One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Boo_Boo
Page: <<prev 1 ... 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 ... 1349 next>>
Apr 2, 2014 23:15:03   #
No, these dogs go very far back in history. The origins of the breed can be traced back to antiquity and the Molossian family of dogs. The Molossian family of dogs bears the name of the people with whom they were most often associated - the Molossi tribe, a group of people who lived in ancient Greece and favored the use of robust, muscular dogs in warfare. Officially termed canus molossi (dogs of the Molossi), these animals were renowned for their fierceness, and for their innate ability to intimidate the enemies of the tribe. In modern times the breed has been mated to enhance their fierceness. This is the problem with designer dogs.

ginger wrote:
No they were not bred to fight. Just some a**holes train them to.
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 23:08:35   #
Nicely written. But, DNA can tell the parentage of the animal. Which could lead to the study of the effects of inbreeding on the species. There are zoos that go to great lengths to prevent in breeding. Take for example the destruction of the healthy giraffe and its dissection in front of a group of kids and then they destroyed a p***e of healthy lions to prevent inbreeding. I do admire your thinking out of the box, and the exploration of genes and their placements in the helix; and even if we mapped the entire sequence, there is not way, at present, to replace specific genes and produce a dog that will not revert to instinctual nature of the wolf. If DNA is tracked then breeders can ensure that they are not interbreeding and therefor produce healthier specimens.

no propaganda please wrote:
On the surface, your idea of checking the DNA sounds good. however, there are so many genes involved in temperament, not a single gene for any behavior in either man of dog. You would have to find all the genes for fear aggression, which are different from those which modify reactive to noise, territorial, food protective, toy hording aggression. The genes may be located in different areas for different breeds, so the crosses might have new locations, not like either parent. Studies to find the gene for primary lense luxation in terriers took years and thousands of dollars and it is only a single gene, no modifiers. Way too much of a task. then you have to add envirorment, epilepsy, brain tumors, diabetes as causes for aggression and you can see what an impossible task it really is. Suggestion for anyone buying a dog. go to a reliable breeder, handle their adult dogs, watch the dogs at dog shows and performance events, check the pedigrees, then train and socialize the dog well, feed it well and make sure that if you bought it as a house dog, not a working dog for livestock or hunting, it lives in the house with you. Make sure the breeder will help you any way they can, and get references from people who have purchased dogs from that person. A bargain dog seldom really is a bargain.
On the surface, your idea of checking the DNA soun... (show quote)
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 22:22:18   #
Two times in one day. Yes, s***ery needs to be put to bed. High time to move forward and stop living in the past.

rumitoid wrote:
Bury the past and pave it over with apple pie America? Sounds right. No revisionist history there: we sell hot dogs, fer cryin' out loud! S***ery? Get over it and play ball.
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 22:14:14   #
Difference between a feral cat and a pit bull, the cat will run and try to escape. A pit bull attacks and when they get the taste of blood, then they go into a biting frenzy. I am not saying that they should be all rounded up and put down, but I am saying that none should be adopted that is in tact and should not be allowed to breed. If they have bitten then they should have the extraction of the canine teeth so they can not bit again and cause serious damage. In 15 years or so, the breed will naturally die out. They are handsome animals and I am sure that some of them are lovely pets.

cant beleve wrote:
Have any of you ever watched pit bulls and parolees? These Dogs can be mean'so'are feral cats. This argument that they need to be done away with is ludicrous. And black sheep. I am very surprised that you of all people would write such b.s.
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 21:51:09   #
I do not agree with you in 99.9 percent of the time. However, when you are right; you are right! I have to agree with you, if people do not like what Bo says or the manner in which he presents his side, move on to a post that you can make a reasonable input. Bo does not ask and I have not seen him demand anyone agree with him, he is very reasonable when treated as an equal without calling him names. Of course he will respond in the same manner he is addressed.

rumitoid wrote:
Ve'hoe wrote:
No,,,we want unlimited 2nd amendment rights because you have no right to infringe,,,, YOU and the l*****ts want to silence opposition......

I personally, like beating the crap out of bojerkoff.....
If I could just pick up hungry fleabags, and beat bojerkoff over the head with him,,,,, there would be two bodies and no weapon..... perfect,,, but what sign of life would either of those brain dead dimwits have that proved they were alive at one time??? Certainly not brain waves...


Every right in the Bill of Rights has reasonable restrictions and/or standards. Common sense and a nation of laws demand it. That is my opinion and in no way looks to "silence opposition." Lump me in with anyone for wh**ever reason looking to suppress opposition and you egregiously misspeak. That was uncalled for. If Bo bothers you, ignore. Boycotting him for wh**ever reason is your choice of course, just as what he says is his choice, but wishing a whole community to silence an oppositional voice goes back to the medieval practice of scapegoating.
Ve'hoe wrote: br No,,,we want unlimited 2nd amendm... (show quote)
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 21:43:01   #
Bo, you and I do not always agree, but I will stand beside you! And you are welcome for a number of reasons: your responses to me are reasonable, you do not take any guff from anyone, and it is the right thing to do!

BoJester wrote:
Thank you Ginny for being the voice of reason and pointing out the hypocrisy that so many conservatives complain that their rights are being infringed, but they have no problem with taking rights away from those they disagree with
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 21:13:18   #
NO! I am not a Liberal and some of his posts are borderline, but he has just as much right to state his opinion as you or I. Recently there were a few people that were banned from this site. Why, well one told jokes and stood up for my daughter and the other....who knows. But, the point is too many people claim rights, but are unwilling to allow others to have the same freedoms and rights. So, no! The school yard bully is not Bo. If you are uncomfortable with his post, stop reading them.

Kidriculous wrote:
Let's all band together and boycott Bo Jester. I don't know about the rest of you but I participate in these threads because I believe in being open minded and I value others opinions...even if they are different from mine. I don't, however, appreciate people who use childish insults to bash people who have different beliefs. If you agree, please stop acknowledging Bo's comments. It may take a few days but sooner or later he will either go away or he will realize that he needs to act like an adult and not a schoolyard bully. His intent to the whole forum is to get a rise from the reasonable. It is this ridiculous behavior that is creating the division in this country. DNR!
Let's all band together and boycott Bo Jester. I d... (show quote)
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 19:55:29   #
Yes I have. I also have been to a farm that has "walkers and trotters." Skinny legs; they look so fragile. Farm horses are remarkable. Huge beasts. Duckie likes to go with me when called out to those farms. As yet, we have made no rescues from those places. Most of those breeders really love their animals.

maelstrom wrote:
Thank you for the comment, have you ever been to a quarter horse show? Talk about designer breeds, they have bred some of them to have the biggest butts :lol: they look more like big pigs :cry:


:thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 11:23:17   #
This often happens when humans start breeding for characteristics. Designer dogs! Take the Lacy, this dog will be able to survive in any situation. They have been bred to take down large animals, as big as bulls. They can survive eating scrub grass and go for days without water. Now they are great dogs, but in 20 years they too may become a hazard to humans and in particular small children. I like mutts. Most of them are a combination of many breeds. I do love animals, and my heart breaks when I turn away a pit bull. But, my family has to come above my rescue efforts.

Thank you for the insight and thought you put into your comment.

maelstrom wrote:
I agree with you Ginny
Pit bulls were not only bred to attack but to keep attacking until it's a k**l. In-breeding is a problem with all breeds because it accentuates their positives and negatives, if in the wild it would never happen, it has been promoted by people. Now after years of breeding it works it's way into the DNA of the animal, creating this so called memory gene. I point this out because it is not entirely up to who brings up the dog. The dog can come from a loving home and one day a switch gets turned on and it decides to attack.

For example I've had a golden retriever, all on it's own as very young puppy stared to retrieve dead birds it would find on the coast. Had a border collie, couldn't figure out why she chased the horses until I realized she wasn't chasing them she was herding them.

Found a mix puppy, very loving dog, slept and would clean cat she was raised with. Would suddenly chase cat and if it would be completely submissive she would just stop the aggression, well one day the cat became slightly defensive, and the dog reacted and she broke it's neck, never drew any blood. Had nothing to do with how she was brought up.

Pit bulls " may" have a switch also, as far as I see it, it's a crap shoot, a gamble each owner takes, unfortunately innocent people can be collateral damage.
I agree with you Ginny br Pit bulls were not only ... (show quote)
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 11:18:22   #
That is right. There are no across the states tests on these animals yet and no database yet, many states are in the process of passing laws and building a mega base regarding animal attacks--not just pit bulls. Vets have hypothesized that the reason for the sudden triggers is a result of breeding for the aggressive tendencies. In my mind, backyard breeders need to be shut down and fined or jailed there are too many animals that come from these puppy mills that wind up in bad situation. Animal control in 15 states do take DNA, scan for microchips, when they either capture or k**l a dog or cat. Larger animals are always tested; by larger I am talking about bears, cougars, and the like.

Terry Allan Hall wrote:
So...what you're saying is that there's no DNA evidence to prove either your point or mine...right?

And while I've never tried to do so, I'm guessing that it would be difficult to verify lineages from "back-yard breeders", as they'd most likely NOT want to admit that they sold an inferior animal, whether to a pet store or directly to the buyer. Likely would cut into the profits, ya know?

Maybe Animal Control should start taking DNA from dogs being destroyed for viciousness, which might prove to be instructive...
So...what you're saying is that there's no DNA evi... (show quote)
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 10:49:47   #
There is no evidence to support your claims. Many of these animals were immediately put down; their bodies cremated once it was determined that there were no rabies. No DNA testing was performed on those animals. The only dog that I know of, at this very moment who attacked and severely wounded a 4 year old child, was taken into custody and subsequently saved with provisions that the biting teeth be removed and the dog never to be placed in another home, is in AZ. All others, to my knowledge was destroyed; and again no testing was done to determine their linage. If you have information that is different than what I have stated, please provide your sources.

Terry Allan Hall wrote:
Some valid points (highlighted)...if we could look more closely into each attack, I believe in most, if not all, cases, the animal was from inbred stock...when a breed becomes popular, "back-yard breeders" cross brother to sister, to get bigger litters, so they have more puppies to sell.
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 10:06:39   #
All dogs can be dangerous. Take for example the Saint Bernard. They were inbreed into insanity back in the 60s. The Doberman, again inbred for skull shape. Madness was a result in some of these dogs. And the list goes on. Of course, there are some good pit bulls, but there are those pit bulls that have been trained and treated well that have still k**led babies, their owners, and other dogs for no reason. Before banning these animals, some research has to be done to figure out what has gone wrong with these animals. It is possible that there has been too much inbreeding to perfect the attack personality. Pit bulls have very muscular bodies and heavy steel trapped jaws that can exert a pressure of over 1800 pounds per square inch. They usually attack silently, even without being provoked. The majority of there victims have been family members. Most animals will give warning that they are going to attack. Not pit bulls, they will just turn and snap; k*****g easily their target. It has even gotten to the point where many insurance companies are now refusing to cover pit bulls, and a few other very aggressive dogs. I would rather been in a room with a rattle snake than a pit bull. And you do know that people select animals that closely match their own personalities. This is an interesting read: http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112518215/dogs-and-their-owners-have-matching-personalities/

Terry Allan Hall wrote:
Contrary to popular hysteria, pit bulls who've been socialized and are from healthy stock (which is to say, not inbred to make them extra aggressive) are no more dangerous than any other breed of dog.

No idea about the bloodline of the dogs that k**led the woman (but have my suspitions), but dogs locked up in a bedroom obviously were never socialized.

Rottweilers are often considered dangerous, as well, but the same applies to them as does pitbulls (and every other breed)...socialization and good breeding makes for loving, lovable dogs, as my son's three Rotties, my 2 Great Danes, my Grandmother's Irish Wolfhound and my daughter's assorted "yappers" prove time and again.
Contrary to popular hysteria, pit bulls who've bee... (show quote)
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 09:33:19   #
Not all of these dogs are bad, and yes dogs are a product of many things such as breed and how they are handled and trained. I hope that your dog(s) never harm you or someone else. For me, well I do not want them within a hundred miles of my family. I wish you nothing but happiness and a long life.

73STNGLKABEE wrote:
some people were born to fight, outlaw them?
Pitbull stigma is a myth. Ive had several and still do. Actually, breaking up fights and supervising play and even getting bitten, as crazy as it sounds, changes you as a human. I believe it could help in interactions with unfriendly dogs or humans in the future, letting you keep a cooler head in emergencies. I am a life time owner, they can be aggressive, but so can any organism/mammal/human/insects etc. stop picking on pitbulls, their plight is difficult enough. Some people just shouldn't have dogs or kids for that matter as well.
some people were born to fight, outlaw them? br Pi... (show quote)
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 01:21:21   #
Nicely put. I so agree with paragraph 2. I can not tell you how many airport floors my husband and I bunked down on waiting for connecting flights. I did not have a campaign like this solider, so my husband and I took turns.

AuntiE wrote:
For those who may be confused, it is a photo of a solider sleeping on an airport floor with his "military" partner "got his back" literally. The solider was awaiting his connecting flight.

The people who would be confused about the photo would be those who NEVER would have anybody's back, because they do not understand the meaning of such a phrase.
Go to
Apr 2, 2014 00:45:56   #
Title and photograph is from AuntiE.


Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 ... 1349 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.