Aughhhhhhhh

Aughhhhhhhhh

Aughhhhhh

Well if that was the case I don't think anybody would disagree there are bad dogs.

Aughhhhhh, aughhhhhhh

I'm sorry but what's logical about a dog killing a dog having the same outcome as a man killing a man, a dogs morales are different from those of a man, if you would punish a dog for killing a dog the same way you'd punish a human for killing a man, not only your logic but your morale is flawed, also like if my morale was actually flawed and you actually were presenting good arguments, I'd agree but you have not typed out a single sentence based on facts, just random stuff that'd come to mind, you call my logic flawed yet you can't say why, because I don't think the same way you do? Who's logic is really flawed here

I have never heard of a dog attacking a human to assert dominance we are of a different species, unless it sees us as part of its pack or family, it won't try to assert dominance, your logic in my opinion is mostly based on assumptions which is why you jump to belittling me and trying to gaslight me whenever you don't have an appropriate response, get off your high horse

What? No I'm not I'm quite neutral towards dogs, but I have a different logic than yours which doesn't mean it's flawed, logic is based on knowledge and so far you haven't really enlightened me about anything you just say your logic is flawed.

Also my logic isn't flawed you just think of your own logic as complete and flawless, therefore you can't accept anything I say and repeat the same sentences by changing the locations of the words and sentences. This is pointless.

Because they are literally sick, rabies causes dogs to be anxious, fearful and constantly agitated, those don't sound like fun feelings to me. Yes to the dog the need is there, you step into it's domaine, you're the attacker, but the dog doesn't understand how society works so how would it know it has to buy the land it calls it's territory, I can't say the same because serial killers make a choice to kill, there is usually nothing wrong with them, if they were rabid like dogs they wouldn't be able to clean everything up and be smart about killing, even if they do have a mental problem, the first time they kill is by choice, they may have less control as time passes but the first time, for a SERIAL killer, is a choice.

Because they're dogs and don't find it fun, I don't think you'd exactly be having fun if you were to attack everybody you see because you couldn't control yourself and are constantly feeling anger at everything that moves. They're sick and not by choice unlike serial killers who choose to become what they are, in most cases.

That's true I agree

A serial killer is still a mammal of the same intellect killing for fun and not a mammal of lower intellect defending it's territory, nor a different mammal with rabies that can't control it's agrevation. Need I explain further?

I don't think that's a suitable example, you're comparing a man killing his kind and eating them for fun to an aggrivated dog.

I don't think that's the point, when you adopt for example a pit bull you have responsibility over it and have to raise it so that it doesn't attack others, I know that some breeds are more easily aggrivated.

Yeah, but that's just nature I don't think wild dogs are the same thing as pets nor are the dogs who tear things to shreds "bad"

Yeah but those can't be called bad dogs, bad to humans? Sure, does that make them bad dogs? No, I mean we are considered bad by dogs when we enter their teritory but are we bad people? No. In conclusion I don't think this debate will ever go anywhere, goodbye

So if somebody does research on a controversial matter and doesn't reach the exact same conclusion as you did they just haven't done any and are completely ignorant. Got it.