[Clessers]

Originally Posted by kdbrich

funny...but I don't see that it will be an issue to have packs of labs roaming the streets or breaking into houses because people don't have their beloved pit bulls to protect 'em.

I dont really understand what this has to do with anything? I have yet to see packs of pitbulls roam the streets ... or packs of any dog for that matter? and what you quoted has nothing to do with your comment?

Not really sure what it will help as most people have set in their mind that certain things are bad but ....

In a recent study of 122 dog breeds by the American Temperament Testing Society (ATTS), pit bulls achieved a passing rate of 83.9%. That's as good or better than beagles ... 78.2%, and golden retrievers ... 83.2%.

Keep in mind the pitbulls entered were treated with love and compasion ... not boughten to fight.

[kdbrich]

My point is that I don't know that labs are such bad dogs that we're going to have the number of severe lab attacks that have happened in recent years with pit bulls.

Likewise, since people commit murders, they're still going to murder--whether they use a gun or not. Homes going to be left unprotected and vulnerable to burglaries if people don't have their precious pit bulls.

On the other hand, if labs are not now currently an issue, they're not going to suddenly fill the vacuum left by no pit bulls.

[2Adam29]

the best idea I think is grandfathering in all current pit bulls. we outlaw them, and that way, no current owner has to get rid of man's best friend, and at some point we will be rid of these animals. Then everyone is relatively happy. It's a compromise, those who don't want pit bulls have to wait a bit, and those who do, don't get to get any more of them.

[Clessers]

Hello again everyone - I wanted to thank everyone who posted on my thread. I really do appriciate everyone who took the time to read my post and respond.

After hearing what many people think about the BSL and pitbulls in general I will post my last reply. I can understand why people feel like they do about pitbulls.
In this last reply I will give an idea of a way to monitor "aggresive" dogs more closely.

Rather then pass BSL and kill many peoples pets what I propose we do follows:

All dogs that qualify as "aggressive" such as amstaffs / APBT / Rots / Doby's and so on are tested using the ATTS ( American Tempterment Testing Sociey )

In order to recieve a "aggressive" dog lisence breeders must provide an ATTS certificate for all dogs they wish to breed. This will help to ensure that the dogs being bred are not being bred for dog fights. This will also help to take any chance of a dog inheriting aggressive genes out.

Penalties should be very firmly enacted on anyone who is caught owning a dog that was not legally obtained from a certified breeder. Any dog that is not legally obtained must be tested by the ATTS.

by passing requirements like this - 2 things will happen.

#1 unreliable and irrisponsible owners will no longer try to obtain these dogs due to all the steps involved in owning one legit.

#2 we will finally see if the "breed" is the problem or if the owners are the problem.

If we are still seeing a high majority of Pitbull attacks - we can then look at the pits that are attacking. Are they legally obtained and passed the ATTS testing?

[kconnor]

Originally Posted by Todd4

Totally agree with that post.

Why is it that just because people can have something, they do?

There are about 1,000 other breeds of dog. Just pick any one of them. Will it really affect your life so much if you can't own a pitbull.

I know there are good dogs and great owners, blah, blah, blah...but just take one for the good of society and all those bad owners and abused/vicious dogs.

yes, it would affect my life deeply. My dogs are my whole life, they are my kids.... we don't go banning kids b/c they do wrong. Punish the deed, punish the owners, dont punish the dog, JUST BECAUSE ITS A PIT.

Ban a pitbull? why? just b/c of all the BAD media you hear about them? Where's the good media? Like the pitbulls that go to ol folks homes, etc. Better yet, why is it always just pitbull 'attacks' splashed all over the news?

Pitbulls have a bad rep... and its only getting worse. What we've been trying so hard to do.... stop portraying vicious dogs as all being pitbulls, ALL dogs have the capability of biting and attacking.

Enforce a leash law... and stick to it. I hear somewhere in Ohio that if caught with your dog not properly restrained you're fined $2000. I hear one story of a pit 'attack' and the owner had their what? 80lb? dog on a skinny little leash meant for a poodle.

Don't punish us responsible owners. For those of you who are for the ban.... how would you like it if we banned your kids? I can almost bet if the portraying of pitbulls being so vicious werent splashed all over news channels, we wouldnt even be in this dilemma now.

A dog, no matter what breed is born vicious. Just like no baby is born a seriel killer.

[kconnor]

Originally Posted by Clessers

I dont really understand what this has to do with anything? I have yet to see packs of pitbulls roam the streets ... or packs of any dog for that matter? and what you quoted has nothing to do with your comment?

Not really sure what it will help as most people have set in their mind that certain things are bad but ....

In a recent study of 122 dog breeds by the American Temperament Testing Society (ATTS), pit bulls achieved a passing rate of 83.9%. That's as good or better than beagles ... 78.2%, and golden retrievers ... 83.2%.

Keep in mind the pitbulls entered were treated with love and compasion ... not boughten to fight.

I agree... glad someone posted some FACTS (as in the ATTS comment)

[ehenningsen]

What do you propose then to limit the number of pitbulls from attacking people?

[Clessers]

If pitbulls were boughten by responsible owners who showed them nothing but love and compasion at home they wouldnt attack. By nature pitbulls arent human aggressive, which is partially why at a dog fight both dog owners stay in the ring for the entire 1 - 2 hour dog fight. My post above which explains the steps involved in owning a pitbull would get rid of ur young "macho man" owners who would encourage aggressive behavior. In order to get the dog ATTS certified the owner would have to fly to texas to be certified, i believe this plane ticket inconvience is going to rule out a lot of your irrisponsible owners, not to mention if the dog shows any misplaced aggression they will fail the test.

Those steps i believe would leave pitbulls attacking or biting just as few people as any other common large size breed.

These pitbulls that have been attacking would not even pass the first few test of the ATTS, the only place a dog is aloud to show aggression in the ATTS testing is when the dog owner is being confronted in a threatning manner.

BTW if your asking me to respond to you from now on pls quote me so i know when to respond

[2Adam29]

Robbers Break Into Home, Threaten Victims With Pit Bull

funniest thing in my life, to see such a heated debate such as this one, with pit bull owners clinging to their pets, trying desperately to have people see the good in them, and then this breaks and they're just like... OH COME ON! What are the odds of that happening?!?

[kdbrich]

It's a dog. Yes, I love dogs (I have 3 of 'em). But use some common sense. You don't have to go out and buy the biggest baddest breed possible. What's wrong with a furry little shih tzu? Not macho enough?