# Forum More Stuff At the end of the day  Pit Bull

## Marc

https://www.facebook.com/DeKalbCount...6461179778771/

----------


## Bros

Do you have one?

----------


## phild01

Pit Bulls were long ago bred to be aggressive attack dogs. Sure they can be docile dogs but I see that aggressive trait slipping through the cracks in the hands of bad owners. Sure there are other breeds that can be aggressive too but there are breeds that simply have a natural happy disposition.

----------


## chrisp

> Pit Bulls were long ago bred to be aggressive attack dogs. Sure they can be docile dogs but I see that aggressive trait slipping through the cracks in the hands of bad owners. Sure there are other breeds that can be aggressive too but there are breeds that simply have a natural happy disposition.

   :What he said:

----------


## PhilT2

Any other councils have similar rules? https://www.logan.qld.gov.au/laws-an...hibited-breeds

----------


## r3nov8or

The History of Pit Bulls – Love-A-Bull

----------


## Marc

Yes, lots of ignoramus ideas in relation to Pit Bull dogs. Any dog can be thought to be aggressive, From a Chiwawa to a great dane. German shepherds have an aggressive gene that shows up around 10 years of age and makes the dog a menace. Responsible breeders have cleared that gene and also the hip dysplasia one more or less successfully and no one is talking about banning the german shepherd. Pit Bull dogs are just another dog that is much more a pet than a guard dog.  The post by r3novator gives a comprehensive story about the dog in the USA. It is the same dog that we, the illuminati down under, have "banned" based on bias and misconception.

----------


## chrisp

> Yes, lots of ignoramus ideas in relation to Pit Bull dogs. Any dog can be thought to be aggressive, From a Chiwawa to a great dane. German shepherds have an aggressive gene that shows up around 10 years of age and makes the dog a menace. Responsible breeders have cleared that gene and also the hip dysplasia one more or less successfully and no one is talking about banning the german shepherd. Pit Bull dogs are just another dog that is much more a pet than a guard dog.  The post by r3novator gives a comprehensive story about the dog in the USA. It is the same dog that we, the illuminati down under, have "banned" based on bias and misconception.

  
... and probably banned because they have been used to protect drug dens and the like, rather than misconceptions. 
I love dogs, but I am very happy to have a ban on dangerous dogs, and dogs that the (irresponsible) owners seem to parade around as a weapon rather than a pet.

----------


## Marc

Nonsense. The irresponsible owner can use any dog as a weapon. South african mastiff? Staffie? Bulldog? Doberman? German S ? There is nothing different in a Pit Bull, only the ignorance of those who fear it.

----------


## UseByDate

> Yes, lots of ignoramus ideas in relation to Pit Bull dogs. Any dog can be thought to be aggressive, From a Chiwawa to a great dane. German shepherds have an aggressive gene that shows up around 10 years of age and makes the dog a menace. Responsible breeders have cleared that gene and also the hip dysplasia one more or less successfully and no one is talking about banning the german shepherd. Pit Bull dogs are just another dog that is much more a pet than a guard dog.  The post by r3novator gives a comprehensive story about the dog in the USA. It is the same dog that we, the illuminati down under, have "banned" based on bias and misconception.

  I have owned German Shepherd Dogs for twenty five years (three bitches) and I did not know about this ten year gene switch. None of my dogs seem to have had it. As they got older they just seemed to mellow. My sister has owned more than ten GSDs (I have lost count) and never encountered this ten year gene. I have never had a problem with my dogs being aggressive  towards people or dogs. I must admit that my last dog did not like cats but she never harmed any.
 Australia banned the importation of GSDs for 43 years because they were thought to be dangerous dogs. I don't know of any other country that imposed an importation ban. The result was massive in-breeding that let to many health issues.
 GSDs can quite easily be trained to be aggressive. GSDs are not dogs that should be owned by inexperienced people. Most of the reputable breeders will not sell GSDs to inexperienced people that are not willing to devote the time needed to train them. The problem, now, is that there are many “back yard” breeders that are willing to sell them to anyone. Many of these breeders cannot even spell German Shepherd Dog. ( I am not joking). I have seen GSD owners that have no clue how to  train their dog and it is easy to predict that the dog will grow up and be uncontrollable or/and aggressive. Some people take great pride in having aggressive dogs. We have a local that has two male GSDs and he has named them Hitler and Goebbels. He and his dogs are shunned by all other dog owners. Both dogs are very aggressive.
 It is not the dog's fault if it is aggressive. The problem is that GSDs are very intelligent, very agile, very fast and very powerful and that will make them very dangerous if not disciplined.

----------


## craka

Being breed selective is in most parts is grossly misguided. Most people miss identify what pit bulls are to begin with.  A family friend had what many would consider a pit bull, it was a bitsa and the biggest sook ever, my little sister and it used to use each other as pillows and fall to sleep.   A friend currently has a pit bull cross, again a massive sook, and very very well trained in obedience. 
I grew up with firstly a doberman when a young kid, then with Kelpies used as cattle dogs and currently own a lovely dobeman, all which have been well treated and had vast many hours of training.   
Biggest problem is not the dog, it's the owner, they are either neglectful/mistreat, lazy or haven't a clue on how to train a dog.  
For Australia in recent years the most common dogs for attacks are labradors and cattle dogs.   It's misrepresented in the media and by a minority with an agenda that pitbulls and larger dogs are dangerous dogs.  
 Most people probably do not realise the wounds a dachshund can inflict.   All dogs can be dangerous, if let be.

----------


## Whitey66

While there is good and bad in all dogs (just like people), the statistics don't lie when it comes to deaths and injuries caused by Pit Bulls. 
Admittedly the "Pit Bull" group covers a lot of breeds though, so that probably makes the statistics look a lot worse.
If it's caused by a training issue, maybe more scumbags own Pit Bulls than other breeds?

----------


## phild01

> Most people probably do not realise the wounds a dachshund can inflict.

  Ooh I know. When I was a kid, the neighbours dachshund attacked our Sydney Silky and was my lesson not to get too involved,  damn thing ripped half my fingernail off.

----------


## craka

Like I said mis representation/identification and those with an agenda.    
When I was a delivery driver years ago, I'd be more happy to walk in to a yard with 3 pitbulls than a blue heeler. Had more issue with blue heelers than with any other breed of dog personally. Not saying that heelers a bad breed but if you delve into more statistics you will find that pitbulls get a very undeserving bad rap, in comparison with other dogs that attack more.

----------


## phild01

Yeah, been bitten by a blue heeler too.

----------


## phild01

> For Australia in recent years the most common dogs for attacks are labradors

  Labradors aggressive, unaware of that.  Got a goofy super friendly one next door.

----------


## craka

Oklahoma Woman Killed in Attack by Pack of Dachshund Dogs | Time

----------


## Marc

> While there is good and bad in all dogs (just like people), the statistics don't lie when it comes to deaths and injuries caused by Pit Bulls. 
> Admittedly the "Pit Bull" group covers a lot of breeds though, so that probably makes the statistics look a lot worse.
> If it's caused by a training issue, maybe more scumbags own Pit Bulls than other breeds?

  You have to see those stats for what they are. The injury were inflicted by Pit Bull. Is a ban on the breed the solution? It's the same nonsense you hear about guns, pedalled by ignorants. The ban on the weapon or the particular breed of dogs solves nothing. It is the person behind the dog or pulling the trigger that kills.

----------


## craka

I'm not saying they are by their breed. I'm trying to advocate that dogs aren't aggressive by breed as such.. Simply for the fact that labs are a go to breed for a lot of people as they think they are lazy dogs that don't need a lot activity. Any dog that isn't trained, excercised and stimulated can become a dangerous dog.

----------


## phild01

Remember as a teenager walking from Dundas to Amaroo Park for the Sunday motor race.  Got there in the dark early morning when some german shepherd approached with a menacing bark.  We had to get to the entry and assumed it to be the park's guard dog.  I approached it feeling very afraid and the thing ended up being super friendly.

----------


## UseByDate

> Remember as a teenager walking from Dundas to Amaroo Park for the Sunday motor race.  Got there in the dark early morning when some german shepherd approached with a menacing bark.  We had to get to the entry and assumed it to be the park's guard dog.  I approached it feeling very afraid and the thing ended up being super friendly.

  German shepherds herd sheep. German Shepherd Dogs have menacing barks. :Smilie:

----------


## Bros

I am not sure if there are bad dogs but here sure are bad owners.

----------


## Marc

> I am not sure if there are bad dogs but here sure are bad owners.

   That is the point of the video Bros. A friend has a mix pitbull, it is the most fun and friendly dog you can have.

----------


## PhilT2

> I am not sure if there are bad dogs but here sure are bad owners.

  Survey shows that pit bull owners have 10 times more criminal convictions than owners of other breeds.   https://www.ava.com.au/sites/default...on%20FINAL.pdf

----------


## phild01

> https://www.ava.com.au/sites/default...on%20FINAL.pdf

  Mentioned as a 'Status' dog; is quite apt for many owners.

----------


## PhilT2

Pit bulls responsible for most fatal attacks. https://www.medicinenet.com/dogbite-...acks/views.htm

----------


## Bros

Only dog we have ever owned, had him for 17 yrs and I still miss him as it gave me an excuse to go walking as we would walk for miles a couple of times a week.

----------


## r3nov8or

Do you still have the cowboy (or is it a sheriff?) outfit, Bros?   :Smilie:

----------


## Marc

> Survey shows that pit bull owners have 10 times more criminal convictions than owners of other breeds.

   Yes, a clear sign that the breed needs to be banned. Ban the dog and all the owners will turn meek taxpayers.  
" I am not saying to kill all the stupid people ... just saying to remove all the warning label and the problem will sort itself out" ...  :Smilie:  
One of the many downsides of democracy is that it relies on votes from the average punter. Therefore the politician needs to create a perception of 
a) extreme danger and b) the solution laying at the feet of the "saviour" politician only.  
Australia is the country of bans. 
Cruelty to greyhound? Ban!
Cruelty to live export? Ban! Knife attack? Ban knives they are oh so bad!  
Massacre with a semi automatic? Ban semi automatics since as everyone knows, they can walk the streets by themselves.  
And when things are shaky politically, all you need to do is fabricate the evidence and then signal your virtue in high definition with a ban. The accomplished savior is canonised and the parties involved show their great virtue and compassion. 
Look at me look at meee, I banned the bad Pit Bull, I am Oh So compassionate and humanitarian! 
Most criminals have tattoos.
Ban tattoos and criminals will be automatically redeemed and turn from a life of crime.
Oh and drug addicts do a lot of body piercing. Ban body piercing and folks will no longer turn to drugs.

----------


## chrisp

> Yes, a clear sign that the breed needs to be banned. Ban the dog and all the owners will turn meek taxpayers.

  I don’t think that the owners will change, but at least they won’t have a ‘status’ dog to use as a weapon.  
It’s the same with guns. The people who want assault weapons are the people who probably shouldn’t have them.

----------


## Bros

> Do you still have the cowboy (or is it a sheriff?) outfit, Bros?

   Looking good isn't it but alas it isn't me.

----------


## UseByDate

> Survey shows that pit bull owners have 10 times more criminal convictions than owners of other breeds.   https://www.ava.com.au/sites/default...on%20FINAL.pdf

   

> Pit bulls responsible for most fatal attacks. https://www.medicinenet.com/dogbite-...acks/views.htm

  So criminals who associate with criminals have a higher chance of being killed by their dogs than the general population. Is this not a good thing? :Smilie:

----------


## UseByDate

> The people who want assault weapons are the people who probably shouldn’t have them.

  People in the Australian Army want assault weapons. They would not be able to do their job without them.

----------


## PhilT2

> So criminals who associate with criminals have a higher chance of being killed by their dogs than the general population. Is this not a good thing?

  No, victims are usually kids. Maybe dog owners kids so a sort of Darwin thing going on there; or neighbours kids or kids going past on the footpath. Sometimes sleeping kids so dogs not always provoked.

----------


## r3nov8or

Marc, I should have asked earlier, but what was your motivation for throwing this bone here in the first place?

----------


## chrisp

> People in the Australian Army want assault weapons. They would not be able to do their job without them.

  Talk about pedantic! I’ll rephrase.... 
Members of the general public who want assault weapons are the people who probably shouldn’t have them.   :Smilie:  
Australia’s gun laws are probably the defining good thing that the Howard government did while in office.

----------


## chrisp

> One of the many downsides of democracy is that it relies on votes from the average punter. Therefore the politician needs to create a perception of 
> a) extreme danger and b) the solution laying at the feet of the "saviour" politician only.  
> [....]  
> And when things are shaky politically, all you need to do is fabricate the evidence and then signal your virtue in high definition with a ban. The accomplished savior is canonised and the parties involved show their great virtue and compassion.

  I take it that you are referring to the current Morrison [caretaker] Government and the Medivac legislation?   :Smilie:

----------


## PhilT2

Politicians respond to pressure from the public. An event like a toddler being killed by a pit bull generates a certain amount of pressure on pollies to "do something" If they're seen to not respond then their political rivals will use that at the next election. Legislation is the art of the practical not the perfect solution. Laws to have a dangerous dog "put to sleep" are easy to craft; laws to have the same done to stupid dog owners are a bit more of a challenge.

----------


## DavoSyd

> Marc, I should have asked earlier, but what was your motivation for throwing this bone here in the first place?

  he was seeing who'd get their hackles up...

----------


## UseByDate

> No, victims are usually kids. Maybe dog owners kids so a sort of Darwin thing going on there; or neighbours kids or kids going past on the footpath. Sometimes sleeping kids so dogs not always provoked.

  I did have a smiley at the end of my post.
 Most dog attacks are domestic. The chance of a child being brought up in the home of a criminal, especially the type of criminals listed in your referenced article, becoming a criminal is much more likely than the general public. 
 They are listed as “aggression (whatever that means), problems with drugs or alcohol (drug addicts), crimes involving children (paedophiles?) and domestic violence. 
 The BBC news this morning did a piece on the Pit Bull fighting industry. They interviewed a man who breeds and sells fighting dogs. The man was located in Eastern Europe (I can't remember the country) and it was stated that he exports to four continents. The price of a dog is 3000 Euros plus shipping. (4750 Australian dollars).

----------


## UseByDate

> Talk about pedantic! Ill rephrase.... 
> Members of the general public who want assault weapons are the people who probably shouldnt have them.   
> Australias gun laws are probably the defining good thing that the Howard government did while in office.

  I want one.  :Tongue:

----------


## UseByDate

> Labradors aggressive, unaware of that.  Got a goofy super friendly one next door.

  American (USA) figures:
 Deaths by breed per year.
 Top 10
 Pit Bull                                               24
 Rottweiler                                       3.75
 GSD                                                              1.7
 Mix-breed                                       1.4
 American bulldog      1.25
 Mastiff/Bullmastiff      1.2
 Husky                                                          1.1
 Labrador Retriever     0.75
 Boxer                                                           0.6
 Doberman Pinscher 0.5 
 USA population 330,000,000
Homicide rate 16,000 per year.   
 These figures are total figures. They are not adjusted for dog breed popularity.
Top ten popular breeds 
 Labrador Retriever
 GSD
 Golden Retriever
 French Bulldog
 Bulldog
 Beagle
 Poodle
 Rottweiler
 Yorkshire Terrier
 German Short Haired Pointer

----------


## Marc

> I take it that you are referring to the current Morrison [caretaker] Government and the Medivac legislation?

  Well ... it is a trend exploited by all sides. Let's just mention the live cattle ban, spurred by faked and paid for acts of aggression in Indonesia, the ban on greyhound racing, the multiple attempts at banning live sheep again with faked videos of sheep in bad conditions just to name a few. what no one mentions is the cost of this bans. The idiotic ban on cattle export cost millions to the farmers, got thousands upon thousands of cattle starved to death. and similar case for the greyhound. politicians don't care for the cattle or sheep or dogs, they care for their job and perks and do whatever to cling to their chair.. would sell marijuana to primary schools if there was votes in it. 
As for the medivac legislation it is an act of sabotage by the left labour and the braindead watermelons who work on the principle of bring in as many dead weight as possible since they will all vote labour. Their aim is the banana republic and Malcolm Chavez for president and El Che for spiritual leader.

----------


## Bros

> As for the medivac legislation it is an act of sabotage by the left labour and the braindead watermelons who work on the principle of bring in as many dead weight as possible since they will all vote labour. Their aim is the banana republic and Malcolm Chavez for president and El Che for spiritual leader.

  Can we now assume you are not a labor voter?

----------


## intertd6

I've seen some viscous dogs when I used to pig hunt & bull terrier pit bull breeds are the most dangerous, I have seen placid bull terriers set off by fireworks and attack each other so hard sparks came off their teeth, then they locked jaw to jaw & nothing could get them apart, not even a garden hose of water forced into their mouths , they were initially bred to deal with 1000kg Bulls so anything smaller is like a picnic to them.
Children,  bogans and those breeds need a good separation .
inter

----------


## DavoSyd

> I have seen placid bull terriers set off by fireworks and attack each other so hard sparks came off their teeth

  But bull terriers are not pit bulls?

----------


## Bros

> I've seen some viscous dogs when I used to pig hunt & bull terrier pit bull breeds are the most dangerous, I have seen placid bull terriers set off by fireworks and attack each other so hard sparks came off their teeth, then they locked jaw to jaw & nothing could get them apart, not even a garden hose of water forced into their mouths , they were initially bred to deal with 1000kg Bulls so anything smaller is like a picnic to them.

  I know what you are saying. I went pig hunting with a group of blokes many moons ago and one of them was an electrician in the council and had access to the dog pound. If they got ripped by a boar tusk he would shoot it and get another one. They would catch them and transfer them to a large pen and domesticate them before selling.  
We had about 4 dogs one of them was a new recruit and off they would run and when they caught a pig I would have to knee its neck and keep the legs off the ground until the vehicle with the cage came along.  
I remember two dogs taking down a big sow and the recruit hung on so long the pig tore itself away and tore the dogs tooth out, now this dog was the least experienced.
 So that sort of behavior seems to be instinct to them. Outside of hunting pigs the dogs were as tame as could be.

----------


## DavoSyd

> So that sort of behavior seems to be instinct to them.

  "prey drive"

----------


## Marc

Hunting dogs are chosen for their strength, they can be anything you like as long as they are strong. Stuffies, Pit bull, Labrador, German shepherd, Boxer, Rotti, you name it they are all happy to go hunting if you train them. The best hunting dogs are mixed mongrels providing they have the muscles. I have been hunting Pumas with a pack of dogs and a knife, and the killing instinct is in every dog. Thy just wait for you to tell them to go.  
To think that you can train a killer dog, regardless of breed and then have it on your lap and watch TV is immensely stupid. However you can have any breed as a pet providing you have trained him as a pet from birth. Dogs are not wildlife, they have some 30,000 years of sharing their life with humans. Yes some dogs are dangerous even from birth but they are the exception and this exception is not one particular breed's treat. 
The ban on pit bull dogs and the reason given for it are stupid and statistically irrelevant. The one that takes the cake is the one stating that pit bull owners have 10 times the criminal conviction of other pet owners. I say give pit bull dogs away and see who keeps them and then take the owners into custody. If statistics are to be believed, you have a very good chance to catch a criminal by default. I wish the police would work that way ... all they need to do is raid certain suburbs, certain places of worship based on statistics they surely could have great success.

----------


## DavoSyd

Where are 'pit bull type' dogs banned?

----------


## Marc

*As you can see ... highly scientific. 
Wankers... 
Why can't you own pit bulls in Australia?*   Estanislao Deloserrata, Journalist. Engineer. Military Staff (Retired) Answered Aug 2, 2018 · Author has *4.4k* answers and *2m* answer views    _“Why can't you own pit bulls in Australia?”_
Read about it _“Restricted breed FAQs - Why do dogs have to be declared as restricted breed dogs?_ _The Government has introduced these controls in response to widespread community concern about dog attacks._ _The effects of dog attacks are compounded when the dog is of a breed that is predisposed to aggressive behaviour and has physical traits that make the effects of an attack more severe._ _These attacks can result in horrific injuries which leave the victims with not only physical, but also emotional scars. In extreme cases dog attacks can result in the death of the victim._ _The Government is therefore committed to increasing dog controls so that owners can be held accountable for the proper control of their dogs.”_ Department of Premier and Cabinet

----------


## intertd6

> But bull terriers are not pit bulls?

   I know they are more docile than pit bulls , they are a similar breed though, those bull terriers I saw fighting each other weren't hunting dogs and were town backyard pets who shared the same yard & best of mates.

----------


## DavoSyd

Are 'pit bull type' dogs banned everywhere in Australia?

----------


## r3nov8or

Are you all going to continue entertaining Marc without knowing why?

----------


## DavoSyd

> Are you all going to continue entertaining Marc without knowing why?

  Lo, but good sir, I'm just a meek and simple person seeking simple answers?

----------


## UseByDate

> Lo, but good sir, I'm just a meek and simple person seeking simple answers?

  I think I prefer the old DavoSyd. :Wink:

----------


## Marc

> Are you all going to continue entertaining Marc without knowing why?

  Not everything needs a specific reason or agenda r3no, I happen to like dogs, cattle, horses and sheeps ... and think that politicians banning tings to harvest sympathy and votes, are a disgrace. And culling from helicopters to kiss the watermelons ass is equally disgraceful.

----------


## DavoSyd

> I think I prefer the old DavoSyd.

  this is a serious thread, your petty insults are of no use here...

----------


## DavoSyd

> I think that politicians banning tings to harvest sympathy and votes, are a disgrace.

  where are they banned? my mate has a pit bull - he's at Gosford...

----------


## UseByDate

> Lo, but good sir, I'm just a meek and simple person seeking simple answers?

   

> this is a serious thread, your petty insults are of no use here...

  Apologies.
 I interpreted your post as humour. I don't think of you as a meek and simple person as you claim to be. I think my interpretation was supported by the ancient and flowery preamble. I posted in the same humourous vein. I see that you have interpreted my post as insulting. It was not meant to be.  
 I believe that humour is taken and not given as I also believe offence is taken and not given. That is both are in the mind of the receiver.
 Maybe I have a keener sense of humour than you, and you have a keener sense of offence than me.

----------


## Bedford

> this is a serious thread,

----------


## DavoSyd

> I interpreted your post as humour.

  You didn't think the second one was though? I thought it transcended the usual sarcasm, towards a more nuanced and barely perceptable ultra-sarcasm? But it's like throwing a dart at a map, you never really know where you'll end up.  
BTW also found out that owning a pit bull type dog in NSW is not a crime.

----------


## UseByDate

> You didn't think the second one was though?

  You are correct and that is why I offered an explanation in post #60.

----------


## UseByDate

> Not everything needs a specific reason or agenda r3no, I happen to like dogs, cattle, horses and sheeps ... and think that politicians banning tings to harvest sympathy and votes, are a disgrace. And culling from helicopters to kiss the watermelons ass is equally disgraceful.

  Marc, you seem to know about horses. I know nothing. The horse in this video makes a left turn just after the three minute mark. It seems to rotate 90 degrees, travel sideways before resuming forward motion. I have not seen this before and am intrigued by it.
 Question: Is this normal or would it be the result of training, maybe dressage?   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfzmVUrZplw

----------


## phild01

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfzmVUrZplw

  I feel really old now  :Sad1:

----------


## r3nov8or

> Marc, you seem to know about horses. I know nothing. The horse in this video makes a left turn just after the three minute mark. It seems to rotate 90 degrees, travel sideways before resuming forward motion. I have not seen this before and am intrigued by it.
>  Question: Is this normal or would it be the result of training, maybe dressage?   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfzmVUrZplw

  It's called drifting, spaghetti western style  :Smilie:

----------


## Marc

The horse is young and full of beans and very well trained since it does what is required without any direction from the model riding it. It's a bit of a show off from the horse. 
Lovely video

----------


## phild01

> from the model riding it. 
> Lovely video

  Happens to be Sade (who is singing too)!

----------


## Bros

No jigger needed.

----------


## Marc

Sade? Likely not the Marquise ...  :Rofl5:

----------


## UseByDate

> Sade? Likely not the Marquise ...

  More like shah-DAY. 
 Sade is a band and Sade Adu is the lead singer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yfuCpcX7EU 
 Sade Adu honours the contribution of the rest of her band members. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7tmYY_0SgA

----------


## Whitey66

> Stuffies, Pit bull, Labrador, German shepherd, Boxer, Rotti, you name it they are all happy to go hunting if you train them.

  Could you train this "Stuffie" to hunt? 
Or this German Shepherd  :Wink:

----------


## intertd6

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.870588)]*Restricted breeds, menacing and dangerous dogs*  American pitbull or pitbull terriers.Japanese tosas.Dogo Argentino (Argentinean fighting *dogs*)Fila Brasiliero (Brazilian fighting *dogs*)Perro de Presa Canario or Presa Canario.other *breeds* whose importation is prohibited by the Customs Act. More items... • Dec 11, 2018  [/COLOR]  *Restricted breeds, menacing and dangerous dogs - City of Sydney*https://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au › r...

----------


## Marc

> Could you train this "Stuffie" to hunt? 
> Or this German Shepherd

  Well that should read Staffordshire or Staffy, I would have no chance with a stuffed inanimate object, however with the German Shepherd I would have no need to train him. He is a hunter and so where 100 generations before him since hunting is an ancient tradition in germany recognised as such and not shunned by gun haters vegetarian left handed slim single male living in the inner city with their mother and a cat. 
PS
That doll represent a Spoodle, I own a Spoodle and I think you could not find a more gentle and harmless dog. He grew up with 3 cats and believes he is a cat.
However. If he smells a rabbit, rat, possum or any other furry animal he turns into a relentless hunter and does not stop even when he gets injured by his prey like when he chases a possum.

----------


## Marc

> [COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.870588)]*Restricted breeds, menacing and dangerous dogs*  American pitbull or pitbull terriers.Japanese tosas.Dogo Argentino (Argentinean fighting *dogs*)Fila Brasiliero (Brazilian fighting *dogs*)Perro de Presa Canario or Presa Canario.other *breeds* whose importation is prohibited by the Customs Act.  More items... • Dec 11, 2018  [/COLOR]  *Restricted breeds, menacing and dangerous dogs - City of Sydney*   https://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au › r...

  Yes, inter, i know what the city of Sydney considers dangerous. The point is not what is dangerous but _why_. The point is that it is owners who make a dog dangerous and not the dog breed. Some breed are better than others naturally for hunting that is undeniable, however the accidents with dogs are most if not all the time the result of humans who have given the wrong training or neglected a dog

----------


## Bros

Marc's dog

----------


## r3nov8or

Schnoodle?

----------


## intertd6

> Yes, inter, i know what the city of Sydney considers dangerous. The point is not what is dangerous but _why_. The point is that it is owners who make a dog dangerous and not the dog breed. Some breed are better than others naturally for hunting that is undeniable, however the accidents with dogs are most if not all the time the result of humans who have given the wrong training or neglected a dog

  That is the just not the city of Sydney laws , it's the NSW regulations which they have shown on their site, I gave you my eyewitness account of some bull terriers that went crazy because of fireworks, like most animals they can be unpredictable sometimes, with those dogs it can have fatal or devastating consequences & the evidence shows it.
inter

----------


## craka

> That is the just not the city of Sydney laws , it's the NSW regulations which they have shown on their site, I gave you my eyewitness account of some bull terriers that went crazy because of fireworks, like most animals they can be unpredictable sometimes, with those dogs it can have fatal or devastating consequences & the evidence shows it.
> inter

  Again training, and looking after the dog, desensitising it to situations etc..  Not just throwing it in a yard and throwing/leaving food and water for it.  
Shall we ban horses too?

----------


## Marc

Any animal can become a problem and even dangerous in the wrong circumstances, a turtle a parrot a snake a fish. 
 Politicians should learn to stay out of our lives and do what matters, not pretend to care to harvest votes.  
Ban is not the answer in a civilized democracy, ban is the answer of an arrogant tyrant or an imbecile politician that believes to be superior to the average person and  "knows better what is good for you". 
I used to have a neighbour who had adopted a puma cub for pet (yes, not here obviously ... God forbid!) He even toilet trained him, and it was part of the family walking in and out of the house. He got older and got tired of the puma so he chained him to a dog kennel. The poor animal turned wild and no one could go near him. 
Solution? Ban pumas for pets and add them to the list of "dangerous breeds".

----------


## UseByDate

> That is the just not the city of Sydney laws , it's the NSW regulations which they have shown on their site, I gave you my eyewitness account of some bull terriers that went crazy because of fireworks, like most animals they can be unpredictable sometimes, with those dogs it can have fatal or devastating consequences & the evidence shows it.
> inter

  Inter 
 When you gave your eyewitness account, were you more specific about the breed of dog that you had witnessed? (bull terrier?).
 The American Pit Bull Terrier is a totally different breed of dog from a Staffordshire Bull Terrier. 
 The UK Kennel Club's recommendation of suitable breeds of dogs for families with children includes, near the top of the list, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.  https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/get...with-children/ 
 “Three examples of breeds that can be particularly suited to families with children, because of their loyal and affectionate nature, are the _Labrador, Boxer and Staffordshire Bull Terrier_, however there are many more that are particularly good with children.”

----------


## UseByDate

I have just noticed that the Staffordshire Bull Terrier is restricted or banned in some countries and yet the UK Kennel Club (oldest kennel club in the world) recommends them for families with children. Makes no sense to me.    :Confused:

----------


## intertd6

> Inter 
>  When you gave your eyewitness account, were you more specific about the breed of dog that you had witnessed? (bull terrier?).
>  The American Pit Bull Terrier is a totally different breed of dog from a Staffordshire Bull Terrier. 
>  The UK Kennel Club's recommendation of suitable breeds of dogs for families with children includes, near the top of the list, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.  https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/get...with-children/ 
>  Three examples of breeds that can be particularly suited to families with children, because of their loyal and affectionate nature, are the _Labrador, Boxer and Staffordshire Bull Terrier_, however there are many more that are particularly good with children.

  They were no midget staffies, medium sized, well trained & socialised with people, it opened my eyes to how they can turn.
inter

----------


## UseByDate

> They were no midget staffies, medium sized, well trained & socialised with people, it opened my eyes to how they can turn.
> inter

  Like this? http://ankc.org.au/Media/pdf/Deletab...ullTerrier.pdf

----------


## intertd6

> Like this? http://ankc.org.au/Media/pdf/Deletab...ullTerrier.pdf

   From what I can remember 35 plus years ago,  I can't exactly remember what head shape they had. 
Inter

----------


## Marc

> Characteristics: Courageous, full of spirit, with a fun loving attitude. A unique feature is adownfaced, egg shaped head. Irrespective of size dogs should lookmasculine and bitches feminine.

  How outdated.

----------


## havabeer

Came here thinking we where going to have a chat about Mr worldwide

----------


## joynz

American Staffordshire Terriers: 
A man attacked by two dogs in Sydney's west five weeks ago has died in hospital, as figures reveal an increase in attack incidents across NSW. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-...ttack/10864514

----------


## Marc

Obviously we must kill all american staffordshire terriers now. We will despatch helicopters to do the culling from the air.

----------


## UseByDate

If we do, I recommend this helicopter. Back in the winter of 1968-69 I helped develop this helicopter (vibration tests) without the aid of computers or even hand held calculators. It has two attributes that make it suitable, namely that it is named after a species of cat (quite fitting for hunting dogs) and it holds the official world speed record for helicopters.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-JjrbL7gh4

----------


## r3nov8or

> ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-JjrbL7gh4

  I watched half. Were there dogs?

----------


## UseByDate

> I watched half.

  Well done.

----------


## Marc

Nice helicopter. Since you know about them, can you answer the following: <br>
The noise the helicopter makes, that chop chop chop, is due to the blades hitting the air the blade in front has moved. I once wrote to Bell asking why don't they stagger the level of the blades at different levels and if that would reduce the noise.<br>
No answer of course for the outsider peasant. <br>
But i always wondered if such an obvious solution would work.<br>This would be very important to cull Pit Bull from helicopters since it would take them by surprise.

----------


## PhilT2

> This would be very important to cull Pit Bull from helicopters since it would take them by surprise.

  Legal barriers make culling stupid pet owners problematic but sometimes the situation resolves itself. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47454610

----------


## UseByDate

> Nice helicopter. Since you know about them, can you answer the following: <br>
> The noise the helicopter makes, that chop chop chop, is due to the blades hitting the air the blade in front has moved. I once wrote to Bell asking why don't they stagger the level of the blades at different levels and if that would reduce the noise.<br>
> No answer of course for the outsider peasant. <br>
> But i always wondered if such an obvious solution would work.<br>This would be very important to cull Pit Bull from helicopters since it would take them by surprise.

  Good question. I thought I knew but I was wrong. It was always assumed that the noise was coming from the tips of the main rotor but it has been found not to be so. The rotor rotation rate and rotor length are designed so that they are operating in non turbulent air. An aerofoil will only produce efficient lift if operating in “clean” air.  
 You guess is nearly correct though.
 What has been discovered, recently, is that the rotor blades are “cutting” (flying into) the air vortexes produced at the tips of the rotor blades. Your solution would not work because the vortexes are “sucked” down with the down wash into the path of the rotors.  https://www.businessinsider.com.au/s...14-2?r=US&IR=T

----------


## r3nov8or

Lucky for pit bulls, then. Have to cull from the ground, wearing sneakers.

----------


## UseByDate

> Lucky for pit bulls, then. Have to cull from the ground, wearing sneakers.

  Dog olfactory system v human sneakers. :Wink:

----------


## r3nov8or

> Dog olfactory system v human sneakers.

   Down wind, of course. All the usual stuff one does when hunting, to ensure supremacy over other beasts

----------


## Marc

RickW ... if you have something to say, against or in favour of pit bulls or other bull, say it here, don't go sneaking in the dark in my profile and leave bad reputation. No one gives a stuff about reputation let alone me.

----------


## johnc

Hey Marc, I'm told that pit bull owners typically get a tattoo every time they get a tooth removed and most have a lot of tattoo's. Nobody says pit bulls are stupid, most have more functioning brain cells than the person holding the leash. Hasn't this run long enough, they are dogs with powerful jaws, an angry dashound will never be able to manage the damage a pit bull can muster, not suitable for children IMO, not so sure they are that acceptable around most adults either.

----------


## Uncle Bob

IMO, generally the owners of such animals think that having a dangerous dog makes them look tougher. Or they could be just a bit dim witted.
I think the person in the following article was probably both  :No:   https://www.canberratimes.com.au/can...13-p513xd.html

----------


## phild01

Got to wonder what the appeal of of a potential weapon like that is :Confused:

----------


## Whitey66

> Hey Marc, I'm told that pit bull owners typically get a tattoo every time they get a tooth removed and most have a lot of tattoo's. Nobody says pit bulls are stupid, most have more functioning brain cells than the person holding the leash. Hasn't this run long enough, they are dogs with powerful jaws, an angry dashound will never be able to manage the damage a pit bull can muster, not suitable for children IMO, not so sure they are that acceptable around most adults either.

  Spot on  :2thumbsup: 
They talk about de-sexing the Pit Bulls to stop them breeding, I think de-sexing the negligent owners would give a much better long term result.

----------


## Marc

> They talk about de-sexing the Pit Bulls to stop them breeding, I think de-sexing the negligent owners would give a much better long term result.

  Agreed, it's not the dog, it's the owner. Almost any dog can be made bad / aggressive. And any medium size dog including a poodle can inflict serious damage. 
Just like guns. Thye need someone to pullthe trigger. Thye are harmless by themselves.

----------


## johnc

Some dogs due to their build and power are far more dangerous than others once roused, however in many cases it is the fault of owners, although a dog through breeding can be more dangerous if the breeder has selected aggression as a trait for the breeding pair, I do like the idea of nutting irresponsible owners, if you can't raise a dog properly you probably should be raising children.

----------


## UseByDate

Pack of six Pit Bulls injure 4 year old girl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9fZGEW8F90

----------


## phild01

Old neighbours had two Rottweilers well trained like that, one of them still savagely finished off their Siamese cat.

----------


## r3nov8or

> Pack of six Pit Bulls injure 4 year old girl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9fZGEW8F90

   The massacre didn't happen  :Confused:

----------


## UseByDate

> The massacre didn't happen

  Did you only watch half again?  :Confused:  One of the Pit Bulls steps on the girls foot.

----------


## Marc

The conversation about "dangerous" dogs are usually but not always between those who listen to the news, but know little about dogs. 
 Just like guns. I enjoy the media commentators calling the rifles when used by criminals "high powered rifles".
What on earth is a "high powered rifle"? This ill informed pretend technobabble created for maximizing emotional impact is meaningless if you know the basics about guns. Could have some meaning at the beginning of last century to differentiate between smokeless powder and black powder, however a rifle in the hands of a criminal if high or low power, if .22 caliber or .457 magnum, if black powder muzzle load, makes little difference.  The criminal can kill with any of the above.  
But the commentator will be more popular by using big words, just like politicians get acclaim when they make political mileage from criminal acts to pass legislation that would otherwise have no chance.
The message of the dangerous dog or the high powered gun is the same. "We" the sensible good citizen or the valiant politician will save you. All we need is to take away the dog or the "high powered" gun from the bad people and all will be good again.
The reality is that it is the identity politics that is the danger, the moron politician and the cheer leader good citizen.

----------


## Jon

High power rifle?  Dad used to have one, Savage .22 high power.  Lever action firing a .22 bullet with a much larger cartridge. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Savage_Hi-Power
A beautiful piece of machinery
----

----------


## intertd6

> The conversation about "dangerous" dogs are usually but not always between those who listen to the news, but know little about dogs. 
>  Just like guns. I enjoy the media commentators calling the rifles when used by criminals "high powered rifles".
> What on earth is a "high powered rifle"? This ill informed pretend technobabble created for maximizing emotional impact is meaningless if you know the basics about guns. Could have some meaning at the beginning of last century to differentiate between smokeless powder and black powder, however a rifle in the hands of a criminal if high or low power, if .22 caliber or .457 magnum, if black powder muzzle load, makes little difference.  The criminal can kill with any of the above.  
> But the commentator will be more popular by using big words, just like politicians get acclaim when they make political mileage from criminal acts to pass legislation that would otherwise have no chance.
> The message of the dangerous dog or the high powered gun is the same. "We" the sensible good citizen or the valiant politician will save you. All we need is to take away the dog or the "high powered" gun from the bad people and all will be good again.
> The reality is that it is the identity politics that is the danger, the moron politician and the cheer leader good citizen.

  When it boils down, some bogan dog owners have spoiled it for everyone.

----------


## Marc

> High power rifle?  Dad used to have one, Savage .22 high power.  Lever action firing a .22 bullet with a much larger cartridge. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Savage_Hi-Power
> A beautiful piece of machinery
> ----

  Do you really think that media commentators that can not differentiate a shotgun from a rifle or a bolt action from an semi or a full auto would know about one obscure and obsolete wildcat named "high power" for commercial purposes and refer to the criminal's gun by way of the chambering of said obsolete cartridge? 
You are missing the point. 
Criminals use what they can get, that is common chambering like 308 or 7.62x39. Familiarity and knowledge about guns is frown upon, one must show repulsion and horror at guns. They are the instrument of satan and it is a sin to possess one. They are "high powered" so must be bad. Pit bull are HORRIFYINGLY bad and the breed of demons and belong in hell.
That is the point.

----------


## craka

> I do like the idea of nutting irresponsible owners, if you can't raise a dog properly you probably should be raising children.

  
I absolutely agree with that statement. 
Unfortunately too many do not know how to raise a dog, but have numerous children.    Oh and how the government promoted it,  aka the baby bonus.

----------


## Jon

> Do you really think that media commentators that can not differentiate a shotgun from a rifle or a bolt action from an semi or a full auto would know about one obscure and obsolete wildcat named "high power" for commercial purposes and refer to the criminal's gun by way of the chambering of said obsolete cartridge? 
> You are missing the point. 
> Criminals use what they can get, that is common chambering like 308 or 7.62x39. Familiarity and knowledge about guns is frown upon, one must show repulsion and horror at guns. They are the instrument of satan and it is a sin to possess one. They are "high powered" so must be bad. Pit bull are HORRIFYINGLY bad and the breed of demons and belong in hell.
> That is the point.

  And you must be licensed to own a gun, and some styles of gun are deemed too dangerous to be owned as in the wrong hands they can do a lot of damage very quickly. 
And some dogs in the wrong hands can do a lot of damage very quickly. 
And the Libertarians will say the gun laws are an infringement on their rights.  And the same with dogs. 
----

----------


## craka

> And you must be licensed to own a gun, and some styles of gun are deemed too dangerous to be owned as in the wrong hands they can do a lot of damage very quickly. 
> And some dogs in the wrong hands can do a lot of damage very quickly. 
> And the Libertarians will say the gun laws are an infringement on their rights.  And the same with dogs.

  Even if you agree with that mantra is doesn't stop people that do not follow the law from gaining them.   People are deluded to think that gun laws actually prevent horrific events.      I think when I last looked, there is/was reported to be approximately 600,000 illegal firearms circulating in Australia.

----------


## Marc

https://youtu.be/kTxaLpz5Q5s

----------


## Bigboboz

> Even if you agree with that mantra is doesn't stop people that do not follow the law from gaining them.   People are deluded to think that gun laws actually prevent horrific events.      I think when I last looked, there is/was reported to be approximately 600,000 illegal firearms circulating in Australia.

  Nothing is rarely perfect but is the alternative of something more like the US better?

----------


## PhilT2

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2019/...hoot-20190403/

----------


## Marc

And this proves that american pit bull are dangerous.
Oh ... forgot ... also proves that there is a gender pay gap. 
That men are bully, that global warming is upon us due to the men produced CO2, that we should all become vegetarians and that leprechauns are green and live in your backyard providing you compost your veggie scraps and have a worm farm in your mother's house.
The yeti moved in next door.
He is male (oh so baaad)

----------


## Whitey66

> https://youtu.be/kTxaLpz5Q5s

   It's good to see that they turned that dog around and gave him a better chance at life but I still would not let that dog anywhere near a kid.

----------


## UseByDate

> Nothing is rarely perfect but is the alternative of something more like the US better?

  It must make Americans (USA) annoyed to have their country singled out as “what we don't want to become like”.
 The number of guns in a community does not correlate with the number of gun related homicides.
Out of the 171 countries listed the USA is rated 87th in the list of most gun homicides per capita. 
 The USA       has  4    gun homicides per 100,000 people per year and 112  guns per 100 people             
        Australia has  1    gun homicides per 100,000 people per year and 15   guns per 100 people       
       Honduras  has 92 gun homicides per 100,000 people per year and    6   guns per 100 people
       Iceland      has 0.3 gun homicides per 100,000 people per year  and  30   guns per 100 people  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_and_homicide

----------


## Bros

End of the line here.  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-...ttack/10985978

----------


## phild01

> End of the line here.  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-...ttack/10985978

  Surely he will just go and pen two more killing dogs.

----------


## Bloss

> Nice helicopter. Since you know about them, can you answer the following: <br>
> The noise the helicopter makes, that chop chop chop, is due to the blades hitting the air the blade in front has moved. I once wrote to Bell asking why don't they stagger the level of the blades at different levels and if that would reduce the noise.<br>
> No answer of course for the outsider peasant. <br>
> But i always wondered if such an obvious solution would work.<br>This would be very important to cull Pit Bull from helicopters since it would take them by surprise.

  https://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdef.../gallery/13347

----------


## Bigboboz

> It must make Americans (USA) annoyed to have their country singled out as “what we don't want to become like”.
>  The number of guns in a community does not correlate with the number of gun related homicides.
> Out of the 171 countries listed the USA is rated 87th in the list of most gun homicides per capita. 
>  The USA       has  4    gun homicides per 100,000 people per year and 112  guns per 100 people             
>         Australia has  1    gun homicides per 100,000 people per year and 15   guns per 100 people       
>        Honduras  has 92 gun homicides per 100,000 people per year and    6   guns per 100 people
>        Iceland      has 0.3 gun homicides per 100,000 people per year  and  30   guns per 100 people  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_and_homicide

  Interesting selection you cherry picked from the list.  Wow, US is safer than south America and middle east! Not a reference point I'd be bragging about. Right next the peaceful place of Yemen and Palestine!  
And Iceland is really representative with a population of ~350k  :Rolleyes:  
Look, the appeal of guns isn't lost on me but balancing having them becaue you like them and want own some doesn't outweigh the downsides.  There's a reason US cops are trigger happy and go over the top, they're #*&# scared. 
It's the same with Pittbulls to get things back on theme, just because you like them isn't good enough reason for others to accept the risks that came with your decision to have one.

----------


## Bros

One of my "distant relations" decided he wanted a dog. I asked him what type and he said a mans dog. I asked him what type of dog was that and he said big and strong as he didn't want to be seen with a small dog. 
I have no idea if he got a dog or not as I hadn't seen him since. 
So some people use a dog as and extension of their ego.

----------


## UseByDate

> Interesting selection you cherry picked from the list.  Wow, US is safer than south America and middle east! Not a reference point I'd be bragging about. Right next the peaceful place of Yemen and Palestine!  
> And Iceland is really representative with a population of ~350k  
> Look, the appeal of guns isn't lost on me but balancing having them becaue you like them and want own some doesn't outweigh the downsides.  There's a reason US cops are trigger happy and go over the top, they're #*&# scared. 
> It's the same with Pittbulls to get things back on theme, just because you like them isn't good enough reason for others to accept the risks that came with your decision to have one.

  Not a cherry pick at all. The two countries were selected because they were the worst on the list and the best on the list in relation to the rate of gun related homicides. All you have to do is click the order by rate column. If I was to cherry pick I could have chosen Austria which has hal*f* the gun homicide rate of Australia with twice the gun ownership or Jamaica  that has 52 times the gun homicide rate of Australia and halve the gun ownership.
 The point is when singling out a country to demonise you had the opportunity of selecting at least 86 countries worse than the one you selected. Why do you ignore the 86 countries and select the USA? Is it possible that you consider the people living in these 86 countries as being in some way “not like us (Australians)” and therefore their gun crime does not matter and should be ignored? 
 Where have I ever said I like Pitbulls? I have never owned one. I prefer dogs with high intelligence. I have always owned German Shepherd Dogs except for my present dog, an eight year old rescue Border Collie (original owner died).

----------


## Marc

> One of my "distant relations" decided he wanted a dog. I asked him what type and he said a mans dog. I asked him what type of dog was that and he said big and strong as he didn't want to be seen with a small dog. 
> I have no idea if he got a dog or not as I hadn't seen him since. 
> So some people use a dog as and extension of their ego.

  True, and perhaps it is necessary to qualify the term "pet" and "dog". 
A dog is a domestic animal that has shared human habitat for tens of thousands of years and evolved with the help of cross breading to adapt to the different tasks we have asked from it. 
Today, city dwellers have dogs that originally had a purpose for ... no purpose at all. 
To compensate we make up tasks for the dog in order to keep it healthy so we walk it and train it.
The city home dog find himself with a variety of bodies built for a variety of tasks that he no longer fulfills. 
The owner, thinks that by having a big strong dog he will look the part of the ....... (insert stupid fantasy here), to his peers. 
Pet is a new concept, an animal kept for companionship, to pat and pet for no other purpose than fan and joy. And to be shared by the whole family not just one person, including children.
Can a working dog with a specific task be a pet as well? Most likely not, perhaps in exceptional circumstances and depending highly from the way he is treated and trained.  
Today folks buy dogs like they buy toys, with complete disregard of the needs and requirements to keep the dog physically and mentally healthy. 
The dog is labelled a "pet" regardless of background, breed and upbringing and lumped with the family kids for them to pull his ears, tail and take his food out of his mouth. 
There is a high intake of so called rescue dogs, dogs that have been mistreated, beaten and chained and then abandoned for some organization to keep and find a new owner. 
Cheaper too.
The end result is necessarily a compromise at best. An adult dog with baggage that was bred for hunting or for guard dog asked to be a "pet".
It is not the bread and restricting the breed makes little sense just like restricting gun ownership. It is the owner that needs restricting.

----------


## DavoSyd

> Interesting selection you cherry picked from the list.

   you could also take a closer look at the _source_ *UseByDate* posted? it was just a combined list of: 
1. Number of guns per capita by country 
and  2. List of countries by intentional homicide rate  *UseByDate* just added the "gun homicides" bit in for unknown reasons - but it's actually just a list of "intentional homicides"....

----------


## UseByDate

> you could also take a closer look at the _source_ *UseByDate* posted? it was just a combined list of: 
> 1. Number of guns per capita by country 
> and  2. List of countries by intentional homicide rate  *UseByDate* just added the "gun homicides" bit in for unknown reasons - but it's actually just a list of "intentional homicides"....

  My bad. I have been checking the facts about guns and gun violence and have misquoted the data referenced. The total figures do not just include gun related homicide but also gun related suicide.  
 Honduras
 Total gun “violence” 60/100,000
 Homicide                   66/100,000  
 Suicide                       0.41/100,000
 Unintentional              0.13/100,000
 The figures do not add up precisely because the data is gathered over differing periods. 
 Australia
 Total gun “violence” 1.04/100,000
 Homicide                   0.18/100,000
 Suicide                       0.8/100,000
 Unintentional             0.02/100,000
 Undetermined            0.01/100,000 
 The table does seem to show a correlation between gun ownership and gun related homicide in high income countries. Gun related suicides seem to dominate, by far, the total number of gun related deaths. In the “other” countries it seems that gun related homicides dominate the total figures. 
 The fact still remains that there are many countries with a higher gun homicide rate than the USA.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate 
 I welcome any forum member correcting me if I make an error.

----------


## DavoSyd

> The fact still remains that there are many countries with a higher gun homicide rate than the USA.

  the fact remains that US situation is a far less desirable scenario than the one we have here.   

> The table does seem to show a correlation between gun ownership and gun related homicide in high income countries.

  
well, the graph is pretty unambiguous:    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate 
original data source:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26551975  *Violent Death Rates: The US Compared with Other High-income OECD Countries, 2010.*  Grinshteyn E1, Hemenway D2. *Author information*    *Abstract*  *BACKGROUND:* 
Violent death is a serious problem in the United States. Previous research showing US rates of violent death compared with other high-income countries used data that are more than a decade old. *METHODS:* 
We examined 2010 mortality data obtained from the World Health Organization for populous, high-income countries (n = 23). Death rates per 100,000 population were calculated for each country and for the aggregation of all non-US countries overall and by age and sex. Tests of significance were performed using Poisson and negative binomial regressions. *RESULTS:* 
US homicide rates were 7.0 times higher than in other high-income countries, driven by a gun homicide rate that was 25.2 times higher. For 15- to 24-year-olds, the gun homicide rate in the United States was 49.0 times higher. Firearm-related suicide rates were 8.0 times higher in the United States, but the overall suicide rates were average. Unintentional firearm deaths were 6.2 times higher in the United States. The overall firearm death rate in the United States from all causes was 10.0 times higher. Ninety percent of women, 91% of children aged 0 to 14 years, 92% of youth aged 15 to 24 years, and 82% of all people killed by firearms were from the United States. *CONCLUSIONS:* 
The United States has an enormous firearm problem compared with other high-income countries, with higher rates of homicide and firearm-related suicide. Compared with 2003 estimates, the US firearm death rate remains unchanged while firearm death rates in other countries decreased. Thus, the already high relative rates of firearm homicide, firearm suicide, and unintentional firearm death in the United States compared with other high-income countries increased between 2003 and 2010.  
--- 
updated 2019 study:  *Violent death rates in the US compared to those of the other high-income countries, 2015.*Grinshteyn E1, Hemenway D2. *Author information* *Abstract*Violence is a serious public health issue in the U.S. This research compares the US and other high-income countries in terms of violent death. We used data from the World Health Organization for populous, high-income countries. Data from CDC's WISQARS and WONDER systems were used to assess mortality data among US white and non-white populations and in low-, medium-, and high-gun states in 2015. Death rates per 100,000 populations were calculated overall, by age, and by sex. Poisson and negative binomial regression were used to test for significance. The homicide rate in the US was 7.5 times higher than the homicide rate in the other high-income countries combined, which was largely attributable to a firearm homicide rate that was 24.9 times higher. The overall firearm death rate was 11.4 times higher in the US than in other high-income countries. In this dataset, 83.7% of all firearm deaths, 91.6% of women killed by guns, and 96.7% of all children aged 0-4 years killed by guns were from the US. Firearm homicide rates were 36 times higher in high-gun US states and 13.5 times higher in low-gun US states than the firearm homicide rate in other high-income countries combined. The firearm homicide rate among the US white population was 12 times higher than the firearm homicide rate in other high-income countries. The US firearm death rate increased between 2003 and 2015 and decreased in other high-income countries. The US continues to be an outlier among high-income countries with respect to firearm deaths.    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30817955

----------


## UseByDate

> the fact remains that US situation is a far less desirable scenario than the one we have here.    
> well, the graph is pretty unambiguous:    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rate 
> original data source:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26551975  *Violent Death Rates: The US Compared with Other High-income OECD Countries, 2010.*  Grinshteyn E1, Hemenway D2. *Author information*    *Abstract*  *BACKGROUND:* 
> Violent death is a serious problem in the United States. Previous research showing US rates of violent death compared with other high-income countries used data that are more than a decade old. *METHODS:* 
> We examined 2010 mortality data obtained from the World Health Organization for populous, high-income countries (n = 23). Death rates per 100,000 population were calculated for each country and for the aggregation of all non-US countries overall and by age and sex. Tests of significance were performed using Poisson and negative binomial regressions. *RESULTS:* 
> US homicide rates were 7.0 times higher than in other high-income countries, driven by a gun homicide rate that was 25.2 times higher. For 15- to 24-year-olds, the gun homicide rate in the United States was 49.0 times higher. Firearm-related suicide rates were 8.0 times higher in the United States, but the overall suicide rates were average. Unintentional firearm deaths were 6.2 times higher in the United States. The overall firearm death rate in the United States from all causes was 10.0 times higher. Ninety percent of women, 91% of children aged 0 to 14 years, 92% of youth aged 15 to 24 years, and 82% of all people killed by firearms were from the United States. *CONCLUSIONS:* 
> The United States has an enormous firearm problem compared with other high-income countries, with higher rates of homicide and firearm-related suicide. Compared with 2003 estimates, the US firearm death rate remains unchanged while firearm death rates in other countries decreased. Thus, the already high relative rates of firearm homicide, firearm suicide, and unintentional firearm death in the United States compared with other high-income countries increased between 2003 and 2010.  
> --- 
> updated 2019 study:  *Violent death rates in the US compared to those of the other high-income countries, 2015.*  Grinshteyn E1, Hemenway D2. *Author information*    *Abstract* 
> Violence is a serious public health issue in the U.S. This research compares the US and other high-income countries in terms of violent death. We used data from the World Health Organization for populous, high-income countries. Data from CDC's WISQARS and WONDER systems were used to assess mortality data among US white and non-white populations and in low-, medium-, and high-gun states in 2015. Death rates per 100,000 populations were calculated overall, by age, and by sex. Poisson and negative binomial regression were used to test for significance. The homicide rate in the US was 7.5 times higher than the homicide rate in the other high-income countries combined, which was largely attributable to a firearm homicide rate that was 24.9 times higher. The overall firearm death rate was 11.4 times higher in the US than in other high-income countries. In this dataset, 83.7% of all firearm deaths, 91.6% of women killed by guns, and 96.7% of all children aged 0-4 years killed by guns were from the US. Firearm homicide rates were 36 times higher in high-gun US states and 13.5 times higher in low-gun US states than the firearm homicide rate in other high-income countries combined. The firearm homicide rate among the US white population was 12 times higher than the firearm homicide rate in other high-income countries. The US firearm death rate increased between 2003 and 2015 and decreased in other high-income countries. The US continues to be an outlier among high-income countries with respect to firearm deaths.    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30817955

  To the best of my knowledge I have not claimed that the USA does not have a higher gun related homicide rate than that of Australia. If you could furnish evidence to the contrary then I will examine it and report back to you.
 What I have claimed is that there are many countries with a higher rate of gun related homicides than that of the USA and that they have fewer guns.  If you could furnish evidence to the contrary then I will examine it and report back to you. I am keen to learn. 
 Disclaimer: All my claims are made on a per capita  basis.

----------


## Marc

https://medium.com/handwaving-freako...e-1108ed400be5   Everybody’s Lying About the Link Between Gun Ownership and Homicide BJ Campbell  No correlation whatsoever. 
So let’s briefly recap. Gun Murder Rate is not correlated with firearm ownership rate in the United States, on a state by state basis. Firearm Homicide Rate is not correlated with guns per capita globally. It’s not correlated with guns per capita among peaceful countries, nor among violent countries, nor among European countries.    So what in the heck is going on in the media, where we are constantly berated with signaling indicating that “more guns = more murder?”
One: They’re sneaking suicide in with the data, and then obfuscating that inclusion with rhetoric. 
This is the biggest trick I see in the media, and very few people seem to pick up on it. Suicide, numerically speaking, is around twice the problem homicide is, both in overall rate and in rate by gun. Two thirds of gun deaths are suicides in the USA. And suicide rates are correlated with gun ownership rates in the USA, because suicide is much easier, and much more final, when done with a gun. If you’re going to kill yourself anyway, and you happen to have a gun in the house, then you choose that method out of convenience. Beyond that, there’s some correlation between overall suicide and gun ownership, owing to the fact that a failed suicide doesn’t show up as a suicide in the numbers, and suicides with guns rarely fail. 
Accidents are a relatively small portion of total gun deaths, but obviously that entire chunk of the numbers happen to people who own guns. Can’t die of a gun accident without a gun.
So when you include both of those factors in your data set, you end up with a positive correlation for this new quantity you’ve brewed up, called “gun deaths.”

----------


## DavoSyd

> To the best of my knowledge I have not claimed that the USA does not have a higher gun related homicide rate than that of Australia.

  yeah, all you said was (and i paraphrase):  "I can't see why america is always the example people point to when other people say  "well, at least we are better than that X country"" 
USA is THE example, because it is the BEST example. 
or are you going to tell us more about your research into Honduras?

----------


## DavoSyd

> https://medium.com/handwaving-freako...e-1108ed400be5   Everybody’s Lying About the Link Between Gun Ownership and Homicide BJ Campbell  No correlation whatsoever. 
> So let’s briefly recap. Gun Murder Rate is not correlated with firearm ownership rate in the United States, on a state by state basis. Firearm Homicide Rate is not correlated with guns per capita globally. It’s not correlated with guns per capita among peaceful countries, nor among violent countries, nor among European countries.    So what in the heck is going on in the media, where we are constantly berated with signaling indicating that “more guns = more murder?”
> One: They’re sneaking suicide in with the data, and then obfuscating that inclusion with rhetoric. 
> This is the biggest trick I see in the media, and very few people seem to pick up on it. Suicide, numerically speaking, is around twice the problem homicide is, both in overall rate and in rate by gun. Two thirds of gun deaths are suicides in the USA. And suicide rates are correlated with gun ownership rates in the USA, because suicide is much easier, and much more final, when done with a gun. If you’re going to kill yourself anyway, and you happen to have a gun in the house, then you choose that method out of convenience. Beyond that, there’s some correlation between overall suicide and gun ownership, owing to the fact that a failed suicide doesn’t show up as a suicide in the numbers, and suicides with guns rarely fail. 
> Accidents are a relatively small portion of total gun deaths, but obviously that entire chunk of the numbers happen to people who own guns. Can’t die of a gun accident without a gun.
> So when you include both of those factors in your data set, you end up with a positive correlation for this new quantity you’ve brewed up, called “gun deaths.”

  exactly! 
there's just more murderers & suicidal people over there, that's all.  
just a trick of the statistics!

----------


## Bros

My BIL (not the relation I mentioned previously) two yrs ago bought a Greyhound. Greyhound breeding seems to be very rigidly controlled. His Greyhound never raced as ex racing Greyhounds have to be muzzled when in public which is enforced by the local council and a canine control council via microchipping.
They don’t look a savage dog but that is the law where he lives. In fact the looks of the dog doesn’t appeal to me but it’s not for me to tell him how to spend his money.

----------


## UseByDate

> My BIL (not the relation I mentioned previously) two yrs ago bought a Greyhound. Greyhound breeding seems to be very rigidly controlled. His Greyhound never raced as ex racing Greyhounds have to be muzzled when in public which is enforced by the local council and a canine control council via microchipping.
> They don’t look a savage dog but that is the law where he lives. In fact the looks of the dog doesn’t appeal to me but it’s not for me to tell him how to spend his money.

  The Greyhound may not have raced but it may have been trained to race.
 We had a similar law in SA which stated that a Greyhound had to be muzzled in public but it was modified many years ago. Most Greyhounds that retire from racing are retrained and if the retraining is successful they are not required to be muzzled. It is my understanding that it is statewide. 
 Queensland has similar laws but it seems to be on a council by council basis.    
 “Under Queensland State Legislation, all greyhounds are required to wear a muzzle while in public unless they are QLD GAP greyhounds – identified by the GAP green collar. Where council local laws permit, this green collar allows the GAP greyhounds to be muzzle free. Please be sure to check with your council regarding local laws on the muzzling of greyhounds.”    https://gapqld.com.au/our-greyhounds/faq/

----------


## UseByDate

> yeah, all you said was (and i paraphrase):  "I  can't see why america is always the example people point to when other  people say  "well, at least we are better than that X country""

  I am always sceptical when someone needs to paraphrase when a precise quote could be obtained with the tiniest of effort.      

> USA is THE example, because it is the BEST example.

  Just saying it is so does not make it so.   

> or are you going to tell us more about your research into Honduras?

  No. The provision of the information about Honduras has had the desired effect of informing you of the rate of gun deaths there.

----------


## UseByDate

Gun ownership and gun homicide correlation. USA
 Back of the envelope calculations with rounding. 
 There are 330,000,000 Americans (USA).
 72% identify as white. 12% identify as black. The rest are mainly Hispanic. The cited article only has statistics about black and white people. 
 72% of 330,000,000 is 237,000,000 white
 12% of 330,000,000 is 39,000,000 black 
 Firearm homicide rate for black men is 29.12 per 100,000 per year.  
 Firearm homicide rate for white men is 2.1 per 100,000 per year.
 Ie black men are subject to firearm homicide at a rate 15 times that of white men. 
 Overall the rate of gun ownership in the USA is about 120 per 100 people. (1.2 guns per person) 
 Now if there was a correlation between gun ownership and firearm homicide then you would expect  that the black community owns guns at a rate 15 times that of the white community. 
 Number of guns owned by the black and white community is (237,000,000 +39,000,000) times 1.2 = 330,000,000
 If we take x as the rate of gun ownership of white people then:
 Total number of guns is also = 237,000,000x + 39,000,000 times 15x = 330,000,000
 x=0.4 guns per white person and 15x = 6 guns per black person 
 If we take a typical family of 4 people then white families have a total of 1.6 guns and black families have a total of 24 guns.  _So, in order to believe that there is correlation between gun ownership and gun homicide then you have to believe that black families have 24 guns each and also believe that owning 24 guns makes the family 24 times more dangerous than owning one gun._ 
 Homicides are overwhelmingly “white on white” and “black on black.” 
 I am not 100% sure on my mathematics and logic. I invite criticism of both.    https://edition.cnn.com/2018/04/23/h...udy/index.html 
 “Compared with white men, the researchers found that black men experienced 27 more firearm homicides per 100,000 people annually nationwide (29.12 for black men vs. 2.1 for white men).”

----------


## DavoSyd

> Just saying it is so does not make it so.

  it's OK, I'll leave you with your opinions, I know your views are immutable - I just engaged to cite your data error...

----------


## r3nov8or

Imagine if pit bulls had guns

----------


## Marc

More dangerous than a monkey with a razor blade ...  :Smilie:  
Actually Use's calculations on gun ownership and homicide put some light on something that is politically incorrect and therefore never debated. 
It is cultural background, education and social status that has statistical relation with homicide, not number of guns.
Fact.
The latest influx of middle eastern people in the south west of Sydney has seen a spate of violent crime involving guns. 
Of course no one is game to point out this blatant link.  
And we have other equally valid evidence in Melbourne.
But not suppose to say this. God or Ala forbid.

----------


## Bros

> The Greyhound may not have raced but it may have been trained to race.

   His greyhound never raced nor trained to race so it never applied to his dog.

----------


## UseByDate

> Imagine if pit bulls had guns

  Who would be stupid enough to give a Pitbull a loaded gun? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXcnlie9k8w

----------


## Marc

And something that is never discussed. Why is it that when it comes to gun crime, the left is always crying gun laws, between sips of soyachino, rather than bloody government should check every single container that comes in and every parcel that comes in?
Criminals don't buy guns in the shop so no law will ever curb gun crime. Guns come illegally in the country by the thousands by containers and by post. It is the government that let us down every time and then tries to pass the blame on law obeying gun owners.
Pathetic. And they get away with their rhetoric every time thanks to the bloody watermelons.

----------


## UseByDate

> His greyhound never raced nor trained to race so it never applied to his dog.

  Queensland seems to have the most complicated laws regarding Greyhounds. If your BIL wants to take his Greyhound out in public without a muzzle then he needs to contact his council to find out what laws apply. If his council permits, he can get an exception once the dog has been assessed by the GAP. 
 Australia and Northern Ireland are the only two places in the world that require Greyhounds to be muzzled in public.  http://greyhoundequality.org/lawsqld.html  The Saluki is the middle east's equivalent of the Greyhound and I don't think muzzle laws apply to them.

----------


## Marc

I remember seeing greyhounds muzzled in Sydney years ago, but now and after the failed attempt at banning dog racing, I see plenty of what seems rescue dogs, walked just like any other dog.
i don't know if it is me that does not know the breed but they seem sad to me. They walk with the head hanging down like carrying a great load. May be I am just thinking too much, they certainly act different from my Spoodle.  :Smilie:

----------


## Bros

> Queensland seems to have the most complicated laws regarding Greyhounds. If your BIL wants to take his Greyhound out in public without a muzzle then he needs to contact his council to find out what laws apply. If his council permits, he can get an exception once the dog has been assessed by the GAP.

   He's well ahead of this as his greyhound doesn't need a muzzle. He's had it for a couple of yrs now and knows the rules and takes it out in public.

----------


## Bigboboz

> Not a cherry pick at all. The two countries were selected because they were the worst on the list and the best on the list in relation to the rate of gun related homicides. All you have to do is click the order by rate column. If I was to cherry pick I could have chosen Austria which has hal*f* the gun homicide rate of Australia with twice the gun ownership or Jamaica  that has 52 times the gun homicide rate of Australia and halve the gun ownership.
>  The point is when singling out a country to demonise you had the opportunity of selecting at least 86 countries worse than the one you selected. Why do you ignore the 86 countries and select the USA? Is it possible that you consider the people living in these 86 countries as being in some way “not like us (Australians)” and therefore their gun crime does not matter and should be ignored?

  
Picking end points is still cherry picking and the two were excellent examples as to why cherry picking is pointless to prove a point   

> Where have I ever said I like Pitbulls? I have never owned one. I  prefer dogs with high intelligence. I have always owned German Shepherd  Dogs except for my present dog, an eight year old rescue Border Collie  (original owner died).

  Sorry, the point on Pittbulls wasn't meant to be directed to you personally, I phrased it poorly.  The point was to get comment on the thread topic that I don't think it's good enough to want something allowed just because the individual wanting it (I used "you" in my prior comment but this is what I meant) knows they will be responsible but risk has increased for all.

----------


## Bigboboz

> “Compared with white men, the researchers found that black men experienced 27 more firearm homicides per 100,000 people annually nationwide (29.12 for black men vs. 2.1 for white men).”

  US definitely has stats within stats, some areas of the US are more like Honduras than what a 'rich' country should be.   
The additional thing that the stats don't show are the types of guns behind those stats.  In Germany (according to family members of mine) the types of guns are restricted to hunting style guns and you can't just get a licence to just to own a gun. You need to demonstrate that you will be hunting (not sure on the details how you do this).  I wouldn't be surprised if this was similar across the EU. 
In Oz, from talking to mates that grew up on farms, getting hunting rifles is not restricted. So what exactly needs to be changed?  Do individuals really need concealled or assault style guns? 
Haven't even touched on mass shootings

----------


## Bigboboz

> And something that is never discussed. Why is it that when it comes to gun crime, the left is always crying gun laws, between sips of soyachino

  I'm definitely not left but have a strong preference to have minimal armed population, good or bad guys, don't care.   

> , rather than bloody government should check every single container that comes in and every parcel that comes in?
> Criminals don't buy guns in the shop so no law will ever curb gun crime. Guns come illegally in the country by the thousands by containers and by post. It is the government that let us down every time and then tries to pass the blame on law obeying gun owners.
> Pathetic. And they get away with their rhetoric every time thanks to the bloody watermelons.

  Agree more checks should be done, money better spent then on middle class welfare which is straight vote buying with our own money but the argument we can't stop them so may as well let everyone have them is not argument.

----------


## UseByDate

> it's OK, I'll leave you with your opinions, I know your views are immutable.

  My views are quite malleable but I fear you will need a bigger hammer.  :Wink:

----------


## UseByDate

> Actually Use's calculations on gun ownership and homicide put some light on something that is politically incorrect and therefore never debated. 
> It is cultural background, education and social status that has statistical relation with homicide, not number of guns.

   :What he said:

----------


## UseByDate

> He's well ahead of this as his greyhound doesn't need a muzzle. He's had it for a couple of yrs now and knows the rules and takes it out in public.

   :2thumbsup:

----------


## UseByDate

> Picking end points is still cherry picking and the two were excellent examples as to why cherry picking is pointless to prove a point

  I chose Australia and the USA because those two  countries were chosen by you and I selected the end points to  demonstrate the full range of firearm violence. I did not cho*o*se what  countries were the worst and the best. Cherry picking defined as:  selecting data that supports an argument and ignores that which does  not. I included a reference to the full data set. I hid no data. By  your definition any selection of any data points is cherry picking  including your own.

----------


## UseByDate

> US definitely has stats within stats, some areas of the US are more like Honduras than what a 'rich' country should be.

  It certainly does: 
 Male Firearm Homicide Rate/100,000/year                  State                  White                  Black                  Diff.                   Missouri                  2.77                  59.42                  56.65                   Michigan                  1.52                  49.14                  47.62    

> The additional thing that the stats don't show are the types of guns  behind those stats.  In Germany (according to family members of mine)  the types of guns are restricted to hunting style guns and you can't  just get a licence to just to own a gun. You need to demonstrate that  you will be hunting (not sure on the details how you do this).  I  wouldn't be surprised if this was similar across the EU.

  What difference does it make what gun kills you? What is the definition of a “hunting style gun”? Most, if not all, European countries have sports shooters and compete in the Olympics. How can they practice without “non hunting style” guns?      

> In Oz, from talking to mates that grew up on farms, getting hunting  rifles is not restricted. So what exactly needs to be changed?  Do  individuals really need concealled or assault style guns?

  I notice that you have used the term assault _style_ gun. Assault _style_ guns are not assault rifles (as used by the military). The USA is a collection of states with varying gun ownership laws. Ownership of assault rifles is  much more restricted than assault style guns (assault weapons).

----------


## Marc

An AR is a lightweight rifle capable to fire single shots, semi, and full auto, gas actuated, usually with muzzle break and detachable magazines. 
The onerous restrictions on legal firearm ownership goes far beyond the AR.  
Hunting rifles can only be bolt or lever action, not semi and are even limited in the size of the magazine. Handguns are so restricted that it is pointless considering owning one. Talking about concealed weapons only shows ignorance of Australia gun laws. 
In the UK and Europe Semi automatic rifles are allowed and even suppressors (silencers) are allowed for hunting.  
To attribute our relatively low murder rate to our gun law is an insult to our intelligence. Culture, social standing and education is the only factor in murder rates and such can not be legislated. In fact the left in Canberra and the media in general are hell bent in destroying our education system by introducing the most idiotic and socially destructive agenda to wipe out the family unit and values. It is those actions that must be denounced as social poison and not appeals to emotions about guns. How about screen our immigration and restrict cultures who kill and murder each other for centuries and come here with that sort of baggage?  
If Port Arthur had happened in Texas, the shooter would have lasted about 3 minutes flat since someone with a gun would have returned fire. As it was in Tassie all it took was a call to the police with a tip about some phoney drug stash 4 hours away and so the only guns were out of the equation and the hired gun could go about his business undisturbed.

----------


## PhilT2

> If Port Arthur had happened in Texas, the shooter would have lasted about 3 minutes flat since someone with a gun would have returned fire.

  This is a popular fantasy among gun nuts. Sadly the reality is usually different. At a shooting in sutherland springs, Texas in 2017 an armed civilian was able to wound the killer as he was leaving, having already murdered 26. The actions (or lack thereof) of the armed guard at the parklands high school are well recorded. Numerous armed guards at the Las Vegas hotel made no difference to the toll taken by a killer equipped with bump stocks and large capacity magazines. None of these offences were perpetrated by migrants of course but we shouldn't let facts get in the way of a good story.

----------


## Bigboboz

> What difference does it make what gun kills you?

   Pretty sure those in New Zealand woudl have cared if the gun used had smaller magazines and lower firing rate.   

> What is the definition of a “hunting style gun”? Most, if not all, European countries have sports shooters and compete in the Olympics. How can they practice without “non hunting style” guns?

    

> I notice that you have used the term assault _style_ gun. Assault _style_ guns are not assault rifles (as used by the military). The USA is a collection of states with varying gun ownership laws. Ownership of assault rifles is  much more restricted than assault style guns (assault weapons).

  Ok, so what guns can't you get in Oz that are that are so dearly missing from your arsenal?

----------


## Bigboboz

> An AR is a lightweight rifle capable to fire single shots, semi, and full auto, gas actuated, usually with muzzle break and detachable magazines. 
> The onerous restrictions on legal firearm ownership goes far beyond the AR.  
> Hunting rifles can only be bolt or lever action, not semi and are even limited in the size of the magazine. Handguns are so restricted that it is pointless considering owning one. Talking about concealed weapons only shows ignorance of Australia gun laws. 
> In the UK and Europe Semi automatic rifles are allowed and even suppressors (silencers) are allowed for hunting.

  Not sure what you point is here. Are you complaining that an AR and restrictions for beyond the AR are too restrictive? Is there a reason to want one of these other than just wanting one? Is it the lure of being told you can't have something that is the ultimate subconcious driver?  Like picking Pitt Bulls. Sooo many dog options but no, this is the breed you want. 
I'm seeing a trend.

----------


## Bigboboz

> This is a popular fantasy among gun nuts. Sadly the reality is usually different. At a shooting in sutherland springs, Texas in 2017 an armed civilian was able to wound the killer as he was leaving, having already murdered 26. The actions (or lack thereof) of the armed guard at the parklands high school are well recorded. Numerous armed guards at the Las Vegas hotel made no difference to the toll taken by a killer equipped with bump stocks and large capacity magazines. None of these offences were perpetrated by migrants of course but we shouldn't let facts get in the way of a good story.

   :What he said:

----------


## Bedford

The former pro-gun control candidate has been charged with murdering her campaign treasurer with a gun. :Doh:   https://thefederalist.com/2018/08/13...ign-treasurer/

----------


## UseByDate

> [/COLOR]
>  [COLOR=#ff3300][COLOR=#000000]Pretty sure those in New Zealand woudl have cared if the gun used had smaller magazines and lower firing rate. 
> Ok, so what guns can't you get in Oz that are that are so dearly missing from your arsenal?

  What was the firing rate and how long does it take to change a magazine? 
 I would like a few more F-35A aircraft. Do you think that people should not have the right to defend themselves? And before you ask, I have “controlled” F18s and F111s.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVyKMwaqw7M https://www.gd-ots.com/armaments/air...ystems/gau22a/

----------


## Marc

> Not sure what you point is here. Are you complaining that an AR and restrictions for beyond the AR are too restrictive? Is there a reason to want one of these other than just wanting one? Is it the lure of being told you can't have something that is the ultimate subconcious driver?  Like picking Pitt Bulls. Sooo many dog options but no, this is the breed you want. 
> I'm seeing a trend.

  Bob ... it is not OK for you to ask me what I want making this personal. I could respond in kind and ask what the hell do you know about guns, hunting or anything else for that matter since it seems you are talking out of the wrong orifice most of the time ... but i will not do that.  
In fact I will tell you that I have been hunting and using all sorts of guns since age 12 and that is way over half a century. In that period I have seen a growing trend among the soyachino and watermelons type condemning gun ownership most of the time with complete ignorance on the subject and only religious/political zeal. Usually the same types, support free immigration open borders, and would go and advocate for the return of criminal syrian fighters, chant the global warming song, participate in criminal violent farm invasions, stage fake animal cruelty for the media and all sorts of other actions where the end justifies the means ... in their own mind anyway.  
Nothing new Bob. In fact rather boring. You should start a lobby group to save an endangered frog in the place where the Adani mine is coming. May be print bumper bar sticker with "Don't fart, save our planet for the future of our children" on it.

----------


## Marc

> What was the firing rate and how long does it take to change a magazine? 
>  I would like a few more F-35A aircraft. Do you think that a people should not have the right to defend themselves? And before you ask, I have “controlled” F18s and F111s.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVyKMwaqw7M https://www.gd-ots.com/armaments/air...ystems/gau22a/

  I would like to have suppressors for hunting like in a lot of other countries. Makes life easier and saves the shooter's health. Not that Bob would know, he is probably advocating no firecrackers for Australia day ... or no Australia day perhaps? Only poodles and chihuahuas to be legal?

----------


## UseByDate

> I would like to have suppressors for hunting like in a lot of other countries. Makes life easier and saves the shooter's health. Not that Bob would know, he is probably advocating no firecrackers for Australia day ... or no Australia day perhaps? Only poodles and chihuahuas to be legal?

   :Rofl5:

----------


## DavoSyd

> In fact I will tell you that I have been hunting and using all sorts of guns since age 12 and that is way over half a century.

    

> And before you ask, I have controlled F18s and F111s.

  let the pissing competition COMMENCE!!!!  :brava:

----------


## Bigboboz

> Bob ... it is not OK for you to ask me what I want making this personal. I could respond in kind and ask what the hell do you know about guns, hunting or anything else for that matter since it seems you are talking out of the wrong orifice most of the time ... but i will not do that.

  I'm trying to understand what exactly is too restrictive with the current laws.  If there are common aspects which shooters want changed and why, it would be a useful insight.   

> In fact I will tell you that I have been hunting and using all sorts of guns since age 12 and that is way over half a century. In that period I have seen a growing trend among the soyachino and watermelons type condemning gun ownership most of the time with complete ignorance on the subject and only religious/political zeal. Usually the same types, support free immigration open borders, and would go and advocate for the return of criminal syrian fighters, chant the global warming song, participate in criminal violent farm invasions, stage fake animal cruelty for the media and all sorts of other actions where the end justifies the means ... in their own mind anyway.  
> Nothing new Bob. In fact rather boring. You should start a lobby group to save an endangered frog in the place where the Adani mine is coming. May be print bumper bar sticker with "Don't fart, save our planet for the future of our children" on it.

  Seems we only disagree on on unrestricted access to guns out of that complete list.  Less fussed about Pitt Bulls but again, there are other options great dogs...   

> Not that Bob would know, he is probably advocating no firecrackers for Australia day ... or no Australia day perhaps? Only poodles and chihuahuas to be legal?

  Nope, wrong again, very much pro firecrackers. Firecracker nights are among my most memorable memories from growing up.

----------


## UseByDate

> The additional thing that the stats don't show are the types of guns behind those stats.  In Germany (according to family members of mine) the types of guns are restricted to hunting style guns and you can't just get a licence to just to own a gun. You need to demonstrate that you will be hunting (not sure on the details how you do this).  I wouldn't be surprised if this was similar across the EU.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0-J2pYLCvI

----------


## Marc

Good for you to post that video Use. I knew that besides the myths and legends of OZ, European gun laws are way more lenient than ours. One thing that the slingshot channel left out is that it is legal in Europe _and_ UK to own suppressors (silencers) shoot and hunt with them. 
My personal peeve is the banning of crossbows here. Surely banning crossbows and letting 9 out of 10 containers come through customs without checking is a great political success.
Meantime the distressed soyachino sipper ladies, after the multicultural cheer leaders meeting, chant in chorus the dangers of guns, bows, knifes, slingshots and sharpened pencils truly believing that they have made Australia a better place.
Meantime the police cleans up after the gangs and the bomb makers.

----------


## Demixl

As I always say, there are no bad dogs, it's just a matter of how you train them and how much time you spend with it, especially in the first year. I was a dog owner but unfortunately she died of cancer. It had a big emetional impact on my familly. It's just like when a familly member dies 'cause pets are familly members. After Luna's death, we got an aquarium so the fish are now our only pet. Of course that fish are not the same as a dog, they cannot show their love too you but there are other benefits: they don't destroy your house, don't bark, don't need that much attention. Plus, their aquarium is a unique piece of art that you have in the house. It's highly customizable. As a bio familly we got in the tank only natural items which won't harm the fish, like live rocks (they are a must for the fish, more on https://arcreef.com/live-rock/live-rock-guide/), corals, marine plants.

----------


## Demixl

As I always say, there are no bad dogs, it's just a matter of how you  train them and how much time you spend with it, especially in the first  year. I was a dog owner but unfortunately she died of cancer. It had a big  emotional impact on my familly. It's just like when a familly  member dies 'cause pets are familly members. After Luna's death, we got  an aquarium so the fish are now our only pet. Of course that fish are  not the same as a dog, they cannot show their love too you but there  are other benefits: they don't destroy your house, don't bark, don't  need that much attention. Plus, their aquarium is a unique piece of art  that you have in the house. It's highly customizable. As a bio familly  we got in the tank only natural items which won't harm the fish, like  live rocks (they are a must for the fish, more on  https://arcreef.com/live-rock/live-rock-guide/), corals, marine plants.

----------


## UseByDate

> As I always say, there are no bad dogs, it's just a matter of how you  train them and how much time you spend with it, especially in the first  year.

  I am not so sure about that. :Wink:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHAYCZcM1c0

----------


## phild01

Owner should get a long stint in jail but probably won't...another moron dog owner. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-...coast/12100630

----------


## toooldforthis

> Owner should get a long stint in jail but probably won't...another moron dog owner. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-...coast/12100630

  I saw that.
Hope I am wrong, but am expecting a lot of dogs (and other pets) to be abandoned as people get hit hard financially with The Plague

----------

