- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 



October 15th, 2004, 11:50 AM
Hi guys..its gotten quiet about the whole demo..I think right now, we need to organize it more than ever. The law is still not passed..we still have a chance..and there is no way that we should be giving up...please contact your MPs I urge you strongly..and let us decide when we would like to have this demonstration at queens park...we need to let everyone know that we are not accepting this decision that was made by Bryant..NO WAY!

October 15th, 2004, 11:53 AM
Any MOBSTER"S on this forum?? :eek:

October 15th, 2004, 02:54 PM
I agree, we need to start moving now. Could we please come to a landing on a date and time.

October 15th, 2004, 03:41 PM
We can wait for permission to be given for the demonstration permit. If we do that we will be legal, etc. But person applying for it should have insurance, in case something goes Wrong. (and they way it looking now, something could go wrong. people are totally PO'd about this!)
Or we can just show up, & take our chances with getting arrested, if somebody else decides we are a Problem. And that's Another Good reason Not to bring dogs! If at this point they end up at Toronto Animal Services, who is to say if you will ever get them out of there alive?!

And, Oct 31 works for me, but..I have to get permission, if we want to go that route, & who says we can get Q.P. on Oct 31st? For all I know there might be a Hallowe'en party going on there????

So, folks -any ideas???
(Oh yes, i did speak to a PB Rescue, & Bryant is dodging any meetings with Both of the major PB rescues. Pit Crew & Barlees Angels :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

October 15th, 2004, 03:56 PM
I found this on the net. Check out the paragraph with the ***. (The majority who wrote/emailed M.B. did support BSL (at that point in time). But it was NOT overwhwelming support, as his aid says in print & he says on the air.
Another report described the 1st meeting wth Kit/Wat officials, victims etc as 'hastily assembled'. So not all the media are in line with his tactics.
See Below, either Keith Lesie of Cdn. Press has it wrong, or M.B. is wrong.
Ont. attorney general says pit bull problem more urgent than first imagined

TORONTO (CP) - The problem of pit bull attacks in Ontario is more widespread and "more urgent than we imagined in the first place," Attorney General Michael Bryant said Thursday as he vowed action to protect the public from the dogs.

Bryant met with victims of pit bull attacks, police, dog owners and trainers in a hastily arranged gathering to help him prepare legislation to deal with the dogs he once said "amounted to an assault weapon on four legs."

"It's a classic question of nature versus nurture," Bryant said after the hour-long consultation at a legislature committee room. "Is it the dog owner or is it the pit bull?"

He said publicity surrounding an attack in Toronto last month, when police shot and killed two pit bulls after the dogs seriously injured a 25-year-old man, prompted "many, many, many" others to come forward.

"We're learning about the many unreported pit bull incidents," Bryant said. "The government is very concerned about this (and) is going to take action."

********A recent spate of attacks by the powerful, squat dogs has sparked widespread debate across Ontario. Bryant said his office has received more than 4,000 e-mails on the subject in recent weeks, with the majority - but not an overwhelming one - in favour of banning pit bulls.
{***So why has has he & his office been using the word, "overwhelming"!?} :confused:

"There's no doubt that there's got to be some level of restriction in terms of activity (and) mobility," he said. "The question is to ban or not to ban, and we're just not quite ready to make that judgment at this time."

Bryant invited officials from Kitchener, Ont., and Winnipeg to the meeting because both cities reported a dramatic reduction in attacks after they banned pit bulls, but he also asked experts and people who had written him on the issue to attend.

"We don't believe an outright ban on any breed is an appropriate method of initiating appropriate safety measures within a community," said Sonny Allinson of the National Companion Animal Coalition.

Allinson believes better education for dog owners would be more appropriate, a sentiment echoed by Cathie Cino of the Cat and Jack Safety Program, which teaches children how to avoid being attacked by animals.

"Removing one breed from our society is not going to stop the handlers who are commonly in charge of these animals from going to another breed," Cino said. "And there are many more dangerous breeds out there that they can take a hold of and destroy the same as they have with the pit bull terrier."

One man who witnessed a pit bull attack said in an e-mail to Bryant that the animals should be banned.

"The people that own these dogs don't appear to be motivated to changing how they are," wrote George Gooderham. "They should not be allowed. These animals are dangerous."

Bryant agreed that more must be done to ensure that dog owners are responsible for the actions of their pets, but added: "This is about the dog, it isn't about the dog owners."

He acknowledged that identifying which dogs should be classified as pit bulls can be a problem, but said he liked Kitchener's approach of putting the onus on the owner to prove their dog is not a pit bull.

"We heard arguments from people who believe in alternatives and are against a ban, and we heard from people who very much believe it's time for a pit bull ban in Ontario," Bryant said.

"I'm increasingly concerned about pit bulls, but the issue of whether or not we are going to ban pit bulls is undetermined."

The Canadian Press, 2004_________________

October 15th, 2004, 07:38 PM
I dunno you guys..I have a problem with'll be a very dry day..nobody is going to be around..and NOBODY is going to be at work in parliament..we need the politicians to be be peeping out of the windows of the building And SEE us..

I definately urge a a Friday?

But we definately need to move fast...convincing the MPs is our last resort...I vote for a Friday instead of a Sunday..I truely believe more people will be present and affected that way...

With that being said..I'm waiting on your guys' final decision...but we really need to make this happen..and SOON

October 16th, 2004, 11:31 AM
It seems like Bryant is just dodging anyone that doesn't agree with him..did you guys see him on TV?


DEAR LORD! :mad:

October 16th, 2004, 02:07 PM
If you want to organize this, go ahead. I've just looked at what's involved, & heck ..Permit, insurance-a million buck + for 2 1/2 hours, seating, loud speakersystem, to mention a few things. I'm coming in from N.W. of Hamilton to do it (van needed!) And so far, only Spurby has offered any help at all! That included organizations & people who are in an official capacity, better off financially tham we are, & stand to lose a lot more than a dog. ($$$$$$$$$$)

I've got a Mom who will be 90 on Monday & not doing that great.., a kid in high school that has to be picked up from a school @ 3 p.m., an hour away, round trip! And a senior citizen husband who isn't well at all. (Can't lift heavy stuff, heart, back, & respiratory problems. And I'm not gonna kill him for this.)

You Go Pitbulliest! Cuz I've looked at what it's gonna cost me, & could potentially cost me if there's a Problem down there.. :sick: I'm done with it!!
(We are living on old age pension.)

October 16th, 2004, 04:24 PM
I could go if you meet on thursday afternoon or friday morning.

Agreed that a weekday WOULD be more effective, but people need to work, non?

October 16th, 2004, 10:09 PM
I already replied to the message in the other I said, I had no idea this would involve so much? I've been to demos before..but it was mostly a whole lotta people with signs, informative pamphlets and some speakers...

Whats with the permit, chairs, equipment? ...I can see the speakers being necessary to allow people to hear..but I mean..I'm just confused... :confused:

Are you mad at me? I'm sorry...:(

October 16th, 2004, 10:32 PM
being necessary. After 2 Really nasty riots with Civil Service strike demo. (Police involved, law suits, counter suits, people arrested etc) & Anti- Poverty activists demo. which involved a similar riot, + arrests, property damage, & a police horse being blinded.)

Insurance implies that A) Person applying for the permit assumes responsibilty for any damage done by protesters, or anybody else in the immediate vacinity at the time & B) People who decide to protest had better have lot of insurance, or lots of crowd control, or lots of $$$$$. And.. Gangs do own Pittys.)

Then mix in 911, (which probably is a B.S. reason :p ).

These things gave then Premier Harris, at the time all the ammo he needed to limit public protest. ( :rolleyes: And I haven't seen anybody after Harris decide to change it back??? 'Probably never will.)

October 16th, 2004, 10:35 PM
Wow..this is very new to me..

Is there any way we can skip all of this..and do would you say.. "illegally?" Without the permit or insurance? Kind of like, everyone goes on their own sort of deal..we all show up, organize someone to speak, and hand out pamphlets for about two hours?

I've seen it done..which is why I'm having such a hard time believing so much is involved in a demo...I mean..I don't see how this could become a riot..we're all civilized responsible dog owners are we not?

Well, thank you for informing me at least..I don't know what to do now...blah..this sucks..I didn't even know money was involved