YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community - View Single Post - [News] Woman Strangles Rottweiler After It Attacks Her Yorkie

SoCalyorkiLvr · 06-10-2005, 10:54 AM

I was going to just leave it at what I said and "agree to disagree" but you asked to hear my response and I respect that.

I apologize for my comment about someone playing a joke. I just find some of the things you said so incredible that I was having a real hard time "wrapping my head around them" so to speak.

I think we are closer in our beliefs than we think. I hate broad generalizations too and I changed the breed of dog in my analogy three times before posting it with "pit bull". I almost used "lab". I used the "slang shortened pit bull" because that is what the general public knows them as. I have known some very nice American Pit Bull Terriers in my life, but they have killed more children than any other breed of dog in America if I am not mistaken.

I agree that a hero is someone who has "risked his or her life" in a feat of courage. This describes a person who defends someone else from an attack.

I agree that the "legal" definition of "murder" is the act of one human killing another with premeditated malice. This is the definition I gave earlier. A person cannot therefore, legally, ever be guilty of "murdering" a dog.

My analogy never changed, the 15 year old was always stabbing the child so he had to have some object he was using for stabbing, I made the assumption we would all think it was a knife. I added on to the analogy after you said you would pull your child away because I wanted to see if there was a point where you would feel justified in attacking the perpetrator in self defense.

I never said my experience with the boxer was indicative of every dog of that breed. I was merely citing a real life example of something that can happen and does everyday.

I am also opposed to violence if any kind and would never use it unless necessary to defend myself or others. I do not own any guns, I do not spank or hit my children or my animals and I am opposed to war.

I think you were accepting the side of the story where the yorkie owner was really not defending anything and was really not in fear such that she was defending herself or anyone, I was coming from the other side where i believed the woamn was defending herself and her child and her dog and that she had to kill the animal to keep from being severely injured or killed herself.

I think this is where our sides got off differently on the morality issue and I really think we both agree that killing and violence are wrong in most instances.

06-10-2005, 10:54 AM	#29
SoCalyorkiLvr BANNED! Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 8,246	I was going to just leave it at what I said and "agree to disagree" but you asked to hear my response and I respect that. I apologize for my comment about someone playing a joke. I just find some of the things you said so incredible that I was having a real hard time "wrapping my head around them" so to speak. I think we are closer in our beliefs than we think. I hate broad generalizations too and I changed the breed of dog in my analogy three times before posting it with "pit bull". I almost used "lab". I used the "slang shortened pit bull" because that is what the general public knows them as. I have known some very nice American Pit Bull Terriers in my life, but they have killed more children than any other breed of dog in America if I am not mistaken. I agree that a hero is someone who has "risked his or her life" in a feat of courage. This describes a person who defends someone else from an attack. I agree that the "legal" definition of "murder" is the act of one human killing another with premeditated malice. This is the definition I gave earlier. A person cannot therefore, legally, ever be guilty of "murdering" a dog. My analogy never changed, the 15 year old was always stabbing the child so he had to have some object he was using for stabbing, I made the assumption we would all think it was a knife. I added on to the analogy after you said you would pull your child away because I wanted to see if there was a point where you would feel justified in attacking the perpetrator in self defense. I never said my experience with the boxer was indicative of every dog of that breed. I was merely citing a real life example of something that can happen and does everyday. I am also opposed to violence if any kind and would never use it unless necessary to defend myself or others. I do not own any guns, I do not spank or hit my children or my animals and I am opposed to war. I think you were accepting the side of the story where the yorkie owner was really not defending anything and was really not in fear such that she was defending herself or anyone, I was coming from the other side where i believed the woamn was defending herself and her child and her dog and that she had to kill the animal to keep from being severely injured or killed herself. I think this is where our sides got off differently on the morality issue and I really think we both agree that killing and violence are wrong in most instances.