Newsbot Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 A dangerous pit bull type dog, banned under island law, is seized in the Isle of Man after it was illegally imported. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7605206.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutley Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I didn't realise Sarah Palin was visiting the island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 What's the guessing on the identity of the owner? Shaved head, blue adidas traky and big white trainers? Sounds like another fuckwitts dog brought in by a fuckwitt owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartacus Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Pity they weren't so stringent when (Transit) Van essa Felch was in town.. White people eating chips. Suppose it's more accurate than "Freedom to Flourish" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vix Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 What's the guessing on the identity of the owner? Shaved head, blue adidas traky and big white trainers? Sounds like another fuckwitts dog brought in by a fuckwitt owner. The owner of this dog is actually a girl I work with who has had the dog for over 5 years and it has been registered with the government since it was a puppy. I personally think that the fact it has been seized by the government is appauling. The dog has been seen by a behavioral specialist who has said the dog is perfectly safe. I think the comments are above are pathetic... stereotyping people without knowing any backround is not fair. Think before you post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartacus Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Ok, fair enough. But you have to admit that the first image that springs to mind with these dogs is that their owner is a clueless Chav who, despite living in Rochdale, listens to rap music "and dat". As a dog owner I'd hate to have my faithful friend (not you Colin) taken away - especially to be destroyed. But what the hell did she need a fighting dog for? I wish her all the best but I fear the day it ever came after one of mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 The owner of this dog is actually a girl I work with who has had the dog for over 5 years and it has been registered with the government since it was a puppy. I personally think that the fact it has been seized by the government is appauling. The dog has been seen by a behavioral specialist who has said the dog is perfectly safe. I think the comments are above are pathetic... stereotyping people without knowing any backround is not fair. Think before you post! Are you saying this dog was brought in from Northern Ireland 5 years ago and at that time registered with 'the government'? It is interesting that the same government now say: "Pitbull terrier types of dogs are not domestic pets, they are potential killers and should no suitable home be found off the island this dog will have to be put down," a government spokesman said. Given all the dogs out there why choose one you have to 'register with the government'? I would be seriously concerned for anyone who wants a pit-bull as a pet. There are much less aggressive bull terriers if you wanted one (Manchester and Staffordshire). Whilst stereotyping is never a great idea it is a fact that some of the less wholesome Loyalist thugs/drug dealers in NI favour this breed (per the PSNI). This is probably because owners tend to look like their dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vix Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 The owner of this dog is actually a girl I work with who has had the dog for over 5 years and it has been registered with the government since it was a puppy. I personally think that the fact it has been seized by the government is appauling. The dog has been seen by a behavioral specialist who has said the dog is perfectly safe. I think the comments are above are pathetic... stereotyping people without knowing any backround is not fair. Think before you post! Are you saying this dog was brought in from Northern Ireland 5 years ago and at that time registered with 'the government'? It is interesting that the same government now say: "Pitbull terrier types of dogs are not domestic pets, they are potential killers and should no suitable home be found off the island this dog will have to be put down," a government spokesman said. Given all the dogs out there why choose one you have to 'register with the government'? I would be seriously concerned for anyone who wants a pit-bull as a pet. There are much less aggressive bull terriers if you wanted one (Manchester and Staffordshire). Whilst stereotyping is never a great idea it is a fact that some of the less wholesome Loyalist thugs/drug dealers in NI favour this breed (per the PSNI). This is probably because owners tend to look like their dogs. The dog was registered with the government as in it had a licence.. as should all IOM dogs as I understand it?!? the government have been happy to issue the dog licence for the past 5 years and now since the introduction of this new legislation they are renaging on this and have taken the dog. I understand the rationale behind the introduction of the dangerous dogs act/s but think they should be working on the proviso that no new american pitbulls can be registered.. not take away loving established family pets... and demand that they are re-homed in 14 days or the dog will be destroyed.. do you not think that is a bit severe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheriff Buford T. Justice Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Well I'm glad it's been taken away. These dogs are not a natural breed and have only been bred for fighting purposes. They're cute and harmless until they mawl an innocent child's face off. They're completely unpredictable and there's no need for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vix Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Well I'm glad it's been taken away. These dogs are not a natural breed and have only been bred for fighting purposes. They're cute and harmless until they mawl an innocent child's face off. They're completely unpredictable and there's no need for them. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=25893149946 The link above is to the facebook group for Champ... In relation to the comments above...any dog being provoked could be prone to attack a child.. Many breeds have got the same stigma attached to them as american pitbulls... my boyfriend has got a boxer and he is literally the softest dog I have ever come across.. its not fair to tar all american pitbulls with the same brush... just because some have been violent in the past... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 I understand the rationale behind the introduction of the dangerous dogs act/s but think they should be working on the proviso that no new american pitbulls can be registered.. not take away loving established family pets... and demand that they are re-homed in 14 days or the dog will be destroyed.. do you not think that is a bit severe? They're cute and harmless until they mawl an innocent child's face off. They're completely unpredictable and there's no need for them. My concern is why would someone want one of these dogs given their reputation (which wasn't acquired yesterday or for a single isolated attack)? Did your friend acquire it naively or did she realise she was getting a pit-bull terrier? There really are so many ordinary, pleasant mongrels and other dogs out there one wonders why she didn't choose one of them? It seems such a risky choice to have made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 There really are so many ordinary, pleasant mongrels and other dogs out there one wonders why she didn't choose one of them? Or a polar bear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finneginswake Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 When a dog attacks a child the owners invariably claim that it was behaving out of character IMO any dog which cannot be safely let off its lead in public should be put down, not just "dangerous" breeds Anyone who has seen that huge alsation/cross thing tied outside Tesco would agree. I often see it wearing a muzzle and dragging its owner along Other than showing up the inadequacies of the owner and producing heaps of shit, I fail to see what these "pets " are for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutley Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 its not fair to tar all american pitbulls with the same brush... just because some have been violent in the past... Erm yes it is actually. The dogs were breed specifically to be aggressive and to fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 There really are so many ordinary, pleasant mongrels and other dogs out there one wonders why she didn't choose one of them? Or a polar bear. Better still exploit the Manx connections: ursus kermodiae - Kermode's Bear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.