AURORA | The full city council will likely decide next month whether to lift the city’s ban on pit bulls.
Council’s Public Safety Committee opted Tuesday to send the plan — being pushed by Councilwoman Renie Peterson — to the full council for consideration at a meeting early next month.
The city’s Animal Care division has come out against lifting the ban, arguing it has worked well and lifting it would mean a flood of pit bulls from other metro-area cities where the dogs are still banned.
Under the city’s current rules, three breeds of dogs commonly recognized as pit bulls — American pit bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers and Staffordshire bull terriers — are banned within the city limits. When city council first enacted the ban in 2005, there were 10 breeds barred from the city, but council in 2011 softened the ban to just three breeds and gave owners a chance to have their dog DNA-tested to prove whether they were in fact a banned breed.
Dogs who were already in the city at the time of the ban were allowed to stay if their owners paid a registration fee and followed certain restrictions.
According to the city’s numbers, about 90 registered pit bulls remain in the city, down from about 500 when the ban took effect. The city has euthanized more than 1,100 restricted-breed dogs since the ban.
Peterson said her plan calls for lifting the ban, but requiring owners of the three banned breeds to carry homeowners or renters insurance. It also increases the cost of a fine for owners of dogs that bite someone.
I applaud CM Peterson for making an effort to lift the ban. However, I have little faith she will have the backing by co-council members or, the board of public safety to make it happen.
It is not the breed of the dog but rather the training and containment of the dog that matters.
I’d like to know if this city owns dogs of other breeds that have bitten people minus a command to do so?
Councilwoman Renie Peterson will have any and all attacks from pit bulls on her hands, as the bites from these dogs have dropped to almost zero since the ban.
No, that would be people who own dangerous dogs of any breed and do not take care and caution.
I place the deaths of family pets who have displayed no signs of aggression on you and your kind.
FYI – Yotie is one of the DBO trolls. I forget which one. They claim to support dog safety, but only care about bites from pit bulls, and labs (which to them are pit bulls, but only when they bite), and jack russell terriers (same as labs), etc. They claim to be a victim’s rights organization, but don’t actually support anything that will reduce dog bite injuries.
Well, Boo-Hoo! I don’t give 2 hoots in Hades about the “deaths of family pets.” What I care about are the deaths, dismemberments, scalpings and other serious injuries of human beings caused by pit bulls! A study of dog injuries in hospitals spanning 15 years published in the April 2011 Annals of Surgery under the heading, “Mortality, Maiming and Mauling by Vicious Dogs” found that a person has a more than 2500 times greater chance of dying if attacked by a pit bull than some other breed/type of dog. No individual should be allowed to own such an animal. The only place people should ever see a pit bull is confined within a sturdy cage in a zoo!
We know you don’t care.
We also know you don’t tell the truth.
We also know you are a bigot.
What we don’t know, is why you are a scared little man who is terrified of dogs because they have short hair and big heads. Maybe you were abused as a child. Don’t take it out on my city.
I don’t care about dogs, I care about human beings.
Prove anything I’ve posted isn’t true.
You have no proof whatsoever that I’m a “bigot.”
You don’t know if I’m “little,” or even if I’m a man, for that matter. I could be a 300-woman for all you know!
Just because I hate pit bulls doesn’t make me “terrified of dogs” and what the heck does being “abused as a child” have to do with this argument?
Although I am loathe to stoop to the level of a name-calling pit nutter: Men own pit bulls for the same reason they drive huge, jacked-up trucks — they’re trying to compensate for “something” they don’t have! Women who own pit bulls are of the same ilk as those crazy women who visit, and sometimes marry, serial killers and other men in prison — they are inveterate losers and think associating with a dangerous man, or owning a dangerous dog, sets them apart and makes them special. And they’re right. It does set them apart — it tells everyone they’re stark raving mad!
You are willing to believe negative stereotypes people because they own a toe of dog. Ummm…bigot.
What the heck is a “toe of dog”?
My quote was from the “Annals of Surgery,” so ask the “Annals of Surgery” to PROVE IT!
The remainder of my post was my own personal opinion, i.e., a personal view or judgment formed about a particular subject and there is no way to PROVE a “personal opinion.” Sheesh! I feel as though I’m involved in a discussion with a bunch of mentally-challenged 6-year-olds!
Prove it.
My comment consisted of OPINIONS!. The definition of OPINION is “a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.” I did not claim anything I said was a FACT. There is no way to PROVE an OPINION! You are one dumb broad!
Typical foamer. As usual, foaming over your own war of words and trying to provoke a confrontation over your own misguided ideals and biases. Sad, really.
YOU are the one who butted into a discussion I was having with other commenters, so how am I “trying to provoke a confrontation”? If you will explain how I, or anyone else, can PROVE an OPINION, I will be happy to comply. And while we’re on the subject of “provoking,” why haven’t you provided the federal law, state statute or local ordinance forbidding the “unauthorized use of a study” which you claim I “had gotten into trouble for using”? If anyone here is trying to “provoke” others, it is YOU, Eula! (BTW, “Eula” is just about the most white trash name I’ve ever heard!)
And now you resort to name calling. Sad, really.
I’m beginning to think you’re posting your comments from the common room in a loony bin somewhere. I did NOT “resort to name calling.” What I SAID was that “EULA is just about the most white trash name I’ve ever heard!” The only NAME I called you is EULA and if you want to get upset at someone for giving you a white trash name, take it up with your parents!
pit nutter is name calling. stereotyping people you have never met is racist.. psychoanalyzing people you have never met makes you look stark raving mad and stupid! what planet are you from?
The definition of “racist” is: “a person who believes that a particular race is SUPERIOR to another.” What I KNOW, not what I BELIEVE, is that people who hate pit bulls are superior to pit nutters. It has NOTHING to do with “race” because a pit nutter may be black, white trash, Hispanic, Asian, or whatever. Just because something is “stereotyping” does NOT make it “racist.” Sheesh! Did you finish elementary school?
Hey, didn’t youguys get into trouble with unauthorized use of that study? How about we contact the publisher to let them know that you are using it?
A person cannot “get into trouble” for referencing, or posting the results of, a “study” or something published in a magazine, newspaper, online, or whatever. I suggest YOU “contact the publisher” and ask. You, like mary bishop olson above, need to go back to school!
Wanna make a bet?
Yes, I’ll bet. You are even more delusional than I thought and quite frankly, I did not think that was possible! Please cite the federal law, state statute or local ordinance forbidding the “unauthorized use of a study” and the penalties therefor.
One other thing: Please explain how I’m going to collect my winnings from someone who doesn’t have a proverbial “pot.”
but the amount of dog attacks and maulings has not gone down…wow..you are such a genius..you must be a dogsbite.org member..LOL!
I you really care about the pit bull ban, show up and speak up. at the
City Council meeting. Sign up before 7:30 to speak.
Sat through the session.
The Council Members present where respectful and willing to listen.
The staff from the shelter presented an argument that was based on the predication that all pit bulls are bad.
The downplayed comments from people opposing BSL stating they were mostly from outside Colorado, (not true)
They then played up comments from people who support BSL stating that many citiizens where concenred or frightened by pit bulls, but ignored that many of those comments are from out of the state and gave no numbers to reperesent how many citizens of Aurora have made those comments.
I SEE “PIT BULLS” EVERYDAY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. The number in Aurora is mind blowing and they refuse to aknowledge that they still exist.
My dog was “illegal” until the DNA laws were etablished and is now legal.
I never had on call from a neighbor to the AAC, but according to staff, Aurora citizens report the sighting of any pit bull in the city,
When asked by Council Member Legarre about any scientific study showing pit bulls are more agrresive or dangerous they had nothing to offer. The are well aware thet studies show no evidence they dogs they hate are any more agrresive that any others, but they don’t want to aknowledge that,
The staff even went as far as to state people who own pit bulls are more likely to be deviant or gangmembers.
Then as evidence thet cited that more pit bull dogs are being retunred to owners. THat is due to DNA testing which thwarts their attempts to dispose of a dog they see as “bad”.
They then stated less pit bulls are now in the shelter and less pit bull bites have occured, with no mention that they same number of dogs go through the shelter and dog bites overall have not reduced. Evidence that killing dogs that look a certain way will result in less dogs that look that way, but not evidence that BSL is making our neighborhoods safer or reducing costs at the shelter.
Why would they give an opinion based presentation based on selected numbers and a false preception? Because they do not like dogs that look a certain way and can rpoduce no evidence as to why except for their conjecture and fear.
Cheryl Conway of the Aurora Animal Control appears to have close ties to members of anti pit bull groups and is letting her bias cloud the way our city is running its animal control division. The city will continue to be denied grants as long as BSL laws are in place, but she refuses to accept that just because a dog appears to be ugly to her, it does not make it disposable.
We need new leadership at AAC.
I have a theory that if the city makes all red cars iilegal and impounds and crushes all red cars, that will lead to less red cars in the impound lot and less fatal accidents involving red cars. So much for science, right Ms. Conway.
Well then let’s bring back lawn jarts and the ford pinto…
The number of fatal attacks by pit bulls vs other dogs is staggering. It’s so high that a non-fatal pit bull attack becomes a data outliner of 1 for that breed.
Keep denying it. I’ll check back in 2 weeks with another fatal pit bull attack.
How about we just address aggresive dogs and bad owners?
Way to state stats with no evidence.
let me try that….Only 2 percent of people that support BSL can form cojent thoughts. No evidence, just a stat I heard.
I’ll report back in two weeks with the news my dog has not attacked anyone.
You keep judging based on appearence and fear. I do the same based on action and love.
Sad, sad, sad…
Huh?! I think you need to re-read Mr. Fraser’s post because your response is totally unrelated to his comments.
Huh…I think you need to recheck who the comment was in response to, that would be Yotie.
MJC wasn’t referencing your comment to Yotie, he/she was referencing one of your asinine comments directed to me.
Just heard there was a car crash and someone was hurt. Better get on that ban cars parade before you miss your chance to spew ignorance.
And if you want to slippery slope me, I’ll do the same to you. No, don’t ban cars, let everyone drive. Telling a 10 year old they can’t drive is like what Hitler did. End drunk driver discrimination!
Let’s play.
10 years do not have the capcaity to drive, Society and science agree,
So me evidence “ugly” dogs are more dangerous. I can show you evidence that 10 year old are worse drivers than 16 year olds.
Drinking is legal. Driving is legal. Combined, not so much. Why, SCIENTIFIC evidence showing drinking impairs ability to drive. Where is the evidence pit bulls are different than other dogs?
Wanna play the Hitler Game too> He rounded up people that looked a certain way because he did not like them and had them killed….hmmmmm.
What an asinine comment! Unless you’re Amish, or live in a cave somewhere, motorized vehicles are one of the necessities of life. However, NO ONE needs to own a pit bull! In fact, unless a dog is used for the purpose for which it was bred (created), it is superfluous. Ergo, unless you’re involved in dog-fighting, there is no reason for you to own a pit bull!
Sorry Jason. You are wrong. We have buses, legs, bikes, etc. NO ONE needs a car, we all want one.
NO ONE needs any dogs at all. Let’s just ban them all.
You are wrong on your history of pit bulls as well.
But you don’t care if you are right, do you? You are more than happy to spread lies and false information if it makes your point.
Do you live in Aurora? If not, NO ONE needs your input and the only reason to be hear is because you are into blog-fighting.
If you do, come on by the council and make your opinion known. I disagree, but be a big boy and bring evidence, not conjecture and biased opinion based on fear.
Sorry. YOU are wrong! Buses are “motorized vehicles” and I said NOTHING about owning such, I simply said “motorized vehicles are one of the necessities of life.” Yes, people can walk or ride bikes, but what if they can’t get a job within walking or bike-riding distance. How do they get there? If a car hits a pedestrian or bike-rider and he’s lying beside the road bleeding to death, how is he going to get to an emergency room? Ambulances, after all are “motorized vehicles.” Ambulances, fire trucks, police cars, etc., etc. are ALL “motorized vehicles” and in this day and age, have become one of the necessities of life!
The bulldog was crossed with the English white terrier solely for the purpose of fighting other does. This is no lie and YOU know it! No, I take that back, since you get all your information from pit nutter websites, you think they were bred to be “nanny dogs.”
No, I do not live in Aurora. Now let me ask you a question: Are you Mr. James Gold? If you are, then all you have to do is pick up the phone and have the comments section reserved for Aurora residents only. So, either do that or be advised those of us who are not Aurora residents will continue to post here!
How did we ever survive before the invention of cars. People must have just sat around and died.
Pit Bulls were bred as work dogs in the 1700’s and later used for fighting in the 1800’s.
They have many characteristcs that make them good work dogs that also worked when fighting.
This does not in any way mean that pit bulls are solely for fighting.
Mastiffs were bred for war to kill humans. Are they only good for killing people.
Herding dogs do more than herd.
Huskies can do mor ethan pull sleds.
All dogs are individuals, just like people.
To assume you can know what the nature of everydog is based on appearence and breeding is ridiculous.
According to the SPCA, the Old English Bulldog was cross-bred with the Old English Terrier (aka the English White Terrier) to produce a dog with the strength and agility of the bulldog and the gameness of the terrier and the reason for creating this type dog was solely for the purpose of blood sports such as bull- and bear-baiting and fighting other dogs.
The mastiff was created to protect estates from poachers, not to kill humans during war.
All dogs are not individuals because they are bred to perform specific tasks and this is not true of humans.
So you are willing to state that every pit bull is a bad dog. No exceptions?
Good to see where you know Jason from. He is all over the internet and very easy to find.
don’t forget to bring the psychic gerbil with you..
there will still be crashes..just not red car crashes..couldn’t resist throwing some DBO logic into the mix..
This is just another example of why we need to clean house on council when it comes time to vote.
Again, a good question to ask would be if any of our German Shepherds or Belgian Malinois, highly trained city dogs, have bitten anyone when not commanded to do so? If the answer is yes, then the next question should be, when was the dog put down or taken out of service?
Quite right. Yes, they can claim less bite from ‘pit bull type’ dogs but since they have killed them all small wonder. But how do they explain little to no change to their dog bite stats if not increased numbers?
It is because the people who were in bad ownership of pit bull type dogs are now in ownership of other breeds. It isn’t rocket science.
Actually, this is a good chance to prove that bans work when a kid is killed within 6 months of the ban being lifted.
So you are rooting for a kid to be killed so you can be proved right. Pathetic!!!
I have seen a lot of car crashes with SUVs. The SUVs did a lot of damage. We should ban SUVs since they are big and scary. Anyone who does not agree is responsible for anyone ever killed by an SUV.
The drivers of the SUVs are not at fault. It is the car.
I have had my pit bull for 5 years.
The score so far – Kids Licked – 30+ vs. kids bit – 0.
Do you want me to kill my dog?
To operate a car you need a license, registration and insurance. Not the best analogy. I want you to microchip, provide a 6ft fence and have insurance and register yourself as a pit bull owner. No more dine-and-dash.
My dog is licensed. I have a 6 foot fence. I have insurance. So does that mean my dog is OK? All dog owners should license thier dogs, have home-owners or renters insurance, and secure their perimeter. Why are you more worried about short haired dogs with big heads. That’s right, because you think they are ugly. Add a fuzzy tail and you are OK though.
Dine and Dash – what does that mean. You think I am mooching because I have a dog you don’t like.
The analogy is perfect because it show that you and your kind want to put the blame only on the object, in this case an animal, and not the person driving or negleting their responsibilities. You even take it to a further level and say one type of breed is bad because of its characteristics. Just how SUVs differ from smaller cars. Just like you, I say forget the driver, it is the vehicle and its size and shape to blame. You may not like it because it points out the selfish, me and my concerns first attitude you and yours have, but does not mean it is bad.
I want you to provide evidence my dog or any dog with short hair and a big head is intuitivly evil or dangerous.
Why is my dog different that any with a fuzzy tail?
But did you ever stop to think that generally the people who get into trouble with a car are the ones who don’t have a driver’s license or insurance?
Not true. Most people who “get into trouble with a car” have both a driver’s license and insurance.
Not true, my friend. Let’s use California’s statistics. According to the California DMV, “Compared to validly licensed drivers, suspended/revoked and unlicensed drivers are 2.60 and 2.73 times more likely to cause a fatal crash…” Since you have trouble with statistics, as demonstrated by your belief in DBO, that means that people who have suspended or revoked licenses are over two and a half times more likely to cause a fatal crash and the percentage is higher for unlicensed drivers.
I am NOT your “friend” and I wouldn’t believe anything you said if your tongue came notarized! Additionally, there are more ways to “get into trouble with a car” than causing a crash!
Are you actually concerned about this Yotie or are dog attack fodder for comical statements? We take public safety very seriously and do not find a second’s humor in any dog attack regardless of breed.
Dog to be Euthanized After Attacking Toddler
Yotie • 5 days ago
Pit bull nomnomnom on toddler… tastes so good. CHOMP
People who are concerned about “public safety” do not own pit bulls!
Only Jason can care about safety. Only Jason knows what is right or wrong.
You are a bigot and your words make that obvious for anyone who reads them.
Typical pit nutter: you have nothing to support your contentions, so you resort to personal attacks and name-calling. I was in a discussion a few months ago about pit bulls and one woman, who was undecided about the land sharks, commented that all the personal attacks, name-calling and senseless arguments of the pit bull proponents had convinced her pit bulls should be banned because the people who owned them were rude, uneducated and obviously unbalanced!
I’ve seen people post the same thing. All one has to do is read the comments posted by pit bull proponents to know these people are belligerent, argumentative, ill-informed and as vicious as the 4-legged sharks they choose to own.
I don’t own one now nor have I ever owned a pit bull. I don’t own a gun either but am not in favor of the gun contol efforts of late. Criminals and nutbags have no problem getting one, read the paper on the daily and you’ll see that is true.
With that said, when my current dog passes, I might want to own a pit. That way, if you decide to kick my front door in and help yourself to my hard work, you’ll be saying hello to my little friend.
I’m a responsible dog owner and will worry about the dog training and my containing of the animal on my own, thank you.
If you really believe a pit bull, or any other dog allowed to live inside the house, will “protect” you or your property, you need to Google “Would Your Dog Protect You from an Intruder?” and check out the KOTV results. Additionally, pit bulls are much more likely to attack their owner or a family member/friend of their owner than they are to attack an intruder.
I believe a theif will target homes that present less of a challenge.
If a “thief” is going to “target” a home, he can eliminate the dog before he breaks in — as thieves sometimes do.
How so?
If you can’t figure that out, you’ve got a problem!
The thief hasn’t broken in yet and the dog is always inside the home when I’m not there. You don’t know the floor plan of my home, by the way.
If you’re worried about break-ins, why don’t you move to a better neighborhood? You should take all that money you waste on dogs and spend it on a decent place to live.
I’m not sure any neighborhood is exempt from burglaries anymore. I have a decent place to live. I don’t worry about break-ins because I have a dog. My current dog waits for my command that it’s alright for someone to enter. Without that command being given, all I can say is good luck. You will require medical help.
I cannot imagine where you live that there aren’t any safe neighborhoods. No one breaks into houses in the neighborhood where I live. Of course, that is likely because most people where I live have guns.
As for your dog protecting you or attacking someone, that’s what all the people said who participated in the KOTV “test” in Oklahoma. They were shocked when the “stranger” entered their homes and their fleabags either whimpered and hid behind them or ran and hid in another room. Indoor dogs expect their owners to protect “them,” not vice versa. If you want to protect yourself, get a gun.
I live in Aurora, CO. There are no safe neighborhoods here. Only areas that are a little less likely to be hit than others.
What good is a gun if I’m burglarized while away from home? My dog however, is always waiting…
Yeah, waiting to run under the bed and hide if some breaks in!
When someone is attacking a member of my family, it is personal. Calling my dog a vicious mutant baby killer is personal.
Being willing to go into homes and take family pets because you think they are ugly is not so balanced.
Assuming I am poor or uneducated betrays you good intentions.
Using the behavior of some to judge all, sounds like your friend is about as grounded as you.
Nothing to support them….besides the 100s of Pit Bulls I have dealt with or the one I own.
Unless you have four legs and a tail — actually, the tail wouldn’t surprise me! — then no “dog” is, or ever will be, a “member of” your “family.” Thus far, I have not called your pit bull a “vicious mutant baby killer,” but I’m doing it now!
“People who are concerned about “public safety” do not own pit bulls!”
Yes, this is such a documents and accepted fact. We have nothing to support our stance, but yet you have such awesome facts as this that really drive home your point.
Ever hear of projection….might wanna look it up. You are a master of it.
When someone makes a comment in an online discussion, or anywhere else, unless he/she references a specific study, then his/her statements are OPINIONS! There is a heck of a lot of difference between an “opinion” and “documented facts.” I don’t know where you went to school, but wherever it was is obviously not spending enough on education!
People that care about public safety do not want to give the people a false sense of security, either. But, you see, my friend, that is exactly what you are endorsing in your campaign. Care to elaborate?
Again, I am NOT your “friend!” Furthermore, your nonsensical post is so confusing I have no idea what you’re howling about! Care to elaborate?
We thank the city council on taking the time to forward the proposal to study session. We believe that facts will prevail in this discussion, and urge Aurora, and Colorado residents to email in support of repeal. While we see some strangely off color insults to both the process, and victims of dog bites from people who claim to be “advocates” for that group, we take the issue of public safety seriously. After all, this is our state, and our communities.
We hope ACC can find partners in which to help grow the “care” part of their mission, and review fact based research instead of hysteria based websites.
We know from peer-reviewed, published journals that experts in the field of both animal behavior and welfare agree that dog bites have many factors. However, breed is not one of them.
We would hope that the fear based groups would engage in real conversation instead of quips and misinformation.
We can work towards a safe, humane Aurora, and Colorado by addressing real issues. Breed neutral legislation that holds bad owners accountable, support for dog bite victims regardless of type of dog, resources to promote responsible ownership and community outreach. With these factors, Aurora can be a part of the non-BSL communities in Colorado who not only look to an owner to take responsibility, but enjoy significantly lower bite rates.
I don’t understand the appeal of these ugly, cinder-block headed dogs. Their heads look like an alligator crossed with a bison.
Your mom kept you despite of the same issues.
Hate based on appearence and laws based on fear…WOW!!!!!
Hey, you’re insulting alligators and bison! LOL! There is nothing else on the face of God’s green earth that comes close to being as ugly as a pit bull. Their big, ugly, hellhole mouths stretch from ear-to-ear; they have evil little demonic eyes, and the way their legs are attached to their oversized bodies make them look deformed. Pit bulls are unnatural, repulsive, hairy devils!
Do you come from a family of racists and bigots.
That type of language flows from you too easily.
Your opinion is uglier than my pit pull’s a$$.
I’m not at all surprised you chose that analogy because people like you seldom extract their noses from their pit bull’s a$$!
Notice you are more affected by the pit bull’s ass than by your being associated with racists and bigots.
Typical pit nutter, you have nothing to support your contentions, so you resort to personal attacks and name-calling!
Again, attacking a member of my family made it personal.
If you can’t stand the heat…..
You accused me from coming from a “family of racists and bigots” and YOU have the audacity to accuse ME of “attacking a member of” your “family.” You are one delusional pit nutter!
Uh. Pot. Kettle.
so what is your contention fraser? besides pot calling kettle black.
Jason Fraser Yotie
• 21 hours ago
Hey, you’re insulting alligators and bison! LOL! There is nothing else on the face of God’s green earth that comes close to being as ugly as a pit bull. Their big, ugly, hellhole mouths stretch from ear-to-ear; they have evil little demonic eyes, and the way their legs are attached to their oversized bodies make them look deformed. Pit bulls are unnatural, repulsive, hairy devils — they look like something that just escaped from a circus freak show!
In order for “pot calling kettle black” to apply, pit bulls would have had to call me names before I described them as the big, ugly, hellhole mouthed, demonically-eyed, oversized, deformed monsters they are and so far as I know, pit bulls do not talk!
Well, isn’t it funny that we meet again, Jason. Now it is time that YOU prove and back up what you say. We are all waiting for your information that is injected with lies from DBO. It is time that you support your contentions.
No, it’s not “funny” at all that we “meet again.” What is it that you want me to “prove” and “back up”? All one has to do is LOOK at a freaking pit bull to know that the repulsive, hellmouthed, demon-eyed monsters are just as plug ugly as I said they are!
Well, your word usage kinda gives you away. You are a member of a hate group. Call it what you will, but most of the sane world can see exactly what you are and who you are representing. I understand the need to voice your opinion, but resorting to name calling (especially since the verbiage is known to be used by you and your fellow extremists) is outright disgraceful.
Please show me where I’ve called anyone a “name” when he/she didn’t call me a “name” first.
Your efforts to divert or minimize my words are not effective. Get over yourself.
I have made no attempt to “divert or minimize” your “words,” although I’ve no doubt everyone reading these comments would be eternally grateful if you refrained from tying any “words” at all! I simply asked you a question and because you cannot answer my question, you have resorted to making false accusations — as usual!
If by “hate group,” you are referring to dogsbite.org, you couldn’t be more wrong. I am not, nor have I ever been, a “member” of dogsbite.org. This “group” and I cannot even agree on how dog-bite fatalities should be counted!
By “hate group,” I assume you mean DBO, a group with which I have no affiliation whatsoever! You and your ilk love and promote frankenmaulers that kill, dismember, scalp and otherwise badly injure people on a daily basis. I cannot think of anything more “outright disgraceful” than that!
And once again, your words give you away!
Hello Thomas McCartney. ….why hide behind yet another alias?
I am NOT “Thomas McCartney.” The only other name I ever use online is “RoastPuppy.” Contact Disqus and ask if you don’t believe me!
Your just ignorant. Saying its insulting to an alligator.. well I bet the city will lift the ban on pitbulls before anyones allowed to own alligators. Find something better to do then pick on a breed because it hasnt done anything to you personally.. be mindful of what you say about God’s creation before he ends your exsistence.
That’s rich! You call me “ignorant” and you cannot even write a two-sentence comment without numerous grammatical errors! Typical pit nutter!
BTW, I also said the comment was insulting to “bison.” Why didn’t you have a problem with that? Are is it just alligators you hate? What did alligators ever do to you?
Furthermore, you do not know what the “breed” might have done to me “personally.”
Instead of making asinine comments about pit bulls and other things you know NOTHING about, you should be trying to find a course in English grammar and composition and take it!
“God’s creation”? You are delusional! God did NOT create pit bulls nor any other dog. Dogs are unnatural creatures in that they did not evolve naturally, but were created by man from wolves. Want to know what “God” thinks of dogs? Read Rev. 22:15. God would have NEVER created something as ugly, filthy and destructive as a pit bull!
Please tell us, Ms. Peterson, how is the city going to ensure that pit bull owners maintain that homeowners or renter’s insurance you suggest? What city agency will be placed in charge of making certain pit bull owners pay their insurance premiums every month, quarter, or whatever? Where will the money come from to pay the additional personnel the agency in charge of “pit bull insurance compliance” will be forced to hire to make certain pit bull owners are in compliance with the law?
Please tell me why you think “pit bull” owners are less likely to follow the rules than other dog owners.
People in red cars tend to speed more. I want a special set of rules and regulations making sure owners of red cars have car insurance.
A year or so ago, Terrell County, Georgia, enacted a law in which pit bull owners were required to maintain a policy of insurance of at least $100,000 to cover any damages done by their dogs. Once the law went into effect, so many pit nutters were dumping their “pitties” on the highway, in distant neighborhoods, etc. that animal control had to hire temporary dog catchers to pick up all the abandoned land sharks. The dog catchers were bringing pit bulls to animal shelters faster than they could be euthanized! Of course, all this was good because the fewer pit bulls the better. The bad thing was that those owners who chose not to dump their demon dogs failed to purchase the required insurance and the county is having to depend on neighbors, etc. to “turn in” pit bull owners in order to enforce the law. The only way to solve the pit bull problem is an outright ban on pit bulls!
Pit Bull nutters dumping their dogs are not very pit bull nutty now are they, Sounds like another embelished story full of half truths. And another case of DBO knows whats is best for everyone else in all places.
If you think the story is “embellished,” check it out yourself. And FYI, I do NOT get my information from dogsbite.org. DOB and I cannot even agree on how deaths-by-dog incidents should be counted. DBO counts only those deaths in which the person is actually killed by a dog. I count all dog-related deaths, e.g., those in which a person is chased into traffic by pit bulls and is hit and killed by a car, people who die later of an infected dog bite, etc. I have NEVER quoted anything from dogsbite.org, but I have seen where people have cut and pasted some of my comments — and the comments of others — on the DBO site.
When laws are enacted requiring pit bull owners to maintain insurance, they either have to dump their land sharks or keep them hidden from authorities because 99.99% of pit bull owners do not have the proverbial “pot,” let alone money for insurance premiums.
DBO …..really, That is like refering to the KKK for cultural studies.
99.99% of pit bull owners do not have the proverbial “pot”
No, you don’t make stuff up at all.
I suggest you look up the definition of “opinion.” Every time you post, you prove every opinion I’ve ever expressed regarding pit bull owners is true!
Mr. Fraser is correct. All you do is personally attack people and call them names.
You both sound like the bully who is crying cause they got punched int he nose.
You reap what you sow.
You are one delusional pit nutter!
According to mental health professionals, the reason people who drive red cars are more likely to speed is because people who like the color red are more daring than those who choose cars in sedate colors. I read in some psychology magazine that the most careful drivers are those who drive white, grey and tan cars.
There is no evidence people who drive red cars are less likely to have insurance. However, people who drive red cars are more likely to be stopped by police because police officers know people who choose red cars are more likely to speed and drive recklessly, just like pit bulls are more likely to attack and seriously injure someone than an ordinary dog.
More stereotyping.
I could really care less what color of car people drive.
It is a point to show how extreme people who want to impose killing family pets are.
Really? You’re the one who said: “I want a special set of rules and regulations making sure owners of red cars have car insurance.” You post so much garbage, you can’t even remember what you say!
It’s “couldn’t really care less,” not “COULD really care less.” Is English your first language?
I can aknowledge, like all breeds, some “pit bulls” are bad dogs.
Can you aknowledge that some “pit bulls” are good dogs?
Who is extreme?
How does the city ensure all vehicle owners maintain current insurance? Not all drivers are in compliance.
Where is the extra personnel to handle the non-insured drunk driver that hits and runs?
The “city” does NOT “ensure all vehicle owners maintain insurance.” This task is left to the Colorado Dept. of Regulatory Agencies – Dept. of Insurance, an agency with a multi-million dollar budget. And no, not all “drivers are in compliance” because when some deadbeat fails to pay his insurance premiums, it takes some time for the insurance company to contact the Dept. of Insurance and then it takes even more time for the Dept. of Insurance to contact the driver … it is a long, drawn-out process. The Dept. of Insurance is a well-regulated agency that has been in the business of attempting to enforce insurance requirements for decades. The City of Aurora does not have a department, the personnel, or the money to ensure pit bull owners pay their insurance premiums!
Different states have different departments, but it takes a while for information regarding a lapsed insurance premium to get to the Dept. of Motor Vehicles and even if the person’s driver’s license is suspended for lack of insurance, there is nothing to stop a person from driving without a license. All I’m saying is that it is impossible to enforce insurance requirements for drivers, pit bull owners, or anything else. Accordingly, the only answer to the pit bull problem is to ban pit bulls.
Why are people hired to work in the “Animal Care” division who obviously lack education about animals and animal behavior? There are multiple studies that confirm that dog BITES are not breed specific — any dog can be taught to be aggressive and any dog, no matter how docile, may bite if they feel threatened. Pit Bulls have historically been considered “America’s Dog” because of their loyalty, and “nanny” dogs because of their gentleness with children. Unfortunately in recent years the breed has become a popular accessory for “tough” guys who’ve decked the dogs out in leather and spikes. That was not the dog’s choice as it is not the dog’s choice to be maimed or killed because of violent, social deviants who force them to fight. Watch this video of the largest fighting ring break up in history and pay attention to how the dogs are responding to their rescuers.
The dogs are maimed, starved, chained and abused yet they greet their rescuers with wagging tails, licks and appreciation. If dog bites have decreased in Aurora during the period of the ban on Pit Bulls it is likely for two reasons – because certain types of PEOPLE have left the area due to the ban and because, in areas where there are no breed bans, dog owners are being held responsible for their dog’s behavior — as it should be — so there is a growing awareness and acceptance of that responsibility among dog owners, regardless of the breeds with whom they share their lives. There are no facts or statistics that the “Animal Care” division can point to that will uphold their claim that this ban is responsible for fewer dog bites. Most Colorado communities don’t ban specific breeds so why would Aurora be “flooded” with Pit Bulls? Instead, Aurora, take the lead in getting those communities that do have bans to reconsider and lift their bans as well. Isn’t it time that we humans allow ourselves to evolve enough to accept the truth and, as the saying goes, “stop blaming the wrong end of the leash”?
Thank you City Council for considering lifting the ban of pit bulls in Aurora. I do hope that the city council consults with true experts and animal behaviorists when making their decisions. I also hope they are able get their hands on true scientific facts. These resources are widely available. I can see that some people are using the comments section in this article to spread fear as well as use this forum to state their unsubstantiated claims and opinions as fact… I am sure that the city council will be able to see through their smoke and mirrors. Breed neutral responsible ownership laws are far more effective than breed specific legislation. This is what will make this city a safe community for our families.
I don’t know why people continue to argue about this. The current tide is this: Breed bans have been in place long enough, in enough places, that the tide is turning. Factual data has come out that shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that breed restrictive legislation is a feel good law that accomplishes nothing. We’ve found over the last 20 years that 1. The number & severity of attacks have not gone down. The breeds have just changed 2. Cities and counties do not know how to keep accurate accounts of such and have been shown to rely on “media reports” when making ordinance decisions, instead of actual data 3. media reports have been proven to be inaccurate and skewed, with countless examples of non-pit bull attacks not being reported at all and a single pit bull attack being recounted in the media 200+ times. 3. Many dogs commonly called ‘pit bulls’ by the average person have been shown to have a very low percentage, if any, of pit bull in them when put through a DNA test. All of these reasons are just pieces of the total puzzle that have lead many cities and counties to finally realize that their breed bans have accomplished nothing for safety but have resulted in many wasted tax dollars and many dead dogs. People need to start being responsible for their dogs, rather than putting the blame on a breed. People also need to smarten up and realize that their own prejudices can create the very situation they are afraid of when it wasn’t there before. There’s nothing to argue about anymore. Facts are facts. Breed bans are an outdated bandaid that have been proven to do nothing expect cost tax payers money.
“First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew….”
They came for the Pit Bulls and I did not speak out because I did not own a Pit Bull.
Then they came for my German Shepherd and there was no one left to speak out for me.
It’s not the dog, it’s the owner. As much as I know many good Pit owners a with fantastic dogs….the bad ones give the good ones a bad name.
I am against breed specific bans because I’m a student if human nature. When they succeed in banning one breed…they don’t stop there, they move on to the next and the next and the next till only their pocket pooches remain and no one is allowed to own a dog over 10 pounds.
My dog is kind and loving and would never hurt me or anyone else who wasn’t trying to harm her….. but all a ban sees is her breed. The City of Aurora didn’t hesitate to break into my yard and kidnap my German Shepherded while I was at work because a single neighbor complained that she was barking. It cost me 600$ to get her back. I have no doubt they wouldn’t hesitate to kidnap and kill my dog for the crime of being a “Banned breed”
…