Bananaman Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 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! Bullshit! Was this 'behavioral specialist' who said the dog is perfectly safe a qualified veterinary surgeon? You Vix are an out and out cock! Scarily my beautiful wife had to go and destroy another pikey chav scumbag's pet a few months ago. Somehow the Gypo lot had managed to get their hands on an Alaskan Timberwolf. Now here's the rub. They took it to my wife (caged, somehow pikeys really respect vets) to have it's vaccinations. Beautiful wife said; This isn't leaving the building I don't care how much you paid for it. Was destroyed under the dangerous dogs act before any silly arsed animal lovers could try to re home it. A fucking timber wolf! Staffies don't cut the mustard with the chav bunch no more (Which is a shame - I like Staffs). You have been warned! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananaman Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Arse! Meant to add Bring on the Trumpets! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 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. How was its breed described? The article also refers to it being illegally imported, how did that happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comeover Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I keep reading in various places that Champ has had a licence for the last 5 years. I find that weird as he isn't even 4 years old yet!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 How was its breed described? The article also refers to it being illegally imported, how did that happen? We don't know in this case do we? but I wouldn't be surprised if pit-bull owners describe them as 'bull terriers' on forms. Or maybe 'toy poodles' as that is how the owners generally see themselves. Its not like the vehicle test - "want your dog licence - bring the dog" I think the 'behavioural specialists' should check out the people who want to own pitbulls. There has to be something wrong in choosing a fighting dog with a repuation for horrendous injuries to babies. P.S. If Vix is Salford I claim my £50! I missed it last time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I keep reading in various places that Champ has had a licence for the last 5 years. I find that weird as he isn't even 4 years old yet!! 'Champ' is a daft name for a pit-bull. 'Chomp' would be more appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comeover Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Why don't the Government so a DNA test?? The results could have been back by now, and everything sorted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 P.S. If Vix is Salford I claim my £50! I missed it last time.... Fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Buy an illegal breed of dog and then cry when it gets taken away to be put to sleep? There is a lesson to be learned somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knoxville Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 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! Bullshit! Was this 'behavioral specialist' who said the dog is perfectly safe a qualified veterinary surgeon? You Vix are an out and out cock! Scarily my beautiful wife had to go and destroy another pikey chav scumbag's pet a few months ago. Somehow the Gypo lot had managed to get their hands on an Alaskan Timberwolf. Now here's the rub. They took it to my wife (caged, somehow pikeys really respect vets) to have it's vaccinations. Beautiful wife said; This isn't leaving the building I don't care how much you paid for it. Was destroyed under the dangerous dogs act before any silly arsed animal lovers could try to re home it. A fucking timber wolf! Staffies don't cut the mustard with the chav bunch no more (Which is a shame - I like Staffs). You have been warned! Your wife kills animals for a living..........can I stick a needle full of bleach in her please, I'm curious to how she would react. I dont know this dog from Adam, but at the end of the day it hasnt hurt anyone, there hasnt been any reports of it being violent to anyone........so what is the point in putting it down, if it was brought here after the ban was introduced then someone in the Government needs to look at how animals are registered. Like somoene said above, its not like getting your car done, but maybe thats how it should be done, any dogs brought into the Island should be seen by a vet and have the various tests done etc. If it was brought here before the ban, then let it be. I for one think its pretty nasty that its being put down if it cant be re-homed, espc when its done nothing wrong to hurt anyone. All I'm going to say is Karma......so if your wife is killing the dog, sorry I mean putting it down.......then at some point its going to come back and bite her in the ass, and hopefuly she'll be foaming at the side of her mouth by the end of it. EDIT - for the spelling police on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I took my rottweiler to the vets the other day for a check up, the doctor picked him up and had a good look around then he said "I am going to have to put him down." I started crying and asked him why, to which he said "because he is fucking heavy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutley Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannin Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Your wife kills animals for a living..........can I stick a needle full of bleech in her please, I'm curious to how she would react. <snip> All I'm going to say is Karma......so if your wife is killing the dog, sorry I mean putting it down.......then at some point its going to come back and bite her in the ass, and hopefuly she'll be foaming at the side of her mouth by the end of it. She doesn't kill animals for a living, but unfortunately it's part of her job. There will be times that it's the hardest part of her job and even times that it's the most caring part of her job. Offering to inject her with bleach (not bleech) is a little bit dumb IMHO. I think that it's unfortunate that this dogs will be destroyed, if it has not been aggressive then there are questions about why it can't be re-homed. If it truly is a pitbull then there is no way it can be re-homed in the UK, I'm not sure about Ireland or other parts of the world. People do often mistake other bull terriers and crossbreeds for pitbulls so I can understand hoiw it could have been around for a while and not been spotted/reported before. It is an unfortunate truth that these dogs do have very aggressive tendencies and cause a significant risk to people and other animals, this is not their fault but the fault of those that have engineered them. It is a shame that the dog must lose it's life (and a family must lose a pet they love) but the law dictates that is the case with these dogs. Regardless if the dog's nature it will be destroyed (rightly or wrongly) for the safety of the public at large. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I think stating that Bananaman's wife kills animals for a living is a little harsh, if she is a vet then her job is to treat animals, but for me if a vet deems an animal as a danger then I for one will fully agree with her decision. As for the dog in question would any of you who state this beast was no danger be willing to put your young children in a room alone with it, to me an animal bred for fighting has no place in a domestic environment as a pet, even the most timid of dogs once they get the taste for attack are a danger let alone one who has it as a natural instinct to attack. As for the question of the person buying this beast as a pet could someone please explain the mentality of why a person with children buys a fighting dog as a pet, thats about the same level as leaving a bag of heroine around kids with the statement of "Well they havn't touched it before why should they now". Ok rant over, I shall now go and take my Siberian sabre toothed hunting hamster out for a walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananaman Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 She doesn't kill animals for a living, but unfortunately it's part of her job. There will be times that it's the hardest part of her job and even times that it's the most caring part of her job.Offering to inject her with bleach (not bleech) is a little bit dumb IMHO. Thank-you. Did I ever tell of the time a rather unpleasant family brought a Pitbull for my wife to have a look at? They argued and argued with her that it wasn't a Pitbull but an 'Irish Staffordshire Terrier'. I kid you not. Oh and they grabbed the dog and legged it out of the practice before she could do anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.