Staff Dogs and Muzzles

System

liam8282 wrote: »

You haven't proven anything, merely quoted sentences of a paragraph, from a website selling insurance.

Which then goes on to sell you insurance for a SBT. Thus proving insurance isn't an issue.

For every insurance company you name that will not insure a SBT, I guarantee I will name 5 that will. So far you have named 0.

What exactly have proved?

All I have stated was my friend couldn't get insurance for her business if she allowed Staffies in. You responded by the very intelligent argument of "RUBBISH".

I have proved that some insurance companies do discriminate against Staffies. That is all I wanted to prove. As a side I have also proved that some countries have restrictions against Staffies (although not many have banned them like I originally stated)

Obviously another poster provided evidence of one that does insure Staffies so next time I will see my friend I will mention this too her. I am sure she will be very pleased to discover this. It will allow her business to grow and make more money.

I don't really understand why you are still arguing when my points have been proved?

Is you Staffie forcing you to carry on arguing? Is he growling at you while you are writing these posts? Do you need help? Shall I phone the RSPCA to come and save you? I am getting concerned now.....

gregg1

liam8282 wrote: »

You haven't proven anything, merely quoted sentences of a paragraph, from a website selling insurance.

Which then goes on to sell you insurance for a SBT. Thus proving insurance isn't an issue.

For every insurance company you name that will not insure a SBT, I guarantee I will name 5 that will. So far you have named 0.

What exactly have proved?

This is ridiculous. Give it a rest.

liam8282

goater78 wrote: »

All I have stated was my friend couldn't get insurance for her business if she allowed Staffies in. You responded by the very intelligent argument of "RUBBISH".

I have proved that some insurance companies do discriminate against Staffies. That is all I wanted to prove. As a side I have also proved that some countries have restrictions against Staffies (although not many have banned them like I originally stated)

Obviously another poster provided evidence of one that does insure Staffies so next time I will see my friend I will mention this too her. I am sure she will be very pleased to discover this. It will allow her business to grow and make more money.

I don't really understand why you are still arguing when my points have been proved?

Is you Staffie forcing you to carry on arguing? Is he growling at you while you are writing these posts? Do you need help? Shall I phone the RSPCA to come and save you? I am getting concerned now.....

Your argument has changed several times along the way because you been proven wrong so many times.

Finally when you have actually done a bit of research, you have formed a new argument and new opinion that fits with the facts.

Yet mine has been constant and I am glad to have enlightened you on this subject.

System

Ironically all the information I have learnt has come from fosterdog. I have actually learnt quite a bit about Staffies after this thread. On the other hand I don't think you've posted any facts or information at all? You've just argued for the sake of it.

Please don't mention the dangerous dogs list again as everyone already knew that!

gregg1

liam8282 wrote: »

Your argument has changed several times along the way because you been proven wrong so many times.

Finally when you have actually done a bit of research, you have formed a new argument and new opinion that fits with the facts.

Yet mine has been constant and I am glad to have enlightened you on this subject.

Goater has done what you have been banging on about and proved his (and my) point. Now lets drop it.

Hermione_Granger

goater78 wrote: »

Another quote from the link

"Pet insurance for Staffordshire Bull Terriers seems to be a tricky proposition"

If it was shown on a website then it must be true.

Elvis Presley is not dead.
http://www.webspawner.com/users/elviselvis/

As it turns out, there are many concrete reasons to believe that the King is still alive.

The World trade centre was brought down by bombs.

http://newsone.com/742485/the-11-most-compelling-911-conspiracy-theories/

The World Trade Center collapse
appeared similar to a controlled demolition. Many speculate that the towers were in fact blown down with explosives placed in selected locations

And my favourite:
Dinosaurs played marbles.

http://weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/51316/dinosaurs-played-with-marbles/

Led by Dr. Ashy Larry, the team found conclusive evidence that dinosaurs played with marbles. ”Many people think that dinosaurs were all business, just stomping around eating everything they could find, but really, they were much more playful animals,” said Dr. Larry. ”They had a love for games of chance, just like humans. They played marbles and we can tell from the dig, that they enjoyed it

liam8282

gregg1 wrote: »

Goater has done what you have been banging on about and proved his (and my) point. Now lets drop it.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy

System

Hermione_Granger wrote: »

If it was shown on a website then it must be true.

Elvis Presley is not dead.
http://www.webspawner.com/users/elviselvis/


The World trade centre was brought down by bombs.

http://newsone.com/742485/the-11-most-compelling-911-conspiracy-theories/


And my favourite:
Dinosaurs played marbles.

http://weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/51316/dinosaurs-played-with-marbles/

Yes I accept the web is never the most reliable of sources. However at the end of the day on an internet forum there is no other evidence that can be provided

I would argue the sites you have chosen are "fun" sites or conspiracy sites while the link I had was actually for a site that sells insurance. However its a moot point!

liam8282

goater78 wrote: »

the link I had was actually for a site that sells insurance.

Insurance for SBT, ironic.

supermum38

liam8282 wrote: »

The dog being a "staff" is irrelevant.

Any dog can suddenly attack, if you want a certain breed muzzling, all breeds should be muzzled.

As always, it is not the dog, but the owner at fault.

ALL dogs should be on a lead in public places, at ALL times. Also dog owners should be able to control their dogs.

I agree. The OP should look up the Dangerous dogs act and will see that there are certain breeds banned from this country because they are bred to be aggressive and Staffordshire Bull Terriers are not on that list!

As for the consequences of Police involvement, the dog is unlikely to be destroyed (as it did not cause a death) but the owner might be asked to muzzle it in future as a condition to keep the dog.

I think the OP should muzzle their dog from now on as they are worried their dog might become aggressive as a result of the attack...and guess what it's not a Staffy. If not they might find themselves on the other side of this argument.

POINT: ALL dogs are potentially dangerous NOT just Staffies. ALL owners are responsible for their dogs and responsible owners WILL muzzle their dog if there is a risk.

MY ADVICE: Take you much-loved dog to a puppy training class so it knows how to behave around other dogs and when walking your dog stay clear of dogs off leads.

P.S. I AM A STAFFY OWNER!