Pit-bulls to be banned

[Table 5]

I volunteer with a dog shelter organization where the main breed they carry are pit bulls. They can be great animals, but have a tendency to snap a lot more than other breeds. Its not their fault most of the time, since they are brought up badly, but the odds are way too high compared to other dogs.

ban them.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by Mike__@Jan 25 2005, 05:32 PM
I agree with having stricter laws on owning pitbulls. Not every owner gets a pitbull to train it to be aggresive. Some owners get it because they love the breed.

That may be the case, but the breed itself was artificially selected to be agressive, powerful, and tenacious. It was genetically selected to be a killer. Breeding these traits out will not happen in just a few generations.

[Patek23]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos+Jan 25 2005, 05:02 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RougeUnderoos @ Jan 25 2005, 05:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

What about Bulldogs and Poodles?, Bulldogs have the hardest bite and Poodles with the sharpest teeth. When either of these dogs bite it's going to to the most damage. Should they be banned to?


This sort of seems like dog racism like when (and in some cases still) people thought that the black people where more violent than other "kinds" of people.

I'd much rather be attacked by a poodle or a bulldog than I would by a pit bull. Are you sure your facts are correct about a bulldog having the most powerful bite? Maybe we are not talking about the same thing but when I hear bulldog I think of those little Winston Churchill-looking things with the big head and the bow legs and the slobbering.

Maybe a poodle has the sharpest teeth but it's definitely not going to cause more damage than a 60 pound pit bull.

Its not like racism because it's dogs. [/b][/quote]
Thats the british bulldog a smaller breed.



heres an american bulldog.

[Patek23]

I know that when Pitbulls attack it's much deadlier. But thats like banning Karate because if your attacked by a karate person it's going to be more deadly than the average person.


I guess I disagree because I've owned a Pitbull and it was the most lazy and easy-going animal, it was always happy to be around people and was even once attacked by a black lab and never really fought back, On the other hand we rescued a Yorkshire Terrier (had been abandoned) and it was a vicous little bugger and attacked EVERYONE at somepoint. The dog I currently own is a half wolf half husky and some other breeds and it's even more easygoing than the pitbull. I just think it all depends on the owner or the dogs experience.

Truth be told the only dog that I've seen that are consistantly vicous are german shepards, been attacked twice (one with luckily no bites).

[Indi]

what about pitbull crosses? I have a dog that I picked up from the SPCA that looks like she may have some pitbull (size of the head etc). This is by far the best dog I have ever had.....absolutely loves kids......am I to be afraid that someone is going to want to euthanize my dog because she may have some pit bull lineage? Where do you draw the line?

jc

[Table 5]

Im assuming they would grandfather the pitbulls, not euthanize all the existing ones.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by jcody@Jan 25 2005, 05:48 PM
what about pitbull crosses? I have a dog that I picked up from the SPCA that looks like she may have some pitbull (size of the head etc). This is by far the best dog I have ever had.....absolutely loves kids......am I to be afraid that someone is going to want to euthanize my dog because she may have some pit bull lineage? Where do you draw the line?

jc

That's the funny thing about pit bulls though. I had a friend who had one that was an excellent family pet for years. It acted totally submissive and docile until one day it did attack someone out of the blue. Never even showed a sign of aggressiveness before.

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by Flaming Homer+Jan 25 2005, 04:40 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flaming Homer @ Jan 25 2005, 04:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Jan 25 2005, 04:32 AM
I frequent some Golden Retriever boards and those dedicated dog owners freak at the mention of breed bans.

There are only bad owners, not bad breeds says they.

That's probably true, but this particular breed seems to be deadly when its set off, regardless of the reason.

Its not just a bite as with many other breeds, its life and death.

Ban them.

Cowperson

What about Bulldogs and Poodles?, Bulldogs have the hardest bite and Poodles with the sharpest teeth. When either of these dogs bite it's going to to the most damage. Should they be banned to?


This sort of seems like dog racism like when (and in some cases still) people thought that the black people where more violent than other "kinds" of people. [/b][/quote]
I have two Golden Retrievers and recently read in the Ottawa Citizen, an article about breed bans, where a veterinarian said Golden's, the most friendly of family dogs, is the most common biter of all . . . .

I doubt that but I have have seen my Golden's kill gophers in an instant and/or rip them in half in tug of war, requiring a shovel to clean up the bloody mess.

They're worthless as guard dogs because they love people so much but . . . they can be ferocious killers of the proper rodents.

But you don't hear about - never I think - Golden's killing or maiming kids and adults for life.

Yet you see stories regarding such incidences all the time about Pit Bulls and Rottweillers.

Is it breed racism? Or just the fact you're dealing with a particular breed where you can't make a mistake?

My sister has a couple of Rotties and a five year old little girl. Everyone is happy apparently but I don't want to see that little girl in headlines someday.

Some stats for the conversation:

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf

Cowperson

[Mike__]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Jan 25 2005, 10:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Jan 25 2005, 10:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Mike__@Jan 25 2005, 05:32 PM
I agree with having stricter laws on owning pitbulls. Not every owner gets a pitbull to train it to be aggresive. Some owners get it because they love the breed.

That may be the case, but the breed itself was artificially selected to be agressive, powerful, and tenacious. It was genetically selected to be a killer. Breeding these traits out will not happen in just a few generations. [/b][/quote]
Maybe they should divide breeds into Categories such as Dogs known for aggression etc.and limit owners to 1. Some may like them for security which is fine but I hate seeing owners who have 3 pitbulls and just leave them in the back and basically just leaving them out there until night or feeding time. IF the dogs attacks, it is put down and the owner is fined and can never own another one.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Flaming Homer+Jan 25 2005, 10:42 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flaming Homer @ Jan 25 2005, 10:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

I'd much rather be attacked by a poodle or a bulldog than I would by a pit bull. Are you sure your facts are correct about a bulldog having the most powerful bite? Maybe we are not talking about the same thing but when I hear bulldog I think of those little Winston Churchill-looking things with the big head and the bow legs and the slobbering.

Maybe a poodle has the sharpest teeth but it's definitely not going to cause more damage than a 60 pound pit bull.

Its not like racism because it's dogs.

Thats the british bulldog a smaller breed.



heres an american bulldog. [/b][/quote]
That's a problem with pit-bulls because there are different "kinds". American Pit Bull Terrier, American Bulldog, Staffordshire Terrier, pit bull and all sorts of mixes in between.

That document Cowperson linked to calls them "pit bull types". How do you ban that? Based on looks?

[Indi]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Jan 25 2005, 05:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Jan 25 2005, 05:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-jcody@Jan 25 2005, 05:48 PM
what about pitbull crosses? I have a dog that I picked up from the SPCA that looks like she may have some pitbull (size of the head etc). This is by far the best dog I have ever had.....absolutely loves kids......am I to be afraid that someone is going to want to euthanize my dog because she may have some pit bull lineage? Where do you draw the line?

jc

That's the funny thing about pit bulls though. I had a friend who had one that was an excellent family pet for years. It acted totally submissive and docile until one day it did attack someone out of the blue. Never even showed a sign of aggressiveness before. [/b][/quote]
every dog has the ability to "snap"......I say lets ban Jack Russell Terriers, one of those bit me once, oh and german shepherds, because we all know that they are bred and trained as guard/attack dogs from day 1...then we'll ban Rottweilers, then Dobermans, ...oh what the hell, lets ban every breed except labs and retrievers, no wait, there was a lab in the paper about a month ago that was involved in a biting incident...hhhmmm, I guess its time to get a cat..no wait, they scratch, and those scratches can give you a nasty infection......time to haul out my old fish tank again.
To ban a breed is silly...to put restrictions on a breed is not. Lets tighten down on bylaws, any unprovoked attack....I'm sorry, that dog has to be put down.....by the way, a bite is not an attack in my books. Some people are very foolish around dogs...tease them etc.....and they get bitten....deservedly so. Open more off leash areas where dogs can go and socialize.....dogs are a very social animal, take that out of the equation and you will have a bad situation.

jc

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by jcody+Jan 25 2005, 08:28 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (jcody @ Jan 25 2005, 08:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

That's the funny thing about pit bulls though. I had a friend who had one that was an excellent family pet for years. It acted totally submissive and docile until one day it did attack someone out of the blue. Never even showed a sign of aggressiveness before.

every dog has the ability to "snap"......I say lets ban Jack Russell Terriers, one of those bit me once, oh and german shepherds, because we all know that they are bred and trained as guard/attack dogs from day 1...then we'll ban Rottweilers, then Dobermans, ...oh what the hell, lets ban every breed except labs and retrievers, no wait, there was a lab in the paper about a month ago that was involved in a biting incident...hhhmmm, I guess its time to get a cat..no wait, they scratch, and those scratches can give you a nasty infection......time to haul out my old fish tank again.
To ban a breed is silly...to put restrictions on a breed is not. Lets tighten down on bylaws, any unprovoked attack....I'm sorry, that dog has to be put down.....by the way, a bite is not an attack in my books. Some people are very foolish around dogs...tease them etc.....and they get bitten....deservedly so. Open more off leash areas where dogs can go and socialize.....dogs are a very social animal, take that out of the equation and you will have a bad situation.

jc [/b][/quote]
Do you know anything about pit bulls - their history and what they were bred for? You should look it up.

They crossed bull dogs (powerful fighting dogs used for bull baiting) with terriers (high spirited dogs that do no give up easily once they are set off) to create a breed that would kill anything no matter how much someone tried to stop it. They were bred for the purpose of killing.

Are you're comparing that to a Jack Russell Terrier?

[Looger]

how aboot banning some owners?

like the ones that hang kittens from clotheslines in their back yards to make mean dogs that attack everyone?

some breeds are quick-triggered, some eventually get violent no matter what.

edited for kitten content

[nfotiu]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Jan 25 2005, 05:58 PM

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf

Cowperson

That's only an average of 20 deaths a year in the US. Pretty insignificant to justify all this banning activity. That is less people than get bitten or crushed by reptiles in the US. Although, I am curious to see how many other dogs and other animals they kill every year.

http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm

[Tron_fdc]

Originally posted by nfotiu+Jan 25 2005, 10:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (nfotiu @ Jan 25 2005, 10:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Jan 25 2005, 05:58 PM

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf

Cowperson

That's only an average of 20 deaths a year in the US. Pretty insignificant to justify all this banning activity. That is less people than get bitten or crushed by reptiles in the US. Although, I am curious to see how many other dogs and other animals they kill every year.

http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm [/b][/quote]
What I want to know is what's wrong with the Chow Chow????



How many of us would run if one of these things was chasing us down?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by nfotiu+Jan 25 2005, 10:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (nfotiu @ Jan 25 2005, 10:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Jan 25 2005, 05:58 PM

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf

Cowperson

That's only an average of 20 deaths a year in the US. Pretty insignificant to justify all this banning activity. That is less people than get bitten or crushed by reptiles in the US. Although, I am curious to see how many other dogs and other animals they kill every year.

http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm [/b][/quote]
I would wager a guess that most, if not all of the 'other-than-dog' attacks and deaths are caused by animals that are also not allowed to be had has pets within city limits in most cities.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

I've never understood the fuss about this subject - why its so hard for society to deal with I mean.

If we can place limits around owning a gun, carrying a knife, or for that matter driving a car, to try and ensure public safety, why is it so hard with dogs?

I don't see why the options have to be 'ban them' or leave it alone. I know lots of people here have suggested exactly the kinds of limits I'm talking about, but for some reason our collective common sense just never finds its way into the law books. Weird.

[Indi]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Jan 25 2005, 08:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Jan 25 2005, 08:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

every dog has the ability to "snap"......I say lets ban Jack Russell Terriers, one of those bit me once, oh and german shepherds, because we all know that they are bred and trained as guard/attack dogs from day 1...then we'll ban Rottweilers, then Dobermans, ...oh what the hell, lets ban every breed except labs and retrievers, no wait, there was a lab in the paper about a month ago that was involved in a biting incident...hhhmmm, I guess its time to get a cat..no wait, they scratch, and those scratches can give you a nasty infection......time to haul out my old fish tank again.
To ban a breed is silly...to put restrictions on a breed is not. Lets tighten down on bylaws, any unprovoked attack....I'm sorry, that dog has to be put down.....by the way, a bite is not an attack in my books. Some people are very foolish around dogs...tease them etc.....and they get bitten....deservedly so. Open more off leash areas where dogs can go and socialize.....dogs are a very social animal, take that out of the equation and you will have a bad situation.

jc

Do you know anything about pit bulls - their history and what they were bred for? You should look it up.

They crossed bull dogs (powerful fighting dogs used for bull baiting) with terriers (high spirited dogs that do no give up easily once they are set off) to create a breed that would kill anything no matter how much someone tried to stop it. They were bred for the purpose of killing.

Are you're comparing that to a Jack Russell Terrier? [/b][/quote]
Thanks for the info re pitbulls, I'll try and remember it. The only 'comparison' there is to be made here is that most breeds of dogs could be classified as dangerous if you go back far enough. Why do you think the main dog for police forces and security places are shepherds? Because they are extremely intelligent and vicious. Jack Russel Terriers, they are hands down one of the most vicious breeds out there.....uh oh, theres that comparison again...damn, when will I learn. Pit Bulls can be vicious and they have the size/strength to back it up, I guess thats where the comparison ends. Lets look at it another way, a small snubnose 38 will have the same consequences as a magnum 45....that is also a comparison, right or wrong, its the truth. By taking a broad brush and saying Ban Pit Bulls is inherently wrong, as was pointed out earlier, there are several types of dogs that would be lumped into being called a 'pitbull'......this is animal genocide at its best (worst).

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by jcody@Jan 25 2005, 11:24 PM
Thanks for the info re pitbulls, I'll try and remember it. The only 'comparison' there is to be made here is that most breeds of dogs could be classified as dangerous if you go back far enough. Why do you think the main dog for police forces and security places are shepherds? Because they are extremely intelligent and vicious. Jack Russel Terriers, they are hands down one of the most vicious breeds out there.....uh oh, theres that comparison again...damn, when will I learn. Pit Bulls can be vicious and they have the size/strength to back it up, I guess thats where the comparison ends. Lets look at it another way, a small snubnose 38 will have the same consequences as a magnum 45....that is also a comparison, right or wrong, its the truth. By taking a broad brush and saying Ban Pit Bulls is inherently wrong, as was pointed out earlier, there are several types of dogs that would be lumped into being called a 'pitbull'......this is animal genocide at its best (worst).

German Shepherds were bred for loyalty and to obey commands, which makes them less dangerous in general.

Pit bulls are the oppisite. They were bred to display wild traits. I think banning them is more akin to banning badgers or wolverines as pets, then most other breeds of dogs.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally posted by Tron_fdc@Jan 25 2005, 03:46 PM

What I want to know is what's wrong with the Chow Chow????

How many of us would run if one of these things was chasing us down?

They may be "cute" and fluffy, but looks deceive. I had a neighbour that had two Chow-Chow's, and whenever someone would walk by, they would bark like there's no tomorrow and lunge at the person only to get held back by their leash.

Damn powerful dogs too. The guy had a hard time controlling them when walking them.