|

06-20-2009, 12:07 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Florida
185 posts, read 28,319 times
Reputation: 45
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday
Well, I have to "quote insurance companies" because, if I want homeowners insurance, or renters insurance, I may not be able to get it if I have a Pit Bull (and several other breeds) in the home.
The above is a FACT.
|
Gday give me the name of the insurance company that refuses hiome owners insurance if you have a pitbull. I want to phone them and find out why they do this.
|
|

06-20-2009, 12:09 PM
|
|
Taipan
Status:
"NO to Obamacare"
(set 1 day ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV and NW of Florence Junction, AZ
20,776 posts, read 7,009,532 times
Reputation: 2865
|
|
I did a quick search and found this website that talks about insurance limitations and Pit Bulls
Insurance for Pit Bulls, What Insurers Accept Pitbulls
|
|

06-20-2009, 12:10 PM
|
|
Taipan
Status:
"NO to Obamacare"
(set 1 day ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV and NW of Florence Junction, AZ
20,776 posts, read 7,009,532 times
Reputation: 2865
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tambintime
Gday give me the name of the insurance company that refuses hiome owners insurance if you have a pitbull. I want to phone them and find out why they do this.
|
See my post above
And I said LIABILITY insurance coverage. There is a difference.
|
|

06-20-2009, 12:26 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Florida
185 posts, read 28,319 times
Reputation: 45
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday
Well, I have to "quote insurance companies" because, if I want homeowners insurance, or renters insurance, I may not be able to get it if I have a Pit Bull (and several other breeds) in the home.
The above is a FACT.
|
Where did you say liability cover?
As you can see there are insurance companies that cover bully breeds and pitbulls so why did you infer that you use the insurance company as if they had some kind of authority in deciding on pitbulls.
|
|

06-20-2009, 12:29 PM
|
|
Taipan
Status:
"NO to Obamacare"
(set 1 day ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV and NW of Florence Junction, AZ
20,776 posts, read 7,009,532 times
Reputation: 2865
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tambintime
Where did you say liability cover?
As you can see there are insurance companies that cover bully breeds and pitbulls so why did you infer that you use the insurance company as if they had some kind of authority in deciding on pitbulls.
|
I said "liability" several times.
And the FACT is, there are insurance companies that will not write such coverage if you have certain breeds of dogs. Your inference was that I was being untruthful. You were mistaken.
Fact is, some homeowners don't know about their particular companies limitations / exclusions to the policy. And when their animal, say a Pit, injures someone, the homeowner may find they have no coverage.
|
|

06-20-2009, 12:40 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Florida
185 posts, read 28,319 times
Reputation: 45
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday
I said "liability" several times.
And the FACT is, there are insurance companies that will not write such coverage if you have certain breeds of dogs. Your inference was that I was being untruthful. You were mistaken.
Fact is, some homeowners don't know about their particular companies limitations / exclusions to the policy. And when their animal, say a Pit, injures someone, the homeowner may find they have no coverage.
|
What is this Gday? You the Homeowners saviour now? This is about pitbulls having a place in civilized society not whether some insurance companys will give them cover. Some do and some do not cover pitbulls, big whoop! Is this your whole reasoning for your argument, some insurance companys?
|
|

06-20-2009, 01:12 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
10 posts, read 9,002 times
Reputation: 12
|
|
It's not the dog it's the owners of the animal who think it's macho to have a tough dog. The trends in your link just show the dogs these morons choose to own.
|
|

06-20-2009, 01:16 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London UK & Houston USA
4,375 posts, read 1,228,301 times
Reputation: 766
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by copjak
It's not the dog it's the owners of the animal who think it's macho to have a tough dog. The trends in your link just show the dogs these morons choose to own.
|
I soooo agree with you.
Dogs are Dogs are Dogs. Unfortunately it's the moronic owners that make a Dog either placid or ferouscious. My family have owned all types of Dogs and NONE of them were pre conditioned to any kind of behaviour.
|
|

06-20-2009, 01:42 PM
|
|
Senior Member
Status:
"Skol Vikings"
(set 14 days ago)
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Minnesota
2,654 posts, read 986,150 times
Reputation: 573
|
|
Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada September 1982 to November 13, 2006
According to that report link . Pit bull Terriers accounted for 1110/2209 attacks that caused bodily harm. That's not including the Pit bull mixes.  Second place goes to the Rottweiler at 409.
Pit lovers blame irresponsible owners, and I understand their point. But it doesn't support their case that this breed is (or can be) a safe. If a disproportionate number of Pits are in the possession of irresponsible owners, then what's the point of defending the breed? Personally, I don't want Pit Bulls anywhere near my neighborhood. I have a fear of snakes and Pits.
The only way this breed can be trusted, is if there is an intense screening process to earn the right to be an owner or a breeder of a Pit Bull. And I mean very intense. It's the only way to get these dogs out of the hands of the dirtballs.
Question for those who know about breeding. Is it possible that irresponsible owners and breeders can make each generation of Pits more vicious? Temperament can be bred can't it?
|
|

06-20-2009, 02:08 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London UK & Houston USA
4,375 posts, read 1,228,301 times
Reputation: 766
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzie679
Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada September 1982 to November 13, 2006
According to that report link . Pit bull Terriers accounted for 1110/2209 attacks that caused bodily harm. That's not including the Pit bull mixes.  Second place goes to the Rottweiler at 409.
Pit lovers blame irresponsible owners, and I understand their point. But it doesn't support their case that this breed is (or can be) a safe. If a disproportionate number of Pits are in the possession of irresponsible owners, then what's the point of defending the breed? Personally, I don't want Pit Bulls anywhere near my neighborhood. I have a fear of snakes and Pits.
The only way this breed can be trusted, is if there is an intense screening process to earn the right to be an owner or a breeder of a Pit Bull. And I mean very intense. It's the only way to get these dogs out of the hands of the dirtballs.
Question for those who know about breeding. Is it possible that irresponsible owners and breeders can make each generation of Pits more vicious? Temperament can be bred can't it?
|
You have to understand that a disproportionate amount of pitt bulls are owned by people who get them for their reputation as a dangerous dog. They then train the dog to be feroscous and people wonder why these dogs then attack. You cannot train a dog to be feroucous and then put kids etc with them and expect them not to attack. My sister had a pitt and it was a absolute sweety. Cesar Millan has many pitt bulls and has had no trouble. The high numbers of pitt bulls attacking are due to the large proportion of Pitt bull owners who are Morons and get them for the wrong reasons.
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|