• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Destroy the dog?

SDET said:
Really? Fila Brasileiro? Let's see here: The Brazilian Portuguese word for "breed" is raça which literally means "race". If you discriminate against the Fila Brasileiro that makes you "raçista" or racist.
Click to expand...

If you were aiming for a joke, you missed!
 
Sparky2 said:
I won't attack or criticize your low opinion of the breed, good sir.
Especially since it is based upon personal experience coupled with much study on the subject.
I do respect that of you.

I do know that my mixed breed pit bull Simon is an exceptionally sweet dog, though he does scare the hell out of some early morning exercise walkers, just by virtue of his size and appearance.

Once they get to know him, however, they love him nearly as much as I do.
Click to expand...

I thank you for that sir, I really do. And just to clarify, it's not necessarily that I have a low opinion of the breed. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say, I have grave concerns about the breed. And, as I said, I don't blame the dogs, I guess if I were to blame anybody, it would be man. The dogs certainly didn't selectively breed themselves. And I do think it's a damn shame.

Incidentally, though I've never been a cat person, we recently adopted my bro-in-law's cat, and his name is Simon. :)
 
Last edited:
I think people should be looking more into the character of the dog than the breed. Every breed can be dangerous so it is much better to have a character test before destroying what could be a very friendly animal.

You can always destroy it if it turns out to be a dangerous dog but not before.
 
Sparky2 said:
It's like saying, "I love pony cars!"
You are probably taking about an old Ford Mustang, but you may also be referring to a Chevy Camaro, the Corvair, Dodge Dart, and the list goes on and on.
Click to expand...

Chomsky said:
As a car guy, I feel compelled to point-out the Corvair is *not* a 'pony car'.
Click to expand...


And to jack the thread a bit more…;)

The Dodge Dart also is not a pony car, although in certain configurations, it might qualify as a "muscle car".

The term "pony car" derived from the popular 60s Ford Mustang (hence, pony car) and was generalized to include the Mustang's direct competitors:
Chevrolet Camaro
Dodge Challenger
Mercury Cougar (the early one before it morphed into a "personal luxury car”)
Plymouth Barracuda
Pontiac Firebird

Don't even get me started on muscle cars! :lamo
 
Last edited:
CHuDWah said:
And to jack the thread a bit more…;)

The Dodge Dart also is not a pony car, although in certain configurations, it might qualify as a "muscle car".

The term "pony car" derived from the popular 60s Ford Mustang (hence, pony car) and was generalized to include the Mustang's direct competitors:
Chevrolet Camaro
Dodge Challenger
Mercury Cougar (the early one before it morphed into a "personal luxury car”)
Plymouth Barracuda
Pontiac Firebird

Don't even get me started on muscle cars! :lamo
Click to expand...
Excellent further differentiation, and accurate I believe!

Thank you. :thumbs:

Long live Lee Iacocca & John Z! :cheers:
 
CHuDWah said:
And to jack the thread a bit more…;)

The Dodge Dart also is not a pony car, although in certain configurations, it might qualify as a "muscle car".

The term "pony car" derived from the popular 60s Ford Mustang (hence, pony car) and was generalized to include the Mustang's direct competitors:
Chevrolet Camaro
Dodge Challenger
Mercury Cougar (the early one before it morphed into a "personal luxury car”)
Plymouth Barracuda
Pontiac Firebird

Don't even get me started on muscle cars! :lamo
Click to expand...

The Challenger is a pony car? I own one and there ain't anything pony about it. I also owned a Camaro Z28 at one time. I considered that as well as my Challenger to be muscle cars.
 
I'm just proud to say that I have driven each and every one of those cars at one time or another.

I may not have owned all of them over the years, but yeah.....

I got to drive them.
Including the 'unsafe at any speed' Chevy Corvair.
;)
 
Chomsky said:
Long live Lee Iacocca & John Z! :cheers:
Click to expand...


Well, Iacocca is but sadly DeLorean isn't. If Iacocca is the father of the pony car (Ford Mustang), DeLorean deserves to be called the father of the muscle car (Pontiac GTO).
 
Gaius46 said:
The Challenger is a pony car? I own one and there ain't anything pony about it. I also owned a Camaro Z28 at one time. I considered that as well as my Challenger to be muscle cars.
Click to expand...


I was referring mostly to 60s/early-70s cars. But yeah, even back then there was some pony car/muscle car crossover. A hemi Challenger could legitimately be called a muscle car, a slant-6 one not so much - same for Camaro and all the others. A pony car could be configured as anything from a grocery-getter to a ground-pounder. A muscle car is always, well...muscular.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Local news story doing the rounds here, the local police have confirmed the dog is "soft" and "friendly" and they also say the dog is s pit bull, local reports also state the dog is a pit-bull and as such there are conditions on ownership of such a dog under the Dangerous Dogs act of 1991.

The problem is the dog has repeatedly escaped its 6 feet high enclosure and wanders around the streets, without a lead or a muzzle which are conditions the owner recognises he must comply with to keep such an animal.

In court, the owner and his mum are now saying it isn't a pit bull but a golden retriever cross with a Staffordshire bull terrier (so why the 6 feet fence etc?) but the dog is facing a destroy order.

So, should the dog be put down as the owner cannot comply with the conditions of ownership?

Personally, not a fan of such animals but if owners can prove their fitness to own and control such an animal and there is no risk to others then I think they can keep such dogs. I think that dog ownership (just like gun ownership) should be licenced and people who own either should have training. Certainly anyone taking such a dog to children's parks or letting them wander around streets or parks without being on a lead / muzzled should have their collar felt pretty darn quick.
Click to expand...

Should we kill an innocent animal because his owner messed up?

Um, no. He should either find a way to not mess up anymore, or we should find a new damn owner.

What is with some people, or indeed the government, thinking animals' lives matter less than than the average tin of beans? "Destroy" this innocent dog? Let's just call it what it is: killing animals for no good reason.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Local news story doing the rounds here, the local police have confirmed the dog is "soft" and "friendly" and they also say the dog is s pit bull, local reports also state the dog is a pit-bull and as such there are conditions on ownership of such a dog under the Dangerous Dogs act of 1991.

The problem is the dog has repeatedly escaped its 6 feet high enclosure and wanders around the streets, without a lead or a muzzle which are conditions the owner recognises he must comply with to keep such an animal.



In court, the owner and his mum are now saying it isn't a pit bull but a golden retriever cross with a Staffordshire bull terrier (so why the 6 feet fence etc?) but the dog is facing a destroy order.

So, should the dog be put down as the owner cannot comply with the conditions of ownership?

Personally, not a fan of such animals but if owners can prove their fitness to own and control such an animal and there is no risk to others then I think they can keep such dogs. I think that dog ownership (just like gun ownership) should be licenced and people who own either should have training. Certainly anyone taking such a dog to children's parks or letting them wander around streets or parks without being on a lead / muzzled should have their collar felt pretty darn quick.
Click to expand...

Its just a dog, no reason to go all out nazi on dog owners.
 
Sparky2 said:
Just for everyone's enlightenment, and before this thread goes on too much further, a 'Pit Bull' is not a breed of dog.

It is a general category or type of dog, and there are many specific breeds that are commonly referred to as pit bulls.

These include the Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Bully, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and the American Bulldog.

It's like saying, "I love pony cars!"
You are probably taking about an old Ford Mustang, but you may also be referring to a Chevy Camaro, the Corvair, Dodge Dart, and the list goes on and on.

My dog Simon is considered a pit bull mix, but my wife and I just know him as 'the sweetest boy in the world'.

Here Simon is, eyeballing me as I bring out a slice of cheddar cheese for him.
He has never attempted to climb over the fence.
:shock:

View attachment 67207284
Click to expand...

Run its a evil pit bull! lol
 
CHuDWah said:
Well, Iacocca is but sadly DeLorean isn't. If Iacocca is the father of the pony car (Ford Mustang), DeLorean deserves to be called the father of the muscle car (Pontiac GTO).
Click to expand...
In *spirit*, of course! :thumbs:

(I wasn't even aware Iacocca was still around)

CHuDWah said:
I was referring mostly to 60s/early-70s cars. But yeah, even back then there was some pony car/muscle car crossover. A hemi Challenger could legitimately be called a muscle car, a slant-6 one not so much - same for Camaro and all the others. A pony car could be configured as anything from a grocery-getter to a ground-pounder. A muscle car is always, well...muscular.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

A pony car draws on the Mustang's heritage, while a muscle car generically implies a car of any heritage with a relatively light or moderate weight body and a large powerful V8 engine.

My H.S. buddy's '70 SS Nova with a solid-lifter 375HP 396, Muncie 4 spd, and Posi with 4.11's, was not a pony car - but definitely was a muscle car! The 2nd fastest quarter of any American car C & D tested that year! (just nudged out by a Vette)
 
Last edited:
Gaius46 said:
The Challenger is a pony car? I own one and there ain't anything pony about it. I also owned a Camaro Z28 at one time. I considered that as well as my Challenger to be muscle cars.
Click to expand...

'A muscle car, by the strictest definition, is an intermediate sized, performance oriented model, powered by a large V8 engine, at an affordable price.'

Muscle Car Definition ? Muscle Car Club

'Pony car is an American class of automobile launched and inspired by the Ford Mustang in 1964.[1][2] The term describes an affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image.[3][4]'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony_car


The important words here are 'intermediate' and 'compact'.

Originally, muscle cars were ONLY intermediates like GTO's, Charger's and Torino's. And pony cars were compact-based cars like Mustang's, Camaro's, Challenger's and Javelin's.

The Challenger DEFINITELY was a pony car (I owned two of them - a '70 and a '74; and a '74/'79 Camaro and a 73 Mustang and 2 '72 Cougars...all at different times; ALL V8 models of course). They were slightly larger pony cars, but they were definitely (along with the Plymouth Barracuda) designed and marketed as pony cars.

Today, all the 'pony' cars are humongous...especially the Challenger. But I believe what determines whether a car is an intermediate or a compact is more to do with interior volume than exterior size. SO, on that basis, I believe a modern Challenger is considered a pony car - but I could be wrong. And at over 2 tons for the V8 versions; it is one heck of a BIG pony car...more like a Clydesdale pony.
 
Manc Skipper said:
~ Rather than destroying the dog, could it not be re-homed to somewhere more secure, or to owners who could spend time with it?
Click to expand...

SmokeAndMirrors said:
Should we kill an innocent animal because his owner messed up?

Um, no. He should either find a way to not mess up anymore, or we should find a new damn owner.
Click to expand...

I believe in the case of this particular dog, rehoming would be the only option as the current owner keeps getting himself arrested and his mother isn't really capable of controlling the dog.

Trouble is, there are already thousands of dogs in shelter looking for rehoming and this one falls to the back of the queue. The RSPCA euthanasia policy gives such dogs a 10 day period to find a home or the dog is put to sleep. Cumbria is pretty good with sheepdogs and other working dogs and its only in the towns that you find people who want pit bull type dogs and this one has already proven quite a handful.

It wouldn't find a home on a working farm.
 
All I know is pit bulls can be extremely dangerous and have killed/maimed many children. And I don't care about the 'those were badly trained dogs' excuse. There is no reason one MUST own one and no human will die if they cannot have a pitbull.

They have been banned in many places and I am all for that...though I love dogs.

Where are pit bulls banned in Canada | Ban Pit Bulls

Dogs are NOT sentient..if they post a realistic threat to humans they should be either removed or killed.

I am also for laws that make pet owners directly responsible for the actions of their pets. If a pet of theirs kills a child then the pet owner should stand trial for a serious crime that includes moderate-heavy jail time if convicted.
 
Last edited:
Infinite Chaos said:
Local news story doing the rounds here, the local police have confirmed the dog is "soft" and "friendly" and they also say the dog is s pit bull, local reports also state the dog is a pit-bull and as such there are conditions on ownership of such a dog under the Dangerous Dogs act of 1991.

The problem is the dog has repeatedly escaped its 6 feet high enclosure and wanders around the streets, without a lead or a muzzle which are conditions the owner recognises he must comply with to keep such an animal.



In court, the owner and his mum are now saying it isn't a pit bull but a golden retriever cross with a Staffordshire bull terrier (so why the 6 feet fence etc?) but the dog is facing a destroy order.

So, should the dog be put down as the owner cannot comply with the conditions of ownership?

Personally, not a fan of such animals but if owners can prove their fitness to own and control such an animal and there is no risk to others then I think they can keep such dogs. I think that dog ownership (just like gun ownership) should be licenced and people who own either should have training. Certainly anyone taking such a dog to children's parks or letting them wander around streets or parks without being on a lead / muzzled should have their collar felt pretty darn quick.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the answer is, but I know that if a dog has never acted in an aggressive way, still less attacked anyone, then it should not be put down. Here in Spain, if you own a dog on the dangerous breeds list the owner and the dog have to undergo a psychological examination; the owner must have 3rd-party insurance against the dog's behaviour, and the dog must wear a muzzle in public places. If those conditions aren't met then the owner is fined and the dog destroyed. I utterly disagree with the last part.

In the case you've cited, clearly the owner has failed to keep his dog under control and failed to ensure it wears a muzzle. If it is proved that the dog is indeed an American Pit Bull Terrier, or any other breed on the list, the owner should be sanctioned, not the dog, which appears to have done nothing wrong.
 
Sparky2 said:
Just for everyone's enlightenment, and before this thread goes on too much further, a 'Pit Bull' is not a breed of dog.

It is a general category or type of dog, and there are many specific breeds that are commonly referred to as pit bulls.

These include the Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Bully, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and the American Bulldog.

It's like saying, "I love pony cars!"
You are probably taking about an old Ford Mustang, but you may also be referring to a Chevy Camaro, the Corvair, Dodge Dart, and the list goes on and on.

My dog Simon is considered a pit bull mix, but my wife and I just know him as 'the sweetest boy in the world'.

Here Simon is, eyeballing me as I bring out a slice of cheddar cheese for him.
He has never attempted to climb over the fence.
:shock:

View attachment 67207284
Click to expand...

IMO you're kind of correct, but only up to a point. I mean an American Bulldog that weighs 120 pound would never be classifiedas a Pitbull. The breeds you mention are better termed as 'bull breeds'.
 
Manc Skipper said:
If you were aiming for a joke, you missed!
Click to expand...

I was trying to be light-hearted about a notion that works in Brazil, but not English-speaking countries: Discriminating against a breed of dog is a kind of racism.
 
CHuDWah said:
I was referring mostly to 60s/early-70s cars. But yeah, even back then there was some pony car/muscle car crossover. A hemi Challenger could legitimately be called a muscle car, a slant-6 one not so much - same for Camaro and all the others. A pony car could be configured as anything from a grocery-getter to a ground-pounder. A muscle car is always, well...muscular.
Click to expand...

Got cha and agree. Mine's a 6 liter hemi. She is muscular. :).
 
DA60 said:
'A muscle car, by the strictest definition, is an intermediate sized, performance oriented model, powered by a large V8 engine, at an affordable price.'

Muscle Car Definition ? Muscle Car Club

'Pony car is an American class of automobile launched and inspired by the Ford Mustang in 1964.[1][2] The term describes an affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image.[3][4]'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony_car


The important words here are 'intermediate' and 'compact'.

Originally, muscle cars were ONLY intermediates like GTO's, Charger's and Torino's. And pony cars were compact-based cars like Mustang's, Camaro's, Challenger's and Javelin's.

The Challenger DEFINITELY was a pony car (I owned two of them - a '70 and a '74; and a '74/'79 Camaro and a 73 Mustang and 2 '72 Cougars...all at different times; ALL V8 models of course). They were slightly larger pony cars, but they were definitely (along with the Plymouth Barracuda) designed and marketed as pony cars.

Today, all the 'pony' cars are humongous...especially the Challenger. But I believe what determines whether a car is an intermediate or a compact is more to do with interior volume than exterior size. SO, on that basis, I believe a modern Challenger is considered a pony car - but I could be wrong. And at over 2 tons for the V8 versions; it is one heck of a BIG pony car...more like a Clydesdale pony.
Click to expand...

Understood. On interior volume the Challenger is basically a two seater. You can put two people in the back but unless they're tiny they aren't going to be comfortable.

Up front on the other hand is very comfortable.
I'm a 6 footer and am very comfortable in it - my daughter lives 12 hours by car from us and we've taken it to visit her twice (and will be going to see her in it next week) and I have no trouble making the trip in a day with a couple of fuel/food stops. I've driven afriend's Camaro and wouldn't dream of doing the same. I have to fold myself into that car.
 
DA60 said:
All I know is pit bulls can be extremely dangerous and have killed/maimed many children. And I don't care about the 'those were badly trained dogs' excuse. There is no reason one MUST own one and no human will die if they cannot have a pitbull.

They have been banned in many places and I am all for that...though I love dogs.

Where are pit bulls banned in Canada | Ban Pit Bulls

Dogs are NOT sentient..if they post a realistic threat to humans they should be either removed or killed.

I am also for laws that make pet owners directly responsible for the actions of their pets. If a pet of theirs kills a child then the pet owner should stand trial for a serious crime that includes moderate-heavy jail time if convicted.
Click to expand...
of course dogs are sentient...many are more so than human beings
 
If Pit Bulls are socialized early and accept the company of strangers and other dogs, they are as safe as any breed.

The wife and I were volunteers at the SPCA for over 20 years and have seen it, and have been trained to recognize it.
 
RetiredUSN said:
If Pit Bulls are socialized early and accept the company of strangers and other dogs, they are as safe as any breed.

The wife and I were volunteers at the SPCA for over 20 years and have seen it, and have been trained to recognize it.
Click to expand...
same with human beings: if they are socialized early and accept the company of others they are safe...otherwise...not so much
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom