Time to ban Pitbulls from Calgary

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Ban 'em all.

Calgary did invent ginger "beef".

[fulham]

We legislate to protect people from the idiots.

The idiots that cant drive fast, and safely
the idiots that cant responsibly own high power firearms
the idiots that cant responsibly use drugs/alcohol

A idiot, or even just below average pitbull owner; is who we need to protect people from.

we don't make laws based on the great drivers, responsible gun-owners/people, or the good pitbull owners

[GGG]

But studies show banning pit bulls is ineffective at reducing dog bites in cities that have done it. Unlike gun control where there is correlation between stricter gun laws and a reduction in gun violence.

So unless we want to ban all breeds over x pounds or x jaw strength to reduce the damage potential you aren't going to help.

It would be like just banning the AR-15 but not similar weapons another weapon with similar traits would take its place.

More liabilit and Jail time for offenders would help as would licensing and inspection requirements.

[driveway]

I'm sorry, I don't have a dog in this fight (obviously pun intended), but I need to point out how terrible and misleading these charts are.

Spoiler!

The 2017 chart claims Pitbulls are responsible for 74% of fatal attacks on humans, which was apparently 29 attacks. However, if you do the math, you can see that there were 49 total fatal attacks which means pitbulls were responsible for 59% of fatal attacks, not 74%!

The same problem exists in the 2016 chart, where pitbulls are claimed to be responsible for 71% of attacks, but are clearly only responsible for 54% (22 of 41 total).

So, by all means keep campaigning for what you believe in, but for god's sake use beter data if you're going to do it.

[GreenLantern2814]

The problem is always the owner. Nobody who takes their dog to the park for an hour a day has a bad dog.

Pit bulls are a problem because they attract morons who don't know how to properly raise them.

They're also a problem because they're nigh unstoppable once triggered.

I'm not thrilled about pit bulls, but if it wasn't them, it would be Dobermans. Or rotties. Or shepherds. Or whatever. The macho ###### bag needs a fur flag to fly.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by driveway

I'm sorry, I don't have a dog in this fight (obviously pun intended), but I need to point out how terrible and misleading these charts are.

Spoiler!

The 2017 chart claims Pitbulls are responsible for 74% of fatal attacks on humans, which was apparently 29 attacks. However, if you do the math, you can see that there were 49 total fatal attacks which means pitbulls were responsible for 59% of fatal attacks, not 74%!

The same problem exists in the 2016 chart, where pitbulls are claimed to be responsible for 71% of attacks, but are clearly only responsible for 54% (22 of 41 total).

So, by all means keep campaigning for what you believe in, but for god's sake use beter data if you're going to do it.

So one breed is responsible for over half of all human fatalities?

That's troubling, especially considering dogs don't kill humans.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by driveway

I'm sorry, I don't have a dog in this fight (obviously pun intended), but I need to point out how terrible and misleading these charts are.

Spoiler!

The 2017 chart claims Pitbulls are responsible for 74% of fatal attacks on humans, which was apparently 29 attacks. However, if you do the math, you can see that there were 49 total fatal attacks which means pitbulls were responsible for 59% of fatal attacks, not 74%!

The same problem exists in the 2016 chart, where pitbulls are claimed to be responsible for 71% of attacks, but are clearly only responsible for 54% (22 of 41 total).

So, by all means keep campaigning for what you believe in, but for god's sake use beter data if you're going to do it.

Sorry my fault for not linking the site and only the chart. I guess the way they calculate it is that 74% of the fatal human attacks had a pitbull involved. So there are few occasions where there was more than 1 dog that caused a fatality. Like a pitbull and a german shepard attacked together to kill a kid.

So in this example for 2018 it looks like a Chihuahua will be included as a breed that kills.

Hong Saengsamly
49-years old | Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Hong Saengsamly, 49-years old, was killed by at least one of her three dogs. She was last seen alive on March 23 when her daughter left her home. Her son, referred to as "Jack" in the police report, conducted a well-being check the next day after being unable to reach her. When he entered her home, he found her in a prone position in the kitchen, unresponsive. One of his mother's three dogs, a large black and white pit bull, began guarding her body and became hostile. Jack shot the dog twice, killing it. When police arrived, they discovered the dead pit bull in a room connected to the kitchen. The medical examiner listed her cause of death as "multiple puncture and blunt force injuries due to mauling by dogs." The manner of death was ruled an accident. Jack indicated to police that none of the dogs were violent, and "they had never attacked a person before." Another pit bull and a chihuahua also lived in the home. Both dogs were turned over to the Milwaukee Area Domestic Animal Control Commission. [source citations]

Date of death: March 25, 2018 Chained: No
Breed of dog: Pit bull (2) Chihuahua (1) Relationship to dog: Family
Sex of dog: Unknown Owner of dog: Victim
Spay/Neuter: Unknown Multiple dogs: Yes
On/Off property: On Criminal charges: No

https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-st...ities-2017.php

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Yep. "Pitbulls aren't dangerous, poor owners are." The exact same way that an assault rifle doesn't kill people, bad people do.

Phase them out, let people who already own them keep them, but ban any breeding or acquiring of new one. Complete ban in 20 years. People can purchase another dog, not one that was bred for their aggression. If they don't want another dog, it's because they don't care for dogs, they care for pitbulls due to their breed's notorious habits.

You're comparing an inanimate object that is specifically designed for killing, that has no other use than to shoot a bullet, with a trainable, loving animal.

That is just such an objectively stupid comparison.

[-TC-]

I thought this was a joke or a troll thread, instead, it's just stupid and ignorant.

I know lots of folks, with young kids, with pit bulls and they are the sweetest, kindest dogs you'd ever meet.

I lump this in with the people who want to kill all the sharks because they attack people..or bears, or cougars... and on and on.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by -TC-

I thought this was a joke or a troll thread, instead, it's just stupid and ignorant.

I know lots of folks, with young kids, with pit bulls and they are the sweetest, kindest dogs you'd ever meet.

I lump this in with the people who want to kill all the sharks because they attack people..or bears, or cougars... and on and on.

Yes. I am all in for banning Calgarians from owning sharks, bears and cougars too. Would you seriously leave your kids alone with those pitbulls being imported from kill shelters in the States?

[FlamesAddiction]

It's a combination of owners and the breed. The breed is powerful, tenacious and can snap easily. A lot of the people who get dogs like that are probably not overly intelligent and possibly have the same traits.

I am sure that pitbulls can be ideal pets under the right circumstance, but I don't see a greater good in not banning them. There are many animals that people are banned from owning. It's not a right to own a dog or animal of any kind.

[-TC-]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Yes. I am all in for banning Calgarians from owning sharks, bears and cougars too. Would you seriously leave your kids alone with those pitbulls being imported from kill shelters in the States?

You should stop.

You aren't improving your stock at all.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It's a combination of owners and the breed. The breed is powerful, tenacious and can snap easily. A lot of the people who get dogs like that are probably not overly intelligent and possibly have the same traits.

I am sure that pitbulls can be ideal pets under the right circumstance, but I don't see a greater good in not banning them. There are many animals that people are banned from owning. It's not a right to own a dog or animal of any kind.

So what breeds to you propose to ban and on what basis do you believe that banning pot ills only will reduce severity of Human / Dog injuries. You should have some evidence when you are advocating xhange

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Nyah

That chart says that only 43 dogs were killed by other dogs in 2017 in the US (unless those numbers are 100's or something)? I'd question where they're getting these numbers from, that seems really low. Can you post a link?

Well i rewatched that doc, and if you can believe the CBC, pitbulls killed 37,000 other cats and dogs in the US in 2015. and yes, all these dogs being flown in from the US are given straight to the new owners without anyone from the SPCA or any other org assessing them first.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by -TC-

You should stop.

You aren't improving your stock at all.

Well you didn't answer the question. Or is it fake news to you that we are bringing in 100s of a known dangerous breed without vetting them?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Well i rewatched that doc, and if you can believe the CBC, pitbulls killed 37,000 other cats and dogs in the US in 2015. and yes, all these dogs being flown in from the US are given straight to the new owners without anyone from the SPCA or any other org assessing them first.

Well cats kill 2 billion song birds a year so maybe we need more pitbulls

[Scroopy Noopers]

I’m all for some kind of control measures.

But I reaaallly don’t want to see what a Pitbull black market will look like. Because that’s what will happen.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by -TC-

I thought this was a joke or a troll thread, instead, it's just stupid and ignorant.

I know lots of folks, with young kids, with pit bulls and they are the sweetest, kindest dogs you'd ever meet.

I lump this in with the people who want to kill all the sharks because they attack people..or bears, or cougars... and on and on.

Says everyone who's ever had a pitbull that has suddenly attacked their kid. Pitbulls were bred to fight and kill. It's like saying you can train a shark, bear or cougar not to be a shark, bear or a cougar.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Well they aren't a very good man killing machine according to those charts I posted then.

It isn't that they're not good at killing; it's that they're more selective.

[karl262]

Originally Posted by -TC-

I thought this was a joke or a troll thread, instead, it's just stupid and ignorant.

I know lots of folks, with young kids, with pit bulls and they are the sweetest, kindest dogs you'd ever meet.

I lump this in with the people who want to kill all the sharks because they attack people..or bears, or cougars... and on and on.

Thats a very specific demographic, folks with young kids and pit bulls. And you know lots of these societal anomalies?


Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk