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
  #1  
Old December 26th, 2004, 04:20 PM
Faceless Faceless is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 162
Brutal article from today's Toronto Sun

This is pure trash journalism, with so many outright lies, it's not even funny. This "reporter" deserves to be blasted (edit: with emails, obviously. Not a shotgun.)

Sunday, December 26, 2004

PIT BULL LAW UNLEASHED: Province bans breed after spate of maulings

By Chris Doucette, Toronto Sun. (email: chris.doucette@tor.sunpub.com)

After countless vicious pit bull attacks, Ontario finally decided to bite back in 2004.

Horrific maulings of children, adults and other dogs, have repeatedly been front-page news over the years. But it was the province’s decision to push for a ban on the controversial breed that made headlines this year.

“Enough is enough,” Attorney General Michael Bryant said shortly before introducing new legislation on Oct. 26 that would stop pit bulls from being bred, sold, imported or possessed in Ontario, as well as cracking down on irresponsible owners of dangerous dogs.

‘EATEN ALIVE’

After hearing of a Toronto man who was “practically eaten alive from the ankles up” by two pit bulls, the minister spent six months considering the matter and concluded the dogs were “ticking time bombs.”

The new laws, which would begin 90 days after the Bill-132 passes, include a grandfathering provision that exempts existing pit bulls but forces them to be spayed or neutered and remain muzzled and leashed in public.

Similar bans have been tremendously successful in other municipalities, such as Kitchener, which made the move in 1997 after 35 attacks on people in the previous two years. Only eight incidents have been reported since.

However, many animal groups and dog owners remain vehemently opposed to Bill-132, calling it harsh and unnecessary.

Pit bull owner Stephanie Ferguson vows she’ll “fight this bill with every breath in my body.”

“(Pit bull owners) are having their rights trampled on,” the veterinarian technician said. “My dog is guilty of being dangerous when she has yet to harm anyone or anything.”

Ferguson claims her dog is “loving” and “sweet” and doesn’t deserve to live life from behind a cage on her face.

Phyllis Young thought the same of her dog Bandit until he turned on her three-year-old grandson, Daniel Collins.

“He was my dog and I considered him a family member,” she said in October after Bandit was sentenced to die.

NO WARNING

The 35-kilo, pit bull-Labrador cross attacked Daniel without warning – as is often the case – in the kitchen of his grandmother’s home. The toddler needed 250 stitches.

Ferguson said Bill-132 does nothing to prevent such attacks. “Experts agree that approximately 70% of dog bites occur in the family home, or at a home the victim is familiar with,” she explained. “Muzzling one breed of dog outside the owner’s home will not prevent these bites.”
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old December 26th, 2004, 04:36 PM
Faceless Faceless is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 162
Besides the obviously biased "reporting" (i.e. wording things in such a way to emotionally inflame those who are not educated about this issue,) there are a couple things right off the top of my head:

1) The reporter claims that Michael Bryant took 6 months to consider the issue. This is B.S. If I remember correctly, the incident in Toronto happened at the end of August, and Bryant announced his ban in October. How is that 6 months of consideration? Not to mention that he didn't consult anyone who actually knew anything about dogs.

2) The reporter claims that similar bans have been "tremendously successful." Please tell this to the victims of all the attacks from other breeds that have occurred in Winnepeg and Kitchener. This is the usual dishonest manipulation of the facts: Sure pit bull attacks went down since there were less pit bulls, but they always fail to mention attacks from other breeds.

3) The reporter claims that Bandit attacked Daniel without warning. Again, B.S. When the Sun originally ran the article, it stated that Daniel tried to hug the dog (who didn't really know him and was clearly uncomfortable with him) and the dog gave him a clear warning growl. Daniel was startled by this, and not understanding this tried to hug the dog again, which led to the attack. The clear perpetrators of this crime were Daniel's guardians who left him to interact with a strange dog unsupervised, and Bandit's owner who happened to be Daniel's grandmother. Of course, they've got off the hook, by completely blaming the animal.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old December 26th, 2004, 05:13 PM
DogueLover's Avatar
DogueLover DogueLover is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 421
So Sad

This is so truly disgusting! I realize that there are people who get "attacked" by dogs on a regular basis.......... but I blame the owners of the dogs, the irresponsible adult or person who invades the dog`s territory, and the media for this ridiculous ban.
People who have dogs who do not like strangers, who have not been raised in homes with children, or know that their dog has certain "triggers" but fail to act on that information are to blame for the attacks,,,,,,,,not the dogs.

Our Angel, who does not like certain people ( often your dog is a better judge of character than any human) is put "away" ( in her own room ) while there are people around that she does not like or people that she does not know. I have friends who are afraid of dogs so when they come over Angel goes to her room. My theory is why put the dog and this person at risk if you can prevent an incident. Even people that she does like are not left alone with her just because you can never be sure what your dog may percieve as aggressive behavior in another human.

The same precautions go with having my daughters` friends over to play. If we know that the children visiting are afraid of her then she goes to her room.( She actually doesn`t consider this punishment....... she is happy to go there she has her toys, her food, and the TV on so she doesn`t really care, most of the time she just sleeps as she is the world`s largest couch potato)
I don`t believe that banning the breed is going to make that much of a difference, the reports of dog attacks will continue, it will just be some other breed. Maybe if people started paying closer attention to their pets and the behavior of the pet this would not happen. It is just so sad how the media feeds the fear and how easily they can sway even the biggest animal lovers to their side of the fight.

I have to add that not all owners are to blame, however, we all know that the animal will lose it`s life should an incident happen, so why not take every precaution to prevent it.
Even when the victim has gone into a fenced yard where the dogs are tied, (clearly the victim is in the wrong) the animal will be destroyed. Wouldn`t it be nice if the "victim" was held as responsible for their actions toward the animal as the animal is for theirs.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old December 26th, 2004, 05:21 PM
Faceless Faceless is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 162
We as dog owners have to be careful though, because we will get accused of "blaming the victim." Your post is right on the money, though.

In this case, I think we all can agree that Daniel was the victim and he is totally not to blame. His guardians and grandmother however, are not just victims, they were the perpetrators of the crime, because they allowed their child to get hurt, when it was clearly avoidable. I don't see a difference between this and child abuse, except that they didn't intend for harm to occur. They were stupid, and their child and the dog paid the price.

They should have been charged with criminal negligence causing harm.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old December 26th, 2004, 07:23 PM
PitPal's Avatar
PitPal PitPal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: GTA, Ontario
Posts: 38
Yes, not to blame the toddler, because he doesn't know anything, but I read somewhere when the story was fresh, that the child used to hurt Bandit. He would poke Bandit's eyes or grab it's ears, to the point that Bandit would run away from him and hide behind the grandmother when the boy entered a room.
I guess the grandmother found it was a lot easier to blanket the dog with blame rather than risk taking any flak for sticking to the whole truth.
That Sun reporter is an idiot - and I guess once he/she saw the Star get away with the 24th story, it was safe to dig in again.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old December 26th, 2004, 07:23 PM
babyrocky1's Avatar
babyrocky1 babyrocky1 is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,126
the article also doesn't mention that the guy who was suppposedly eaten by the two pits was also the breeder of those dogs and that he and the owner were known to police and that the dogs were trained to kill because the two humans apparantly had some serious enemies. Bryant came out with inflamatory remarks about pit bulls that very day. The six months were used strictly to promote his own discusting political career. As far as the young boy goes though I think that because our dogs are generally so friendly its very possible they
really didn't expect the behaviour. which is all the more reason that we need to push for education in place of this discusting proposed stuff that we have going on now. sorry for the rant. Merry Christmas everyone!
__________________
My Ontario Includes Democracy...bye bye Bryant!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old December 26th, 2004, 08:09 PM
Loki Loki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 333
Here is an older(Sept 2004) story from "the successful" city of Winnipeg. Surprise, surprise, SUN reporting at it's finest. They've been trying to do the same thing to rottys in Winnipeg:

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Winnip...04/615139.html

" The attack on the Pomeranian is the latest of several recent incidents in which Rottweilers have become violent in Manitoba this summer.
Two nine-year-olds suffered severe bites in the past three weeks.... "

Maybe I'm biased, but that doesn't seem like a city with "tremendously succesful" dog-legislation.

The media sickens me. The papers in Toronto seem to be desperately trying to keep this issue alive. They know it helped to sell a ton of papers, this year.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old December 27th, 2004, 11:00 PM
Akeeter Akeeter is offline
banned user
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Ancaster, near Hamilton, Ont.
Posts: 381
Exclamation One thing I 'd like to know-Identity of 'Eaten Alive' person-?

The man who was breeder & the person who re-homed the 2 puppies to a friend who as it states here 'nearly ate him'..? The actual identity of this man has never been made public. This is very unusual. Even in the case of a dog attack or any other kind of attack on a child, it is usual for the person's name to be given. I'm still wonder WHY this person's name has never been made public. Is there some reason the public shouldn't know his name?
if anyone is interested, I would ask them to email the Sun & any other media source & ask Why such secrecy is connected with this individual.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old December 28th, 2004, 03:23 AM
twodogsandacat's Avatar
twodogsandacat twodogsandacat is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 1,361
Complain - Formally

Someone should actually log a complaint. Here: http://www.ontpress.com/complain/index.asp

The reporters totally get it wrong over and over. It really makes me question everything else I read.

Also can anyone provide information on the 'trainer' who was watching those two pits when they attacked him, were they trained to be aggressive? I don't want to blame the victim here but has it even been looked at as a possible reason? Did the dogs have autopsies performed on them? Was there human flesh found in their stomachs? If not then the word 'eaten' isn't very accurate is it?

The more these lies get repeated the more people will believe them. Complain - Formally!!!

BabyRocky1: Sorry I paged down right past this but can you provide any source or documentation or such for:
the article also doesn't mention that the guy who was suppposedly eaten by the two pits was also the breeder of those dogs and that he and the owner were known to police and that the dogs were trained to kill because the two humans apparantly had some serious enemies.

If this were the case then it would certainly prove that the individual is responisble not the dogs. If I drove my truck into a wall I could hardly complain to Isuzu that their products are dangerous. Shouldn't this be public information?

Last edited by twodogsandacat; December 28th, 2004 at 03:30 AM. Reason: Adding Question for BabyRocky1
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old December 28th, 2004, 10:13 AM
Schwinn's Avatar
Schwinn Schwinn is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Georgina
Posts: 2,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akeeter
The man who was breeder & the person who re-homed the 2 puppies to a friend who as it states here 'nearly ate him'..? The actual identity of this man has never been made public. This is very unusual. Even in the case of a dog attack or any other kind of attack on a child, it is usual for the person's name to be given. I'm still wonder WHY this person's name has never been made public. Is there some reason the public shouldn't know his name?
if anyone is interested, I would ask them to email the Sun & any other media source & ask Why such secrecy is connected with this individual.
It seems the more the person attacked can be painted as an innocent victim, the more we hear about them. And the more they can be painted as helpless, even more coverage is given. For example, there was an attack on a postal worker, and that person's name is always mentioned, and usually given at least one quote. When it is a child, that person's full description with a picture is given, and they are quoted out the wazoo. More heart strings to tug=more info given of the victim. I'm willing to bet that the more the public will side with the dogs, the less info is given about the victim. Kind of like we still hear how Bryant is going to make it so no more paperboys are attacked, but we still haven't heard from a lot of the same papers that the dog wasn't even a pitbull.
__________________
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
  #11  
Old December 28th, 2004, 12:12 PM
babyrocky1's Avatar
babyrocky1 babyrocky1 is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,126
ask her and see if she remembers which paper it came from,.Both men the owner and the breeder,victom were being interviewed while the owner was visiting the breeder in the hospital. I know that as soon as I heard the story before hearing that the guy had bread these dogs I knew as Im sure you all figured out that it was very suspisious Other info has been printed that is circumstancial I admit, like the fact that they were out at three in the am, the dogs both wearing spiked collers etc. and in one of the papers I thought I read that a witness saw the guy hit or kick one of the dogs, but Im not susre cause Ive just read so much that theyre all running together in my mind. Not that any one of those things in itself is proof- it isn't. I think it describes the attitude though, and does anyone think that these dogs were spayed and nuetered, and more importantly did any reporter ask. I still wouldn't have typed this except that one of the people who I work with knows the guys and told me that they "the dogs"were trained to kill because of the enemies "the humans" that they both had. Is it proof? no but do I 100% believe it absolutely and If I know this info then so do the police and so does the attorney general. I have called Kyle Rays office and blasted them for seemingly supporting the ban that day that this happened and not questioning the police to find out what the story is about the people. Kyle Ray is the city counsellor for that riding. Im neither a reporter or a cop or a lawyer and if this nameless person wants to sue me he can go ahead. Im so angry about this one incident being portrayed the way that it has been that Ive felt like going to the area and investigating it myself. I have said flat out to my mpp that the 'victom is a drug dealer and he said to me that is known in the house. Of course none of them can say anything about it as slander laws would prevent it but Its certainly enough info for me to draw a conclusion. If we could only prove this it would make an amazing splash in the media since this is the incident that keeps getting repeated. May be a private detective? Find a real investigative journalist? By the sounds of it these folks are quite dangerous or maybe theyre just punks but either way they sparked this whole thing by intentionally creating dangerous dogs and if we could prove it maybe it could turn the tide. There were alot of witnesses that day and we know the area it happened in. I never asked the guy for a name and I dont think he wouuld give it to me but Ill give it a shot.
__________________
My Ontario Includes Democracy...bye bye Bryant!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old December 28th, 2004, 12:37 PM
babyrocky1's Avatar
babyrocky1 babyrocky1 is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,126
Sorry about the mess of my postings my daughter isn't here and her computer illiterate mom, thats me, cant figure out how to edit. The first part of my rant stated that a friend had cut the article out of the news paper but Im not sure which paper. Ive definately read that info more than once and in different papers, that the walker was also the breeder I mean. so someone else must have them. And another thing about all this, Julian Fantino is a big time ban fan and a hopeful liberal appointment. So as hard as all this may be to prove it would show the attorney general as the fraud he is if these folks can be shown to be known to the cops- A body that he is responsible for. What other reason could there be that those names the owners or the breeder would not be mentioned?
__________________
My Ontario Includes Democracy...bye bye Bryant!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old December 28th, 2004, 12:57 PM
Loki Loki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 333
I remember that The Toronto Star did mention, in one small article, that the dogs that "tried to eat him alive" were known to residents as being aggressive.
If I recall correctly, the police were called on 3 occasions before the incident regarding the dogs. One guy said that the dogs had lunged at him and ripped his brief-case out of his hand.

I'll try to find the article.....
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old December 28th, 2004, 01:00 PM
twodogsandacat's Avatar
twodogsandacat twodogsandacat is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 1,361
We NEED to know

Bryant refers to these dogs as ticking time bombs and I believe that in this case these two dogs most likely were. I am not one to blame the victim BUT if the victim was building these bombs then shouldn't that be known to the public?

You don't count a bomb builder who blows himself accidentally while building the bomb as a victim. Why should we in this case? I'm tempted to drive to Toronto to start asking the neighbours questions but shouldn't that be the job of the police and it would most likely be dangerous? Has Bryant or the soon to be Liberal employee Fantino gagged the police? Does any body know what the public is 'entitled' to know by law?

I willing to throw in a few bucks for a private detective but shouldn't we first find out if any other group is already planning on doing this? Does anybody know a private detective? Still the AG has no problem making statements that are unproven so I am going to say that these dogs were likely trained to attack - badly trained. Correct me if I am wrong Mr. Bryant. Somebody has to ask this question in the house - I will email Mr. Kormos of the NDP to see if he is willing to.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old December 28th, 2004, 02:27 PM
babyrocky1's Avatar
babyrocky1 babyrocky1 is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,126
Talking

thank you Two dogs and a cat and Loki for taking this seriosly. I cant sleep at night for thinking about the bull thats been spread concerening this incident in particular. It was the beginning of the whole MB thing. I have felt exactly the same thing about going to the neighbours myself but we don't know who the guy is and that would make us very vulnerable. However if theres no other option Im game. Im a forty something grandmother but I have taken a self-defence course at my local community centre Seriously though Maybe we should start with putting all of the written info together from that day, all in one place like pieces of a puzzle, and see if we can find a paper trail. The reporters also know who the people are but I guess they cant say. If there are previous police reports is that not public info? It is pretty sad when we have to do this stuff ourselves but then if were successful well have only ourselves to thank. I think that if we get close to proviing this we might be better of to keep it to ourselves until were absolutely ready with proof and great media timing. It needs to hit MB like a bomb thats already done its ticking. I keep going back to the fact that hes responsible for the cops and that they have not investigated this situation. What about contacting sosme of the reporters that did more balanced coverage of the story and see if theyll provide more info that is not of a confidential nature?
__________________
My Ontario Includes Democracy...bye bye Bryant!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old December 28th, 2004, 03:45 PM
twodogsandacat's Avatar
twodogsandacat twodogsandacat is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 1,361
It would certainly debunk Bryant

I remember reading the article regarding the briefcase. I won't be able to look until tomorrow but it was either a star or a Toronto sun article I'm sure.

Also I know Pulse24 seems to like to catch Michael lying. I have already sent them a thank you for having the most balanced reporting and received a response. It seems that when they went to journalism school they listened while a lot of the other reporters didn't but took notes in marketing class so they could sell more papers.

If somebody does want to hire a private detective I will send some money to a licensed PI as long as they can be found on the web. It will be safer for everyone and it doesn't have to be done until we collect as much of our own information as we can.

It has to be tough owning a pit now days and I support any responsible owning standing by their dog. When they attacked your dogs they attacked mine as well. I was sick over a sweet pit dumped at the canal. I visited her at the pound and honesty thought no one would adopt her. Well my Christmas gift was that a dog walker at the pound did adopt her and she now lives on a beach with two other dogs. So far MB she hasn't blown up - and never will.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old December 28th, 2004, 11:37 PM
twodogsandacat's Avatar
twodogsandacat twodogsandacat is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 1,361
Maybe a hit

The 2 dogs that attacked the guy that was walking them in Toronto were owned by a drugdealer the attack victim was their trainer . That story was burried by the media pretty quickly .
Pitbull stories sell papers correction notices do not
.
http://www.canada.com/national/sound...4-01f4fb160185

I have emailed the sender asking about a possible correction story.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old December 29th, 2004, 09:42 AM
Schwinn's Avatar
Schwinn Schwinn is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Georgina
Posts: 2,258
Going through the comments, here's another well worded one!

http://www.canada.com/national/sound...4-01f4fb160185
__________________
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
  #19  
Old December 30th, 2004, 11:38 PM
twodogsandacat's Avatar
twodogsandacat twodogsandacat is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 1,361
Still Looking

Well I looked thru micro fiche until my eyes bled. The libary has promised me all the hardcopies of the Toronto Star for Oct Nov and Dec as soon as the micro fiche comes in for those months. The original attack happened in the last week of Aug but Bryant didn't go PR crazy until Oct so I'm hoping it's in there somewhere.
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 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
    vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise (Reduced on this page: MySQL 0%).
  • All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:29 AM.