Housing.. Vereinsboxen and Dog Carrier Kennels (Portable) - Page 11

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Abhay on 16 April 2010 - 17:04

Pitbulltalk.com, should change the name of their forum, to "The Blind leading the Blind" Forum.
It has to be made up of the most ignorant, and less knowledgable members, of a Pit Bull forum, that I have ever seen.
Believe me, that's quite a distinction.

  Tatonka Kennel, is basically an extension of Buckshot Sorells.  Whether you like their practices, or dogs, or not,
calling them a BYB, is ridiculous and ignorant.
 Now if someone's name appears on dogs such as Gr. Ch Chuco Loco, and Big Thicket's Gr. Ch Ajax, and too many
more to mention, perhaps they may have a right.  In this case, it's just Stupidity.

I also must state, a dog on a 12ft chain, with a heavy duty swivel on both ends, attached to a ring around an axle, has a lot of room to exercise, and has a much more feeling of freedom, than a dog in an enclosed kennel run.

 Through the years, I have had, and seen dogs who would get  claustrophobic, in even a large run, yet thrived on a chain.

Jenni78

by Jenni78 on 16 April 2010 - 17:04

 I think you are being kind, Abhay! I had a superb response typed earlier but I lost it and didn't have the energy to retype it. I was hoping you would chime in with some common sense. I think calling them "blind" is kind. In my original response, I called them "furbaby/petbull morons who are so stupid and ignorant that they don't realize that THEY are the downfall of the breed."

Keith, you mean well, my friend. But to use that site as evidence to anything but the magnitude of human stupidity is sheer hilarity. If you have concrete evidence, such as court records, or a conviction, as we have w/BSC, then by all means, come forth with it, but to post that link is an embarrassment to all of us who are APBT fanciers. I, for one, would rather bury my head in the sand and forget there are people out there that stupid. Reading the little bits I did made me nauseous. Then I laughed. I laughed really, really hard. 

As KCzaja once begged of the pet crowd - PLEASE do NOT try to get involved in arguments you know NOTHING ABOUT! It only hurts the cause! The Pitbulltalk forum would do well to abide by this rule. 



Keith Grossman

by Keith Grossman on 16 April 2010 - 18:04

I really couldn't give a fat rat's ass less about which pit bull forum is what...it really doesn't interest me.  It should be obvious, however, that this woman is pretty hypocritical and has a laissez faire attitude toward the safety of her dogs.  If you want to worship someone who thinks that 'mental stimulation' consists of letting several of her pits eviscerate a geriatric Doberman, that is your prerogative; I think she's a low life.

by Abhay on 16 April 2010 - 18:04

I have forgotten much more about bulldogs, than anyone on the above mentioned forum would know. That includes who you refer to as "this woman".  I didn't see where worship of anyone or anything was even implied.

Jenni78

by Jenni78 on 16 April 2010 - 18:04

 Keith, this isn't about Diane at all. It's about not discrediting what may have been a valid point by citing very poor sources. My last statement in my prior post comes to mind, again. If you care about dogs and truly want to help, learn the facts.

Keith Grossman

by Keith Grossman on 16 April 2010 - 18:04

I have made it clear that I don't believe that dogs should live in their crates but if the 'valid point' is that a crate is tantamount to a 'sensory deprivation chamber' or that a pup is safer chained out in the yard unattended than it is inside the house in a crate, I think you're misguided.  And in this case, it is about Diane because she came here all full of self-righteousness that, under the circumstances, she holds no claim to and made that point.

Mystere

by Mystere on 16 April 2010 - 18:04

Televangelists come to mind.  You know, the ones who can tell everyone else how they should live and act...

Red Sable

by Red Sable on 16 April 2010 - 18:04

You know, the ones who can tell everyone else how they should live and act..."

but in fact are doing the same or worse.  That is what gets me.

Jenni78

by Jenni78 on 16 April 2010 - 19:04

 No, Keith, the "valid point" I refer to was that maybe Diane is guilty of all you alleged- maybe. Maybe not. If so, then essentially you did her a big favor by citing a bunch of morons as evidence against her. That's all. 

by Abhay on 16 April 2010 - 19:04

If someone keeps numbers of extremely "dog aggressive" canines, they risk an accident, everytime they leave the house.  Call it Murphy's Law, or anything else, but if something bad is going to happen, it will occur when one is not at home.

Dogs know when the Master or Mistress is home, and also when not home. The dogs act much different in each scenario.
One can take all precautions. One can check all equiptment and hardware. There is still no guarantee.
 Certain dogs, think, plot and scheme.  They wait until the Master is gone to act out on their intentions.  May sound crazy, but it's true.

I am prisoner to my dogs. I never leave the house. If any accident happens, I am right here to rectify the situation.  It is the only way to guarantee the dogs will be safe.
 





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top