Go Back   Pet forum for dogs cats and humans - Pets.ca > Discussion Groups - mainly cats and dogs > Breed characteristics and traits > Breed bans - BSL - Pit Bull bans

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old January 21st, 2007, 09:34 PM
DiNKy's Avatar
DiNKy DiNKy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jesse's mommy View Post
You are the one who threadjacked the sticky.
sorry, i didnt mean to do that. i had read a few short threads before i posted mine. they were just peoples storys about there pits. so i added mine
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old January 24th, 2007, 01:11 PM
Odieandmaggiesd Odieandmaggiesd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: rockland
Posts: 37
There's other reason's a dog can turn...like health..I had a boser who was about 10 years old, I had to put him down...his hind legs were bad and he couldn't go up stairs or up on the couch anymore...and it came to a point where he just got tired of it...He attacked a few people, luckily I caught him before he could do any harm to anyone...Putting him down was the hardestthing Iever did...the last thing he ever did was give me a kiss...(I like to think he was thanking me) he never even got to bring his big juicy tongue back in....(wipes a tear)....

The problem I have here is that you said..pitbulls are known to turn...but they aren't...in fact they are known for their rock-solid temperment...in your case I'm guesing the dog was about 1 year and a half old or so...and was most likely tryint to re-assert her position in the familly pack...I went through this twice, once with Odie and once with Maggie...through vigilant leadership and a close eye, they have found their places and I trust them 100% around anyone and everyone....

as for the headlines...it's pretty bad when if the attack comes form a "non-bully" breed that the headline will read a dog attacked so and so...but if a pit-bull attacked a burglar while defending his 85 year old mum...it's a "PIT-BULL ATTACK"....not dog saves owner....
__________________
Staffies-the king of breeds-a work horse-a cuddly licking machine-found in the top ten breeds for kids by the southhampton U-so comitted to their people they are willing to do anything to please them...the only breed for me
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old March 9th, 2007, 10:25 AM
Bucketz Bucketz is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Scarborough
Posts: 18
Some good news!! hope were next!!

MIDDLETOWN CITY COUNCIL

Pit bulls no longer banned from city
Amended ordinance prohibits chaining animals.
Click-2-Listen
By Ed Richter

Staff Writer

Thursday, March 08, 2007

MIDDLETOWN An amended dog ordinance bans chaining animals and beefs up penalties for irresponsible pet owners.

Middletown City Council on Tuesday unanimously approved the amended ordinance that also eliminated breed-specific designation of pit bulls as vicious dogs.

Extras
Latest headlines
Bluffton baseball player dies a week after bus crash that killed 6 others
Fatal bus crash re-enacted
Calls to 911 reveal calm, but surprise at bus wreck reports
Pilot makes emergency landing at Butler County Regional Airport
Votto's homer won't get him to first base
Get latest headlines via RSS feeds
Carol Collier, a resident who spoke in support of the amended ordinance, said she has "Yorkies that are more vicious than pit bulls."

"I believe if you have love for an animal you will not keep it chained," she said. "I believe (dog owners) should be made responsible. Somebody needs to stand up for these animals."

A member of the committee who helped develop the amended ordinance, Leland Gordon, executive director of Animal Friends Humane Society in Trenton, said of pit bulls, "We don't want to judge a book by its cover. If you own a pit bull, please be more responsible."

Gordon also voiced his support for the measure against tethering, saying "it's a terrible life living on a chain."

Last September, several residents questioned the "breed-specific" designation of pit bulls as vicious. Also, an Ohio appellate court declared Toledo's breed-specific law unconstitutional, according to a staff report from city Law Director Les Landen.

A committee was formed consisting of Vice Mayor Anthony "Tony" Marconi, Councilwoman Laura Williams, Animal Control Officer Liz Lucas, Kim Sterling, a former dog warden, Matthew Heller, a local veterinarian, Gordon and Landen, who worked several months to restructure the city's ordinances regarding dogs.

The ordinance was amended to include:

Increasing the penalties for repeat offenders allowing their dogs to run at large and including spay and neutering for the dogs for repeat offenders.

Eliminating the breed-specific designation of pit bulls as vicious dogs.

A definition of dangerous dogs to include an unprovoked attack and injury of another dog.

Adding provisions to the code to limit and regulate outdoor tethering of dogs.

Eliminating prohibitions of owning pit bulls in the city.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old March 9th, 2007, 02:45 PM
Prin Prin is offline
Senior member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 28,492
Woo! Good luck!
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old March 9th, 2007, 10:11 PM
therufflife therufflife is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vernon, BC
Posts: 3
Wink Hello!

Hello everyone! I am new here! My Name is Monique & this thread has deeply touched me! I used to have a Red Nose Pit. To this day he was the best dog I have EVER worked with. I am a dog trainer, and work with tons of breeds....none have which have compared so far.
My view on this topic is: Bans are only going to stop the people who give Pits (any breed for that matter) a "good" name. The people who for years have only had these dogs as tough, fighting, & mean dogs...and give them a bad name....will always have them. No matter if there is a ban or not.
The problem out there is the LACK OF EDUCATION! for owners, and observers. Here is a great site, most people who acuse "Pit Bulls" of being the aggressor cant pick them out in this line up...can you?
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
This is a great website to send out to all your dog loving friends, see if you can pick out the right dog.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old March 9th, 2007, 10:43 PM
babyrocky1's Avatar
babyrocky1 babyrocky1 is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,124
Hi there Therufflife, I think we like you already!
__________________
My Ontario Includes Democracy...bye bye Bryant!

Last edited by babyrocky1; March 9th, 2007 at 10:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old March 9th, 2007, 10:46 PM
babyrocky1's Avatar
babyrocky1 babyrocky1 is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucketz View Post
MIDDLETOWN CITY COUNCIL

Pit bulls no longer banned from city
Amended ordinance prohibits chaining animals.
Click-2-Listen
By Ed Richter

Staff Writer

Thursday, March 08, 2007

MIDDLETOWN An amended dog ordinance bans chaining animals and beefs up penalties for irresponsible pet owners.

Middletown City Council on Tuesday unanimously approved the amended ordinance that also eliminated breed-specific designation of pit bulls as vicious dogs.

Extras
Latest headlines
Bluffton baseball player dies a week after bus crash that killed 6 others
Fatal bus crash re-enacted
Calls to 911 reveal calm, but surprise at bus wreck reports
Pilot makes emergency landing at Butler County Regional Airport
Votto's homer won't get him to first base
Get latest headlines via RSS feeds
Carol Collier, a resident who spoke in support of the amended ordinance, said she has "Yorkies that are more vicious than pit bulls."

"I believe if you have love for an animal you will not keep it chained," she said. "I believe (dog owners) should be made responsible. Somebody needs to stand up for these animals."

A member of the committee who helped develop the amended ordinance, Leland Gordon, executive director of Animal Friends Humane Society in Trenton, said of pit bulls, "We don't want to judge a book by its cover. If you own a pit bull, please be more responsible."

Gordon also voiced his support for the measure against tethering, saying "it's a terrible life living on a chain."

Last September, several residents questioned the "breed-specific" designation of pit bulls as vicious. Also, an Ohio appellate court declared Toledo's breed-specific law unconstitutional, according to a staff report from city Law Director Les Landen.

A committee was formed consisting of Vice Mayor Anthony "Tony" Marconi, Councilwoman Laura Williams, Animal Control Officer Liz Lucas, Kim Sterling, a former dog warden, Matthew Heller, a local veterinarian, Gordon and Landen, who worked several months to restructure the city's ordinances regarding dogs.

The ordinance was amended to include:

Increasing the penalties for repeat offenders allowing their dogs to run at large and including spay and neutering for the dogs for repeat offenders.

Eliminating the breed-specific designation of pit bulls as vicious dogs.

A definition of dangerous dogs to include an unprovoked attack and injury of another dog.

Adding provisions to the code to limit and regulate outdoor tethering of dogs.

Eliminating prohibitions of owning pit bulls in the city.
Where the heck is Middleton, Rocky and I are packing hahahhah! No not really well stay here and fight til we WIN laws like that here!
__________________
My Ontario Includes Democracy...bye bye Bryant!
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old March 9th, 2007, 11:39 PM
jesse's mommy's Avatar
jesse's mommy jesse's mommy is offline
Slave to the Wigglebum
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 3,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by babyrocky1 View Post
Where the heck is Middleton, Rocky and I are packing hahahhah! No not really well stay here and fight til we WIN laws like that here!
You're welcome in Florida anytime!
__________________
Stupid People Have Stupid Children, Hence All The Ignorance In The World!
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old March 14th, 2007, 05:30 PM
brooke150558's Avatar
brooke150558 brooke150558 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: washington
Posts: 13
i luv pit bulls!!!

they are so cute. i just dont get why people hate them so much. most of the people ive met that dont like them havent even met one just heard stories. i had a rottweiler (R.I.P. Bear. we all miss you so much you big goof) who was absolutely one of the best dogs in the world and would not hurt a fly. and everyone was scared of him just because of how he looked.

i think it depends on the owner and the conditions a dog is raised in that determines whether a dog is mean or not.

personally its the small dogs you should be more worried about. once when we were walking our rottweiler another couple walked by with a couple of pugs and they attacked him. bear just stood looking at us like nothing was happening while these two beasts were trying eat him lol. dont worry nobody was hurt.

i guess in the end the lesson is dont judge a breed by what it looks like
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old November 4th, 2007, 09:56 AM
daisy may daisy may is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northern Alberta
Posts: 1
Angry

I owned a rotti for 12 years, she has been by far the best kids dog I have had yet. In BC many places have strict regulations. In Kamloops you must have The "vicious" breeds muzzled, tied and caged (in vehicles) whenever in public places. We stopped going there. My rotti is a kind and loving dog and would not understand this kind of treatment. Instead of banning breeds may be the should ban some breeders who are irresponsible. If the puppys show signs of abnormal aggression they should be distroyed then and not used in a breeding program. Responsible owners make good dogs.
A friend of ours breeds border collies and refuses to sell them to just anyone- you must be willing to put the work and time into the breed (they are VERY high energy). If you can't prove that you will be keeping the dog active he won't sell you one. We need more breeders like him.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old November 13th, 2007, 12:17 PM
Dingo Dingo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 222
While I agree that breed-specific bans are problematic, I'm not convinced by those who claim that Pit Bulls aren't aggressive or dangerous.

From Wikipedia:

A study published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association in September, 2000 reports that in the 20 years studied (1979 to 1998) "Pit-bull type dogs" and Rottweilers were involved in one half of approximately 300 dog bite related fatalities in the US [http://www.dogbitelaw.com/breeds-causing-DBRFs.pdf]. Another study of American and Canadian dog bite related fatalities from September 1982 to November 2006 produced similar results, reporting that Pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% fatal dog attacks [http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Atta...20Clifton.pdf]. This study also noted: "Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity to be listed, pit bull terriers are noteworthy for attacking adults almost as frequently as children." and "They are also notorious for attacking seemingly without warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking pit bulls' tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized."

Last edited by Dingo; November 13th, 2007 at 12:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old November 13th, 2007, 12:36 PM
marko's Avatar
marko marko is offline
Administrator - Pet lover
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Montreal Quebec Canada
Posts: 11,277
I think you'll find Dingo that most people on our board subscribe to the idea that bad owners make bad dogs and that there are VERY few bad dogs.

It is my personal experience that pitbulls in general are very friendly with people. I know of quite a few families that have pitbulls and kids and have NO problems.

Is it possible to have a killer pitbull? Yes. It is also possible a human child to become a sociopath, but it happens RARELY. When it does happen though, it makes the news. Same with Pitbulls.

Is it equally possible to have a killer (add your big dog breed of choice here)? Yes.

Generally when you group obedience train dogs, take them to vets when they need them, give them love, food attention, exercise, you get a good dog.
Neglect the above and your chances GREATLY increase that you get a dog with problems regardless of breed.

__________________
Please tactfully EDUCATE or IGNORE posters you don't agree with.
Please PM me & Include URLs and post #'s for any issues and it's my pleasure to help.
I'm firm - but fair. Mind the Rules and enjoy your stay.
Newcomers FAQ - How do I post on this BB?
Pet facebook group
Check out the Pet podcast
Follow me on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old November 13th, 2007, 02:19 PM
Dingo Dingo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 222
I think that last response is a tad disingenuous. I believe that bad owners make bad dogs as well, but I also believe that there are other factors.

In the case of Pit Bulls there are two problems. Pit Bulls and their relatives were created as fighting dogs, so understandably they're often dog aggressive. They're often described as "dominant," "suspicious of strangers," "natural guard dogs" and other euphemisms designed to distract from their general tendency towards aggression. Breeders are partly to blame for not paying enough attention to temperament, or for encouraging this type of "dominance" and "suspicion."

Of course, well cared for, well trained dogs belonging to responsible owners are rarely a problem, but the image of pit bulls as scary and aggressive is unfortunately what draws some irresponsible people to them. Unfortunately, some people choose Pit Bulls (and Preso Canarios, and Rottweilers and similar breeds) precisely because of their scary image.

On the other hand, training can only go so far. Good luck training a Border Collie not to herd or a retriever not to fetch, for example.

My personal experience with Pit Bulls has been different from your own. Several years ago, two Pit Bulls who lived on my street escaped their yard and mauled a young girl, nearly killing her and tearing off most of her face in the process. Last month, a friend's dog was nearly killed, and her husband was attacked, by a Pit Bull belonging to their neighbour that got off its leash. I've also frequently seen Pit Bulls behaving aggressively towards other dogs, including my own, at dog parks and in other public areas.

Of course, everyone's experience will be different. That's why I provided statistics that show that Pit Bull breeds and mixes are disproportionately represented in serious attacks on human children and adults: more than 1100 of 2209 recorded attacks in the US and Canada between 1982 and 2006, according to one study. Compare that to just over 400 for Rottweilers and mixes, fewer than 100 for German Shepards and mixes, 11 for Dobermans, 1 for Poodles.

So while I have problems with vague breed-specific legislation, I also think it's foolish to take a head in the sand approach as well. Perhaps the legislation should be addressing issues like breeding, muzzling, leashing, containing and training requirements for breeds known to be problematic, and for their owners, rather than outright bans. Or maybe they're right, and certain breeds with a documented propensity to human aggression should not be propagated, at least not according to the current standard. Clearly one serious attack by a Poodle over 24 years can be seen as an anomaly; more than 1100 attacks by Pit Bulls in the same period, representing over 50% of recorded attacks, seems more like a trend.

Last edited by Dingo; November 13th, 2007 at 02:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old November 13th, 2007, 03:02 PM
marko's Avatar
marko marko is offline
Administrator - Pet lover
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Montreal Quebec Canada
Posts: 11,277
Everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want.

Your last post talks about dog bites so I assumed you are referring to people.
This post talks about aggression toward other dogs - TOTALLY different story. I think in order to come to logical conclusions about things you need to weigh equal factors. You can't logically compare apples and oranges. Saying you can train border collie not to herd or a terrier not to dig is vastly different than suggesting you can train a pitbull not to be aggressive to humans...because pitbulls were NOT bred to be aggressive toward humans.

Training can only go so far in some cases correct, especially training against what the breed was designed for...but that's not the case here and it's not the general experience of our membership. WHY? Primarily because the vast majority of our members (especially the longtime regulars) ARE those great dog owners that are responsible enough....to be responsible pet owners.

I actually think we are on the same page here Dingo. I think we both agree that responsible owners MAKE good dogs. The best solutions rarely have to do with the breeds but rather the dog owners themselves. That's why breed bans will never work IMO.....because irresponsible owners will just go out and get a breed not on the ban list. Pitbulls are just the breed in the spotlight today.

That will be my contribution to this thread...it's an old thread.

best of luck in your research Dingo.

Marko
__________________
Please tactfully EDUCATE or IGNORE posters you don't agree with.
Please PM me & Include URLs and post #'s for any issues and it's my pleasure to help.
I'm firm - but fair. Mind the Rules and enjoy your stay.
Newcomers FAQ - How do I post on this BB?
Pet facebook group
Check out the Pet podcast
Follow me on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old November 13th, 2007, 03:28 PM
Dingo Dingo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 222
I mentioned aggression towards other dogs, yes, but also against people. The statistics cover attacks on people. They may not be 100% accurate, and probably don't take all questions into account, but it's undeniable that there's something there.

And it should be pointed out that even some good owners have dogs that attack. The Pit Bull that attacked my friend's husband and their dog last month was kept by what to all accounts seems to have been very responsible owners.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old November 13th, 2007, 04:23 PM
Schwinn's Avatar
Schwinn Schwinn is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Georgina
Posts: 2,258
Wikipedia can be a suspect source at best (I know, I use it often). A lot of controversial contain "facts" that are skewed in whatever direction the majority of editors are leaning, which becomes obvious when you look at the debate sections.

I had a set of arguments, but I'll use the sites that you have for reference.

From your first link referencing the JAVMA--

"Conclusions-Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates. (emphasis mine) Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog's bred with certainty, situtional [sic] and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bit injuries to humans and public policy concerning dangerous dogs."

And from this link(http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/danger.htm#statistics), also from the site referenced in you post--

"Unfortunately, however, there are serious gaps in the data on this subject, leaving our assumptions and conclusions open to doubt."

And further down the same page, a court ruling--

"Our review of the record reveals no current statistics since 1996 were presented to support the notion that pit bulls have continued to be involved in a "disproportionate number" of attacks or fatalities. In our view, despite its own factual finding to the contrary, the trial court improperly relied on an outdated, irrelevant, and inadmissible source of factual information to revive the "vicious" pit bull sentiment and justify the finding that the statutes and ordinance are constitutional."

The fact remains that it would be next to impossible to find a true expert who would suggest that pitbulls in and of themselves are vicious, or prone to attack human. As a matter of fact, during the Ontario hearings, not one canine expert testified for the fact that pitbulls are aggressive towards humans. Instead it was a grandstanding city official who ignored the fact that bites INCREASED in his city once pitbulls were banned, a self-proclaimed expert who is actually a dog groomer who never handles pitbulls, and a lot of anecdotal evidence from the general public. Yet those in opposition to the ban included the head of the OSPCA, several veterinarians as well as high up members of kennel clubs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingo
In the case of Pit Bulls there are two problems. Pit Bulls and their relatives were created as fighting dogs, so understandably they're often dog aggressive. They're often described as "dominant," "suspicious of strangers," "natural guard dogs" and other euphemisms designed to distract from their general tendency towards aggression.
Now THAT'S disingenuous. One of the breeds labled "pit bull" (and banned in Ontario) is called the Nanny dog because of thier gentleness with children. As a matter of fact, both the CKC and AKC list breeds referred to as "pit bulls" as "good with children" and go as far as to say "human aggression is rare with this breed, and discouraged in showing".

The other problem? Every dog that "attacks" is called a pitbull. This was evidenced by our illustrious former attorney general when he proclaimed that he was banning pit bulls to protect that poor child in Cambridge. The problem? When the OSPCA seized the dog, they determined it was a mix of several breeds, including whippet, yet had no "pit bull" in it what so ever. Of course, he forgot to mention that. Probably blinded from standing in front of the media lights so much.

We can agree on one thing, though. There is something going on. My argument has always been, why have pit bulls, who've been around for a couple of hundred years, only been a problem since the early '90's? Before that, it was rottweillers, before that doberman's, and before that, german sheppards (like the one who did, literally, rip off a part of my sister's face, and at that time, there was a massive movement to ban them). And lastly, if this breed is such a danger, why are they used as therapy dogs (in Ontario, right up until the ban) and as police dogs in some states? I'm at work, and normally don't post from here, so I don't have time to look up the reference, but it's on here somewhere of one pitbull who was sent out of Ontario to avoid being destroyed, only to become a police dog in Washington State.
__________________
Hagar:"What kind of dog is that?"
Man with dog:"He's a nice dog!"
Hagar:"You know, at the end of the day, that's always the best kind."
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old November 13th, 2007, 06:22 PM
Dingo Dingo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 222
Now who's quoting selectively? Scroll a little further down on that same page, and you'll see a section titled Serial attacks and rampage attacks, which says

Quote:
Through January 20, 2002, the log of life-threatening and fatal attacks showed that pit bulls had committed 592 (45%) of the 1,301 total attacks qualifying for inclusion, including 280 (21%) of the attacks on children, 222 (60%) of the attacks on adults, 51 (34%) of the fatal attacks, and 321 (45%) of the maimings and disfigurements.
The section on "Canine homicides" includes a list of fatal dog attacks going back to 2004, in which Pit Bulls feature disproportionately. The entry for October 2007 includes two deaths, one caused by a "pack of 7 dogs" of unnamed breed, and the other reading

Quote:
On October 3, 2007, Tina Marie Canterbury, 42, of Middleburg, Florida, was mauled to death by the two pit bulls which she had raised from the time they were puppies.
Even allowing for problems with reporting and discerning breed, there is clearly something going on.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old November 13th, 2007, 09:39 PM
Schwinn's Avatar
Schwinn Schwinn is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Georgina
Posts: 2,258
That's hardly quoting selectively. That's a disclaimer on the research they used to reach thier conclusions. That supports the argument that a pitbull is not always a pitbull. Again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwinn View Post

"Conclusions-Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates. (emphasis mine) Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog's bred with certainty, situtional [sic] and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bit injuries to humans and public policy concerning dangerous dogs."
Or is this the "selective" quote?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwinn View Post
(http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/danger.htm#statistics), also from the site referenced in you post--

"Unfortunately, however, there are serious gaps in the data on this subject, leaving our assumptions and conclusions open to doubt."
Again, this is saying that it is leaving doubts to thier own conclusions, which are the same as yours, that pit bulls are inherently dangerous.

I'm not sure what posting two specific examples are for. I could post several examples, including one where a golden retriever literally ate a woman's face in France (the face transplant lady? I may have the breed wrong, but it wasn't a pitbull) and an example of where a pom ripped out a baby's throat. I could also point you to the story of where police just north of me shot a border collie who attacked a woman, and probably would have killed her had someone not intervened.

I could go on and tell you several stories of dogs that have attacked me, or were aggressive to me. I could tell many more stories of pit bulls who were gentle pets, more gentle that any other dog I've ever seen (my own seven year old part pit, who's the fifth dog I have with, and who is in a house with a 2 1/2 year old and a 3 month old, is the most gentle dog I have ever been with, out of different breeds, including a husky, and a couple of lab crosses). I guarantee that I could come up with a lot more stories of pits who have lived long full lives and never hurt anyone than you could come up with about pits who've attacked or mauled. Why? Because the number of pits who are or have been loving family pets disproportionatly outnumber the vicious ones.

Toronto had estimated they had several thousand pit bulls in the city. Yet the number that have attacked was less than 1%. For a dog that's "vicious" and "prone to attack", that's what statisticians would call "statistically insignificant". Does that mean that deaths due to pit bulls or any other breed should be ignored? No, not at all. Quite the opposite. What it means is that attacking people is not a natural tendancy for these animals. It also means that we need to focus our energies on what the real issue is. Otherwise, 10-15 years from now, we'll be back at the same table arguing the same thing, only it will be a different breed that's up for being banned, just as it was for rottweillers 15 years ago, dobermans in the '80's and german shepards before that.
__________________
Hagar:"What kind of dog is that?"
Man with dog:"He's a nice dog!"
Hagar:"You know, at the end of the day, that's always the best kind."
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old November 13th, 2007, 10:34 PM
Saradog Saradog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 141
The dog who mauled the French woman's face was a Lab.

About a year ago, when a "pit bull" puppy supposedly chewed a baby's toes, there was a huge outcry. Then apparently the ferret did it. Then there was some question about the parents.

Recently, a neglectful father allowed a dachschund to maul his baby. Where's the outcry about this? Oooh, nooo, the media decided that the smell of urine in the baby's diaper attracted the dog. Presentation was totally different for the dachschund mauling than for the supposed "pit bull" mauling (which probably wasn't the dog at all).
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old November 14th, 2007, 12:24 AM
Dingo Dingo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 222
Posting the specific examples was intended to demonstrate that Pit Bulls are regularly implicated in attacks on humans. No one's saying that other breeds aren't as well, only that Pit Bulls appear to be disproportionately represented. No one's saying the research or statistics are perfect either, but at the very least anecdotally the evidence seems to be there. When these things keep coming up again and again with a given breed, we have to wonder why.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old November 14th, 2007, 07:25 PM
LavenderRott's Avatar
LavenderRott LavenderRott is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,671
Let me start by saying that my computer is currently not available so I do not have access to the dozens of links to back up everything that I am about to post. As my internet connection on this computer is tentative at best, I do not have the HOURS it would take to find those links AND post. So you will either have to take some of what I am about to say on faith. You could do the research yourself or just think I am a liar - it really is up to you.

First off - according to the American Kennel Club and the Canadian Kennel Club, there is no such thing as a Pit Bull. You will find that in almost every single breed ban there are three breeds listed ("and mixes thereof") - the American Staffordshire Terrier, The Staffordshire Bull Terrier and the Bull Terrier. While there are other registering entities in North America, these two are the most "reputable" and in most circles considered the authorities. So we will base the following facts on this assumption.

Now - since I am a U.S citizen, I spend more time on the AKC website so I will be using the information gathered there in the last 10 minutes to make my point.

Quote:
"Pit-bull type dogs" and Rottweilers were involved in one half of approximately 300 dog bite related fatalities in the US [http://www.dogbitelaw.com/breeds-causing-DBRFs.pdf].
In 2006, AKC registered a total of 4,312 puppies of the breeds mentioned above. If you just use this number to figure out the percentage of "pit bulls" that bite - you will see that the number is 2.06%. That is a remarkably low number and doesn't begin to take into account the number of dogs registered in previous years, dogs registered to other registries, dogs that are not registered or "mixes thereof".

When you look at this - you will see that banning breeds is ridiculous and so is placing severe restrictions on "viscious breeds" such as the ones you mention in a previous post.

Here is a rather novel idea - uphold the laws that were on the books before the breed ban! Every single city that I have ever lived in has had laws on the books pertaining to vetting, leashing, and registering dogs. I think you will find that, almost without exception, dogs that attack and kill people are intact, loose, unregistered dogs.
__________________
Sandi
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old November 15th, 2007, 09:36 PM
ginahunt3 ginahunt3 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bridgeport, CT U.S.A
Posts: 2
My precious pit bulls.

I have owned pit bulls for 14 yrs., I have 2 4 y.o. now (Kaos, a male @ Nairobi, a female) and I cannot stand when people who have never even been near one talk about how vicious they are. Dogs are like children, they know what they are taught. Every child (and some adults) in my neighborhood comes to see them. One of my neighbors had a full grown chihuahua mix & when my male was 3 mos. old he used to play with him all the time and once he was full grown (about 85 lbs.), he still tried to play with him. He didn't realize that with the size difference all the jumping & rolling around would have squashed the poor little thing, but he has never tried to hurt anyone or anything, and my female is the same way. They are both sweet and lovable. People blame the dog but they should place the blame where it belongs with the owner.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old November 15th, 2007, 11:14 PM
ginahunt3 ginahunt3 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bridgeport, CT U.S.A
Posts: 2
Thumbs down A pit bulls love & loyalty

I live in Connecticut & about 2 mos. ago (maybe less), there a horrible accident on the highway, numerous cars and trucks were involved and there was at least 1 fatality. The driver of one of the trucks involved and was hurt and had his pit bull in the cab with him even though the truck was overturned the dog was not hurt. When rescuers tried to take him amay, he would not leave his owners side! Where could you find more love and devotion than this dog showed him?
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old December 2nd, 2007, 03:15 PM
Jodi55 Jodi55 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: FL
Posts: 7
Well as far as I'm concerned I feel the same as almost everyone else. The pit bull takes the bad rap for every breed out there. Yes I do understand some are made aggressive which whoever said when the dog was put down the human who did that to that innocent animal should be also was so right. Or better yet put him in the pit to fight the pit bull. I know that might offend some people but here in Fl. there is a small county called St. Johns and from now on whenever animal control picks one up they will never go up for adoption even if they are not aggressive they will be put down if the owner doesn't come in to claim him/her. You can probably walk into any animal shelter and the majority of those animals are either full pits or mixed with pit. In the area I live this one guy in the next neighbor hood has 2 pits. He has a total of 4 dogs and all those dogs are always chained. There are a few others that do the same with their dogs and it makes me sick. There is a wonderfuld site called dogsdeservebetter.com which relates to a chained dog 24/7 or a caged dog. Why have them??? I guess I'm a bad one to even talk on this subject just because I feel this breed of dog is doomed from the day it's born.

Last edited by Jodi55; December 2nd, 2007 at 03:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old January 18th, 2008, 12:12 PM
PreciousFlower PreciousFlower is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4
I know pitbulls who are very loving, gentle, and loyal, as well as protective. I also know other dog breeds who are the same.

It is the way they are RAISED. That determines the type of dog a dog turns out to be. A dog, just like a child, knows what a sense of fairness is. If you need to 'discispline' a dog, the best way to do this is to REDIRECT them, causing their attention to go to something else. Children tend to be the same way.

Lets face it, having a dog/cat/any pet is just like having a two year old around all the time.

If a pet is treated with love, that is what they learn and know.

Pitbulls have gotten a bad rep because of the cruel humans who train them to fight. And once that cruelty has been forced upon the animal, that is how they react. The animal has no choice in the matter. It's the humans who do this to them that need to be "put down". Unfortunately, once an animal has been trained to be such, they need to be put down. And yet, the humans who do this to them are allowed to continue to live.

Injustice.

I was recently surrounded by three pitbulls and one german shepard. I was walking my 6 month old puppy Flower, whose mother is half golden retriver and half chow, and whose father is half great dane and half saint bernard after I got home from work (11pm). Flower went into full protective mode and chased off all four large dogs who had surrounded us and were circling us both away. Flower and I were not hurt by the dogs, but their intension was clear with their growling and teeth barred. In the process, my shoulder now has a torn rotator cuff, but we both are safe.

Two days later that same dog pack attacked a postman and they have sense been rounded up and beheaded to test for rabies.

I dont understand people who let their dogs roam or dump them on the side of the road.

You might think me radical in my thinking, but if a dog who is owned by human who trains them to be ficious and that dog has to be killed to protect society, then the human who trains them to be as such needs to be killed by injection too. Otherwise, they will continue to train dogs to be cruel. To stop it, the humans responsible for this need to die too.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old January 24th, 2008, 01:06 PM
Marcee2800 Marcee2800 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiNKy View Post
i dont find anything wrong with that quote. pit bulls can turn on their owner for no reason, and i feel that way because of my own personal experience, not because i saw it on the news!
But so can any other dog your statement should have been dogs can turn on their owns not pitbulls can.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old January 24th, 2008, 01:11 PM
Marcee2800 Marcee2800 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiNKy View Post
i DID NOT put my dog to sleep. but i felt it was best to take her to a shelter since the second my back was turned, she would lower her head crouch down and growl. thats not normal for a good dog to do. i even thought that maybe it would pass, but when she started doing the same thing to my daughter who at the time was only 1 1/2 yrs old i realized something was wrong. and i would hope anyone else in this situation would do the same thing instead of being so closeminded to thinking that a dog, if raised a certain way could not possibly turn on its owner, or in my case, harm my child!
and I hope people wouldn't, what people don't understand is that almost every pitbull that goes threw the front door of the shelter will go out the back door in a body bag I hope that people would talk to expierence pitbull owners or an animal behaviorlist or that they would socialize them like crazy as a puppy, and try to get to the root of the problem also get test done and see if it is a health problem and there were medical problems there is so much more that you could have done for that dog. So sorry but I don't agree with you at all.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old January 24th, 2008, 01:44 PM
Marcee2800 Marcee2800 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingo View Post
I think that last response is a tad disingenuous. I believe that bad owners make bad dogs as well, but I also believe that there are other factors.

In the case of Pit Bulls there are two problems. Pit Bulls and their relatives were created as fighting dogs, so understandably they're often dog aggressive. They're often described as "dominant," "suspicious of strangers," "natural guard dogs" and other euphemisms designed to distract from their general tendency towards aggression. Breeders are partly to blame for not paying enough attention to temperament, or for encouraging this type of "dominance" and "suspicion."

Of course, well cared for, well trained dogs belonging to responsible owners are rarely a problem, but the image of pit bulls as scary and aggressive is unfortunately what draws some irresponsible people to them. Unfortunately, some people choose Pit Bulls (and Preso Canarios, and Rottweilers and similar breeds) precisely because of their scary image.

On the other hand, training can only go so far. Good luck training a Border Collie not to herd or a retriever not to fetch, for example.

My personal experience with Pit Bulls has been different from your own. Several years ago, two Pit Bulls who lived on my street escaped their yard and mauled a young girl, nearly killing her and tearing off most of her face in the process. Last month, a friend's dog was nearly killed, and her husband was attacked, by a Pit Bull belonging to their neighbour that got off its leash. I've also frequently seen Pit Bulls behaving aggressively towards other dogs, including my own, at dog parks and in other public areas.

Of course, everyone's experience will be different. That's why I provided statistics that show that Pit Bull breeds and mixes are disproportionately represented in serious attacks on human children and adults: more than 1100 of 2209 recorded attacks in the US and Canada between 1982 and 2006, according to one study. Compare that to just over 400 for Rottweilers and mixes, fewer than 100 for German Shepards and mixes, 11 for Dobermans, 1 for Poodles.

So while I have problems with vague breed-specific legislation, I also think it's foolish to take a head in the sand approach as well. Perhaps the legislation should be addressing issues like breeding, muzzling, leashing, containing and training requirements for breeds known to be problematic, and for their owners, rather than outright bans. Or maybe they're right, and certain breeds with a documented propensity to human aggression should not be propagated, at least not according to the current standard. Clearly one serious attack by a Poodle over 24 years can be seen as an anomaly; more than 1100 attacks by Pit Bulls in the same period, representing over 50% of recorded attacks, seems more like a trend.

If you think that "suspisious of stangers" and "natural guard dog" discribe a pitbull then you just have no clue and should really go meet a responsibly owned Pitbull, they LOVE people the only problem we.ve ever had with all the pitbulls we have rescued was knocking people over cause they were so excited to see them, nobody is a stanger to them and they really aren't good guard dogs. There were breed to be like this so that when they were in the pit and in unbelievable pain that there owner could pick them up and not have them be agressive if they showed agression to people in anyway to judges or spectators they would be shot and not breed. And as far as statistics go here are some for you the AMPT has passed the American Temperment Test at %83 when the average for all other breeds in %77 and they passed over the lab, retiriver and cocker spaniel. and in a 7 year study for dogs most likey to bit out of 100 different breeds they were 4th... FROM THE BOTTOM. and out of all dog bites in the United States they accounted for %1.89 so as far as statistics go they are in the AMPT favor.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old January 24th, 2008, 04:51 PM
mastifflover's Avatar
mastifflover mastifflover is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,007
Marcee you are so right pits have gotten such a bad rap I have only been attacked by their tails or tongues. These dogs are not human aggressive but can be dog aggressive but so can any breed. These dogs are very bright and need a smart owner a passive owner will have a dog that runs circles around them. Besides if bite statistics were real small dogs would probably have the highest incidence of biting. I have never had a large dog or pit get aggressive with me but have been bit by a small dog being held by the owner in a store while paying for my purchase the thing lunged and grabbed my wrist. If that was a pit it would have been pts. Yes there can be bad pits but there can been bad dogs in any breed and that usually happens because of bad breeding byb or mills.
__________________
Robin
A dog has so many friends because they wag their tails not their tongues.
R.I.P. Buddy 2002-2008 The best Mastiff ever.
Now owned by Clark the Crazy American Bulldog
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old January 24th, 2008, 07:03 PM
Marcee2800 Marcee2800 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastifflover View Post
Marcee you are so right pits have gotten such a bad rap I have only been attacked by their tails or tongues. These dogs are not human aggressive but can be dog aggressive but so can any breed. These dogs are very bright and need a smart owner a passive owner will have a dog that runs circles around them. Besides if bite statistics were real small dogs would probably have the highest incidence of biting. I have never had a large dog or pit get aggressive with me but have been bit by a small dog being held by the owner in a store while paying for my purchase the thing lunged and grabbed my wrist. If that was a pit it would have been pts. Yes there can be bad pits but there can been bad dogs in any breed and that usually happens because of bad breeding byb or mills.

Yes thank you I am glad to see how many people know the true AMPT,
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Terms of Use

  • All Bulletin Board Posts are for personal/non-commercial use only.
  • Self-promotion and/or promotion in general is prohibited.
  • Debate is healthy but profane and deliberately rude posts will be deleted.
  • Posters not following the rules will be banned at the Admins' discretion.
  • Read the Full Forum Rules

Forum Details

  • Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
    Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
    vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise (Reduced on this page: MySQL 0%).
  • All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:41 PM.