i heard that and im not sure if i believe it can our government even do that?
2007-08-09 06:15:07 · 14 answers · asked by hi 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
why would you wont to kill inocent dogs its the trainers that teach them how to attack like that not the dogs!!!!
2007-08-09 06:24:40 · update #1
2007-08-09 06:20:09 · answer #1 · answered by davidmi711 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
For crying out loud.
How strange that people support wiping out a breed of animals in a city because of hyped but extremely rare incidents, yet they do nothing to stop the dreaded swimming pool.
"About 1,500 children drown each year in the United States."
"Thirty-seven percent of children who drowned were between one and four years old"
"Toddlers between the ages of one and four years were most likely to drown in artificial pools (56 percent)"
Let's see...
37% of 1,500 = 555
56% of 555 = 310.8
310.8 children between the ages of 1 and 4 died because of swimming pools in 1995.
Meanwhile, "During 1995-1996, at least 25 persons died as the result of dog attacks (11 in 1995 and 14 in 1996)."
11 People in 1995, not just 1 to 4 year olds, but overall.
Hmm. Sounds like a lot of panic over a relatively small number of fatalities while the terrible, evil swimming pool goes unmentioned.
What a heap of garbage. Just the type of illogical panic legislation that sacrifices liberty on behalf of the news-panicked, gullible people among us.
Think it through folks. Heck, more kids probably died in buckets and bathtubs than as a result of dog attacks. Are we ready to send the FBI in to seize unauthorized buckets?
2007-08-09 07:21:14 · answer #2 · answered by the_defiant_kulak 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
have you ever regarded on the info carefully, I remember examining that maximum persons of democrats in S.Carolina have been Black, so a strategies as i be conscious of maximum persons in non city aspects of the south are republicans now with the aid of fact the dems are liberal, subsequently I assume that various the white voters will make believe they're dems and vote for Obama interior the regularly occurring so as that the dems gets a candidate it relatively is unelectable. (they'll vote 4 the republican in november). possibly they have been conversing relating to the 9out of 10 white authentic democrats who will vote for community son John Edwards.
2016-11-11 20:50:17 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes our Government can do that.If the bill passes the House and Senate and president Bush sign it it is a law.But this would be a law for all states. To pass such a bill in SC the state would have to pass that law.
I think all bit bulls should be banned. Human life is more important.
2007-08-09 06:23:01 · answer #4 · answered by ♥ Mel 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
that would be up to the state Governor, not the President, although I understand some people do not understand the difference between the two. So if you heard that from anyone, you may wish to consider the source.
2007-08-09 06:21:57 · answer #5 · answered by julvrug 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, Federal law applies to all 50 states.
2007-08-09 06:19:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yeah! Right!
I'll bet this is right up there on the top of his agenda. Bush doesn't give a damn about the people what makes you think he's worried about some idiot ball player and his pit-bulls.
2007-08-09 06:21:56 · answer #7 · answered by From Yours Trully 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
That would be up to the individual states.
2007-08-09 06:28:21 · answer #8 · answered by TedEx 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I hope so also these dogs are usually owned by men who are unsure of there sexuality and need to portray a macho image.
2007-08-09 06:19:48 · answer #9 · answered by region50 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Of what value to society are pitbulls?
Get a beagle instead!
2007-08-09 06:36:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋