Anybody see the pitbull bash in the gazette?

[Cygnet]

Sorry, Prin, but when people ask for "statistics," one is likely going to have to cite to sources outside this board.

[wdawson]

your right most of us are human and do screw up..........see what happened in montreal this past week........do we ban all goths........we already have a gun registry.......and that really helped........ban assault weapons....single shot weapons are much easier to control ban all smith & wesson guns and allow all others , cause smith & wesson where the gun of choice of 80% of all incidents. ban all ford suv's they tend to roll over the most......your logic seems way out in left field to me.....in my opinion.
if you can back up your credentials as to your expertice on all topics you involve yourself in that would be great.......i notice that you never post in any thread that has a posative theme.

[Prin]

Originally Posted by Cygnet

Sorry, Prin, but when people ask for "statistics," one is likely going to have to cite to sources outside this board.

Yeah, but that wasn't the case about that website. I would just rather this stay on topic and not become a discussion about how other pitbull boards say this and that. (And forums are not great for references by the way)

[K9Friend]

This is probably one of the most interesting threads I've seen in a while.

[Prin]

I don't know how you can say that- it's turning into a thread I saw last week.

[Cygnet]

Originally Posted by BMDLuver

I'll address this first then wade through the rest.

Define screwup?

Is it the husky who has spent his last two years living next door to a bichon and had playdates with it, who then picks it up while everyone is sitting around having drinks and devours it before it can be saved? Is that a screwup?

Is it the Bouvier des Flandes who lived with cats for 5 years then one day decided to shred the two cats to death while the owner was at work?

Is it the Great Pyrenese who decides after having the same dogsitter for two years to attack and scar the dogsitter for life?

Is it the Golden Retriever who bit the toddlers nose off after having lived with children for 5 years through all ages?

All known dogs, all considered well adjusted dogs, not rescues,from topnotch breeders not fight breeders. None screwups IMHO.

I actually agree with (what I think is) your point, BMDlover. Some people claim that dogs NEVER are dangerously aggressive without giving plenty of warning first. The notion is that the owner is either lying about the dog's previous signs of aggression or was completely oblivious to signs that any reasonable person would have seen. I don't think that this is true. I think (as your examples show) that for some dogs the first sign of a serious temperament problem is a serious, dangerous (and sometimes deadly) attack.

In the vast majority of cases, however, I do think that dogs don't kill other dogs without letting their owners know that they are capable of, and intending to do it, however.

[wdawson]

no kidding prin

[pitgrrl]

Originally Posted by Cygnet

I don't "find the idea of chasing a squirrel up a tree distasteful." I find the notion that I might find myself living next door to one of the ten percent of pit bulls (according to this poll of RESPONSIBLE pit bull owners http://www.pitbulltalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=3833 )whose dogs want to "kill every other dog on sight" slightly worrisomel, though. Wouldn't you? It doesn't make me feel better for you to tell me to "just get another breed" since I am not worried about the dog I get. I am worried about the dog my neighbor gets and its capacity and desire to kill my dogs.

I realize that (in most cases) it takes a screwup for a dog to kill another dog. But most of us are human and we DO screwup. And if you doubt that lots and lots of pit bull owners are at least as apt to screw up as other dog owners, take a trip to death row of the nearest urban shelter and you will see all the living (at least until their time is up) evidence of pit bull owner irresponsibility.

I love high drive dogs. (I have one). But I don't agree with the notion that aggression=drive. Some of the highest drive dogs I know are field bred labradors. They love to work, they don't quit and they are TOTALLY non aggressive toward man or beast. I know plenty of aggressive, sometimes dangerous, low drive dogs (many akitas and chows fit that description) as well.

I'm in no way equating dog aggression with drive or vice versa, but I am catagorizing them similarily in so much as they are management issues. If you think you might screw up, put things in place as back up. It's not like dog aggression means your dog turns into the Hulk and can rip through cement and metal to get at another dog, it just means you need to deal with your dog accordingly.

Frankly, I'm not worried about my neighbour's dogs, I worry about my neighbours, and people in general's, ability to take on responsibility. I don't see how dog aggression is resoponsible for all the pitbulls rotting away in shelters, to me it's clear that that fact rest on the shoulders of humans who failed to step up and deal with their dogs.

To get back on topic here, I think that letter to the Gazette is just a manifestation of alot of what we're debating here. It posits pitbulls as these unpredictable beasts of super canine strengh who want nothing more than to kill. The real issue, to me, is a clearly irresponsible owner who allowed their dog to be in a position where a totally natural and expected drive would cause harm. It seems like the most predictable, and therefore manageable, thing in the world that a dog would chase and kill a cat if given the opportunity, so the warning by the author should not be about a dangerous dog, but rather about a dangerously irresponsible owner.

[wdawson]

i still want to see total proof it was a pit.....and not a similar looking dog

[jawert1]

Originally Posted by Cygnet

Sorry, Prin, but when people ask for "statistics," one is likely going to have to cite to sources outside this board.

And that includes you Cygnet, you are not exempt from having facts and numbers to back up your claims of "expertise". You've done nothing but bait and antagonize with bad information for awhile now, jumping in where you deem it necessary to pick a fight.

Originally Posted by Cygnet

Well, we absolutely know that lots and lots of pit bull breeders breed for dog aggression, don't we?

and that equals just HOW many individuals? HOW MANY in the overall population in Ontario? HOW MANY in the overall population in CANADA? HOW MANY in the population of the Eastern Hemisphere?

Do tell Cygnet, live up to what you just claimed everyone else has to do in order to pass your standards.

[BMDLuver]

Relating to this original topic... there was also something in the news and chronicle last week about a pit that wandered on to the next door neighbours lawn.. I'll try to find the article as she wants the breed banned in Pointe Claire and there's going to be a town council discussion about it. You can bet there will be many there to make sure a ban does not take place. PB of the SPCA really helped the cause as well with his ridiculous comment.

Prohibit pit bulls, resident pleads
No ban: McMurchie
BY WENDY SMITH

The Chronicle

A woman who witnessed her neighbours’ pit bull allegedly roaming without a leash wants that breed banned in Pointe Claire.

“I’m just trying to be proactive here,” said Dee Davidson. “I don’t need the money I would win from a lawsuit after the fact when my grandson’s face is ripped open.”

According to Davidson, the neighbour told her the dog had bit someone six months ago but not to worry because he wouldn’t do it again.

“I thought, perhaps I could speak with the psychiatric veterinarian who gave you that analysis. Or maybe he put his paw on a Bible,” Davidson quipped.

Diane Caron, the owner of the one-year-old pit bull, Ringo, said not only are the allegations completely false, Davidson also never spoke to them about her concerns.

“He never bit anybody,” said Caron, who took over ownership of Ringo in July, after her husband’s daughter became too busy to take care of him. “He never hurt anyone. He’s like a baby. He comes and cuddles with us; he puts his head against my heart as if he’s listening to the beat of my heart. He’s more like a cat than a dog.”

Caron confessed she’s not much of a dog lover but has never had any problems with Ringo. Neither have her own children, who looked after him while she and her husband were away on vacation. She pointed to a “general misunderstanding” that feeds people’s fear of the breed.

While the executive director of Montreal’s Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals admits that even he’s not particularly fond of pit bulls, Pierre Barnoti maintains that “saying because they scare me, every pit bull is an aggressive dog, would be nonsense.” He’d rather see legislation prohibiting the breeding and training of killer dogs.

“Not all dogs are aggressive, but they can become aggressive if you show them how. And the real crime is when a human makes an aggressive animal out of a dog,” he said.

“What amazes me is that today you can call a company and rent an aggressive dog — whether it’s a pit bull, a German shepherd, a Doberman, whatever — and put it into your lumber yard or your car lot, when alarms and security are so developed that you don’t need a dog to be a killer.”

Ringo is always on a leash when Caron takes him out for walks, doesn’t bark at people and stays close, she said. “He’s not the kind of dog who would wander off.”

Davidson isn’t so sure. “Children are unpredictable; they squeal,” she said. “When you look at all the factors, it’s a bit like Russian roulette.”

After approaching Pointe Claire city council with her concerns at its Aug. 18 meeting, Davidson is compiling a list of municipalities on the island of Montreal that prohibit aggressive dogs.

Mayor Bill McMurchie said council would go through the process of determining whether to legislate a ban once she presents that list.

“I don’t know what the decision of council will be,” he said, “but I can tell you the last time we did that exercise, we didn’t ban dogs by breed. It’s evident, even to politicians, that there is more than one breed of dog which can be

aggressive.”

A ban wouldn’t work, and it would lead to a slippery slope, Barnoti cautioned. “Eventually we’re going to forbid Chihuahuas. We’ll remain with the fleas and no dog.”

But, Davidson maintains, pit bulls are dangerous enough to warrant a ban. “I realize a lot of people have pit bulls that are probably wonderful dogs, and they may get a bad rep by association, but statistics don’t lie. If it were a collie, I probably never would have called.”

[Cygnet]

Originally Posted by jawert1

And that includes you Cygnet, you are not exempt from having facts and numbers to back up your claims of "expertise". You've done nothing but bait and antagonize with bad information for awhile now, jumping in where you deem it necessary to pick a fight.



and that equals just HOW many individuals? HOW MANY in the overall population in Ontario? HOW MANY in the overall population in CANADA? HOW MANY in the population of the Eastern Hemisphere?

Do tell Cygnet, live up to what you just claimed everyone else has to do in order to pass your standards.

Uh, you misunderstood, jawart. I was being criticized for backing up what I said with an independent source. In the quote you posted, I was just responding to that criticism by pointing out that one really has to cite to independent sources when one is asked for "statistics."

As to how many dog fighters there are in Toronto, or Canada, or in the "eastern hemisphere," (huh?) I don't know. I know it is a big problem and lots of dogs are dying. Here is one shelter's statistics: http://www.hudsonreporter.com/site/n...d=523586&rfi=6

Note that 65% of the dogs they get in are pit bulls or pit bull mixes, and 60% of those are deemed aggressive. 20% showed physical signs of fighting or neglect. How can any pit bull person read figures like this and not be horrified? I'm not even a pit bull person, and they horrify me.

As to whether I am trying "to pick a fight," it is pretty much my experience that if anybody tries to talk to pit bull people about changing anything (except of course, that the media has to change and start only reporting GOOD pit bull stories) , they immediately react with defensiveness and self-pity and calls for censorship. Given the horrible state of pit bull suffering out there and the breed bans being proposed and passed in increasing numbers of places, you'd think that they would be open to discussing ANY ideas. (require spay/neuter for non-show pit bulls? Why not? Change the breed standard to make dog aggression a disqualification? Good idea). Or at least they would want to politely discuss why they think it isn't a good idea. After all, I LIKE pit bulls and don't want to see them banned everywhere. If they can't deal with me without getting defensive and calling for censorship, how are they going to deal with people who, frankly, don't have any use for pit bulls?

[seeker]

Originally Posted by Prin

I don't know how you can say that- it's turning into a thread I saw last week.

Yeah, the one that got closed and I see this one heading in the same direction.

[technodoll]

what i STILL don't understand and would love to know is... how did the dog get into the house/appartment in the first place? was the old cat hiding under the couch and the dog pulled it out? was it lying on the floor? how did the dog know there was a cat there? who lets a DOG wander into their home anyways?

[Prin]

And how long was the dog holding the cat in its mouth- I mean the cops aren't too quick about dog things in Montreal... I highly doubt it stayed vicious for a half hour or whatever without calming down.

[pitgrrl]

Originally Posted by technodoll

what i STILL don't understand and would love to know is... how did the dog get into the house/appartment in the first place? was the old cat hiding under the couch and the dog pulled it out? was it lying on the floor? how did the dog know there was a cat there? who lets a DOG wander into their home anyways?

Good questions really, and to add another, is that seriously what passes as a letter to the editor? I don't get why they even printed it?

[Prin]

They print anything in the Gazette these days. It's a few months away from becoming a full out tabloid.

[pitgrrl]

Originally Posted by Prin

They print anything in the Gazette these days. It's a few months away from becoming a full out tabloid.

Aww, I knew there was a reason I didn't read the Gazette. I sent them a letter, but who know's if they'll actually publish it.

Originally Posted by Cygnet

Note that 65% of the dogs they get in are pit bulls or pit bull mixes, and 60% of those are deemed aggressive. 20% showed physical signs of fighting or neglect. How can any pit bull person read figures like this and not be horrified? I'm not even a pit bull person, and they horrify me.

What does it mean to be deemed "aggressive" ? Human aggressive? Dog aggressive? What type of temperment testing are they using? What kind of breed knowledge does the person administering these tests have?

It's truely a sad state of affairs, but still, to my mind, a problem with people, not the dogs.

[Prin]

I'm not even a pit bull person, and they horrify me.

Umm. It makes sense that you are afraid of something you know nothing about. Some people choose to learn as much as they can about the things they fear to try to rationalize it.

WATCH OUT! SCARY HORROR COMING!




NOOOOO!!! NOT MORE HORROR! *SCREAMS**




ENOUGH! I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!


NOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

[technodoll]

i think cygnet meant, the numbers are horrifying, not the dogs

[Prin]

Oh. But still...

[technodoll]

i must say something though. as the owner of a dog-aggressive breed (it's even in the AKC standard...), we did our research before we got the dog and agreed that if our boy ever became what he was supposed to be by genetic predisposition (the stuff that no training can remove, such as prey-drive), then we would be prepared to deal with it and change our lifestyle to accomodate his character.

Dakotah's personality & tolerance towards other dominant male dogs has drastically changed the past few months, to the point where now we can say "darn he's really an akita now" BUT we knew to expect it, every breeder worth their salt would say it's normal. We are extremely careful not to put him or any other dog in confrontational situations, and that means not letting him loose at the dog park unless there are only females present and holding him very close and tight when crossing other male dogs on walks. He's under "lock and key" so to speak. Can an accident ever happen? Of course. Nobody is immune, that's why they are called accidents. That doesn't make us irresponsible owners though.

So we have one dog-aggressive akita (note that it is dominant male-specific aggression, if the male is submissive there is no issue) with a very low prey-drive, and a super friendly "love all dogs" akita with a VERY high prey-drive, who if given the chance would rip a bird, squirrel, rat or cat to pieces. Does that make either of my dogs viscious, or a danger to humans? Absolutely not. It just forces us to be better guardians to make sure society never points a finger at them for being "dogs" and doing what comes naturally to them for their breed & individual personality: one is to fight for Top Dog Status, the other is to Hunt for prey

[Prin]

True. My dogs chase squirrels and cats and that in no way means they are going to go after a kid. They never have, and probably never will. They love kids. One and the other are just not the same.

[K9Friend]

Originally Posted by seeker

Yeah, the one that got closed and I see this one heading in the same direction.

sorry, i must have missed it.

[Cygnet]

Originally Posted by technodoll

i must say something though. as the owner of a dog-aggressive breed (it's even in the AKC standard...), we did our research before we got the dog and agreed that if our boy ever became what he was supposed to be by genetic predisposition (the stuff that no training can remove, such as prey-drive), then we would be prepared to deal with it and change our lifestyle to accomodate his character.

Dakotah's personality & tolerance towards other dominant male dogs has drastically changed the past few months, to the point where now we can say "darn he's really an akita now" BUT we knew to expect it, every breeder worth their salt would say it's normal. We are extremely careful not to put him or any other dog in confrontational situations, and that means not letting him loose at the dog park unless there are only females present and holding him very close and tight when crossing other male dogs on walks. He's under "lock and key" so to speak. Can an accident ever happen? Of course. Nobody is immune, that's why they are called accidents. That doesn't make us irresponsible owners though.

So we have one dog-aggressive akita (note that it is dominant male-specific aggression, if the male is submissive there is no issue) with a very low prey-drive, and a super friendly "love all dogs" akita with a VERY high prey-drive, who if given the chance would rip a bird, squirrel, rat or cat to pieces. Does that make either of my dogs viscious, or a danger to humans? Absolutely not. It just forces us to be better guardians to make sure society never points a finger at them for being "dogs" and doing what comes naturally to them for their breed & individual personality: one is to fight for Top Dog Status, the other is to Hunt for prey

Are you irresponsible for owning a dog aggressive akita? I don't think so. He is what he is and the best you can do about his dangerousness is to manage it as responsibly as you can, which you obviously are. But I think that the akita community is irresponsible for calling for dog aggression in the akita standard. Dog aggression is a totally, 100% negative trait. It contributes absolutely nothing to an akita's ability to do any work an akita might do, including being a companion, and in fact is a huge detriment to that. Is life "under lock and key" the best that Dakotah can have, under the circumstances? Yes. Is it the best he should have? I don't think so.

The trait of dog aggression is a huge reason why so many akitas die in shelters. Wouldn't you rather that Dakoteh could get along with other male dogs? If he progresses (as he very well may) to the point where he can't get along with any other dog and can't go to the dog park at all, is that okay with you? What if his dog aggression progresses (less likely, but possible) to the point where he doesn't get along with your bitch and you have to keep them separated 100% of the time? Dog aggression restricts the lives of dogs who have it. It adds NOTHING to their lives. It is sort of like having a dog with hip dysplasia. You would deal with it if you got one, but (if you are a responsible puppy breeder or puppy buyer), you would do everything in your power to avoid producing or having a dog with it.

Akitas tend to be dog aggressive for exactly the same reason that pit bulls tend to be. That is, they were historically (and, in the case of pit bulls, often still are) bred for dog fighting and since then, breeders have put their own needs over that of the needs of the breed and have continued to breed dogs who were dangerous toward other dogs. It is important to note that in neither breed, is the level of dog aggression something that "comes naturally." It was consciously bred for by human beings. To be fair, I have had akita breeders tell me that responsible akita breeders ignore the standard and breed away from dog aggression. I have also heard the opposite, however. It is certainly accurate to say that temperament is a Big Issue with akitas. Anybody who is paying attention knows that lots and lots of them die because of serious temperament issues. And sometimes they die after seriously injuring people or other dogs.

[Cygnet]

Originally Posted by pitgrrl

Aww, I knew there was a reason I didn't read the Gazette. I sent them a letter, but who know's if they'll actually publish it.



What does it mean to be deemed "aggressive" ? Human aggressive? Dog aggressive? What type of temperment testing are they using? What kind of breed knowledge does the person administering these tests have?

It's truely a sad state of affairs, but still, to my mind, a problem with people, not the dogs.

Of course the "problem is with people." Nobody would say otherwise. Dogs only breed because people either encourage them to or allow them to. Responsibly owned, responsibly managed dogs don't produced litters of puppies that end up dying in shelters.

So, what, exactly would you propose to do about the "problem with people" that causes 65% of the dogs coming into this shelter to be pit bulls or pit bull mixes, 60% of whom are deemed aggressive? You can ask the pit bull community to try to be more responsible, but hasn't that already been tried? And the folks (described in the article) who are mostly breeding these throwaway pit bulls don't exactly seem to be the kind to listen to calls for responsibility, do they? So, what's next?

[Puppyluv]

Originally Posted by Cygnet

Sorry, Prin, but when people ask for "statistics," one is likely going to have to cite to sources outside this board.

A poll of a couple of dog owners isn't a very reliable "statistic" source. I reccomend that before you make the comments that you are, you find some REAL statistics, with REAL numbers. Don't give people a 'HUH?' to avoid answeing a question. You say you "know" this is a big problem, but how do you know it if you can't provide any sources outside of a random poll on a pet owners website???? You need to back your mouth up with something.

[technodoll]

Are you irresponsible for owning a dog aggressive akita? I don't think so. He is what he is and the best you can do about his dangerousness is to manage it as responsibly as you can, which you obviously are. But I think that the akita community is irresponsible for calling for dog aggression in the akita standard. Dog aggression is a totally, 100% negative trait. It contributes absolutely nothing to an akita's ability to do any work an akita might do, including being a companion, and in fact is a huge detriment to that. Is life "under lock and key" the best that Dakotah can have, under the circumstances? Yes. Is it the best he should have? I don't think so.

the akita community is currently lobbying to get the AKC & CKC breed description changed from "Aggressive toward other dogs" to "Dominant toward other dogs". No responsible breeder in their right mind would breed for aggression, in fact I don't know of ANY who encourage this in the slightest, on the contrary. Most breeders Temperament Test their dogs. Akita breeders are very protective of their breed and nobody wants them on any BSL lists, trust me! Of course you always have the moron BYBs who don't give a crap about anything and breed whichever animal in their hands to make $... until we have laws in place that put these people in jail, we just have to deal with it.

The trait of dog aggression is a huge reason why so many akitas die in shelters. Wouldn't you rather that Dakoteh could get along with other male dogs? If he progresses (as he very well may) to the point where he can't get along with any other dog and can't go to the dog park at all, is that okay with you? What if his dog aggression progresses (less likely, but possible) to the point where he doesn't get along with your bitch and you have to keep them separated 100% of the time? Dog aggression restricts the lives of dogs who have it. It adds NOTHING to their lives. It is sort of like having a dog with hip dysplasia. You would deal with it if you got one, but (if you are a responsible puppy breeder or puppy buyer), you would do everything in your power to avoid producing or having a dog with it.

How do you know how many akitas die in shelters, and the reason they DO? are you an akita expert also? I would challenge you to back that up with proven numbers... The North American akita community I am involved in rescues and places hundreds of dogs each year and I can tell you, VERY FEW cannot be placed because of temperament issues. Some dogs, like in any other breed, do not tolerate other dogs or cats so they need to be the only dog in the family, but it's a fact of Canine life, not breed-specific in any way. And to suggest that Dakotah would get aggressive towards my girl down the road is absolutely ludicrous - you have no idea of dog pack behavior rules, do you? Did you also know that both my akitas form a "Pack" with my dogsitter's intact male pitbull, that they all eat in the same bowl at the same time, they all drink from the same water dish at the same time, they share treats and toys and cookies from each other's mouths and have NEVER EVER had a squabble? If you understood canine behavior, you would see that this is normal. However, enter a NEW dog in the house and all THREE dogs are on alert: who are you, and where will you try to be on the pack's totem pole?

Akitas tend to be dog aggressive for exactly the same reason that pit bulls tend to be. That is, they were historically (and, in the case of pit bulls, often still are) bred for dog fighting and since then, breeders have put their own needs over that of the needs of the breed and have continued to breed dogs who were dangerous toward other dogs. It is important to note that in neither breed, is the level of dog aggression something that "comes naturally." It was consciously bred for by human beings. To be fair, I have had akita breeders tell me that responsible akita breeders ignore the standard and breed away from dog aggression. I have also heard the opposite, however. It is certainly accurate to say that temperament is a Big Issue with akitas. Anybody who is paying attention knows that lots and lots of them die because of serious temperament issues. And sometimes they die after seriously injuring people or other dogs.

so we now have both an akita and a pitbull expert on our board. i suppose you own both breeds too, and can see in their daily lives how things really are? you belong to both akita and pitbull communities and have been actively involved in the breed, and rescue, and training, and pet therapy, etc for many years? hmmm? bah, why waste more keyboard time on this... those who know me & my dogs know what i meant in my original post. for the rest who spew fictional nonsense.... :troll: !!!

[pitgrrl]

Originally Posted by Cygnet

Of course the "problem is with people." Nobody would say otherwise. Dogs only breed because people either encourage them to or allow them to. Responsibly owned, responsibly managed dogs don't produced litters of puppies that end up dying in shelters.

So, what, exactly would you propose to do about the "problem with people" that causes 65% of the dogs coming into this shelter to be pit bulls or pit bull mixes, 60% of whom are deemed aggressive? You can ask the pit bull community to try to be more responsible, but hasn't that already been tried? And the folks (described in the article) who are mostly breeding these throwaway pit bulls don't exactly seem to be the kind to listen to calls for responsibility, do they? So, what's next?

Again, what does it mean to be deemed "aggressive"? The types of temperment tests used in many shelters would fail a dog for showing high prey drive or dog aggression. To me, neither of these traits should be labled as generic aggression. If a dog is highly fearful, shows signs of human aggression, etc. than by all means, give the dog a great day, some love, and then do the responsible thing and cull. But, if the dog is simply displaying traits that are typical of the breed, and is a good stable dog that could flourish in the hands of a responsible owners, why deem the dog unadoptable?

Frankly, I think you are underestimating the amount of work people do with in the pitbull communitee. Unfortunatley, there is a huge problem of BYB and a mentality of animals being disposable, but don't think for a minute people don't dedicate their lives to trying to clean up that mess. Are you aware of the various rescues, educational programs, training programs, cheap or free spay/neuter initiatives etc?
Perhaps if the plight of pitbulls is weighing so heavy on you, you could look into getting involved or starting up similar programs in your area, rather than sitting back and critizing the breed and it's communities.

[babyrocky1]

Cygnet what is your motivation here? I really dont get it, I have to work and dont have time to go through all of your posts point by point AGAIN!

Let me tell you straight up that I dont know much at ALL about "pure bred dogs"

Heres what Ill give you...I dont see why breeders of dog aggressive DOGS cant breed away from dog aggression, ofcourse I dont see it as a positive trait but from what little I do know about breed standards is that all breeds are bred as close to their origins as possible. It seems to me that all though the physical characteristics would be maintained and especially with "pitties" the temperment with children and adults would be maintained, that dog agression in any breed would be seen as a negative. However, if thats possible, then your fight is with the dog breeders, AKC, CKC etc. Why come here and constantly attack us whom you not so lovingly describe as "pit bull people" when it should be obvious to any idiot that none of us breed our dogs not do we advocate it...( our dogs are all spayed and nuetered and would have been or were before the law)

Any one of us on this board would be devastated should our dogs ever hurt another living thing! Including a squirrel or a rabit.

We have proposed very positive alternative legislation and amendemts to deal with the legitmate concerns of public safety regarding dogs.
You may not glean this out of r ecent posts because that was all done two years ago when this whole thing started.

Since then we have been fighting politically, legally, and either spending alot of time actually dealing with the enormous amount of rescue work,or supporting the people who do, socializing our existing dogs, getting dogs out to more "friendly" provinces as well as trying to keep the spirits of one another high to get through this thing.

So once again, I will ask you why you continue to post all of this negativity about our alleged "
"pitties"...Is your fight not with the breed clubs...ask them these questions.
Again...I know nothing about breeding dogs so if someone can clarify the goings on of breed standards and possible answer Cygnets question about breeding away from dog aggression I would be most grateful cause I dont see any other legitimate points..and Im not sure this is either. (there is still the argument of nature and nurture)

This part of the board has been functioning very well as a place where positive ideas to help our dogs have become reality and I would hate to see it change to a place where we end up spending all of our time defending ourselves YET AGAIN !

Cygnet, please read Hansard...that is where all the testimony is on all of this and you will see what we are up against and what positive suggestions the passionate and the educated "pit bull People" gave to the committee who was stacked against us from the start.

Can some one please post the link to Hansard...?
Or Cygnet you can search them here if you are so inclined.
I made sure to attend and most everyone else has read the whole four days of it so I was surprised and saddened to see that there are a few folks on the board who think that we are simply against the ban and have no solutions...we have too many for me to go into again.
Another thing you might like to do is research the "Dangerous dog laws in Calgary!
Calgarys laws were held up during the hearings as an example of good Public Safety as well as animal safety during the hearings. Its all here on the site!
We also have a petition asking for proper laws and suggesting it to be named Courtneys Law in honour of a young Ontario girl who was killed by a dog that was NOT a Pit bull and whoes mother testified AGAINST BSL at the committee hearings and tearfully wondered why the 33 reccomendations of an Ontario coroners inquest were all but ignored!