terrible dog attack

Marklf

A very, very important problem with ABPTs and pit-type dogs, as we have discussed, is that there is a culture, full of people involved in illegal activities, who don't give a damn about the dog, about breeding, or about the law. You know the type of owners I mean, who seriously contribute to the detriment of this breed.

 Do you really expect these people, who already fragrantly defy laws (i.e. dogfighting) and do not care about their dogs, are going to go through all that trouble? No! They are going to laugh and continue buying from sneaky, backyard breeders, keep the dogs caged in basements and in the backyards...Unethical backyard and fighting breeders will continue skirting the law, hiding their dogs, etc, which is not that hard to do. the only people that will be affected by this type of licensing and significant fees are the responsible, law-abiding ABPT owners, who will go through it to keep their dogs. A crackdown on crime is needed, not a crackdown on the breed.

Are you speaking of these reqirements only for full-blooded APBTs, or "pit mixes/pit bulls/what have you" ? And how would you decide

a) If a dog is a "pit mix" (remember many are not sure when they adopt dogs from a shelter, for example, what the dog is a mix of...genetic testing? But how accurate is that? Then should ALL dogs be required to have genetic testing? Of just ones who "look like" pits?), and

b) if it is enough of a mix to be required to be in this program? A half? A sixteenth? What if they aren't sure? What is the cutoff?

whtsthfrequency

Do you really expect these people, who already fragrantly defy laws (i.e. dogfighting) and do not care about their dogs, are going to go through all that trouble? No!

What this would do however is give Animal Control/Law enforcement the more tools to take this dogs from those that do not comply with the laws.  It will stop the ones that are parading their "bad" dogs around town as they attempt to "look cool".  It will also stop those that are not "hard core" thug pit owners from irresponsibly breeding their dogs.  For example the kid down the street that has acquired two female pits (actually he had three but one choked itself to death) that he thinks it will be a good idea to breed them for no reason other then adding to the already swollen pit bull population.  If he had to pay a significant amount to own those dogs and a even higher amount to breed them it would certainly discourage him from doing so!

whtsthfrequency

Are you speaking of these reqirements only for full-blooded APBTs, or "pit mixes/pit bulls/what have you" ? And how would you decide

The same way they decide any of the BSL that they put into effect. 

whtsthfrequency

a) If a dog is a "pit mix" (remember many are not sure when they adopt dogs from a shelter, for example, what the dog is a mix of...genetic testing? But how accurate is that? Then should ALL dogs be required to have genetic testing? Of just ones who "look like" pits?), and

Actually I think that the shelters should not be adopting out Pits or Pit mixes.  I know that is going to bring down the wrath of some that post here but with all of the breeding for higher aggression that has taken place with this breed over the last several years how does the shelter know that the dogs are safe?  Yes it it not the dogs fault they could have been breed badly put that does not change their genes!  If the shelter are going to continue to adopt out these dogs they need to have very restrictive and careful screening process in place.  As it is right now the local shelter, which always has tons of "pit mixes" will allow just about anyone to adopt one.

Mark

Marklf

how does the shelter know that the dogs are safe? 

*snort*...that's actually a funny statement because it applies to ANY and ALL dogs adopted from shelters. Most do some sort of temperament assessment ranging from cursory to involved and certified. Do you actually think the result is some sort of all clear that ANY dog adopted is "safe" for the balance of it's LIFE regardless of the training, socialization, structure or lack thereof the new home provides?

According to your statements then...NO dog should be adopted from a shelter.

Your statements about dogs from shelters...apply to ANY breed or mix, anyone who knows dogs at all, would agree that shelters can only ever know so much *headshaking* Many do A LOT to test and others, do next to nothing at all. There is no guarantee a dog of ANY breed adopted as an adult...will be perfect or the exact thing you were expecting. That is actually...part of the specialness of adopting!

People who adopt are people who want to SAVE A LIFE...and most will do what they can to work with the dogs they adopt...in fact we see many such wonderful people here on this forum on a daily basis. It takes a special person to adopt an adult shelter dog...they don't come with instructions or a detailed account of their early lives or a list of phobias or triggers. Many do just great and have no issues...but some DO. That's not about breed...it's more about their early starts in life, and how they find their way to shelters in the first place.

rwbeagles

According to your statements then...NO dog should be adopted from a shelter.

As I posted my I knew my proposal would draw the wrath of some on this forum but please do not put words into my mouth!!!  I am talking about only that breed which is being specifically bred (by some breeders) to have increased aggression! 

Mark

If he had to pay a significant amount to own those dogs and a even higher amount to breed them it would certainly discourage him from doing so!

But the problem is, he wouldn't pay. He'd acquire them from some random source or backyard/fighting breeder, and no one would be the wiser. If he breeds them in his basement and then sells to pups to like-minded people, it's the same deal. How would AC deal with this? Should they be knocking on everyone's doors and searching their houses for dogs? That's a rather large violation of personal rights, for everyone.

It will stop the ones that are parading their "bad" dogs around town as they attempt to "look cool".

It might stop this, but that's more of an annoyance than anything else.

It will also stop those that are not "hard core" thug pit owners from irresponsibly breeding their dogs.

How will it stop them? Are AC people going to check in and make sure people's dogs are pregnant or not pregnant? How will they define an irresponsible versus a responsible breeder?

There are simply too many loopholes.

whtsthfrequency:

Are you speaking of these reqirements only for full-blooded APBTs, or "pit mixes/pit bulls/what have you" ? And how would you decide

Marklf: The same way they decide any of the BSL that they put into effect.

The problem is, that "way" is deciding that anything that looks like a mix of a banned dog is also banned. And BSL definitions are FAR to vague and unsubstantiated for people to be setting rules about whose dogs should require a higher licensing fee. My friend has a lab/boxer mix that looks like a pit, and was turned away from many apartment complexes because breed restriction rules said no APBTs, and it looked like an APBT.

I am talking about only that breed which is being specifically bred (by some breeders) to have increased aggression!

I understand your sentiment, but such a blanket statement would put many perfectly normal dogs of that breed out of homes. They don't deserve to suffer because some idiots are breeding fighters.

whtsthfrequency

Marklf

A very, very important problem with ABPTs and pit-type dogs, as we have discussed, is that there is a culture, full of people involved in illegal activities, who don't give a damn about the dog, about breeding, or about the law. You know the type of owners I mean, who seriously contribute to the detriment of this breed.

 Do you really expect these people, who already fragrantly defy laws (i.e. dogfighting) and do not care about their dogs, are going to go through all that trouble? No! They are going to laugh and continue buying from sneaky, backyard breeders, keep the dogs caged in basements and in the backyards...Unethical backyard and fighting breeders will continue skirting the law, hiding their dogs, etc, which is not that hard to do. the only people that will be affected by this type of licensing and significant fees are the responsible, law-abiding ABPT owners, who will go through it to keep their dogs. A crackdown on crime is needed, not a crackdown on the breed.

Are you speaking of these reqirements only for full-blooded APBTs, or "pit mixes/pit bulls/what have you" ? And how would you decide

a) If a dog is a "pit mix" (remember many are not sure when they adopt dogs from a shelter, for example, what the dog is a mix of...genetic testing? But how accurate is that? Then should ALL dogs be required to have genetic testing? Of just ones who "look like" pits?), and

b) if it is enough of a mix to be required to be in this program? A half? A sixteenth? What if they aren't sure? What is the cutoff?

An excellent post and some great points - not least the last one.  I mean, would it be enough that the dog's great great grandfather was a pit (making the dog "one sixteenth pit";) or would the genetic material have to be more closely examined - the dog does not get the same amount of genetic material from the sire and the dam.

Marklf - we in the UK have a ban on Pit Bulls.  Do you know how much % a dachshund is

I *know* you haven't suggested banning a breed, but BSL is not just about bans.  It encompasses any legislation that is breed specific (hence the name).  And it dosn't work!  Pit were banned here 10 years ago, but there are still plenty of them about in certain areas of the country.   And every so often there is a media flare up and responsible people (who don't even own an APBT) have to fight to hang on to their dogs if the dog looks ANYTHING like a pit. 

It's important to remember that criminals don't as a general rule, obey laws!  It's practically part of he job specification.

Marklf

If the shelter are going to continue to adopt out these dogs they need to have very restrictive and careful screening process in place.  As it is right now the local shelter, which always has tons of "pit mixes" will allow just about anyone to adopt one.

I don't know how many shelters do, but the shelter i volunteer at does. There is a list of restrictions to adopt akita/pit/rott/dobe/gsd etc. I'm not exactly sure what the restrictions are, but you have to meet them all, and they also do a property check.

whtsthfrequency

But the problem is, he wouldn't pay. He'd acquire them from some random source or backyard/fighting breeder, and no one would be the wiser. If he breeds them in his basement and then sells to pups to like-minded people, it's the same deal. How would AC deal with this?

Don't misunderstand my neighbor is not a "thug" or even a want to be "thug" he does not want to raise his dogs for fighting or any illegal purpose.  But he is also not attempting to breed his dogs in a manner that most here would label "responsiblely".  His dogs would not be health tested much less temperment tested prior to mating with what ever stud dog he finds (which would not be health or temperment tested either).  He is not attempting to breed his dogs for higher aggression but he does not have the experience or knowledge to prevent that from happening.  Knowing him he would have paid to license his dogs but would have had them spayed to avoid a higher fee.

whtsthfrequency

It might stop this, but that's more of an annoyance than anything else.

Actually the "parading" of the dog is a major reason many "thugs" get them.  afterall what good is a "status symbol" dog if no one can see it!

whtsthfrequency

How will it stop them? Are AC people going to check in and make sure people's dogs are pregnant or not pregnant? How will they define an irresponsible versus a responsible breeder?

What it will do is give AC powerful tools for when they do come across pit owners which will help them determine the responsibility level of the owners.  For example as I mentioned the owner would have to have the prober licenses for the dogs, if they don't AC takes the dogs.  The owners would have to have liability insurance for the dogs if they don't AC takes the dogs.  Yes could the bad guys keep their dogs hidden?  I suppose they could keep them in their basement out of sight but if they are doing that guess what?  Their dogs are NOT eating their 90 year old neighbor!

whtsthfrequency

There are simply too many loopholes.

Then help to close the loopholes!!!!  Doing nothing about the issues facing this breed is not going to work either!!!!  Unless people are given a better plan they will end up supporting an out right ban!!!

whtsthfrequency

The problem is, that "way" is deciding that anything that looks like a mix of a banned dog is also banned. And BSL definitions are FAR to vague and unsubstantiated for people to be setting rules about whose dogs should require a higher licensing fee. My friend has a lab/boxer mix that looks like a pit, and was turned away from many apartment complexes because breed restriction rules said no APBTs, and it looked like an APBT.

I will concede that some not "pit" owners may be inconvenienced but we could put a system in place for those that have questionable dogs could present their case to an impartial knowledgeable board for determination.

whtsthfrequency

I understand your sentiment, but such a blanket statement would put many perfectly normal dogs of that breed out of homes. They don't deserve to suffer because some idiots are breeding fighters.

The sad fact of dog breeding is that many dogs sufer "for the betterment of the breed".  In this case the breed is in serious danger of becoming outlawed and banned if that takes place alot more "perfectly normal dogs" will be out of homes!!!  So yes those that want to save this breed better face the fact that some dogs will be lost in the effort!

Mark

Marklf

Don't misunderstand my neighbor is not a "thug" or even a want to be "thug" he does not want to raise his dogs for fighting or any illegal purpose.  But he is also not attempting to breed his dogs in a manner that most here would label "responsiblely".  His dogs would not be health tested much less temperment tested prior to mating with what ever stud dog he finds (which would not be health or temperment tested either).  He is not attempting to breed his dogs for higher aggression but he does not have the experience or knowledge to prevent that from happening.  Knowing him he would have paid to license his dogs but would have had them spayed to avoid a higher fee.

Have you done what you can to educate him?

BTW, kudos for offering a solution. We might debate that solution but at least you offered one. And the only people that obey the law are law-abiding citizens. In Texas, we have a concealed carry permit for guns. A law-abiding citizen may carry, with permit, a concealed handgun (shoulder holster, pouch in a purse, etc) but criminals carry guns without permits, often without registering the sale. Your solution of government enforced breeding program maybe idealistic and I am certain is with good intentions but, really, it could apply to any breed. Let's pretend that these laws could be enacted tomorrow. How would you enforce it? In Dallas, there is about one cop for every 450 people in a city of 1.2 million people (as of 2006). They have a choice between catching a stop light sniper (actual recent case) or tracking down a kid that's thinking about breeding his dog. They can pursue organized crime shipments of drugs or walk door to door checking licenses. By the way, there are a few parts of Dallas known as the "War Zone" where police only respond in numbers, so it's not necessarily feasible to do that. This then requires neighbors to be educated and report suspicious activity. Granted, if seized during an arrest, a suspect might be subject to additional fines but that is after the fact. But pit bulls are not the only breed that has shown signs of aggression. The Akita has special challenges. So does the Alaskan Malamute. And not to take away from the breeding problems of pit bulls, but many other breeds have bitten, fatal or not. Should they also be included and how would one craft the language of those ordinances, without impinging on the rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness for law-abiding citizens?

Why does your neighbor want to breed? Because they look "tough"? To make money? Many people break rules with impunity and casual disregard. Do you always drive the speed limit? Do you come to a complete stop at every stop sign? Do you signal every lane change? Do you talk on the cell phone while driving (not illegal in all areas)? Granted, a law in place becomes a tool of enforcement. So, how do you propose enough ACO's and police officers to handle it. In New York City, there is a branch of the police dept that handles just pets. A handful of people, literally, to cover 5 million (?) pet animals. Money that could be spent on this in Dallas is being spent to build Jerry Jone's new stadium for the Cowboys. That is, even if the rules could be agreed upon, there is not enough people to police it and the thugs may go as far as Kleburg. In my rural county, there is a lady who breeds Poms and Sibes. And sells out of the Home Depot parking lot. And the police have their handsful taking care of meth labs. At one point, my county was the capital of north Texas meth production.

RidgebackGermansShep

Marklf

If the shelter are going to continue to adopt out these dogs they need to have very restrictive and careful screening process in place.  As it is right now the local shelter, which always has tons of "pit mixes" will allow just about anyone to adopt one.

 

I don't know how many shelters do, but the shelter i volunteer at does. There is a list of restrictions to adopt akita/pit/rott/dobe/gsd etc. I'm not exactly sure what the restrictions are, but you have to meet them all, and they also do a property check.

That is good but I know at all the local pounds there is very little oversite as to who is allowed to adopt a pit bull.  Which can mean that inexperienced, untrained owners are ending up with dogs that were specifically bred for an aggressive temperment.

Mark

ron2

Have you done what you can to educate him?

Of course!  I chat with him often and encourage him to socialize his dogs with mine.  The last thing I want is to have unsocialized pit bulls runing around on my street!

As for your question about how to enforce these laws?  They would be enforced the same way all animal control laws are enforced!  AC officers and regular LE officers would have some added tools when they ecounter people with Pit Bulls.  If the dogs are licensed and insured and not in violation of any other laws the dog is free to remain with the owner.  If however the dogs are not licensed and/or insured the officers now have the tools they need to take the dog.

ron2

Why does your neighbor want to breed? Because they look "tough"?

Because he things it would be cool to breed them.  Understand these are still pups 9-10 months old and he just thinks breeding them would be a good idea.  He is not going for the "thug" image but he really has no knowledge of their "lines" or what that could mean to their temperment.  He does know that the breeder he got them from raises "fighters" so the odds are pretty good there could be some issues with the temperment of them.

Mark

Marklf

Because he things it would be cool to breed them.  Understand these are still pups 9-10 months old and he just thinks breeding them would be a good idea.  He is not going for the "thug" image but he really has no knowledge of their "lines" or what that could mean to their temperment.  He does know that the breeder he got them from raises "fighters" so the odds are pretty good there could be some issues with the temperment of them.

On the basis of incomplete parent information alone, I would suggest not breeding. In the case of a known bad background, I would highly recommend not breeding. Even if these dogs are sweethearts. NDNA recombines in every conception, even in the same litter. A resulting litter might be loving couch potatos or could become unhinged at the rustle of leaf, and that can happen with any dog, not just this breed.

I think it would be really cool if he didn't breed. I can understand loving the breed and if he really wants more pits, adopt them. And he should be mindful that proper breeding sometimes means not breeding at all. If he really loves the breed, he must educate himself. Thankfully, he has you as a source of info. Better yet, see if he will read some of the info we have.

Discussion threads such as this have been going on for years, meanwhile yet another place considers the following:-

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) - A new committee in Omaha is looking into the possibility of a citywide ban on pit bulls.

The effort follows a spate of recent pit bull attacks, including one last week in which a dog attacked four people and ripped part of the scalp from a 15-month-old girl's head. Doctors say the toddler faces years of surgery.

The committee plans to announce a plan of action with a couple of weeks.

The committee is made up of Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey, the city attorney, three members of the City Council, the Nebraska Humane Society and the Omaha police department.

What it will do is give AC powerful tools for when they do come across pit owners which will help them determine the responsibility level of the owners.  For example as I mentioned the owner would have to have the prober licenses for the dogs, if they don't AC takes the dogs.

 I'm not sure you quite got what I was saying earlier, so I'll try to shorten it - sometimes when I get verbose my meaning is lost, I admit :)

But that will only work if the AC *knows* about the dogs, which they would not if such a person decided to hide them. What is to stop a person from buying a pit from a bad breeder and then just keeping it in his basement and taking it to fights? By come across, do you mean that AC should have the authority to search people's houses without cause? And again, who will be deciding what constitutes an "ethical breeder"? We all have different definitions, how will they be standardized?  Number of litters? Number of breeding dogs? Various form of health testing? Etc. How would you be able to prove the number of litters you produce is acceptable?

How will AC keep track of this? How can they possibly monitor every pregnant dog in the area, as well as watching where the pups go? How will they even know there *are* pups if someone keeps it ont he down-low and just sells them off to whomever?

Because such tactics are what unethical people will employ if such a thing is instituted.

****Note: I'm not asking you specifically these questions, I'm using them as examples of why such legislation would basically be unenforceable and only affect those responsible owners who would make sure to pay the fees and be honest about their dogs.
 

Now I'm not sure what the answer is either, and you certainly have some good ideas, but I don't think it would work in practice. People that already skirt the law anyway are not going to obey a law like this, and I don't think there is a way to really force it without taking away everyone's right to privacy as well as breaking that back of the already-spread-too-thin AC manpower.

 
I think a better thing to do would be to reduce the prevalence of crime (and criminals) in general. Then by defauly the number of people who would skirt the law and have these dogs would be reduced. Tougher police forces, more men, better armed/protected civilians (although that's another debate all together), better social programs to keep kids off the street, more accessible education, etc.