Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
what in the heck does the current presidential administration have to do with bsl that is passed on a LOCAL level???
I agree this guys a bit out there .. the point I took is this .. with bsl it is true that animal control can just take your dog ? I do believe they can get order to come right in your house or yard .. In fact if you live in areas with that law.. just ask folks from denver they went door to door and just killed the pits and tossed em in a dumpster .. all of them.. and your vet just can say here is the address. And this much does anger me.
not following the obama angle thou . and there are pics that were leaked it was thousands of legal dogs killed and most of the photos were of the thousands of them in a dumpster . I have seen no data showing this made any dent in bites or attacks. Cause the morons will just get a different breed to exploit.. can we ban stupid people
Stop BSL there are i believe 10 cities or states trying currently check it out and you tell me if I am reading it in correctly ?
i'm not sure what you are addressing in my post.
there might be 10 cities or states trying now, but is that more than were trying before obama was elected/took office? i'm not sure - even if it is, there's no reason to say that it's because of obama. that was my point. i just think the "this is obama's fault" angle that the previous poster used was really out of the blue.
seriously. and i haven't seen any particular increase in localities or states considering bsl lately anyway. my state had a legislator trying to change the state constitution so it would allow bsl to be passed during the bush presidency. whoop de doo.
i mean, what, bush would have stepped in and vetoed a state or locality's bsl or something? give me a break. the president doesn't have the power to do that. not EVERYTHING is obama's fault, and bsl is really a non-partisan issue. it's funny, on some of the bsl threads on the political board there are tons of people calling each other typical liberals or typical conservatives for either supporting or opposing bsl. it's just got nothing to do with party.
edit: wow, this person seems to be spamming the whole internet with this wackadoo theory. i doubt they'll be back.
If it is me that you refer to with this wackadoo theory I have no objection I have been fighting this law BSL for nearly 9 years,I have personal experience in Miami-Dade County where 2 of my Staffies that I sent to my sister from Portugal where I was living at the time got arrested for doing nothing wrong but getting of my sister's property,I flew to Miami eventually we won and the 2 dogs are now in Washington adopted out.Dade-County has had BSL for more than 20 years,Denver has had BSL for G-D knows how long,and of course Ontario Canada also forever,10 years those 3 places will still have BSL.
To clear up another point I am neither a Republican or a Democrat I dislike most politicians equally,but I do guage the growth of Dog-Fighting and Breed Specific Legislation by the number of Google Alerts I receive daily.
Are you aware that a little Daschund could land up on death row for nipping a veterinary nurse,that is in a Town or City called Lafayette?The numbers are growing.
Petitions and letters to Mayors Dear Rt. Honourable Sir Your Highness are not working, us "Stupid Masses" have to started getting angry, but writing on blogs "My Pitbull is beautiful it is friendly" is only converting the converted achieving zero else.
If animal -lovers are not willing to fight rather pack it in,I am about to.But do write this in your diary,with the Help of our good friends from Peta and the neuter spay policy, 1 year from now how many dogs will be banned and then remember WACKADOO Selwyn Marock smarock10@yahoo.com
Petitions and letters to Mayors Dear Rt. Honourable Sir Your Highness are not working, us "Stupid Masses" have to started getting angry, but writing on blogs "My Pitbull is beautiful it is friendly" is only converting the converted achieving zero else.
and blaming the president achieves what, exactly?
in my state (pennsylvania), as i mentioned earlier, there was a movement in the state legislature (while bush was president, gasp!) to amend the state constitution to make it possible for localities to enact bsl. at the moment pennsylvania's constitution prohibits this. there was a huge public outcry, letter writing campaigns, protests, petitions, etc. the amendment was dropped and that was that. so yes, changing public opinion (be it by using your own dog as an example or citing the statistics that prove that bsl doesn't work) does work against bsl, and so do petitions and letters. pennsylvania has proven this.
what exactly do you propose that people do to "fight back"? you've given no solutions, you've only dismissed what other people are doing. should we post all over the internet that bsl is obama's fault? that just makes bsl opponents look crazy, to be honest.
as for the rest of your post, i am an opponent of bsl so i'm not sure why you're trying to convince me that it's wrong or tell me how much you've done about it. i'm glad you're fighting against bsl, but i don't like your approach in this thread.
I agree this guys a bit out there .. the point I took is this .. with bsl it is true that animal control can just take your dog ? I do believe they can get order to come right in your house or yard .. In fact if you live in areas with that law.. just ask folks from denver they went door to door and just killed the pits and tossed em in a dumpster .. all of them.. and your vet just can say here is the address. And this much does anger me.
Yes, that is true. They do not need any search warrant or documentation. In most cases, if the breed of dog is illegal they can enter your home or yard and take them. It's scary too because who gets to decide if they are a 'pitbull'? I've seen dogs in shelters I've pulled from that are labeled pitbulls that are clearly labs or boxers or other breeds. Even shelter workers and many vets can't definitively say if a dog is 'pit' but they have the power to seize and kill them?
The good news is people seem to be more aware now that there is no such thing as a bad breed of dog. Many of the cities that have enacted these laws are seeing their bites stats rise. They still have the occasional pit bite because the fact is the majority of pit bites they are are dogs owned by criminals. Criminals want aggressive dogs. And the criminal element will never adhere to the laws. They'll continue to bring them home, train them to be aggressive and bites will continue. The ones that don't want to deal with the law for the breed specific laws just go get other large breed dogs and train them to be aggressive, so the bites continue, but they see it in other breeds.
My biggest arguement to counties and towns that are looking at BSL is if you ban a 45 pound pit your criminal element may come home with a 140 pound mastiff that they'll train to be aggressive, so in the end all you're doing is putting your public in more danger. The people that walk into the county and town commission meetings on this very pro-BSL always seem to sit up and take notice when you bring that up. I've seen a huge number of pro-BSL people walk out very anti-BSL because of how much danger it puts their families in.
We've got to get to the heart of dog aggression and in most cases it goes back to improper ownership. Don't get me wrong - there are some dogs out there with aggression issues that aren't due to humans screwing them up. I don't think there are many and I don't think it's solely a single breed. I think you're just as likely to see a psycho poodle as you are a psycho pittie. If we want to keep the public safe from dog attacks we've got to start passing stricter ownership laws. You've got to keep your dog confined; no allowing it to roam unattended. And you can't be chaining them; too many studies have shown time and time again that a dog's aggression level escalates if it's chained.
And as much as it's a hated topic, we need to push spay and neuter. The fact is a dog with hormones running through it's system is more likely to bite, period. I'm not saying every dog on the planet or in the country should be altered, but if you aren't breeding your dog and aren't working your dog there is no reason it shouldn't be spayed or neutered by a year old.
If only they had laws against biting people... Then they wouldn't have to ban breeds. Kind of goes to the gun debate also: If only they had laws against killing people...
I feel that certain breed should be banned.
As to the confiscation thing tho, that I don't agree with, unless the dog in question has shown to be agressive.
But to take a dog that is just passing thru the city, county or state? That is tyranny!
The other thing is that whoever in authority must have someone with knowledge of the breeds to pass judgment.
A friend of mine had her house insurance cancelled because the insurance guy saw her Boxer which had his tail and natural ears, and judged it to be a pit bull. Ignorance abounds.
I feel that certain breed should be banned.
As to the confiscation thing tho, that I don't agree with
OK, which breeds? What if BSL came to your town & all Boxers were banned? Would you euthanize your dog? Would you hand it over to the authorities? This is where the confiscation comes into effect. If the breed is banned, it's banned. No grandfathering it in. If you own one when the law goes into effect....too bad.
and even experts on dog breeds are often not capable of identifying the components of a mixed breed dog. in any case, if my dog is half lab and half pit, which half counts? what about part lab, part pit, part poodle? etc etc etc. is it like the "one drop" rule of old race laws? any trace of pit in a dog's ancestry and it is a walking time bomb that should be destroyed? if my dog was half pit but didn't look like a pit, i think most bsl advocates would think it was fine. and if there was no pit in the dog, but it had a big square head and muscular body, they'd want it banned. it's just absurd and illogical.
the fact is, when bsl is enacted it's NOT experts who are making the determinations. it's laymen who might seize a mastiff, dogo de argentino, boxer, or any of the dozens of breeds and countless mixes that are routinely mistaken for "pit bulls".
bsl has failed whenever it has been enacted. denver, which has one of the longest standing breed bans in the world, has seen no decrease in number or severity of dog bites. italy and the netherlands recently reversed their longtime breed bans because they didn't work.
and none of this even touches on the fact that pits are a breed that is bred to be human-friendly, that bites by pits are reported more widely and more specifically (a lab bite is a dog bite in the paper - a pit bite is a pit bite), that bites by non-pits are reported as being by pits, that problem pits represent a tiny percentage of the breed population, etc etc. even IF pits are in fact supernatural, evil devil dogs, bsl still doesn't work.
Last edited by groar; 03-02-2010 at 06:54 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
thanks
