What did this man need that he didn't have?

[Seth]

Wrong crowd Seth.

It's almost as if people here think that your life isn't more important than a dog's...

As usual, I guess because guns are so evil, we're just supposed to allow ourselves to be attacked by a pack of dogs instead of defending ourselves.

It's funny how such self-proclaimed intelligent and rational people, can be so stupid and irrational.

Actually Pit bulls are destroyed on sight in the UK (they are illegal as is any dog bred for 'self defence' or the more technical term 'wanker' dog). However if its a choice between Seth and a Pit Bull its going to be a difficult moral dilema

Go fuck yourself. Oh, and if you got the balls, why don't YOU come give it a bash? Or are you a coward?

[Collector1337]

The police and the army are the same thing? Again, are you shitting me? It is very dangerous to confuse police work with military work. Are you saying that your country actually does this?

This comes from someone who lives in country where the police have tanks!

Something you'd know I'm very outspoken about if you can read.

Whether you use the army or 'police' whose sole purpose is to shoot people is pretty unimportant.

If your "sole purpose is to shoot people" then you are not a cop.

Are you saying in your country you have guys standing around whose sole job it is to shoot people? Or just airports?

I can guarantee if you steal someone luggage in front of an armed policeman at Heathrow airport they won't arrest you , they will probably call someone else to do so but there job is to shoot people not to get involved in minor crimes.

Then he isn't police.

It's pretty hilarious how you have guys in your country who you claim sole job is to shoot people, but me having a gun makes me a "gun nut." If there is no need for guns, then why the fuck do you have guys who do nothing apparently, other than stand around waiting to shoot someone?

There is obvious merging of police and military work, what do you think most the work most Western armies do these days?. It's hardly fighting other armies its basically police work with heavy weapons.

Check out the concept of paramilitary groups
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramilitary

The "merging" of military and police work is a very bad thing, not just for the individual but all of society.

[MrJonno]

There has never been a clear divide between military and police, the first police where military and most military work is policing. Anti-terrorism work is as much the army as the police. It's an escalation of force where unarmed police as the normal most common response to the somewhat rarer event of a nuclear tipped ICBM at the other end

[Seth]

There has never been a clear divide between military and police,

Maybe not in your neck of the woods, but around here we were quite careful to distinguish between the police and the military, and we in fact FORBID our military from engaging in peacetime law enforcement work. It's called the "Posse Comitatus" law.

We did that precisely because the idiots in the UK were using the military as policemen in the Colonies, and they grossly abused that authority all the time.

[rainbow]

There has never been a clear divide between military and police,

Maybe not in your neck of the woods, but around here we were quite careful to distinguish between the police and the military, and we in fact FORBID our military from engaging in peacetime law enforcement work. It's called the "Posse Comitatus" law.

We did that precisely because the idiots in the UK were using the military as policemen in the Colonies, and they grossly abused that authority all the time.

So where does your National Guard fit into this careful distinction?

[aspire1670]

Wrong crowd Seth.

It's almost as if people here think that your life isn't more important than a dog's...

As usual, I guess because guns are so evil, we're just supposed to allow ourselves to be attacked by a pack of dogs instead of defending ourselves.

It's funny how such self-proclaimed intelligent and rational people, can be so stupid and irrational.

Actually Pit bulls are destroyed on sight in the UK (they are illegal as is any dog bred for 'self defence' or the more technical term 'wanker' dog). However if its a choice between Seth and a Pit Bull its going to be a difficult moral dilema

Go fuck yourself. Oh, and if you got the balls, why don't YOU come give it a bash? Or are you a coward?

Why don't you post your address so Mr J knows where to go to to give it a bash? Or are you a blowhard?

[Cormac]

You also ignorantly and stupidly attribute a violent dog to the specific breed, and not the way in which in was trained and reared.

Then I'm in good company, no political party wants to overturn it, neither does any significant pressure group

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_Dogs_Act_1991

Having a certain breed of dog doesn't mean that dog will necessary attack someone in the same way as having a gun doesn't necessary mean you are going to shoot someone but you seriously are confusing me with someone who gives a shit. Collective responsibility something most people learn at school

The whole subject of the thread is absurd, owning a pit bull is a serious criminal offence in the UK and actually puts you in danger of being shot (its the equivalent of waving a gun around in front of of the police/public)

Except dog owners and those who know a thing or two about dogs. Amongst these groups there is a growing opposition to breed specific legislation.

Assholes who abuse dogs, and teach their dogs to be aggressive can swap at any time from one breed to another. In fact, history shows this to be the case. In the last 50 years, the dog breed that was perceived as dangerous by the public changed along with this fashion, and I've named the breeds in this very thread. The common factors between these breeds are: 1. They are dogs, and 2. Theu were for a period considered fashionable by assholes who abuse dogs and turn them into dangerous creatures.

Legislation should focus on controlling the owners of dogs, and should enforce strict rules around raising, training, and keeping dogs.

[Cormac]

There has never been a clear divide between military and police, the first police where military and most military work is policing. Anti-terrorism work is as much the army as the police. It's an escalation of force where unarmed police as the normal most common response to the somewhat rarer event of a nuclear tipped ICBM at the other end

There is an absolute distinction between the police and military in Ireland.

I suspect there is also such a divide in the UK.

However, at some points there may be a blurring of the distinction - but only as far as mission is concerned - but the fundamentals of the distinction will still apply.

[Audley Strange]

The worst ones have to be those dogs that come from Hell. I've seen them mentioned in the papers as "Devil Dogs". Those fuckers are terrifying, sacrificing children with their teeth to the Lord of of Deceit.

I'll post a pic of one of them in action, but be warned it's pretty horrible...

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

[MrJonno]

There has never been a clear divide between military and police, the first police where military and most military work is policing. Anti-terrorism work is as much the army as the police. It's an escalation of force where unarmed police as the normal most common response to the somewhat rarer event of a nuclear tipped ICBM at the other end

There is an absolute distinction between the police and military in Ireland.

I suspect there is also such a divide in the UK.

However, at some points there may be a blurring of the distinction - but only as far as mission is concerned - but the fundamentals of the distinction will still apply.

In Northern Ireland there were (are?) soldiers patrolling the streets for decades, even the current 'police' are armed to the teeth. Sticking someone in a tank a putting a police label on them doesn't turn into the police.

The only real difference between the police and the military is in fire-power whether they are British, Irish or American, what they have on the side of their vehicles is irrelevant

[MrJonno]

Legislation should focus on controlling the owners of dogs, and should enforce strict rules around raising, training, and keeping dogs.

Controlling people is a lot harder controlling their 'property' whether its a gun or a dog

[Audley Strange]

There has never been a clear divide between military and police,

Maybe not in your neck of the woods, but around here we were quite careful to distinguish between the police and the military, and we in fact FORBID our military from engaging in peacetime law enforcement work. It's called the "Posse Comitatus" law.

We did that precisely because the idiots in the UK were using the military as policemen in the Colonies, and they grossly abused that authority all the time.

Well, considering you've, in the past, used Glenn Beck as a source, I wonder if you do occassionally peruse the comedy styling of Alex Jones over at Infowars.com. Not only does he rave and rant about Posse Comitatus, but has many videos of the army and national guard being used to assist police in things like random spot checks of cars and the like.

I mean it's Alex Jones so it could all be fake or confirmation bias, but there are many of the opinion that since the terrorists blew up the 9th of September, that the State and local government HAVE been using the military for law enforcement work.

[Tyrannical]

Some dog breeds simply are more violent and dangerous on average than others, and the cause is genetics. It is wrong to say all members of a breed are"too" violent, but statistically as a group they can be.
Environment is a mitigating factor in animal behavior. But separating the learned from the intrinsic behavior of dogs is sort of like the difference between domesticated and trained wild animals. That difference, and one which domesticated animals were bred for is comfortableness and non-aggression towards humans. Certain dog breeds as opposed to most domesticated animals were not bred for these characteristics.

Now I'm sure Seth realizes that in an average environment on average, a yellow lab will be less dangerous than a pit bull. But Seth believes that you shouldn't judge all pit bulls based on a smaller percent of the population, and that good training can improve behavior.

[mistermack]

I have to agree, and I see nothing wrong with species specific dog laws.
Pit bulls especially, as they have been bred for fighting instincts. That doesn't mean that all pit bulls will be dangerous, just that they will be, on average.
It's not just the instinct to attack. It's the consequences when they DO attack. Pit bulls are bred to do far more damage than the average dog, when things go wrong.
Saying that all breeds are equally dangerous is just not true. So banning specific breeds on CAREFUL consideration of their record is perfectly fair.
Owning any breed of dog that you like isn't an inaliable individual right, nor is it an essential freedom. It's something that affects other people, so they have a right to regulate it, if they want.

I would personally go a lot farther, and regulate big dogs far more than at present. Try to weed out the dogs owned by morons.
These dogs get passed around like second-hand cars. One person keeps it for a while, can't handle it, then passes it on, and eventually they get dumped. I know one girl who has nothing, has had two kids taken off her for lack of care, has another baby currently, who lives on benefits, and is always broke.
Last thing I heard, she had a year-old alsatian in the tiny flat, because it's owner was in prison. The dog was wrecking the place, last think I heard, it had moved on. She's lucky it didn't kill her baby.
But, she's too dim to know any better.
Stiffer licensing laws would restrict this kind of stuff.
A few years ago, that Alsatian would probably have been a pit bull.
It has made a difference.

[pErvinalia]

There has never been a clear divide between military and police, the first police where military and most military work is policing. Anti-terrorism work is as much the army as the police. It's an escalation of force where unarmed police as the normal most common response to the somewhat rarer event of a nuclear tipped ICBM at the other end

There is an absolute distinction between the police and military in Ireland.

I suspect there is also such a divide in the UK.

However, at some points there may be a blurring of the distinction - but only as far as mission is concerned - but the fundamentals of the distinction will still apply.

In Northern Ireland there were (are?) soldiers patrolling the streets for decades, even the current 'police' are armed to the teeth. Sticking someone in a tank a putting a police label on them doesn't turn into the police.

The only real difference between the police and the military is in fire-power whether they are British, Irish or American, what they have on the side of their vehicles is irrelevant

Jeez you spew some crap sometimes, Jonno. Police and military are trained in totally different tasks and one is tempered by strong civil liberty concerns, while the other only has to meet the minimal set of liberty concerns.