[Jawbone54]

FIsher-Price Power Wheels Motorcycle

Eager youngsters who gunned the throttle found that it often stayed gunned, stuck in a petrifying state of perma-acceleration. Presumably, the child on the motorcycle was then taken on a hellish, intestine-twisting scream ride. At one point, he or she would face choices unthinkable except in an Evel Knievel meets Knightrider crossover episode: Do I jump? Or do I ride it out and see if I can clear the gully? Is it sentient? Can it be reasoned with?

[Dakar²]

Yeah, uh, what's the top speed on those?

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Yeah, uh, what's the top speed on those?

In my head...60 mph, minimum.

[Dakar²]

The way he described it I don't blame you.

[Jawbone54]

In actuality, probably 5 mph. I had something similar when I was little. It was so slow I gave up on it about 3 days after Christmas.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

In actuality, probably 5 mph. I had something similar when I was little. It was so slow I gave up on it about 3 days after Christmas.

So did I, but I loved it. Even though it wasn't super-speedy, I was controlling a machine!

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by talisker 

True, in the same way that tuned, lowered cars with pumping stereo systems and massive loud exhausts aren't inherently dangerous. It's just that they tend to be driven by aggressive neanderthals.

You can justify a pit bull's character all you want, but they do tend to appeal to people who like their "hard man" image. i.e. probably the people least suited to looking after a dog.

And the puppy should be destroyed. It chewed off a baby's toes, for f*cks sake.

I'm all for banning idiots worldwide. There would be a WHOLE lot more elbow room. Particularly idiots who play THEIR stereos loud enough for me to hear them a block away, and who drive any car irresponsibly. That's just rude and stupid (respectively).

I do not believe THAT puppy (you saw the picture on page 1?) was able to chew ANYTHING off of ANY baby. See my earlier post-what baby would sit still for something painful like that? What puppy of that age would stick around when baby started kicking him in the face? It doesn't make any sense.

[BISPyrs]

-The irresponsibility of the parents should not be blamed on the dog. People are responsible for their OWN actions. Not animals. -

Regardless of the breed, the puppy's Breeder bears a great deal of the responsibility here. I have been involved in the breeding, training and showing of Great Pyrenees Dogs, (100+lbs) for over 15 years. I have also assisted in training classes at the local obedience club. I have worked with, groomed and shown dogs of many different beeds, sizes, and temperaments. I also have been involved with rescuing a great many dogs from unfortunate situations. Yes, I've really "Gone To The Dogs" and I know a thing or two about dogs, breeders and owners.
A responsible breeder would not have allowed these people to have the puppy in the first place. Regardless of the breed, a 6 week old puppy is too young to be separated from its mother and littermates. At 6 weeks a puppy may not physically need it's mother for nurishment. BUT, it is at 5-6 weeks that the mother begins to teach proper social behavior to her pups. When a puppy first develops teeth who do you think its first victim is? When the puppy nips mom, mom will correct the pup, setting the stage for future training. Also there is much to be learned from the littermates. The puppies begin to learn proper social behavior by interacting with the other pups. Again setting the stage for future training.
Unfortunately it is also at this age that the pups begin to get very expensive to feed. The pups also become alot more work for the breeder at this point as the mother stops cleaning up after them as soon as the pups start eating solid food.
The irresponsible breeder will try to tell you that the pup bonds better to its new owners at the younger age. This is pure nonsense. The pups and even adult dogs will always "Bond" to the most consistant member of the household. The person who is most consistant with rules and expectations is the one that, in the dog's eyes, can be most counted upon in life. At 9 weeks of age, my pups are fully prepared to venture out away from mom and littermates. Most of the adoptive families report the pups do not even wimper or cry the first night. The only one who benefits from placing pups at 6 weeks of age is the breeder, not the new owners, and certrainly not the puppy!
A Responsible Breeder would have also prescreened the puppy's new home and family. Buying from a responsible breeder takes time. A responsible breeder would never place a puppy with an impulsive buyer. The responsible breeder asks alot of questions and checks upon personal references. A reponsible breeder does temperament testing of each pup and the breeder carefully matches each puppy's "personality" to its perspective new family and situation. A Responsible Breeder is just that, RESPONSIBLE...
Had the breeder of this puppy done his or her job responsibly, this puppy would not have been placed with these people and this most unfortunate situation would not have occured.
YES, the child's parents are responsible but so is the puppy's breeder...
If all the Breeders across the country were held to a higher standard and risked being held accountable if they fail to meet that higher standard, there would be alot less irresponsible Breeders, fewer dogs in shelters and rescue programs and whole lot less problems.

For more information on Responsible Breeding see
Getting Started as a Responsible Breeder on the AKC website.

[Jawbone54]

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by BISPyrs 

Regardless of the breed, the puppy's Breeder bears a great deal of the responsibility here.

You are absolutely correct. Did you note that the puppy was SIX WEEKS OLD? That's too young to be properly weaned (most breeders keep the pup with the mom for about 8 weeks). That makes this sound like a very bad back yard breeder at work.

And when do puppies start to teeth? Can a six-week old puppy really gnaw much at all? Our last pup was an 8-week old German Shepherd, and as I recall he didn't have many teeth when we got him.

[Snow-i]

well of course its the dog's fault.
[/sarcasm]

I can't believe that some people wouldn't solely and squarely put the blame on the parents. Its no-ones or no-puppy's fault but their own. their story obviously doesn't even add up yet some people still want to say the puppy is to blame.

The parents are responsble. Period. There's nobody else to point the finger at in this situation. Not even a 6 week old puppy.

[tford8]

What I don't understand in all of this is the news blurbs on Nancy Grace saying docs were unsuccessful in reattaching the toes. Supposedly the parents found the toes. Now, I'm a cat person with an in-house pit. If any of these guys chewed off some toes I certainly wouldn't find them. They'd eat them. Something stinks here. I've had kittens and puppies try to nurse on my fingers, toes and earlobes as well when that young so it's not too far fetched to think that puppy may have been trying to do just that. Makes me wonder when they fed that puppy too. Pits, like any other animal is influenced by the treatment they get. And, on Nancy Grace of course they show full grown pits fighting. Gee, I'm sure that puppy was getting in shape for that? Give me a break. As a responsible pet owner when someone asks if my pit will bite I NEVER tell them no. Any animal that has teeth has the ability to bite even if they never have before.

[ghporter]

tford8, great first post! Welcome to the MacNN Forums, too!

I have a hard time with ANY AND ALL TV news anymore. It's not about "informing", it's almost always about "inflaming." Nancy needs a spanking for that particular bit of horror. Show THE PUPPY (pictured on the first page of this thread)-he's a tiny guy, a little wooly bear of a thing, NOT a full grown anything. Distorting the truth to sell is BAD. Shame on you, Nancy Grace!

[Imaswtsnstn]

Pit bulls are good dogs, it's all in how you raise them and train them... And I agree with some of you that the parents are trying to cover something up, how would a baby just sit there while a puppy chews on their toes?

[FireWire]

UPDATE on CNN

BENTON, Louisiana (AP) -- A woman jailed after four of her infant daughter's toes were gnawed off says the family's pet ferret did it, not their pit bull pup as police had said.

But her husband blames the dog, a city official said.

"The way the bite marks were on her foot, the ferret being out of its cage, I knew it wasn't the dog," Mary Hansche told KTBS-TV on Tuesday.

The month-old girl was injured December 10 as Hansche, 22, and her husband, Christopher Hansche, 26, slept; they woke up when they heard her crying. (Watch the calls come in to rescue the puppy )

The parents were jailed on $50,000 bond each, charged with child desertion and criminal negligence.

The husband had blamed the dog and told police the ferret had been in its cage all night, Bossier City spokesman Mark Natale said Wednesday.

The charges wouldn't change regardless of which pet was involved, Natale said, because the baby "was injured by an animal while in the custody of the parents."

The girl has been released from the hospital and is in state custody.

Attorney Pam Smart said she is waiting for results of a hair analysis to back up the couple's statement that they were not using drugs, calling the case a "very unfortunate accident."

So it seems the debate has to start over Sounds fishy to me that the parents disagree on whether the ferret was free or not, but anyway...

I hate to see how the parents are treated in this sad story. Jailed? 50 000$ bond? Child desertion and criminal negligence? They were frigging sleeping! You don't abandon a child if you allow yourself a few hours of sleep! She's a mere month old: new parents don't get to enjoy much sleep during this period, so it's entirely possible that they were sleeping so hard they didn't hear anything (I have a friend who didn't even wake up when I made something fall while trying to get next to her in bed in the dark. I would have thought the noise would've awaken the whole neighborhood...)

This make me sick! People make mistakes and don't automatically deserve to be punished for them.

The charges wouldn't change regardless of which pet was involved, Natale said, because the baby "was injured by an animal while in the custody of the parents."

Does that mean that if you bring your kids in the forest to enjoy the fresh air and the scenery, and suddenly a wild animal attack you from the bush, you are going to be in trouble for daring exposing your child to *gasp* the outside world? After all, they were in your custody..

And beside, how come an animal that hurts someone deserve to be killed? If I am angry at someone and punch them or injure them, I'm gonna get a fine and maybe a little time in jail. Why would it be different with an animal, a puppy nonetheless... <OT>often I see people roughing a innocent animal, and they would deserve to get hurt. Sometimes I even get close of hurting them myself, but if the animal dares respond to mistreatment, they could get killed, even thou the human was responsible... </OT>

[Dakar²]

What they fail to mention is that ferret is either part pitbull, or an orphan raised by pitbulls.

[andi*pandi]

maybe I watch too much Bones, but it seems to me a good forensics expert should be able to figure out if the teeth marks are ferret-sized or puppy-sized.

Let's wait and see what that drug test says.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by FireWire 

So it seems the debate has to start over Sounds fishy to me that the parents disagree on whether the ferret was free or not, but anyway...

Sounds like somebody's selling out their ferret to protect their puppy.

Originally Posted by FireWire 

I hate to see how the parents are treated in this sad story. Jailed? 50 000$ bond? Child desertion and criminal negligence? They were frigging sleeping! You don't abandon a child if you allow yourself a few hours of sleep!

If they had left the child outside while they slept, would it have been abandonment? Would they have actually been any less attentive?

Originally Posted by FireWire 

And beside, how come an animal that hurts someone deserve to be killed? If I am angry at someone and punch them or injure them, I'm gonna get a fine and maybe a little time in jail. Why would it be different with an animal, a puppy nonetheless...

Sorry, welcome to America. Animals don't get human rights here. If people wish to kill them, the only requirement is that we do so humanely (and even that is actually pretty liberal of America). Then again, would it really be more merciful to toss them out to die on the streets?

[sugarmonkey]

the puppy is only a baby as well. Why don't people realize that accidents happen, and that there is no more vicious and destructive an animal than humankind?
I hope the best for the baby and for the animals as well, and that they are not
"punished" for an accident. Obviously, the parents need to take parenting classes for all

[sugarmonkey]

yes, indeed, why is it that animals are always featured (the only time, for that matter, for the most part) when by accident or just as is their nature (as their habitat is being destroyed by humans and they have no where to go but to human inhabited areas for food) they are "punished" and usually killed for injuring humans (usually by accident) ...some people should go and have the guts to read what humans are doing to the other animal inhabitants of this small planet. It will make your toes curl. But since we have become the "powerbrokers," I guess we can do what we want. I hope karma comes around sometime in this universe. Maybe then we'll learn a little compassion for all....

[ghporter]

It was NOT the ferret. I've owned ferrets, and while they can be chewers, they, even BIG males, are too small (and too smart) to keep going after something that is kicking them (across the room, maybe?). And ferrets' stomachs are not very big-they eat often and in relatively small doses-so where are those toes? Oh yeah, they were found-a ferret, like a dog, is not going to gnaw off something thinking it's food and not swallow it. Nope. Mom and dad still have some explaining to do.

Sugarmonkey, I think "parenting classes" should be a must for ALL perspective parents-before they get a baby started. But since that's not something that we in the U.S. can manage socially, then we need something else. In this case, the state's child protective services, some forensic investigation (in something other than a small town in Louisiana) and some deep, searching questions are in order.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

You are absolutely correct. Did you note that the puppy was SIX WEEKS OLD? That's too young to be properly weaned (most breeders keep the pup with the mom for about 8 weeks). That makes this sound like a very bad back yard breeder at work.

And when do puppies start to teeth? Can a six-week old puppy really gnaw much at all? Our last pup was an 8-week old German Shepherd, and as I recall he didn't have many teeth when we got him.

Yeah that'd be pretty sad if they put the poor puppy to sleep and then noticed that it didn't even have any teeth yet. I'm pretty sure a 6 week old puppy doesn't.

[IceBreaker]

Girl killed by pit bull terrier

A five-year-old girl has been killed by a pit bull terrier on Merseyside.
The girl was mauled to death by the dog at the family home in St Helens in the early hours of Monday.

Despite suffering serious injuries in the attack, the grandmother managed to lock the dog in a run outside the home in Knowles House Avenue, Eccleston.

Dog handlers and armed response police officers were called to the property shortly before 0430 GMT. The pit bull terrier was destroyed.

Police say it is not clear why the dog attacked the child and her grandmother but an investigation is under way.

Superintendent Jon Ward said: "This is such a tragic incident.

"When a child loses her life in such circumstances, it has an effect on the whole community.

"I would reassure the public that there will be a thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding this young child's death.

"In such incidents, safety of the public and of police officers is of utmost importance and with that in mind, we were left with no other option but to have the animal destroyed quickly and humanely.

"Officers are with the family and our sympathies are with them at this time."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...de/6222319.stm


natural selection continues.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by IceBreaker 

Girl killed by pit bull terrier

A five-year-old girl has been killed by a pit bull terrier on Merseyside.
The girl was mauled to death by the dog at the family home in St Helens in the early hours of Monday.

As far as I can tell, the only thing this story proves is that people in the U.S. aren't the only ones who ignore the need to train their dogs; folks in the UK also don't properly train dogs, with tragic consequences.

[Kevin]

[ghporter]

Kevin has a good point. Shall we all agree that this one's "done?"

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

As far as I can tell, the only thing this story proves is that people in the U.S. aren't the only ones who ignore the need to train their dogs; folks in the UK also don't properly train dogs, with tragic consequences.

Preachy tone aside I don't know what you're talking about. Most people don't train their dogs not to kill and eat them. And I'm thinking that the grandmother and little girl didn't train theirs to kill. It's possible that the father is a fighting pitbull breeder and trainer but I think a better explanation is that there is something in these dogs that can come out with terrible consequences more than in other dogs. I've known and loved several pitbulls that were totally gentle but the 'failure to train' theory you espouse seems like nonsense. How would you even go about training a dog not to suddenly and unpredictably rip you to shreds out of the blue? Maybe you want to rephrase it so people don't just disregard your defense of them as mere over-defensiveness.

[larrinski]

the one thing that caught my attention was the "natural selection" title. Please explain how this story has anything to do with evolution...Will the baby have any more difficulty reproducing with some missing toes?

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by larrinski 

the one thing that caught my attention was the "natural selection" title. Please explain how this story has anything to do with evolution...Will the baby have any more difficulty reproducing with some missing toes?

Yes according to the theory any disadvantage will be bred out of a species over time. I can see someone with a limp having a harder time getting laid at the bar than a great dancer and the limp is a result of the cognitive disadvantage the thread is talking about these people's actions selecting out of the genepool.

[larrinski]

I may not be an expert, but I think an accident to one person who may or may not get laid at a bar, has little to do with natural selection. This means that over time evolution will weed out people who have injuries/ accidents...

[glideslope]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Pitbulls are aggressive, but from the description, it seems clear that it wasn't trying to attack the baby. It only got the toes.

Ok, so it was looking for a Snickers rather than the Chinese Buffet? Perverted.

Death to all Pit Bulls.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by larrinski 

I may not be an expert, but I think an accident to one person who may or may not get laid at a bar, has little to do with natural selection. This means that over time evolution will weed out people who have injuries/ accidents...

Well I'm sure that evolution does weed out people that have accidents... that why we are scared of heights and going too fast and spiders and pitbulls.... the people that weren't are gone from the genepool.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Kevin has a good point. Shall we all agree that this one's "done?"

Apparently not.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by IceBreaker 

Louisiana Police: Pit Bull Puppy Chewed Off Baby's Toes While Parents Slept...natural selection at work in my opinion.

Yay! So two incompetent parents who don't pay attention to their dog OR child leave them alone together and of course the media blames the fact that it's a pitbull! YaayyY!!!

Honestly, I used to hate pitbulls til I met the one downstairs. Her name is Tasha, and her owners take her for walks 2-3 times a day, sans leash. She is THAT well trained. She trots around, and looks EXTREMELY scary, yet is one of the most gentle dogs I've met.

Seems to me that 95% of the pitbull problem are ****ing idiot owners who don't care for their dogs properly, or try to train them to be tough to make up for having little dicks.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by IceBreaker 

if ever a breed of dog should just be outright banned, pitbulls are it.

If ever the death penalty should be used without fair trial, it should be used on the idiots who train pitbulls to be aggressive dogs. My dog is part staffordshire bull terrier, I think, which is kinda the 'showdog' of pitbulls. She's stocky, muscular, and very athletic, and also the most cuddly, loving dog I've ever had.

It's the owners. 100%.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Almost forgot...

My wife and I were speculating on what happened. Some vet was interviewed and decided it was probably the dog trying to breastfeed. He said, "I know that sounds crazy! However, it's actually not only possible, but quite likely."

Seems kind of like when a surfer whose leg was ripped off by a great white shark sits next to a marine biologist and they both readily agree that the shark wasn't actually trying to attack the surfer, but it was a "curiosity bite."

THE BREED OF DOG IS AGGRESSIVE AND THE PUPPY ATE THE KID'S TOES! Case closed.

EVERY PUPPY CHEWS ON ****! EVEN GOLDEN RETRIEVERS! Puppies should NOT be left alone in a room UNSUPERVISED with ANYTHING of value. ESPECIALLY A ****ING CHILD.

That's just retarded. Personally I think both parents need to be shot in the face, and probably euthanize the baby also, as it has horrible horrible genes. How freaking stupid to you have to be to leave a newborn kid near a puppy!?!?!

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Pitbulls are aggressive,

If trained to be, they are. Otherwise nope. Just like German Shepards, Dobermans, and a lot of other athletic dogs, if they're trained to be aggressive, that's what they'll end up like. My friends have a shepard that was abused.... it's brain has a loose wire now, when it'll flip into kill mode. Yet most german shepards are great.

When bad people get dogs, they create bad dogs. Period.

I have a downstairs neighbor with a pitbull... I was initially afraid of it also, after hearing so many stories about them, but this thing is one of the nicest, calmest, most well trained dogs I've ever seen. The owner never even uses a leash, and walks it in my neighborhood, and downtown. When my dog was a puppy, it ran up to it, smacked it in the face, and tried jumping on it and play biting, and the pit (named Tasha) did not even respond, and ignored the dog, and just walked away towards it's owners. It's amazing how great this dog is, yet how terrible they are when owned by incompetent irresponsible owners.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

The only Pit Bull related law I would support is an IQ test for ownership. I don't know who is more ignorant, Pit Bull owner or the people cry out: "BAN THEM, BAN THEM" every time they see story about them.

How about this, as an application to own a pitbull (if you check even one of these boxes, you cannot own a pitbull):

[ ] You own an album by 50 cent.

[ ] You have at one time worn gold 'thug' chains on a regular basis

[ ] You are dating a girl who has a kid but is under 21 years old

[ ] You got a girl pregnant when you were under 20 yrs old and didn't marry her and instead left

[ ] You wear fubu

[ ] You have a mexi mustache where it's kinda there but kinda not and you don't shave it because you think it makes you look tough

[ ] Your car is worth under 3,000 dollars yet you've installed an amplified subwoofer in it

[ ] You live in a trailer park

[ ] You think Tu-Pac was an 'artist'.

[ ] You think owning a tough dog makes you cool

I could ad more I guess. But I think you get my point.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by rickey939 

That's why I have a toy poodle.

Believe it or not, standard poodles are responsible for quite a large percentage of dog bites.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by IceBreaker 

don't see many stories of poodles attacking and killing people.

yes I imagine all the pit bull owners are upset at the thought of their little "prescious" being banned but it seems they are the ones that end up getting killed.

pit bull kills owner - Google Search

Again, believe it or not, poodles are resposible for a very large percentage of dog bites. Why don't they kill people often?

Simple. Think of the average type of person who owns a poodle, and how they treat it. Now think of the average type of person who goes out specifically to get a pitbull. Notice a difference?

I live in the same building as a pitbull. It's a very gentle dog. It walks offleash next to a park full of small children, and in our neighborhood there are tons of other dogs around. It does not need a leash, because it is calm, confident, and well trained. A pitbull is a very HIGH ENERGY dog. If you don't take it on walks (I don't mean around the block, I mean a 45minute-1.5 hours) at least TWICE a day it's going to get antsy and have a lot of energy to burn off. This is usually where bad behavior STARTS. Read the book by Cesar Milan. He has a big chapter on aggressive dogs, and why they turn out that way, and it is ALWAYS the owners fault.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by OAW 

This is a tragedy without question. But charging the parents in this instance seems unwarranted. I just don't see anything negligent in their actions. Despite the reputation of pit bulls, apparently it is not illegal to own them and more importantly, this is a 6 week old puppy we are talking about here!

OAW

Have you ever owned a 6 week old puppy!??!?!

THEY DESTROY EVERYTHING. THEY ARE TEETHING. They chew furniture, shoes, toys, walls, WHATEVER THEY CAN GET IN THEIR MOUTHS. This is why RESPONSIBLE owners who have puppies do crate training, so that when the owners cannot provide 100% supervision, the dog is in a crate unable to have 'accidents' or chew on things. My dog is half aussie shepard, and half staffordshire bull terrier, which is close to a pitbull. She tried to chew on EVERYTHING when we got her, but we kept watch on her ALL THE TIME when she was not in her cage, and guess what? When she tried to chew on anything that was not a toy, she was reprimanded and it was taken away. When we had to go somewhere, or take a nap, or even leave the room for THIRTY SECONDS, she would be put in the crate.

That is called responsible dog ownership. Eventually, the dog figures out the rules of the household, which the owners set. Unfortunately for this pup, 6 weeks is far, FAR to young to understand ANY rules. The notion of leaving a puppy this young in a room with a newborn and going to sleep is ****ing INSANE. Those parents need to be shot.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

theory: they weren't sleeping on the bed, but passed out from drugs or alcohol, and thus didn't wake up fast enough.

I used to be up out of bed the second I heard a cry from the nursery.

NOOOO! It couldn't be! Say it ain't so! These yahoos need a .38 special in the back of the head, as they're obviously unfit to do anything in life if they can't even take the responsibility of making sure their own freaking offspring is safe with them in the room.

[amsalpemkcus]

Originally Posted by centerchannel68 

How freaking stupid to you have to be to leave a newborn kid near a puppy!?!?!

It's the sharp puppy teeth s*&^%$ad!

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by Face Ache 

And you're a ****ing idiot. A pit bull owning idiot.

Where's the surprise?

Put your money where your mouth is. When you have a kid, let's leave it on the floor with a 6 month old puppy of your choice. See what happens.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by talisker 

I'm not saying the dog should be destroyed because it was its "fault" or it deserves a punishment. Clearly the parents are the ones at fault. I'm saying it because it, for whatever reason, chewed a baby's toes off.

Yes, all puppies chew, but chewing the toes off a living infant, who would be screaming at the time, seems slightly unusual.

It's a simple rule in my book, if a dog seriously injures or kills somebody then destroy it. Removes any risk it may do it again. Do it humanely and the dog won't suffer at all. I love my pets but if there was a risk of them hurting my kids they'd be gone in a flash.

Frankly, I don't know why I'm even responding to your post, your last sentence is just plain rude, the bleatings of fool who has lost the argument. As to your question about would I beat my eight month old child's a$$ like she was a 10 year old, well I wouldn't beat any child's a$$. It's not what I believe in and lashing out with physical violence isn't an impulse I have in these situations. And I don't own a pitbull. Funny, that.

1. Adopt a newborn.

2. Pick any 6 week old puppy. Any breed.

3. Leave them in a room, on the floor, unsupervised for an hour.

Repeat this test as often as you're still a free person, and let's check the results.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

I'm all for banning idiots worldwide. There would be a WHOLE lot more elbow room. Particularly idiots who play THEIR stereos loud enough for me to hear them a block away, and who drive any car irresponsibly. That's just rude and stupid (respectively).

I do not believe THAT puppy (you saw the picture on page 1?) was able to chew ANYTHING off of ANY baby. See my earlier post-what baby would sit still for something painful like that? What puppy of that age would stick around when baby started kicking him in the face? It doesn't make any sense.

Dude. It's a 6 week old puppy. It has no training whatsoever, and the infant making 'noise' and 'flailing' is not going to convince the puppy to go away, it's going to convince the puppy that it's a playtoy. You could test this with your own infant and ANY type of 6 week old puppy.

Babies cannot effectively kick defensively at an animals face to drive it away. Actually, you just reminded me of a funny story:

http://www.onion.demon.co.uk/theonio...upidbabies.htm

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

What they fail to mention is that ferret is either part pitbull, or an orphan raised by pitbulls.

[Gossamer]

Learn to love it.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by centerchannel68 

How about this, as an application to own a pitbull (if you check even one of these boxes, you cannot own a pitbull):

[ ] You own an album by 50 cent.

[ ] You have at one time worn gold 'thug' chains on a regular basis

[ ] You are dating a girl who has a kid but is under 21 years old

[ ] You got a girl pregnant when you were under 20 yrs old and didn't marry her and instead left

[ ] You wear fubu

[ ] You have a mexi mustache where it's kinda there but kinda not and you don't shave it because you think it makes you look tough

[ ] Your car is worth under 3,000 dollars yet you've installed an amplified subwoofer in it

[ ] You live in a trailer park

[ ] You think Tu-Pac was an 'artist'.

[ ] You think owning a tough dog makes you cool

I could ad more I guess. But I think you get my point.

Ooo! Try and guess which one of those categories I fit into.

[Jawbone54]

The point is being missed. The parents were the ones responsible. Whether or not a pit bull is aggressive is a moot point; the pit bull needed (according to experts) close to an hour to chew the baby's toes off. It's also been indicated in recent local news that it might have been the family's ferret. Regardless of which animal it was, the parents were negligent and have obviously been hiding quite a bit.

And thanks to this thread for really bringing out our next banned member. The clock is now ticking. You heard it here first.