Not only was I the worst, I was also the loudest.
A nameless band teacher gave me that advice one day, ending my short career as a drummer, well before it even began.
That was in third grade and it was the truth. An excited Labrador retriever has a more consistent rhythm than I do. Arms flailing, sticks pounding and headaches following, The unknown band assistant was mostly right, I had no business pursuing percussion further. It just wasn’t my gig.
I often feel that way about adults, who’ve long stopped listening to reason — and other people. Since when did talking louder become a better tool for debate than listening?
There’s also a point when it makes sense to stop talking because the point has already been made. I knew the moment the teacher made a beeline for the sticks in my hand, before she immediately reached for the aspirin bottle, what her point was.
I wish I had aspirin for the pit bull folks these days. The group of rabid owners regularly take to city hall, Internet message boards, other people’s grocery lists, bathroom walls and everywhere else to write and preach about the ills of restricted breed bans. Only hours after news comes out, pit bull fans are aggressively trolling websites to extol how unaggressive their animals are.
Take a deep breath folks. There are bigger problems in the world right now.
I get frustrated when I see people so vociferously defend animals while hunger and poverty permeate the news all the same. It’s not that I don’t care about dogs — I do, very passionately — I just wish some of that same enthusiasm rubbed off on people causes. It’s not an either/or proposition, I fully acknowledge that, but it would be nice to moderate comments on the rising number of poor people once.
There’s little doubt that these people are standing on solid ground, too. There are bad pet owners in the world, and they have a habit of raising aggressive dogs. What prompts these people to be so outspoken is the idea that the dogs can’t defend themselves in city courts or council meetings, and their nobility in fighting for mostly harmless animals is well taken.
Even further, it’s true that pit bulls can make for good family pets. Those dogs can be just as happy and well mannered as any family dog that I had growing up.
It’s also true that some dogs have been bred with undeniable traits that can make them ill fitted for some situations. Dalmatians were inbred for so long that some were crazier than my grandmother. Labradors were the same way; growing up our dogs had hips worse than, well, my grandmother. Golden retrievers can lose clumps of hair at a time, and the list goes on and on. I’m not Gregor Mendel, but math is on the side of saying that the possibility for bad traits exists.
To say that one breed is completely harmless is as logically flawed as saying that just one breed is inherently flawed.
But the methods of swamping meetings, and sending hate mail to prove your point doesn’t help any cause. Aurora is currently a battleground for this kind of debate and it seems that the good logic held by these dog owners is being flooded with unnecessary screams of corruption, collusion, ignorance and miserable taunting.
Down, folks.
Perfectly reasonable people can reach sensible conclusions without breathless hyperbole and constant fighting. Recent cities have shown that it’s possible to inject calm arguments into a debate and find common ground. Cities like Toledo, Ohio, have rejected breed bans in favor of punishing owners for being bad pet owners. That’s the right way to go.
Constantly bombarding everyone with convenient data isn’t only the wrong way to go, it’s also needlessly loud. Turn down the volume, hopefully we can better hear what we all have to say.
Aaron Cole is managing editor of the Aurora Sentinel. Reach him at acole@aurorasentinel.com
Please allow us a response to this interesting piece.
First, surely someone who has a degree in journalism understands bias in writing and so the words like “rabid” and “aggressive” enforce a stereotype about a group of people which simply is not true.
On the other side, thank you for acknowledging that dogs are individuals without regard to breed type. We would have hoped you might have extended the same courtesy to people who share a common belief but, choose to go about expressing it in a different manner.
We do not ever condone vitriol nor violence among advocates we support or work with, and certainly not within our own group. We believe that respectful dialogue is paramount in this and have seen, so far, that this is exactly what has happened. If you have seen otherwise in our posts, blogs or activities, please show us where. We would be interested and would like to address it.
We have remained open to speaking with people who would like the ban to stay in place, going so far to speak to a woman who was brave enough to stand up and speak her mind at a Council meeting. We wrote about her bravery and our conversation. You can view that on our blog. We are, and remain open, to speaking to people opposed to the ban repeal. They simply need to contact us. We will say that in all honestly, after receiving eight death threats, which we discussed with Aurora Police, from people opposed to repeal, we will not engage in hateful arguments nor endure threats. We also wish you could moderate your pages at times. It is exhausting to see the same out of state, and sometimes out of country individuals, posting the same myths, angry rants and threats to pit bull type dogs and they people who have them.
People have to right to address their city council, and ask for changes in policy. Your article mocks this right. You did so with chickens also. Because an issue in not important to one person does not negate it to others. We support communities to go to their city government, and open dialogue with the people they have voted into office. To support this, we have not spammed City Council with emails filled with pictures and unsubstantiated claims. We have submitted packets filled with peer-reviewed research that provides empirical evidence. We have responded to any concerns and question they may have had. As far as we have been told, not one piece of hate mail has been sent by any advocate.If you are hearing differently, we might suggest you find other sources in which to gather your facts.
We, along with many pit bull type dog owners, work tirelessly in fields that address the human conditions you worry about. Our own board consists of scientists, social workers, veterinary technicians, veterans and community activists. We spend our other hours working with senior citizens, discovering ways to make our environment less toxic to our communities, working to save you dog’s life while we have had to banish our own from the community we live in, and reaching out to under-resourced areas to help provide support so they can keep their beloved pet without regard to what breed it is.
Lastly, our group is not just about removing bans, it is about safe, humane communities. Breed bans send the wrong message about dog bites safety, who is deserving of attention based on the breed of dog who bites you, and takes family pets away from their homes. One only needs to look at recent bites and fatalities to find the greatest majority of these breeds responsible are not banned in Aurora.
We stand ready to help provide outreach and resources to Aurora. We also will continue to have a respectful discussion about the removal of the ban until it is gone, and reckless owners are held responsible without regard for breed. That is neither “rabid” nor “aggressive.” It is because we are passionate about responsible dog ownership and resources for people.
One thing to be sure is we wholeheartedly agree with your statement that reckless owner laws are they way to go. Kudos for that!
The AKC itself acknowledges that BREED MATTERS and that a dogs personality is a function of its BREED: https://www.akc.org/breeds/index.cfm
BREED MATTERS
Every dog has a distinct personality based on its breed. With 178 AKC-recognized breeds to choose from, doing your research is essential to finding the right breed for your lifestyle and a lifetime of happiness!
On breed bans:
“The AKC has always opposed breed bans on the basis that there are no bad dogs, just bad owners. We support reasonable, enforceable, non-discriminatory laws to govern the ownership of dogs,” said Margaret Poindexter, General Counsel for the AKC. “We also have serious concerns about AKC breed standards being used by law enforcement to identify dangerous dogs. Breed standards are intended to serve as the written ideal of a dog which breeders can aspire to, not a benchmark for defining dangerous dogs.”
the AKC is terrified of speaking truth because if they did they might loose a fair chunk of change. I would not have bought a Maltese for hunting upland game. No, I spent some big bucks for a Drathaar of German champion lines … and yes, he was worth it because of his BREED TRAITS to both point AND retrieve… while my GSPs were good at pointing… expecting them to retrieve was a ‘foreign language’ to them. I didn’t have to ‘train’ my Border Collie to herd…. the moment when he was nearly 4 months, he saw a friend’s herd of geese and went right to herding them into the next pen…. and yet you have some idiots trying to promote that Pit Bulls and their foundation stock as well as ‘herding dogs’. Only the Boerbel that is currently interbred with Pits is a herd guarding dog. It comes out of South Africa, bred to guard outland ranch cattle against all predators such as large cats, hyennas and human raiders are large and both animal and human aggressive yet these underground networks are including them in their breeding ‘programs’… and this is why you really can never ‘trust’ a current Pit… there is simply NO way, even with the UKC (which was designed FOR PBs) ‘registration… there is simply no way to totally verify the lineage…. as there was with the GSDs I worked with and my own gun dogs….or my Cairns and Scotties…. i met most of the kennel owners that contributed to my dogs… you simply cannot say that with most Pits….
ANIMAL PEOPLE concluded that the parallels prevalent in all three states support a hypothesis that both hunting and child abuse reflect the degree to which a social characteristic called dominionism prevails in a particular community. Stephen Kellert, in a 1980 study commissioned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in part to discover effective defenses of hunting, defined dominionism as an attitude in which “primary satisfactions [are] derived from mastery or control over animals,” a definition which other investigators extended to include the exercise of “mastery or control” over women and children.
Beings we are talking about the AKC. The AKC is the defining organization in Americas “Standard” of all recognized breeds Correct?
So why would we even think to band a breed that the AKC describes as fallowed?
The Staffordshire Bull Terrier is extremely courageous and obedient,
highly intelligent and affectionate with a sense of humor. This,
coupled with its affection for its friends, and children in particular,
its off-duty quietness and trustworthy stability, makes it a foremost
all-purpose dog. He looks forward to daily exercise, and his powerful
jaws enjoy a supply of sturdy chew toys. While he is a sweet-tempered,
affectionate dog, his strength and determination require an experienced
owner who can work with him in a firm, but gentle way. The Staffie’s
coat is short and smooth, and needs only a quick brushing once a week.
They are now up to be included in the ‘dangerous dog act’ in UK…. go back and really learn their history for the last 300+ years… check out ‘butcher’s dog whic was their original purpose.. a needed one at that time but now?
You better get your facts right Staffys are not going to be on the DDL in the uk . We are the UK voices for the Staffys and their are to many of us. You silly women who have you been speaking to the ninja who knows sweet FA about anything. Go figure and get some real facts for once.
“RABID” and AGGRESSIVE are two very different things… ‘rabid is a health issue… and since a very highly disproportionate of Pits are NOT vaccinated, the victims have to undergo the rabies protocols which are not only still painful but very expensive. and the owners of these dogs usualy disappear so the victim has to pay for his own recovery…. yet Pit owners fight tooth and claw against any guarantee of fiscal responsibilty conditions… aggressive is generally an inbred trait…the most abused breed (after the Pit) is the greyhound yet you are going to have to look long and hard to find an innately aggressive one.
At my age, I can probably bet that I’ve been working with dogs longer than your footprint has been on the earth… but never took money for it, except when I worked with a friend in NY to train her champion GSDs for police departments…. but I have worked with the human component of the PB problems as I taught in juvenile corrections so I probably know more of the dirty secrets of the PB underground networks that breed these more aggressive and larger individual dog, than anyone would want to know…. or that you may only suspect but resist acknowledging.
The following quotes come from a collection of articles compiled in The Complete Gamedog- A Guide to Breeding and Raising the American Pit Bull Terrier by Ed and Chris Faron. – https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_TQhn0TrPSbN3FHdlZaMklJaUE/edit?usp=sharing
Plastic surgeons view & why Pit Bull attacks are so severe – https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_TQhn0TrPSbMUR0YzZvbHFnNWc/edit?usp=sharing
ARE “PIT BULLS” DIFFERENT? AN ANALYSIS OF THE PIT BULL TERRIER CONTROVERSY – https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_TQhn0TrPSbTTZLZ19FdGltNDA/edit?usp=sharing
Psychological Characteristics Owners of High Risk for Aggression Dog Breeds | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/200903/psychological-characteristics-owners-high-risk-aggression-dog-breeds
Ownership of High-Risk (“Vicious”) Dogs as a Marker for Deviant Behaviors – https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_TQhn0TrPSbc3NwT0ttcHdlbEk/edit?usp=sharing
Dogmen: The Rationalization of Deviance – https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_TQhn0TrPSbYkdBejJKMzNqcjA/edit?usp=sharing
Reckless owner laws are the way to go? Your last statement goes directly against everything else you stated. Also this all sounds all good and fine, but if bot BSL, how do you propose to make irrersponsible owners more responsible?
And one another thing..you complain that the people making comments are from other towns. The Pit Bull Advocacy is not from this town either. I could maybe see giving some consideration to repealing this ban if a group of citizens from this town got together and brought it up for legislation, but we all know this is not the cased. These people are from places like Animal Farm Foundation, that profit from donations, and after they are done with Aurora, they will move on to another town, that’s what they get paid for. The citizens, forv the most part, have already expressed that they want to keep the Ban, it is working, the number of dog related injuries that are serious and that put people in the hospital are way down from when Pit bulls were legal
Actually most pit nutters are crazy people that threaten death and violence, I have been advocating for BSL for about a year now, and most of the pit nutter responses that I have ever gotten were death threats, and these were pit parents not dog fighters . I have never seen any BSL advocate act this way.
It’s pretty much a lose-lose situation for advocates. If we stay silent, you’ll say no one supports repeal of the ban. If we speak out in a way that annoys you, you’ll say we’re rabid and irrational and you won’t listen. Perhaps the emotional tone of the comments you get on this subject should make you think about WHY people get so agitated? P.S. There is ZERO evidence that a dog of a certain appearance is dangerous because of its genetics. The DNA tests your city demands of dogs called “pit bulls” show that the vast majority of the dogs have NO genetic component of the breeds typically called by that name. So I don’t get your point about Mendel, unless you’re going to propose that all dogs with short hair and blocky heads are dangerous. Which of course is exactly the assumption made by cities like Aurora that ban “pit bulls”, wantonly kill innocent dogs and break up families, and why these bans are so cruel and ineffective. Maybe that explains why people get emotional about them….
Thank god SOMEONE said something about that!
In fact the people pro ban are more of trolls then we are.
On a daily basis on pages CLEARLY for pit supporters comments from people who are for the ban… They had to like the page to comment… But WE’RE “rabid” and “aggressive”?!
This is an ignorant article.
Thank you ColoRADogs for your well-stated comments. I think the part of this OpEd that I find upsetting is the reference to their being more important causes in the world (i.e., the rising number of poor people). I, for one, am an ardent animal welfare advocate; however, I am also an advocate for the poor and disenfranchise as well. I volunteer a significant amount of time with the homeless, at food banks and we;; as monetary contributions to child welfare causes. Because I choose to support one worthy cause does not negate the validity of another. If everyone only supported ONE cause in this world – where would that leave us? And lets consider for a moment the correlations between poverty, criminal lifestyles, lack of education, child abuse and the pit bull problem. I do not agree with BSL as it is a wrong-headed approach to the dog-bite/attack problem. I support laws that punish irresponsible ownershi, cruelty and neglect while promoting education and resources for pet owners.
And therein lies the problem. An opinion piece like this. Anyone can post an article or an opinion piece and act like some kind of expert. But the proof is there in the media that there is tremendous bias towards certain type dogs and people. Things are starting to change for the better because people stand up against unfair treatment of people and dogs who have done nothing wrong but get blamed for one incident when other people and other dogs don’t. This rarely has anything to do with public safety but everything to do with stereotyping of people and animals, an unfortunate habit that too many people still have. We all have to question what is put out there in the media because it’s a business. Nothing more than that. And there are many people who are in elected positions that know nothing about an issue they are voting on. It pays to speak up but of course, in a civil manner. Humans are always going to have problems created by humans but if a subject or vote has to do with dogs of course you are going to talk about dogs. Caring about dogs does NOT exclude caring about people.
It is you people who turn every breed of dog into a pit bull. For example, (keep in mind that this list is not comprehensive for lack of space) we have the confirmed boxer-shepherd mixes that DBO claimed to be pit bulls, all of the bull mastiffs that DBO claims are pit bulls, and you people even tried to turn a pair of AKC registered black labs into pit bulls. Nice try on the bait and switch, though.
What you constantly fail to understand is that people must continue to use the parallel term of ‘racist’ because you knuckleheads cannot seem to grasp the equidistant concept that what you practice and advocate for is equal to racism, but you dimwits apply it to the animal kingdom. Talk about profound ignorance!
One final thought: Were you aware that within your last statement that you have included ALL dog breeds considering that they are all man-made and every dog breed has temperament and behaviors that have proven to be harmful and cruel? Yea, didn’t think so.
Interesting, but you lost me when you stated that dalmations can have aggressive genes. Thank you for pointing that out, because pit bulls were MADE to have aggressive genes. You can’t train that out of them.
It is fairly impossible to select for consistent aggression in a dog breed. It is why we see it in so many breeds, including dogs such as heelers who are incredibly popular. Additionally, there are small breed dogs who are top biters. Those would include Chihuahuas and Dachshunds. Obviously they tend to do less damage than a large breed dog. They have not been “made” to have “aggressive genes,” but yet here they are on the top of the list. Dalmatians have been selectively breed for a spotting pattern and it has resulted in some issues with temperament. There are communities that have tried to include this breed in their bans. They are also a breed which has been listed as dangerous on some insurance lists. No breed is immune from discrimination, and breed-neutral legislation is how we protect communities.
I would highly recommend that you go to YOuTube and watch the PBS documentary DOGS DECODED and watch for the Russian experiment in trying to breed a less aggressive silver fox. They were trying to promote a fur industry but the natural silver fox is a really really nasty creature and the breeders were getting ripped to shreds so the idea was to breed a less aggressive fox, but a very surprising result came from this program… worth watching.
where did the words “dalmation” and “aggressive” appear together.
His quote: Dalmatians were inbred for so long that some were crazier than my grandmother –
Thanks for showing your inability to comprehend what you read.
kristy, i don’t think anyone pays much attention to bigsis86 anymore. she’s now infamous for stating: “Sure, you can educate women on how to keep from being raped.”
You know, we could turn that statement back around on her or him or it or whatever this person is by saying that anyone associated with DBO (which we know that he/she/it is) has been bred to be an idiot, especially with a response like he/she/it just made.
Yea, that was in reply to a comment I made regarding a child being molested and no one commenting on her news article. So her response was not only way off base but totally disgusting.
Of the 4,597 dogs involved in fatal and disfiguring attacks on humans occurring in the U.S. & Canada since September 1982, when I began logging the data, 3,103 (68%) were pit bulls; 549 were Rottweilers; 3,908 (85%) were of related molosser breeds, including pit bulls, Rottweilers, mastiffs, bull mastiffs, boxers, and their mixes. Of the 543 human fatalities, 282 were killed by pit bulls; 86 were killed by Rottweilers; 409 (75%) were killed by molosser breeds. Of the 2,762 people who were disfigured, 1,865 (68%) were disfigured by pit bulls; 320 were disfigured by Rottweilers; 2,319 (84%) were disfigured by molosser breeds. Pit bulls–exclusive of their use in dogfighting–also inflict more than 70 times as many fatal and disfiguring injuries on other pets and livestock as on humans, a pattern unique to the pit bull class. Surveys of dogs offered for sale or adoption indicate that pit bulls and pit mixes are less than 6% of the U.S. dog population; molosser breeds, all combined, are 9%.
shut up Merritt.
Truth sounds like hate to those who hate the truth.
In Chicago over 77% of murders are perpetrated by African Americans…… See how that works? Just because there is a disproportionate amount of a population being affected does NOT equal an “aggressive” race. Or maybe to you it’s one in the same? That’s what’s called racism.
Merritt- Your horribly inaccurate stats along with hysterical tirades like those of Thomas McCarthy, and the usual suspects, do not just lead the public to believe untruths. What they do is create unsafe communities by lying about how to prevent dog bites. You also released a study of yours that you said concluded that there was a high rate of pedophiles among deer hunters. Please stop printing such horribly inaccurate numbers that have been disproved time and again.
You know a pit lover is lying when they’re typing on their keyboard.
Please tell the people of Aurora you have something more to offer to such an important dialogue KaD.
There are no such data. Hospitals don’t keep records on “breeds” involved with dog bites The phrase “related Molosser breeds” is meaningless. There is no such thing as a “pit bull class”. If you lump a whole bunch of dogs together, whose only similarity is a certain physical appearance, you’re accomplishing the perfect “lie with statistics”. Kind of like the Aurora Animal Control did in its report to the city council. As for Merritt he pulls his info from newspaper accounts and other notoriously unreliable sources (as for as “breed” identification goes)……. so guess what……….. garbage in, garbage out…
why post under the name of animal people now, merritt? is it because too many people have associated you with flawed and debunked ‘statistics’?
Should post under the name Brainless People .
Yes YOU should.
I know why you are scared of pit bulls , your head is solid bone .
look in the mirror pitty bull… you refuse to acknowledge the bad as well the good… what will it take for you to see the totalyity of the breed which includes death and maulings… not bites… mauling…. this could easily be YOUR child, your nephew, your cousin or merely your neighbor… are you insured?
This very sad instance has nothing to do with me or my dogs . Worry about yourself , not my family .
Its amazing how Pit Lovers hate the organizations that have the true facts and data about Pit Bulls, such as DOB and Animal People. They hate the truth
i have no idea who DOB is. as far as animal people, if you believe everything clifton cites as statistics, then you would also believe it when he stated that animal trappers and hunters will be convicted of pedophilia within 10 years.
They hate.
does truth and reality scare you Randy? That is usually the resort of those who don’t want to look at reality.
WIll you be also posting the children killed by bullmastiffs and the one recently who was attacked badly by a black lab?Because again, there is owner culpability. But, hysteria sells and brings in donations. On the backs of dog bite victims. Shameful.
you scare me, joanna. i’m afraid you’re going to go postal on an innocent person some day. it’s not normal when someone wishes death on an innocent disabled child, and people that own pit bulls. it’s obvious you need professional mental health treatment.
https://foolishfolliestoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/mcginn.jpg
https://foolishfolliestoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/mcginn2.jpg
Perhaps you should read this, since pretty much every aspect of pseudo-science nails your “statistics” on the head. Particularly the part about not being able to reproduce results and not sourcing data. So, even though you have been asked many times, it bears repeating, where DOES your data come from? https://webspace.utexas.edu/cokerwr/www/index.html/distinguish.htm
He surveys adverts, pure genius eh?
Yes, SophiaRose! I have continually asked the same question for well over a year and still have not received a valid reply. The only type of response that I get is from DBO supporters who continually re-victimize the victims and try to turn Shepherd-Boxer mixes into pit bull type dogs.
I think you have posted this 497 times.
pitty bull…I think you left off a digit. Shouldn’t it be more like 5,497 times?
Maybe 9,497 , either way , no one is listening and ever will .
Nope not to YOUR ignorant statistics (: <3
Wow , not only are you an idiot , but a chicken .
There are 3 parts be sure to read them all
https://whoiscolleenlynn.com/clifton_study_and_statistics_a_reliable_source/
Arron, I certainly hope that you are aware that a large majority of nasty emails were sent from people who are members of Dogsbite and related hate-groups. For that matter, that cult of people spend the majority of their time advocating on behalf of a person who set up her own attack and created her own personal vendetta, probably because she is vindictive and suffers from ‘little sister syndrome’ where she feels that she deserves all of the attention. They also spend the majority of their time trolling the internet looking for dogs that attack and hoping that someone gets fatally injured so they can harass and stalk the the victim or the victim’s family. When there are no dog attacks, they spend their time trying to find ways to shift responsibility for their own shortcomings, argue with false and unverified information, refuse to take responsibility, create stories to fit into the group, and have even created a bloody doll and posted it on ebay with the name of the organization.
Do you really think that these people have the capacity to positively contribute to society?
Yes, KaD, even though you used a word which is not permitted, I can still see your response. And no, I do not speak lies. DBO is indeed one crock. All of it. The person who runs it has no idea on how to keep accurate records, all of the information is intentionally circled around to confuse the reader, the third party in which you speak so highly of refuses to disclose his source which renders his studies invalid and useless, and what you may not totally understand is that anyone can write an amicus brief, even she can do it in all of her idiocy. Word on the street is that she didn’t even write the amicus brief, by the way. Your leader intentionally set up her attack by startling the dog and her bite wounds were superficial in comparison to those she supposedly advocates for. Why does her story keep changing and why can’t she keep her story straight? It is time that you get over yourself, KaD. You are losing your misdirected battle.
That little doll tactic was not done by a DBO person. it was done by another organization that is pro Pit Bull. DBO always maintains a high level of honesty and integrity, that’s why when newspapers, magazines lawyers and courts go to DBO when they need the true facts and figures. Even a couple of organizations that wrote Pro Pit Bull articles..went to DBO for the facts they needed
Yea, right. Like I really believe that one! Did you know that we can see right through you? And did you know that you just gave me the best laugh of the month!?
is that jaloney baloney posting under a new name? hiding in shame because she was busted and outed by some of her own cult members. lol
Are you for real? It is well known who posted that item for sale on ebay, joanie was admonished by the coven mistress of DBO herself for pulling that stunt. DBO a credible source of information? Best laugh i have had all year.
Lets let the public decide who is credible..
https://whoiscolleenlynn.com/
https://foolishfolliestoo.com/?p=293
oh looky what I found
DBO maintains the highest level of honesty and integrity??!!?? What planet do you live on anyway because it obviously isn’t earth??
For your information that nasty disgusting doll auction was done by one of DBO’s supporters. It was easily traced back to her email account and also acknowledged by another one of your group.
As for integrity….how about *Stumping for pits* as the lead in a post regarding a young woman who had lost part of one leg?? Or referring to someone mauled by their own dog as a *Darwin Attack*? Or let’s just look at the moronic *Psychic Gerbil* crap constantly used on DBO’s own page…that in itself speaks volumes about the level of maturity, intelligence, and integrity that DBO exemplifies. FACE IT…that organzation and its founder is a fraud and it is being proven time and time again.
Considering how many dogs are euthanized yearly in this country, how about across the board mandatory spay/neuter? Wouldn’t that help reduce the number of attacks as well as reducing the number of unwanted dogs?
The good news is that shelter killings have dropped fairly precipitously over the last few decades.. I’m not sure of the exact number, but if believe the decline is around 70 to 80% since the 70’s.
However, mandatory spay neuter tends to cause more problems that give solutions. There are major enforcement issues and ultimately, the problem (speaking broadly) in the communities where there are repeal issues is not that people don’t want to spay or neuter their pets, but that they don’t have easy and low cost access to spay or neuter services. Plus if you had mandatory spay neuter nationwide, then what you would end up with is more incentive for backyard breeders to operate. We would end up in the same place we are today, having expended significant resources trying to enforce an unenforceable law.
But if we were to expend those same funds providing low cost spay neuter services and making them accessible in poor communities (eg. Mobile clinics that could operate within the communities), there would be real progress.
“…Causes more problems…” Check out San Francisco. Mandatory spay/neuter has greatly reduced shelter killings and attacks. Free spay/neuter for pit bulls is available. Where there is no mandatory spay/neuter, even free services do not entice pit bull owners to spay/neuter. (There is also a problem with Chihuahuas over breeding.) Pit bull owners S/N at an alarmingly low rate, around 30%. Around a million unwanted pit bulls killed in shelters yearly. What MSN laws also do is give neighbors the ability to report dangerous dogs that have not been S/N. Owners are held accountable. Over and over I see advocates dismissing any sort of regulation, insisting that education is more effective. How do you educate a population that insists a fighting breed is somehow a “nanny” dog?
San Francisco is probably the only city where it has worked… and that’s because they do combine with incredible low cost spay/neuter programs, and an extremely active pit bull community. It’s also among the wealther cities in the country, so there’s more funding to subsidize those programs. For every San Francisco, there’s a Kansas City and a Los Angeles and a Little Rock and the list goes on.
Again, it’s not just about having free services available, it’s about having them available and accessible. For example – let’s say the person who needs the services is someone who relies on public transportation (where they can’t bring their dog), and the clinic is an hour away and only open during their working hours. This is a fairly common scenario.
Neighbors can report dangerous dogs without mandatory spay neuter. And what do you propose about dangerous dogs of breeds that aren’t covered by mandatory spay neuter laws?
As far as your education, I would say the focus should be on making people realize that they are neither fighting breeds nor nanny dogs. They’re just dogs.
Mike, I believe in spay/neuter for all breeds. Here in Los Angeles, that is what we have. And the bus argument, come on. You get a dog, you have some obligations. Everyone has a friend or relative with a car, there are also mobile clinics… options are available and if you are too poor to care for a dog properly, you shouldn’t have a dog.
The history of the breed is well annotated: they were bred to fight. Not all pits are aggressive, but the ones that are can be very dangerous. Not for me, and hopefully not for any of my neighbors.
The bus argument is a real one – not one of my own invention. I agree with your point that when you get a dog, you have obligations. Unfortunately, what we see time and time again is that the human side of the leash doesn’t fulfill them – if anyone can devise a way to legislate against “stupid and ignorant” I’m all for it. I also agree with you 150% on the importance of mobile clinics – the question is whether or not those clinics are being provided to the areas that need them the most. Sometimes they are, most often they aren’t.
As far as fighting breeds: the assumption being made is that the dogs being bred for fighting these days are actually of any given breed. At best, the significant majority aren’t actually purebred pit bulls (eg. APT, AST) by any stretch of the imagination, but instead are highly mixed breed dogs bred for their physical characteristics. As an example, there was just a case in Ontario where someone was selectively breeding rottweiler/boxer mixes to look like pit bulls. Many of today’s snubnosed dogs, like boxers and bulldogs, weren’t a century ago, and buried physical traits reemerge when dogs mix. This is why Aurora actually changed their pit bull identification process to include DNA testing, because many of the dogs that were considered pit bulls simply weren’t.
https://aspcapro.org/blog/2013/09/25/bully-this%E2%80%94-results-are-in%E2%80%A6
96% accuracy in identifying pit bulls.
Two people killed by pits yesterday, a 3 year-old boy and an elderly woman. A 4-year old girl killed a few days ago by family pit. 9 children killed so far this year by pit/pit mixes. Numerous attacks and maulings.
I know three instances where pits killed smaller pets, one right here on my block. And I don’t live in an area that has a lot of pits.
How many Golden Retrievers are bred to be hunting dogs? They still love to retrieve.
You can fight against restrictions, the result will be a ban. No perfect solutions, but doing nothing will only result in a rise in fatalities.
Meanwhile, I walk with pepper spray and a knife.
Would you care to share with anyone who may read this what that ASPCA study was actually studying, and what the findings were? Actually referring to it as a breed identification study is misleading bordering on dishonest. As is including Bullmastiffs as pit bulls, or pit bull type dogs. Or boxer mixes. This is the problem with the pro-BDL/BSL side.. it doesn’t take them long to start quoting fabricated statistics, or to focus on anything other than actual factors that show up in these tragedies again and again such as chained and abused dogs, backyard breeders, dogs with histories of violence, unattended children, etc. Heck, even the anti-BSL side seemed to miss the fact that federal anti-dog fighting laws were tightened last month, so I’m not claiming that either side is perfect.
mandatory insurance requirements, with seizure of the dog if you don’t have it, allowable grace period to obtain the insurance unless it’s already attacked a victim… which in that case it’s euthanized within 10 days with NO court delays. 2nd offence (assuming the human end gets another dog of the same type and doesn’t adhere to the regulations then they have jail time AND forbidden to own any dog for a period of time and an education class. You can’t realistically keep people from having these dogs, but you CAN try to mitigate the damages they cause to innocent citizens.
I agree with you on one count. Anyone convicted of animal abuse or gross negligence in owning a dog should have their right to own a dog revoked. As far as everything else, as long as it applies to all dogs… Great! Or, dogs that are kept/intended for certain purposes.. Such as defense, breeding, etc. We shouldn’t have amateurs breeding, training or keeping dogs for negative purposes, right?
Pit Bull advocacy can threaten and push all they want, but they cannot force people to get a Pit Bull. Most people have seen the risks involved in having one of these dogs, and they don’t want to take that risk. Most figure “Why take the chance?” And, most people, do not take kindly to them being in the neighborhoods either, and some are pretty vocal about that.
Psychological Characteristics Owners of High Risk for Aggression Dog Breeds | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/200903/psychological-characteristics-owners-high-risk-aggression-dog-breeds
really, joanna. how could you, of all people with all of those so called “credentials” believe such nonsense. 869 W.V. college students are a drop in the bucket of the the millions of pit bull owners.
“In the West Virginia study data was collected data from 869 college students who completed an anonymous online questionnaire.”
I believe that Los Angeles does have (or did at least) have a mobile spay and neuter clinic big RV set up as a vet office for those low income or non-English speaking areas. San Francisco is also a much more ‘contained’ city while Los Angeles resembles and amoeba on the map…. and the Sf SPCA had a program that tried to re-breed the Pit Bull and turn it into the ‘St. Francis Terrier’ but after 8 years they had to admit it was a waste of time and money and a failure. They used to have a call-in radio program in the 80s and you could follow that…
There are fighting breeds… Dog fighters CHOOSE Pits primarily as well as their ‘experiments’ in inter breeding. They do NOT fight with poodles, do they. However, even as well as I know dogs, I would never leave ANY dog alone with a child… frankly more for the safety of the dog.
The shelters are euthanizing over 900,000 Pit Bulls alone, every year for the past , at least, 4 years.
And millions of dogs of other breeds. It’s a failure of our society, but one that is certainly getting better. The numbers used to be 10x higher after all.
***Cities like Toledo, Ohio, have rejected breed bans in favor of punishing owners for being bad pet owners. That’s the right way to go.***
That depends on someone getting attacked first, or another child’s face being torn off. Perish the thought that we get PROACTIVE and prevent those tragedies from happening in the first place. After it’s all said and done, it’s not the owners who disfigure those victims, its the dogs.
Saying one breed is flawed is not illogical if it is TRUE. Pit bulls were bred for centuries to be a pit fighting dog extraordinaire. The traits that were BRED into them to make them so-disproportionate, unprovoked, and explosive aggression, hold and shake attack style (which causes exponentially more damage than a mere dog BITE), gameness (unwillingness to recognize submission in other dogs or to give up attacking, even after being stabbed and shot repeatedly), and high pain tolerance-make these dogs unsafe, unsuitable, and defective as a PET animal. That is why pit bull have KILLED more people than every other breed COMBINED, every decade since 1851 (fatalpitbullattacks.com). That is why they kill and cause SEVERE, life altering injuries at a rate more than three times the next most vicious breed (https://images.bimedia.net/documents/Dog+attack+stats+with+breed+2012.pdf). This is why pit bulls ALONE are responsible for 99% of the FATAL attacks on other people’s dogs (https://www.17barks.blogspot.com/2014/01/its-slaughterhouse-out-there.html). The fact is that dog fighting is a BILLION dollar a year tax free industry, and without the cover of people keeping pit bulls as pets the felons could not continue to get away with it. Almost a MILLION pit bulls a year are euthanized at the taxpayers expense, two thirds are owner surrendered (https://cravendesires.blogspot.com/2011/10/animal-people-more-adoptions-will-not.html)
Hi KaD-
Thank you for finally posting something other than an insult. However, every single site you have that claims “evidence,” have long been discredited as nothing more than the “National Enquirer” of breed behaviors. Craven Desires is one that supports people who have been demoted from jobs as firemen for their graphic descriptions of killing pit bulls. Every one of these sites regularly has comments that incite and support violence against dogs who look a certain way, and their owners. Several of the sites are also owned by the same person who has a more popular site that is quoted often. We speak strongly against anything but open and respectful dialogue. However, when threats of violence or worse are posted on those sites, what do we hear from Colleen and her people? Silence.
The other concern is that these usual postings from you and your cohorts come from across the country. They are not from Aurora nor even Colorado. You have no real stake in this conversation. You do not pay taxes here, do not own a home or have a family in Colorado.
We are the ones in the community. We will be there to offer resources to all owners and their dogs in Aurora and beyond. We live in these communities, raise our children, buy our homes and pay our taxes here.
The people of Aurora, and of Colorado, deserve so much better than you and your friends agenda and misinformation.
No they haven’t been discredited.. you’re losing your reasonable ‘voice’… those ones you fear the most are the most respected and the ones that are considered authoritative, enough for court awards of 6 digits…., Since the government doesn’t seem to care how many people, esp children are killed by these dogs every year to keep a mandated data base on not just numbers by rating the bites on a rubric scale describing the severity. Chihuahuas probably bite more, but on a scale of 1 to 10 probably a never more than a 1 while Pits would most often rate a 5 to 10 (death) number, but at least that would take out the emotionality from the evaluations if everyone clearly understood what is being discussed.
Joanna- We see that you also spend a great deal of time posting on community boards that are not in your state. This is, of course your right. However, people are growing tired of the hysteria based discussions. This is being witnessed as communities and states across our nation look to owners, and not dogs, to hold accountable.
Simply put, border collies do not herd sheep because they are raised on sheep farms; rather, they are raised on sheep farms because they herd. In addition pointers point, retrievers retrieve, and mastiffs guard, all because those traits are part of their breed expectations, meaning strong and continuous selection in the underlying breeding program ”
Simply put Pit bulls do not attack because they are raised with dog fighters and drug dealers, dog fighters and drug dealers use pit bulls because they attack!
It is their nature, their genetic truth and reality.!!
It is not how you raise them rather it is simply what they are.!!
Just like sled dogs run and pull, it is just their nature.!!
A pit bull type dog is what it is and does what it is.You can no more alter it genetic makeup then you can a collies to herd, a hounds to track, a retriever’s to retrieve, a labs to swim, a pointers to point, a sled dog to run and pull.
They do what they are and a pit bull type dog is a mauling violent killer that has been bred to be a land shark, nothing you do can change that, even if you have them from birth.
No matter if you love them, or how you nurture, train, rehabilitate, raise them optimally as normal dogs from birth, you can not change their Genetic reality to Kill, Maul, Maim, Disfigure, Dismember, cause Life Flights or trips to the Intensive Care Unit.
For over 600 years the current pit bull type dog was brought into being through careful selective genetic breeding to create the most violent murderous fighting dog possible.
I hope Mr Cole notes who it is “aggressively trolling websites”… because it’s not the “pit bull fans” he calls out in his editorial.
And Mr Stephens: I love your proposal to ban all “Molosser” breeds (though this term is essentially meaningless because it refers to the ancient type of dog from which mastiffs and bulldogs descend.)… Your ban would include St Bernards, Newfoundlands, Bernese Mt Dogs and all mastiff-related breeds, as well as English bulldogs and all the bulldog-related breeds. Ironically, it would NOT include the purebred APBT/AST or SBT. Those breeds are NOT Molossers.. they are bulldog and terrier mixes. Same as the bull terrier (white and colored versions) the miniature bull terrier and the Boston bull terrier… all of which share very very similar historic origins/purpose and breeding.
Emily my sweet, what abvout Or all dangerous dogs must be: Or all dangerous molosser breeds, do you not understand, only dangerous molosser dogs are referenced such a such as pit bull type dogs not all molosser dogs.
Any breed mixed with a molosser such as the bull dog or old english bull doggie breeds would be Molosser breeds genetically with the same genetic truths and realities & outcomes such as as any APBT/AST or SBT.
In Calgary, by Bill Bruce’s own admission and documentation, pit bulls lead the serious bite count with 13% of the city’s serious bites attributable to pit bulls, yet pit bulls account for less than 1% of the city’s dogs.
In fact, pit bulls are responsible for nearly as many serious bites (13%) as the ENTIRE sporting breeding category (15%), which includes all of the most popular breeds (Labs, Goldens, Poodles, Spaniels, etc) and houses 70% of Calgary’s dogs.
Why aren’t these breeds attacking in the face of irresponsible ownership?
An example of why leashing and licensing laws don’t work to solve the breed-specific problem of pit bulls:
Pitbull supporters always point to Calgary Model as the perfect solution when dealing with dangerous dogs. The city introduced its responsible pet ownership bylaw in 2006.
Calgary’s bylaw department emphasizes responsible pet ownership through intensive licensing, hefty fines and owner education.
Has their model worked? The statistics from the past four years would indicate a resounding “NO”. For the past four years dog bites have risen steadily every year, and over 350% in the past 4 years, from 58 in 2009 to 203 in 2012.
And In 2010 Pit bulls led the ‘bite’ count. Meanwhile in Toronto, four years after implementing Breed Bans, dog bites were down 32%, from 486 to 329.
Bites in Toronto blamed on the four banned breeds fell sharply, from 71 in 2005 to only six in 2010.
Considering these breeds regularly inflict the most serious damage, this is an undeniable win for the citizens of Toronto.
so glad for the opportunity to expose your sexism as well as your selective cherry picking for the purpose of ginning up hatred. Here’s Mr Bruce himself on the subject:
https://councillordiane.ca/thoughts-pit-bull-ban/
and his department on the subject:
https://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/ABS/Pages/Animal-Services/Animal-Services.aspx
so unlike you, Mr Bruce, who cares about and is responsible for public safety, as opposed to hysteria-mongering, knows that breed bans do not work.
no more responses from me. Troll on.
Oh poor poor sweet cheeks, bet that is the most you get in a year baby 😉
Bruce is a scum bag pit nutter, pit pusher, pit apologist, the numbers prove the reality of his failure, anecdotes and pit nutter talking points are not relevant nor credible.
Pit bull attacks go through the roof due to his molly coddling them and he shrugs scratches himself and has no rejoinder.
Barbara Kay: Dog bites man — again and again
Barbara Kay | 13/08/22
Thanks to (literally) thick skin, a Calgary-resident beagle named Arlo will recover from a recent unprovoked attack by two neighbouring pit bulls. The vet bill for stitching up Arlo’s neck and shoulder — $3600 — tells us that what will be officially recorded as “bites” were in fact the mauling typically associated with pit-bull-type dogs.
If Arlo had been the family’s thin-skinned child, one shudders to think of the likely outcome. Here is yet another reminder that the vaunted “Calgary model” for containing dangerous-dog harm isn’t working.
Because of the disproportionate damage they cause to other animals and humans, especially children, some 600 communities across North America have chosen breed selective legislation to ban pit-bull-type dogs. But Calgary opted for “responsible pet ownership”: strict licencing, public education and owner accountability.
So the (unlicenced) pit bulls’ owner is paying the vet bill. Which is no solace to Arlo and his owners, or other neighbours, now understandably fearful in their instantly-devalued homes.
Arlo’s assailants should be euthanized. Instead they will be “assessed,” after which they may get a second chance, as juvenile first (human) offenders usually do. Trouble is, dogs are not humans.
The purpose-bred fighting breed cluster pit bulls represent, genetically programmed for impulsive aggression, cannot be trained into reliable sociability, any more than greyhounds can be trained to adopt the running gait of a sled dog.
If this strikes you as mere common sense, reader, you are out of the canine-correctness loop. Most dog-industry spokespeople — veterinarians, humane shelters, animal charities — have bought into the sentimental, but anti-scientific tropes promoted by pit bull advocates. Ignoring hard evidence, they piously invoke common mantras like “all dogs bite” and “it’s bad owners, not bad dogs.”
Both statements are misleading. Unlike pit-bull-type dogs, non-fighting dogs usually only bite defensively. When they do, they grab and release; they don’t maul in the grip-and-rend style of fighting dogs. Explosive, unpredictable aggression can emerge in pit bulls as young as four months. Bad owners may exacerbate pit bulls’ inherited traits, but even ideal owners cannot eliminate or reliably control them.
In his continually updated “Clifton Report,” available online, Animal People editor Merritt Clifton publishes tallied of serious human damage — maulings, maimings and fatalities by dogs — tallied by breed. (He has been tracking such data since the early 1980s.)
According to these numbers, derived from Centers for Disease Control and police reports, amongst other sources, pit-bull-type dogs represent 3000% of the actuarial risk of more typical breeds. Rottweilers represent 2000%, and — to show the disproportion — German Shepherds, the third highest-risk breed, represent only 300% average risk.
Since 1982, pit bulls have killed 259 of the 511 North American victims of fatal dog attacks
In fact, Farmers Group Insurance in California recently stopped liability coverage for pit bulls and Rottweilers (and wolf hybrids). Tellingly, the number of attacks and the amount of payout has doubled in those jurisdictions that — like Calgary — refuse to enact breed selective legislation.
Before the late 20th century proliferation of pit bulls into the dog population, no other breed had ever killed or maimed humans in numbers that come even remotely close to those killed by pit bull type dogs. (Dobermans, widely maligned in their fashionable day as dangerous, have killed four people in the U.S. since 1982.)
The exponential growth of pit bull love — they currently represent the second most popular breed after retrievers in sales — is a worrying cultural phenomenon. Now 6% of the dog population, since 1982, pit bulls have killed 259 of the 511 North American victims of fatal dog attacks, according to Clifton.
Bans work. They eliminate the loathsome crime of dog fighting and ancillary criminal activity, notably drug dealing, that dog fighting attracts. They stop the co-optation of public spaces by intimidating youths parading canine weaponry. Overcrowded humane shelters empty out, as dumped pit bulls represent much of their intake.
Most important: Bans spare animals and people horrible suffering. San Francisco saw an 81% decline in fatal or disfiguring pit bull attacks in the eight years following its ban; Toronto dog bites have decreased by 32% — from 486 to 329 — since the 2006 Ontario ban on pit bulls.
The Calgary model is failing. Despite its record licencing rate of 90% — four times higher than the average in other cities — Calgary area pit bull attacks have more than tripled: from 58 in 2009 to 201 in 2012.
Facts are facts. What part of “public safety hazard” does Calgary not understand?
National Post
75% of all Animal Shelters in the US will euthanize all pit bulls, pit crosses or any dogs that even looks like one immediately with no attempt to adopt them out.
The other 25% will also euthanize within a few days to a week if adoption doesn’t take place.
Why is this?, because nobody wants any of the evil disgusting Mutants, they can’t give them away, that is why 93% of all Pitts in Animal Shelters in the US are killed , over 1.1 Million Pit Bulls every year are killed in this manner every year after year after year after year in the US alone.
Over 100 a day are killed in animal shelters in LA county alone, 73,000 a year after year after year after year.
That is over 12 million pit bulls killed in Animal Shelters in the US in the last decade alone.
The Idiot Pit Nutters who are playing their rescue game are losers and losing the battle as the few hundred they save is a pittance compared to the Million plus killed the same year.
They show their support for these mutants by fighting against laws against their breeding that could prevent this as a result much needed mass slaughter of pit bulls, they are responsible for all of this and show their ignorance and hypocrisy by continuing fight against what is actually in the best interests of this perverted breed.
That’s 2,750 a day or 345 every hour, right this moment somewhere in the US a pit bull will rip, ravage and maul no more and instead is feeling the loving sting of death, oh what a lovely truth and reality that no pit loving pervert can deny or combat, how does that feel pit nutters……Now the pit bull will find it’s true forever home, the deep dark forever night, all that it warrants or deserves, bye bye mutant and don’t come back!
Sadly one does not even have to search for the many attacks of these savage mutant undog’s on humans and pets, there are literally hundreds of new incidents every day carried out by these disgusting creatures, here is another.
These are all major daily newspapers and network TV station accurate factual reports with direct access to Doctors, ER’s Animal control officers, Police, the victims family, witnesses, the guilty pit nutters, all in news reports from major city newspapers and TV stations, as legit therefore as it possibly can be.
There is only one breed that has every been or is a threat to public safety and that is the pit bull, the sooner they are exterminated the sooner tragic attacks like the one below will be ended.
Ban the breed and end the deed.
Dogs are not humans, there is every reason to be threatened by a pit bull just because of what it is, no different then it would be to feel threatened by ANY bear, lion, tiger, wolverine, cobra etc. that you encountered, if they charged you then there would be justification to kill any of them if you were carrying, same thing with a pit bull, any pit pit bull.
You can no more be biased or prejudiced against any pit bull then you can be so against any bear, lion, tiger, wolverine, cobra etc. so that is an absurd argument on the part of the nutters.
That 6% of the dog population carries out 70%+ of the killings, mauling, crippling, disfiguring and dismembering attacks to such a disproportionate extent speaks for itself and to the genetic truth and reality that exists in any pit bull type dog, it is what it is and does what is in it’s DNA.This has been breed into them over 600 years and is their truth, they must therefore become extinct.
Any other dog will bite and run giving you a few stitches, a pit bull will not stop till you are DEAD.What about that do you not understand, the difference between another dog’s bite and a pit bulls mauling and dismembering, disfiguring and killing.
A pit bull BSL works EVERYWHERE it is useful in almost eliminating all serious dog attacks that maim, disfigure, dismember, maul, cripple.
or kill, this is a simply proven fact in all cases.The number of pit bulls is dramatically reduced as are the numbers of them put to death.
The need to have BSL is to have a preemptive capability to avoid a pit bull attack from happening due to it’s extremely savage consequences.
It is enacted against all pit bulls as they all have the genetic DNA propensity to carry out these horrific attacks that are non existent in 99% of all other breeds, ban the breed and you ban the deed, simple as that.
Dealing with an attack after the fact is simply not acceptable due to the horrific nature of said attacks.
With any other breed other then Rottweiler’s, wolf hybrids and Akita’s and a few others in very small numbers it is not a naturally genetic reality for them to carry out such horrifying attacks.
Hence they need to be dealt with in an aggressive reactive modality where all of the breed are not looked on as one but rather based on the actions of the individual misbehaving dog.
This can be done in a very aggressive proactive manner so that as soon as a dog like a lab lets say starts behaving inappropriately severe consequences can be brought to bare on the owner and their dog in an escalating manner as needed to deal with a situation that has developed.
This duel track approach can deal with the pits issue as other normal dog breeds can be dealt with as well so vicious dogs of other mainstream breeds are also held accountable for their actions.
There should be mandatory Spay/Neuter programs for all breeds but clearly the one that needs it the most and where the most change would be effected would be with the Pit Bull type dog.
The pit bull drooler’s don’t get it, they are in effect demanding that they be able to walk around with a loaded.
hand gun, round chambered, safety off with a hair trigger & that we all smile when they point it at us.
Pit bulls or Pit bull cross, same difference, same outcome, same reality as to what they are.
And all Pit bulls or restricted dogs including pit bull crosses by law should have leashes and Muzzles which they almost never have, this should become the law everywhere, and all to often you see them running around as such unmuzzled, this is an even greater problem then them being unleashed.
Pit bulls and Pit bull crosses and others like mastiffs, Rotts etc. attack and kill and maim while normal dogs bite, that is the big difference in the outcome and should result in a completely different attitude towards these dogs and why they should be banned outright.
The stats are very clear and accurate and show this reality even if you want to put your head in the sand, it still is what it is.
Certain breeds like Pit bulls etc.are fundamentally evil in nature and action and do not deserve the freedom of action to carry out their DNA.
“Pit bulls are different; they’re like wild animals,” says Alan Beck, director for the Center for the Human Animal Bond at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, West Lafayette, IN. “They’re not suited for an urban environment. I believe we should open our eyes and take a realistic approach to pit bulls.”
A 1993 Toronto study found pit bulls accounted for 1 percent of licensed dogs but 4 percent of bites. More ominous is a 2000 study by the Centers for Disease Control looking at 20 years of data on fatal dog attacks in the U.S.
Of 238 such incidents in which the breed of the attacking dog was reported, “pit bull-type dogs” were involved in 32 percent of them while being 1% of the population.
Pit Bulls should be banned from inside city limits anywhere.
No matter what you identify them as or what you choose to call them if any dog has pit bull genetics in it then the outcome of said genetics are always the same, death, mauling’s, crippled and disfigured victims when their DNA is expressed into reality which it invariably will be the case.
So you can call them something else to protect them but they are still pit mixes who are what they are and do what they do, who as a result have no right to ever come into human contact.
Pit bull or Pit bull cross, same difference same outcome same reality as to what they are.
And all Pit bulls or restricted dogs including pit bull crosses by law should have leashes and Muzzles which they never have and all to often you seem them running around as such unmuzzled, this is an even greater problem then them being unleashed and that is bad enough.
Certain breeds like Pit bulls etc.are fundamentally evil in nature and action and do not deserve the freedom of action to carry out their DNA.
The point is, other dogs bite, Pit bulls and Pit bull crosses and others like mastiffs, Rotts etc. attack and kill and maim, that is the big difference in the outcome and should result in a completely different attitude towards these dogs and why they should be banned outright. The stats are very clear and accurate and show this reality even if you want to put your head in the sand, it still is what it is.
2/3 of the fatalities by pit bull type dogs in 2013 were the actual family members of the pit bull who had been raised from a pup in optimal conditions, these are facts that are documented.!
My Legislation Proposal to be enacted by all states,
cities and counties in the US & Canada.
All dogs must be:
Or all dangerous dogs must be:
Or all dangerous molosser breeds, including pit bulls (Staffordshire bull terriers, American pit bull terriers, and any dog generally recognized as a pit bull or pit bull terrier and includes a dog of mixed breed with predominant pit bull or pit bull terrier characteristics), rottweilers, presa canarios, cane corsos, chow chows, Doberman pinschers, German shepherds, mastiffs, dogo argentinos, fila brasieros, and their mixes must be:
* Licensed
* Micro-chipped with any bite history in database
* Insured: All dogs must be covered by mandatory liability insurance of $100,000 min. generic and $500,000 after a skin breaking bite with insurance companies based on actuarial statistic’s determining said rate.
* Spayed/neutered (except for limited approved show dog breeders)
* All breeds involved in any bite incident must be kenneled in a locked five-sided enclosure with concrete bottom.
For all other dog owners language can be written that enclosure such as fences must be capable of containing your dog period, such generic language puts the onus on the owner, have the fines be so onerous that said owner will ensure this they make this so.
1,000 the first time, double the second time and permanent confiscation the third time with a ban on said person from owning any dog within city limits, this will create an effective outcome directly or indirectly.
* All dogs must be on leashes outside of home enclosure
* All molosser breeds must also be muzzled outside of home enclosure
* No transport of declared dangerous dogs for the purpose of re-homing. (Dangerous dogs must be dealt with where their history is known.)
* All of the rules listed above also apply to rescues: rescued dogs must be licensed and subject to inspection.
$1,000 fine for noncompliance
Elimination of the one-bite rule in all of the 50 U.S. states
Manslaughter charges for owner of dog that kills a human
Felony charge for owner of dog that mauls human, dog, or other domestic animal
“OTHER BREEDS BITE MORE OFTEN THAN PIT BULLS”
The Myth:
Fighting breed advocates often erroneously claim that other breeds (Chihuahuas, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, etc.) bite, and even kill, more often than fighting breeds.
The Reality:
The statistics vary depending on breed popularity in a particular area. However, Chicago IL, Las Vegas NV, and New York NY all verified that pit bulls were the #1 breed for reported bites in 2013.
We believe that the focus shouldn’t be on the number of bites, but on the severity as well as the fatalities. Dog “bite” victims usually endure a brief attack lasting seconds, while dog “mauling” victims often endure lengthy attacks should they survive.
One of the longest dog attacks on record was in Cary, Illinois and involved 6 peopled being mauled for an hour and half total. Nationwide, pit bulls rank as the #1 breed whose attack is likely to result in the victim’s death.
Unfortunately, many communities do not record the severity of reported bites. Both a single shallow puncture from a Chihuahua and a fatal mauling by a 100 lb. Cane Corso are officially reported as a “bite.”
It is important to understand that fighting breeds have a completely different bite profiles than most other breeds. They are bred to bite down, clamp and shake, causing severe tissue damage.
Many attacks can go on for 10-30 minutes, even as passers-by try in vain to remove the attacking dog by choking it, kicking it, beating it with shovels or baseball bats.
There are cases of fighting breeds continuing to maul their victim even after the police have shot the dog multiple times at point-blank range.!
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO IDENTIFY A PIT BULL
The Myth:
No one can correctly identify a pit bull. Fighting breed advocates claim that most people shown a collage of dog photos online can’t tell which one is the pit bull.
The Reality:
Many pit bull advocate groups post a collage of dog pictures online and ask the public to “identify the pit bull”.
What the public does not know is that the majority of dogs pictured are shot from camera angles deliberately designed to mislead. In addition, they show heads only, so size cannot be considered—this would not be the case when seeing the dog in real life.
They also feature many rare breeds that are related to pit bulls, but which are extremely uncommon in the United States (e.g., the Dogue de Bordeaux, Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldog, and Ca de Bou).
And one of the dog breeds that is included is an American Staffordshire Terrier which is the exact same breed as the American Pit Bull Terrier, but registered with another organization. Click here for an in-depth, illustrated article about this misleading test.
It should also be noted that many humane societies offer discounts on spaying/neutering of pit bulls. If pit bulls are so difficult to identify, then how do shelter workers identify who qualifies for the discount?
There are also many pit bull rescues with the term “pit bull” in the organization name. How do these groups know which dogs to rescue?.
The Myth:
“There’s no such breed as a pit bull.” “Pit bulls aren’t a breed; they are just a ‘type’ of dog.”
The Reality:
The term “pit bull” in lower-case letters refers to three closely-related breeds. The original breed was the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, a dog bred for pit fighting in the 18th and 19th centuries in the UK.
After importation to the U.S. in the late 19th century, they continued to be used for fighting, but were bred to be taller and heavier.
These larger cousins were then registered in the UKC as “American Pit Bull Terriers” (1898) and in the AKC as the “American Staffordshire Terrier” (1936). Note that these are identical breeds under two different names, and many individuals hold conformation championships in both registries.
In addition, some of the original, smaller dogs were reimported from the UK and were recognized in the AKC as the original “Staffordshire Bull Terriers” (1935).
A recent ASPCA study revealed that 93% of shelter workers were able to properly identify a “pit bull,” meaning one of the three closely-related (or identical) breeds above (click here to see the study).
The American Pit Bull Terrier is actually one of the purest and oldest of registered breeds. The second-largest national kennel club in the world, the UKC, was originally founded in 1898 for the express purposed of registering fighting pit bulls.
For approximately the first 50 years, a pit bull not only had to be purebred, but had to win 3 dog fights in order to be registered with the UKC. Today, these dogs’ descendants compete to win prizes in conformation, weight pull, and other sports.
Thousands have earned the title of UKC Conformation Champion.
Verdict: The three “pit bull” breeds, including the American Pit Bull Terrier, are just as purebred as St. Bernards, Schnauzers or Dalmatians.!
Hey now…educate yourself guys.
My T-Rex likes coconuts!
you’re all just racist against T-Rex’s!!!
please leave t~Rex’s alone my family had bred them for years and the only time i was bitten was by a pibble.
educate yourself you hater,I hope get mauled by a chihuahua.
t-rex make the best nanny dinosaur, its all how they are raised don’t you know.
I will be posting this at the dinosaurs love kids and kids love dinosaurs.
don’t you know the famous dinosaur barney?
president roosevelt had a dinosaur and fred flintstone.
helen keller had 25 of them.
wiggle tails?
educate yourself its haters like you that give dinosaurs a bad name.
come over to my house and meet my t-rex
awww you really hurted my feelings, Im going to go eat worms!!
My brontosaurus bites and my T-Rex never does. In fact the T-Rex is scared of him!
T-rex only bite if they’re trained to
my vet says t-rex is the only dinosaur that doesn’t bite
I have 8 t-rex and I’m a vet tech
I’am a vet tech too and i have a therapy dinosaur, it reads to kids at schools
64 kids crawl all over my t-rex, and he’s never shown aggression
Get the FACTS!!!
there’s no such thing as a t-rex
people are so quick to label anything 20 ft tall with a 5 foot neck and muscular as a so called “t-rex”
all dinosaurs have teeth
Their are over 30 types of dinosaur mistaken for a T-Rex, not only that, their is a media conspiracy against them. T-Rex attack stories sell.
My T-Rex saved my life; he roared at a bit of smoke & we evacuated the house. Last week I read that a T-Rex killed a child; that is SO rubbish – there is no such thing as a T-Rex! Get educated! I’m so done with this – I’m going to feed my T… I mean my Giant Lizard. Goodbye!
t-rex aren’t real. nothing is real.
omg u ppl r so ignorent!!!!!!! i had a terradactle an that little basturd was way meaner than my t-rex!!!!!! only ppl who fight t-rexes make them mean an bite so dont judge the hole bread just cuz a few buttwipes train there dinos to attack i raise my t-rex with love an he kisses us all the time!!!!!! U PPL R RACIST AN U MAKE ME SICK!!!
t-rex built this great nation
ROTFLMAO!
You haters only have 153 likes. Our T-Rex breeders club has 4000! TAKE THAT, HATERS!!!
It’s a nannysaurus!
Parents need to teach their brats proper kindness and respect around t-rex. ANY dinosaur has it’s breaking point when TERRIFIED!!
Good news, T – Rex went extinct and no longer prey on communities
Myth #1: It’s the owner not the T-rex
Myth # 2: It’s impossible to identify a T-rex
Myth #3: Human-aggressive T-rex’s were “culled”
Fatal attack statistics about T-rex’s are false
The media conspiracy against T-Rex’s
T-rex’s are not unpredictable
T-Rex’s do not have a locking jaw, they just eat you alive
T-Rex’s used to be the most popular dinosaur in America
T-rex’s pass the American Temperament Test
Punish the deed not the breed (of dinosaur)
T-rex’s originally were “nanny dinosaurs”
T-rex’s were once known as nanny dino’s.
T-Rex’s will lick you to death.
There’s no need to muzzle and leash your T-Rex in the Doggy Park.
Don’t forget to attend our ‘Million T-Rex March’ on The White House. President Obama loves T-Rex’s and he thinks everyone should own one. Except him.
Its not an attack if the T-rex is wagging its tail.
There no bad T-rex’s…only bad owners.
I’ve seen chihuahuas more aggressive than my T-Rex.
*giggles*
TSL has been proven not to work in Denver
Best babysitters ever….NOT
MY T-rex is the sweetest dino ever.
T.Rex’s make the BEST Therapy Dinos ever. And are wonderful as Guide-Dinos for The Blind.
velociraptors bite more than T-rex’s.
Let’s set up a T-rex kissing booth for our kids.
Let’s bring a T-rex into school and let the children read books to a perfectly trained T-rex
Let’s bring our T-rex to the walk for the victims of T-rex’s in Houston to show them they don’t have to be afraid of T-rex’s
Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to May.25, 2013.
By compiling U.S. and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2013, Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, shows the breeds most responsible for serious injury and death.
Study highlights
Pit bull type dogs make up only 6% of all dogs in the USA.
The combination of Pit Bulls, rottweilers, their close mixes and wolf hybrids and other Pit Bull Type Dogs:
84% of attacks that induce bodily harm.
75% of attacks to children.
87% of attack to adults.
72% of attacks that result in fatalities.
80% that result in maiming.
Springfield, MO
In April 2008, the Springfield-Greene County Health Department released data to a local TV station – following the City of Springfield’s adoption of a 2006 pit bull ban:
“The Springfield-Greene County Health Department reports that dog bites and vicious dog complaints are declining since the implementation of the Pit Bull Ordinance in the City of Springfield two years ago. In 2005 the health department fielded 18 vicious dog complaints, but only eight in 2007. Bites were down from 102 in 2005 to 87 in 2007.”
“The ordinance, which requires pit bull owners to register their dogs annually, has also resulted in fewer pit bull dogs being impounded at the Springfield Animal Shelter.
In 2005 there were 502 pit bull and pit bull mixes impounded, compared to only 252 in 2007.
According to statistics taken from the Springfield-Greene County Health Department, as reported in the News-Leader March 12, for the three-year period beginning in 2004, there were 42 “vicious” animal attacks recorded in the jurisdiction covered.
After passing the local ordinance banning or strictly controlling the ownership of pit bull or pit bull types, the number of attacks has dropped dramatically.
For the five-year period from 2007-2011, there was a total of 14.
“Because we are impounding fewer pit bulls, we’ve also seen overcrowding in our shelter subside,” says assistant director Clay Goddard. “It is the natural tendency of pit bulls to fight, so our animal control staff are forced to segregate them in individual pens.
When we have several pit bulls in the shelter simultaneously, this severely limits space for other dogs.”
***************************************************
Washington
In 2008, the City of Wapato passed an ordinance that bans new pit bulls, rottweilers and mastiffs. Nine months after its adoption, in March 2009, Wapato Police Chief Richard Sanchez reported successful results:
“Nine months into the ban and police calls about vicious dogs have been cut in half. The Wapato Police tell Action News they’ve gone from 18 reports in January, February and March of last year to seven so far in ’09. “Seven calls in three months… that’s nothing,” says Chief Richard Sanchez, Wapato Police Department.
Chief Sanchez credits local cooperation for the decline of dangerous dogs.”
***************************************************
Rhode Island
When the City of Woonsocket was debating a pit bull ordinance in June 2009, the animal control supervisor in Pawtucket, John Holmes, spoke about the enormous success of Pawtucket’s 2003 pit bull ban:
“Holmes says he predicted that it would take two years for Pawtucket to experience the full benefit of the law after it was passed, but the results were actually apparent in half the time.
“It’s working absolutely fantastic,” said Holmes. “We have not had a pit bull maiming in the city since December of 2004.”
Holmes says the law also capped the number of legal pit bulls in Pawtucket to about 70 animals.”
In July 2013, Pawtucket Mayor Donald Grebien and City Council President David Moran sent a joint letter to Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee asking that he reject a statewide anti-BSL measure before him.
While they agree that some pit bulls can make good pets, said Moran and Grebien, “the number and severity of pit bull attacks against people and other animals in the early 2000s required us to take the action we did.”
Prior to the 2004 city ordinance, Pawtucket Animal Control officers responded to many calls about serious pit bull attacks against people and animals, according to the letter. Two of the worst cases involved a nine-month pregnant woman and a child.
While proponents of the bill argue that breed-specific bans don’t work, said Grebien and Moran, “the results in Pawtucket dramatically prove that they do work.”
In 2003, the year before the local ban on pit bulls went into effect, 135 pit bulls, all from Pawtucket, were taken in at the Pawtucket Animal Control Shelter for a variety of health and safety reasons, with 48 of those dogs needing to be put down.
In 2012, 72 pit bulls were taken in, only 41 from Pawtucket, with only six needing to be euthanized, according to the two officials.
“That’s a tremendous improvement,” they state in their letter.
***************************************************
Per section 8-55 of Denvers pit bull ban:
A pit bull, is defined as any dog that is an APBT, Am Staf Terrier, Staff Bull Terrier, or any dog displaying the majority of physical traits of anyone (1) or more of the above breeds, or any dog exhibiting those distinguishing characteristics which substantially conform to the standards set by the AKC or UKC for any of the above breed.
Over the course of 22 years, the Denver ban has withstood numerous battles in state and federal courts. It has been used as a model for over 600 USA cities that legislate pit bulls, as well as US Navy, Air Force, Marine and Army bases ( so much for Sgt Stubby).
without it, we’d see just what we see in Miss E’s lame replies. Every pit owner would claim their land shark was anything but a pit bull.
Miami Dade county voted 66% to keep their pit bull ban, just as it is worded, last year.
In a discussion of the Denver ban, Assistant City Attorney Kory Nelson recently told the San Francisco Chronicle that:
“Since 1989, when that city instituted a pit bull ban, ‘we haven’t had one serious pit bull attack,’ said Kory Nelson, a Denver assistant city attorney. His city’s assertion that ‘pit bulls are more dangerous than other breeds of dog’ has withstood legal challenges, he said.
‘We were able to prove there’s a difference between pit bulls and other breeds of dogs that make pit bulls more dangerous,’ he said.”
Sources: Denver Post
***************************************************
Toronto:
In a November 2011, public health statistics published by Global Toronto showed that pit bull bites dropped dramatically after Ontario adopted the Dog Owners Liability Act in 2005, an act that banned pit bulls:
The number of dog bites reported in Toronto has fallen since a ban on pit bulls took effect in 2005, public health statistics show.
A total of 486 bites were recorded in 2005. That number fell generally in the six years following, to 379 in 2010.
Provincial laws that banned ‘pit bulls,’ defined as pit bulls, Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and dogs resembling them took effect in August 2005. Existing dogs were required to be sterilized, and leashed and muzzled in public.
Bites in Toronto blamed on the four affected breeds fell sharply, from 71 in 2005 to only six in 2010. This accounts for most of the reduction in total bites.
***************************************************
Salina, KS
Rose Base, director of the Salina Animal Shelter who lobbied for the ordinance, told the Salina Journal:
The ordinance has made a difference, she said. Records at the Salina Animal Shelter indicate there were 24 reported pit bull bites in 2003 and 2004, and only five since — none from 2009 to present.
Salina has 62 registered pit bulls, Base said. Before the ordinance she guessed there were “close to 300.” Since the first of this year three of the registered pit bulls have died of old age.
“We definitely haven’t had the severity of bites that we had in the past,” Base said. “Our community has been somewhat safer because of the law that was passed
***************************************************
Prince George’s County, MD
Prince George’s County passed a pit bull ban in 1996. In August 2009, Rodney Taylor, associate director of the county’s Animal Management Group, said that the number of pit bull biting incidents has fallen:
“Taylor said that during the first five to seven years of the ban, animal control officials would encounter an average of 1,200 pit bulls a year but that in recent years that figure has dropped by about half. According to county statistics, 36 pit bull bites, out of 619 total dog bites, were recorded in 2008, down from 95 pit bull bites, out of a total of 853, in 1996.”
***************************************************
Salina KS (a second article)
Note that they admit that the pit bull ban did not reduce the number of bites, but it did reduce the severity of bites reported by all breeds. Proof that when pit bull deniers find a jurisdiction that banned pit bulls, but reported no decrease in overall bites, is a moot point. Its death and dismemberment we are focusing on, not bite counts.
In the monthly city newsletter, In Touch, published in September 2006, the City of Salina reported that the pit bull ban adopted in 2005 significantly reduced pit bull biting incidents in just a 12 month period.
The number of pit bull bites depicted in the “Salina Pit Bull Bites Reported” graph shows 2002 with 13 pit bull bites, 2003 with 11 pit bull bites, 2004 with 15 pit bull bites and 2005 with only one bite. The newsletter notes that “animal bites reported have remained constant, but the severity of bites have decreased dramatically” since the enactment of the pit bull ban.
Wichita, Kansas
In January 2009, the Wichita Department of Environmental Services released a number of pit bull statistics. The figures are based upon the Wichita Animal Control department’s investigation of 733 dog bites in 2008.
Included in the data are pit bulls encountered by the Wichita Police Department. In the 1-year period, 95% of police encounters with aggressive dogs were pit bulls.
The report also showed that the percentage of pit bull encounters had increased from 66% in 2004 to 95% in 2008. Subsequently, four months after the release of this data, the City of Wichita enacted a mandatory pit bull sterilization law.
55% of all dogs deemed dangerous were pit bulls (41 pit bull dogs deemed dangerous).
34% of attacks and bites involved pit bull dogs (246 pit bull attacks/bites).
28% of dogs found running at large were pit bulls (1,279 pit bulls found running loose).
25% of dogs impounded were pit bulls dogs (1,575 pit bulls impounded).
37% of all dogs euthanized were pit bull dogs (1,255 pit bulls euthanized).
23% of dog complaints involved pit bull dogs (2,523 complaints involved pit bull dogs).
9/10/2013
Bites by pit bulls have dropped dramatically since 2004
Hearing on Alix’s leash law violation put off to Sept. 20
PAWTUCKET – The city has seen a dramatic decline in the number of attacks by pit bulls since a 2004 ban on the breed went into effect, according to data released by local officials.
In response to an open records request by The Breeze, the Pawtucket Police Department and Pawtucket Animal Control, through City Solicitor Frank Milos, provided documents showing just how rarely pit bulls have attacked people or animals in the city since the ban was enacted.
For the four years leading up to the ban, from 2000 to 2003, officers responded to 71 incidents of biting or scratching involving pit bulls in Pawtucket, a majority of those, 51, involving attacks on people.
In the 10 years since the ban was put in place, police responded to 23 total attacks involving pit bulls, with only 13 of those involving attacks on people.
For three years, 2008, 2010, and 2012, there were no attacks by pit bulls reported, according to the information provided by the city.
The following are the 71 pit bulls attacks separated out by year for the four years before Pawtucket’s pit bull ban went into effect:
* 2000 – 20 incidents, 18 involving attacks on people, two involving other animals.
* 2001 – 14 incidents, nine involving attacks on people, five on animals.
* 2002 – 17 incidents, 14 involving attacks on people, three on animals.
* 2003 – 20 incidents, 11 involving attacks on people, nine on animals.
The following are the 23 pit bull attacks in the city for the 10 years since Pawtucket’s pit bull ban was unanimously approved by the Rhode Island General Assembly:
* 2004 – Eight incidents, five involving attacks on people, three involving attacks on other animals.
* 2005 – One incident involving a person being attacked.
* 2006 – Three incidents, one involving an attack on a person, two on animals.
* 2007 – Four incidents, one involving an attack on a person, three on animals.
* 2008 – No incidents.
* 2009 – Two incidents, both involving attacks on people.
* 2010 – No incidents.
* 2011 – Two incidents, both involving attacks on people.
* 2012 – No incidents.
* 2013 – Three incidents, one involving an attack on a person, two on animals.
John Holmes, Pawtucket’s veteran animal control officer and the key proponent of the 2004 ban, said the numbers before and after 2004 “speak for themselves.”
“The law’s worked,” he said. “We didn’t put this law in to destroy pit bulls, in fact, quite the opposite.”
The last serious pit bull attack in Pawtucket was the day the bill was signed into law, said Holmes. Residents have been safer because of the ban, he said.
“Public safety has always been the issue,” he said. “They’re just missing so much of what this is all about. We’re going backward here.”
“The LA Times (and other advocates) are fond of mentioning that many pit bulls live without incident as gentle pets. These advocates ignore more compelling facts.
321 humans have been killed or disfigured by dogs during calendar year 2013; 316 of those attacks were by pit bulls.
16 of the attacks have caused human fatalities, 15 of those deaths were caused by pit bulls.***.
California leads the nation in fatal pit bull attacks with 25% of the nation’s total.
To omit this essential information in an editorial opinion on pit bulls is tantamount to a lie of omission.”
Pit Bulls Lead ‘Bite’ Counts Across U.S. Cities and Counties.
Dog Biting Incidents: 2008 to 2012.
Animal control departments in at least 25 U.S. states report that pit bulls are biting more than all other dog breeds. These states include: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin.
The oft-quoted myth by pro-pit bull groups that pit bulls “do not bite more than other breeds” is categorically false. In addition to leading bite counts, the pit bull bite is also the most damaging, inflicting permanent and disfiguring injury.!
Last Summer, Riverside County supervisors unanimously passed an ordinance requiring pit bulls older than 4 months in unincorporated areas of the county to be spayed or neutered. Registered breeders, law enforcement and therapy dogs are exempt from the ordinance, which takes effect next month.
In 2010, San Bernardino County supervisors passed a similar ordinance for unincorporated areas of the county, such as Mentone. Owners of non-sterilized pit bulls can be fined $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second and $300 for subsequent offenses.
Highland and Yucaipa adopted the same ordinance, according to Brian Cronin, chief of the county’s animal control division, which handles animal control in those two cities.
The San Bernardino County ordinance said pit bull breeds account for about 20 percent of the dogs at animal shelters and are put down more often than any other breed.
Cronin emailed figures showing the county’s intake of pit bulls has decreased 28 percent since the ordinance took effect and that euthanization rates have dropped by 56 percent.
In August 2011, San Bernardino County Animal Care and Control, which oversees unincorporated areas and Highland and Yucaipa, reported a 9.6 decrease in dog bites after enacting a pit bull sterilization law in 2010.
The law, approved unanimously by the Board of Supervisors last week, expands upon an ordinance approved last year that requires pit bull owners to spay or neuter their pets.
Supervisor Neil Derry introduced the original proposal in response to an increasing number of attacks by pit bulls in recent years that resulted in four deaths — two of them young children — in the last five years.
The county saw a 9.6 percent decrease in dog bites in the year since the spay/neuter program was instituted, said Brian Cronin, the county’s animal care and control division chief.
The ordinance was passed to reduce the number of dogs destroyed at taxpayer expense, Cronin said.
HAS MANDATORY S/N FOR PITS WORKED FOR SAN BERNARDINO, CA?
HELL YES!!
The following is the six (6) year trend for Pit Bull admissions and euthanasia of this specific type/breed of dog in County owned or operated animal shelter facilities:
FY 2007-08 Admissions 1,623 Euthanized 1,276 (78.6% of intake)
FY 2008-09 Admissions 1,705 Euthanized 1,321 (77.4%) of intake)
FY 2009-10 Admissions 2,066 Euthanized 1,593 (77.1% of intake)
FY 2010-11 Admissions 2,523 Euthanized 1,632 (64.6% of intake)
FY 2011-12 Admissions 2,265 Euthanized 1,085 (47.9% of intake)
FY 2012-13 Admissions 1,815 Euthanized 727 (40% of intake)
You will note, the percentage of Pit Bull type dogs euthanized has been significantly reduced since the implementation of the San Bernardino County Mandatory Pit Bull sterilization ordinance.
The ordinance was implemented in fiscal year 2010-11 in which Pit Bull admissions hit an all time high of 2,523. Last year Pit Bull admissions were at 1,815.
This is a significant reduction in admissions for this type of dog after the ordinance was passed. You can not argue that spay/neuter hasn’t had a positive impact.
Over 600 Cities, Towns & Counties in the US currently have BSL against pit bull type dogs.
Animal Planet
Pit Bulls Already Banned in a Dozen Countries
By Terrence McCoy Wed., Feb. 27 2013
Pit bulls have been banned the world over as well as 0ver 600 cities, towns and counties in the US alone.
The prohibition on the pit bull type dog wouldn’t be anything unusual.
In 1989, Miami may have been one of the first communities to ban pit bulls — but it sure hasn’t been the last, raising questions as to whether it’s only a matter of time before every municipality imposes some sort of regulation on the animal.
Already, more than a dozen countries have banned pit bulls, making it, quite possibly, the most regulated and feared dog in the canine world.
Composed from various online resources, here’s a breakdown of the bans and regulations:
Countries that have enacted regulation on pit bulls (or some deviation):
**In 1991, Singapore prohibited the entry of pit bulls into the country.
**In 1993, the Netherlands banned pit bulls.
**In 1997, Poland enacted legislation enforcing pit bull owners to display “clear warning signs” and keep the animal behind reinforced fencing.
**In 2000, France banned pit bulls. The goal was to let the breed “die out.”
**In 2001, Germany banned pit bulls.
**In 2001, Puerto Rico banned pit bulls.
**In 2003, New Zealand banned the importation of pit bulls.
**In 2004, Italy banned pit bulls.
**In 2009, Australia prohibited the imports of pit bulls.
**In 2009, Ecuador banned pit bulls as pets.
**In 2010, Denmark banned pit bulls and pit bull breeding.
**In 2014, Venezuela will ban pit bulls.
Nationwide, a ban on pit bulls is also far from exceptional.
Cities that have laid down some sort of legislation:
Sioux City, Iowa
Council Bluffs, Iowa
Independence, Missouri
Royal City, Washington
Denver, Colorado
Springfield, Missouri
Youngstown, Ohio;
Melvindale, Michigan
Livingston County, Michigan.
L.A. NOW
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — THIS JUST IN
Lancaster’s dog ordinance is cited in helping to drive down gang crime January 21, 2010
A Lancaster ordinance imposing stiff penalties on owners of “potentially dangerous” and “vicious” dogs is reaping positive results, and may have even helped to drive down gang crime in the city, officials said.
The law, adopted in January 2009, was primarily aimed at preventing gang members from using dogs, such as pit bulls and Rottweilers, to bully people or cause physical harm, officials said.
City officials said that 1,138 pit bulls and Rottweilers were impounded last year by the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control. Of those, 362 were voluntarily surrendered by their owners in response to Lancaster’s ordinance.
“A year ago, this city was overrun with individuals — namely, gang members — who routinely used pit bulls and other potentially vicious dogs as tools of intimidation and violence,” Lancaster Mayor R. Rex Parris said in a statement.
“These individuals delighted in the danger these animals posed to our residents, often walking them without leashes and allowing them to run rampant through our neighborhoods and parks. Today, more than 1,100 of these animals have been removed from our city, along with the fear they create. Lancaster is now a great deal safer because of it.”
Parris believes there is a correlation between the results of the dog ordinance and a drop in the city’s gang crime rate. Lancaster’s violent gang crime, which includes homicide, rape, robbery and aggravated assault, fell by 45% last year, and there was a drop in overall gang crime by 41%, Parris said, citing statistics from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.
Under the dog ordinance, a hearing officer can deem a dog to be potentially dangerous, for example, if the animal becomes aggressive when unprovoked.
The dog can be impounded, and the owner must have it properly licensed, implanted with a microchip and vaccinated at his own cost before the animal’s release.
Dogs deemed to be vicious can be destroyed if they are determined to be a significant threat to public safety, according to the ordinance.
It also requires owners of potentially dangerous dogs to ensure proper leashing and muzzling, complete a dog obedience training course, spay or neuter their animals, and pay a fine of up to $500 for each offense.
Owners of dogs deemed to be vicious face fines of up to $1,000 per offense, and they could be prevented from possessing any dog for up to three years.
Though city officials praise the dog law, some residents continue to challenge its fairness. They argue that “breed-specific” legislation is an injustice to canines, because irresponsible owners are to blame for a dog’s behavior, not the dog.
— Ann M. Simmons
From the CDC (1998 report, page 4):
“Despite these limitations and concerns
(about identifying the exact ‘breed’ of pit bull type dog responsible for a
killing), the data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted
for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998.
It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the
United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a
breed-specific problem with fatalities.”
****************************************************************
In June 2013, after a Bay Area child was killed by a family pit bull, San Francisco Animal Care and Control cited the decrease in pit bull bites and euthanasia since the adoption of a 2005 pit bull law.
After 12-year-old Nicholas Faibish was fatally mauled by his family’s pit bulls, the city adopted a mandatory spay-neuter law for the breed. The reasoning was that fixed dogs tend to be calmer and better socialized.
Since then, San Francisco has impounded 14 percent fewer pit bulls and euthanized 29 percent fewer – which is a “significant decrease,” said Rebecca Katz, director of the city’s Animal Care and Control department.
Another significant indicator, she said, is that there have been 28 pit bull bites reported in the past three years – and 1,229 bites by other breeds during the same period. In the three-year period before that, there were 45 pit bull bites and 907 incidents involving other breeds.
Results of mandatory breed-specific S/N in SF: success in San Francisco, where in just eight years there was a 49% decline in the number of pit-bulls impounded, a 23% decline in the number of pit-bulls euthanized, and an 81% decline in the number of pit-bulls involved in fatal and disfiguring attacks.
When the City of Auburn debated enacting a pit bull law in January 2010, Sgt. Bill Herndon of the San Francisco Police Department weighed in about the success of San Francisco’s 2005 pit bull law:
“Since requiring all pit bulls to be neutered, they say they are finding fewer pit bulls involved in biting incidents.
Sgt. Bill Herndon, of the San Francisco Police Department’s vicious dog unit, said the numbers and severity of pit bull attacks are down since San Francisco enacted an ordinance in 2005 after the mauling death of 12-year-old Nicholas Faibish.
“The number of complaints of mean pit bulls has dropped dramatically,” Herndon said.
San Francisco’s animal control department reports more than 30 percent fewer pit bulls at the shelter or being euthanized.”
****************************************************************
Ed Boks, Executive director, Yavapai Humane Society (responsible Jan 2004 as director City Center for Animal Care & Control in NYC for trying to rename pit bulls New Yorkies; is pb owner)
Pit bull type dogs represent 3000% the actuarial risk compared to other types of dogs.
Insurance companies will have calculated the risks the other listed breeds represent based on what they’ve had to pay out through the years.
This isn’t ‘prejudice’, this is cold statistical reality. Actuarial realities don’t yield to sentiment or a feeling of entitlement — they just are what they are.
Toronto dog bites fell after pit bull ban
Patrick Cain, Global News : Monday, November 14, 2011 02:12 PM
The number of dog bites reported in Toronto has fallen since a ban on pit bulls took effect in 2005, public health statistics show.
A total of 486 bites were recorded in 2005. That number fell generally in the six years following, to 379 in 2010.
Provincial laws that banned ‘pit bulls,’ defined as pit bulls, Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and dogs resembling them took effect in August 2005. Existing dogs were required to be sterilized, and leashed and muzzled in public.
Bites in Toronto blamed on the four affected breeds fell sharply, from 71 in 2005 to only six in 2010. This accounts for most of the reduction in total bites.
The fall in bites blamed on the four breeds tracks a reduction in the dogs themselves, data obtained separately by globalnews.ca under access-to-information laws shows. Some 1,411 Toronto dogs were in the four breeds in 2008, as opposed to 798 in mid-2011.
“It is encouraging to hear that fewer people are victimized by dangerous dogs,” Ontario Attorney-General John Gerretson said in a statement.
About 1,000 Ontario pit bulls have been put down since the ban took effect.
With totals of Toronto dogs by breed and ten years of bite data, it is possible to see which dogs are most likely to bite in Toronto based on a ratio between dogs of a given breed in 2011 and reported bites over the decade between 2000 and 2010. Below are the 20 most bite-prone dogs. The four prohibited breeds all appear in the top eight slots.
Council Bluffs, Iowa.
Pit bulls are not only problematic in large cities; they threaten mid-sized cities and small towns as well. Located in the heartland, Council Bluffs, Iowa has about 60,000 citizens.
After a series of devastating attacks, beginning in 2003, Council Bluffs joined over 600 U.S. cities and began regulating pit bulls.
The results of the Council Bluffs pit bull ban, which began January 1, 2005, show the positive effects such legislation can have on public safety in just a few years time:1.
Council Bluffs: Pit Bull Bite Statistics.
Year Pit Bull Bites % of All Bites.
2004 29 23%.
2005 12 10% (year ban enacted).
2006 6 4%.
2007 2 2%.
2008 0 0%.
2009 0 0%.
2010 1 1%.
2011 0 0%.
Barbara Kay: Study proves pitbull ban is justified
There’s nothing more humiliating for a journalist than pontificating on a subject with ardent conviction, and then being proved wrong. But there’s nothing more gratifying for a journalist than pontificating on a subject with ardent conviction and being proved right.
At the moment I am doing a modest little victory dance as I type. One of the first columns I ever wrote for the Post (December 10, 2003) argued that pit bulls were a danger to society because of their nature. Naturally I backed up my claim with plenty of statistical ammunition. And today I feel vindicated.
I was, even as a newbie, aware that readers who disagree with you can get pretty hot under the collar, but I had no idea how exponentially explosive the response is when you diss a dog breed. My column was distributed to dog-owner sites and I received a tsunami of hate mail the like of which I have never seen before or since. I was called unprintable names – and more than one pitbull owner spelled out in graphic detail what he would like to see a trained pit bull do to me. (One responder, curiously enough, expressed the hope that I would get all my fingers chopped off while playing the piano. Not sure what the connection to pitbulls is there.)
Anyway, reasonable people shared my opinion.
Well, all those pitbull owners can now turn their wrathful attention to Dr. Malathi Raghavan, a University of Manitoba epidemiologist, and author of a new study of dog bite cases between 1984-2006 in the journal Injury Prevention that suggests the controversial bans are having a positive effect. After “breed-specific legislation” was passed, Manitoba’s overall provincial rate of bite-related hospitalizations dropped from 3.5 to 2.8 per 100,000 people. A spokeswoman, commenting on the study, conceded that pitbulls “genetically hard-wired” to be combative, but diplomatically added the usual refrain that all dogs have the capacity to be nasty if they are ill-trained.
The idea that pitbulls owned by nice people are no more dangerous than any other breed is a myth, of course. Dogs bite four to five million Americans every year. Serious injuries are up nearly 40% from 1986. Children are victims of 60% of bites and 80% of fatal attacks. Nearly half of all American kids have been bitten by the age of 12. Pitbulls or crosses alone account for more than a third of dog bite fatalities.
Sure all dogs bite, but most dogs let you know before they bite that they have hostile intentions, and they let go after they bite. As I noted in my previous column, “Unlike other biting dogs, pitbulls don’t let go. They are impervious to pain. Neither hoses, blows or kicks will stop them. Other dogs warn of their anger with growls or body language like terrorists, pitbulls attack silently and often with no perceived provocation.
The breeders, trainers and Kennel Clubs know all this. Yet dog civil libertarians resist “profiling” or penalties that impinge on the dog’s “right to due process” (their actual words). Gordon Carvill, (at the time of my 2003 column), president of the American Dog Owners’ Association, is implacable on breed profiling, falsely claiming, “There is no dog born in this world with a predisposition to aggression.” This is canine political correctness run amok. Disinterested experts overwhelmingly disprove this claim with ease.
Just so pitbull owners shouldn’t feel lonely, Rottweilers aren’t always so cuddly either. In 1998 there were 1,237 reported dog attacks in Canada, and a full half of them were accounted for by pitbulls and Rotties. Some jurisdictions in Quebec ban both, and it doesn’t cause me a single minute’s loss of sleep.
It’s a pretty strange society that imposes speed limits on cars (because we all know it isn’t cars that kill, it’s bad drivers) and doesn’t allow guns to be carried in the street (because we all know it isn’t guns that kill, it’s bad people), but (even though we all know it’s pitbulls that kill, whether their owners are good or bad), won’t take the simple step of reducing harm to our citizenry, especially children, their easiest prey, by banning high-risk dogs.
Royal Oak Ordinance Requires $1 Million ‘Dangerous Dog’ Insurance Policy
May 15, 2013 6:13 AM
Reporting Ron Dewey
ROYAL OAK (WWJ) – Royal Oak is about to unleash new regulations on dog owners.
The new rules, which go into effect Thursday, require owners of “dangerous dogs” to carry $1 million in liability insurance, post signs, complete an obedience class with the dog, and keep the dog in a locked, fenced-in area. Owners must also comply with seven pages worth of other requirements to keep their pets in the city.
Officials say a dog is deemed dangerous if it bites or attacks a person, or causes serious injury to another domestic animal. Exceptions include dogs protecting an owner or a homeowner’s property.
City leaders say they created the ordinance after receiving 32 reports of dog bites and attacks during 2012 in Royal Oak.
Royal Oak resident John Scott said the ordinance is a good move for the city, putting the responsibility on the owners instead of the dogs.
“If you’re a dog owner, you know that dogs are protective of their territory. There’s an old saying that there’s no bad dogs, just bad owners,” he said.
Lori Wosnicki, who has a Bernese Mountain Dog, she understands the reason for the new ordinance, but still thinks that it goes too far.
“Look at this dog, who goes to schools and has kids lay all over him. I have a really hard time with [the ordinance] because how do you decide what’s dangerous,” she said.
Violation of the dog ordinance is a misdemeanor offense, punishable by a fine up to $500 and 90 days in jail.
https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2013/05/15/royal-oak-ordinance-requires-dangerous-dog-insurance/
Coverage to End For Bites by Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, Wolf Hybrids
Farmers Group, Inc., will stop covering homeowners for bites by three breeds, saying they are responsible for a quarter of all claims in California
By Sharon Bernstein
Tuesday, Feb 12, 2013
America’s infatuation with canines has led to a breathtaking rise in the number of dog bites – and in the amount of money that insurance companies pay to compensate the bitten.
In California, one major insurer is growling back.
Farmers Group, Inc., has notified policyholders that bites by pit bulls, Rottweilers and wolf hybrids will no longer be covered by homeowners insurance in the state.
The move has drawn criticism from pit bull rescue groups and trainers.
“It is offensive,” said Candy Clemente, who trains pit bulls for the Animal Planet show “Pit Boss.” They are condemning these breeds indiscriminately without giving the home owners a chance to prove their dogs are not vicious.”
But insurers say that bites from pit bulls and the other breeds have gone up dramatically in recent years – along with the cost of settling damage claims.
“We reviewed our liability claim history and we determined that three breeds accounted for more than 25% of dog bite claims,” said spokeswoman Erin Freeman. “In addition, these three breeds caused more harm when they attacked than any other breed.”
The move by Farmers, which will go into effect for California homeowners as their policies come up for renewal, is one of several efforts nationwide by insurance companies to limit an ever-increasing level of liability for dog bites.
Across the U.S., insurance companies paid out $480 million to people who were attacked by dogs in 2011 – a 50% rise in just eight years, according to data from the Insurance Information Institute. In California that year, insurers paid more than $20 million to settle just 527 claims.
Just last week, a 91-year-old Desert Hot Springs woman died after she was attacked by her two pit bulls. In San Diego on Monday, a woman and her daughter were convicted of involuntary manslaughter in another attack, after their two dogs attacked a 75-year-old woman who later died.
Emako Mendoza stepped outside her home to get a newspaper in June of 2011 when she was mauled by the two dogs. She suffered a heart attack and her left arm and leg had to be amputated. Mendoza died six months later.
To deal with the skyrocketing claims and attendant expense, insurers have adopted a number of new measures, the insurance institute said. Some, like Farmers, are asking customers to sign waivers acknowledging that bites will not be covered under certain circumstances.
Others are charging people extra for breeds like pitbulls, or refusing to cover dog bites altogether.
Still more insurers use what they call the “one-bite rule,” saying they’ll cover an attack the first time it happens – not if the animal bites someone else at another time.
Two states, Pennsylvania and Michigan, do not allow insurers to cancel or refuse coverage to owners of specific breeds.
The ASPCA has no obligation to share safety issues about pit bulls with the public. On their “Pit Bull Information” web page, they write: “Sadly, pit bulls have acquired a reputation as unpredictable, dangerous, and vicious.” Yet, spelled out in the ASPCA Shelter Guidelines — designed to protect shelter workers — are the unique risks attributed to pit bulls. One of them is that they “attack without warning,” which is equivalent to unpredictable behavior.
From the ASPCA’s The Care of Pit Bulls in the Shelter Environment:
There are “cases of experienced handlers who had developed good relationships with the dogs over a period of months still being attacked without warning or obvious provocation.”
Pit bulls “ignore signs of submission from other dogs” and “give no warning prior to attack.” They add that this is “different than normal dog behavior.”
“Today’s pit bulls” have multiple names including: “Staffordshire Terrier (AKC 1936), American Staffordshire Terrier (AKC 1972, Am Staff), American Pit Bull Terrier or Pit Bull Terrier.”
“These dogs can be aggressive towards humans and more likely to cause fatal attacks to people than other fighting type dogs.”
“Pit bulls will climb fences, chew up stainless steel food and water bowls, destroy copper tubing of automatic water systems and conventional cages, and attack other animals through chain link fences.”
“Pit bulls can break through conventional cage doors and destroy typical epoxy paint on the floors and walls.”
“Pit bulls require special housing considerations” and “isolation from other animals if dog aggressive or have a high prey drive.”
“Install a panic button in rooms housing pit bulls along with other restraint equipment in any room housing pit bulls.”
It seems unlikely that the ASPCA or shelters participating in the “Adopt-A-Bull Contest” will tell potential adopters to install a panic button in their home or that pit bulls attack without warning.
Wapato, WA residents safer because of ban:
In 2008, the City of Wapato passed an ordinance that bans new pit bulls, rottweilers and mastiffs. Nine months after its adoption, in March 2009, Wapato Police Chief Richard Sanchez reported successful results:
“Nine months into the ban and police calls about vicious dogs have been cut in half. The Wapato Police tell Action News they’ve gone from 18 reports in January, February and March of last year to seven so far in ’09. “Seven calls in three months… that’s nothing,” says Chief Richard Sanchez, Wapato Police Department.
Chief Sanchez credits local cooperation for the decline of dangerous dogs.”
About 31,400 dogs attacked about 61,500 other animals in the U.S. in 2013, killing 43,500 and seriously injuring 18,100.
The animals killed included about 12,000 dogs, 8,000 cats, 6,000 hooved animals, and 17,000 other small domestic animals, primarily poultry.
The seriously injured included about 12,400 dogs, 4,000 cats, and 1,700 hooved animals. Few small mammals and poultry survived reported dog attacks.
Pit bulls inflicted 99% of the total fatal attacks on other animals (43,000); 96% of the fatal attacks on other dogs (11,520); 95% of the fatal attacks on livestock (5,700) and on small mammals and poultry (16,150); and 94% of the fatal attacks on cats (11,280).
About 30,000 pit bulls were involved in attacks on other animals, many of them killing multiple other animals.
There are about 3.2 million pit bulls in the U.S. at any given time, according to the annual ANIMAL PEOPLE surveys of dogs offered for sale or adoption via online classified ads.
Thus in 2013 about one pit bull in 107 killed or seriously injured another animal, compared with about one dog in 50,000 of other breeds.
Complete details of the year-long epidemiological survey that produced these estimates will appear in the January/February edition of ANIMAL PEOPLE.
Merritt Clifton Editor OF Animal People:
Of the 4,576 dogs involved in fatal and disfiguring attacks on humans occurring in the U.S. & Canada since September 1982, when I began logging the data, 3,094 (68%) were pit bulls; 549 were Rottweilers; 3,899 (85%) were of related molosser breeds, including pit bulls, Rottweilers, mastiffs, bull mastiffs, boxers, and their mixes. Of the 541 human fatalities, 281 were killed by pit bulls; 86 were killed by Rottweilers; 408 (75%) were killed by molosser breeds.
Of the 2,755 people who were disfigured, 1,862 (68%) were disfigured by pit bulls; 320 were disfigured by Rottweilers; 2,316 (84%) were disfigured by molosser breeds.
Pit bulls–exclusive of their use in dogfighting–also inflict more than 70 times as many fatal and disfiguring injuries on other pets and livestock as on humans, a pattern unique to the pit bull class.
Fatal and disfiguring attacks by dogs from shelters and rescues have exploded from zero in the first 90 years of the 20th century to 80 in the past four years, including 58 by pit bulls, along with 22 fatal & disfiguring attacks by other shelter dogs, mostly Rottweilers & bull mastiffs.
The only dogs rehomed from U.S. shelters to kill anyone, ever, before 2000 were two wolf hybrids in 1988 and 1989. 33 U.S. shelter
dogs & one U.K. shelter dog have participated in killing people since 2010, including 24 pit bulls, seven bull mastiffs, and two Rottweilers.
Surveys of dogs offered for sale or adoption indicate that pit bulls and pit mixes are less than 6% of the U.S. dog population; molosser breeds, all combined, are 9%.!
17 Barks
Sunday, July 28, 2013
Pit shelter and euthanasia stats
Merritt Clifton, Editor at Animal People recently shared some pertinent information about the number of pit bulls in shelters and their ultimate disposition.
I think it bears repeating because it refutes the idea that “BSL” is somehow to blame for all the pit bull deaths.
The current U.S. pit bull population is about 3.2 million, and it has been about three million for about 10 years now, according to the annual ANIMAL PEOPLE surveys of classified ads offering dogs for sale or adoption.
About one million pit bulls per year enter animal shelters, about two-thirds surrendered by their keepers, most of the rest impounded for dangerous behavior.
Most of these dogs have already been through three homes — their birth home, the home that bought them, and a subsequent pass-along home, before they arrive at shelters.
An average of just over 900,000 pit bulls per year over the past 10 years have been killed in shelters after flunking behavioral screening, with a peak of 967,000, a low of 835,000, and 910,000 killed last year.
This is about 60% of all the dogs killed in U.S. shelters today, up from about 50% in 2003. The average age of pit bulls killed in animal shelters is about 18 months.
So what we have at any given time is a third of the pit bull population having not yet reached maturity, a third (at most) in homes they will still occupy at the end of the year, and a third flunking out of homes and being killed — which translates into a 50% failure rate among adult dogs in homes each & every year. Among all other dog breeds combined, about 5% enter shelters each year.
Animal people news
Hi Thomas-
We see you’ve changed your name again. Credibility is important. Using your real name (which is female) might help. Again, the people of Aurora, along with Coloradans, deserve much more than cut and paste responses meant to inflame and create fear. They deserve true, peer reviewed empirical data, information from experts, and a local discussion.
Alexandra Semyonova:
The year the ban was lifted, there were 180 pit bulls IN THE ENTIRE NETHERLANDS awaiting euthanisia. This was the accumulation of about five years — confiscated pit bulls waiting for court appeals to be finished so they could be put down. 99% of them had harmed someone or something.
After the lifting of the ban, the Netherlands is back to euthanizing thousands of pit bull type dogs every single year. The very people who screamed that killing 180 in five years’ time was just too too sad, the same ones who demanded that the ban be lifted to save the lives of those 180 pit bulls — they are now casually dumping them by the thousands.
They don’t seem to mind pit bulls dying, as long as it’s themselves doing this to pit bull type dogs.
Aside from shelter euthanasia, dogfighting is back. Hundreds of pit bulls are dying this miserable death every year again. During the ban it was down to a couple of tens yearly.
BSL is needed to protect the rest of us and our children and pets, but BSL is also needed to protect pit bulls against the type of person who wants them. Repealing the ban has been a disaster for the pit bulls themselves.
9.16.2013
Legal Experts and the Enemy of Humanity
THOMAS J. MOYER, Chief Justice, Ohio Supreme Court 1987-2010
“The trial court cited the substantial evidence supporting its conclusion that pit bulls, compared to other breeds, cause a disproportionate amount of danger to people. The chief dog warden of Lucas County testified that: (1) when pit bulls attack, they are more likely to inflict severe damage to their victim than other breeds of dogs; (2) pit bulls have killed more Ohioans than any other breed of dog; (3) Toledo police officers fire their weapons in the line of duty at pit bulls more often than they fire weapons at people and all other breeds of dogs combined; (4) pit bulls are frequently shot during drug raids because pit bulls are encountered more frequently in drug raids than any other dog breed…. The evidence presented in the trial court supports the conclusion that pit bulls pose a serious danger to the safety of citizens. The state and the city have a legitimate interest in protecting citizens from the danger posed by this breed of domestic dogs.”
WILLIAM M HOEVELER, US DISTRICT JUDGE, ADOA v Dade County, Florida
Despite plaintiffs’ contention that there is no such animal as a pit bull, plaintiffs’ own experts have written articles about their pedigreed dogs referring to them by the common nickname of pit bull. At trial, these experts identified photographs of dogs as pit bulls, rather than delineating the dogs into any one of the three breeds recognized by the kennel clubs. Moreover, veterinarians commonly identify dogs as pit bulls — rather than one of the three recognized breeds — by their physical characteristics.
Two veterinarians, testifying for the defendants, stated that they are often called upon to identify a dog’s breed because it is an integral part of the animal’s health record. This they do by reference to standard physical characteristics. Generally, these veterinarians testified, owners themselves know what breed their dog is.
There was ample testimony that most people know what breed their dogs are. Although the plaintiffs and their experts claim that the ordinance does not give them enough guidance to enable owners to determine whether their dogs fall within its scope, the evidence established that the plaintiffs themselves often use the term “pit bull” as a shorthand method of referring to their dogs. Numerous magazine and newspaper articles, including articles in dog fancier magazines, refer to pit bull dogs. Veterinarians typically refer to the three recognized breeds and mixed breeds with conforming characteristics as pit bulls. In addition, the veterinarians who testified stated that most of their clients know the breeds of their dogs.
DON BAUERMEISTER, Council Bluffs, IA prosecutor
All dogs can “get into it”. The reality, though, for way too many dog owners is the sudden, unprovoked, violent and very serious attack from a pit bull. These folks have to pay the immediate vet bill. Yes, sometimes, the Court is able to intervene and order restitution, but what about the dead dog. What about the psychological damage to those who had to witness the attack. I have seen pit bulls attack and injure other dogs. It is something that you will never forget. A very purposeful bite, indeed. Pit bulls are pros and the rest of the dog world are amateurs. Man made them this way.
KORY NELSON, Denver, CO City Attorney
The most significant point about the justification for bans or restrictions of pit bulls is that these are not dependent upon a claim that every pit bull has a higher than average propensity for attacking humans. The justification is based on the clear evidence that, as a group, pit bulls, compared to other breeds, generally have a higher propensity to exhibit unique behavioral traits during an attack.
These behaviors havea higher likelihood of causing more severe injuries or death. The Colorado Dog Fanciers trial court made this clear, stating that, while it could not be proven that pit bulls bite more than other dogs, there was “credible evidence that Pit Bull dog attacks are more severe and more likely to result in fatalities.” The court, in great detail, noted fourteen separate areas of differences, including: strength, manageability and temperament, unpredictability of aggression, tenacity, pain tolerance and manner of attack.
A municipality that is experiencing a problem with pit bull attacks needs to consider for itself the best course of action to protect its citizens, especially those most likely to be unable to defend themselves from the tenacious and sustained attack of a pit bull, who will likely bite, hold, and tear at its victim despite efforts to stop it. However, given the clear rational evidence, breed-specific legislation is still a legally viable option.There is no new evidence that undermines the holdings of Colorado Dog Fanciers, only new relevant evidence that adds additional support for BSL, as the differential treatment of pit bulls is based upon logical, rational evidence from the scientific field of ethology.
BOB JOHNSTONE, Cincinnati, OH city attorney
We have amassed what I consider an overwhelming amount of information that demonstrates to me that pit bulls are, by far, responsible for more fatal or serious attacks than any other breed.
JUDGE VICTOR E. BIANCHINI, San Diego, CA
A pit bull is the closest thing to a wild animal there is in a domesticated dog.
U.S. SUPREME COURT, April 26, 1897, SENTELL v. NEW ORLEANS & C. R. CO.
Laws for the protection of domestic animals are regarded as having but a limited application to dogs and cats; and, regardless of statute, a ferocious dog is looked upon as hostis humani generis, and as having no right to his life which man is bound to respect.
Behaviorists/veterinarians
RANDALL LOCKWOOD, PhD
Randall Lockwood, who said he has witnessed the best and worst of pit bulls, said illegal dog-fighting is perpetuating dogs that are hazards to humans and other animals. Shaped by dog-fight enthusiasts, they are “a perversion of everything normal dogs should do. What they’ve created is a canine psychopath.”
“Fighting dogs lie all the time. I experienced it first hand when I was investigating three pit bulls that killed a little boy in Georgia. When I went up to do an initial evaluation of the dog’s behavior, the dog came up to the front of the fence, gave me a nice little tail wag and a “play bow” — a little solicitation, a little greeting. As I got closer, he lunged for my face.”
The pit bull, in its purebred or mixed form, has been responsible for most of the fatal dog attacks on humans in the last two years. In 1987, there were eight deaths from dog attacks in the country, and seven involved pit bulls. In 1986, there were 13 deaths, seven involving pit bulls. But pit bulls have been victimized by hype.
The dogs are no strangers to ordinances. A pit bull ban was passed in London in the 1400s.
These dogs can be canine crocodiles. They have a dark and bloody history.
In the United States, pets are considered property in the eyes of the law. And one of the most hotly defended rights of the individual is the right to own anything, no matter how stupid or dangerous the choice — even when what someone wants to own is a threat to them, their family, and the community around them.
FRANKLIN LOEW, dean of Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine
I’m not aware of any other breed of animal that has ever been singled out this way. This is man biting dog.
HUGH WIRTH, veterinarian
RSPCA Victoria president Dr Hugh Wirth said the dogs were a menace and were not suitable as pets for anyone.
“They are time bombs waiting for the right circumstances.”
“The American pit bull terrier is lethal because it was a breed that was developed purely for dog fighting, in other words killing the opposition.
“They should never have been allowed into the country. They are an absolute menace.”
“The fact of life is that the community doesn’t want American pit bull terriers. They’ve said it loud and clear over and over again – they want them banned.”
GRAEME SMITH, veterinarian
My views about associating a breed with dangerous behaviours were challenged over time as I saw the impact of Pit Bull attacks. Talking to owners with dogs of this breed who have themselves been turned on, it became clear that these animals are unpredictable and when they attack they can cause serious injury or death.
It is very hard to give Pit Bulls the benefit of the doubt.
Avoiding the identification of dogs and their behaviours by their breed means the legislation in place can be such that allows these Pit Bulls “one free bite.” This “one free bite” can have fatal consequences.
If it looks like a Pit Bull, it is a Pit Bull.
What’s at stake is the safety of people and their own pets in the wider community, there is no room for gambling with an unpredictable animal.
And that is so often the case. No one knows where these dogs are until they come out and cause some form of grief. My position is about protecting the public and other animals from these animals.
NICHOLAS DODMAN, BVMS, ACVB, ACVA
Rottweilers were originally bred to guard the money of peasants returning home from the city of Rottweil in Germany, so their fierceness was prized. Staffordshire bull terriers and pit bulls were programmed to deliver a full crushing bite to the noses of bulls. “They’re locked and loaded,” as Dodman puts it.
on breed profiling
But Dodman defends the practice. “The insurance companies have no ax to grind,” he says. They base their decisions on actuarial statistics showing that certain breeds in certain homes are a recipe for trouble and the cause of lawsuits.
on the MA muzzling law
After a spate of attacks by pit bulls this summer, Massachusetts lawmakers passed legislation requiring the dogs to be muzzled in public. Some pit bull owners protested, but a Tufts expert says the law may be a good idea. Breeds like pit bulls and Rottweilers, says animal behavior expert Nick Dodman, are hardwired for aggression.
“Some of these dogs are as dangerous as a loaded handgun,” Dodman– director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at TuftsSchool of Veterinary Medicine – said in an interview with The Boston Globe Magazine.
Genetics play a big role.
“No doubt about it, pit bulls are genetically predisposed toward aggression,” he told the magazine. “Justas certain breeds of dogs were bred to herd, certain were bred to hunt, certain to point, and others to swim.”
While most pet owners accept that their dogs have certain genetic behavioral characteristics, there is still resistance to the idea that some dogs are more dangerous than others.
“Everybody accepts [genetic behaviors like herding or hunting] until you throw in the word ‘aggression’ and things like a full, crushing bite, which some breeds were specifically bred for in the past.”
Statistics on dog attacks reinforce the link between certain dogs and dangerous behavior.
“It’s like a scene from “Casablanca” when they say, ‘Roundup the usual suspects,’” Dodman told the Globe.“It’s always German shepherds, chow, husky, pit bull.The numbers do the talking.”
He added that pit bulls and Rottweilers alone account for more than 50 percent of the fatal dog attacks every year. Despite the danger, the owners of these dogs often fail to take proper precautions.
“A lot of owners of aggressive breeds are suffering from denial and ignorance, because no one wants to be fingered as having that kind of dog,” Dodman said.
“Genetics does play a role and people who think it doesn’t are kidding themselves,” says Dodman. “The pit bull is notorious for a very hard bite. They are always No. 1 in the lethal dog bite parade. The dog was bred for pit fighting. It was bred to never give up, to bite and hang on.”
KATHERINE HOUPT, VMD, PhD, DACVB
Says Katherine Houpt, director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at Cornell and author of Domestic Animal Behavior: “Different breeds have genetic predispositions to certain kinds of behavior, though that can be influenced by how they are raised. The pit bull is an innately aggressive breed, often owned by someone who wants an aggressive dog, so they’re going to encourage it.”
“I have seen so many pit bulls taken by very nice, very dog-savvy people who did all the right things,” said Houpt. “They take them to socialization class, they take them to obedience school, they are fine for a few years, and then they kill the neighbor’s dog.”
BONNIE V. BEAVER, BS, DVM, MS, DACVB, Professor and Chief of Medicine, Department of Small Animal Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Texas A&M University
Executive Director, American College of Veterinary Behaviorists
By its origin, a pit bull is a fighting dog that takes very little stimulous to initiate aggression, and it will continue to fight regardless of what happens.
Pit bulldogs have been responsible for about 70 percent of the deaths of humans killed by dogs since 1979.
The AVMA warns veterinarians to be careful about supplying behavioural evaluations of dogs for insurance purposes.
“It’s risky for veterinarians,” said Dr. Beaver, explaining that there are many situations in which a dog may behave aggressively, and temperament tests can’t rule out the possibility of aggression. “You don’t have temperament tests that can identify all possibilities.”
KATHRYN HAWKINS, DVM
After seeing another dog die from a pit bull attack, I feel compelled to write. The opinion that pit bulls are “mean because of the way they are raised” is often not the case.
A Both of the dogs I took care of that died were attacked unprovoked by pit bulls that were in families that raised them responsibly. Just as a retriever is bred to hunt birds — an instinct you can’t stop — many pit bulls have a genetic tendency to attack other animals.
When they do, they are extremely powerful and don’t quit. I have never been bitten or growled at by a pit bull — they are very friendly. But when the instinct to attack another animal occurs, they cause serious damage, or death.
They don’t bite people any more often than other breeds but when they do, it’s bad. The aggressiveness toward other animals and damage they do is not because of “the way they are raised” — it is usually due to a genetic instinct not in the control of the owner.
ARTHUR HERM, veterinarian, animal control
He said he disagrees with those people who believe they can train aggressiveness out of dogs, and added he believes aggressiveness is “inherent” and “genetic” in all dogs while pit bulls “seem to have more of that.”
MICHAEL W. FOX, veterinarian, animal behaviorist
“I spent 20 years studying the behavior of dogs and it’s not in their nature. Man, has created a monster, If you wish…These dogs were selectively bred to fight, they have greater propensity to fight than other animals, which is brought out in training.”
“They can attack people, and because the attitudes of Pit Bulls it is more likely they will attack people. The worry is the power of the dogs jaw…to bite and not let go. It’s quite sufficient to crush right through a child’s arm or leg.”
SHERYL BLAIR, Tufts Veterinary School symposium – Animal Aggression: Dog Bites and the Pit Bull Terrier
The injuries these dogs inflict are more serious than other breeds because they go for the deep musculature and don’t release; they hold and shake.
Colleen Hodges, Veterinary Public Health spokeswoman
Some families think that they can raise a loving pet if they treat a pit bull like any other dog. They may not realize that the dog was bred to fight and that some of these dogs may have fighting in their genes.
They are tough, strong, tenacious. They are much more capable of inflicting serious damage, and some of them do. I would not recommend pits as a family dog.
GARY WILKES, animal behaviorist
No other breed in America is currently bred for fighting, in such great numbers as the American Pit Bull Terrier. No other breed has instinctive behaviors that are so consistently catastrophic when they occur, regardless of how rarely they happen.
The reality is that every English Pointer has the ability to point a bird. Every Cattle Dog has the ability to bite the heel of a cow and every Beagle has the ability to make an obnoxious bugling noise when it scents a rabbit or sees a cat walking on the back fence. Realistically, if your English Pointer suddenly and unpredictably points at a bird in the park, nobody cares.
If my Heeler nips your ankle, I’m going to take care of your injuries and probably be fined for the incident. If your Beagle bugles too much, you’ll get a ticket for a noise violation. If your Pit Bull does what it’s bred to do…well, you fill in the blank.
ALEXANDRA SEMYONOVA, animal behaviorist
You will also not prevent the dog from being what he is genetically predisposed to be. Because the inbred postures and behaviors feel good, fitting the body and brain the dog has been bred with, they are internally motivated and internally rewarded.
This means that the behavior is practically impossible to extinguish by manipulating external environmental stimuli.
The reward is not in the environment, but in the dog itself! As Coppinger and Coppinger (2001, p. 202) put it, “The dog gets such pleasure out of performing its motor pattern that it keeps looking for places to display it.” Some dogs get stuck in their particular inbred motor pattern.
As pointed out above, this kind of aggression has appeared in some other breeds as an unexpected and undesired anomaly – the golden retriever, the Berner Senne hund, the cocker spaniel have all had this problem.
The lovers of aggressive breeds try to use these breeding accidents to prove that their aggressive breeds are just like any other dog, “see, they’re no different from the cuddly breeds.” But a cuddly breed sometimes ending up stuck with a genetic disaster does not prove that the behavior is normal canine behavior. All it proves is that the behavior is genetically determined.
“These dogs aren’t killers because they have the wrong owners, rather they attract the wrong owners because they are killers.” The 100 Silliest Things People say about dogs.
JOHN FAUL, animal behaviorist
Faul said they were dangerous and a threat to life. He said the pitbull was bred to be absolutely fearless and had a “hair-trigger” attack response.
“The cardinal rule is that these dogs are not pets,” he said.
“The only way to keep them is in a working environment.”
He said the only relationship one could have with the pitbull was one of “dominance, sub-dominance”, in which the dog was reminded daily of its position.
ANDREW ROWAN, PhD, Tufts Center for Animals
“A pit bull is trained to inflict the maximum amount of damage in the shortest amount of time. Other dogs bite and hold. A Doberman or a German shepherd won’t tear if you stand still.
A pit bull is more likely to remove a piece of tissue. Dogs fight as a last resort under most circumstances. But a pit bull will attack without warning. If a dog shows a submissive characteristic, such as rolling over most dogs wills top their attack. A pit bull will disembowel its victim.”
“A study by Dr Randall Lockwood of the US Humane Society found that pit bulls are more likely to break restraints to attack someone and that pit bulls are more likely to attack their owners, possibly as a result of owners trying to separate their dogs from victims.”
Jørn Våge, Tina B Bønsdorff, Ellen Arnet, Aage Tverdal and Frode Lingaas, Differential gene expression in brain tissues of aggressive and non-aggressive dogs
The domestic dog (Canis familiaris), with its more than 400 recognised breeds [1], displays great variation in behaviour phenotypes.
Favourable behaviour is important for well-being and negative traits such as aggression may ruin the owner-dog relationship and lead to relinquishment to shelters or even euthanasia of otherwise healthy dogs [2,3].
Behavioural traits result from an interaction of both genetic and environmental factors. Breed specific behavioural traits such as hunting, herding and calmness/aggression are, however, evidence of a large genetic component and specific behaviours show high heritabilities [4-8].
ALAN BECK, Sc.D
However, Alan Beck, director of the Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine Center of the Human-Animal Bond, favors letting the breed go into extinction.
“This breed alone is a risk of serious public health factors,” Beck said. “We are keeping them alive against their own best interests.”
Beck said while he does not advocate taking dogs from current and caring owners, he does feel that it has become more of a social and political issue for people than a health one.
“If these dogs were carrying an actual disease, people would advocate euthanizing them,” Beck said. “This breed itself is not natural.”
“It has this sort of mystique that attracts a population of people. Of course, most of these dogs are never going to bite, as champions of the breed will tell you. But most people who smoke don’t get cancer, but we know regulations help reduce a significant risk.”
“I know you’re going to get beat up for this. But they just aren’t good dogs to own. That’s why so many of them are relinquished to shelters. There are too many other breeds out there to take a chance on these guys.”
MERRITT CLIFTON, journalist, Animal People editor
There are very few people, if any, who have written more on behalf of dogs over the past 40-odd years than I have, or spent more time down the back alleys of the developing world observing dogs in the habitats in which normal dogs came to co-evolve with humans.
But appreciation of the ecological roles of street dogs & coyotes, exposing dog-eating and puppy mills, opposition to indiscriminate lethal animal control, introduction of high-volume low-cost spay/neuter and anti-rabies vaccination, introduction of online adoption promotion, encouraging the formation of thousands of new humane societies worldwide, etc., are not to be confused with pit bull advocacy.
Pit bull advocacy is not defending dogs; it is defending the serial killers of the dog world, who kill, injure, and give bad reputations to all the rest. Indeed, pit bull advocacy, because it erodes public trust in dogs and people who care about dogs, stands a good chance of superseding rabies as the single greatest threat to the health, well-being, and human appreciation of all dogs worldwide.
STANLEY COREN, PhD
“A dog’s breed tells us a lot about that dog’s genetic heritage and makeup. Genetics is a strong determinant of personality. In the absence of any other information, we can make a reasonable prediction about how the dog will behave based upon its breed.” p 84
“When we crossbreed, we lose some of that predictability, since which genes will be passed on by each parent and how they will combine is a matter of chance. Fortunately, there is some data to suggest that we can still make predispositions without knowing much about its parentage.
John Paul Scott and John L Fuller carried out a series of selective breeding experiments at the Jackson Laboratories in Bar Harbor, Maine. By happy chance, their results revealed a simple rule that seems to work. Their general conclusion was that a mixed breed dog is most likely to act like the breed that it most looks like.” p 77
Dog trainers/animal control, Pit Bull breeders, owners, fanciers, experts
TRISH KING, Director, Behavior & Training Dept. Marin Humane Society
“There is no direct eye contact or very little direct eye contact. It is very quick and over with. Which is one reason why with pit bulls and rottweilers, we have problems. Because they’re bred to do direct eye contact and so they are off putting to other dogs and actually scary to other dogs.”
The fourth undesirable characteristic – arousal or excitement – is actually the most problematic. Many bully dogs cannot seem to calm themselves down once they get excited. And once they get excited all their behaviors are exacerbated.
Thus, if a dog is over-confident and has a tendency to body slam or mount, he or she will really crash into the other dog or person when he’s aroused, sometimes inadvertently causing injury. He may begin to play-bite, and then bite harder and harder and harder.
When you try to stop the behavior, the dog often becomes even more “aggressive.” In this way, play can turn into aggression fairly quickly. Research on the brain has shown that excited play has exactly the same chemistry as extreme anger. This allows a play behavior to switch quickly into aggression. And, once the dog has become aggressive a few times, the switch is much easier.
KURT LAPHAM, a field investigator for the West Coast Regional office of the Humane Society
Most breeds do not multiple-bite. A pit bull attack is like a shark attack: He keeps coming back.
DAVID GENDREGSKE, Clare County MI Animal Control Director
“In my opinion they appeal to the most irresponsible pet owners and to younger people,” he said.
“The younger people have no jobs to support the animal, or they have to move where animals aren’t allowed and (the dogs) end up here.” Certain people like pit bulls because they are intimidating, he said. “They want to scare people. It’s an intimidation thing.
They’re number one with those being incarcerated. If there’s a dog left behind (when someone is sentenced to jail or prison), it’s always a pit bull,” he said. He cited the time a pit bull got out of a car and attacked a horse.
He was pulled off, but he went back and grabbed the throat. He was pulled off again and again and went back after different parts of the horse. “What kind of a dog but a pit bull would do that?” he asked. “All dogs can bite but not with that ferocity. “ Some people will say that how a pit bull acts and reacts is dependent upon how the dog is raised, he said.
“But he was raised to kill for centuries,” he said. “You can’t breed it out in one generation.” If the popularity of pit bulls is a fad, it’s a long term one, he said. “I keep seeing more and more pit bulls,” he said. “It’s getting worse.”
Pit bulls, he said, are not good as a working dog, except for perhaps wild boar hunting. “And they’re not one of the smarter breeds,” he said, despite other’s beliefs that they are intelligent.
KEVIN COUTTS, Head Dog Ranger, Rotorua, New Zealand
There was concern among dog authorities about American pitbulls being allowed into New Zealand as they were dangerous, unpredictable animals, Mr Coutts said.
“A lot of people in this town get them because they are a staunch dog and they will fight. They are perceived as vicious … It’s frustrating they were ever allowed in the country … we can’t go back now though,” Mr Coutts said.
COUTTS’ comment on a pit car mauling
This sort of thing happens when people own this breed of dog and then don’t look after them.
VICTORIA STILWELL, celebrity dog trainer
Presas are not to be fooled with, they’re dangerous. You’ve got a fighting breed here. You’ve got a dog that was bred for fighting. You’ve got one of the most difficult breeds to handle.
CESAR MILAN, celebrity dog trainer
“Yeah, but this is a different breed…the power that comes behind bull dog, pit bull, presa canario, the fighting breed – They have an extra boost, they can go into a zone, they don’t feel the pain anymore. He is using the bulldog in him, which is way too powerful, so we have to ‘make him dog’ (I guess as in a “regular” dog) so we can actually create the limits.
So if you are trying to create submission in a fighting breed, it’s not going to happen. They would rather die than surrender.”. If you add pain, it only infuriates them..to them pain is that adrenaline rush, they are looking forward to that, they are addicted to it…
That’s why they are such great fighters.” Cesar goes on to say…”Especially with fighting breeds, you’re going to have these explosions over and over because there’s no limits in their brain.”
GARRETT RUSSO, dog trainer
I estimate Medical & Veterinary bills related to injuries caused by pit bulls in the Tompkins Square dog run in 2011, $140,000.00. Estimated Medical (human) & Veterinary (canine) bills from all other breeds and mixed breeds combined during the same period, $5,000.00. (Estimate gathered from reports to by owners to the dog park association.)
STEVE DUNO, dog trainer, pit bull owner
“The dogs that participated in these attacks weren’t Pekingese. You don’t have herds of Pekingese roaming the city attacking people. When someone says all breeds are created equal, well then they’re denying the definition of what a breed is. Breed serves a particular purpose.”
“I like them. They’re eager. They’re athletic. They’re aesthetically pleasing. But even if they’re bred perfectly, they can be problematic, particularly with other dogs.”
“When you combine the breed specific behaviors … with owners who either don’t give a rip, or with owners who (have) too much dog, you have a problem.”
JEAN DONALDSON, dog trainer
Most commonly, she sees dogs with aggression problems. While she’s a fierce opponent of “breed bans” like the proposed outlawing of pit bulls that San Francisco debated two years ago, she believes it’s undeniable that some breeds are predisposed to violence.
Many breeds that were bred as guardians or fighting dogs were carefully designed to not like strangers, she says. She thinks it’s disingenuous of breeders to further enhance this trait, and then expect owners to compensate with training.
ARLENE STERLING, Newaygo County, MI Chief Animal Control Officer
“It is genetically inbred in them to be aggressive. They can be very nice dogs, but they are very prey driven and they are extremely strong. It makes them high risk dogs and it makes them extremely dangerous.”
BOB KERRIDGE, New Zealand SPCA executive director
“That is the only real way to solve this problem – is to license owners and to give them the responsibility that goes with owning a dog. It would be extremely useful when you have a neighbour who is concerned about that dog next door. You can look at it and see they don’t have a license and take it away. That’s owner responsibility.”
“We led the charge to stop the importation of the pitbull because of the concerns they would be crossbred with other dogs… But there’s not a lot we can do about that because it’s happened. We wish someone had listened all those years ago.”
JIM CROSBY, pit bull hired gun
“Line breeding tends to concentrate recessive traits. The propensity for violent attacks by a dog would be a recessive trait.”
MELANIE PFEIFFER, veterinary assistant
Working in a veterinary hospital, you are exposed to all kinds of animal trauma. One of the more common ones is dog fights. I can honestly say that in three out of four cases, an American pit bull terrier is involved. Many times, we are able to save the life of the afflicted, but yesterday, we were not.
I propose that all owned American pit bull terriers be registered and all breeding be halted indefinitely. How many mutilated faces, mangled limbs, butchered pets and even human deaths does it take to convince us that this breed needs to be phased out?
DIANE JESSUP, Washington pit bull owner and expert
“It’s not sensible to get an animal bred for bringing a 2,000-pound bull to its knees and say I’m going to treat this like a soft-mouth Labrador,” says Jessup, the former animal-control officer. She blames novice owners, as much as actual criminals, for bringing the breed into disrepute. “It’s a capable animal, and it’s got to be treated as such.”
JOHN ROCKHOLT, South Carolina dogman
“It’s inhumane not to allow them to fight. If you have to encourage them to fight they are not worth the powder it would take to blow them away. To never allow them any kind of combat…That’s inhumane.”
RAY BROWN, former pit bull owner, breeder, dog fighter
Pit bulls didn’t become dangerous because we fight them; we fight them because the English specifically bred them to be dangerous.
MARK PAULHUS, HSUS southeast regional coordinator
If it chooses to attack, it’s the most ferocious of all dogs. I’ve never known of a pit bull that could be called off (during a fight). They lose themselves in the fight.
F.L. DANTZLER, HSUS director of field services
“They’re borderline dogs. They’re right on the edge all of the time. Even if the dogs are not trained or used for fighting, and even though they are generally good with people, their bloodline makes them prone to violence.”
HORSWELL BB, CHAHINE CJ, oral surgeons
Dog bites of the facial region are increasing in children according to the Center for Disease Control. To evaluate the epidemiology of such injuries in our medical provider region, we undertook a retrospective review of those children treated for facial, head and neck dog bite wounds at a level 1 trauma center.
Most dog bites occurred in or near the home by an animal known to the child/family. Most injuries were soft tissue related, however more severe bites and injuries were observed in attacks from the pit-bull and Rottweiler breeds.
Younger (under five years) children sustained more of the injuries requiring medical treatment. Injury Severity Scales were determined as well as victim and payer mix demographics, type and characteristics of injury, and complications from the attack.
DR RICHARD SATTIN, chief of unintentional-injuries section of the Centers of Disease Control
We’re trying to focus public attention on this greatly underestimated public hazard.
In 1979, pit bulls accounted for 20 percent of fatal attacks by dogs. That figure had risen to 62 percent by 1988.
Nobody knows the dog population of the United States or the exact breakdown by breed. We do not believe that pit bulls represent anywhere near 42% percent of dogs in the United States. Therefore, we believe that the pit bull excess in deaths is real and growing.
ROBERT D. NEWMAN, M.D.
As a pediatrician I was disturbed to read Vicki Hearne’s assertion that there are no bad breeds, just bad dogs (Op-Ed, April 15). There is ample evidence to suggest that certain breeds of dogs are more dangerous to children than others.
From 1979 to 1994, there were 177 known dog-bite-related fatalities in the United States. Of these fatalities, 66 percent were caused by five breeds: pit bull, Rottweiler, shepherd, husky and malamute.
If you include crosses among these five breeds, that number rises to 82 percent. Other breeds, like Labrador retrievers and golden retrievers were not implicated in a single fatality during this same period.
I laud the American Kennel Club’s attempt to include information about dog breeds considered ”not good with children” in the coming edition of ”The Complete Dog Book,” and lament the fact that the book is being recalled at the request of some breeders.
Seattle, April 16, 1998
Dr. EDGAR JOGANIK (after trying to reattach scalp and ear to a pit bull victim)
Pit bull attacks are typically the most severe, and in about one-third of all attacks, the animals are family pets or belong to close friends.
That should be the message, that these dogs should not be around children, adults are just as likely to be victims.
Everyone should be extremely cautious.
DR. MICHAEL FEALY
When a Pit Bull is involved the bites are worse. When they bite, they bite and lock and they don’t let go… they bite lock and they rip and they don’t let go.
DR. CHRISTOPHER DEMAS
Bites from pit bulls inflict much more damage, multiple deep bites and ripping of flesh and are unlike any other domestic animal I’ve encountered. Their bites are devastating – close to what a wildcat or shark would do.
DR. AMY WANDEL, plastic surgeon
I see just as many dog bites from dogs that are not pit bulls as bites from pit bulls. The big difference is pit bulls are known to grab onto something and keep holding so their damage they create is worse than other breeds.
DR. PATRICK BYRNE, Johns Hopkins Hospital
I can’t think of a single injury of this nature that was incurred by any other species other than a pit bull or a rottweiler.
ANDREW FENTON, M.D.
As a practicing emergency physician, I have witnessed countless dog bites. Invariably, the most vicious and brutal attacks I have seen have been from the pit bull breed.
Many of the victims have been children. In a recent study from the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, pit bull attacks accounted for more ER visits than all other breeds combined.
In young children, the most common part of the body injured was the face. Numerous studies have proven that the number-one cause of dog bite fatalities is the pit bull breed.
I am certain that many attacks are due to owner negligence, but the fact remains that many were unpredictable and were perpetrated by formerly “loving and loyal” pets.
Dr. Chagnon has every right to leave our town as she claims she will if pit bulls are banned, just like every one of her patients has the right not to attend her clinic where she brings her pit bulls.
I applaud Mayor Pro Tem Joanne Sanders for bringing this issue to the forefront. In the interest of public safety, I recommend we enforce a spay/neuter requirement on pit bulls while reviewing and revamping all of our policies relating to animal bites.
Hey Thomas/Darrin/Lori or whatever! Where’s your T-Rex comparison??? Come on you know you want to share it!! It is so well thought out and on point!!
The Pit Nutters exposed credo:
Media manipulation is their watchword, their attempts to give their mutants a make over can not hide the evil in their eyes nor the moral stench that exudes from their being, pit bulls are one of satan’s more natural creations, a set of horns and pitchfork would have been a far more appropriate visual reality presentation then the cute pitty poo farcical misrepresentations they present to the public.
…and you’ve proven our point. We can only hope that when Aurora looks at where the true issue of inappropriate comments are, they see your posts. We certainly hope the author of this editorial is looking.
I hope so too, as you helped raise another important talking point. What particular interest do you have in exploiting other commenters? Perhaps you wish to illicit harm on others, soley based on a difference of opinion. This is the very same antisocial behavior that make us so uneasy with the prospect of pit bull fanatics living next to us. Where do you find the time to engage in such activity? Nobody cares who ColoRADogs is, or at least pretends to be. But obviously, this editorial hits a little close to home 🙂
The point of you comment is fairly clear based on the sophomoric choice of names. Do you truly believe the people of Aurora, and dog bite victims deserve such flippant discussion? If you have questions about our group, you are welcome to check out our webpage or Facebook.
THAT↑↑↑↑ is probably one of the more idiotic things you have ever posted. Pit Bulls do not have a moral stench and wouldn’t the correct wording for your statement be +immoral+??
MARK WULKAN, MD, surgeon at Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta
“There is a difference with the pit bulls. In the last two years we’ve seen 56 dog injuries that were so severe the patient had to be admitted to the hospital so this doesn’t count just a little bite and then goes to the emergency room. Of those 56, 21 were pit bulls. And then when we look at our data even further, of the kids that were most severely injured, those that were in the hospital for more than 8 days or had life threatening injuries, 100% of those were pit bulls.
STEPHEN COHN, MD, professor of surgery at the University of Texas Health Science Center
“I think this is a public health hazard, this particular dog. We just have to have them contained in a way that protects the general public. I don’t want to see another kid come in dead.”
JOHN BINI, MD, chief of surgery at Wilford Hall Medical Center
“There are going to be outspoken opponents of breed legislation, who say: ‘My pit bulls lie with my baby and play with my rabbit.’ And that’s fine. I just think we’re seeing something here, and I think it does warrant a discussion as to whether this is a risk that a community wants to take.”
MORTALITY, MAULING, AND MAIMING BY VICIOUS DOGS, April 2011 Annals of Surgery
“Fortunately, fatal dog attacks are rare, but there seems to be a distinct relationship between the severity and lethality of an attack and the breed responsible,” they wrote in an article published in the April issue of the medical journal Annals of Surgery. “These breeds should be regulated in the same way in which other dangerous species, such as leopards, are regulated.”
DAVID E. BLOCKER, BS, MD, Dog Bite Rates and Biting Dog Breeds in Texas, 1995-1997
Bite Rates by Breed page 23
One out of every 40 Pit Bulls (2.5%) and about one out of 75 Chow Chows (1.4%) generated a reported human bite each year (Table 29; Figure 7).
One out of 100 Rottweilers (1%) caused a reported bite, and less than one out of 250 German Shepherds (0.37%) bit a human each year, not statistically different from the average for all dogs combined (0.53%).
Huskies, Dobermans, and Australian Shepherds had bite rates slightly lower than German Shepherds but higher than Labrador Retrievers.
Less than one in every 500 Labrador retrievers (0.15%) was associated with a reported bite each year. All other breeds examined individually, including Poodles, Cocker Spaniels, and Dachshunds, had bite rates lower than Labrador Retrievers.
Odds ratios for each of the five most commonly biting dog breeds versus all others presented similar findings (Table 30). The odds of a Pit Bull in Bexar County causing a bite were 5 times greater than the odds for all other breeds combined, at 4.9 to 1.
Chow Chows and Rottweilers also had odds ratios significantly greater than the average, at 2.9 to 1 and 1.8 to 1, respectively. The odds ratios for German Shepherds and Labrador Retrievers were significantly lower than the average, at 0.67 to 1 and
0.26 to 1.
PETER ANTEVY, pediatric E.R. physician, Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital
Dr Antvey sees at least five dog-bite victims a month in his emergency room. Unfortunately, he said, “the biggest offender is the pit bull.”
MELISSA ARCA, MD
The reality is that any dog can bite, and statistically speaking, a child is most likely to be bitten by the family dog or a dog that they know. When you’re talking about bite severity resulting in life-threatening and even fatal injuries, pit bulls and Rottweilers are the main culprits.
Experience absolutely colors our perception, and in this case I can’t help but be affected by what I’ve seen. I will never forget a young child I treated in the ER during my pediatric residency. She suffered severe facial lacerations and tears to her face after a pit bull attack in her local park.
Aurora, Colorado
Population 339,030
Also in March, Aurora released statistical data showing a significant reduction in the volume of pit bull attacks and pit bulls euthanized after adopting a pit bull ban in 2005.
“Since the ban has been in place, bites are down 73 percent from pit bulls,” said Cheryl Conway, a spokeswoman for the city’s animal care division.
She described various problems the city encountered before enacting the ban in 2005 that included irresponsible owners letting the dogs run at large, and owners using pit bulls to taunt pedestrians.
She added that the dogs placed a tremendous burden on city staff. According to city documents, before the ordinance was enacted in 2005, up to 70 percent of kennels in the Aurora Animal Shelter were occupied by pit bulls with pending court disposition dates or with no known owner. That number is now only 10 to 20 percent of kennels.
“There hasn’t been a human mauling in many years. Complaints and requests related to pit bulls are down 50 percent. Euthanasia of pit bull dogs is down 93 percent. Of those few that are put down, they are primarily those that come in as strays and their owners don’t come to claim them,” she said.
************************************************************
Omaha, Nebraska
Population 415,068
After the City of Omaha adopted a pit bull law in 2008, Mark Langan of the Nebraska Humane Society, who opposed the law, said in September 2009 that pit bull biting incidents were down 35% since its adoption:
“Despite the attack of Haynes, The Humane Society’s Mark Langan says pitbull bites are down since new laws went into effect last year. Langan says so far this year 54 bites have been reported compared to 83 last year.”
In September 2010, the Nebraska Humane Society provided bite statistical data to city council members and an evaluation of the effectiveness of the pit bull ordinance adopted by the City of Omaha in late 2008.
“It is the position of the Nebraska Human Society that this ordinance has been effective in reducing bites involving dogs defined as “Pit Bulls” in the ordinance.”
Judy Varner, President and CEO, Nebraska Human Society
Varner’s attached statistical data shows that bites by pit bulls dropped 40% after one year of the adoption of the ordinance, 121 bites in 2008 down to 73 bites in 2009. The bite rate dropped even further in 2010.
2008 Pit Bull Bites: 121 Total
2009 Pit Bull Bites: 73 Total
2010 Pit Bull Bites (through August): 28 Total
In January 2013, the Nebraska Humane Society reported that pit bull bites dropped to 31 in 2012, down from 121 in 2008 (a 74% reduction), the year that Omaha enacted a progressive pit bull ordinance.
2008 Pit Bull Bites Total: 121 (pre-breed specific ordinance)
Level 2: 52; Level 3: 58, Level 4: 8; Level 5: 3 (69 were Level 3-5 attacks)
2009 Pit Bull Bites Total: 73
Level 2: 49; Level 3: 17; Level 4: 4; Level 5: 3 (24 were Level 3-5 attacks)
2010 (through August) Pit Bull Bites Total: 28
Level 2: 19; Level 3: 6; Level 4: 2; Level 5: 1 (9 were Level 3-5 attacks)
2012 Pit Bull Bites Total: 31
No bite level break down provided
************************************************************
Saginaw, Michigan
Population 51,230
In November 2012, Saginaw reported a reduction in dog attacks eighteen months after enacting a “Light” BSL ordinance1 requiring owners of the top 5 dangerous dog breeds2 to comply with new regulations.
Eighteen months after Saginaw created its dangerous dog ordinance, put into effect in June 2011, Saginaw City Chief Inspector John Stemple said it has helped to lower the amount of dog attacks in the city.
“It was the government reacting to a problem,” Stemple said. “And if you look at the numbers, it’s been very effective.”
The ordinance requires residents to register dogs whose breeds are deemed “dangerous” at the City Clerk’s office, post a “Dog on premises” sign in the front of their homes and when outdoors, keep their animals either on a leash or within a 4-foot-high fenced area or kennel.
The breeds included in the ordinance are pit bulls, presa canario, bull mastiffs, rottweilers and German shepherds.
Stemple said he has heard from employees at Consumers Energy and the U.S. Postal Service that the signs and tethering rules have made their work safer. The number of reported dog bites fell in 2011 to nine, from 24 in 2009.
************************************************************
Ottumwa, Iowa
Population 24,998
In July 2010, Police Chief Jim Clark said there had been no recorded pit bull attacks since the city’s 2003 pit bull ban. Between 1989 and 2003, the city had a pit bull ordinance, but still allowed pit bulls as “guard” dogs.
“Police Chief Jim Clark says since the ban, there have been no recorded attacks by the animals.
“We haven’t had any attacks since then for one thing because it is illegal,” said Clark. “Most people are keeping their dogs inside their house or inside their basement and not letting them out loose so therefore they’re not around other people to attack them.”
“In the two-and-a-half years before the 2003 ban, Ottumwa police recorded 18 pit bull attacks, including the death of 21-month-old Charlee Shepherd in August 2002. There were at least three other attacks on children during this time.”
************************************************************
Little Rock, Arkansas
Population 189,515
When the City of Indianapolis was discussing a pit bull sterilization law in April 2009, Little Rock Animal Services Director Tracy Roark spoke about Little Rock’s successful 2008 pit bull ordinance:
“There was a day when you could walk down any street in center city Little Rock, you could see several pit bulls chained up. You don’t see that anymore,” said Tracy Roark with Little Rock Animal Services.
Roark told Eyewitness News over the phone that pit bull attacks have been cut in half and credits their new law with getting them there.
“This is the most abused dog in the city,” said Roark.
The Little Rock law passed last year and requires pit bulls to be sterilized, registered and microchipped. Also dogs – regardless of the breed – are also not allowed to be chained up outside.”
************************************************************
Fort Lupton, Colorado
Population 6,787
When the City of Fort Collins was mulling a pit bull law in March 2009, Fort Lupton’s Police Chief spoke about Fort Lupton’s successful 2003 pit bull ban, including zero pit bull biting incidents since the law’s adoption:
“Fort Lupton Police Chief Ron Grannis said the city hasn’t had a pit bull bite since the ban was enacted, but it still has the occasional pit bull that is picked up and taken away.
Although he said the ban has not been well-received by every resident, he thinks it was the right decision for the city.
“I believe it makes the community safer,” he said. “That’s my personal opinion. Pit bulls are not the kind of dogs most people should have. They are too unpredictable. … These dogs have been bred for thousands of years to be fighters.
You can’t take it out of them. A lion cub may be friendly for a while, but one day it can take your head off.”
************************************************************
Reading, Pennsylvania
Population 80,560
After an 8-year legal battle, pit bull advocates dismantled a pit bull law adopted by Reading in 1998. It was reported in the same news article, in February 2008, that the law had significantly reduced biting incidents:
“Reading’s 1998 law required that aggressive or dangerous dogs, when outside the home, be muzzled and kept on a leash shorter than three feet long with a minimum tensile strength of 300 pounds.
The law also punished violators with fines of up to $1,000 or 30 days in jail.
The law is credited with helping to reduce dog bites from 130 in 1999 to 33 in 2006. As a result, the law – or at least elements of it – were not being actively enforced, the Reading Eagle reported last year.
Read the book THE LOST DOGS: MICHAEL VICK’S DOGS AND THEIR TALE OF RESCUE AND REDEMPTION
No one ever said that this is a 100% breed. many PBs make it thorugh their lives without doing harm… and then there are those that wait for 8 ears and more before that internal genetic program explodes…. Beau Rutledge was killed by the family pet Pit that his mother had actually helped whelp… she had Kissy Face’s dam. Perhaps this is the most dangerous aspect of the Pit; that they are wiggle butt, goofy, playful dogs right up to the nanosecond they ‘”Go PIT”….. and because the family trusts them so much, the results are even more disasterous. You have to make a judgment call based on the realtiy of the breeding AND the degree of severity when they do have that genetic program click in.
Please, please read THIS retelling of the death of little Beau Rutledge as the anniversary of his death is tomorrow. If you can read that book, you can read this story.
https://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/animal-rights/family-pit-bull-kills-toddler-beau-rutledge-while-mother-bathroom
The child was killed by a dog who was whelped by a backyard breeder, who left her child alone with a dog? Responsible parents never take their eyes off their children for a second, nevermind leave them alone in a room with a dog. Where is the mother’s responsibility in this? You lot are always calling for the dog owners to made accountable for their dogs actions, where is the mothers accountability in this? Where is the babysitter’s accountability in the baby’s death? Where is the grandfather and the mothers accountability when the toddler got bitten? I could go on and on, the common theme here is irresponsible adults and caregivers. What happened to taking responsibility for your actions or inactions that lead to a tragedy? I am guessing that is the hard route to follow, it is easier to blame everything and everyone but yourself. I dont know how all you lot sleep at night.
Better yet… ask her about Susie Iwicki, who kept her dogs confined in cages all day.
Pit bull advocates are reason enough to regulate these poor misunderstood dogs. The folks who misunderstand these dogs most seem to be pit bull owners and advocates. They have had a good twenty years to have a go at their “education” efforts, and the attacks are escalating. There are studies that show a high propensity for criminal and anti-social behavior among owners. Then there is the altruistic brand that are likely a worse sort, they can’t be truthful about what pit bulls are, put tutus on them and cling to the long debunked “Nanny Dog” myth. Or worse…they believe it’s all how you raise ’em. They can’t accept the fact that the dogs for which they advocate are bred for blood sport by sadists. They are willing to put their children on an alter of sacrifice to make a point. Often they fail, and their children pay the cost…or you will.
I know of neighborhoods who no longer have their mail delivered because of “dangerous dogs”. I see people walking the streets with bats and golf clubs, who are now getting knives and guns so they can protect themselves for a walk around the block. People who have discovered that pepper spray isn’t enough. This is because there are more and more of us who have had close calls, or an actual attack, watched a pet being killed by one, or perhaps we have a family member or a friend who was attacked. It’s not rare, as the author suggests, dog attacks are the third most common insurance claim made, and guess which type of dog is involved with the majority of the incidents? More people have been injured and killed in the Inland Empire, CA in the last decade by pit bulls than by earthquakes, but guess which kind of disaster is dominating the news right now? The actuarial scientists who work for the insurance industry have taken notice, which is why many companies will not cover incidents involving “pit bulls”. If you are a victim, you will go to court to fight against an owner who will insist that “the dog never once shown aggression”. You, the victim will find justice served to you in a great big, “just one of those bad things that happen” platter.
Risky choices need to come with liability and harsh consequences when there is failure to prevent calamity. Most local policy is not proactive. Denver got it right to simply ban pit bulls, it’s easier than to deal with their advocates. Or, give it the vote. Maimi-Dade, Florida voted last year to keep their 20 year pit bull ban.
and don’t forget the guide dogs and GENUINE service dogs, dogs that cost in the neighiborhood of $50,000.00 to train and place are being attacked which means that handicapped person has to start all over again and is at a huge vulnerability for the usual 2 years it takes to get a service dog. There needs to be a law that if a dangerous dog harms a service or guide dog that the owner must pay for the replacement… or that licensening fees for dangerous dogs carry an surcharge to make a fund for such an eventuality.
Only problem with punishing the owners of bad dogs is that it is reactive, instead of preventive. Someone has to get hurt or killed before anything happens, and 90% of the time there is no liability Insurance on the dog. Dogs need liability Insurance
Sending death threats and trying to ruin ones political career or businesses works for the Pit Bull advocates, that’s why they do it. Our lawmakers are, for the most part, a bunch of little girls that cave in because of the pressure put on them. They are too scared to do the right thing. Bully Dogs are owned by Bully people.
Also, The bullying and threats by the Pit Bull advocacy are another reason many people do not speak up on this issue. They are afraid too. This is what this advocacy wants. The only way to decide this fairly is for a public vote, let the citizens that live in each area vote for what action they want. A Pit Bull Ban? Tighter BSL, that has the provisions for such laid out in black and white? or No Ban or BSL? The citizens are the ones that live there, pay taxes and vote for lawmakers. Why are we relying on our Senators, legislators to decide what We want, and why are we allowing people to come into our individual States and push for what THEY want. THEY do not even live in these places and yet they have paid lobbyists trying to push laws that the people don’t want. Put it up for public vote. This way people have nothing to fear by voting for what they want. The Pit Bull Advocacy wants nothing to do with a public vote, has been suggested to them in a couple of places that this is what they can do, deal with their citizens on what they want, may campaign, but they want nothing to do with that. I wonder why?
If you ban the breed like Pts and their mixes then you have far less worry about the ‘deed’. Statistics on towns that have been able to resist the howling of the mindless crowds show this.
You mean like Denver? 8.0 child (under the age of 5) dog bite injury hospitalizations (eg. overnight stay) per 100,000 residents, nearly twice the state average. Or do you mean the United Kingdom, with 16.0 per 100,000.
Pit bulls kill and severely maim more than any other type. This year, people are dying every 6 days (average every 13 previously), and having body parts and entire faces removed even more often, with daily attacks on people and pets- all from pit bulls.
You can add up ALL the other deaths attributed to all other breeds, and still not match what pits have done. They kill well over half of all DBRF’s, and are responsible for 90% of all severe maulings where a limb or face is lost.
Honestly, this is really the only metric that matters.
I really want to know WHY is it OK to accept all these injuries and deaths, just to allow some people to own a particular type of dog? Your rights end where mine begin, so what about MY right not to deal with this threat?
Dog ownership is NOT a right, it is a privilege.
Yes, it IS an owner problem, but the best way to solve it is to end the ability for people to be irresponsible with a dog so deadly. Pit owners as a whole have NOT proven responsible. If they had, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation; there wouldn’t be so many attacks because the dogs would be properly contained, trained, and managed. They aren’t, we see the effects of this everyday.
I know, I know- There are many responsible owners, and I am sorry they are caught up in this, and I am sorry they feel under attack. I am also sorry that I feel under attack by your dogs every day too. I have been attacked by a loose pit bull, on the beach. Now look like a burn victim when in short sleeves, and was bankrupted by the enormous bills insurance did not cover. I know what can happen, it is ugly, painful, terrifying, psychologically damaging, and EXPENSIVE (often for the taxpayer).
There are pits that make great pets, again, I know this. Too bad you cannot tell which pits will kill, and which will not. Many of the deaths are family dogs that never showed any aggression, so you just cannot tell until it is too late. Telling me that YOUR pit bull is really sweet and wonderful means nothing. Many people drive drunk too, and get where they are going unharmed. BUt we as a society feel that the risk is not worth it, so it is illegal.
And don’t make the excuse that “You cannot tell its a pit bull!” That is nonsense, there are pics with these stories, and even the owners ID their dogs as such. I also see that pit owners can tell their dogs type just fine when they are collecting pit bull only freebies, like spay and neuter or training, or when bragging about how sweet their pitties are. I am supposed to believe only owners with dogs that have attacked don’t know the kind of dog they have? Come on now.
You can talk all day about how mean chihuahuas are, or how you were bit by a lab, but the fact is that pits really do harm many more people, in more severe ways, than any other dog. Near daily life flights? It’s a pit bull thing.
BSL STOPS ATTACKS, before they happen. There is a reason that cities with BSL have less severe attacks and fatalities. BSL also saves the lives of pits that no longer die in droves in shelters, in these areas.
I say- BAN the BREED, END the DEED.
Get another kind of dog, there are 400 breeds to choose from. Why have one bred to fight?
all in all, a fluff piece. there is not a little bit of bad in good and a little bit of good in bad. Intent of the creation of the breed, and intent of the advocates – all bad. Responsible management of what we have left to deal with, would be good. We are not going to get that from advocates of a bad thing. Health and welfare of our neighborhoods. A good thing.
They can’t help themselves. They don’t feel a sense of victory until every city is forced to dodge deadly dogs, and watch them daily, clamp down on loving, normal dogs, and gnaw the life out of them. Meanwhile, the victim dogs’ owners look on in horror, only to pick up their beloved dog from the puddle of blood where the pit bull dropa it, as soon as it is sure your dog is dead. Often the pit bull owners look on and enjoy it, and then run off with their “dogs”. If pit bulls were not causing a problem, we wouldn’t even notice them. Why would anyone expect the dog fighters and breeders to keep quiet on this page? Pit Bull “advocates” (such a nice term for what they are really doing), have nothing but time. When the dog fighting pit is empty, and the spectators go home, what’s left to do, other than breed some more pit bulls, contact their “rescue” friends and force their gamebred fighting dogs down everyone else’s throats? Oh, and jump all over any group aiming for any limitations on breeding, ever! Huffington Post amping up these deadly dogs never caught the attention of “ColoRADogs” as biased. Why? Oh, it is only “biased” when they don’t say “treat a pit bull like any other dog”, “there is really no downside”. Tell this to the parents of (search term their names) Victoria Wilcher, Kevin Vicente, Charlotte Blevins, Amaya Hess, and this is just a very short list of permanently disfigured kids in USA.
If pit bulls were not creating a problem, they would go as unnoticed as labradors. Instead, they are killing more humans and more pets than every other dog breed in existence. Huffington Post “Treat pit bulls like any other dog breed”, as “there is literally no downside” is totally biased. Ask (search these kids’ before and after injuries) Victoria Wilcher, Kevin Vincente, Charlotte Blevins, Amaya Hess. People who want to push for unlimited breeding are in this for the money and don’t give a rat’s arse about those kids or yours.