GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum
Page 1 of 3 1 23 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   The logic of pit bull owners defy basic logic.. (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1165260)

crockett 04-20-2015 01:48 PM
The logic of pit bull owners defy basic logic..
 
This is the history of PitBulls..

Quote:
Pit bulls were created by breeding bulldogs and terriers together to produce a dog that combined the gameness and agility of the terrier with the strength of the bulldog.[2] In the United Kingdom, these dogs were used in blood sports such as bull-baiting, bear-baiting and cock fighting. These blood sports were officially eliminated in 1835 as Britain began to introduce animal welfare laws. Since dogfights were cheaper to organize and far easier to conceal from the law than bull or bear baits, blood sport proponents turned to pitting their dogs against each other instead.
They were a dog specifically bred to be aggressive. Yet we hear all the time how nice and great they are because so and so uncles brother owns one and lets their baby ride it like a horse..

The theory is always put out there that the dogs just get a bad rap because of irresponsible owners.. Yet this theory was actually put to the test..

Quote:
In an effort to counter the fighting reputation of pit bull-type dogs, in 1996 the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals renamed pit bull terriers to "St. Francis Terriers", so that people might be more likely to adopt them. 60 temperament-screened dogs were adopted until the program was halted, after several of the newly adopted pit bulls killed cats.
So even the very best tempered dogs which were put out for adoption were ruthless killers of other animals.


So lets think about this issue with some common sense. Dangerous animal known to attack and kill people does it make a good pet? Well lets look at some other examples..


Mountain Lions, a very dangerous animal in the wild would it make a good pet? Probably not. The last person killed by a mountain lion in the US was in 2008

Alligators.. Yet another dangerous animal and yet another animal which wouldn't make a very good pet. The last person killed in the US by an Alligator was in 2007.

Bears.. Oh unless your name is Grizzly Adams a bear would probably not make a good pet.. In 2014 1 person in the United States was killed by a bear.


In 2015 the only 2 deaths caused by dogs were by pit bulls.

In 2014 21 of the 32 deaths caused by dogs were by Pit Bulls. 2nd place is 3 deaths by Rottweiler. Yet according to Pit Bull supporters the media over sensationalizes it in disproportion to other attacks.. Stats don't lie folks.. Pit Bulls out kill every other dog breed by a staggering number.


Obviously most people with even a small amount of common sense would agree owning a bear, alligator or mountain lion would not be a smart thing to do. Yet for some reason certain "types" of people like to defend owning a pit bulls, which are clearly more deadly than all three of the aforementioned wild animals combined.

Common sense is not very common it seems..

Grapesoda 04-20-2015 01:49 PM
your logic is a fucking mystery as well

aka123 04-20-2015 01:58 PM
I don't get it either; well I get it, but I don't approve it.

I have dog specifially selected by the basis it was bred for. It is fetching dog for hunting. As in hunting it is still nowadays crucial to what the breed is bred for, what is its purpose.

As my orientation starts from that; it is quite hard to understand/ approve that people get dogs those purpose is to kill (the dog itself kills).

crockett 04-20-2015 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grapesoda (Post 20454055)
your logic is a fucking mystery as well
My logic is very sound.. Should I own a dangerous animal known to kill people as a pet? Why NO, GrapeSoda, I do not think that I should, because I'm a responsible person whom understands that I can't possibly control the mind of a dog which was bred for killing. There by thinking logically, I opt to not own a dog which might kill, mane myself or others.

That is a very logical solution and a responsible action. Your "logic and personal responsibility" probably differs I take it..

L-Pink 04-20-2015 02:09 PM
I would never own a pit bull for a number of reasons but ........

Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20454051)


Obviously most people with even a small amount of common sense would agree owning a bear, alligator or mountain lion would not be a smart thing to do. Yet for some reason certain "types" of people like to defend owning a pit bulls, which are clearly more deadly than all three of the aforementioned wild animals combined.

Common sense is not very common it seems..

In order for your "Crockett science" theory to be correct the same amount of human contact hours would need to be spent with bears, alligators and mountain lions as is spent with pit bulls. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh Do you really think the results would be the same then? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh


.

aka123 04-20-2015 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 20454081)
I would never own a pit bull for a number of reasons but ........

In order for your "Crockett science" theory to be correct the same amount of human contact hours would need to be spent with bears, alligators and mountain lions as is spent with pit bulls. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh Do you really think the results would be the same then? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh


.
What the contact hours help if the dog is bred to kill the ones it is in contact with? :)

Okay, maybe the owners excluded, unless the dog has bad day.

L-Pink 04-20-2015 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aka123 (Post 20454085)
What the contact hours help, if the dog is bred to kill the ones it is in contact with? :)

Okay, maybe the owners excluded, unless the dog has bad day.
So taking into effect the amount of hours pit bulls spend in close contact with humans vs the amount of households that have 10 foot gators living with them is irrelevant as a comparison when determining total deaths between species?

Com'on man ........... How many people in Michigan/Ohio/Kentucky/etc have even seen a gator?

aka123 04-20-2015 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 20454089)
So taking into effect the amount of hours pit bulls spend in close contact with humans vs the amount of households that have 10 foot gators living with them is irrelevant as a comparison when determining total death between species?

Com'on man ...........
Yes you are right: the alligator has to be bred for some centuries or decades to be even more effective and aggressive killing machine. What comes from that if your dog/ gator is pussy in a dog fight? For example likes the other dog, instead of tearing it to pieces? Come on..

L-Pink 04-20-2015 02:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aka123 (Post 20454095)
Yes you are right: the alligator has to be bred for some centuries or decades to be even more effective and aggressive killing machine. What comes from that if your dog/ gator is pussy in a dog fight? For example likes the other dog, instead of tearing it to pieces? Come on..
What the fuck are we arguing about? Re-read my original comments. I haven't commented about breeding .....

crockett 04-20-2015 02:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 20454081)
I would never own a pit bull for a number of reasons but ........




In order for your "Crockett science" theory to be correct the same amount of human contact hours would need to be spent with bears, alligators and mountain lions as is spent with pit bulls. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh Do you really think the results would be the same then? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh


.
Actually my science theory works out very good. How is that you ask? Well it's simple, most people understand it's not a good idea to spend a lot of their free time in the company of dangerous animals such as Alligators, Bears or Mountain Lions.

Although we do have some slow learners in the gene pool, lucky for them, bears, alligators and mountain lions generally aren't as accessible as pit bulls.

aka123 04-20-2015 02:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 20454104)
What the fuck are we arguing about? Re-read my original comments. I haven't commented about breeding .....
But the breeding is the core of this whole thing; including this thread. The dog is not wild animal to begin with.

MaDalton 04-20-2015 02:31 PM
i would not lump in alligators, they have a brain that is as big as a walnut - open mouth, close mouth, make a roll, swallow - that's about it

but bears...


L-Pink 04-20-2015 02:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aka123 (Post 20454119)
But the breeding is the core of this whole thing; including this thread. The dog is not wild animal to begin with.
But that's not my point, that's not what I commented on. Yes, I agree about the breeding. I don't agree with his summation about bears, mountain lions and gators not being as dangerous.

Rochard 04-20-2015 02:42 PM
It's pretty obvious there is a problem here. I don't hear about black labs attacking two month old children and killing them and then attacking the parents.

We've had two dog deaths in the dog park here since it opened years ago, and in both cases pitbulls attacked and then killed the other dogs. Sorry, this is just a nasty mean and violent breed of dog.

There is just zero defense against this.... Pit bulls make up 6 percent of the dog population in Canada and the US, but they are responsible for 68 percent of dog attacks and 52 percent of dog-related deaths from 1982 to 2009.

AmeliaG 04-20-2015 02:54 PM
Renaming a breed to get strays adopted is not a scientific study of nature.

Crockett, I've asked this before, but what do you do in this industry?

You talk about politics constantly, but you appear to have no beliefs except that authoritarianism is good and freedom is bad.

crockett 04-20-2015 03:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmeliaG (Post 20454140)
Renaming a breed to get strays adopted is not a scientific study of nature.

Crockett, I've asked this before, but what do you do in this industry?

You talk about politics constantly, but you appear to have no beliefs except that authoritarianism is good and freedom is bad.
Much like most of this board, I long ago moved out of Adult. Why does it matter? Yes the board at one time was only adult, but now days most people here are probably also doing mainstream like myself..

Does the fact I no longer run adult websites change anything about Pitbulls being deadly dogs?

As for the renaming of the dogs, it serves a very fucking obvious point. They went out of their way to select the most docile pits which they had. They adopted them to "good" homes not fucking rednecks leaving them on chains.. Yet even still with everything being as good as it could possible be to give the dogs a fair shake the dogs still attacked and killed other animals. Why? Because that's what they were bred to do..

It doesn't take a lot of common sense to understand the problem is not just a bad or undeserved reputation, but that the dogs are dangerous animals and thus should be treated as such..

sandman! 04-20-2015 03:30 PM
do i care how many cats pitbulls kill ?

my buddies dog keeps killing skunks so what ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20454051)
This is the history of PitBulls..



They were a dog specifically bred to be aggressive. Yet we hear all the time how nice and great they are because so and so uncles brother owns one and lets their baby ride it like a horse..

The theory is always put out there that the dogs just get a bad rap because of irresponsible owners.. Yet this theory was actually put to the test..



So even the very best tempered dogs which were put out for adoption were ruthless killers of other animals.


So lets think about this issue with some common sense. Dangerous animal known to attack and kill people does it make a good pet? Well lets look at some other examples..


Mountain Lions, a very dangerous animal in the wild would it make a good pet? Probably not. The last person killed by a mountain lion in the US was in 2008

Alligators.. Yet another dangerous animal and yet another animal which wouldn't make a very good pet. The last person killed in the US by an Alligator was in 2007.

Bears.. Oh unless your name is Grizzly Adams a bear would probably not make a good pet.. In 2014 1 person in the United States was killed by a bear.


In 2015 the only 2 deaths caused by dogs were by pit bulls.

In 2014 21 of the 32 deaths caused by dogs were by Pit Bulls. 2nd place is 3 deaths by Rottweiler. Yet according to Pit Bull supporters the media over sensationalizes it in disproportion to other attacks.. Stats don't lie folks.. Pit Bulls out kill every other dog breed by a staggering number.


Obviously most people with even a small amount of common sense would agree owning a bear, alligator or mountain lion would not be a smart thing to do. Yet for some reason certain "types" of people like to defend owning a pit bulls, which are clearly more deadly than all three of the aforementioned wild animals combined.

Common sense is not very common it seems..

TROLLENSTEIN 04-20-2015 03:39 PM
Any dog breed can be aggressive. Any. That's common sense. You're opinions lack common sense. The reason you hear almost only exclusively about Pitbulls going bananas and wrecking a human is because of the media. The media portrays them as only "Devil Dogs" etc. I'd bet a kidney if you got any real statistics on the amount of times a smaller breed of dog bit someone you'd shit your pants. If a Pit bites you it's gonna spoil your whole day at the very least. But if a yappy little asshat breed of a dog bites you... you're gonna be embarrassed instead. So that's why you won't be hearing about a "Satanic Shih Tzu" in the media anytime soon...

The people that parade the breed around as a penis extensions, or just being simply retarded human beings, are the major cause of problems for the breed not the breed itself. For example, my sister owned a hamster when were kids. It bit both of us multiple times when we were trying to clean it's cage. It was batshit insane aggressive, but we don't label every other hamster in the world as a vicious bastard. Why? Because we use common sense. Some dogs are bad, some humans are bad, some hamsters are "Devil Rodents". 9/10 I'd be willing to bet the problem is the owner, not the dog. The other 1/10 are simply just batshit dogs. But that is not a valid reason at all to tar an entire breed of animal with the same brush. Doing so shows a utter lack of common sense. :2 cents:

dyna mo 04-20-2015 03:41 PM
fact: statistics tell us Pit Bulls kill and maim more people than any other breed.

crockett 04-20-2015 03:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TROLLENSTEIN (Post 20454174)
Any dog breed can be aggressive. Any. That's common sense. You're opinions lack common sense. The reason you hear almost only exclusively about Pitbulls going bananas and wrecking a human is because of the media. The media portrays them as only "Devil Dogs" etc. I'd bet a kidney if you got any real statistics on the amount of times a smaller breed of dog bit someone you'd shit your pants. If a Pit bites you it's gonna spoil your whole day at the very least. But if a yappy little asshat breed of a dog bites you... you're gonna be embarrassed instead. So that's why you won't be hearing about a "Satanic Shih Tzu" in the media anytime soon...

The people that parade the breed around as a penis extensions, or just being simply retarded human beings, are the major cause of problems for the breed not the breed itself. For example, my sister owned a hamster when were kids. It bit both of us multiple times when we were trying to clean it's cage. It was batshit insane aggressive, but we don't label every other hamster in the world as a vicious bastard. Why? Because we use common sense. Some dogs are bad, some humans are bad, some hamsters are "Devil Rodents". 9/10 I'd be willing to bet the problem is the owner, not the dog. The other 1/10 are simply just batshit dogs. But that is not a valid reason at all to tar an entire breed of animal with the same brush. Doing so shows a utter lack of common sense. :2 cents:
Here we go..someone whom can't understand basic math..

31 people killed by dogs in 2014 of those 21 were by pit bulls. Leaving 10 deaths to "other" breeds.. yet your logic seems to imply that it's media over reacting.

Rochard 04-20-2015 03:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TROLLENSTEIN (Post 20454174)
Any dog breed can be aggressive. Any. That's common sense. You're opinions lack common sense. The reason you hear almost only exclusively about Pitbulls going bananas and wrecking a human is because of the media. The media portrays them as only "Devil Dogs" etc. I'd bet a kidney if you got any real statistics on the amount of times a smaller breed of dog bit someone you'd shit your pants. If a Pit bites you it's gonna spoil your whole day at the very least. But if a yappy little asshat breed of a dog bites you... you're gonna be embarrassed instead. So that's why you won't be hearing about a "Satanic Shih Tzu" in the media anytime soon...
No. Stats tell us that pitbulls are the most dangerous dogs in the US.

Don't tell me any dog can be aggressive. I've had my black lab 13 years, she's never attacked, bit, maimed, or killed anyone.

Rochard 04-20-2015 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20454178)
Here we go..someone whom can't understand basic math..

31 people killed by dogs in 2014 of those 21 were by pit bulls. Leaving 10 deaths to "other" breeds.. yet your logic seems to imply that it's media over reacting.
what is that, two out of three? Obviously the media must be over reacting.

TROLLENSTEIN 04-20-2015 04:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20454178)
Here we go..someone whom can't understand basic math..

31 people killed by dogs in 2014 of those 21 were by pit bulls. Leaving 10 deaths to "other" breeds.. yet your logic seems to imply that it's media over reacting.
Basic maths... basic. Hah. You are pulling your "facts" from DogBites.org. It'd probably help your case to be supplying verifiable statistics from proper sources, not a website set up specifically to champion to demonisation of Pitbulls.

Quote : "DogsBite.org is a public education website about dangerous dog breeds, chiefly pit bulls."

Meanwhile back in the land of reality, The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (JAVMA) states :

"report that the breed of the dog or dogs could not be reliably identified in more than 80% of cases."

Thus "pitbull" and "pitbull-type" become blanket terms for :

"Twenty different breeds, along with two known mixes"

So yeah, I'd probably go with JAVMA studies and conclusions rather than those of a site started by people who HATE the breed. :2 cents:

TROLLENSTEIN 04-20-2015 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20454187)
No. Stats tell us that pitbulls are the most dangerous dogs in the US.
No, no they don't actually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20454187)
Don't tell me any dog can be aggressive. I've had my black lab 13 years, she's never attacked, bit, maimed, or killed anyone.
You loved your dog and treated it like family as 99% of responsible owners do. It was happy and had no need to show aggressive traits that ALL carnivores have. If someone else owned her and treated her like shit then the dog simply would have become aggressive out of necessity. Simply because she didn't attack, bite or maim anyone because you treated her well does not change the fact she could have become aggressive due to someone elses treatment.

crockett 04-20-2015 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TROLLENSTEIN (Post 20454221)
No, no they don't actually.



You loved your dog and treated it like family as 99% of responsible owners do. It was happy and had no need to show aggressive traits that ALL carnivores have. If someone else owned her and treated her like shit then the dog simply would have become aggressive out of necessity. Simply because she didn't attack, bite or maim anyone because you treated her well does not change the fact she could have become aggressive due to someone elses treatment.

Yes it's all lies.. Everyone is just hating on the poor pit bull..

Fatal dog attacks in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TROLLENSTEIN 04-20-2015 04:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20454225)
Yes it's all lies.. Everyone is just hating on the poor pit bull..

Fatal dog attacks in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You're now using Wikipedia as a source? Wow.

crockett 04-20-2015 04:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TROLLENSTEIN (Post 20454229)
You're now using Wikipedia as a source? Wow.
How many pit bulls are chained up in your backyard?

TROLLENSTEIN 04-20-2015 05:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20454231)
How many pit bulls are chained up in your backyard?
None. I would never chain a dog up. I'd treat my dog like a member of my family, which it would be. You lost your argument, get over it and move on. No need to start going the childish route and attempting to insult me. :2 cents:

ErectMedia 04-20-2015 05:04 PM
Got pictures of my daughter as a baby with my old pit laying next to her. Nicest dog in the world to family as it's how ya raise them. Now if you ran up on me or my daughter unannounced yes the dog would jump up as it's got your back from unknown people, one "it's okay girl" from me and then she's back in chill mode. Would never leave pit alone with my daughter and not from fear she would eat her but from the dog sometimes being affectionate and not realizing that she's a heavy ass dog. :2 cents:

As far as killing cats goes don't give a shit as tired seeing 8 billion dumb cat photos on my families facebook. :1orglaugh

crockett 04-20-2015 05:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TROLLENSTEIN (Post 20454234)
None. I would never chain a dog up. I'd treat my dog like a member of my family, which it would be. You lost your argument, get over it and move on. No need to start going the childish route and attempting to insult me. :2 cents:
I lost my argument? Did those 21 people dig themselves out of the grave? You are too stupid to argue with.. that's all.

L-Pink 04-20-2015 05:12 PM
Worth reading with some equally good links.

"Do a bit of homework, and you quickly discover two irrefutable truths: The pit bull is one of the absolute best, most loving family dogs in America, and it?s also the absolute worst, racking up the most attacks, injuries and severe bites (and deaths), coupled to all sorts of fear, fear, fear"

What should we do about all the pit bulls? - Notes & Errata by Mark Morford


.

Grapesoda 04-20-2015 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20454131)
It's pretty obvious there is a problem here. I don't hear about black labs attacking two month old children and killing them and then attacking the parents.

We've had two dog deaths in the dog park here since it opened years ago, and in both cases pitbulls attacked and then killed the other dogs. Sorry, this is just a nasty mean and violent breed of dog.

There is just zero defense against this.... Pit bulls make up 6 percent of the dog population in Canada and the US, but they are responsible for 68 percent of dog attacks and 52 percent of dog-related deaths from 1982 to 2009.
you know there is a 'minority' here in the states with similar stats... how about that?

TROLLENSTEIN 04-20-2015 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20454237)
I lost my argument? Did those 21 people dig themselves out of the grave? You are too stupid to argue with.. that's all.
HURRRRRR U STOOPID DURRRRRRRR. Are you 12? You started a thread on a subject you obviously know nothing about, tried in vain to back up your OPINIONS using "facts" from ridiculous sources, then went full retard-mode when your own "logic" was proven wrong an tried to insult me. Settle down, princess.

L-Pink 04-20-2015 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TROLLENSTEIN (Post 20454242)
HURRRRRR U STOOPID DURRRRRRRR. Are you 12? You started a thread on a subject you obviously know nothing about, tried in vain to back up your OPINIONS using "facts" from ridiculous sources, then went full retard-mode when your own "logic" was proven wrong an tried to insult me. Settle down, princess.
I carried an expandable police baton every time I walked my dog in in the city or a public dog park. And it wasn't because I was worried a Golden Retriever was going to come running up.

Every dog has a genetic predisposition to certain behaviors, anyone who ignores this fact has their head in the sand or more likely defending their choice in K-9's. :2 cents:


.

dyna mo 04-20-2015 05:35 PM
i couldn't care less if the pit bull that mauled and killed someone didn't have a DNA validated pitbull pedigree. it's within the family of Pit Bull breeds. all of the breeds under the Pit Bull designation are bully dogs and statistics have proven that pit bull group of sub-breeds are dangerous.

from a few hours ago
Baby killed by pit bull in Dallas, police say - CBS News

TROLLENSTEIN 04-20-2015 05:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 20454252)
I carried an expandable police baton every time I walked my dog in in the city or a public dog park. And it wasn't because I was worried a Golden Retriever was going to come running up.

Every dog has a genetic predisposition to certain behaviors, anyone who ignores this fact has their head in the sand or more likely defending their choice in K-9's. :2 cents:


.
I totally agree with that. Like I said above every dog, no matter what the breed, is fully capable of attacking someone. And I'd go so far as saying it should be law in all countries (not sure if it is or not in the USA) that dogs be on a leash at all times in public because nobody wants to take even the slightest chance on something bad to happen. I've owned a Golden Lab, an Old English Sheepdog and now a Pit bull (Molly). Never had a bad thing with any of them, all good dogs. But I think labeling an entire breed of dog worthy of extermination due to a few bad ones out of 1000s and 1000s of good ones is ridiculous in the extreme.

TheSquealer 04-20-2015 05:42 PM
Every dog is capable of......

BUT Pit Bulls have been selectively bred and are selectively bred for aggressive traits and are physically built by design to fight and kill. That's the difference which distinguishes them from nearly every other breed of dog

crockett 04-20-2015 05:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TROLLENSTEIN (Post 20454242)
HURRRRRR U STOOPID DURRRRRRRR. Are you 12? You started a thread on a subject you obviously know nothing about, tried in vain to back up your OPINIONS using "facts" from ridiculous sources, then went full retard-mode when your own "logic" was proven wrong an tried to insult me. Settle down, princess.
You start off your reply with "HURRRRRR U STOOPID DURRRRRRRR." then go on to ask if I'm the 12 yo?

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

SuckOnThis 04-20-2015 05:46 PM
Some dogs were bred to retrieve, others were bred to herd, others were bred to kill.

Anyone who claims pits are misunderstood is either in serious denial or just not very smart, most likely both.


Show me another breed that does this shit......

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...62_634x560.jpg


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...12043254f6.jpg


http://vote29.com/newmyblog/wp-conte...ve-300x216.jpg

MakeMeGrrrrowl 04-20-2015 05:50 PM
I am the biggest animal lover I know and I am extremely fearful of them. I have to force myself to take them out in the pen to photograph them at the SPCA.

I fostered one (from a dog fighter) who was disfigured and even at 5 weeks old I thought it was much more fiesty with the growling and biting/head shaking than any other puppy I have been around. Not an exaggeration.

People who love them just do, but I cant see myself ever owning one.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:49 PM.
Page 1 of 3 1 23 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123