terrible dog attack

    • Gold Top Dog

    Mods warning.

    Take a step back and a deep breath if necessary, as you and only you will be held liable for what you type.  Let's remember we need to post with respect to our fellow members.

    Thank you. 

    • Puppy

    whtsthfrequency

    And a person with a lab mix that looks like a pit should not be required to pay a large fee to license their dog. Because it isn't a pit. Pure and simple.

    How does this person know that the dog is a lab mix and not a pit mix???  If he/she knows the actual linage of the dog he/she should not have a difficult time convincing a unbiased and knowledgeable panel!   If he/she cannot convince the panel that the dog is not a pit don't you think they would prefer the option of getting a license and keeping the dog which is what my proposal would offer rather then having to get rid of the dog which is what they would face when their city bans their dog?

    whtsthfrequency

    It is absolutely enforceable to reduce crime. Is it really so "pie in the sky" to, for example.....

    Train more and better police officers for quicker response time and wider patrolling

    Expand Animal Control with more manpower and funding to respond more quickly to situations warranting their protection.

    Give officers better weapons and protective

    Have better armed and trained civilians.

    Have programs for at-risk kids and don't keep stripping funding from them.

    Give people longer and harder sentencing and give parole out much more rarely.

    All of these are very doable, and are not being done. If you say such things are pie in the sky, how is your proposal any better? 

     

    How will doing any of those things address the problems that the pit bull breed is facing?  You can double your police force, triple you AC, impose longer sentences, issue guns to all your citizens and program the heck out of the children but it will not have the slightest effect on the problems which are leading to these pit bull attacks because until the dog breaks loose and mauls someone NO LAWS ARE BEING BROKEN!!!!  Until a law is broken the police, AC and even the armed citizen cannot do anything!!!

     

    whtsthfrequency

    And, all of the people you speak of who own these aggressive dogs whom you say are not criminals....you think they're just going to up and pay the fee like good upstanding citizens? No, they'll try to hide the dogs - but before you blow up, read the following: and I quote

    If there are people that keep their dogs locked up in their basements to avoid getting a license for them then so what????  Those dogs are NOT able to go out and eat their 90 year old neighbor!!!!

    Because dogs never, ever escape from where they are contained, ever. Sorry, I keep forgetting that.

    First you are trying to say that AC will not be able to find the dogs because they will be "Locked up in the basements" NOW you are claiming they will escape and be running loose???  Well if they escape and are running loose guess what......AC can now get them without having to search the basements!!!  In fact that is what animal control does!!!  They chase down dogs that have gotten loose!  Under my proposal once animal control; has found these basement dogs that are now running loose they will have the power to get rid of the dogs and to go after the owners!

    whtsthfrequency

    The issue is attacking the problem from the top down, instead of from the bottom up. For example, what good does it do going around busting kids for weed possession or small-time crackheads on the street? Nothing. As we have seen, our war on drugs has been a total failure.  You have to attack the problem where it originates - the dealers and the cartels. Same thing here - attack from the top - reduce crime.

    Having spent close to 25 years on the "front lines" of the "war on drugs" I can tell you that busting cartels will not change the behavior of irresponsible pit bull owners!  Reducing crime is a nice thought but as I have pointed out several times until the dog breaks loose and mauls someone there is no crime being committed!

    whtsthfrequency
    It is simply unfair to force a person to pay a significant fee and now carry a reputation for having a dangerous dog, when no one can prove that the dog IS in fact dangerous, as well as not being able to prove that this dog is a type of dog that the law even applies to!

    How "fair" is it going to be for that same owner to have to get rid of his/her dog because their city passed a ban on it?  That is what is happening in cities all over this country and as I stated earlier if someone owns a pit bull they may be just one dog attack away from their city passing a ban on their dog!  My proposal is an attempt to prevent that from happening, while your lack of a proposal is helping to make those bans a reality.

    Mark

    • Gold Top Dog

    Marklf

    whtsthfrequency

    And a person with a lab mix that looks like a pit should not be required to pay a large fee to license their dog. Because it isn't a pit. Pure and simple.

    How does this person know that the dog is a lab mix and not a pit mix???  If he/she knows the actual linage of the dog he/she should not have a difficult time convincing a unbiased and knowledgeable panel!   If he/she cannot convince the panel that the dog is not a pit don't you think they would prefer the option of getting a license and keeping the dog which is what my proposal would offer rather then having to get rid of the dog which is what they would face when their city bans their dog?

    whtsthfrequency

    It is absolutely enforceable to reduce crime. Is it really so "pie in the sky" to, for example.....

    Train more and better police officers for quicker response time and wider patrolling

    Expand Animal Control with more manpower and funding to respond more quickly to situations warranting their protection.

    Give officers better weapons and protective

    Have better armed and trained civilians.

    Have programs for at-risk kids and don't keep stripping funding from them.

    Give people longer and harder sentencing and give parole out much more rarely.

    All of these are very doable, and are not being done. If you say such things are pie in the sky, how is your proposal any better? 

     

    How will doing any of those things address the problems that the pit bull breed is facing?  You can double your police force, triple you AC, impose longer sentences, issue guns to all your citizens and program the heck out of the children but it will not have the slightest effect on the problems which are leading to these pit bull attacks because until the dog breaks loose and mauls someone NO LAWS ARE BEING BROKEN!!!!  Until a law is broken the police, AC and even the armed citizen cannot do anything!!!

     

    Doing the things whtsthefrequency suggested will reduce crime in general.  It will take criminals off our streets and put them behind bars.  It is the criminals who are creating dangerous, human aggressive dogs.  The suggestions offered are rather like going to the issue at its root, rather than flailing at leaves - which are harder to reach and numerous.

    Now, if all those things were done and there was STILL an issue with dangerous dogs, then it would make sense to think: what laws do we need now?  And THEN add more.  What I am saying is - and I THINK whtsthefrequency agrees - lets enforce and strengthen the laws we HAVE first.  This makes a lot of sense to me.

    Marklf
    Having spent close to 25 years on the "front lines" of the "war on drugs" I can tell you that busting cartels will not change the behavior of irresponsible pit bull owners!  Reducing crime is a nice thought but as I have pointed out several times until the dog breaks loose and mauls someone there is no crime being committed!


    Yes, BUT - lets say the owner does not care about little things like obeying the law.  They have a Pit, and its a dangerous one and they haven't bothered to get him licensed.  The AC can't search properties to check for unlicensed dogs because that is not a feasible option and it's a violation of privacy.  One day, the dog gets out and mauls someone, and then the owner is hauled over the coals when the AC get their hands on the dog.  But it is already too late - someone has still been mauled!  So how has your law helped them?

    Now ron made a GREAT point.  If the bite is severe enough to warrant hospital attention, the owner faces criminal charges.  Now THAT is a good law.  Lets face it - if a dangerous dog breaks loose and runs amuck, the owner should pay the price no matter what breed the dog is.  Here in the UK you can face charges if:

    • your dog is "at large" in a public place
    • if there is fear that the dog will bite.

    What is wrong with this?

    Give AC more man power and this kind of law could be enforced.  And again, it is not breed specific.

    Lets say your law is passed and it works.  Pits, pit mixes and pit types are now strictly regulated.  Someone starts breeding Dobes for aggression to get AROUND the law (and that would be another breed down the pan, by the way) and then you have to start all over again with a NEW breed.  Sigh.  And with "new breeds" being created, the problem would never go away, it would just have a new face... like one of those monsters that grow a new head every time you chop one of its many heads off.

    Now punish the DEED - enforce laws we ALREWADY have in place to protect folks and make the penalties for owning a dangerous dog severe - and it doesn't matter WHAT breed your dog is.... if he puts a toe out of line, you have to pay the price.

    • Gold Top Dog

    Having spent close to 25 years on the "front lines" of the "war on drugs" I can tell you that busting cartels will not change the behavior of irresponsible pit bull owners!

     

    I was using it as a metaphor. Don 't take everything so literally. I'm really beginning to feel the need to bang my head against a wall here. Sheesh

    We need to reduce the source of such dogs.

    But I think I'm done here, as my points keep getting continually ignored, twisted, and misinterpreted in order to generate long,  poorly punctuated rambles. "ZOMG pitbulls....!!!!!!????? we need to "make" MORE uNENfORcEABLE laws !!!!!!!!!!!!!!.....why not lol???????"

    • Gold Top Dog

    A couple of things:  dangerous dog laws do in deed make a mauling a crime.

    If people would lobby for the ENFORCEMENT of existing laws; if people would regularly report dogs at large;  if people would lobby for lower cost vet services including spay and neuter a positive outcome is a possibility.

    Picking on one breed will make absolutely no LONG term difference.

    Think of a train that drops off its caboose.... There is always a last car, just the name changes. 

    • Gold Top Dog

    There have been several excellent point made and even some decent suggestions but now this thread has been reduced to a rather silly arguement.   At this point a couple of you ...and you know who you are, are just "Right fighting"  no new points are being made any more just a general stamping of feet and shouting " I'm right, you're worng"   That resolves NOTHING. And for the Record What Breed of dog do the people stamping their feet the hardest own?? I really think that may be relavent.

    Can we simply agree to the following.....?

    Idiots should not be allowed to own or breed Pit Bulls.

    There are laws on the books RIGHT now that are not being enforced.

    Additional laws would also have to be enforced if any good is to come from them.

    As a Nation when we have to choose between standing up for what is right or what is convienant, right will not always win.

    As Individuals our rights are being threatened on a daily basis because we are either too ignorant or lazy to protect oursleves against zealots.

    Rather than going BSL , lets go common sense!    If you have a dog pit bull or the "dreaded"  Dachschund a BITE is a BITE. If a trip to the doctor or Hospital is needed The owner of the dog is responsible 100% for all bills and compensation for pain and suffering. If the dog was running loose criminal charges should be pressed against the owner or caretaker of the dog. If the dog bites a second time it should be put to sleep.  Either the dog or the owner is not doing their job.

    It really can be just that simple. Not a Breed issue , not a drug dealer issue .   You are either in charge of keeping you dog and the public safe or you aren't.

    Having my breed of dogs I stand a HUGE chance of dealing with my own solution.  As a responsible Breeder and Owner I KNOW this and I make every effort to protect my family and my dogs.

     Bonita of Bwana

     

    • Puppy

    mrv

    A couple of things:  dangerous dog laws do in deed make a mauling a crime.

    If people would lobby for the ENFORCEMENT of existing laws; if people would regularly report dogs at large;  if people would lobby for lower cost vet services including spay and neuter a positive outcome is a possibility.

    Picking on one breed will make absolutely no LONG term difference.

    Think of a train that drops off its caboose.... There is always a last car, just the name changes. 

    While I agree that the actual mauling may be a crime under the laws that we have now, the point of both my proposal and the bans, that are going in to effect in many areas, is to prevent the mauling from this specific breed.  The current laws do little to prevent these dog attacks and do absolutely nothing to protect the breed from those that are trying to make it more aggressive.  Yes some other breed could become the new "bad" dog but if there is already a system in place that prevents dog attacks, protects the breed, and educates the owners rather then banning the breed, if an area starts having problems with a new breed of "bad dogs they could simply add the same requirements for that breed.  That is far better then them adding it to the list of dogs that are banned.

    Mark

    • Puppy

    Bonita of Bwana
    And for the Record What Breed of dog do the people stamping their feet the hardest own?? I really think that may be relavent.

    I would guess that I am the one you think is "stamping" my feet the loudest so I will happily answer that.  Over the years I have owned many dogs including pit mixes, and GSDs.  I currently have a rotti mix and a mini schnauzer pup.

    Bonita of Bwana

    Idiots should not be allowed to own or breed Pit Bulls.

     

    I agree that "idiots" should not own any dogs but with certain breeds such as pit bulls it is even more important.  Unfortunately there is currently no way to prevent "idiots" from owning and ruining this breed.

     

    Bonita of Bwana

    There are laws on the books RIGHT now that are not being enforced.

    The laws that are on the books are not adequate or even intended to protect the breed from those that are ruining it.

     

    Bonita of Bwana

    Additional laws would also have to be enforced if any good is to come from them.

    I agree.

     

    Bonita of Bwana

    As a Nation when we have to choose between standing up for what is right or what is convienant, right will not always win.

    I will agree but I have to add that good and honorable people will not always agree on just what is "right".

     

    Bonita of Bwana

    As Individuals our rights are being threatened on a daily basis because we are either too ignorant or lazy to protect oursleves against zealots.

    While I can agree with that statement I would add that with those individual rights comes certain responsibilities.  When a group of people do not live up to those responsibilities it opens the door for the zealots to threaten the rights of all.

     

    Bonita of Bwana
    Rather than going BSL , lets go common sense!

    You have been around long enough to know that common sense is not that common!  BSLs are unfortunately the reality of the day so my common sense tells me that rather then have the BSLs written by people that do not care for this breed of dog and want to rid us of it we should offer up BSLs that will address the publics concerns and need to feel safe while at the same time protecting both the breed and those that desire to own it in a responsible manner.

    Bonita of Bwana
    If you have a dog pit bull or the "dreaded"  Dachshund a BITE is a BITE. If a trip to the doctor or Hospital is needed The owner of the dog is responsible 100% for all bills and compensation for pain and suffering. If the dog was running loose criminal charges should be pressed against the owner or caretaker of the dog. If the dog bites a second time it should be put to sleep.  Either the dog or the owner is not doing their job.

    While I agree that an owner of any dog is 100% responsible for the actions of their dog.  The comparisons between the "dreaded" dachshund a and a bite from a pit bull come across as trying to trivialize the problems associated with this breed.  Human aggression should not be allowed with ANY breed of dog but the fact is if I am attacked by the "dreaded" dachshund I can pretty easily send him to the next county with one kick but attempting to do that same kick on a pit bull is a good way for me to end up with the nickname of "stumpy".

    Bonita of Bwana

    Having my breed of dogs I stand a HUGE chance of dealing with my own solution.  As a responsible Breeder and Owner I KNOW this and I make every effort to protect my family and my dogs.

    I have read many of your posts and know how much you truly care for your breed of dog.  Hopefully your breed will never face the same level of irresponsible ownership and breeding that the pit bull has fallen to.  I know that breeders like you are constantly vigilant against allowing that to happen but on the outside chance that your breed was the next "bad dog" breed would you prefer that the laws restricted ownership of the breed such as what my proposal would do or an outright ban on the breed which is what is happening too often with pit bulls?

    Mark

    • Gold Top Dog

    Long discussion with no real workable resolve.  Controlling the actions of humans is expensive and almost impossible to fully achieve.  The question has to be what are those that truly love the breed willing to sacrfice to change the course of APBT.  Can the dog evolve into something distinct and ever so different so that the reputation is left behind.  I am told "responsible" breeders have a lot of control over the dog's life. 

    • Bronze

    I am fairly new here and I was not going to get into this for the simple reason that these things always seem to go the same place. The people on the right will not be swayed and neither will those on the left. I understand this issue from multiple levels and I would like to  tell you the stories of a few of the "pitbulls" I have known in my life. The first I found on a backroad standing on the center yellow line. I was driving home from work (I lived in the middle of nowhere) when I saw him. He was a young blue intact male and he was covered in blood. Deep gashes and lacerations and punctures covered nearly every inch of him and he was just standing there. Not flinching from the few cars that flew by him. He just stood there, head down, blood dripping on the ground like rivers. I stopped. I knew he had been fought, and could guess that he had somehow been spared death and been dumped instead for 'failing' his masters. I opened the door and crooned to him "Come on, Baby. Come on." and he lifted his head, sniffed the air and came and jumped in the car. Yup, I was nuts. Certifiable. I was hoping he was too tired from the fight he had already been in to come after me. He laid down in the front seat and just stared at me the whole ride home while I told him I'd take care of him and prayed in my head he wouldn't kill me for it. Maybe some of you don't like that comment? Maybe some of you will use it as ammo that they are a dangerous breed. Do what you like. It is how I felt and it is truth, but it did not stop me from helping him. I do NOT believe they are a dangerous breed, but this one had been abused and fought and that made him unpredictable, end of explanation. At that time I lived with a group of friends at the beach and had a couple of dogs already. When I opened the car door I had planned to leave him in the car and go and lock the others up and get a leash for him and clean him up a little, then call the Vet. It didn't happen that way. When I pulled in the driveway one of my friends opened the front door and my female beagle, who did NOT like strange dogs flew out the door at the same time I opened the car door and he jumped out (I tried to keep him in). She went for him, and I mean LIT INTO HIM. He put his head down and shoved her away, she came again, he did the same, over and over until I managed to get a grip on her and give her to my friend so she could be locked up. He did NOT even ATTEMPT to fight back. Just shoved her away with the top of his head. My friends locked the other dogs up as well and we took him in and gave him some water. We cleaned some of his wounds while we waited for the Vet to call back (it was after hours). He never complained. We took him to the Vet that night where he had over 200 stitches to put him back together and he NEVER so much as grumbled at anyone. Multiple times after he healed I would be walking him and people would set their dogs loose on him, while I (ALWAYS) had him on leash, to "see what he could do". I'm talking adult middle class people letting loose labs, goldens, and huskies on my poor pit. He NEVER fought back, not one single time. He ALWAYS put his head down and shoved them away. He eventually got along with my Beagle and my other dogs, or I should say they eventually got along with him, although he was shunned for a while. He was the best dog and I adored him. I had named him "Baby" after he started responding to it. Guess I spent a lot of time saying "Poor baby"Wink I got to spend just under 2 years with him before he was diagnosed with Osteosarcoma and our best efforts to save him all failed. We found it late and got only 3 weeks with him after diagnosis before he was in so much pain we had to euthanize. It was the kindest and most difficult thing we could do for him. He had been fought. He had been abused. He had been neglected. He was excellent with other dogs, children, and all people. He was NOT vicious.

    Moving on to the next. These next two stories will be from my time working (not volunteering) at the local animal shelter. The first is the story of 2 pit bulls that were brought in by the state police on a Saturday morning. They were state evidence and were to be held on "lockdown" at the shelter until the courts determined their fate. One was a 2-4 year old neutered male Fawn, and the other a 9 month to 1 year old red and white female. They had no names that were known. They were brought in on catch poles and the cops looked nervous. Told us to be careful for they had consumed a man. Yes, eaten him. These dogs were healthy with bright shiny coats and eyes and a bit chunky. They were not fearful, and did not appear aggressive at all. They had NO scars anywhere on their bodies to indicate they had been fought or abused in any way and their appearance certainly indicated that they had not been neglected. We asked whom they had eaten and were told "their owner". Hmmmm. Wow. Never would that of these two. Beautiful dogs. The cop put them in the cage and looked relieved to be rid of the "monsters". I had to go in the cage to give them food and water so I walked in. These dogs were rubbing all over me. The male brought me a toy that had been thrown in to play with him. They both rolled over so I could scratch their bellies. Hmmmm....vicious. So I asked him straight out. I said "listen, I know you're not supposed to give details but we have to know the circumstances so that we can try to figure out what the trigger was so the staff can be safe. It will go no further, but you must tell us." It took some convincing but he did. Those two dogs HAD belonged to a drug dealer. That is a fact, the case was tried long ago. And they HAD eaten their owner. Oh yes, they did, no doubt, absolutely. That too was proven in court and those loveable, wonderful dogs paid for their sins with their lives. You see, the WHOLE story, and the part that failed to make it into the papers of course, was that their owner had driven out to the middle of nowhere for a drug deal and it had gone wrong. He had taken his beloved (there is no doubt he loved them, they were very well cared for and non-aggressive) dogs with him and he had been sitting in the car with the window cracked a bit, like he was talking to someone. They shot him in the head through that crack and walked away. The car was not found until 7 days later. The dogs could not fit through the crack to get out so they were stuck with their dead owner. When it went to court the coroner said the earliest dog bites did not occur until approx. 72 hours after death. They were hungry and they were stuck and he was dead. But did that part make the papers? No it did not. Only the part about them consuming their owners. I'm pretty sure my Golden may very well do the same in a similar situation and I wouldn't hold it against him. That story illustrates the onesidedness of the press.

    Next the shelter held 3 pitbulls from a local very high profile dog fighting ring. They were all females and along with the 3 dogs we took tons of horrifying paraphenelia that would make you ill. One of the females was so badly injured that she was ripped wide open from her shoulder blades to her tail and 4 inches across. Even more terrible that wound was positively teeming with maggots. These dogs were scarred all over. They had been fed gunpowder, starved, beaten, and even fed their own puppies in a twisted attempt to make them meaner. They were NEVER vicious to us. They were good girls and they had been hurt so badly. Their owners friends regularly had people coming in to try to steal the dogs (who were also evidence in a court case). They would try to break in at night to steal those dogs. One in particular (the maggot infested one) as she was apparently undefeated and the BEST fighter? She would lay on your lap to have her belly scratched for hours. I knew they would be put down, I knew the public saw them as vicious, dangerous dogs, but when I look at them? All I see are victims.

     

     

    • Bronze

    And although I certainly don't have the answers, I would also like to say that if breed bans are passed against pits the "thugs" will absolutely find another breed to torture. I can say that with certainty based upon my own experience. During my time at the shelter, when the pit population was "out of control" the ACs started pulling them all off the streets, searching for them, checking for licenses and taking them if they weren't. If not claimed in 7 days they were euthanized. I was horrified, but it happened, and NO breed ban had been passed. They were "supposedly" cracking down on licensing, but there was a definite focus on "pit bull types". During that time MANY American Bulldogs, Corso's, Presa's, Neo's, lab mixes, etc. were euthanized as well since they were unlicensed and not claimed and they fit the 'type'. The vast majority of these dogs were not aggressive at all. Well this went on for nearly a year and the population of pit bull types in our area dramatically dropped, yet we were still breaking up fighting rings regularly. Difference being now we were breaking up rings with Chow's, Shar Pei's, Labs, Golden's, Husky's, Malamutes, Shepherds......you name it they were fighting it. One very memorable night we broke up a ring during a fight between 2 Newfoundlands. I'm not kidding. 2 beautiful purebred Newfoundlands and they were ripping each other to shreds. They had been beaten, starved, fed gunpowder, tasered, burned with cigarettes and hot pokers, forced to walk on a treadmill while someone held cardboard on it covered in broken glass, all manner of vile and horrid thingsIck!. They sadly were beyond redemption. They tried to eat all of us, including their owners when they were found (the boys were microchipped), despite all of our best efforts for over 6 months. The two once beautiful dogs had been stolen from a fenced yard in the next county while the woman was downstairs switching laundry. They were brothers and were 2 years old. They had been missing for just under a year. They WILL find another breed and it WILL continue on despite whatever bans you put on them. And let me tell you, those two vicious abused Newfoundlands struck terror into the heart of this seasoned dog person who has dealt with more than my fair share of aggressive dogs over the years. It can get much much worse.

    • Gold Top Dog

    Wow guys....aside from all the bickering this sure has been thought provoking and has supplied some AMAZING ideas to help the issue. and THAT is how problems get solved!

    I dont think there is ONE sole solution but its debates like these that are a direct reflection of the arguments going on in cities and counties across America. So dont take this heated debate as something to fret over, take it as ammunition and the reality of the debates going on!!!

    In my county and the surrounding ones we have no threat of BSL, we have no pit bull attacks so I rarely get to apply my ideas and thoughts. I've gone to Sacramento several times to lobby against BSL when they had pit bull meat-ups and I have participated in pit bull walks in SF but there isnt much a person from out of county to do. The promoters of BSL really only respond to residnets of that county but I've been able to help and educate a lot of people onlone and over forums.

    So I just wanna say thank you for everyone's input. Even if I dont agree with you your a reflection of what pit bull advocates have to go up against and if it ever does come to my county I like to think I'll be prepared! I hope our differences dont spill over into other topics, are all dog lovers and should be on the same side!

    • Gold Top Dog

    And since some of you keep asking where the money is going to come from  I'll repost this....

    I think this law could be paid for by the registration fee's of the responsible owners who register their dog. It would stink to have to pay a $500 fee every year for my dogs but if it meant enforcing a law such as this I'd be all for it. In conjunction with mandatory spay/neuter laws for unproven, unregistered dogs I think ti would work great. As a responsible owner I already spay/nueter and repfer to leave the APBT breeding to those who can ensure sound temperment and sticking to the breed standard. My favorite kennel, Matrix Kennels are producing amazing dogs who excel in agility and most have their CGC. The owner will NOT give any of his puppies to anyone he hasnt met personally but he is very easy to meet through local shows and sporting events so he isnt so far out of reach. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one for having my liberties taken away from me BUT if it is a alternative to BSL that outlaws my dogs I'd be all for it.

    Responsible owners who could not afford to pay the fee could volunteer with the local aspca, HS or host fundraisers which would also get them involved in the community and spread awarness. I would hope the local community giving forth their efforts that people hiding or breeding their dogs would be exposed. In Texas there has been a huge serge in the community turning in BYB's and dog hoarders. The regular community is just as tired of these issues as we are.

    Is it a ideal situation? Heck no! Is it worth it....oh YES!

    I mean really at this point what alternative do we have?

     And for those of you who think preaching responsible ownership to these thugs types is realistic concept, I'll say this again..........

    . Have you been on a pit bull forum? Even the people with good intentions have no clue about responsible ownership and trying to educate them is like speaking another language.

     

    I'm not trying to argue with those who are seeking a solution. I appreciate your input but some things just are idealistic and are not going to work. I URGE you to take a peak at a pit bull forum such as pitbullforum.com

    they are very adamant, ignorant people who will not listen to reason. You cant tell them not to breed there dogs they dont listen, you cant tell them to not chain up there dogs or that they need to build a secure fence so there dogs stops getting loose. Its sad and a swift reform by responsible owners is the only thing I can see working.

    • Gold Top Dog

    AuroraLove

    And for those of you who think preaching responsible ownership to these thugs types is realistic concept, I'll say this again..........

    . Have you been on a pit bull forum? Even the people with good intentions have no clue about responsible ownership and trying to educate them is like speaking another language.

    This is why pet ownership programmes are needed in elementary schools in areas hardest hit. Children are much more open to kindness and inclined to try it than adults or esp...young adults. Breaking the cycle of bad choices is something that needs to start young...which is why many anti drug or violence programmes are aimed at elem school kids. It doesn't always get thru...but it is nice for a child to see positive things...SOMEWHERE, and have available mentors SOMEWHERE.

    • Gold Top Dog

    Marklf

    mrv

    A couple of things:  dangerous dog laws do in deed make a mauling a crime.

    If people would lobby for the ENFORCEMENT of existing laws; if people would regularly report dogs at large;  if people would lobby for lower cost vet services including spay and neuter a positive outcome is a possibility.

    Picking on one breed will make absolutely no LONG term difference.

    Think of a train that drops off its caboose.... There is always a last car, just the name changes. 

    While I agree that the actual mauling may be a crime under the laws that we have now, the point of both my proposal and the bans, that are going in to effect in many areas, is to prevent the mauling from this specific breed. 

     

    If the dog was hidden away so the owner could avoid the license fee and then escapes, the law would change nothing. 

    Marklf
    The current laws do little to prevent these dog attacks and do absolutely nothing to protect the breed from those that are trying to make it more aggressive. 

    Of course they do!  Why do you think dog pounds EXIST!  The problem is not that there are no laws in place, it is that they are not being enforced.  

    Marklf
    Yes some other breed could become the new "bad" dog but if there is already a system in place that prevents dog attacks, protects the breed, and educates the owners rather then banning the breed, if an area starts having problems with a new breed of "bad dogs they could simply add the same requirements for that breed.

     

    Yes, and then the same thing will happen... ANOTHER breed will be chosen, or even created and thus the problem will NEVER go away.  So it's not a case of ploughing money into it, seeing an effect and then maintaining the status quo.... it would be a constant cycle, up until the point where some bright spark says, "hey, lets make a law addressing dangerous individuals, not dangerous breeds!  then we wouldn't have to keep redoing this law for all the different breeds!  what's that you say?  we already GOT some laws like that?  Well why didn't you SAY!?!"