higher rate of attacks with serious injuries and deaths- those facts can't be denied.
That said, my neighbor's Pit, is a good girl and very gentle even with their five year old, and their two tropical birds walking around the floors.
Strong athletic dog breeds have a higher rate of attacks with serious injuries and deaths- those facts can't be denied.
That said, my neighbor's Pit, is a good girl and very gentle even with their five year old, and their two tropical birds walking around the floors.
Neither the Constitution, nor the Bill of Rights mentions livestock, pets, animals or property.
It does mention arms.
Dogs are not arms.
They are not protected.
As far sa the Nathzees go... it's not that they went after dogs. It's that many of their laws were foisted on the German Public as "Fur Ze Kinder." For the Children. Get rid of guns fur ze kinder. Get rid of gypsy's fur ze kinder. Get rid of retards and mental midgets fur ze kinder. Get rid of Jews 'fur ze kinder.'
It's not that anything doggy-ish was addressed by the Kraut Painter-acolytes. It's that they used the same BS that leftist Democrats and commies (Socialists... like... national socialists) use every day to justify forfeiting rights.
Sirhr
I chose poorly for my example, several of the other folks contributing to this compared dogs to the second amendment.
My poorly made point was that a firearm is not dangerous by itself, but does require responsible ownership.
A pitbull, by design is dangerous. Are all of them dangerous? No. But they are living, breathing animals capable of acting independently. They are the defacto choice for drug dealers specifically because they will defend their territory to the death. Not a bad trait, but many times, the dogs don't consider just the yard as their territory.
A firearm cannot act independently.
]
Yes you fucking twit. People should be punished for what they did, for what actually happenned. Not for what ever fucktard story about what could have happenned, they cherry pick to get retards and women to demand restrictions on others rights.
Bro, you'd wipe out cartels within a week. Okay maybe a year - but honestly can you think of another way to accomplish that? You have to remove the money or some other asshole will always step up to take it no matter how many you kill or put in jail.
Have you seen what legalized weed did to criminal organizations in states where it's been enacted?
Think of the tax money!
What do you care if you neighbor wants to kill himself in his own house?
Legalized weed is, to a surprising degree, controlled by organized crime.
