>IT DEPENDS ON HOW THEYRE RAISED

File: 1491055363022.png (287KB, 603x800px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 603x800px

>>2392908

>>2392908
>inb4 the faggots come in saying they've been bit more by GSDs and labs than pits.

>>2392908
>leaving a 3 week old alone with any dog

>>2392916
a saint Bernard isn't going to fuck up a child.

>>2392944
Depends on how old it is and how it was raised.

Dogs can become jealous of their litter mates, and or challenge them for resources, such as territory or whatever, using their teeth the way dogs do. They could also view the baby as a toy, or have their prey drive triggered and attack the baby when it squeals.

That's why you keep your fucking dog away from your babies, and make damn sure they know that you'll fuck them up if they dare go near them without your consent. That's what mother dogs do to protect their pups, and what humans should do to protect their kids.

>>2392916

But muh nanny dog

(I agree with you, but I felt the need to say that)

Poor kid.

Then again the parents are obviously retarded so at least nature did its job.

A golden rule in animal keeping is to always understand that animals are unpredictable
Even when I'm researching reptiles and other animals like pet rats or ferrets or something the books and articles always say, even if you think you trust your dog around small animals, you should never trust it completely because they are unpredictable

You mean a popular breed mauled a baby to death? What are the odds?

>>2392908
I doubt they were raised by sane people, since they left a 3 weeks old baby in their reach without supervision. Sadly we don't know more about the circumstances.

the baby should have watched Caesar's dog whispering show, but a little too late for that now t b h

>>2392966
B a d j o k e d a d

>>2392966
Hahaha

>>2392950
How do breeders get mom dogs to back off when they finally separate the puppies then

Is that a thing that happens where a bitch won't surrender her pups or gets super violent about it

>>2392908
>Leaving baby alone with pets
Why, you aren't even supposed to do this with otherwise completely safe pets like cats. I wouldn't leave a kid alone with a dog larger than them until they can fend for themselves in some way.

>>2392981
Depends on the bitch.

Some are real docile, others are very touchy around their pups.

In dog packs, the bitch usually doesn't let any of the pack members near them until they can walk around on their own, as they're liable to eat them.

>>2392908
FOR THE LAST TIME

ALL A DOG CAN THINK FOR A CHILD AT THIS AGE IS IF HE CAN GET AWAY WITH EATING IT

WOULD YOU TRUST YOUR DOG WITH NOT EATING AN UNATTENDED JUICY BEEF STAKE?

ITS THE SAME THING

>>2392908
S

>>2392981
They get less protective as the pups get older. By the time they are weaned and 8 weeks or older and more independent, the mother won't still be trying to prevent people from getting near them.

>>2392950
>tfw parents gave their dog away because it kept climbing into my crib at night.

Theres literally nothing wrong with pitbulls.

>>2392958
Retarded enough to have not one, not two, but three degenerate animals

File: 1488758830554.jpg (442KB, 638x3464px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 638x3464px

It's illegal to own shitbulls in this country

Life is good

>>2393010
1.dogs don't eat people unless under extreme conditions
2.turn caps lock off because you are a fucking idiot

>>2392908
If you're dumb enough to leave a new baby with any kind of dog, you honestly deserve to reap the consequences. Plus your child would've grown up to be a retard anyway with your retard genes.

File: 9b8e11c0e32a6a7959ffaa6e2dbf4761.jpg (113KB, 679x588px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 679x588px

I've seen this POS maulers express their genes too many times. People that have them, well I don't visit their houses. I see a pit, I'm out of there.

Hell, my cousin makes fun of me. "Watch out Princess, if you sneeze Anon will have a heart attack hrrr hrrr."
It's an ex fighting pit, it's collar is a 3 inch pronged torture device, has showed repeated aggression towards other dogs, acts weird.....yet she lets her kids jump, tackle, etc the damned dog.
But this seems to be a common stupidity among pit owners.

I agree, leaving ANY dog with a baby is bad. But that little shitty pitty myth about 'Nanny dogs' is still well and kicking.

As for Nanny Dogs, closet I've seen to this is St. Bernard, rough coated collies, and Newfies. I have tons of old image files depicting these dogs with kids of all ages.
Would I leave my kids alone with one.
No.
But still, the pitbull as a nanny dog confuses the shit out of me.
Pitbulls, the images I have of them are usually negative towards the breed. Mauling shit, guarding shit, killing shit....
Most family portraits with them are relatively recent.

We should just kill of all fucking dogs and finally be rid of them. Fucking retarded animals.

>>2392908
You shouldn't even leave a cat alone with a baby.

>>2393051

the state of shitbull owners

>>2393110
That's because the cat would take a nap on the baby and accidentally suffocate it, not because it's actively trying to kill the child.

File: IMG_4362.png (716KB, 968x942px) Image search: [Google]

716KB, 968x942px

Fuck pitbulls, my neighboor had two when i was a kid. I was always scared of them but i was told they could not jump over the fence (about a meter high) till one day i woke up and the shitbulls had completely shred my pet rabbits in pieces. They werent even Eating them they just did it as play. They got both put down after that.

>>2393047
Not an argument, man. All evidence points to pits being genetically predisposed to violent outbursts.

>>2393096
Nice confirmation bias. Also, your picture states that the dog is a bulldog, not a pitbull

>>2392908
>Leaving a fucking infant alone with any dog

>>2393114
Wait suffocating is not actively killing it? Or are you trying to say that cats don't understand the morality of killing while dogs do?

>>2392908
THE DOG OF PEACE

>>2392908
>leaving babies alone

Delayed Darwinism.

>>2393197
Or really any animal. Either it's a danger to the baby or the baby is a danger to it, but nothing good comes of it.

>>2393201
Cats don't suffocate their prey. They wouldn't be trying to kill the child or even hurt it, they're just enjoying a heat source in that situation and the harm to the kid is a side effect.

A dog attacking a child is doing just that, attacking as in seeking to cause damage.

File: IMG_1086.jpg (363KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1024x683px

FACT

NATURE CAN NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER PRODUCE AGGRESSIVE ANIMALS

EVER

ALL ANIMALS ARE 100% DOCILE UNTIL HUMANS TURN THEM INTO EDGELORDS

NATURE AFFECTS

>Intelligence
>Color
>Pattern
>Teeth
>Bones
>Sociability
>Mating rituals
>Number of legs
>Dietary needs and preferences

BUT NOT AGGRESSION AT ALL YOU FUCKING BIGOTS!!!

MAUL THOSE WHO INSULT PITBULLS!!!

>>2393205
What is the difference if it both results in a dead child? Unless, again, you're assuming the dog and cat can understand human morals and right from wrong.

File: 71daafd2b26716b57e64da4f2ead28dc5f17b1904f22d28e59fad556eabfc60b.jpg (6KB, 218x252px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 218x252px

>>2392908
>see this posted on facebook
>come here to talk about it
>literally the first thing I see when i pull up the catalog

Never change, /an/

>>2393212
active damage versus passive damage. if you cant understand that you're a retard and should stop asking questions.

>>2393205
She must have crawled under there for warmth

>>2393130
>treated like her children
that's not saying much. i doubt her children are well-adjusted, productive members of society.

>>2393168
facebook anecdotes and clickbait "news" articles are not evidence.

>>2393212
It was an answer to >>2393201
Yeah, you shouldn't leave your baby alone with a cat either, but no one suggested anything about cats and dogs and their understanding of morality until you bought it up.

>>2393269
>>2393227
Someone suggested a cat would kill it accidentally, meaning the dog would mean to kill it and the cat would not mean to kill it. I'm bringing into question how can an animal have the intent or lack thereof to kill, especially when their concept of death is vague at best.

So either you are suggesting an animal knows what killing is, what death is, and the morality of it to choose for or against it, or you are simply subconsciously giving animals human-like qualities. At least if you're doing the former you can back it up, the latter is tumblr tier retardation.

File: 1479651499626.jpg (530KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 1536x2048px

Pit bull thread?

File: San Francisco Call 15 April 1897 — California Digital Newspaper Collection.jpg (249KB, 908x932px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 908x932px

>>2393191
The word "bulldog" was used differently in the past. They meant dogs that were bred for bull-baiting, and some of those dogs were pitbull types. What we today know as pitbulls were back then called by a number of different names; bull dogs, game dogs, bull terriers, pit terriers, and so on. Even today, you can find some pitbull aficionados who prefer to call their APBT as a "bulldog".
The full article refers to this particular bulldog as a "vicious bull terrier". >>2393096
Since the article mentions the dog was a terrier type and the illustration shows the animal with a longer snout than bulldogs, there's a strong likelihood it was a pitbull.

>>2393320
Any dog fighting in a pit was temporarily a pit bull too. There have been accounts of poor farm men using their gun dogs as pit bulls for money.

File: Pit Bull (25).jpg (50KB, 602x517px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 602x517px

>>2393096
This post just makes me want to get a pit bull knowing it will scare faggots away

>>2393308
You don't think predators understand which actions cause harm to others and which don't? You think a cat or a dog really sees no difference between lying down and attacking?
No one is saying dogs and cats know the meaning of death or have any morality about it, just that there's a difference between dog taking an aggressive action and a cat taking a passive action.

>>2393342
I don't think predators care or know if their prey is dead, only that they eat it and it stops moving. If they did know, why would they begin to show down on a deer before the deer stops moving? They don't because they don't have that concept. No one said anything about aggressive or passive (that's not even a correct term for passively killing, it's still actively killing), I am only referring to 'accidentally'. To accidentally kill something means that they would know not to kill it.

>>2393358
The meaning of the word accident (from dictionary.com): an undesirable or unfortunate happening that occurs unintentionally and usually results in harm, injury, damage, or loss; casualty; mishap:

It being an accident does not equate to it meaning "that they would know not to kill it."

Once again, you are just being a retard. Or you are trolling and if so, congrats you made me reply twice.

a pit bull attacked me and my dog on a walk once, so I stomped it to death. I feel a little bad.

>>2393399
By it being unintentional, yes it actually does mean they wouldn't want to. You just proved my point for me, thanks

>>2393415
Actually, your point is the opposite. By your logic, it would be unintentional either way because you've argued animals don't understand intent.

>>2393412

You shouldn't. The alternative was letting it tear your dog apart.

>>2393418
Unintentional requires the creature to understand doing it intentionally. What don't you understand about this?

>>2393428
No. Unintentional means without intent. You argue that animals don't and can't have intent when it comes to killing because they don't understand death. Therefore, using your logic, any animal that kills didn't do it intentionally, or in other words, it was unintentional.

>>2393430
Unintended implies it can be intentional. How can you not understand this?

>>2393211
This is bait, right?

File: aid5197131-v4-728px-Breed-Pit-Bulls-Step-9.jpg (89KB, 728x546px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 728x546px

Fucking wikihow

>>2393431
So? You can still call it unintentional, that doesn't change things.

>>2393447
You're not understanding that you are anthropomorphizing

>>2393448
You're going to have to explain how, because I'm not even arguing with you anymore. I'm going by your own logic. And you said there can be no intent, because animals don't understand death. Therefore when animals kill they do so without intent, aka unintentionally.

>>2393066
PDF (Pitbull Defense Force) detected

Oh look it's this thread again

>>2393457
You can't assume an animal has any intention or lack thereof in killing a person, that's giving an animal human characteristics.

>>2392916
>leaving a 3 week old alone at all

>>2393010
>WOULD YOU TRUST YOUR DOG WITH NOT EATING AN UNATTENDED JUICY BEEF STAKE?

Well, yes, if the dog has been appropriately trained, he won't fucking eat food he knows he's not supposed to either.

>>2393489
But you still would be a moron to leave a steak where your dog could get it, no matter how well the dog is trained. Especially if it's as important to you as a kid is.

>>2393494
>But you still would be a moron to leave a steak where your dog could get it
My dog has been trained not eat food that isn't directly given to her, in her food bowl or when it's been okayed. I could put her alone with some steak, and she wouldn't eat it. She'd instantly beg for it if someone dropped by, though.

Kids aren't steaks, kids are little shits and grab on the dog, pull tails and ears, that's bad. If a piece of steak did that to my dog, I'd let her eat it.

>>2393489
try putting the steak on a moving string on the floor and leaving to go grab the mail. I have a well trained dog but even on the job he needs to refocus from time to time. You should NEVER leave an infant (not even a month old) alone in the house with a free roaming animal.

>>2393484
Ok, great the animal has no intent whatsoever. Fine. But your original point was that you can't see a difference between an animal sitting on a baby and suffocating it (passive) and an animal tearing another animal's throat out (active). And while it may not come down to intent, there is still the active and passive dichotomy. That's the difference.

>>2393518
Passive would be the animal is not actively killing it. Sitting on a child's face is actively killing it. Passively killing it would be letting something die by not intervening. Intervening is what would have killed the child in this scenario. So it's not even a passive killing.

>>2392908
One of family dogs was killed by one of these POS dogs a year ago. My mom let our dog (Maltese) out in the backyard to crap and our neighbors pitbull busted through their screened in back porch and attacked him before she could even react. Honestly were lucky it didn't turn on her or my dad. I will always hate these fucking dogs. They're bred to kill and maim.

>>2393489
Go take a free pup and leave it alone with your well trained dog
Post results

>>2392944
Uh, yes it is. I have serious scarring on my face from being attacked by a Saint Bernard.

also
>leaving a 3-week-old baby alone

what the fuck were these people thinking? if the baby didn't end up dying it should have been taken away by CPS

Passive: "Not involving visible reaction"
The cat is not reacting to the baby, it is, as some other anon pointed out, only finding a warm location to sit on. The dog tearing out an animals throat on the other hand is reacting to said animal. Again this distinction is pretty obvious, you are just being stubborn.

>>2393534 meant for >>2393525

File: stereotypical british man.png (509KB, 652x636px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 652x636px

>>2392908
>after being left alone with family's three pit bulls

I'm not a pitbull defender, but those parents should be sterilized

i've been attacked by four dogs when i delivered food as a job. one was a pit bull. it wasn't viscous, but it did bite me. a lot of people understand that pit bull owners believe one thing, but the overwhelming historical evidence of pit bulls being more aggressive and dangerous than any other breed, and this causes people to be weary of them, and assume any pit bull terrier they encounter has the capability and the intention to bite anyone. anyone who says otherwise is lying to themselves at the risk of themselves and others. they're not pretty dogs and i doubt their intelligence.

>>2393534
>not involving visible reaction
It has to sit on a baby, it's reacting to the warmth (which by the way is only a theory) of the baby, that is an action regarding the baby. A dog eats a baby, that is an action regarding a baby. I mean if the only thing you are calling passive is that one is more violent, you really have nothing on your side but emotion, which I admit is strong.

Passive
1.
accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance.

In the terms of killing, passive killing means letting one die while active killing means killing it. Letting someone die as in not interfering, and active killing as in interfering.

>>2393525
>>2393518
>>2393534
>>2393548
you faggots are dumb.
baby's dead either way and the parents fucked up by leaving it with an animal.
stop playing with semantics and splitting hairs.

>>2393552
I know, I already covered that here >>2393212

>>2393565
you don't get to talk. you're the one doing most of the hair splitting, you fucking retard.

>>2393096
>myth about 'Nanny dogs'

Pits, and bulldogs in general, can be good with children because they have high pain thresholds, and they're less likely to bite an unattended kid that gets too rough with them and pulls on their ears, or bites them, or pokes their eyes or whatever.


>>2393168
>pits being genetically predisposed to violent outbursts.

Pits were bred to be animal aggressive and people compliant, but they need a strong leader.

The overwhelming majority of pit problems, and dog problems, are caused by leadership issues where the owners don't reinforce their leadership role in the family, leading to the dog believing that it has the leadership position, and can impose discipline on family members, like kids, and has the right to defend territory and property that it thinks belongs to them.

There are some dogs that are just naturally more assertive than others, and shouldn't be owned by the average ignorant pet owner, and pit bulls are one of them.

>>2392908
Dey was good boys, dey dindu nuffin.

>>2393010
My dog and six month old juicy beef steak have come to the understanding that you are a tremendous faggot because you fabulously can't your caps lock off.

File: 8a393a7c360465458a7329ec4450c0b2.jpg (16KB, 236x261px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 236x261px

>Pit Bull dogs are bred to be vicious
>Behavioral traits and temperament are hereditary
>Parent(s) stupid enough to leave infant home with 3 pit bulls.
>Infant dead
>Dogs euthanized.
>Parent(s) in prison.

>>2393569
>implying
I only try to show people they are anthropomorphizing. It's a bad habit people get into and they do it without knowing

>>2393462
Because I disagree with blatant ignorance I am somehow a pro pitbull shill?
Your logic is flawed, is this typical of all anti-pitbull advocates?

>>2393439
It's pretty clever and obvious sarcasm, it worries me you had to ask if it was bait.

>>2393597
Being that PETA is anti-pit bull, I'd say so.

>>2393594
Let's go back to the intent question, because at this point I am curious.

Do you not think there is a difference in the animal's intents? Can you readily deny the fact that the cat has the intent to seek out a warm place and the dog has an intent to attack something under the given circumstances?

>>2393615
>intents
I don't believe we can assume an animal's intents, or that it had one to begin with. Because it's an animal and not a human. Like I sad earlier, it's simply theory that cats sit on babies for warmth. I'm getting disappointed, it's like you haven't been listening.

>>2393618
As the owner of three cats I can def say that they gravitate to heat. I don't think my cats sit specifically on my crotch just because it smells nice. And generally I think you are right, people do anthropomorphize animals too much, but at the same time the animals intents in these circumstances doesn't leave too much other room for speculation.
What you are saying is "we can't deduce an animals intent, therefore when cat sits on baby it can be anything from it killing the baby to it thinking the baby is a rocketship." I think it is a lot more logical just to say "We know cats tend to gravitate towards warmth, baby is warm, therefore the cat gravitated to the baby because the baby is warm." Its just simple logic.

>>2393628
>What you are saying is
No not at all.
I recognize the cat is killing the baby. I recognize that the baby dies because of the cat. What I don't recognize is the cat understands it is killing a baby. I do not try to rationalize it beyond it happening, because then you cross over into anthropomorphizing when you try to say an animal is thinking what you are thinking it's thinking. The entire bit about the cat and warmth was to emphasize that we can not assume what an animal's thoughts are. It's not about the cats killing babies anyways

>>2393610
>PETA is anti pitbulls
YAYYYYY PITBULLS!!
PITBULLS FOREVAH!!

>>2393610
>>2393641
WTF I love PETA now

>>2393640
Well you still aren't refuting the logic of my statement. You are just throwing your hands up in the air and going "fuck we can't even BEGIN to imagine wtf a cat is thinking, that shit is WAY too complicated."

When, as I pointed out, its just simple logic.

>>2393646
There's no studies that show this is true though. That is because they can not prove what the cat is actually thinking. You also refuse to understand you can't put your reasoning as an animal's reasoning. You're statement is just inability to understand, so you strawman my argument to make it easier to defeat and put words in my mouth that if you understood the material, you would know was not my position.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1499543/

I also think this might help you understand the whole intent to kill/passive killing if you are still fuzzy on that
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4177939?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Maybe it will explain it better than I could.

>>2393484
I'm gonna interject for one second, sorry. I don't think it's an issue of intent - there's instinctual intent involved yes - but not intent like we see it. It's aggressive action w/ violent outcome vs passive action w/ violent outcome that's being compared here. A cat that is hunting a mouse is much different than a cat playing with a mouse - if both result in death there is still a large difference in the behavior that caused it. A cat suffocating a child to get warmth is much different than a dog tearing a baby apart, one has solid instinctual aggression and the other is an instinctual passively negative act.

Our understanding of intent is conscious, not instinctual - but that doesn't mean that an animal doesn't have intent on an instinctual level. We just have to seperate how we view their acts from anthropomorphization.

>>2393666
But exactly what you did would be anthropomorphization. What if the dog was simply playing rough and killed the baby accidentally? What if the cat wanted to purposely suffocate the infant like a lion suffocates it's prey? That's why we can't assume intent, it opens up stuff like that. And when that happens it just becomes a clusterfuck of 'I'm right because more people like my version of anthropomorphization than your version of anthropomorphization'

>>2393666
>>2393674
how about you stop being nerds. this isn't the high school debate team LMAO

>>2393674
But you would agree we know some things about cats right? Like we know they like to eat, and drink for example. And maybe we even know enough about their hunting abilities and their displays of aggression that it is a given that if the cat wanted to hurt the baby, then it would scratch it or bite it or exhibit some other type of behavior associated with feline aggression. I think you're just refuting simple logic b/c you are so entrenched within your anthropomorphism mindset.
Here's another example. I don't especially enjoy playing with my cats. But I do anyways for 30 minutes a day because from the behavior my cats display its pretty apparent that they want to be played with. Is this wrong?

>>2393682
There is a difference between understanding behavior from physical cues to deduce what an animal may be feeling vs pretending to know what an animal is thinking based on it's actions.

It's hard not to give human characteristics to animals. It is how they became our pets, really. We evolved doing it. We do it every single day without a second thought. So many of the things you do daily could be anthropomorphization. Not all of it is harmful, and it's fun. But speaking strictly in an educational sense, it is not useful and it is very harmful.

>>2393320
Bulldogs originally had longer snouts. The shorter snouts are a newer, English abomination. American bulldogs still look like the one on your picture

>>2393687
Wouldn't knowing how an animal is feeling give you insight into its intention. My cat is acting playful, through deduction i can assume that my cat is indeed feeling playful and therefore i can deduce that she does want to play with me.
Same goes for the baby. The cat is attracted to warmth, I can deduce the cat wants to feel warmth. Therefore when the cat goes to the warm baby I understand its intent to be sitting on the baby to be warm. To further this assumption I also do not see any suggestions of typical feline aggression to make me believe that the cat actually has some other intent. It is not hissing, it is not clawing or biting the baby, and it's tail is not flicking. Thus it is only logical to deduce that the cat is not trying to kill the baby. You're right, I may not know the cat's exact intentions, but logically speaking you can make assumptions based off the hard information that you have at hand, and it would likely be the correct assessment of the situation.

It's true. I mean look how many pug attacks occur due to them being improperly raised.

>>2393692
First off I aid may give you insight. And showing how you feel =/= revealing your inner thoughts, plans, ideas, etc. I may tear up, from there (along with other physical cues) you could be able to tell I am sad. But you won't exactly know why I'm sad, even if you have an idea of why I may be sad, you won't know really know without asking (and assuming I tell you the truth). And this is why the warm breath theory does not hold up in studies, because we can't know what a cat is thinking, we can only record what it does. I'm beating the same dead horse with you. We can never conclude an animal's thoughts because we will never know the thought.

I used a human analogy because I figured it would help since you naturally give animals human characteristics.

I have a 16-mo-old son and a 3-year-old GSP. I would *never* leave them alone together under any circumstance. I love my dog more than anything, but I don't trust him to be alone with my son. Especially now that my son walks and hits/grabs the dog for no reason.

It's stupid that someone left a 3-wk-old infant alone on a jumper, it's insane they did so in the presence of three pit bulls. I feel terrible for the poor kid who never got a chance and died a terrible death so young.

I don't know which pit bull owners are worse: the nig nog thugs or the naive morons who think their dogs are "angels without wings" and aggressively defend the breed and allow these things to happen through wilful neglect.

>>2393698
I agreed with everything you just said in my last post, I said "You're right, I may not know the cat's exact intentions." You're beating a dead horse because you're arguing things I've agreed to and not addressing the fact that you can make logical deductions based off of what we actually know about animal behavior.

>>2393703
But you can't pretend to know what an animal is thinking based off of physical cues. You can make educated assumptions of what it's feeling. Not what it is thinking. That is adding your thoughts to an animal. You still put a lot of human characteristics in your fake scenario. You want to say that because we know behavioral signs, that we know an animal's thoughts. It's simply not true. And I'm beating a dead horse because you still don't understand that.

>>2393705
I have literally never used the word thought in any of my posts. And I wouldn't because I completely understand just how fundamentally impossible that is. You seem to be confusing me being able to deduce animal behavior based off concrete studies of animal behavior and biology with me actually thinking I have any idea how the cat thinks.

>>2393705
Thomas Nagel called, he wants his original argument back.

>>2393526
had a similar experience except my dog was a large gsd with his own dog aggression issues

the pitbull literally had it's ear ripped off before running away

File: 1495110152013.jpg (7KB, 249x250px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 249x250px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO88kUSmKaQ
This is the video that made me realize that pitbulls are more dangerous than any other dog.
>bitten by horse
>still attacks
>Hoofed in the head by horse
>still attacks
>whacked in the head by a stick
>still attacks
>Continue attacking until the horse stomps on it
>Grabs the pits neck and starts slamming it into the ground
>lay on the ground dying like a retard

Would a normal dog respond this way after being hoofed in the fucking head?

>>2393714
You don't have to use the word to mean the word, you can actually imply it.
>the cat wants to feel warmth
>its intent to be sitting on the baby to be warm
>the cat is not trying to kill the baby
This is all putting thoughts into the animal. We don't know the animal is thinking that, like you said we are assuming it. In most cases it is not harmful and it's fun, but when it comes to any kind of study or research or talking logically, then you would not be taken seriously assuming what is going on in an animal's head. Studies are not about making assumptions to reach a conclusion. You may say you think it's impossible yet you still subconsciously use it.

This may be a good read to get you thinking about the ways we anthropomorphize animals. It is a deeply rooted thing we do, we do it naturally. It's hard, almost seems inhuman, to think about it differently. There has been a lot of work put into why we do this and see just how ingrained it really is.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347215003085

>>2393722
is...is the horse trying to eat the dog after killing it?

>>2393737
Nope. just trying to slam it.

>>2393726
Overall we agree that you can't fathom how an animal thinks, that's ludicrous, you just refuse to knowledge that you can deduce how an animal behaves based on information gathered through behavioral studies.

I'll check out that read though and see what it looks like.

>>2393741
I'm simply saying that beyond your own fancy, guessing what an animal thinks is useless and can't be used to base any conclusions.

>>2393742
>dog whines, drools, stares at food I'm holding
>WHAT DO YOU WANT? If only I could understand what you are thinking!!!

>>2393746
>hunger isn't a feeling
How retarded are you, again?

>>2393742
I've agreed with that, we can't tell how it thinks. But we can deduce how it will behave based on our depth of research relating to animals, specifically cats and dogs which are the main "companion" animals.

>>2393747
As you can see there have been at least four different people in this thread arguing with you. I'm not even the person that you began arguing with in the beginning and I'm not the person who you just replied to. Not that the majority is always right or anything, but it shows that you are alienating people because you refuse to give into the fact that we can deduce stuff based on animal behavior which gives us insight into how these animal's minds works (though not total knowledge of them as we have established over and over again).

>>2393748
How it will behave, as in in the future? Or are you concluding why it will behave as such?

>>2393747
Your sophomoric and original philosophic musings are fascinating.

>>2393738
I mean, there is a solid like minute where the horse is just chewing on the dog before it finally tosses it a few more times and kicks it before walking off

>>2393754
thats horses way of killing.

>>2393749
First off, you can't assume that they are different people or the same people as it's all been anonymous. I refer to everyone as if they are a brand new person. Someone wanted to be edgy, I gave them edgy back. It was a stupid comment to make, all you had to think of is the saying 'I'm feeling hungry', that's all it takes. But I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, it's just the Internet so I didn't think someone would take it too seriously.
Just as I have said before and you brought up here, anthropomorphizing becomes a game of popularity, part of the reason why it is such a shitty way to base information off of. Whoever becomes more popular is right. There is a thin line saying that a behavior may be caused by a thought, and that a behavior is definitely caused because the animal thinks like this. So far people have not been able to make that distinction here, no one has put up even an alternative idea that may be going through an animals's head, and that is why anthropomorphizing is still not accepted in scholarly writings. It's not scientific, to be blunt

>>2393750
Why it will behave as such.
And another point just to throw in there. Do we know the intentions of ants? I mean do they even have intentions? Think about that for a second and realize how much fucking smarter we are than an ant, and that it should be fairly simple to figure out how they think (not exactly what it would be to look out of an ant's eyes per se, but just to figure out why they do what they do and anticipate their future behavior and such).
Now think about our intelligence as it relates to that of the average cat. Once again, we are way fucking smarter. So, in theory, we should be able to figure out why they do what they do, and potentially determine future behavior from the cat as well.
It all comes back to us understanding the behavior of the cat on a scientific level and applying it to determine why they acted a certain way and how they are most likely to act in the future. Simple combination of science and logic.

>>2393722
This is indeed the problem with Pitbulls. When they attack they cause massive damage and are hard to fend off. So even if they don't attack more than any other dog, when they do it is a disaster.

>>2393737
The horse is the natural predator of the dog

>>2393722
I worked at a hospital and we had a cop on scene at all times, he told me this story where he shot a pit bull in the head and the fucker laid there for 5-6 mins then got up and ran off

>>2393640
how do you know the baby isn't suicideing.

>>2393722
that horse should own more pits.

>>2393814
it was so satisfying seeing the pitbull flailed around by the horse.

>>2393039
Top tier parents

>>2393211
>NATURE AFFECTS INTELLIGENCE AND COLOUR
FUCK OFF NAZI REEEEEEEEEE

File: 1445625896618.jpg (18KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x480px

>>2393510
you are retarded, seriously

>>2393867
I cried for weeks, man. Apparently I loved that dog.
My parents also didn't like how the dog's favorite spot to sleep was the kitchen's stove.
They gave her to a farmer and she took care of sheep instead of me.

>>2393722
you know, i defend pits sometimes, but i don't feel bad about this at all. i just feel terrible for the horse being attacked. glad that it killed the obviously defective dog. some pits are just psycho and literally have to be killed to "rehabilitate" that aggression.

File: shaved peke.jpg (35KB, 480x559px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x559px

Before my stepdad tried to move in, he brought over his pitbull mix to mingle with our dogs.
Our lurcher ended up breaking his leg. Fucking hated the thing apparently.

>>2393879
SMASHED

>>2393797
>Shooting any animal in the head with a service handgun

>>2393777
Unfortunately it's still about what we can prove and what we can guess. What an animal is thinking we can only guess. What it does we can prove.

>>2393737
>>2393754
I've seen a video where a donkey kept bothering a camel until the camel got pissed off enough and bit the donkey to death. It then continued chewing on the donkey's corpse. I'm not sure if that camel or the horse in that video were eating the other animal or trying to make sure it was dead, both are possible. Even though herbivores aren't adapted to digesting meat well, they can sometimes eat a little bit of it anyway. For example horses, cows and deer are known to eat little baby birds if they get the chance, there are videos of it on Youtube.

>tfw I was three years old I escaped my pram and went straight for my grandma's dog (mind the fact that I haven't met this dog yet)
>It was a leonberger so it didn't do anything to me at all, even let me pick it's nose
Why do people get pitbulls just to try and prove a point?

>>2393993
Gentle giants are total bros. Leonbergers, Newfies, St. Bernards. Love em.

>>2393993
On the flip side, my uncle's leonberger killed my young cousin and severely wounded the other.

>>2393738
SMASHED
SLAMMED

>>2393211
>Nature doesn't affect aggression
>Implying evolution couldn't select and reward more aggressive behaviors
Smh senpai

Dogs are shit tier animals anyways. Why anyone would raise the shittiest of the shit and not expect bad results is beyond me.

>>2392909
If you really are fucking autistic enough to believe that pits are the only breed capable of this shit then you need to kill yourself asap. Live stream it as well I need a good fap

>>2393010
>FOR THE LAST REEEEEEE

Promise?

>>2394118
no one said pits are the only one, you stupid fucking faggot

see me after class

>>2392909
What about Rottweilers, dobermans, Labradors, German shepards, saint bernards, Great danes, bull mastiffs?? Ive never one seen a pittbull hurt anyone. but I was attacked by a Rottweiler when I was very young. But Im not a pussy like you guys, Im not afraid of dogs or rotts or pits because im not an absolute fag. also, does anyone have the video of the golden retriever biting that guys face off?

>>2394132
What's with animal people and emotional anecdotal self-affirming rants with flagrant disregard for apostrophes? Every animal related website has this phenomenon

>>2394142
I think you mean every place on the Internet has this phenomenon.

>>2394132
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

I can fit half this list in your post, 8/10

>>2394142
It is animals speaking through human portal. Dogge just cant conjugate contract form possessive.

Pitbulls are all ugly and stupid and their owners are all niggers
These are facts

>>2393212
Are you fucking retarded. How can you miss the point so fucking badly.

>>2392944
Terrible example, mate. St Bernards can have some nasty attitudes. I've met a few that don't like men, don't like people at all, don't like kids, or just don't like other dogs.

>>2393014
MASHED
LAMMED

>>2394243
Some dogs of any breed are going to have those characteristics though

>>2393488
This

Those people need o be locked up or outcast

>>2393987
>proving vs guessing
That's what using logic based on animal's behavioral patterns is, guessing, albeit an educated guess. No one is talking about determinism or being able to predict the future. Nor are they talking about being able to read the animal's minds or recreate their exact thought processes. You're arbitrarily focused on standards no one else is questioning.

>>2393574
Doubtful.
Genes usually code for several features, not just one. You can breed for pain tolerance, lack of emotional affect ('tells') for fighting, and raw explosive power, but that comes at a cost. Since all dogs are generally human friendly, most dogs with these pit traits will be friendly, too. But if a specific pit ISN'T naturally human friendly, then the fact that we bred out warning signs like growling and improved the pit's pain tolerance and power means that some pits will be murder dogs.

>>2393722
You see this a lot in moose country.
Just shitloads of pits and pit terrier mixes that are horribly scared or dead due to them attacking moose.

Even poorly trained proper guard dogs won't actually try to attack a large animal by biting. Here is an unruly great pyrennese scaring off a moose
https://youtu.be/eSQjzmfrIxk

That said, pits are great as a last line of defense against wolves as two or three pits are suicidally aggressive and probably can at least wound a wolf enough to let other dogs and livestock survive.

>>2394342
we're also comparing a shepherding dog which have been bred to wrangle and drive large animals in a certain way vs a dog that was bred to attack things head on.

>>2392909
Hahahahahaahhahahahaah

>>2393205
There's an old saying "a cat will steal the baby's breath". It means the cat likes to lay on top of warm things and since a baby is nice and warm the cat sits on them. Unfortunately, for the baby, the weight compresses the chest too much and/or their face is covered by the cat and they suffocate.

>>2393431
A little late but I'd like to weight in by drawing you back to the matter at hand. The dogs clearly intended to rip the baby to shreds when they ripped it to shreds. A cat laying on top of a baby intends to sleep in a confortable place, not to asphixiate the baby with its body.

>>2393594
m8 you're a moron. Only thing being discussed is how pitbulls are an overly agressive race, nobody is saying anything about morality until you come by and start pretending you don't notice it so you can flaunt your middle school tier reflections.

>>2394307
Anon questioned it and has been arguing it since the beginning trying to say that scientific evidence is anthropomorphizing animals.
>>2394336
The canine genome has not been completely decoded, don't pretend that it is.
>>2394512
I'd like to draw you back to the thread where you can't tell an animal's intent. This has already been discussed and you are not only late to the game but your argument has already been disproved
>>2394523
I'm assuming you're a nigger because you lack the ability of being self-aware.

File: 993eae600d8649043477913bde87414c.jpg (36KB, 432x648px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 432x648px

I think this is now a /pol/ thread about niggers.

File: tripb_smiling_550p.jpg (89KB, 550x396px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 550x396px

Boy do I sure hate niggers.

>>2394533
Anon questioned what? And how the fuck is scientific evidence anthropomorphizing animals.
And again while you can not exactly know the intent of the animal (i.e. be inside its mind) the general consensus is that you can guess the intent of the animals based on behavior, and it would be an educated guess as well as logical. So we can assume (key word here) that the dog tried to maul the animal and the cat tried to sit someplace warm.

>>2394533
I'll play ball and pretend you're not baiting
>expecting an aggressive breed of dog to behave aggressively and a cat to choose a soft warm place to rest
>anthropomorphizing
Explain how you reach this conclusion, please

>>2394546
It's not, that's the point. You can't know what an animal is thinking, you can only guess it's behavior form cues. Still beating a dead horse because people can not understand that we can't put our thoughts into an animal and act like it's correct.
>>2394550
I didn't though. You are strawmaning

File: IMG_1538.png (129KB, 500x610px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 500x610px

>>2394539
Like every other pit bull thread around here. I'm wondering, does anyone on /an/ actually own one? What's it even like living with them?

>2394553
I have said you can't guess what an animal is thinking. You're beating a dead horse because you keep repeating what everyone else has resigned themselves to say. And you ignore the fact that we can assume intent based on what we know about their nature, even though you already admitted that we can guess behavior based on cues.

>>2394563 meant for >>2394553

>>2394563
I am beating a dead horse because everyone is saying the same argument after I have refuted it so many times. Understanding behavior = understanding what something is thinking. Read the thread this has already been discussed in depth

>>2394562
it's kind of like having a nice penis day, you wake up, do your routine and notice your dick is just a little extra fluffed and impressive looking today and get a nice little boost of confidence but then after about 20 minutes that goes away when you realize you can't bring it out in public

>>2394562
I lived with 4.

One was defensive with it's owners and didn't trust strangers very well. It was confirmed to have been abused when it was younger.

One would fight with other dogs if the others were aggressive but would never act aggressive toward dogs who were't aggressive, no matter how rough they played. When it came to humans it would not show any signs of aggressive no matter what.

Another was like a down syndrome child.It only had one thing on it's mind at all times and that was "play". A stranger to the first dog came into the house one day and entered the bedroom that the dog considered it's territory. First dog went became very defensive with snapping and gnarling. The second dog, which was raised form a puppy without any contact from other dogs, got aggressive towards that dog and nobody else but never tried to initiate an actual fight. The third dog tried to play with everyone in the room during the entire confrontation while carrying around her retarded tennisball.

The 4th was still considered a puppy but was skittish by nature and seemed to be growing more and more into a version of dog #3.


From what I could tell each dogs behavior seemed to be completely correlated to how they were raised. Not a shill by the way. I'm a cat person and wouldn't adopt a dog unless it was forced upon me.

>>2394572
what's the fucking difference though?

knowing something is going to bite vs wanting to bite? is there any significant difference between knowing whether the animal is thinking "kill" or "drive off" or "punish" when the intent is still clearly to bite?

The mistake was getting a pitbull.

/an/ discord
https://discord.gg/g59mdCa

>>2394562
I don't own dogs, I foster though. Fostered many dogs, some I'm sure you'd consider pit bulls. There's nothing really different about it. Have any questions? I'll be happy to answer them. Note, they are all shelter dogs so I doubt I ever fostered an actual American Pit Bull Terrier. All unknown breeds that are guessed by visual ID.

>>2394255
I laugh every fucking time.

I'm a LEO In the united states.

Shit Bulls are a lot less fierce when you magdump on them.

BTW, dogs are property. If you sue a LEO for shooting your dog, the judge wont give a shit.

>>2392908
Have you ever been annoyed by a baby crying on a plane? I bet those dogs endured a good few hours before the annoyance got the best of them. It's 100% the parents fault for letting a kid unattended with creatures with basic instincts.

>>2394572
You can't know that I'm not the same person from yesterday who has been posting in this thread the entire time, therefore you're speaking out of your ass.
I want you to focus on what I highlighted as a keyword in my previous post, the fact that we can make ASSUMPTIONS about the animals intent based on behavior patterns and logic.

>>2393205
Pitbulls don't immediately maul children. They wouldn't be trying to murder your baby in cold blood, they're just acting on their natural instincts to make your baby deceased. It's a different kind of deceased, so it's different.

>>2394576
The difference is more like seeing a dog is fearful vs knowing what the dog is thinking to make it fearful. One you know the feeling, the other you know the thinking behind it.
>>2394585
People say the same thing over and over again. Does not matter if it is the same person or different people, the same refuted argument keeps being brought up like it's new so it's still beating a dead horse. In this case, knowing the number of original posters does not matter.
And I would like you to read through this thread, I already said that assumptions are fun to play with but you can't derive any true data from it. Go play your games with assumptions all day long but don't expect anyone to take you too seriously when you tell them you know what your pet is thinking.

>>2393993
>>2393995
In like 20 years there's gonna be st berns mauling kids and people will be like "just because theyre huge doesnt mean theyre monsters"
and then everyone realizes every dog is a predatory animal and has a threshold that until it is reached, you don't know. we are still a lot bigger than most dogs. cats are safe because theyre small and we are big. lions are not this.

>>2394562

My parents did. I honestly don't know if it's the owner or if they're predisposed to violence(And maybe gender matters?). But that one at least was a good doggo who lived 12 years without killing anyone. What she was like was friendly, hyper and stupid until she got older and was then friendly, slow and stupid.

Now our lab from when I was younger, that guy was a asshole that hated anyone who wasn't part of the family.

>>2393722
fucking H O R S E D

>>2394591
Already read through it. And although you can't derive true data from assumptions you can use true data (behavioral studies of animals) to back up assumptions (logically I might add). And you still can't refute this. And haven't since last night. You just keep saying "DURR BEATING DEAD HORSE" b/c you're mistaking everyone's posts for them thinking they can mimic the animal's mind (which is of course retarded) and you being able to deny that (shifting the goalposts) makes you think you're on top of shit. Let me tell you something. You're not.

>>2394591
>you can't derive data from an assumption

Are you fucking retarded? You absolutely can, there's hard sciences that function with assumptions. Accurate assumptions based on accurate input information leads to repeatable outcomes when reanalyzing and verifying the information/repeating the process. That's valid data.

You can't know the exact thing anything or anybody else is thinking for certain but you can get a pretty accurate result based on accurate information

>>2394591
>>2394607
BTFO like a BITCH!

>>2392908
>leave soft, mushy treat with 3 hungry dogs
What did they expect

>>2394621
death metal

>>2394607
Based on assumptions is a theory. they call psychology a fake science just because you can't tell what someone is thinking. I'm sorry you're trying to argue something you clearly don't understand. I've only given information and all you do is call names, like someone who can't actually form an argument. You're no longer even trying to find truth, you're just trying to be right. Sad.
>>2394605
Show me how you can undeniably tell what an animal is thinking then without anthromorphizing them. You can't, but go ahead and try. Anons are just trying to say the same shit with different insults expecting me to give them a pat on the back for being wrong.

>>2394662
>based on assumption is theory

Theory: a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena

you're the one who has literally no argument and have been moving goalposts, it happened further up in the thread when you said animals are inherently unpredictable when they clearly are predictable due to observed patterns of behavior and you've been moving goalposts since

>>2394669
all you can do is slam out buzz words. You don't give out any coherent arguement, you don't want to learn you just want to be right even if that means being arrogant,

THEORY
a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

Ideas meant to explain something, but is not a law. Look into the difference of law and theory. Talking about moving goalposts, that's all you've been doing; looking into semantics and cherry picking definitions because you can't argue what is at hand.

>>2394662
I never said you can undeniably tell what an animal is thinking, you are once again moving the goalposts. This has been said over five times in this thread. If this is your only argument then you are truly a retard. Respond to the assumption based argument I've given you. You can assume the animal's intent based off what we know about the animal's behavior.

>>2394729
Never said you did, did i? You are putting words in my mouth so you can move goal posts.

read >>2393308 And follow through I've already gone over this.

File: 1495528788126.jpg (249KB, 3000x2250px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 3000x2250px

don't leave kids alone with dogs.
blame the parent.
not the dogs.

>>2394737
Now you are making me read a post you presented to someone else concerning whether an animal has the capacity to have intent to kill (understanding that we are not even sure whether an animal understands the concept of killing)
That is not what I am stating (so you are moving the goal posts again to make me argue something I never even said).
I want to know how you can argue against the fact that we can logically ASSUME an animals intent based off of behavior?
We can assume the animal wants to eat (has intent to eat) when it stands near its food bowl and meows correct?
So why can't we assume the animal wants to be warm when it curls up on a baby and shows NO signs of aggression (and don't give me that bullshit that cats seeking warmth hasn't been proven, unless that's your only argument).

>>2394685
I didn't even pick the fucking buzz word, you did and the primary definition doesn't support your stance, and in the case of animal behavioral science the first definition would apply, and the second would be called a hypothesis.

And ignoring the argument over the definition of theory, you're still wrong because animal behavior is observed, been experimented with and results recorded so making an "assumption" based on behavioral patterns that we know and have been studied would be correct

And here we have the pivot, you're shifting the argument away from the main point because you're fucking wrong and won't admit it

>>2394342
Doesn't look like the dog is scaring that moose off. What's to say it didn't turn around and charge more? The people screaming are infuriating, how the fuck are you going to take a dog out into the wilderness without 100% control over it? It doesn't even come when called? That's so dangerous.

>>2394765
Hence it is a poorly trained dog? Just like mentioned in the post?
Still not suicidal like horse pitbull.

>>2394372

Pyrs are guardian dogs, not herding dogs.

>>2392908
>leaving an infant alone
>leaving pit bulls together unsupervised
>leaving infant unsupervised with any dog

How'd that happen?

>>2392908
>leave a 3-week-old unsupervised
>leave a 3-week-old unsupervised with 3 dogs
That's what I call Darwinism.

>>2392908

Cats are more dangerous for babies tho

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2912331/Stray-cat-saves-Russian-baby-abandoned-freezing-hallway-keeping-warm.html

Post dead pitniggers

File: 24B7C89900000578-2912331-Hero_Marsha_the_stray_cat_pictured_with_local_resident_Irina_Lav-a-25_1421358300754.jpg (43KB, 634x348px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 634x348px

>>2394866
>why are these humans giving me the affections wtf I'm a selfish cunt who cares only about myself wtf.

Anyway what the fuck kind of parents were they. I hope the kid stays with grandma

File: 1460603273178.png (2MB, 1187x776px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1187x776px

>>2394871

it's to say "blame the parents", unless they knew how defunct pitshits were i'd trust my pet around a baby. then again, i only trust small dogs, would keep my baby in a crib were a dog couldnt get it, and not leave my three month old baby alone

>>2394962
*it's hard to day

>>2394964
*say

FUCK

i'm going to bed

>>2394962
No it's pretty fucking easy to say blame the parents. Both for being failures at training 3 powerful large breed dogs that very commonly have high prey drive, and for leaving their infant child alone with 3 dogs.

>everyone ignoring the fact that a 3 year old was left alone at all

It does matter if you left him/her alone with a glass of water or 3 fucking pitbulls something is bound to go wrong.

>>2393525
You're pretty good at this game anon

>>2394983
It was a 3 week old, and you're right, a baby that young really shouldn't be left alone period.

File: download.png (8KB, 200x252px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 200x252px

>>2394964
>tfw it's hard to day

>>2394744
>>2394745
It's literally an argument of 'i won't listen to your argument so I'm right'. Ignorance is truly the worst evil here. The definition does support it by stating it's an idea that is supposed to explain something, meaning it's not concrete. I honestly don't understand how else to help you understand without asking you to go to secondary School.

>>2392960
Very true my dog has lived in our backyard without a leash surrounded by chickens and had never attacked one until recently and we've had him for 7 years

File: Pit Bull (15).jpg (89KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1024x768px

>>2394871
ok

>>2393101
Your autism is showing again, Alex

>>2395017
>>2395019
>>2395024
wtf i love pitbros now.

File: pandora.jpg (169KB, 1326x786px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1326x786px

>>2395042
Usually whenever I post pit type dogs the thread turns to shit asap, but since this thread is already shit I figured I couldn't make it worse

>>2395017
>Orphans because they ate their own mother.

>>2395019
>Had been a good puppy for years, suddenly snapped one day and started calling himself Two-Face. Now in a kennel for the criminally insane.

>>2395024
>Dismembered each others in a murder-suicide pact, no survivors.

>>2395034
>Pit-bull puppy already demonstrating savagery and attacking an older dog's dick, it had to be removed due to an infection.

>>2395049
>Rumored to still roam the roads and to eat lost human children.

>>2395054
>Lost an ear fighting another pit-bull, they initially fought to decide who would attack a human first.

>>2395064
>Passed himself off as a dalmatian for years, sold a hundred of his own puppies to be turned into a fur coat.

>>2395068
>Heroically trekked across all Alaska to maul its owner who had abandoned it.

File: blue-eyed-cane-corso-pups-te-koop.jpg (61KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 400x400px

>>2395080
If the mother was a pit bull, wouldn't the mother eat them first?

>>2395082
No, the father had damaged her too much. She did manage to get a few.

>>2395042
They're puppies, though.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (48KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1280x720px

>>2395090
That makes much more sense

>>2393114
didn't some old cat lady get her face eaten off by her cats some time ago?

File: 15370927979_a4ca8abda8_z.jpg (87KB, 612x612px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 612x612px

>make a meme +

>>2395010
That's not the argument at all

It started with animals being unpredictable, which they aren't

Then became about intent with some other anon, which is irrelevant

Then became about scientifically accepted accuracy which you were wrong about again

Then you tried to pivot it to the definition of theory, which still doesn't support your argument

And now you're trying to be outright dismissive because you can't shift goalposts or pivot any further.

File: L2FwcGhvc3RpbmdfcHJvZC9ibG9icy9BRW5CMlVvZkEwR05YRlo3MmQ1QmktbTc1MUhCTWlkZDUzZ3U4RENDNV9IUUpXOWk5Q0w2NjBPVnBtbnhDdmNsZVFhNm03TVQtbnZJV0lVeU5UdEhHcFBmWmxNWkRXZ1N2dy5SMElaOWNRRHNLY1AzcFRN.jpg (20KB, 510x414px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 510x414px

>>2393201
>>2393212
>>2393308
>>2394744
>>2395010
Autism.

>>2395158
No, it's because you re impossible to talk to. You throw up literally no arguments but I'm wrong because you said I was wrong! How very convincing. I think I'm the only person ITT to even post studies, articles, books and correct definitions, but I am wrong because you say I am wrong. You throw out buzzwords to make my argument less valid when half of the time you aren't even using the correct logical fallacy and it makes no sense. You aren't here to push your own thoughts and ideas, you're only here to make a person wrong. That's where your position falls apart, you don't actually have anything to fight for except going against the grain. That's why my position hasn't been refuted, that's why no one has been able to link to anything backing up their claims, that's why you can't/won't understand or listen. You don't care about being right you care about someone else being wrong. And that is a sad crusade that you won't win. Sorry, kiddo

File: Pit Bull (1).jpg (53KB, 500x365px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x365px

>>2395166
>expecting anything else out of a bait thread
I don't know why you came here if you didn't want autism.

I don't really care if pit bulls are fucked up in the head from the beginning or if shitty owners made them that way, I still take detours around them whenever I meet them while out and about.

>>2393722
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO88kUSmKaQ
>>2394879
Why are pits so fucking dumb? Any other dog would have gave up the first time it got fucked up badly but pits just keep attacking. It's like they just randomly snap for no reason, and they lack any sense of self preservation or fear.

File: racemix.jpg (195KB, 969x1024px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 969x1024px

>>2393051
It's the liberal hippie mindset, anon.

File: Pit Bull (3).jpg (43KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x667px

>>2395232
Banning anything is a liberal mindset

>>2395229
People who are into these dogs have always valued pitbulls' ability to fearlessly keep fighting despite injuries, that way dog-fighting matches are more intense and entertaining. This tenacity is often considered the most important and essential trait of pitbulls. They're bred and raised to act like that.

>>2394132
Literally a woman

>>2395232
>It makes you wonder if she changed her mind
Why would it make me wonder that

>A supposedly "gentle" pooch named Lucky is suspected of killing a 2-month-old baby and tearing the child's body apart in South Carolina. Aiden McGrew, who was born on Valentine's Day and was the youngest of three children, was found dead in his family's mobile home Friday in Ridgeville by his mother, according to The Post and Courier newspaper. The baby was in a swing when Lucky, a golden retriever-Labrador mix, bit the child several times and tore off his legs, authorities said.

Not trying to defend pits or say they aren't shit but how does this happen so often? Do dogs really see human babies as a food source???

>>2395260
If not as prey, as toys.
And dogs aren't exactly tender with their toys either.

>>2395167
I think you're literally just an autist who doesn't realize you can ASSUME the intent of a cat just like you can ASSUME the intent of another person (despite never actually being able to be in either of their minds and TRULY KNOW their intent). Autists tend to have trouble extrapolating assumed intent from behavior.

Is it an issue of not letting your pet know they're supposed to protect the baby? if you play keep away with the baby it might see the baby as a challenge or something. i always figured that if you introduce the baby as something to guard then it develops a love for the baby, like those cute videos of the dogs raising the baby like their puppy

>>2395274
You can assume, but that assumption doesn't mean it will be right. That was the whole point. Again, you're not reading or listening. All you try to do is slip in insults because you got caught in a corner and can't form any new arguments

>>2395267
So they're too stupid to not realize the "toy" is alive and belongs to their humans, and possibly resembles a small human?

File: 1454863693806.jpg (8KB, 212x237px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 212x237px

>>2392908

What I found most funny of all, is that the same People that complain the owners are in the wrong and Pit-bulls are perfectly peaceful, are the same people calling niggers wild monkeys that are inherently aggressive.

>>2395303
Could be.
And don't forget dogs explore with their mouths.

>>2395245
I agree, extermination is much better.

>>2395315
you're an idiots
the same people that defend niggers defend shitbulls
shitbulls are aggressive and stupid just like blacks

>>2392908
>nobody's posted about the Novosibirsk domesticated fox experiment yet
I'm surprised.

It found that breeding plays significantly into behavior, despite the conditions under which they are raised.

>>2395315
That's because nigger owners have the highest bite rate of all common breeds. Besides stupidity like OP, niggers are generally the cause of dog bites. Look into the areas that have the highest bite rates per thousand; poor nigger areas skyrocket compared to poor white trash areas.
>>2395353
The difference being they bred foxes to be feral, not to 'snap'. We already know that dogs can be feral and hate all people. The issue people have with pit bulls is that they think they suddenly turn some day.

>>2395301
Nope the whole point was that you can make the (educated and logical) assumption. You've just lost track of what your arguing because your an autist.

>>2392950
This, a million times this. Even a pomeranian can kill a human baby. All it has to do is get lucky enough to sink it's fangs in where there's a big vein or major artery.

There's a reason why small dog breeds are called "ankle biters". The difference is that a grown adult can shrug off a bite to the ankle. A newborn infant can't shrug off a bite to the neck.

>>2393006
Motherfucker. Don't even leave them alone with dogs the same size as them! A chihuahua can tear open a 3 week old babies throat as easily as a pit bull can crush it's skull.

It's almost as if people forget that dogs are genetic descendants of fucking wolves.

>>2395301
No that's the pointed you've shifted too after being wrong repeatedly, there's no need for a new argument, you can make accurate predictions of animal behaviors with accurate information of animal tendencies in the past and body language / vocal cues

You seem unable to grasp that basic fact

>>2393722
I'm more impressed that the horse didn't freak out and run down the street.

>>2393096
The "nanny dog" stereotype comes from the fact that when suburbs first started popping up people were afraid to leave their kids home alone. It was completely different from being on a farm, where the nearest neighbor was miles away. And also completely different from being in a city, were a police officer was within screaming distance.

So the compromise was big scary dogs. The children would stay INSIDE, and the dogs would stay OUTSIDE, in the yard.

The only way to get inside that house, was to go through that dog (or dogs).

So it would be more accurate to refer to them as "home security system" rather than "nanny dogs".

Why do you think dog houses became so popular in non shithole third world countries? Because the dogs are supposed to stay OUTSIDE. Not inside WITH your kids.

>>2395375
A small dog isn't genetically predisposed to one day snap and maul its owner to death though, hell most dog breeds will never do something like that, only shit genetic garbage breeds like pitbulls.

>>2394191
Well no, not always. The occasional feminazi white chick owns pitbulls because she craves the D but refuses to allow human males to touch her.

>>2395303
More like a baby is moving it's arms and legs around. The dog sees the round little fists and feet, smells the human scent, then thinks "HUMAN WANTS TO PLAY BALL!" Goes to grab the "ball" with it's mouth, then either A: it's a good dog and immediately drops the "ball" when the baby screams. Or B: It's a shitty dog and continues playing, and growing more aggressive, the more the baby screams.

>>2395374
An assumption is still that, you won't know it like a law. That's why assumptions aren't used in scientific studies. Let's look at the definition again since you must have forgotten;
Assumption -
something that you accept as true without question or proof
>without proof
>>2395378
I only refer to the subject at hand. Read through the thread, anons kept shifting further and further from the subject. If I didn't answer their concerns I would be wrong. If I answer them, apparently I'm wrong too. You are unable to understand that people can not tell what animals thoughts are. In fact we can't tell what each other's thoughts are without asking.

>>2395382
No...the "nanny dog" thing started when pit bull apologists in the 90s and 00s found Victorian pictures of toddlers posing with prized bully breeds and thought "perfect, this'll show everyone they were originally cuddly family dogs!"

>>2395396
There's no way a dog chews the legs off an infant without it being intentional. I cannot understand how a pet dog, especially one like a golden retriever, would mutilate a human baby. What sort of thing causes that to happen? I don't get it.

>>2395447
And I forgot to add, like you mentioned, with the baby SCREAMING as it is chewed on, because obviously it would be. How the fuck does a family dog with such deep instincts to protect/not harm its humans just "snap" like that?

>>2395410
Doesn't matter that you can't know it like a law, that's not what anyone is debating.

>>2395455
But it is, the original unoriginal argument was that an assumption can be undeniably used to tell what an animal is thinking. And I'm arguing it can't. You can say a cat is thinking one thing, someone can say the same cat is thinking another thing, you can both be right or wrong and there's no way to tell.

>>2395444
No, the nanny dog thing started because a Staffy's stud name was Nanny because he liked kids. That dog's puppies were called Nanny's pups or Nanny's dogs. And then it spread. Just because someone used it for something later doesn't delete the origins.

>>2392908
What kind of parents let their 3 week old baby alone?

>dead baby
nothing of value lost

>>2395697
Omg anon you're so cool and edgy

File: ss (2017-06-01 at 15.05.06) - BAD RAP - It's Dog Bite Prevention Week. Did you know that there....jpg (35KB, 495x185px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 495x185px

>>2395382
>>2395459
Please post what source you got this from. I've never heard of this before, and can't seem to find anything based on what you said.
The most detailed and plausible "nanny dog" myth origin story I've heard is the "The Nanny Dog Myth Revealed" article on the "truthaboutpitbulls" blogspot. Can't post the link because 4chan thinks it's spam, but it should be simple enough to google.
That page also shares a Facebook post by a pitbull advocate organization. Their official statement is that there is no such thing as "Nanny's Dog", and spreading around that myth is harmful.

>>2395702
desu it's not completely wrong, the baby had no value so far, only potential.

>>2395463
People who shouldn't have kids desu. Not trying to be edgy, but they're the only ones to be blamed when something like this happens.

Shit, a 5 year old can accidentally kill a baby if left alone.

Recent /an/ lurker here, pitching in with a little personal experience.
Went to visit a family friend overseas, and they a bunch of dogs. One of 'em was a black lab/pitbull mix. Gorgeous dog, but right after I arrived and they were all sniffing around me this fucker trots along and snaps at my face. Only reason it didn't catch me was because I was straightening up right when it happened.
I know every dog is different, and that breed isn't necessarily an indication of tendencies, but was not a nice dog.
By contrast, there's a Newfoundland just up the road from us who is extremely protective of the family's daughter. Lovely dog, laid-back so long as you're not being an ass.
I think it's a mixture of nature and nurture.

File: 0% mad.jpg (42KB, 401x455px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 401x455px

>>2395245
>Liberals in America want to ban Muslims

Somebody form México here??

I ask because in recent times its more common to see the wanna be thugs ignorant people adquire pitbulls, but you know that they only do it for "image" and are probably going to be like a plague in a few years.

I want to know if we mexicans can push to make a law for regularization or ban of the breed.

*A lot of pitbulls attack had been registered in the last years, even one entered some highschool and started to attack some girls

>>2395458
Please show me where the original argument was "that an assumption can be undeniably used to tell what an animal is thinking."
Go on, just show me the post and I'll shut up, no need to add anything else.

>>2393954
S L A M M E D

>>2394580
If a cop shot at my car unprovoked would the judge not give a shit? Were those clauses not related or are cops not responsible for property damage they cause?

>>2395232
That image is about as factual as most /pol/ holocaust denial infographics

>>2396194
Disproving/debunking tends to be more effective than insults, anon.

>>2396197
That wasn't an insult, anyone can write text on some pictures. Can you prove that the actress in that video was violently murdered by a black man? Seriously

>>2396456
Direct comparisons to /pol/ are pretty insulting, to be fair.

>>2396456
A 2-second google of the girl's name turns up a raft of reports about it. Use some damned initiative.

>>2396462
It is a /pol/ infographic, to be sure

File: ed2ed1f3-ba0e-4d83-9e66-5e7d2043ac26.png (760KB, 750x1000px) Image search: [Google]

760KB, 750x1000px

>>2396466
A 2 second Google search reveals that there was indeed a woman raped and murdered by a black Muslim in Sweden, and that she liked a multiculturalism page on Facebook at some time during her life. I have seen it debunked before: a person posted "that wasn't her". Maybe I'm just as bad for taking that on faith alone but at least I googled it this time to make sure. The first alt right website I clicked on even had a footnote saying there was initially a rumor it was her, but it isn't.

>>2395385
You're retarded. There has never been a dog breed that has never had an individual snap and attack someone. I've seen more aggressive small dogs than big dogs by several orders of magnitude. Just because it's harder for smaller dogs to maul people to death doesn't mean they aren't snapping and trying

File: 1495510795970.jpg (85KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 640x640px

My new neighbors across the street have a male pitbull. He is very aggressive towards my dog and I. They keep it off leash 24/7. They also do not have a fence.

I can't take my dog for walks because the pitbull will charge at us. I mean, he will literally run across the street and try to attack my dog and I. I tried talking to my neighbors about it, but they refuse to keep it on a leash. My other neighbors are equally as pissed off as I am. The do not allow their children or pets out because of that fucking dog.

How do I go about reporting this? Do I report the dog or the owners of the dog? The dog has bitten 2 people before, but the owners have always bailed him out of the dog pound.

File: 1494824971432.jpg (33KB, 453x500px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 453x500px

>ITT: fucking pussies being scared of dogs

Be careful, anons. You wouldn't want those mean ol' pupper wuppers to hurt you now, would you?