The Pit Bull Ban: Yay or Nay

Clarification.... I was the individual that stated Irish Setters were stupid....Yes I said that but apparently did not include enough context.  Irish setters became very popular following the publication of a book (Big Red), the series that followed and (oh guess what) the Disney film.  The dogs were originally high drive, high strung, active dogs bred to hunt the field for hours on end under poor weather conditions and incredibly difficult terrain.  They needed to work long distances from hunters and be responsive to commands.  Does that sound the like the dog for JQP?  Since they became so popular there was lots of breeding done with no attention to original type, personality, working ability etc.  Long silky coats were soon the norm, not functional weather proof coats.  High drive disappeared into goofiness, bird sense to a great extent left the breed.

Now with that context in mind, my response was short and lacking in detail... It was however no different than the whole scale breed descriptions being offered about pitt bull terriers.

I find it considerably frustrating that individuals who support breed bans continually ignore the fact:  If you remove one breed from list of "legal" dogs, those individuals who were owning those dogs will just move on to another breed.

Dog attacks are a problem, however, adequate enforcement of existing laws, picking up roaming dogs, adequate fines, etc. would likely impact the problem as much if not more than breed bans. 

To condemn an animal to death and a family to distress to address personal paranoia is ludicris.

[&:] Alright, I have said 1000 times that I did not start the thread to stir up trouble, but that is what became of it, and that is not my fault. If so many think I posted just to be a "troll", why are you responding?? Kind of contradicts, don't you think?
 
I can understand why people are upset with me because of the way I feel, but personal attacks are not going to help anyone, unless you're one of those people who feel better about themselves by putting someone else down.
 
mrv - about the "context" of your post regarding IS...let's be honest, you were just trying to offend me, calling Irish Setters "brainless" and saying that the brains were bred right out of them does not have anything to do an educated insight into  irresponsible breeding, you were just saying something offensive about my dogs/breed.
 
Also, you wrote: "I find it considerably frustrating that individuals who support breed bans continually ignore the fact:  If you remove one breed from list of "legal" dogs, those individuals who were owning those dogs will just move on to another breed.". 'Those individuals' who you are referring to are most likely the abusive, neglectful owners, correct? Surely something could serve as an example of abuse to their dogs, I doubt that they've never done something cruel to their dogs. Fine. They can be put in jail, or faced with a large fine, and/or given a permit saying they are not allowed to own a dog. Thus everyone would have to have permits so shelters, pet stores, breeders, etc. would have to check for permits on everyone who wants a dog. The 'bad guy's' permit would say he could not have a dog, and therefore he is prevented from acquiring one. If someone does sell him one, that seller should be punished similarly.
 

ORIGINAL: BEVOLASVEGAS
I crafted a scathing response, but I decided not to post it, as it is mainly a personal attack on the OP for general lack of knowledge/stupidity.

 
BEVOLASVEGAS, it seems you were successful at sneaking a little comment in there, right?? Am I really the one stirring the pot?
 
And no, I would not be able to insert the needle to kill the pit bulls. Would you, then, be able to insert the needle, euthanizing a dog who has just been attacked by one knowing that it could have been prevented? Or what about telling the parents of a child that their son/daughter is dead because of a pit bull attack? I feel more compassionate for those groups, the victims in the attacks...not the aggressors.

That was not my intent,,,, my posting about Irish Setters was specifically made to highlight that breeding practices influence type....I posted to illustrate that comments on one breed (pitt bulls) have corressponding arguments in other breeds.
 
You are correct, there is no point in continuing the discussion... My position will not change, nor will yours.

Good morning everyone! Intersting read with my morning coffee!

I just wanted to comment on the value of this thread. I realize that many have felt insulted and frustrated by Irish's position on pit bulls and I imagine she must feel a bit beat up herself. Although I do not agree with her position, although I understand her concern, I give her cudos for her continuing responses and not running away from the on coming fire. She has IMO tried to respond to everyone and has been for the most part quite civil. Refreshing for this forum.

I think it is important to remind ourselves that the opinions expressed by Irish are the same opinions that the majority of JQP share. Although she may find herself pretty much a 'lone voice' here, believe me she would have many supporters in the real world. I think it is important for us to have this discussion as a reminder of this reality.

I also wanted to say that I was particularily impressed with badraps 1st post. I liked the direction you took. Dyan also!

And no, I would not be able to insert the needle to kill the pit bulls. Would you, then, be able to insert the needle, euthanizing a dog who has just been attacked by one knowing that it could have been prevented? Or what about telling the parents of a child that their son/daughter is dead because of a pit bull attack? I feel more compassionate for those groups, the victims in the attacks...not the aggressors.

I feel the same way I feel about the death penalty - if I personally cannot put up, then I shut up.  Killing another person or a pit bull does not bring the other person back.  Revenge interrupts the grieving process.  I have seen truly aggressive dogs, I'd have no problem making the call or inserting the needle (if I was the vet tech).  But I would do this because I know that there are some dogs that cannot be rehabilitated, or rehab leaves too much of a liability and wastes resources needed for more adoptable dogs.  My decisions have nothing to do with revenge or pit bulls specifically.  This thread is reminding me of people who kill sharks out of spite and ignorance.  Or people that went around stabbing sting rays after Steve Irwin died.  I'd rather have you hate pit bulls just because you hate pit bulls than be so vengeful about it.

She has IMO tried to respond to everyone and has been for the most part quite civil. 

She has yet to address her lack of credible evidence supporting her claims.  Her posts are a "procrustean bed" - she has an opinion based on her own emotions and then she goes looking for evidence to fit her opinion.  That's a very elementary way of analyzing the situation, to begin with an opinion rather than an open-ended question.  I'm very open to either side of this debate because as of yet I cannot find any credible evidence published in academic sources that supports or refutes her claims.

But I do agree, this thread is still rather tame compared to some (on another board I requent).

But when I hear about kids or dogs being attacked by pit bulls, I am outraged. It is a natural reaction. Especially when I see pictures of other dogs that have been attacked by pit bulls, I feel that if I don't take a stand against pit bulls and for the ban that I am forgetting them and abandoning them (them being the dog victims of the attacks). This may sound dumb but it's 100% truth.

You see and hear more about them because that's what the media reports.  My nieghbor's chihuahua attacking my 5- year old ain't gonna make the evening news....

If we substituted the words Irish Setter for the words pit bulls in your above statement, would you feel the same way?

And, hypothetically speaking, if your Irish Setter attacks/bites my child, that would be okay because it's an Irish Setter and not a Pit Bull?  If not, then we can just have your dog and every other Irish Setter PTS, because if your Irish setter bit a child then all Irish Setters should be considered aggressive/vicious and that would be okay with you, right? 


The first thing I thought after I read this comment was, "What about every other dog that has attacked another dog, child?"  That it's just a fluke and nothing should be done...it's okay because it's not a Pit Bull?  IMO, the owner of any dog, no matter the breed, is responsible. 

I also wanted to say that I was particularily impressed with badraps 1st post. I liked the direction you took. Dyan also!

Ditto, exceptionally well written, BadRap.......[sm=bravo.gif]

Lack of evidence? Ok, look here, which is obviously from a credible source. [linkhttp://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf]http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf[/link] Look at the chart. Who is responsible for the most dog bite related fatalities? Pit bulls.
 
Or that they are unpredictable? Someone mentioned a .org site would be better.
Here. [linkhttp://www.swordscrossed.org/node/1121]Pitbulls: These Dogs Present a Special Risk to Non-Owners and Owners Alike: | Swords Crossed[/link] 
 
"Contrary to what many people believe, it's not just "the owner".  Pitbulls are not like any other dog.  Not only are their bites more dangerous and inflict much deeper, more serious injury than the bites of most other dogs, but pitbulls are even more likely than other dogs to attack just out of the blue, without any provocation whatsoever, which in all the above-mentioned cases, the pitbull did. 
Furthermore, even a pitbull who has supposedly been "bred to be gentle" can and will snap, and attack out of the blue, with horrific results."
 
Someone will probably find something wrong with these sources because that person does not care for the information I am posting, but that is alright. [8|]

Killing another person or a pit bull does not bring the other person back. Revenge interrupts the grieving process.

ORIGINAL: Liesje

 
Revenge? Again words are being put in my mouth, which make this entire debate unfair. I never said that I support the ban because I want revenge. I want a ban because pit bulls are dangerous for society and it would prevent the many fatalities pit bulls have caused over the years from increasing and would save lives both human and of other canines.

one flaw i can point out in that document... under purebreed it lists "pit bull type dogs".

pit bull type dogs encompass several breeds including APBT and american staffordshire terrier. does this number also include dogs that are mixed with APBT? we cant say for sure. because their definition of the breed is in error. i cant find the specific source at the moment, but i believe the CDC has recognized this error as well.

edit: did you read the conclusions portion of that document on the first page?
"Conclusions- Although fatalt attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit-bull type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates. Because of difficulties  inherent in determining a dog's breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small portion of dog bit injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the proimary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 200; 217:836-840)"

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

one flaw i can point out in that document... under purebreed it lists "pit bull type dogs".

pit bull type dogs encompass several breeds including APBT and american staffordshire terrier. does this number also include dogs that are mixed with APBT? we cant say for sure. because their definition of the breed is in error. i cant find the specific source at the moment, but i believe the CDC has recognized this error as well.

Ok, how does that discredit my source? I have been talking all along about pit bulls. Pit bull-type = representative of pit bulls.

ORIGINAL: IrishSetterGrl

which make this entire debate unfair

There is no debate. You can't debate an issue without educating yourself on the subject, and educating yourself and debating includes reading, acknowledging and respecting the opposite side's information. You can't just read the stuff you agree with, or that's easy to respond to.

ORIGINAL: IrishSetterGrl

In response to badrap's post:
Note: No, I did not not read your post because I didn't want to take the time.

ORIGINAL: IrishSetterGrl

I want a ban because pit bulls are dangerous for society and it would prevent the many fatalities pit bulls have caused over the years from increasing and would save lives both human and of other canines.

I'm going to quote myself, since you ignored the original post:

Look at it this way, and these are statistics YOU posted:

Pit bulls were responsible for approximately 79 fatal attacks over 20 years. 4 attacks a year.

There are approximately 2,750,000 - 5,760,000 pit bulls in the US. 4 of those 2,750,000 - 5,760,000 pits fatally attack per year.

If the breed were inherently *bad*, don't you think the number of fatal attacks would be higher? Don't you think it's possible, in fact probable, that something or someone happened to those particular dogs? Out of 3 million people there are bound to be some that are genetically wired wrong, abused physically or mentally, or otherwise suffer circumstances that turn them into murderers or criminals, who's to say the same couldn't happen to a small number of dogs...

Pit bull-type = representative of pit bulls

which dogs do you lump into being pit bull type? as i stated that could be construed to be several different breeds and mix breeds.

i think you need to reread the document. because as i pointed out in my edit, it states in the document that BSL will not be effective at preventing fatal dog bites. if your own source shoots holes in your arguement, that is a pretty weak arguement.

one flaw i can point out in that document... under purebreed it lists "pit bull type dogs".

pit bull type dogs encompass several breeds including APBT and american staffordshire terrier. does this number also include dogs that are mixed with APBT? we cant say for sure. because their definition of the breed is in error. i cant find the specific source at the moment, but i believe the CDC has recognized this error as well.

I agree.  And since there are an infinite number of dogs who could fit the description of "pit bull types," some mistakenly, wouldn't that mean that the reports of pit bull type incidents would be larger?  In other words, statistically, the population of "pit bull types" is probably much larger, compared to say...my American Eskimoes or American Eskimo types, thus more incidents reported.