Pit Bulls: What's the appeal?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1263 of them)
Or a drunken hobo clown?

nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:08 (twenty years ago) link

Hahaha.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:08 (twenty years ago) link

"I've heard many stories of once stray or abandoned pit bulls being adopted out to families with kids, and very successfully."
my parents adopted a stray pit bull when i was 3 or 4 and he died when i was about 14. he was the kindest, gentlest, most playful dog i've had (out of 4) and the only time he ever snapped at anyone was at a party of our when some jackass started swatting him and yanking on his tail and shit. he didnt even bite the guy. just snapped and growled.
the only dog i've been bit by is a chow, for what it's worth.

Felcher (Felcher), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:08 (twenty years ago) link

They give great big bear hugs. Therefore, they have -hug- appeal.

[/twee]

And pits are just better than labs. Sorry, but I think labs are more boring.

Kerry (dymaxia), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:09 (twenty years ago) link

I don't really get the whole pet thing, to be honest. I must love Hitler or something.

Markelby (Mark C), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:10 (twenty years ago) link

OH MY GOD has that ever made my day!

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:13 (twenty years ago) link

I certainly have them to enhance my tough guy appeal.

luna (luna.c), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:14 (twenty years ago) link

"I don't really get the whole pet thing, to be honest. I must love Hitler or something."
don't feel bad. i don't like babies. or cake.

Felcher (Felcher), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:14 (twenty years ago) link

How about Hitler-shaped cakes made out of babies?

I certainly have them to enhance my tough guy appeal.

Luna, I said SOME pit bull owners.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:15 (twenty years ago) link

Wait, what's still a legitimate question? HOW MANY TIMES DOES SOMEONE HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT? You don't see the appeal. Many people have said what they like about pits, but somehow you don't see it. I don't know what to tell you, broheems.

oops (Oops), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:15 (twenty years ago) link

Oh I know, Alex, I was just making myself laugh there. Nothing to see here.

luna (luna.c), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:16 (twenty years ago) link

really, i'd prefer hitler-shaped brownies made out of babies.

Felcher (Felcher), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:17 (twenty years ago) link

HOW MANY TIMES DOES SOMEONE HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT?

Maybe I AM NOT CONVINCED BY YOUR EXPLANATION, how about that?

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:17 (twenty years ago) link

hitler was a dog lover, actually.

dyson (dyson), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:17 (twenty years ago) link

Maybe this is more constructive: do you pit-bull owners ever feel stigmatized? Do you ever sense that people are fearful?

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:18 (twenty years ago) link

So you're not convinced that people have pits who are loving, playful, obedient, etc? I don't think there's anything anyone here could say that would get you to see their appeal, but that's your MO pretty much so hey. (no disrespect)

oops (Oops), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:20 (twenty years ago) link

i think he doesnt see how the appeal of pit bulls could possibly override the possible danger that comes with owning a pit bull.

Felcher (Felcher), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:22 (twenty years ago) link

Sure, reduce me to a cartoon character, then say "No disrespect". Yeah right.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:23 (twenty years ago) link

ts: appeal of pitbulls in comparison to inherent danger vs. appeal of automobiles in comparison to inherent danger

nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:23 (twenty years ago) link

What made me think of this thread in the first place...

http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/0060537795.01.MZZZZZZZ.jpg
In her sixth true crime book (after The Embrace), Jones displays a remarkable ability to present an enormous amount of detailed information in a thrilling narrative that is neither sensationalistic nor maudlin. Still, this is a shocking tale, as Jones provides a no-holds-barred investigation into the brutal death of 33-year-old Diane Whipple after being mauled when savage dogs owned by lawyers Marjorie Knoller and Robert Noel entered the "red zone," a nonscientific term used to describe dogs "in the height of attack mode... beyond human control." The incident immediately received major national news attention, and Jones elaborates on the sordid details that emerged, including that the lawyers bred killer dogs to be sold to guard illegal methamphetamine labs, a scheme run from behind bars by Paul Schnieder, an Aryan Brotherhood member whom the lawyers not only represented but later adopted as part of a planned bizarre sexual triangle. Combining investigative reporting with exclusive access to Noel as well as to members of the San Francisco Police Department and the district attorney's office, Jones explores the lawyers' self-styled gothic world, a human "red zone" involving pornography and bestiality that had existed well before the death of Diane Whipple. With its graphic descriptions, this book is not for the squeamish.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:25 (twenty years ago) link

Yeah I see that point. I myself wouldn't choose to own one. But it must be that he overestimates the danger and underestimates the appeal (to people other than him, of course)

(xpost)

haha basically you ARE a cartoon character to me, and I don't think I'm alone in thinking that here

oops (Oops), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:26 (twenty years ago) link

These were *not* pit-bulls, btw.

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:26 (twenty years ago) link

i think the risk is just too great in owning one of those dogs. that is all. i dysagree with kerry + the pro-pit-bull armada. i'm not convinced other wise + she isn't changing her mind either.
'nuff arguing more images of roy.

dyson (dyson), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:27 (twenty years ago) link

do you pit-bull owners ever feel stigmatized? Do you ever sense that people are fearful?

Sort of - because people don't understand anything about them and only go by what they've heard and not their own experience. However, I know what mine are like, and those of my friends and neighbors, so I kind of don't care if other people don't like it or don't get it - they don't have to. And yeah, people have crossed the street to avoid walking by my dogs - but I chalk it up to ignorance. It's very clear that I'm not walking a snarling ball of rage on the end of a leash, but a happy, sometimes drooling, always tail wagging and obedient big ball of puppy.

luna (luna.c), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:27 (twenty years ago) link

Actually we're all cartoon characters up in here.

(goshdarned xposts!)

nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:27 (twenty years ago) link

Also, the dogs that killed Diane Whipple were NOT pit bulls.

luna (luna.c), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:27 (twenty years ago) link

um, yeah, x-post-a-go-go.

luna (luna.c), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:28 (twenty years ago) link

I think some people will cross the street to avoid any kind of dog - and your dog looks very cute Luna. However, I am curious about why someone would want something that clearly, at least signifies, a threat to many people.

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:29 (twenty years ago) link

i think the risk is just too great in owning one of those dogs. that is all.

I agree, which is what prompts the question.

I know the Whipple case dogs weren't pit bulls, but pit bulls entertain a simillar reputation.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:29 (twenty years ago) link

am curious about why someone would want something that clearly, at least signifies, a threat to many people.

I'd put this same question to gun owners.

luna (luna.c), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:32 (twenty years ago) link

However, I am curious about why someone would want something that clearly, at least signifies, a threat to many people.

Also, what's the appeal of a shotgun? (xpost)

I'm not saying this is a factor for Luna, but she is a woman living alone in a dangerous city.


oops (Oops), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:33 (twenty years ago) link

Nobody walks their shotgun.

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:33 (twenty years ago) link

those were presa canarios or whatever the heck they're called that gygax! mentioned upthread, right?

xposts, whoo hoo!

lauren (laurenp), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:33 (twenty years ago) link

They're not considered threatening where I live. I guess it depends on where you live. There are two or three pits on my block.

Kerry (dymaxia), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:34 (twenty years ago) link

so if i see someone with a pit-bull and i cross the street to avoid it, i'm being ingnorant¿
just when i was sick of debating.
me having concern for my safety = ignorance. great. thank you.

dyson (dyson), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:34 (twenty years ago) link

I'd imagine your less likely to run into someone toting a shotgun walking down the street than someone walking a pit bull.

damn x-post

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:34 (twenty years ago) link

If it was legal to walk around with your shotgun people would.
Go to rural Arizona and see what happens when laws allow you to carry weapons around.

oops (Oops), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:36 (twenty years ago) link

This is what happens when devil's advocates come together.

nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:37 (twenty years ago) link

Anyway you're switching up the argument, ie whether you can walk around with a gun has nothing to do with the question. You asked why someone would want to own something that threatened other people. People have owned such things since the beginning of time.

oops (Oops), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:39 (twenty years ago) link

If it was legal to walk around with your shotgun people would.

and if it was legal to own one of these, people would too:

http://www.supposedlysane.com/busterdog.jpg

what's your point?

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:39 (twenty years ago) link

What's yours?

oops (Oops), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:40 (twenty years ago) link

However, I am curious about why someone would want something that clearly, at least signifies, a threat to many people.

There are lots of reasons to own a pit bull, which have been enumerated at length. Making a major decision like choosing the pet with whom you'll spend the next decade or so should be a personal one, and ideally not influenced by others' stereotypes.

xp-a-rama

JuliaA (j_bdules), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:41 (twenty years ago) link

Anyway you're switching up the argument, ie whether you can walk around with a gun has nothing to do with the question

you're the one who brought up the shotgun, I was merely pointing out that owning a dog in a city is something that is done in public.

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:41 (twenty years ago) link

whereas shotguns are kept in private obv.

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:42 (twenty years ago) link

Nobody walks their shotgun.

Cause that was a total non-sequitur

oops (Oops), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:42 (twenty years ago) link

i. am. not. ignorant.

dyson (dyson), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:42 (twenty years ago) link

Anyway you're switching up the argument

I didn't bring guns into this, Luna did.

whether you can walk around with a gun has nothing to do with the question. You asked why someone would want to own something that threatened other people.

No, I asked why someone would want a pit bull. "To Threaten Someone" was someone else's explanation....and an unattractive one at that.

People have owned such things since the beginning of time.

Does that make it right?

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:42 (twenty years ago) link

Okay, I don't mean ignorant in the 'hey you're a fucking dumbass' sense here - but as you are allowed your opinion, aren't I allowed mine?

I don't have pitbulls, or would I have a dog at all - for reasons of safety.

No, people don't walk guns - however I personally know more people who have died or been grievously wounded by them than have ever been bitten by a dog of any kind. Dogs are to be feared and reviled, while guns are 'yeah, hey okay, come look at my grandfather's arsenal, it's cool'.

You don't have to agre with me, but by the same token, don't expect me to agree with you. I have my own, personal experience going on here, something I live with every day... You have paranoia and overly hyped media horror stories. You think I'm a bad mother because I have pitbulls in my house with my child? That's okay, I respect your right to feel that way, and yes, I can even see where you're coming from. But can you see my point at all?

luna (luna.c), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:43 (twenty years ago) link

However, I am curious about why someone would want something that clearly, at least signifies, a threat to many people.
Also, what's the appeal of a shotgun? (xpost)

I'm not saying this is a factor for Luna, but she is a woman living alone in a dangerous city.


-- oops (don'temailmenicelad...), January 26th, 2004 1:33 PM. (Oops)

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 26 January 2004 21:43 (twenty years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.