Only one of these is half pit bull. Can you spot it?

ccrunner609;1204494 wrote:Glad you understand. Listen, MOST people of a higher socio-economic class dont engage in purchasing dogs like pits. If you are going to argue this then you need to be more observant in your travels through life.

you're a fucking idiot.

ccrunner609;1204463 wrote:No the ability over the past 20 years to know that I have NEVER seen a pitbull in a yard or with a person from a nice community or anywhere close.....but as soon as you drive in the hood you see them.


I have ran 20,000+ miles iin my life all over the place. I havent seen one in any of the country club neighborhoods around where I live but see them in town all the time.

You're a fucking idiot.

ccrunner609;1204518 wrote:But I am right.

But you're not.

ccrunner609;1204494 wrote:Glad you understand. Listen, MOST people of a higher socio-economic class dont engage in purchasing dogs like pits. If you are going to argue this then you need to be more observant in your travels through life.

My travels through life, albeit shorter than your own, have noted plenty of well-to-do people owning full or half pit breeds for their temperment around children and their loyalty to owners. I'm not suggesting that there aren't well-to-do people who stay away from them (if intentional, I'd wager it's from an irrational fear, but we all have those about something or other) any more than I'm suggesting that lower class people own them for some ridiculous status symbol, but given the number of REGISTERED pit bulls in the United States, and given the probability that a lot of the latter group doesn't register them with nearly as high a frequency, it would appear that a pit bull is hardly the least-owned dog among middle- to upper-class people/families.

I make the knot and I own a pit. She is my baby and a good bodyguard when travels take me away from my home and family.

ccrunner609;1204544 wrote:I am not talking about middle class. I am talking about Upper class. People with real money. Very low ownership rate of pitbulls in the country club neighborhoods.

You're an idiot.

ccrunner609;1204557 wrote:So you dont think I am right? Do you think there are more pitbulls in your local country club community then labs?

You're an idiot.

/LJ

ccrunner609;1204557 wrote:So you dont think I am right? Do you think there are more pitbulls in your local country club community then labs?

I think there are more than your horrible estimates. And more than Labs? I dunno, probably close. Labs aren't really a showcase country club house type of dog.

ccrunner609;1204463 wrote:

I have ran 20,000+ miles iin my life all over the place.

Run Forrest Run

like_that;1204559 wrote:You're an idiot.

/LJ

Thanks for answering for me. You are just so on today!

ccrunner609;1204544 wrote:I am not talking about middle class. I am talking about Upper class. People with real money. Very low ownership rate of pitbulls in the country club neighborhoods.

Do you even know any upper class people? My neighbor owns a pit and a husky he is a UPS Executive.

rmolin73;1204578 wrote:Do you even know any upper class people?

He's ran past a few of their homes and didn't see any.

What trash this woman must be.



This woman as well.



This guy must be poor and stupid.

BR1986FB;1204584 wrote:He's ran past a few of their homes and didn't see any.

That's most likely because a lot of country clubs don't allow any fencing. You won't see very many full sized dogs

ccrunner609;1204544 wrote:I am not talking about middle class. I am talking about Upper class. People with real money. Very low ownership rate of pitbulls in the country club neighborhoods.

What about families with little kids? Is that why you're roaming these hoods?

ccrunner609;1204544 wrote:I am not talking about middle class. I am talking about Upper class. People with real money. Very low ownership rate of pitbulls in the country club neighborhoods.

I'm well-acquainted with at least six seven-figure earners who own full- or half-breed pits. They're actually becoming rather popular among high earners because of the sympathetic element of adopting dogs brutalized by irresponsible owners. What breed do you think is more brutalized than pits (probably resultant from the borderline superstitious nature of the beliefs about them held by many)?

rmolin73;1204588 wrote:

What trash this woman must be.



This woman as well.



This guy must be poor and stupid.

Much as I'd love to agree with you, this is as much cherry-picking as his anecdote about who he sees when he runs through upscale and/or gated communities.

Raw Dawgin' it;1204613 wrote:What about families with little kids? Is that why you're roaming these hoods?

#ETB'd

O-Trap;1204426 wrote:1. You just showed a complete lack of speciation. They aren't "basically wolves." They have genetic similarities, due to the close species relationship, but they're not "basically wolves," you dunce.

2. You also just suggested that ALL dogs are genius killers that will hunt the weak.

3. ANYONE intending to kill goes after the weak.

They are basically wolves, dunce.
‘
The domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris),[2][3] is a subspecies of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), a member of the Canidae family of the mammilian order Carnivora. “
“
Domestic dogs inherited complex behaviors from their wolf ancestors, which would have been pack hunters with complex body language.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog
That is part of pack behavior to seek out the weak.

This is all that I can figure:

Apparently this guy got caught letting a pitbull such his dickk. While obviously embarrasing, Isatard had no other choice but to blame the pitbull for rabidly slurping his cock.

This has manefested itself into a belief that all pit bulls are inherently evil. Perhaps even Muslim.


All because one day he accidently "spilled" some penut butter on his penis.

Gosh afuckin ruddies, this is sad

isadore;1204680 wrote:The domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris),[2][3] is a subspecies of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), a member of the Canidae family of the mammilian order Carnivora. “

Same source:

"The present lineage of dogs was domesticated from gray wolves about 15,000 years ago."

Also says that mDNA testing suggests a split between dogs and wolves around 100,000 years ago.

They were wolves at one time, maybe, but no, they're not "basically wolves," dunce.

isadore;1204680 wrote:“

isadore;1204680 wrote:Domestic dogs inherited complex behaviors from their wolf ancestors, which would have been pack hunters with complex body language.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog
That is part of pack behavior to seek out the weak.

You're apparently not reading your own article. That section goes on to say immediately after that that the traits passed by wolves ... "These sophisticated forms of social cognition and communication may account for their trainability, playfulness, and ability to fit into human households and social situations, and these attributes have given dogs a relationship with humans that has enabled them to become one of the most successful species on the planet today."

They share characteristics because of a common lineage, but the attributes from wolves that are attested to being shared have zero to do with separating the weak. That was your own addition, and it's incorrect, as rooting out the weak is seen in nature today among other animals, but for the purpose of killing prey to be eaten. Not for blood sport.

You sound like an old man who lies to his kids so that he doesn't have to admit he doesn't know what he's talking about. Please go back to science class and don't come back until you're allowed to remove the cone from your head.

If you can't handle a pitbull, you might be an idiot.

Thanks for nothing whoever merged my thread.

O-Trap;1204710 wrote:Same source:

"The present lineage of dogs was domesticated from gray wolves about 15,000 years ago."

Also says that mDNA testing suggests a split between dogs and wolves around 100,000 years ago.

They were wolves at one time, maybe, but no, they're not "basically wolves," dunce.



You're apparently not reading your own article. That section goes on to say immediately after that that the traits passed by wolves ... "These sophisticated forms of social cognition and communication may account for their trainability, playfulness, and ability to fit into human households and social situations, and these attributes have given dogs a relationship with humans that has enabled them to become one of the most successful species on the planet today."

They share characteristics because of a common lineage, but the attributes from wolves that are attested to being shared have zero to do with separating the weak. That was your own addition, and it's incorrect, as rooting out the weak is seen in nature today among other animals, but for the purpose of killing prey to be eaten. Not for blood sport.

You sound like an old man who lies to his kids so that he doesn't have to admit he doesn't know what he's talking about. Please go back to science class and don't come back until you're allowed to remove the cone from your head.

Gosh a ruddies, if dogs are a subspecies of grey wolves, then they are part of the wolf species.
They are wolves. They have the characteristic of pack animals. Pack hunters search out the weak to kill. The characteristics to be a successful killer were in particular bred into the pit bull as can be seen by its success in killing weak humans.

isadore;1204388 wrote:and Pit Bulls are instinctual killers who seek out the weakest prey for the kill.

I can't help but laugh. Such trash.

isadore;1204748 wrote:Gosh a ruddies, if dogs are a subspecies of grey wolves, then they are part of the wolf species.

Read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_Wolf#Subspecies

"Since 2005, 37 subspecies of wolf are recognised, including the red wolf and not including two Canis lupus subspecies: Canis lupus dingo and Canis lupus familiaris."

Domestic breed dogs are Canis lupus familiaris. Hence, they are NOT wolves, as the classification wolf is a number of subspecies within the Canis lupus species that does NOT include Canis lupus familiaris.

isadore;1204748 wrote:They are wolves.

Nope. Just a close relative.

isadore;1204748 wrote:They have the characteristic of pack animals.

They have SOME remnant characteristics of pack animals, yes.

isadore;1204748 wrote:Pack hunters search out the weak to kill.

Not unless hunting food. It helps with success rate.

isadore;1204748 wrote:The characteristics to be a successful killer were in particular bred into the pit bull as can be seen by its success in killing weak humans.

And the completely fabricated conclusion, stemming from your unquestioned paranoia. I'm sorry you're so paranoid. Hopefully, you can one day trust knowledge, facts, and logic like so many in the rest of the population.