Most people shudder at the thought or sight of a Pit Bull and consider them vicious atrocities, but I will show that Pit Bulls are innocent and really are just misunderstood. I would like to give some facts, dispel some myths, and show the side of the breed that the media chooses not to tell. American Pit Bull Terriers were first introduced during World War I and World War II. The job of the Pit Bull was to deliver messages back and forth across the battlefield. Pit Bulls were first bred to bait bulls and bears as a sport back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but soon became more commonly used as house pets due to their friendliness towards people (Brom, 1987-09, p.14).
The phrase; “bred to kill” and “aggressive killer” are thrown around without hesitation from those that are not familiar with the breed. In the Pit Bull debate, the word "vicious" functions to vindicate the breed and cause a lot of negative reactions from the press and the general public, this aggression is nurtured and not innate. The fact that they are publicly ousted as a particularly fearsome breed doesn’t allow people to form their own opinions and forces them to feel afraid of them. Fear is a feeling of apprehension and a response that is both physiological and psychological, to the perception of danger or harm (Petersen 1996). When we hear of horror stories in the media our minds are made up for us without having an informed argument from both sides of the Pit Bull debate.
Media coverage of the murder trial of Nancy Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman was massive; the label “Trial of the Century” was slammed on newspapers and magazines to boost sales. This trial weaved its way so deeply into pop culture and received overly extensive media coverage because O.J. Simpson was famous. Does that make this act of violence any more inhumane? Does the publicity affect the results, and does that make the unexpected results more outrageous?
By having America pay the debt off as a whole, Hamilton thought that it would bring the people and the government together. But Hamilton wanted to use ways that were so impartial to society. Many people were inclined to adore Jefferson because of Hamilton’s malicious deed. Besides this fact, the people were truly being neglected by the power of the government. The government, just like the wealthy and rich, was so power hungry that they disregarded the people’s kind acts and defaced them as if they were animals.
When lion tries to kill his prey he doesn’t care what the other animal would feel. He just kills the prey roughly, just so that he can prove his kinghood. Important Quote • “the Lord of the Flies hung on his stick” – This quote is said by Simon. He is able to see things and have sense that the other boys are not capable of. In this case, he sees fear, violence, death in other words, himself, and all other human beings captured in the grinning face of the
Luckily, you and I are hunters.” This quote shows that Rainsford thinks that violence is perfectly fine when hunting animals and Zaroff would agree with the quote as well. Why do you think Rainsford chooses to confront Zaroff at the end, instead of ambush him? 7a: I think he does this to rub it in to Zaroff because Zaroff was so sure that he would win the game because he wins every game he faces. Also Rainsford wanted to show how terrible it is for humans to be killed and do it himself to show Zaroff that evil always comes back to haunt you. 8.How do time and place affect the actions of the
In fact, Ender thought that he has defeated the adults by defeating the bugger fleet on the simulator, when in reality it is the adults who won with their deception. Ender is so confused and fooled by this that he believes “It was his victory, not theirs, and a hollow one at that, a cheat” (340). With his losses against the adults, Ender shows that it is necessary to understand the enemy when one fights whether physically or
Caesar's own personality was a key role to his own death making him as guilty as everyone else. If Caesar was a caring ruler he might have survived his assassination but unfortunately he was the stereotypical leader and only cared for the good of himself. Even though the empire was stopped before Caesar could rule it, the republic did not last much longer anyway. Caesar's death was not much of an effect on Rome but nonetheless it was Caesars fault. Caesar was arrogant, hubris and full of pride.
Whenever he described an enemy he made them appear as though they were war mad barbarians out to destroy the fragile balance of Roman power in Gaul. This played on the common belief that most Romans had that everybody in Gaul was bloodthirsty and willing to kill whenever. Most of the times, with the use of hindsight, we can see that Caesar had ulterior motives. However, at the time it seemed like whatever he did was only to protect Rome. Along with depicting Gauls and Germans as bloodthirsty barbarians, he also used his own soldiers to stir emotions in his readers.
Many received notifications from Europeans countries requesting that they become a part of their nation [doc 2]. Some of those who surrendered to the “White people” and went back to their homes were grossly mistreated. They fought back when possible, but were easily defeated by the modern weapons of the Europeans [doc 4]. However, this was not always true, the Ethiopians made it their goal to acquire weapons on par with the foreigners to better hold off their onslaught. They went to war with Italy and, surprisingly enough, defeated them and remained a free people [doc 5].