pitbulls are shit animals for shit people

>>2401901
Am i the exception?
I adopted a skinny mutt labeled a shepherd mix. Then he grew into what was undeniably a pitbull German shepherd mix. I went into the shelter specifically looking for anything except for a pitbull.

Ever think that some of the nice white people that have pitbulls got them for reasons out of their control? I can't give my dog back. It's been two years and i adopted him and now I'm responsible for this shit nigger dog that i now love. God damn it it's contradictory sometimes but I hate fucking niggers and shitbull enthusiasts i swear

>>2401956

I suppose but your doghas every predisposition to snap and if it does it will be bad and it will be your fault. Youre an honorary nigger.

>>2401956
Your dog's mix is also like 1000x worse than a purebred pitbull. You should just kill it yourself now and save someone the hassle later.

>>2401956
As long as you are not a nigger you should be able to tame this thing anyway. The main reason why these things are so aggressive is because they are owned by spics and niggers 90% of the time.

>>2401901
>We keep all our animals indoors because the people next door have a pitbull chained up 24/7.
So, wait, why are you afraid then?

>>2401901
No, pitbulls are dogs for spics and cumskins

People who don't understand how dog raising works is still a meme?

>>2401987
Niggers are notorious for their irrational fear of dogs, especially pits.

>>2401987

The nigger next door has a pit. Its already gotten loose once. We have small dogs and two cats and have to be careful that they never get out of our fenced in area. Unless theyre on a.leash and even then anything could happen.

>>2401901
Why are you lying? Dogs that attack people are not "stitched up and rehabilitated", they get killed. Why do you have to lie on an anonymous message board?

I've been walking my pit down the alley every morning for the past 2 years.
So far no bites, she stares at some people she might know, but that's the most aggressive thing she does.
Sometimes while people are walking by they actually jaywalk across the street. I get a good laugh out of it.
100% of them have been black people though. I think they have dog troubles. Must be those music videos that portray the dogs as aggressive.

>>2402019
black people often seem scared of animals in general

i work at a petco and of course have requests to hold or pet animals, there's tons of black children who are scared to death of something as harmless as a guinea pig and even some adults react in fear to tiny harmless things. it actually makes me sad because all it is is a lack of exposure.

My sister owns a pitbull and the worst thing she has done is shit on the carpet.

whats a strong dog that is friendly like a golden retriever?

>>2402438
A golden retriever.

>>2402026
People being wary of unfamiliar animals makes you sad?

>>2402447
golden retrievers wont bite my enemies though

>>2401901
>tfw some K-9's are pitbulls and are more well behaved than some human police officers

Dog racism is weird and it makes me wonder where cats and carrier pigeons falcons and stuff fit in, especially with military dolphins and other animals

Wonder what Cat is the most disliked for being aggressive

>>2402470
Tigers. They are famous for slaughtering Indian villagers. They even kill for pleasure. Fuck those cats.

>>2401977

Yeah it's all the current owners fault. Has nothing to do with being bred for violence and to ignore pain.

>>2402474
t. Lion

>>2402026
A lot of the dog fear comes from the use of police dogs, starting, I think, during the Civil Rights Era. There's also the unfamiliarity, like you said, but fear and caution are the normal and healthy responses to that.

>>2402544
Shit, I forgot about the "sending dogs after fleeing slaves" thing.

Black Americans don't have nearly the history of owning animals as white Americans do, from the very beginning of European colonization of North America. White Americans are much more likely to own farms and/or hunt, so they are more familiar with farm animals and hunting dogs. White Americans also generally have more money than black Americans and pets are a bit of a luxury. There are several factors at play.

Black Americans and Africans have different attitudes towards animals due to their very different experiences with them.

>>2402555
>Black Americans and Africans have different attitudes towards animals due to their very different experiences with them.
They react the same towards dogs, bugs, and water. Stop making excuses for them because the reason they act the way they do is a combination of ignorance, and absolutely no structure, discipline, and education growing up.

>>2402565
>black Americans scared of water
A lot of them grew up in urban areas so they are less likely to have had access to lakes and pools (public and personal), so they don't know how to swim.

>black Americans scared of bugs
I don't know what you're talking about, but they think roaches and shit are gross, which is objectively true. If they're more disgusted by generic, harmless, outdoors critters like worms and pillbugs and stuff, again, it's because they live in urban areas. They're less likely to have nice yards to play in and can't safely roam their neighborhoods doing stupid kid shit like catching bugs and flipping rocks over to see all the bugs living underneath like a lot of white kids in rural or suburban areas do.

>black Americans scared dogs
Already went over this.

It's not "making excuses". They objectively have a different general life experience than white Americans do. They act a bit differently than you do because they have been exposed to different stimuli than you have.

You put large groups of people down because you can't or haven't bothered to understand them so you can feel superior. You're a low-life and you know it, but haven't taken the initiative to change.

How many times can a board have the literal exact same thread?

>>2402470
K9 unit pits kek anon go fuck yourself

>>2401956
>Am i the exception?

No, stopped reading right there

>>2402573
>boo hoo, poor black have it so hard compared to evil whitey
Fuck your excuses.
If a nigger is too damn lazy, ignorant, or irresponsible to teach thier kids how to swim then put the blame on them. It damn sure isn't because of "oppression".
Call me a low life all you want, at this point I'm fine with labels.

>>2402470
you know one of the first qualities of a police dog is it's propensity for fucking up humans at the snap of a finger right

>dog racism

jesus christ the day of the rope is gonna be so much worse now

>>2402573
Don't bother arguing with him. It's the /pol/ drip over that's been plaguing all other boards with phoneposting faggots who shoehorn politics into every facet of discussion just so they feel validation when the other /pol/lacks rally behind them or have an excuse to take out aggression on those who dissent. You're wasting your time.

>>2401992
>muh TRAINING
No. This ends now, certain breeds of dogs are just naturally more violent and no amount of training is going to fix that. This isn't up for debate, this isn't my "opinion", this is a proven fact. Pitbulls are aggressive, overly violent dogs whose aggression cannot be trained out of them, and the people who perpetuate this idea that pitbull attacks are just accidents due to lack of proper training are deluding both themselves and the world around them, and allowing more and more tragedies to occur simply out of their misguided "humane" interests. It would be in EVERYONE'S best interest if pitbulls stopped being bred and we allowed the breed to die out.

Why is it that every time I come here there's a pit bull bait thread? I don't come to /an/ that often, but isn't this just preaching to the choir?

>>2402019
Weird. Every time I walk my dog and a nigger sees him, I get "DAMN he looks good, is that really your dog?" compliments.

>>2402555
My family is black and we've always had dogs. Many black families I know also have always had dogs. Nearly every house on this block(majority black/hispanic with a couple of whites(you can tell it used to be an all white neighborhood)) has a dog. Niggers across the street have two German Shepherds they keep in a tiny ass fence in area between their houses. They're in separate partitions, too. It makes me angry every time I see them because they always want to play.

>>2401987
Because the fucking nigger pitbull could either get loose or his animals could walk up to the fucker and get bit!

>>2402869
this

>collies will nip at kids because of their herding instincts, so keep them supervised around kids
sounds good, it's what they were bred for after all!

>sighthounds will dash after every animal smaller than they are since they have a high prey drive, so keep a good handle on the leash
sounds good, it's what they were bred for after all!

>the reason my golden takes things so gently from you is because he's got a soft mouth. retrievers need soft mouths to retrieve ducks and game from the water
sounds good, it's what they were bred for after all!

>I'm not comfortable leaving my kid around a type of dog historically bred for fighting and baiting
REEEEE PIBBLE BABBY DINDU NUFFIN NANNY DOG IT'S ALL IN HOW YOU RAISE THEM

File: confused cia.png (28KB, 186x208px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 186x208px

>>2401990
>pitbulls are dogs for spics
This
>and cumskins
What did you mean by this?

>>2402474
>hey are famous for slaughtering Indian villagers
and now donkeys

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=dde_1496669501

>>2402869
You'll never get rid of them unless you can destroy dog fighting rings. With those standing, there will always be a need for aggressively bred dogs, and if they can't have pits, the breeding efforts will move to another dog. The only thing to do would be cracking down on fighting rings and encouraging the breeding of naturally docile pits or pit mixes to satiate the "protect the pit" crowds.

>>2402902
>what did you mean by this?
he meant to say "im a retarded nigger"

>>2402573
You're putting too much effort into responding to a troll, m8

>>2402937
This can't be further from the truth

The "protect the pit" faggots are the problem, not dogfighters. The breed can be outlawed in all states and culled en masse and all issues with pit bulls will be solved. Dogfighters well just get their demon beasts from the black market like they get everything else from regardless

>>2402937
The problem is BYBs. They are genuinely too stupid. They think they are breeding good dogs just because they love the dogs or don't abuse them or whatever. Then they sell these high maintenance dogs who may be prone to resource guarding, dog aggression, prey drive, stranger aggression etc as perfect couch potato family pets and then other retards (let's be honest here only retards buy pups on CL) buy them, then the cycle continues with those dogs. The dog fighting dogs that make money, the ones that go to these National dog fighting rings, they do not go back out into the public easily. They are killed to make sure the dog can never be traced back to them. The vast majority of dogs that bite were poorly bred coupled with people unable to handle the consequences of a poorly bred Animal.

There needs to be more education, and not in a holier than thou sense because that only pisses people off. It needs to be done quickly and in a way that retards can understand. Sweden managed to do it without a breed ban or any stigma on any of their dogs. It probably helps that they have a large political party that is literally there only for animals and nothing else. Our animal related parties are always liberal leaning which actually often hurts the animals. Things like bans, selling off parks, making hunting illegal etc. Maybe we just need an uncucked animal political party

>>2401901
>We keep all our animals indoors
That's what you should do if you have cats.

Fuck dogs of peace though.

>>2402474
The fact that useless and dangerous animals like tigers or bears are not getting exterminated wholesale makes me lose faith in humanity.

>>2403234
>Our animal related parties are always liberal leaning which actually often hurts the animals. Things like bans, selling off parks, making hunting illegal etc.
since when is selling off parks a liberal idea? AFAIK selling off public lands is one of the GOP's favorite things to do

>Maybe we just need an uncucked animal political party
I agree, but because we're essentially a two-party system we will never get it off the ground. the best bet would be to put the pressure on state representatives to add more regulations on who can breed or keep animals, but you'll never get past the "hurr it's my sovereign right to buy a pet just like it's my right to buy a gallon of coke for each of my kids" people.

my ideal animal laws would be something like
>you must be licensed to own a type of pet
>every pet of yours must be licensed
>you must take a test of your knowledge about the pet in order to get the license
>you must be licensed to breed pets, even if you're a hobbyist
>must take a test to be licensed
>you must be subject to regular inspections of your breeding facilities
>overhaul the USDA bare minimums so shitty commercial breeders go under
>pet stores have to show exactly where all of their animal stock comes from and will be fined if it's from breeders that don't comply with the new guidelines
>animal abuse and neglect subject to much heavier fines

it'll never happen though.

>>2404672
I hate these shit bulls as much as anyone, but that's some seriously ethically-illiterate, statist bullshit.

>>2405000
>ethically-illiterate

How? Why is requiring people to have the knowledge to take care of an animal an treat it well unethical?

>>2401901
>jumped on the elderly lady next door to them when it got loose
Wow, what a vicious attack by that brutal monster.

>>2404672
Obongo sold off the most land from national parks to China (mostly Yellowstone) than any other president since creating national parks and the Democrats did not bat an eye about it.

Even if we did put restrictions on breeding, it would be impossible to enforce. It's not like guns where only a few places can make them; anyone with an unfixed dog can make more dogs, and often do so on accident. What will more likely happen is we will fuck over decent breeders, the ones that breed good animals, and the shitty people who were always the problem will still be the problem. All those regulations are likely to make good breeders quit, while assholes will still be assholes. The pet store thing is easier to follow through with Because not every one and their brother has a pet store. Personally I don't think large kennels should have any kind of approval, AKC or otherwise. No good quality dogs come from kennels of more than 10 breeding animals. In fact reputable breeders don't even keep their own males or their own females on their property; they buy studs or stud out. There would also be many kinks to work out. For people that may live hours away from where these tests are being taken, or maybe someone is taking care of a stray dog or watching someone else's dog and now they need to pass that test. Or what if you move in with someone that has a dog? Do you have to take the test now because you take care of it? What if you're fostering dogs? What about people who are from other countries just visiting? What if you're a good dog owner but English is your second language so you end up failing? Will the test be national or state by state, and if the latter would a license from one state count in another? I am just assuming that this would be something that would be grandfathered in. Who are we going to pay to administer these tests? More importantly who are we going to pay to enforce these new regulations and how will we even enforce them?

>>2405084
>What will more likely happen is we will fuck over decent breeders, the ones that breed good animals, and the shitty people who were always the problem will still be the problem. All those regulations are likely to make good breeders quit, while assholes will still be assholes.
Why would reputable breeders quit because of new regulations, but BYBs stay on and comply? The whole point is that people will be fined if they don't comply with the licensure, which will be a cinch for reputable breeders. The cost of licensing doesn't have to be cost-prohibitive.

>There would also be many kinks to work out.
I don't disagree with you.

>For people that may live hours away from where these tests are being taken
Online testing.

>or maybe someone is taking care of a stray dog or watching someone else's dog and now they need to pass that test.
Of course there would be exceptions.

>Or what if you move in with someone that has a dog? Do you have to take the test now because you take care of it?
It's probably easier to not have joint ownership of a pet, even if the two people are married or cohabitating. This would incidentally make a few pet-custody battles a lot quicker.

>What if you're fostering dogs?
Non-profits/charities/rescues and their volunteers would probably get an exception with proof that they're affiliated with the rescue.

>What about people who are from other countries just visiting?
Who takes their pet with them just to visit?
They'd have to go through quarantine anyway.

>What if you're a good dog owner but English is your second language so you end up failing?
Why would the test only be in English? USA doesn't have an official language.

>Will the test be national or state by state, and if the latter would a license from one state count in another?
Probably federal as I'd hope animal-welfare laws would also be federal. Wouldn't want an animal abuser to get away with it just by crossing state lines.

>>2405105
>>2405084
As for where the money for this would come from and who would enforce it, I don't see why a small department that focuses on animal welfare couldn't be created. Fees for licensing would obviously go toward supporting it as well as any fines collected from unlicensed owners/breeders or abusers. The simple answer to cover the rest is "tax dollars". I'd rather not have a long argument on all our opinions about which departments are sucking up more tax dollars than they should be allotted, but you can't deny that some taxes would be better off elsewhere than where they are now.

If you can't create an entire department, you could always turn to adding special animal cruelty investigators to local or state police forces.

>>2405063
>animal abuse and neglect subject to much heavier fines

I was talking about this part. There is no such thing as animal "abuse". It would be the same as "abusing" a plant or even an inanimate object. You can only abuse people.

>>2405063
>>2405331
So what I'm saying is that yes, requiring that and levying fines if people fail to do so is unethical.

>>2405331
>>2405333
I thought they said bugguy wasn't here anymore

>>2405577
''they" lied

>>2405579
>>2405577
Who?

>>2405105
>Why would reputable breeders quit because of new regulations, but BYBs stay on and comply?
The point is BYBs won't comply. If you think our police force is going to put finding unlicensed breeders on the top of their priority, I just have to remind you that they don't even put finding drug dealers at the top of their priority unless said dealers are part of a huge mob like the cartel. If you don't think regulations would keep some decent people from breeding, I'll have to ask you look into things like regulations on old cars (emissions) and on guns. I don't personally own any guns but I knew many people who just gave their pistols away out of state because of the laws just being too difficult to adhere to. On the other hand, I had two co-workers who claimed to have guns, but they had no license and the guns were not registered so they didn't bother complying to the new regulations and just kept their pistols illegally.
And finally I think you should look into current dog licensing in the US. By law you are supposed to have your dog licensed, it costs maybe $10 and some places it will last 3 to 5 years before it's renewed. There is a fine without a license that varies from county to county, usually $50-100. We have no way to tell how many dogs are not licensed because, well, they aren't fucking licensed. But I do know that damn near every dog we get in is not UTD on license, the owners get fined, rinse and repeat. If we can't even enforce that, which is supposed to protect the population from rabies, what makes you think people will care about complying or enforcing one about breeding?

>Of course there would be exceptions.
How do you tell those that are exceptions from those that aren't? What will be the exceptions? How can you be certain someone is an exception and not lying? Will you need to do background checks? Talk to their neighbors? Their vets? Exceptions to the rule makes rules harder to follow. They need to be figured out beforehand

>>2405105
>Online testing
How will they know where to go? Who is telling them to go online? Now we need servers, we need people to create a username and password, and we need people to not only know they are affected by this law, something you can't just tell them online, but we need to tell them how to do it. This is, of course, assuming everyone has a computer and is computer literate. I know it may be a hard concept but there are people out there who barely touch a computer, may not even have one. My vet doesn't have a computer at home and only uses her computer at work for patient write ups. I feel bad for the people down south who often don't have cable or internet, they will have to pile in a van and drive somewhere that does. I do hope you know that the online test, if it will be roughly the same with some variances, will be completely deciphered after the first week of the whole nation needing to take it and the online key would be easy to find. Really the online test is pretty much a drop in the bucket and would be more to see if someone cares enough to bother taking it

>This would incidentally make a few pet-custody battles a lot quicker
I will have to disagree with you there. Now there is an actual legal trail of paperwork, it's not as easy as saying 'I have the dog, the dog is mine' or "I have the receipt/microchip/papers". Now you have to actually go to court (a minuscule amount of 'pet custody' actually goes to court, when they do from what I have seen it's always settled very fast, it has never been a widespread legal issue) to determine who is the owner; maybe the owner with the license is not the one on the microchip, or it's not the one who paid for it. What if both people got the license, but one after the other, Or at the same time? Now it's not as easy as 'hey you have the dog' because dogs are no longer mainly objects in the law. We would have to completely re-do the legal ownership of canines to something that would fit these new regulations

>>2405105
>Who takes their pet with them just to visit?
So now we are just saying 'fuck you' to a whole demographic because you think it's silly? Have you never had a road trip with your dog before? Many people do it's why there has been a huge rise in pet friendly hotels. People could be staying with family, sometimes for months. Our visas allow people to stay for half a year, definitely worth taking your pet for that long.

>They'd have to go through quarantine anyway.
That does not answer the question at all. The quarantine is only needed if the animal is not vaccinated against rabies, and even if it was not vaccinated it would only stay in quarantine for a little over a month. Still leaves a 5 month period for a dog to be mistaken as on that requires a license, or an unlicensed dog that requires a license, whichever your plan would go with. 6 months is amply time to push out a litter.

>Why would the test only be in English?
The test, as it's online, is much easier to let people pick their own language. But when you have to notify every individual who is affected by this new law and new set of regulations, you have to do it in a language they will understand. It also has to be done in some form of personal way; you can't just ask news stations to cover it because people will miss that. You have to mail them or give them a call. How are you going to know what language to do it in? It is a brand new law, immigrants should not be expected to already know or adhere to something they didn't know was happening. This alone would take years and cost a lot trying to keep re-contacting the people you need to reach.

>>2405105
>Non-profits/charities/rescues and their volunteers would probably get an exception with proof that they're affiliated with the rescue.
Rescues don't even have proof that they are a rescue. I can make a facebook page right now called 4chan's cat rescue and I am now the owner of a rescue. The US has no way to make a rescue or shelter 'legitimate', so would that mean anyone calling themselves a rescue is exempt or no rescues are exempt? Do we have to now make a legal process, rules and regulations for a place to be a rescue? The amount of homeless animals, all homeless animals of all types and breeds, will skyrocket as people who had some tiny little rescue on the side are now forced to surrender their animals because they can't make the cut because some people are calling themselves a rescue so they can keep their dogs. Not all shelters are non-profit either, some are public shelters. Non-profits are also private business, meaning that without a warrant they don't need to tell you the specifics of who is doing what for them; they only need to provide financial information when asked. They usually don't do fuck all for anyone because they are incompetent, busy and/or lazy.

>Probably federal
Good luck with that. While I concur, we are a very long way away from having a unified set of animal welfare laws, and to be fair I don't think laws that are needed in one state always work well in another.

>>2402555
Whites owned black people for hundreds of years and they're still not used to them

File: 1496979601176_20170608_204340.jpg (180KB, 755x696px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 755x696px

Lmao, keep cowering, pussies. For a bunch of big talkers, the lot of you really don't bother to cover up your fear of those big scawy doggies.

File: .webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>dogfags will defend this

File: AAAAAA.jpg (132KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 960x1280px

Does this count as a pit?

File: SMASHED SLAMMED 200 PERCENT INBRED MINI IL DUCE SMASHED LOW BACK NO LEG SLAMMED TOADLINE.jpg (121KB, 1080x1026px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1080x1026px

SLAMMED

>>2402457
Nigger detected

>>2401977
Those dogs are genetically predisposed to emotionally flying off the fucking handle.

I've been around them since I was a kid (My uncle bred them) and even the most well cared for, the most loved, the most tame of them could ultimately resist attacking someone, usually a child, to be fucking honest.

It's like if we bred humans to be as emotionally inept and compulsive as possible, and then wondered why they can't be rehabilitated. Those dogs were bred to fight to the death. They lose their shit and go out of control, and were bred for that.

>>2402015
I know right? That seemed really strange. It would definitely have been put down, and even if it wasn't, there's not a chance tax payers money would have payed for its vet bills.

>>2404214
Kill yourself then, since humans are about as useless as they are. We only do shit we think benefit ourselves, just like they do, except we cause a lot more damage to other creatures on the way.

>>2407790
No, actually, you ethically illiterate twat.

I almost got mauled by a pitbull. Those things are ferocious as fuck. It saw me talking with the owner outside while it was still in the house. It started barking like a demon on fire and then burst through the front window, clearly not giving a fuck it just headbutted a thick pane of glass. I still have the scar from where one of the shards got me in the arm.

I am convinced if that damn thing had broken through the window it would have torn my neck a new asshole.

>>2407754
fuck you im not a nigger
whats a spooky scary dog that wont bite then

>>2407994
>whats a spooky scary dog that wont bite then
Almost any dog that has been properly trained, nigger.

>>2407999
>Almost any dog that has been properly trained
Almost all dogs aren't scary faggot

>>2408005
>almost any "scary" dog that has been properly trained
Now go be a nigger somewhere else

>>2408008
>>almost any "scary" dog that has been properly trained
So I can get a Pitbull then

Cheap shitty violent dogs for cheap shitty violent people.

>>2408009
>almost
I wouldn't recommend it for several reasons.
That's not to say that many people have successfully done this, and have had no problems.
Since you are a nigger it probably won't end well though.

Well having a pit chained up outside is like being in jail away from the general populous but the dog isn't at fault and loses the socialization he gets from humans and other dogs,Your outside all day, can't run around,play and no one comes to visit you unless to feed you,what a life.

>>2407831
Great argument.

>>2401901
Fun fact: Pitbulls are mostly owned by spics and niggers because they are almost always uneducated and think that they have a badass thing that makes them look cool.
And because spics and niggers can't call the police because they are either immigrants or drug addicts/muggers, you can safely feel free to shoot any dog you know it's owned by a nigger.
I used to go around and pick a few dogs off with an old rifle of mine on my truck and never got into any shit from it.
Just make sure that it's owned by a nigger and you will never get into trouble.

>>2401901
>Yes the fucker survived
Did the old lady survive?

>>2408576
Garbage in, garbage out.

>>2408854
In that case the original argument about bears and tigers being useless and worthy of killing is garbage, as I just stated the exact thing could be applied to humans. We never do anything that's useful for others than ourselves, just like other animals. But sure.

>>2401901
Pitbulls are only really exceptional insofar as they have a high prey drive and really shitty people get them and either train them to be shitters or neglect them.

They're pretty chill dogos if you take care of them, but you do have to take care of them and keep a close eye on them so that they don't eat someone's asthmatic pocket pooch.

They're a lot like Huskies, a lot of the people who own them shouldn't.

>>2402470
Dog racism makes sense to a degree, because a lot of breeds have very specific deviances insofar as how they act in certain situations.

For example, if you buy an Australian Shepard, you should expect that it's going to act like it's on speed 25/7, don't ask where it found that extra hour, it just did.

You should expect that because that's just how the breed is. Same as you should expect Pitbulls to have a high prey drive and to not get along with other dogos as well because they generally won't.

That being said, training and proper care goes a long way, there are plenty of responsible Pit owners who train their Pits well and keep a close eye on them when they're interacting with other animals. The problem is that there are a lot of Pit owners who don't do these things, either because they think their dog is a saint or because they want it to be the devil.

Everyone I know that owns a pitbull is white tho.

I'm black and live in predominately (97%) white neighborhood. Just saw a white dude walking three pitbulls down the sidewalk the other day.

>>2409036
Not him but just untrue unless you are looking at it from an ethical egoism "no such thing as altruism" angle which is pointless anyway. Even if it's only because it makes us feel righteous, lots of groups of people specifically advocate for animals that aren't humans.

>>2409122
Best for your health if you avoided that murder trio

>>2401956
No, you fucking nigger

>>2409502
Yeah that's completely true. Generally speaking, we do more damage than good though. Some of us try to salvage what's left of what we've already destroyed.
Just got annoyed at other big mammals being called useless, because what the fuck is that supposed to mean? What did he think they have to provide for us in order to be useful?

>>2409558
>>2409502
>>2409036
I made an assumption here that only people had moral agency, meaning that they're the only ones that ethics even apply to. This should be obvious to be fair, since we're on an "Animals & Nature" board, I should have assumed that I would be talking to animal rights nuts and other ethical illiterates who would fail to take that into account.

What I'm saying here is that when something in nature is useless and dangerous, people have the right to change or get rid of it. Nobody would advocate for the conservation of mosquitoes, and there are widespread efforts to exterminate them species-wide. But as soon as you bring up that something considered "cute" or "cuddly" by some should be exterminated or at least culled, then some people lose their shits.

>>2409502
because they suffer if these animals suffer

>>2409569
Why would we be the only ones morals apply to, just because we're the only ones with moral agency? Do you even know what that means?

>>2409569
You don't think there's a difference between the value we humans get from tigers, versus mosquito's? Mosquitoes carry plasmodium which gives people malaria, killing millions annually, and as they are parasitic creatures most of us find them repulsive.

And yes, esthetic value matters. Very few look in awe at a mosquitoes, but would feel good in the presence of tigers, a large mammal with a much, much larger lifespan than insects (and thus a product of a slower evolution than that of insects). Their species cannot be replaced and they undeniably give us aesthetic pleasure. Stating that fact isn't 'animal coddling' or whatever the fuck you think it is. Denying it doesn't make you seem more logical, just edgy.

If humans are the only creatures to with morals apply, and tigers ring positively to the majority of us, it would according to your own bullshit cause us ethical harm, not good, to exterminate them. How hard is it to not get rekt by a large animal unless you live around wild ones, and even then you aren't very likely to be attacked, and both animals and humans could be relocated.

It all boils down to it being reckless and plain stupid to exterminate a species for no good reason at all.

>>2409122
What area is this? I bet it has much fewer pit bull attacks than a predominantly black area.

>>2409632
I know what it means. Do you? But I'll admit I'm being a bit fuzzy with what I'm saying here. My main point is that animals don't have rights, but people do, which is why it's valid to try to judge animals by their usefulness but not people.

>>2409644
I don't disagree completely, which is why I said "at least culled" as an alternative to "exterminated". For things like tigers or bears it would indeed be "better" if we only got rid of like 99% of them, and put the remaining 1% in zoos or reservations, so people can still admire or study them, instead of 100% like with mosquitoes.

I fail to see why someone so hateful towards animals is on the Animal and Nature board.

This post is only agreed with by other racist bastards that hate puppies, I don't understand this tiny-dicked subculture they're just doggies

I'm still reading and goddamn I see nothing but sissy motherfuckers scared of a dog. I am not scared of a pitbull. I own a pitbull/lab mix and a rot, nicest dogs ever. They stay in the backyard but they will run out to people in the street if a gate is left open, they never bite or bark at anyone but these other people just stand there in fear. You people just stand there in fear. Why do you guys just stand there frozen when a scary dog comes up to you? Pussies, all of you. I love dogs, I'd never be scared of one. Then you show off your pitiful length of English vocabulary by just Calling these dogs "niggers". Way to go. So you're retarded, you're a pussy towards dogs, and you hate big animals. Congratulations, you're a moron.

>>2408005
No dogs are scary, buster

>>2407994
The fact you called dogs "spooky and scary" makes you a wussy

>>2407760
Of course dogs bred to kill would.be violent. Maybe the majority of people arent old cooks that want to raise them right. That's fucked up, your grandpa doesn't need dogs

>>2407530
I know. I'm 6'2, 180, as strong as their mouths may be, I would be so fucking ashamed if I seriously let myself get killed by a pitbull. All dogs are puppies, and I've always trusted a dog can identify a good or bad person.

>>2407537
Dogfags? You're on an Animal & Nature board. We like animal and Nature, we're not hear to piddle our twiggy peckers and call people"nigger". Go be senselessly retarded somewhere else.

>>2405331
Someone who sees animals this way doesn't need to be caring for an animal

File: 1489269121988.gif (2MB, 479x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 479x270px

STOP FIGHTING

File: AbstractGoyim.png (9KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 600x600px

>>2405869
((them))