Ban the deed not the breed!!

[centro]

It's not the fact that someone has the right dog or wrong dog.

BUT! the real fact is that Pitty's are always proving them self wrong. JUST as someone says they are good and all someone gets hurt buy them. to be honest im sick of people plasting post around about pittys.
Yes i no other dogs can be agressive and yes other dogs do bite. BUT THERE MUST BE SOMETHING ABOUT THIS BREED FOR THEM TO BAND IT................

IM totally against them and hate them to the fact i could put them down myself. - ONLY because one has attached my dad in the past and they are not nice dogs and make a mess!

I HOPE THE GET RID OF THEM ALL!.

thats my opinion but.

CHeers.

just thought u should know that reading your posts made me want to put my hand in a blender and turn it on high, you sound like a uptight troll who is scared by the outside world, your comments are unneeded slander over subjects you clearly know sweet F.A about, cut your fingers off, make ice cubes out of them, and put them in cups of your tears, you make me sick

 

[snakehandler]

Given that a little whip snake has caused a fatality.....why is it so hard to believe, don't be naive, all dogs are capable of killing!


---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KaotikJezta]

LMAO according to that website a pure bred pug has caused 1 fatality. I dont beleive everything I read on the internet.

So what a pug couldn't kill a baby or cause someone to die as a result of being attacked, eg: weak heart etc.

 

[myusername]

While I don't think pitbulls should be banned I do think that their ownership should be restricted. Regardless of whether pitbulls are naturally more aggressive than other breeds, or whether they attract irresponsible owners, it is clear that they are the most dangerous breed of dog.
Unfortunately, due to people misrepresenting the breed or not registering the dogs at all, I'm not sure ownership can ever really be effectively controlled or restricted.

 

[snakehandler]

The pure bred pit bull is a restricted breed, the one that attacked the little girl is a cross breed, NO LEGISLATION against them!


---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KaotikJezta]

While I don't think pitbulls should be banned I do think that their ownership should be restricted. Regardless of whether pitbulls are naturally more aggressive than other breeds, or whether they attract irresponsible owners, it is clear that they are the most dangerous breed of dog.
Unfortunately, due to people misrepresenting the breed or not registering the dogs at all, I'm not sure ownership can ever really be effectively controlled or restricted.

What evidence is your claim based on. When I was younger Bull Terriers were classed as the most dangerous dog and my mother still believes that to be true, before that it was German Shepards, after that it was Rottweilers. In NSW they are claiming the Bull Arab is the most dangerous. People don't register them for fear that at any given moment they could be banned and seized, the legislation and fearmongering is only adding to the problem of unsocialised animals.

 

[ittybitty]

they dont do this as a need to survive or to protect themselves they do it because they enjoy it

This statement is bull*****... Dogs do not attack out of enjoyment in any way shape or form.. A dog can/will attack for many different reasons, out of fear, self defence from being mistreated, from being trained to do so at command, will to survive, jealousy. the list goes on...

Heck, I have Italian Greyhounds, a breed that was created to be effective at hunting down and capturing small vermin.. Even though they have been bred away from doing what they do best for many years and generations, you put an Iggy infront of a rabbit, and you know who will come off 2nd best. They dont kill these rabbits/rats etc out of enjoyment. It is their instinct as a sighthound to see, chase, contain, what is small, fluffy and very quick. even though they have been adapted to family living, their natural instinct still exists well and truly.


Dogs do not fight because it brings them enjoyment, it is a case of survival of the fittest.

People who dont understand dogs should not own them. You need to be able to read their body language, and see into their eyes. A dogs eyes tell a million words.


Right now on my bed, I have a 50kg oversized German Shepherd, 8 Pomeranians & 3 Italian Greyhounds. I have another 8 Pomeranians tearing around my house playing. Dogs are very adaptable creatures, and all breeds can live together given you understand that no two dogs are the same, and every dog had individual needs..

I trust my dogs more than I would ever trust ANY human being. They are far less complicated than a human, and will more than happily sit and listen to you ramble on about anything and everything. they dont care what you say to them, as long as it is in a happy tone, and you treat them with as much respect as they give you.

I would LOVE to own a Pitbull... But unfortunately unless you obtain one illegally, you have no chance, and even then god knows what it has been crossed with.

 

[grimbeny]

So what a pug couldn't kill a baby or cause someone to die as a result of being attacked, eg: weak heart etc.

And pomeranians mauled 7 people, 1 of which was an adult? The table doesnt even make sense. Wikipedia states that pitbull terriers or mixes thereof account for 32% of fatal attacks between 1979 - 1998.

 

[KaotikJezta]

And pomeranians mauled 7 people, 1 of which was an adult? The table doesnt even make sense. Wikipedia states that pitbull terriers or mixes thereof account for 32% of fatal attacks between 1979 - 1998.

All hail wikipedia. Pomeranians can be aggressive, I had a friend with a rescue pom and no-one except her could go near it. The table doesn't make sense because you don't want it to, you want it to show that pit bulls are the most dangerous. What was it that topped the list, oh yeah, lab crosses.

 

[grimbeny]

re-look at the table, if you cant see why I say it doesnt make sense then lord help you

 

[myusername]

What evidence is your claim based on

Don't quote me but I'm pretty sure I read that they make up about 70% of dog related deaths in the US. Admittedly they are well represented (almost 10% of dogs over there I think?), but that is pretty compelling stuff (if my memory serves me well). Clearly they have the potential to be dangerous. Now whether this is genetic in nature (I believe that it is) or whether it is purely coincidental (i.e. pitbulls attract irresponsible owners who cannot train or socialise their dogs, do not believe this to be the case), I'm not sure.

The pure bred pit bull is a restricted breed, the one that attacked the little girl is a cross breed, NO LEGISLATION against them!

People don't register them for fear that at any given moment they could be banned and seized, the legislation and fearmongering is only adding to the problem of unsocialised animals.

Precisely my point about restricting their ownership presenting numerous difficulties.

 

[KaotikJezta]

If you research the source:

Source: Dog attack deaths and maimings, US and Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006. Merritt Clifton.

You will find that the author himself is anti-pittbull even though his statitics don't back-up any of his claims.

 

[snakehandler]

Seriously!! All dogs are capable if putting a person in hospital, this does not make them dangerous, evil, or anything else! What it means us that people need to take responsibility for the actions of the animals under their control, regardless of species, breed or anything else. To ban a breed is naive! It will not solve the problem, but if a person had real consequences because of the actions of those under their control this will have an effect!


---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[grimbeny]

If you research the source:

Source: Dog attack deaths and maimings, US and Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006. Merritt Clifton.

You will find that the author himself is anti-pittbull even though his statitics don't back-up any of his claims.

The statistics presented in the mentioned study are not those presented in that table

 

[KaotikJezta]

..........

 

[Jeffa]

Bottom line people,
If you want to have the responsibility of owning a pet potentially dangerous or otherwise, you should be 100% accountable for its actions, training, housing and otherwise. If this animal for whatever reason escapes, mauls and kills a person than a life sentance for the owner would be just. Cant handle it then dont get the animal....

 

[alrightknight]

Generaly deaths relating dog attacks are low, in a country like the US where a large population of kept dogs are pitbulls (which are kept in low socioeconomic areas as guard dogs or by criminals who train there dogs to be violent) It makes sense that a large amount of fatal attacks will be to that one breed.

Ive been bashed by 2 aboriginal kids before and they took my wallet, but I dont think that every aboriginal that walks past me is going to try rob me, though most people probably would, because a dog with a bad rap already has done something bad people overlook the thousands of incidences of other dogs that attack people on a much higer scale. I remember a story aout a golden retriever a few years ago that dragged a baby out of its cot by the head killing it because it was jealous, and most people see that breed as the most loving dog around.

 

[grimbeny]

Bottom line people,
If you want to have the responsibility of owning a pet potentially dangerous or otherwise, you should be 100% accountable for its actions, training, housing and otherwise. If this animal for whatever reason escapes, mauls and kills a person than a life sentance for the owner would be just. Cant handle it then dont get the animal....

Although this might sound reasonable do you think it will actually work as a deterent for the people who are likely to abuse a dog?

 

[Jeffa]

Although this might sound reasonable do you think it will actually work as a deterent for the people who are likely to abuse a dog?

Probly not, but if this scum that abuses any animal in their care do get caught, maybe a bit of jailtime and a record of animal crulty acts known to the public wont hurt the community.

 

[snakehandler]

Dog abuse is a different story! A person should be 100% responsible for the actions of the pets in their care, you own it, you are responsible to ensure others are not at risk because of it. If it attacks a person should be charged as if they did the attack themselves!


---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk