You seem to be the one that is having trouble understanding.
Was your uncle a police officer? A member of the military? No, he fucking wasn't. I understand the usage of a guard dog, as I've had one myself (220 lb Old English Mastiff). Like I said before, him having a trained attack dog to protect himself against TEENAGERS that he gets paid to have in his fucking home is just as ridiculous as bragging about him having guns to protect himself against them.
What is so hard to understand about that? I know you are reading my words because you can repeat them, but I want you to try to comprehend them.
'
I understand what you're typing. But it's complete nonsense. It's stupid as shit, and you're saying I'm "bragging" and he "sicked it on teenagers" (your words, not mine). He was in social services and was a guard at Juvenile detention before doing the 'home' work. He got injured on the job (by one of those poor innocent teenagers). He worked with dogs before.
I said his name was cool, nothing more. It wasn't a "brag" that you seemed to be turning into and he didn't "sick it on teenagers" like your first idiotic statement. I know you can read, you just choose to have a magic little conversation in your head of shit I didn't say.
And please, emphasize TEENAGERS some more. Because we all know 16-19 year olds aren't capable of hurting people. The majority of the house was male and 16-19, very few 20 and I don't think he had older than that or younger than 15, honestly, I don't remember too much about it as it was 20+ years ago.
I'm not saying trained attack dogs are for EVERY situation. But for the particular situation my uncle was in, it worked. An example was asked for, I gave one.
Extremely limited chance of the dog turning on him. The dog was also therapeutic for the people at the house. No weapons were in the home, which was good because some of the 'kids' were violent crime offenders.
I can't honestly fathom somebody wanting a weapon like a gun, mace, knife, tazer in that situation.
I realize that. But tell me this: why not pepper spray? Or a taser? If the dog can kill/maim as easily as a gun, then what does that tell you?
Pretty ridiculous, IMO. It's OK to protect yourself by having your dog maul the kids... as long as you don't shoot them! lol
P.S. I also say this because I had a guard dog that not only was so huge as to scare off most threats, but because the breed specifically was trained to catch and sit on intruders/threats until the owner arrived. Not maul them. That to me is acceptable, but having a dog trained to attack (and he even said "it was trained using pads" which means it was trained to bite) and do permanent damage when used in a halfway home/group home... ridiculous.
Let's expand on this. Just like a gun, this dog could kill (like any dog) but just like a gun, a responsible owner doesn't utilize the weapon. In the 11 years he had done this (he was a step-uncle, mom no longer married to his brother) he had never had to use the dog. He didn't want to. But in the situation he was in, he needed to have a dog that COULD protect him if the most dire situations arose. These aren't grenades, they aren't ticking time bombs. Responsible owners can and will treat their dogs that are specially trained with respect and not "brag" or "sick them on kids".
You don't think that police dog coming into your 8 year old's school to let them pet him and have the cop talk about law enforcement isn't trained to attack? The "pads" are used to protect the trainers, it doesn't mean they are trained to "viciously maul". You keep replacing words with the most extreme form.
"His dog was trained and had a kill word" translates to "he sicked his vicious dog on tweens and he mauled them to death until they died of dying".
Your rhetoric is extremist and pretty idiotic as my explanation of the question asked in the beginning was pretty cut and dry. You decided in your little magic-land to create this narrative of the Nothing from the Neverending Story being released into a schoolyard of playful 9 year olds.
