Number 1:
Or number 2:
Since everybody's got a 50/50 chance of simply guessing correctly, also include *why* you chose which dog.
Posted on 05/15/2010 9:34:01 PM PDT by Chet 99
(05-14) 16:08 PDT RENO -- The condemned pit bull that was sprung from the Alameda animal shelter, allegedly by its owners, has been found in Reno and will be euthanized next week, authorities said Friday.
Max, a 3-year-old, 70-pound red nose pit bull, was located at a Reno motel Thursday night and was taken to a local shelter. An Alameda animal control officer will drive to Reno on Monday to retrieve Max, after which the dog will be destroyed, said Alameda police Sgt. Jill Ottaviato.
-snip-
An Alameda County Superior Court commissioner ordered Max destroyed Tuesday. The dog was labeled dangerous because he bit a veterinary technician in Oakland and a friend of Cochran and Perry at the couple's home at the Alameda Islander Motel.
Alameda animal-control officials were ready to euthanize Max shortly after Commissioner Thomas Rasch issued his ruling Tuesday. Rasch, however, agreed to allow Cochran and Perry to say their goodbyes at 11 a.m. Wednesday.
But after the hearing, police believe, Cochran bought a set of bolt cutters, setting into motion a plan he had allegedly hatched with Perry to break into the shelter on Fortmann Way and steal Max. The pit bull vanished from his locked kennel sometime between 4:30 a.m. and 7:30 a.m. Wednesday.
The couple's Ford F-150 pickup truck was seen on surveillance video taken outside the animal shelter the morning of the break-in, said Deputy District Attorney Mark McCannon of Alameda County.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/15/BAER1DEP0P.DTL#ixzz0o4195oml
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/15/BAER1DEP0P.DTL#ixzz0o40s0TaC
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
The woman is the primary caregiver of the dog because her husband/partner is a truck driver and spends a lot of time on the road.
She said the dog is “temperamental at times” and became protective when someone pets him and touches another person at the same time.”
Apparantly she provided good care for the dog, taking it to the vet to have a bad tooth extracted. She said the dog was “grumpy” because he had had that done recently.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/13/BAAR1DDJGA.DTL#ixzz0o720A9Qy
Truck driver couple. Lived at a motel.
‘In this case, feel sorry that the dog turned out to be evil,”
You are anthropomorphizing.
There is NO such thing as an “evil dog”.
“Evil” requires that a being be spiritually sentient enough to know “good” from “evil” and is also capable of making a moral choice.
You may as well put forth the judgment that the dog “sinned”.
Only humans are capable of “sin” and “evil” because only humans possess the ability to distinguish between the two and -choose- one or the other.
The dog was being a dog.
Number 1:
Or number 2:
Since everybody's got a 50/50 chance of simply guessing correctly, also include *why* you chose which dog.
Nah, its a pit bull. Its evil.
Interesting! I’m going to guess it’s the dog on top, because his ears are up. Ears up indicate confidence, right? A dog with his ears down is trying to make himself smaller.
Your score will sent via FReepmail....:)
My nephew was out playing in his front yard with his 2 1/2 year old daughter. Neighbors let the pitbull out their front door, who prompt runs over and attacks her. Luckily, he bit her on the leg and missed the main artery. She is doing okay after lengthy surgery. Don’t tell me it wasn’t the owners fault.
So much for those pointlessly cast pearls....
Hey, who are you calling a swine!?
I read your post. Don’t agree with it. Likely we are using different definitions of evil.
Owners fault and dogs nature. Pit bull no more suited for a neighborhood than a moutain lion, tiger or other wild, unpredicatable, hard to control dangerous animal.
Owner is at fault for owning it.
I hope you sued the heck out of the owner of the pit bull that did that your little girl.
It was my nephew’s daughter. It happed yesterday, and yes, they have found an attorney.
Very sorry to hear about this. Should have said that right away. I hope she will be alright.
And I hope her attorney has been instructed to make the settlement hurt!!!
The question should be, what dog is not only going to bit, but continue to bite with vice like grip, refusing to release even while being hit over the head with a shovel repeatedly. That of course is a pit bull, not a german sheppard.
German Shepherds are quite capable of that and have a *much* higher bite strength than a pit bull, although not as high as that of a Dobermann.
Schutzhund dogs are trained to *not* let go even if you club, whip or shoot them.
Are they all “evil”...or has ~human intervention~ contributed in some way?
Considering we’re discussing wholesale “breed bans”, your proclaimed credo “Your rights end when you give up your ability to protect them.” is ironic, at best.
Guns kill far more people than pit bulls, every day.
You *are* aware that gun bans and breed bans have a strong commonality, aren’t you?
It’s CONTROL of the freedom to own what you have a right to.
Just as the majority of guns never kill anyone, neither do the majority of pit bulls.
Care to reconcile that ideological conundrum?
You either fight nanny-statism in *every* form or you become complicit in it.
I do not like my chances! Both are, in my thinking!
LOL!
Actually, you could be right with either choice but for very different reasons and very specific odds.
One is a “definite” and the other *could* be a “maybe...maybe not” situation.
How you *react* to either dog determines whether you get perforated...or not.
Thanks for at least honestly participating.
I do appreciate it...:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hc5P8n3LRak
Third or fourth one, the dog actually attacks the handler who is trying to pull him off the criminal.
No, I am talking only about pit bulls.
Guns kill far more people than pit bulls, every day.
That logic has been proved here many times to be fallacious. Guns do not jump out of their holster all on their own and go maul somebody - or even shoot them. It is not a valid analogy and it is silly to suggest it.
You *are* aware that gun bans and breed bans have a strong commonality, aren’t you??
In the context of this discussion, there is no commonality whatsoever.
And what is with the * * thingys you are inserting into your post??? Are you typing in texting symbols? Actually will appreciate an answer on this.
You are also reaching when you try to say the State should not have any say in the control of wild beast in residential neighborhoods. To use a correct analogy, do you advocate allowing people to keep a tiger in their home?
Yes, all pit bulls are evil. Human intervention will bring it out. But even without human encouragement, the evil will come out of a pit bull all on its own. They are evil I tell you! Evil! Even the cute loving ones owned by great people that treat them properly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.