thesultanofsheight Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 so your telling me calling a women a dog and pond scum is not sad and pathetic..??? im not quite sure what planet you inhabit but im glad its not the same one as me ... if your think those retorts are witty and clever... Its quite funny really .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vix Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 so your telling me calling a women a dog and pond scum is not sad and pathetic..??? im not quite sure what planet you inhabit but im glad its not the same one as me ... if your think those retorts are witty and clever... Its quite funny really .. if you say so.. i think its weak tbh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silentbob Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Sorry if we have wrongfully stereotyped the owner of a Pitbull - who upon being found out has tried every excuse, including changing her story several times - as a chav/pondscum/doggish type. Be sure to forward us her off Island address when she fucks off and we will surely send her a postcard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananaman Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 A SilentBob. This Sara women hasn't really helped herself with her dreadful spelling and grammar with her pathetic bleeding heart stories. Which does make you assume she's a bit if a thicko. Oooh, a stereotypical pondscum that has a penchant for vile, nasty and outright dangerous animals! Vix - why are you still supporting a flagrant law breaker? I find myself wanting this dog dead now instead of being re-homed because of this bloody stupid charade that a very disillusioned person is running at the moment. Personally, I find that a very sad way for me to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 she won't be leaving the island, and blaming her for the actual problem is pointless as i doubt she had anything to do with bringing the dog over. she is changing her story in an attempt to save the dog AND keep it here, but there are more holes than substance in the fairy tale of 'facts'. on a timeline aspect she has now said she has owned the dog for 5 months ( thats the most recent estimate, but i'm sure it will change to cover my next point once vix has told her) it was advertised on manxnet around 3 months ago, why would the 'old owner' ( or whoever that isn't sarah ) advertise the dog 2 months after it was supposedly sarah's?? it would seem it wasn't really hers and she has come out of the shadows claiming this and that when in all probabillity there was a short time between it being on manxnet and ending up in daffs possession. even this weeks examiner has her named as the owner ( as she claims ) but based on the above timings she cant really have had the dog herself for very long, if at all?? which makes you wonder just how well she really knows the dog?? she may have known the dog casually as a friend of the real owner and now feels the need to 'champ'ion the cause ( slight pun intended ) but it all smells of bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Sheswiththeband claims to have known the dog all its life - wonder if she knows who's owned it, where and when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Whether you're for or against the dog, the basic fact is that the unfortunate dog (albeit no fault of its own) belongs to a person who resides on the island, who is breaking the law in doing so by keeping it here. If it is a pitbull, then the Government has offered an opportunity for it's life to be spared, by giving the owner time to send it somewhere else and although many people disagree with that particular law of killing 'Champ', it is still one of the laws of the island. Personally, if I was to consider the animal as one of the family (as seems the case here), I would be doing my very best to find a safe haven for it and then argue the point later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 I would be doing my very best to find a safe haven for it and then argue the point later. Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananaman Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Whether you're for or against the dog, the basic fact is that the unfortunate dog (albeit no fault of its own) belongs to a person who resides on the island, who is breaking the law in doing so by keeping it here. If it is a pitbull, then the Government has offered an opportunity for it's life to be spared, by giving the owner time to send it somewhere else and although many people disagree with that particular law of killing 'Champ', it is still one of the laws of the island. Personally, if I was to consider the animal as one of the family (as seems the case here), I would be doing my very best to find a safe haven for it and then argue the point later. Welcome to the Bang your head against the wall clubb chap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 But, Manxy, that is the flaw in the argument that has been pointed out by successive posters; the owner has not found a safe haven and then argued the point (which, as you say, any caring owner would have done), but tackled it arse about face. I can fully accept that it is a lovely dog, and has never shown an aggressive tendency (apart from against other dogs, which is a bit of a worry), but it is still a banned breed. More than that, it is not a breed to be trusted and Celt pointed out just why these are such dangerous animals - it is in the bite pattern. But we keep coming back to the same point, it is illegal, it cannot be kept here so, very sadly, it must be dealt with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 I dont think its fair to call someone 'pondscum' when you dont even know them... fair enough critise the action of the individual but refering to Sarah as 'pondscum' and 'dog'... sad and pathetic... obviously you have nothing better to do in your sad, pathetic little lives and it makes you feel witty and clever... Grow Up.. I know her, and i do not object to Ans`s description. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 I can fully accept that it is a lovely dog, and has never shown an aggressive tendency (apart from against other dogs, which is a bit of a worry), but it is still a banned breed. I'm more suspicious than this - we've discussed in-pack and out-pack behavour in dogs I feel we are only hearing about his in pack behaviour - the report says he can only be trusted in 80% of cases - I can almost hear Scottish Terrier's reply that this is perfectly normal and of course dogs have to be controlled. But I'd really like to know what the postman in the area thought about this dog, or any other stranger who had to knock on the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 It has been said that the previous owner has had Champ since he was three months old but 'they don't know how it got here'. Now, I know this might take a bit of imagination but - how about getting on the Ben My Chree with a three month old puppy? Would anyone notice, care, or be able to identify the puppy as a banned breed at that age? No doubt the identity of the breeder is conveniently shrouded in mystery too. There's an old joke "The trouble with women is they take things too personally" - the indignant response being "No I don't!" - It is not about Champ, his bite patterns, temperament or whether he looks less of a killer in sunglasses. It is about what happens if an exception is made and more people think it will be acceptable to bring banned breeds onto the island. If you add the possibility - however slim - that Champ does attack someone and the victim decides to litigate. Major legal battles will ensue. I imagine that politically, DAFF will not have the dog destroyed at all, but will simply bide their time until a place in Eire turns up, thereby not appearing as 'murderers' to the minority of the Manx public with animal welfare red mist over their eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheswiththeband Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 i couldnt give two sh1ts who owns the dog - im sticking up for the dog as there is no way its an american pitbull. if it was, then yeah, i would say yeah it shouldnt have been brought over here or bred here as its completely against the law and yes, i would be scared incase it case it got near my nieces & nephews or any other children. but again i will say Champ is not an APB. and that picture of that little girl, thanks for making me feel terrible whoever posted that. Chinahand - get a grip! before you start slating me i said i have known the dog since it was a puppy, and yes the Law is aware of who had the puppy. however, i didnt say i knew who brought it over or bred it, probably some knob head chav who wants to look hard! i am of the understanding the puppy was rescued from a terrible home, by the person who the law knows. think i will stick to the music forums in future, you bunch of bigots. bring back burning at the stake and hanging! you would all love that! and the birch! infact why dont they have a public dog hanging, then you can all go and watch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 I can fully accept that it is a lovely dog, and has never shown an aggressive tendency (apart from against other dogs, which is a bit of a worry), Errr... it may be me but doesn't showing an aggressive tendency towards other dogs rather show up your "has never shown an aggressive tendency" as an out and out lie? It's either aggressive or it isn't. Or rather as in this case it most definitely is. It's not a person, it's an aggressive fucking dog for chrissake. Start treating it like one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.