pitbull ban (retire, kids, owner)

[pitbull_breeder_47]

Follow Up Home Inspections ??????? I Am A Pitbull Breeder Not A G.d. Social Worker, As Far As Getting A Dog From An Animal Shelter, That Is Your Business, I Want A Real Dog That I Raise Myself, Not Someone Else's Dog That They May Have Mistreated Or Damaged, or missing an eye or some other B.S. ! My Pits Have Good Temperments, That Is All That Concerns Me ! And I Will Keep Breeding Pitbulls Till The Day I Am Gone

[pitbull_breeder_47]

If You Want A Real Dog, Email Me , I Have 23 Pit Pups That Are Ready To Go Next Week !

[Boomerang]

I've worked to support animal rescue groups and never imagined in a million years that I would ever support a breed-specific ban, but it's clear that many people who own pit bull terriers do so irresponsibly and for reasons which are not in line with socially acceptable behaviors. It's also clear that many persons breeding pit bull terriers are not doing so with any knowledge or interest in responsible breeding practices. And it cannot be denied that certain types or breeds of animals present more risk of injury than others due to their nature, size, strength, individual temperament, or lack of proper socialization and/or training.

Whether we like it or not, we all live in society (except for those hermits out there, who aren't very likely to be reading this forum) and must observe certain common courtesies, "norms" and laws designed to ensure everyone's right to quiet enjoyment of their own property, their personal safety, and the right to protect their own animals and property from harm.

When certain harmful elements get out of control, whether they be naturally occuring diseases, wildlife, animals kept as pets, or anything else, it is not unreasonable for society to enact laws controlling the dangers presented by the harmful elements. Relating to pit bull terriers, I believe that their irresponsible owners are the primary danger, but that it would be easier to control ownership of these animals than to prosecute all the irresponsible people who own, breed, buy, and fight them. It's just a fact that pit bulls are the "I'm compensating for my shortcomings" dog du jour, kept by too many people for their intimidation factor or the cruelties of dog fighting.

In my area there have been 2 attacks by pit bulls in the past few weeks. In both cases, the pit bull owners have been problematic for some time, allowing their dog(s) to run loose and complaints by neighbors to the local authorities have been useless. In the first case two pitbulls attacked a small girl walking her puppy, and the girl dropped the puppy in fear, which was subsquently torn apart by the pitbulls. In the second case, a woman gardening in her own yard was attacked by a pitbull who left it's own yard, entered her yard, and bit her without provocation.

Recently I lived in another area where a neighbor let two pit bulls run loose 24/7. These animals exhibited extremely aggressive behavior toward my own elderly dog but fortunately my yard was fenced. On one occasion one of the pit bulls entered another neighbor's yard and tore the woman's purse off her arm, then proceeded to tear it apart in front of her. Despite numerous complaints from neighbors over the course of years, nothing was ever done to the owner which resulted in responsible ownership. As long as the police and animal control communities cannot provide adequate protection to citizens against irresponsible ownership of aggressive animals, I feel it is reasonable to think about taking some alternative actions.

Just my opinion.

[k350]

"harmful elements" so if a certain culture or ethnic group is statistically shown to commit more harm to fellow humans than others that gives society the right to ban them or restrict them?

Everyone is getting all worked up over some dogs when in fact the biggest danger to humans is other humans.

Some one commits a crime, they should be punished, not make some law against the elements that were used in that crime. If that was the case then many things ranging from frying pans, knives, to guns would be banned.

If the dogs are a problem than the owner should be prosecuted. I have seen too many get off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Make it a felony with mando sentencing and you will see a curb on people training not only pits but all dogs to be overly aggressive.

It is a small, very small minority of pit owners that make a bad name for everyone, and most of those are not some innocent, non-negligent attacks, most are owned by very irresponsible owners.

Just like shark attacks, everyone gets all hyped up neverminding the statistics are stacked heavily against people getting attacked by one, more people are killed and injured by falling coconuts in the world than by shark attacks.

It has been proven again and again that banning things does not work and never will work. All a ban will do is make criminals out of those who are not. It will not curb pit bull fighting because it is already illegal but it does not stop those from doing it, nor is it going to stop the irresponsible owners from having them because they could care less about laws anyway.

Did everyone forget the defintition of a free country? It means more than the right to vote and free speech you know.

[Boomerang]

Originally Posted by k350

"harmful elements" so if a certain culture or ethnic group is statistically shown to commit more harm to fellow humans than others that gives society the right to ban them or restrict them?
Everyone is getting all worked up over some dogs when in fact the biggest danger to humans is other humans.
Some one commits a crime, they should be punished, not make some law against the elements that were used in that crime. If that was the case then many things ranging from frying pans, knives, to guns would be banned.
If the dogs are a problem than the owner should be prosecuted. I have seen too many get off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Make it a felony with mando sentencing and you will see a curb on people training not only pits but all dogs to be overly aggressive.
It is a small, very small minority of pit owners that make a bad name for everyone, and most of those are not some innocent, non-negligent attacks, most are owned by very irresponsible owners.
Just like shark attacks, everyone gets all hyped up neverminding the statistics are stacked heavily against people getting attacked by one, more people are killed and injured by falling coconuts in the world than by shark attacks.
It has been proven again and again that banning things does not work and never will work. All a ban will do is make criminals out of those who are not. It will not curb pit bull fighting because it is already illegal but it does not stop those from doing it, nor is it going to stop the irresponsible owners from having them because they could care less about laws anyway.
Did everyone forget the defintition of a free country? It means more than the right to vote and free speech you know.

You're getting so worked up, you're not reading posts thoroughly. What I wrote regarding harmful elements was "whether they be naturally occuring diseases, wildlife, animals kept as pets, or anything else,". Where do you see the words "cultural or ethnic group in that sentence? If you are attempting to compare diverse groups of humans with pit bull dogs, that is quite a stretch IMO.

I don't think your argument is logical re: frying pans, etc. You can't compare animals with inanimate objects. The pit bull owners aren't causing injury. They are allowing their dogs to cause injury. Both need to be controlled IMO.

BTW, this is not a free country in the sense that everyone can just do as they please. No country is. All civilized countries have laws which citizens are expected to respect. Owning or breeding pit bulls is already banned in some areas. There are reasons why this was done.

Of course, you have a right to your opinion. So does everyone else.

[k350]

Well, my response was not directed at you or anyone in general.

As far as freedoms go, you ever lived anywhere else? If not then I guess you do not have much experience to have a good opinion in those matters. It is now just a big fashion here in the states to make a law against any little thing that pops up, from curfew times at public parks, to open container laws, to what color to paint your house, of course most everyone is conditioned to it to even notice or be bothered by it.

More laws is what you call for, in a nation with 2 million prisoners, what sort of punishment do you suggest? Is there a grandfather clause? what constitues a pit bull? You going to require DNA test to verify that something is indeed 100% a pit bull? What about mixed breeds? Is there any guarantee that the laws will not apply to more than just one animal?

My argument is logical by the fact you want to ban the element of the crime, hence what is causing the assault, not the person doing it, it is the same logic as those who want to ban guns.

I am sure the law makers love shifting attention from real crimes and issues going on to fruitless things like dogs, how many dog attacks by pitbulls in MA? Just wondering. I am sure there are a whole list of other crimes that occur with greater frequnecy than dog attacks.

Point is the law is not going to do anything other than make criminals out of otherwise law abiding people. People who are neglectful do not care about the law, this law will have about the same effect as drug laws and gun laws have had along with many other social control laws.

[k350]

Originally Posted by Boomerang

In my area there have been 2 attacks by pit bulls in the past few weeks. In both cases, the pit bull owners have been problematic for some time, allowing their dog(s) to run loose and complaints by neighbors to the local authorities have been useless. In the first case two pitbulls attacked a small girl walking her puppy, and the girl dropped the puppy in fear, which was subsquently torn apart by the pitbulls. In the second case, a woman gardening in her own yard was attacked by a pitbull who left it's own yard, entered her yard, and bit her without provocation.

Recently I lived in another area where a neighbor let two pit bulls run loose 24/7. These animals exhibited extremely aggressive behavior toward my own elderly dog but fortunately my yard was fenced. On one occasion one of the pit bulls entered another neighbor's yard and tore the woman's purse off her arm, then proceeded to tear it apart in front of her. Despite numerous complaints from neighbors over the course of years, nothing was ever done to the owner which resulted in responsible ownership. As long as the police and animal control communities cannot provide adequate protection to citizens against irresponsible ownership of aggressive animals, I feel it is reasonable to think about taking some alternative actions.

Just my opinion.

So, instead of holding authorities responsible, you rather prosecute those who are responsible? If these dogs have been problematic, I guarantee there is a law on the books about it. It is not the fault of responsible dog owners that the police and gov will not hold people accountable for their actions.

But yet even with this example you feel more laws will just magically solve the problem? They do not even enforce the laws that are on the books now, not alone a new one.

Plus as usual, people will still do it or just shift to a different breed dog, still retaining the same problem.

[ndrone1]

Originally Posted by Maineah

All pitbulls should be destroyed. They are a menace. They bring death to children and terror to all who encounter them. They are the scourge of the planet. There is no use for these animals in a civilized world. Citizens should rise up and force governments to ban this breed forever. It has happened in France and Ontario Canada and the USA should follow suit.

Excuse me, but...
Is this even a legitimate response? Your opinion is of no importance to anyone unless you have some reasoning as to why you have it. Has something happened to you to have this opinion to begin with? Were you attacked by a Pit Bull?

What about that time you fell on your knees when you were little and got a horrible scrape and the pain associated with it on that sidewalk? Should we ban sidewalks based on that, too? Please tell us about that time as well.

...

Seriously, get a clue... Pit Bulls are the "scourge of the planet?"... Really? I thought that was pollution... or global warming... or oil... or murderers... or rapists... maybe cockroaches... perhaps cars... or big rig tanker trucks? If you ask me what the scourge of the planet is, I would point the finger at mindless humans who don't think before they act.

Please tell me just because Arnold Schwarzenegger did not go on a people-squashing rampage he was strong enough to do so that you may want to ban him as well? Do you know why? Because he was raised not to kill things just like the pit bull dogs that you do not hear about in the news. I think the problem here is that the dogs have the potential to harm, just as anything or anyone else. Stick a hammer on a rooftop edge, it has the potential to fall and crack your skull. Stick a child in a swimming pool with no ladder, they have the potential to drown. Stick a Pit Bull in a dog-fighting match after is has been trained to kill... now put that same pit bull in the wrong place at the wrong time when the mail man has to come in the front yard and the dog is off of a leash. Does anyone catch my drift here? The potential to harm is the real problem. How can people be so blind to the real issue?

Nature vs. Nurture, believe what you want... the Pit Bull species is not at fault for idiot human beings training them to be horrible animals or idiot dog breeders selling them to the morons who do the training...

In my opinion, the blame is the fault of the owners who don't know the first thing about being a "parent" to anything.

Yes, I'm the proud owner of a beautiful rescued puppy that is a mix of a Pit Bull and a Labrador and I have taken care of animals my entire life.

[ndrone1]

Originally Posted by sushik

Ban them now immediately and punish any owners that do not comply.
Empower all rangers and police to be able to arrest and detain and Pitbull and owner found after te ban.

Pitbulls are a breed that should be irradicated. They should be outlawed to the point where owning a Bear or Wolf is permissiable; that is only by special license and permission.

The breed itself is dangerous, but the owners of the dogs are clueless, that is why government needs to step in and solve this problem.

Please see my above post. This is beyond irrational. Let's ban cars - they keep killing people in accidents!!

Again, it is the POTENTIAL that is the problem.

[miu]

Originally Posted by ndrone1

Yes, I'm the proud owner of a beautiful rescued puppy that is a mix of a Pit Bull and a Labrador and I have taken care of animals my entire life.

But your beloved dog is only HALF pit bull and diluted with lab. That's not the same as having a pure pit bull dog or one that was bred for aggression and to fight.

Anyway, I am a dog lover and pit bulls are not the best dog breed in the world, or the best breed in the world to have as a family pet. And pit bulls are not even recognized by the American Kennel Club (AKC) as an official dog breed, so no Westminster Dog Shows for them.

And what's difficult about just going after the bad dog owners on an individual basis, is that the worst dog owners have no assets to sue for in order to get compensation for medical bills or other damages their dogs may cause. Or they don't even register their dogs in the city or town that they live in, so if they are caught doing something bad, their owners' can't be tracked down by the authorities. Just for a start, there needs to be better enforcement of all dogs having proper license tags and proof of having rabies shots.