Quote:
Originally Posted by justjoined
The way you see it, BJJ/MMA is some newfangled terminology that I invented.
|
For the mouth breathers: I understand the history and concept of mixed martial arts and Brazilian jujitsu. I was sarcastically mocking you for suggesting that it is some obscure cure-all. It's good for people, not so much for animals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justjoined
The way you see it, anyone who disagrees with you must own a Tapout and/or Affliction shirt.
|
The Tapout/Affliction comment was in response to your statement that “[mixed martial arts and/or Brazilian jujitsu] is THE MOST EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUE”. My comment has obviously struck a nerve. As you did not answer the question, I will then assume that you do own at least one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justjoined
The way you see it, a pitbull that got blindsided by a freakin' 9 year old has no relevance to ANY discussion in this thread.
|
You are correct; the way I see it, a 9 year old blindsiding a dog is not in any way relevant to the discussion. Soon after the OP, SF came in and decided to bestow his august father’s wisdom on the rest of us. The topic of the thread, then, became effective ways to defend YOURSELF against an attacking dog. You suggested that the RNC is the MOST EFFECTIVE technique and provided intentionally misleading citations to support your claim. Your citations were misleading because they did not involve people defending themselves against an attack. Rather, they centered on people blindsiding dogs that were attacking others. As an example, allow me to provide a pose a similar question and then apply your answer:
Q: What’s an effective way to defend yourself in a bar fight?
A: Wait until two guys are fighting and sneaking up on one while he is focused on the other and choking him out.
The answer supplied in this example is just as irrelevant as the ones you provided. Being attacked is not the same as blindsiding someone/something that is attacking another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justjoined
The way you see it, I indirectly called you out on a personal level. I mean, can you be more self-centered if you tried?
|
When the Dunedan said that he would take my advice based upon my professional experience, you replied that he would be ignorant to do so. You did call me out. Now that I am here, you appear to be more than a little butt hurt that I would have the audacity to point out the irrelevancy of your comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justjoined
I wasn't even thinking about you until you responded, now I'm just bewildered by the effort you put into your multi-quote replies.
|
I used the multi-quotes because you had a lot of silly things to say that I felt needed to be addressed individually.
That's the way I see it.
---------- Post added at 01:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:32 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
I do not need to work in a kennels, nor do I need to be to lecture on the acquisitin of cognitive intelligence, to KNOW that humans are bigger and more intelligent than dogs.
|
Much bigger, in some cases. Still, morbid obesity and intelligence aren't going to be as helpful as you seem to think. But then, thats just my professional opinion. I'm sure a quick search on Google will turn up a contrary opinion.