The Wichita City Council — at the urging of some dog groups and owners — has resisted breed-specific dog laws. It’s not the breed, it’s the owner or the particular dog, the advocates say. But after yet another person was mauled by what was considered a friendly pit bull — this time, a 1-year-old boy who had his scalp torn off last week by a pit bull-boxer mix — it is tough not to conclude that certain breeds are high risk and justify stricter regulations.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- DorisKing on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- george on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on So they said
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
246 Comments
Phillip, you and I have often disagreed. But on this point, we are united! Pit Bulls are like pornography; hard to define, but we know it when we see it. These beasts are born and bred to be angry and aggressive. Unlike a loaded gun, these dogs do “go off” by themselves. For that reason alone, they need to be banned, if one could figure out how to define just exactly what they are.Worse yet, and more culpable, are the owners. They own these dogs because the dogs are mean. There must be some evil in the owners, too. How do we outlaw this?
How many children need to be mauled before people realize that Pits are dangerous?If we can’t ban the breed, maybe owners should be required by law to carry a huge insurance policy. Owners should face stiff penalties for non-compliance.
Your right to own a dangerous dog doesn’t trump the right of others to not have their children killed or disfigured.
How many attacks especially involving children are attributed to breeds other than Pit Bulls?
Wichita took the low road with the gutless decision to NOT BAN PIT BULLS. Instead they allow “someone” to determine a dog is dangerous in advance?? This last attack was by a dog kept INSIDE an appartment.
This is an ordnance which need to be revisited.
If all pit bulls are bad, then how about all poodles are bad because one bites a child? Have we seen the statistics as to how many dog bites there have been and the breakdown as to the breed?
I still say the owners of the dogs, whatever breed they happen to be, are ultimately responsible for their dog’s behavior. And parents should be responsible for having a 1-yr old child around a dog of any breed. What was the child doing down to where the dog could attack it? Where was the mother of this child?
Responsibility is a two-way street. Dog owners and parents need to be careful when small children are around dogs. End of story.
One of my neighbors used to have two pit bulls. The pit bulls never attacked the owners. But, one day, one of their children accidentally left their gate open. One of the pitbulls charged and bit two puncture wounds into my son as he walked by their yard. We called the police on them. Eventually they got rid of one pitbull, but the wrong one. A few months later, the mail lady got bit by the same pit bull. Now they don’t have any more pit bulls. The people never apologized to us, they only give us dirty looks like we’re in the wrong for calling the police on them. I think part of the reason people get pit bulls is because they know they are mean and will act as a deterent to trespasing criminals. But, far too often , an innocent neighbor will become the victim instead. The laws in Wichita are not strict enough to make pit bull owners owners take their responsibilities seriously. The city of Wichita is not handling the issues effectively.
I owned a pit bull that bit a child, and I can tell you that I was so remorseful…even now. That child has moved away but I wonder how she’s doing. And this was a child who had often played with the dog.
We did everything right for that dog and I thought like many that it truly WAS just how you raised them. NOT TRUE. Even responsible owners this can happen to. We put the dog down that night, my vet (who I had been working very closely with on behavior) even came in from home to do it. No way were we going to have a vicious dog. And we’ll never again own a pit bull.
I know there are pit owners out there right now who think “my dog would never”…well let me tell you you may or may NOT be right, and you better err on the side of a child’s life. If a pit were the size of a toy poodle, we probably wouldn’t have this discussion. But they aren’t, and they do kill.
The sad fact is pit bulls were bred for fighting. Without extensive training by competent trainers, pit bulls will be aggressive. I hate to agree on this point, because it’s not the dogs fault, but they need to be banned.
Typical liberal knee-jerk reaction to everything.
One tragic event is enough to throw logic and common sense out the window.
XXX,
I am surprised to see your stance on this issue.
Using the same logic you used here, shouldn’t we take away your dangerous guns too?
So what “Pit bull” are we banning?
American Pit Bull Terrier?
American Staffordshire Terrier?
Staffordshire Bull Terrier?
Bull Terrier?
Perro de Presa Canario?
Cane Corso?
Argentine Dogos?
All of them are under the very generic term “pit bull”
The Wichita Eagle Editorial board has had the agenda for banning pit bulls from the beginning.
When the City Counsel was made aware of the facts separate from the emotional hysteria they made the right decision.
This city needs strong enforceable, sensible dangerous dog legislation. Breed specific legislation is poor legislation that does little to help the big picture.
Hank
My thoughts on the matter is that certain breeds of dogs or dogs in general (mixed) that are above a certain size and weight limit should not be allowed into towns and cities without special permits.
Part of that permit is a certification that the owner of the dog has sent the dog to a required discipline course and that dog must maintain the discipline training throughout its lifetime.
I would also require that the owner of the large dog require special fencing and restraints to keep the dog bound and caged in the event the owner is not present. Not just any rickety slat board fence, real dog and dig proof fencing where they can’t escape.
I would also make it a crime to allow a large dog to roam freely in a household where children are involved. This is just as irresponsible as leaving a loaded gun laying around. There are no excuses.
Lastly, I would require owners of large dogs be specially licensed and require them to carry comprehensive insurance as well as liability coverage.
The way I see it, large animals are the province of people who should invest a major amount of time and expense for the privilege of owning said animals in a municipality.
Large dogs of all breeds are a loaded gun waiting to go off. Keep it responsible and keep it under close scrutiny.
And no, I don’t want to hear about the seeing eye or handicap assistance dogs. These dogs are well trained and not like the mutts most people keep.
And here is where I disagree with you Kansas.
Not all large dogs are harmful.
You want to introduce an entire litany of legislation and cost on owning a large dog, why?
My friends who own two Great Danes have no porblems with them or their interaction with little kids.
One of the dogs weighs 170 lbs.
More cumbersome government regulations is not the solution.
Sorry Kansas.
Kansas,
If you are going to start wanting these types of government regulations, lets see some proof for why.
Let me see the numbers on “large dog” attacks by breed and your justification for saying they are a “loaded gun” waiting to go off.
Not included in the header is the account of a Wichita police officer of an encounter with a pit bull Monday afternoon. Apparently the officer attempted to help the dog back into its fenced yard. The pit bull attacked and the officer was forced to shoot it.
These dogs are dangerous. They do not belong living in populated areas. The recent position of the Wichita kennel club in defending these animals is irresponsible and stupid. Those attacked by pit bulls in the future may wish to avail themselves of civil redress and demand compensation from those who defend these vicious animals.
I know Nathan and I think some large dogs are as sweet as they can be.
However, this is my reasoning.
The reasoning for gun licensing is to hold adults responsible for the control and registration of said firearms. If one wants to conceal and carry, they must get special training and licensing.
If one wants to wear a firearm out in the open, they must be CLEET certified and in capacity of some type of law enforcement or security.
We know from experience that unlicensed people carry firearms and the results are often devastating.
I’m not concerned about the “sweet” large dogs and responsible owners.
What I’m concerned about are the neglectful large dog owners who may remember to feed the dog or may not.
Those same irresponsible dog owners may keep their fence in repair or they may not.
The owners of large dogs may seek discipline training for their dogs or they may not.
What I’m recommending is a standard that requires restrictions on large dog owners that has standards. Since not all dog owners and not all large dogs are created equally, we as the watchful eye citizen must insure that large dogs are measured out under the same guidelines.
Your example of a 170 pound Great Dane is testament to why large dogs need restrictions and training. A dog that big only needs one time to get out of hand and there’s not much anyone could do to protect themselves from injury from a dog of that size.
Ask any Veterinarian that works around large animals and they will tell you that they are cautious and very aware that some sort of restraint must be made before the Veterinarian will attempt any procedure on them. Veterinarians are the business to treat animals, not in the business of being attacked by animals.
Nathan, I imagine you and your father are the exception rather than the rule regarding raising animals.
What I’m addressing is the lazy slobs who buy a pitbull and then do nothing to discipline it, train it or exercise sensible precautions around it.
Again, it goes back to making the owners responsible for their animals.
I’ve been bitten a few times by dogs “that never bite.” There are no guarantees that a dog with a toothy grin like that won’t go aggressive at a moment’s notice.
JR,
Which of those Pit bulls I listed above are dangerous?
Please enlighten us as to your reasoning and proof.
Citing anecdotal evidence is not justification.
More kids drown in peoples swimming pools than are attacked and killed by pit bulls.
Should we ban those too?
Kansas,
Making cumbersome and restrictive legislation to effect 99% of large dog owners who will never have a problem with their large dog because of a few is just plain stupid.
Once again, let me see your proof.
I already see your flawed reasoning.
I want to see your numbers on large dogs owned and the percentage of them that cause problems and how your restrictions will help that and to what extent.
This is a knee-jerk reaction to a tragic event which will never ever solve the problem, or prevent another death or injury.
All you will do is punish the responsible dog owners. The criminals and drug dealers will ignore this law.
Do some easy research on the web. The city of Kansas City, KS has had a Pit Bull ban for ten years. Yet even this past year – people have been maimed and injured. A ban is simply not effective. It may provide temporary emotional relief – but science and facts do not support breed specific legislation working.
Did you know what breed results in the largest numbers of bites?MIXED BREEDS.
Did you know who it is a family member who is bitten the vast majority of times?
Define Pit Bull? Not easy.You be the cop. I’ll bet you cannot pick out the Pit Bull from the line up:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Findthebull/findpitbull_v3.html
Maybe the city should ban bathtubs too. You are a thousand times more likely to die in a bathtub than a dog bite.
Maybe the City should ban ladders too.
Number of deaths in 2000:
1,307 falling down stairs412 fall from ladders341 bathtub deaths26 Dog Bites (all breeds)
I can report personally of the mixed accountability those who have these animals face.
The owner of the pit bull that attacked my mother is in prison. His girlfriend continues to house and care for the animal. At the hearing a few weeks ago, she was ordered to pay $50 a month until the balance of the almost $600 vet bill my mom incurred to save the life of her dog was paid back. If she misses even one payment SHE will go to prison. That’s the good news.
The bad news is the same dog recently attacked another person. More than 30 stitches worth of injury this time. But since the dog was back in the house when animal control arrived, the animal could not be put down but only held for observation and then released back to the owners girlfriend.
Watch the news folks. Lotsa kids in that neighborhood. Someone is gonna get hurt bad.
I don’t know Nathan, how does one measure the “scalp” of a one year old being torn from its head?
How does one measure the trauma to a dog that was in my yard that was attacked by a neighbors two pit bulls because they would not keep their fence repaired or restrain the dogs?
How does one measure how people are mauled every day by large dogs with irresponsible owners?
There is no proof of statistics required when biting incidence reports indicates there is a problem.
This is not an epidemiological problem where one one weighs risk versus statistic versus common sense.
How many pathogens are allowed into the Hospitals where your Dad works? Do they have a pathogen tolerance level? Can any hospital say, we are going to allow XX amount of tuberculosis to enter our facility this month.
City dwellings are not meant to be storage facilities for large animals. I understand that your Dad has a nice spread of land where he can keep animals. That’s great and how it should be.
But to keep large animals confined in the city, in intolerable conditions and without restrictions is asking for trouble.
What are you going to say to the next child that gets mauled by a large dog Nathan? “I’m sorry, but no need for concern, the large animal is not statistically important enough to have restrictions placed on it.”
I’m talking about an unloaded gun, i.e., the large dog being placed out on the table.
The large dog needs to have restrictions in the same way a firearm is restricted for public safety.
Some people like pouring gasoline into an overheated lawn mower, however, I highly recommend against said action.
Clarification my last. The owner of the pit bull is in prison but the charges are not related to his vicious dog.
“Typical liberal knee-jerk reaction to everything.
One tragic event is enough to throw logic and common sense out the window.”
Posted by Nathan.
Nathan, it’s not one tragic event but many. Your response shows a heartless reaction to the same tragic event. Tell it to the parents of the child in critical condition, or the parrents of the child killed in Missouri by pit bulls, or the parents of the girl in California killed by two pits while trying to get into her own apartment.
It’s a sad fact many breeds are bred for fighting, and all should be banned, as dog fights are not only illegal, but down right inhumane. So tell me, Nathan, just what good are dogs bred for fighting in today’s society? Watch dogs? Not hardly.
Maybe the City should ban ladders too.
Number of deaths in 2000:
1,307 falling down stairs412 fall from ladders341 bathtub deaths26 Dog Bites (all breeds)
Posted by: American Way | November 28, 2007 at 08:22 AM
Believe it or not American Way, there are OSHA rules on ladder safety, stair safety and consumer protection on bath tub safety.
There are self-imposed restrictions on bath tubs mostly. For instance, putting non skid bath mats or applications that prevent falls. There are hand rails and etc.
The average dufus may want to use a rickety ladder to fix a roof, however, if you work for a company, one better be within OSHA compliance with ladder safety training and have an OSHA approved ladder.
I don’t want a beer guzzling pot head to let his pitbull roam the streets because he is too irresponsible to train the dog or keep his fence in good repair.
It’s these types of irresponsible of people that are the cause of the desire for laws of this nature to be enforced.
If everyone was responsible, heck yeah, do what you want.
But not everyone is responsible, thus the desire for the large dog restrictions.
Some decent people get pit bulls for protection of themselves and/or family. But the reason they select this breed is for the same characteristics that hoodlums and other irresponsible people get them. Because they can be, or are agressive and powerful. Since society would be hard put to distinguish whether the owner would be a responsible person/owner, the entire breed needs to be regulated. Apparently Nathan doesn’t live in a neighborhood where loose pit bulls are a problem in the neighborhood. Either that or he doesn’t see a problem because he’s packing. Most people, and especially children are not carrying a loaded weapon for their defense, and loose pit bulls are more than an annoyance! I have 5 pit bulls in less than 150′ feet of my house, they often run loose, they’ve been called in numerous times, but by the time they come out, someone will spot them and put the dogs in the house. My son last year saw a pedestrian backed up against a tree in the yard, two of the pit bulls had him cornered and were trying to get him from the front and side. My son threw a smoker at them, and they took off.The breed needs to be eliminated, because irresponsible owners will never be regulatable.Incidentally, one of the dogs bit a visitor to my neighbor’s house when they picked up the dogs favorite toy, but the incident went unreported.
Ban makes zero different:
Police said they are treating the fatal dog mauling of a 71-year-old Kansas City, Kan., woman as a homicide and are looking for the person who owned the dog.
Jimmie May McConnell was in her garden at about 11:30 a.m. on Thursday when a neighbor’s dog jumped the fence and attacked her, police said.
When firefighters arrived on the scene, “the dog was still on the victim,” Assistant Fire Chief Craig Duke said, and the rescuers had to hit the dog with an ax and a pole to get it off McConnell, officials said.
McConnell was taken to the University of Kansas Medical Center, where she was pronounced dead.
Neighbors told ABC News affiliate KMBC-TV in Kansas City, Mo., that McConnell was so badly injured they hardly recognized her when she was pulled from the garden.
McConnell’s son said his mother didn’t have a fighting chance. “Besides run, she’s defenseless,” Chris McConnell said.
Though police have not yet confirmed the breed of the dog that attacked McConnell, neighbors described it as a pit bull.
A number of recent pit bill attacks have spurred new legislation across the country. A California woman, Maureen Faibish, is on trial in San Francisco, accused of felony child endangerment after the family’s pit bulls mauled and killed her 12-year-old son.
Closing arguments in her trial concluded Thursday. If convicted, Faibish could face up to 10 years in prison.
In Kansas, pit bulls have been banned in Kansas City, Kan., and in Wyandotte County since 1990.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2248330&page=1
But not everyone is responsible, thus the desire for the large dog restrictions.
Posted by: Kansas | November 28, 2007 at 08:28 AM
Then I guess you better go ahead and put some more restrictions on guns. They DO kill people you dontchano.
And look at the number of murderers in prison by race. Maybe we should ban some races?
Again, it is an emotional debate. The City Counsel was brave to withstand the emotionally charged crowd and instead listen to reason and factual information presented by animal professionals.
Let’s get those bathtubs removed from every building in the city.
A ban is Unenforceable. I guess we can throw out search and seizure and private property rules too. Gotta go in agressively and get those nasty Pit Bulls!
I am sorry someone was again hurt by a dog. I am also sorry 341 people died in bathtubs because of irresponsible bathtub owners.
But being sorry and emotional does not resolve the problem.
Can the cops enforce this? Can they pick out the pit bull on the street? Think about a moving vehicle, a moving dog on a leash, nighttime, rain, or snow.
Or – just pick the pit bull out on a bright sunny day:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Findthebull/findpitbull_v3.html
Sorry – there ARE things which can be done. But you cannot address them until everyone calms down and stops being emotional. And of course realize a ban will not STOP the killing/injury.
We are having this discussion because the law enforcement community did not enforce the laws already on the books.
“A nation which does not enforce it’s current laws will soon find that it cannot enforce ANY of it’s laws.”
This applies to the city in this case
I own a female PitBull, I adopted her from a shelter, a day before she was scheduled to be put down. She’s fixed, vaccinated, and has two I.D. tags, and a microchip implanted.
I think the point people are missing, is that the responsible people will be punished, and the irresponsible will not, why because the irresponsible don’t get their dogs vaccinated at a vet, they don’t walk their dog, they don’t get the dog fixed. The onwers and the mom of the recent pitbull attack, are trying to save face by saying the dog was nice and had no problems and this attack was a total shock. First off, it was an un-nutured male pitbull, second off it was living in a cramped apartment (pitbulls are high energy dogs, they need lots of exercise to burn off the excess) thridly the mother is acting like she witnessed the attack happen, she was actually in the kitchen cooking thankgiving dinner when the first inital bite took place out of her eyesight, secondly the boy was 1 year old, too young to leave rolling around on the carpet even without a dog in the apartment. Lastly, does a 1 year old know how to act around dogs? NO, its likley the child was hitting the dog playfully and the dog snapped, I remember a number of toddlers that I have had to teach to pet dogs, not hit them. These are people just trying to save face and blame the dog breed, its easy when it wasn’t even their dog, it was the guys ex-girfriends who made a poor descison by leaving it there. By the way, my pitbull lives with three other dogs, and two kittens, it takes naps with the kittens, and was protective of my friends 2 year old son keeping our other non-pitbull dogs away from the toddler. The pitbull used to be known as the nanny dog, and was a war mascot. Just remember, if we outlaw this breed, the bad dogs will still be around, because the irresponsible, or abusive owners don’t vaccinate, fix, socialize, or exercise their dogs to begin with. So only the registred pitbull onwers like myself will be punished.
JM Walker,
Why are you so heartless to all those who have lost someone to a swimming pool?
We should ban them all.
First to PoliMom: my condolences. I experienced something similar when one of my dogs got the neighbor’s kid. I know it’d not have happened had others in the neighborhood allowed their dogs to run loose, barking and growling at my dogs in their fence. Or even if the neighbor hadn’t fallen on my dog at the same time. Then again, I’m just making excuses. I too put my dog down that night.That garbage about, “Are you gonna outlaw all large dogs?” is just that–garbage. If I had a pound of Rapid-Gro on one hand, and a pound of nitroglycerine in the other, neither or both should be regulated the same since they’re essentially alike????
Long ago my cocker spaniel took a nip out of me. At the time I was told they had the 3rd highest incidence of dogbites in the nation. It was just a slight ‘owie-booboo’ so no big deal. Though it was a full grown cocker, it’d take a dog that size a whole day with frequent potty breaks to do the same damage as a pit (in any of its varied incarnations) can in just a few seconds.
“So only the registred pitbull onwers like myself will be punished.
Posted by: WhiteElephant | November 28, 2007 at 08:51 AM”
Great post!!!! If no one is allowed to have dogs, only the outlaws will have dogs.
We need enforcment!! not BS talk.
So…
Still no one has answered me on what Pit Bull they are talking about.
Allow me to list them again:
American Pit Bull Terrier?
American Staffordshire Terrier?
Staffordshire Bull Terrier?
Bull Terrier?
Perro de Presa Canario?
Cane Corso?
Argentine Dogos?
Incidents of other breed bites may occur because there are a lots of say golden retreivers, so there is bound to be occurances but they are not agressive in nature. Pitbulls have been bred attack to maim and kill, and the occurances per capita is much higher. Which brings up the problem of enforcing a ban. How does the average citizen know what a Pitbull is, is it pure bred, cross bred etc? In Ontario there now is a ban on breeding or importing purebred Pitbulls to be followed by an absolute ban on ownership. The time delay in enforcing a total ban is to forgoe the need of mass, mandatory euthanasia. It’s a new programme and no results can yet be credibly established.
All, Nate, and toss in Chows and those ugly chinese lion dogs, too.
And you can throw in dobies and even the gentle labs if the ignorant owners insist on feeding them gunpowder!
The Ameican Pitbull terrier is one of the most verstile breeds there is. Its one of the only dogs that is currently used as a police k-9, a search and rescue dog, a farm dog, a bomb sniffing dog, and thearpy dogs.
Heres the story of Weela.
“This story is from the Ultimate American Pit Bull Terrier by Jacqueline O’Neil. Weela was also featured in the October, 1996 Outside magazine as an example of the kind of dog one would like to have in a life-threatening situation.
Gary Watkins, eleven years old, was absorbed in chasing lizards when Weela, the family Pit Bull, plowed into him with a body slam that sent him sprawling. Gary’s mother, Lori, saw the whole incident and remembers being surprised at first, because Weela always played kindly with children. But her surprise quickly turned to horror when she saw a rattlesnake sink its fangs into Weela’s face. Somehow Weela had sensed the snake’s presence from across the yard and rushed to push Gary out of strinking range.
Luckily for thirty people, twenty-nine dogs, thirteen horses and a cat, Weela recovered from the snake’s venom. Luckily, because that’s how many lives she saved a few years later. For her heroism, Weela was named Ken-L Ration’s Dog Hero of the Year in 1993. The press release read in part:
In January 1993, heavy rains caused a dam to break miles upstream on the Tijuana River, normally a narrow, three-foot wide river. Weela’s rescue efforts began at a ranch that belonged to a friend of her owners, Lori and Daniel Watkins. Weela and the Watkinses worked for six hours battling heavy rains, strong currents and floating debris to reach the ranch and rescue their friend’s twelve dogs.
From that experience, the Watkinses recognized Weela’s extraordinary ability to sense quicksand, dangerous drop-offs and mud bogs. “She was constantly willing to put herself in dangerous situations,” says Lori Watkins. “She alsays took the lead except to circle back if someone needed help.”
Periodically, over a month’s time, sixty-five pound Weela crossed the flooded river to bring food to seventeen dogs and puppies and one cat, all stranded on an island. Each trip she pulled thirty to fifty pounds of dog food that had been loaded into a harnessed backpack. The animals were finally evacuated on Valentine’s Day.
On another occasion, Weela led a rescue team to thirteen horses stranded on a large manure pile completely surrounded by floodwaters. The rescue team successfully brought the horses to safe ground.
Finally, during one of Weela’s trips back from delivering food to stranded animals, she came upon a group of thirty people who were attempting to cross the floodwaters. Weela, by barking and running back and forth, refused to allow them to cross at that point where the waters ran deep and fast. She then led the group to a shallower crossing upstream, where they safely crossed to the other side.
Stong, gentle intelligent and brave, Weela,CGC,TT, is the ultimate American Pit Bull terrier, epitomizing the best that the breed has to offer. But her story also highlights an important yet often misunderstood fact about the breed. The Pit Bull is a dog that loves to please its owner and tries to become whatever kind of dog its owner desires. Weela has had two owners.
The first owner dumped her in an alley to die when she was less than four weeks old. Her present owner, Lori Watkins, found five starving Pit Bull puppies whimpering in an alley, took them home and raised them. later, the Watkins family placed four of the puppies in loving homes and kept the little female they named Weela. They believed Weela was special, and she proved them right. Most Pit Bull puppies grow up to become a reflection of both their owners’ personality and the care and training they receive. One can only imagine what a different dog Weela would have become if her original owner had raised her, and she had done her best to please him.”
So when dog fighters start using Dobermans or Rottweiler for fighting to circumvent the ban on pit bulls and 20 years from now we have more attacks from them because more of them have been bred and trained for fighting are we going to cry about banning them too?
This mentality about banning misused things is not rational.
The criminals will simply circumvent the law.
We don’t simply disagree with laws against pit bulls.
We simply want comprehensive dangerous dog legislation which makes sense.
Instead we get the media driven knee jerk reaction to ban pit bulls.
I read an article few months ago, where a 10 lb. mutt got inbetween a child and a poisonous snake and took a bite.
American Pit Bull Terrier?
American Staffordshire Terrier?
Staffordshire Bull Terrier?
These three breeds all come from the same background, there essentially the same breed, except for slight differecnes in weight, height, and color combinations. The American Staffordshire Terrier has been seperatly bred from apbt’s for at least 50 years, but they are nearly identical. They are all still called bully type dogs.
Ban the Dobermanns an rottweiller’s right along with them, problem solved. Those too are dangerous breeds, and next to pit bulls are the most common in my vicinity.
A dog will have its instinct triggered by a child squealing, I bet that was what happened to the baby.My grandson was bitten on the lip a couple weeks ago, by his friends small breed house pet. He may have a little scar to show for it, had it been a pit bull, he probably wouldn’t have a face.
About the ‘nice/good’ pit: whenever a set of independent events occur randomly in time or space, you’ll notice event clusters. Probability doesn’t allow for coincidence–it INSISTS on them. Kinda explains the day of reduced violence in Iraq a couple weeks ago, too.
Nathan, my argument was against “large” dogs being in municipalities and the restrictions that should be placed upon them.
I don’t care if they are pit bulls of any breed, German Shepherds or a bull mastiff. Large, uncontrolled dogs held by irresponsible owners is a matter of public safety.
Sorry – there ARE things which can be done. But you cannot address them until everyone calms down and stops being emotional. And of course realize a ban will not STOP the killing/injury.
Posted by: American Way | November 28, 2007 at 08:40 AM
To do nothing would be irresponsible.
Ban the Dobermanns an rottweiller’s right along with them, problem solved.
Did you do your homework?
Problem is not solved. People are still being killed and injured in cities with full bans on specific breeds.
Phantom, after Jimmie May McConnell (see above post) was killed by a pit bull, why don’t you go up to her family and tell them:
“The problem was solved 15 years ago when we banned Pit Bulls.”
A dog will have its instinct triggered by a child squealing, I bet that was what happened to the baby.My grandson was bitten on the lip a couple weeks ago, by his friends small breed house pet. He may have a little scar to show for it, had it been a pit bull, he probably wouldn’t have a face.
Phantom your exactly right, dog bites and attacks happen everyday, chows are notorious for biting, as well as other dog breeds like spaniels and poodles, the only difference, the pitbull does more damadge, and has a bad rap to begin with. So the media is quick to jump on every pitbull attack. I wish they would publicize every dog attack, so people would realize how often this happens, it happens everday in Wichita, by differnt breeds.
Kansas, I can agree with there, large dogs with the potential to cause major injury if they bite or attack should be made sure by law, that powerful dogs are in a responsible owners hands. Thats still a lot of work for police to take care of, it looks like Wichita needs to copy Houston and open up a branch of the aspca Animal Cops in Wichita.
To do nothing would be irresponsible.Posted by: Kansas | November 28, 2007 at 09:23 AM
And we do agree on that Kansas. Calmly. Not emotionally.
What can be done?
1. Adopt a dangerous dog ordnance patterned after Lawrence Kansas or Leavenworth Kansas. (Lawrence is agressive in their approach and volunteer to provide advise – they are proud of their successful program!)
Define Dangerous Dog: Your community decides. Is it one bite? One attack? Exhibit Agression? This covers ALL breeds – how sweet is that?
Training: Train your animal control officers on how to identify “dangerous dogs”. There is a course offered in Topeka which is not overly costly – but provides you with trained professionals.
Code/Ordnance: Get it to court sooner. Using the citation issued by the now trained animal control officer – write your local law to mandatorily capture and lock up the dog PENDING trial. Fines: Up the fines: MAKE THEM TEN TIMES, or MORE TIMES HIGHER. Progressively higher fines which are costly (how much is a child’s life worth?). 2 strike law? Up to the community. One strike and put the dog down.
ENFORCEMENT: Be willing to double or triple your animal control staff and provide vehicles. Wichita is a big city. How many patrolling the streets do you want? How many to be available to RESPOND quickly to a dangerous dog call? (again how much is your kids life worth)
License: How many dogs can one person handle on their property? Limit number of animals.
Spayed/Neutered: Animals which are “fixed” are over 60% LESS LIKELY to be agressive. Make these license’s cheap.. Dogs which are not – pay a HIGH license fee.
Proof of Insurance. Reasonable yes? You do not get a license if you cannot PROVE insurance. (This will cost Pit owners big bucks)
ENFORCEMENT is key. We already have some laws. Tighten them up, look at cities with successful programs and revise the local ordnance. But no law is effective if not enforced. Pay for more patrol officers/equipment/training.
Finally: None of this will stop pit bull attacks in Wichita. It may slow or prevent some – but none of the above applies to irresponsible dog owners, drug dealers, or seedy characters. They will not comply and their dogs are usually the ones which will bite.
Unfortunately, all the above loops will hurt your responsible dog owners.
See Lawrence’s program.
WE, a family dog you shouldn’t have to worry about it mauling your child. Most won’t, and you cannot watch a child 24-7 even indoors. Geez you’ve got to sleep sometime. If you advocate keeping animals away from children, then you’re also advocating not socializing the animal. These attacks can happen in a split second, often it can happen before you get your butt up off the chair.
As for your post about the bans making no difference, you’re wrong. The attack numbers are WAY down in cities where the bans have taken place.
The same typical arguing about semantics and straw men from the usual suspects in this thread. The number and severity of attacks by pit bulls makes a ban a common sense move to protect the public. Unless the pit supporters have some magical powers to ensure that every pit bull will be trained, socialized and properly confined, the risk of even one more death or maiming is too great.
As far as the questions of which pit type breeds to ban, ban them all. Attempting to draw a distinction between an American Pit Bull Terrier, an American Staffordshire Terrier and a Staffordshire Bull Terrier is ridiculous, they are for all intents and purposes the same dog.
In regard to the strawmen of banning ladders and swimming pools, yes I would support a ban on any brand or type of swimming pool or ladder that has escaped from a garage or backyard and attacked someone. I would also ban any swimming pool that attacks a child while it is playing nearby in the backyard.
When you are reduced to comparing inanimate objects to live potentially dangerous animals, you have already lost the argument.
by the way, my dog was fixed.
“I would support a ban on any brand or type of swimming pool or ladder that has escaped from a garage or backyard and attacked someone. I would also ban any swimming pool that attacks a child while it is playing nearby in the backyard. ”
I seriously laughed out loud at that comment.
You know, I think I want a nuke in my backyard. I think that I also want to store hundreds of explosives back there too…oh and guns…left out with no locks or anything. Big ones. Kids can come play with them.
And anyone who tells me I can’t just are communists who don’t believe in freedom. (eyeroll).
With one third of maulings being done by pit bulls, there is a problem. You don’t see Great Danes very often mauling people.
So to compare the two breeds OR EVEN a chihuahua to this kind of bite is ABSURD.
Dog attacks death and maimings:
1982-2006 US and Canada:
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf
You pick the breeds to ban. But better, pick the breeds for animal control to EVALUATE for aggressive behavior before granting a license.
PM: There are exceptions to every rule, and one death by a dog is too many. A ban will never stop that from happening.
“Typical liberal knee-jerk reaction to everything.
One tragic event is enough to throw logic and common sense out the window.”
I think there has been more than “one tragic event”, Nathan
I can’t remember that last time I heard about a anyone getting mauled by a golden retriever.My brother was attacked by a pit bull when he was delivering pizzas, had to go through all the rabies shots, the owner (who was foreign) set the dog free because he was scared and they were never able to find the dog.Another friend of mine was attacked by a pit bull when she was jogging and nearly lost her arm…her scars, both physically and emotionally, are pretty bad.
As usual, Nathan resorts to his argument of extremes: If you ban guns and pit bulls, then you should ban swimming pools, cars, etc.
Whatever…
I’d be interested in knowing about communities that have banned these types of dogs..have they had any incidents since their ban was implemented?
Nice “pit bull story” — Hmmm wouldnt that be one of those “anecdotal” type stories that Nathan doesnt like to see when discussing other matters?
And I see… Pit Bulls dont kill people… bad owners of Pit Bulls kill people…
Same old Same old… Geez
I used to have a neighor with the meanest little Chihuahua that you ever did see. It’d come up on my porch, and snarl and snap at me and my kids, but never bit us. I called him football (no I never punted him but I’d have liked to). I’d tell the dog “bite my kid and you’ll be airborne”. But that was the extent of how scared I was of this mongrel. NOT ONE BIT. Had this been a pit bull, you bet i’d have an issue.
My brother was attacked by a pit bull when he was delivering pizzas, had to go through all the rabies shots, the owner (who was foreign) set the dog free because he was scared and they were never able to find the dog. Mary
So how do you KNOW for certain it was a Pit Bull? Hmmm?
Did you pick out the pit bull successfully at the link provided:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Findthebull/findpitbull_v3.html
It should be a crime to cast blame without knowing for sure. Like the death penalty without the facts.
Additionally, your foreign owner is likely to not obey a ban anyway.
Had this been a pit bull, you bet i’d have an issue.
Posted by: political_mom | November 28, 2007 at 09:51 AM
You feel this way about certain breeds of people too?
Dog…my brother who was attacked told me it was a pit bull, that’s how I know it was a pit bull. I think he got a pretty good look at it while it was chewing on his leg.So are you saying that pit bulls shouldn’t be banned because foreigners will just keep them anyway? That’s a pretty stupid argument.
Well Chas, here is from the mommy government whom you trust and wand to protect you. They do NOT advocate breed specific legislation. Centers for Disease Control and “Prevention”:
Man and woman’s best friend bites more than 4.7 million people a year, and key experts believe that public education can help prevent these bites. The third full week of May is National Dog Bite Prevention Week, and the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), the United States Postal Service, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are each working to educate Americans about dog bite prevention.
Each year, 800,000 Americans seek medical attention for dog bites; half of these are children. Of those injured, 386,000 require treatment in an emergency department and about a dozen die. The rate of dog bite-related injuries is highest for children ages 5 to 9 years, and the rate decreases as children age. Almost two thirds of injuries among children ages four years and younger are to the head or neck region. Injury rates in children are significantly higher for boys than for girls. (See CDC MMWR article.)
CDC is committed to reducing this public health problem by working with state health departments to establish dog bite prevention programs and by tracking and reporting trends on U.S. dog bite injuries. Dog bites are a largely preventable public health problem, and adults and children can learn to reduce their chances of being bitten.
A CDC study on fatal dog bites lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years (Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998). It does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic. Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites. There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill.
Many practical alternatives to breed-specific policies exist and hold promise for preventing dog bites. For prevention ideas and model policies for control of dangerous dogs, please see the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Task Force on Canine Aggression and Human-Canine Interactions: A community approach to dog bite prevention.*
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/biteprevention.htm
Amway, did you even read your own stats? Pit Bulls (and the list was incomplete even by the author’s own standards), were 1100, the next in line were Rotts at 440. That’s a STUNNING difference and supports my position. Also, at the bottom, it explained why some less likely breeds were involved, often in packs of many dogs, or accident (knocked down someone who bumped his head should NOT be even considered for this list) or rabid.
Dog lover, your arguments aren’t even legit. You’re actually hurting your cause, kindof like Nathan with his swimming pool retort.
Interesting thread, reason and facts on one side. Emotion and hysteria on the other side.
The reason that we have a ‘pit bull’ problem in this town is ineffective enforcement of the laws currently on the books.
There are not enough enforcement officers in animal welfare. Making dumber laws will not change that fact.
We should pass a tough law that defines a ‘dangerous dog’, a definition that effectively covers all of the problem pit bulls plus all the other dogs that are dangerous. Then we should allocate the funds required to effectively enforce that law.
The breed specific law that I lobbied to defeat (sucessfully I might add) was stupid on many levels.
The main fault that I had with it was that they used the AKC standards for the American Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier to define ‘pit bull’.
None of the breeds they were legislating against were ‘pit bulls’ and none of them have ever been a problem in Wichita.
When you legislate against ‘pit bulls’ as a breed the law becomes stupid in a hurry when you try to come up with a legal definition of ‘pit bull’. It is not a recognized breed by AKC.
So if you write a law against ‘pit bulls’ using the AKC breed standard all the AmStaff people have to do is add a disclaimer to their breed standard that states that in no way is the AmStaff (a noble breed) to be considered a ‘pitbull’ and you now have no standing in court.
The changes to the breed specific law the WKC and the AKC lobbied for made the legislation tougher and more effective.
What is wrong with that?
Dog…my brother who was attacked told me it was a pit bull, that’s how I know it was a pit bull.Posted by: Mary Caruso
ahuh, Mary, did you correctly pick out the pit bull at the link provided?
What we see from many CONtributors to this forum is the truth about libertarianism gone mad.
First, there’s a completely naive belief in what they like to call the “free market,” which as anyone with half a day’s time spent on Wall Street will tell you is about as “free” as a crooked roulette table in Vegas (is there any other kind?). Markets are simply objects to be manipulated: learn the rules of the game, understand the symbols that produce fear or confidence, and manipulate them.
Today’s libertarian poster child is a 31-year government employee, Ron Paul, whose run for the highest government position in the land amounts to spouting libertarian boilerplate such as, “the fundamental notion that a smaller government allows individuals the freedom to pursue happiness as they see fit.”
Unfortunately for all of us who aren’t in the military industrial complex, a smaller government usually means going after the social benefits that we enjoy in this country (and that other countries enjoy to a much greater extent), from the big bugaboo of welfare to the several other programs that fund libraries, public schools, national parks, fire departments, air traffic control, roads, sewers, water supplies, etc.
For libertarians, personal choice is all there is: you choose to be a drug addict, you choose to be a welfare bum, you choose to be homeless; conversely, you choose to be a CEO, you choose to be a K Street lawyer, you choose to be a middle-manager. Fundamentally, libertarians do not believe in society — we’re all atomized individuals running around on our own and we bump into one another, but that’s not really important — my only interaction with you is an economic interaction (unlike Marxists, who tend to believe that economic relations form the basis of social relations, libertarians like to believe that economic relations signify nothing more than a matter of choice). Essentially, it’s everyone for him or her self (the most absurd manifestation of this tendency can be found in Ayn Rand’s Objectivism, which her devotees liken to a philosophy).
Theirs is a a libertarian fantasyland in which the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and there are no consequences. We’re all equal of course, so long as you don’t mind the fact that I inherited Daddy’s factory and stocks and you inherited a crack habit…personal choice, don’t you know.
Hugo’s Les Miserables is a comedy compared to the selfish, smug, and utterly unrealistic version of social relations held by your typical libertarian.
Why would anyone put the right of owning a dog over the safty of other people?I think it’s safe to assume that anyone who would own a pit bull in the first place is probably not the most responsible person. Irresponsible owners and aggressive dogs are not a good mix…and you’ll find that more often than not when it comes to this particular breed.
“Had this been a pit bull, you bet i’d have an issue.
Posted by: political_mom | November 28, 2007 at 09:51 AM
You feel this way about certain breeds of people too?”
Dog lover, you need to get your prioritys staight if you’re putting dogs on the same level as people.
“ahuh, Mary, did you correctly pick out the pit bull at the link provided?”Posted by: Dog Lover | November 28, 2007 at 10:03 AM
I’m sure my brother could..moron.
Amway, did you even read your own stats?
Yes PM, I am a fair and honest poster who looks and considers all sides and information before forming my opinion. That is why I posted the information for YOU to review and evaluate.
Now, using your same logic and rationale – did you read what the CDC, our own government, says about assigning statistics/numbers to “specific breeds”?
Did you process this information the same way you digested my first post? Be honest.
I was and I don’t think I was in attack mode (exhibit aggressive behavior).
Dog lover…splitting hairs doesn’t make for a valid argument. What difference does it make what sort of Pit Bull attacked my brother or my friend?
If someone gets shot and killed with a gun,would you make an issue of what kind of gun they were killed with? Would it make the fact that they’re dead any less valid?
“I think it’s safe to assume that anyone who would own a pit bull in the first place is probably not the most responsible person.”
HEY not true! When I went to the shelter, I didn’t go LOOKING for a pit bull, but it was the only pup there. And it was the right age (so I thought) where it could be trained correctly. We just fell in love with it then. We figured we’d be good to it and give it a proper home.
I’m sure my brother could..moron.
Posted by: Mary Caruso
Willing to bet a dogs’ life on that? Why don’t you send the link to your brother and see if HE picks out the Pit.
I didn’t pick out the right dog – even after researching Pit Bulls before taking the test.
Who is being honest and who is being emotional here.
What the hell does the “type” of pit bull have to do with anything? Why should I be concerned about the rights of someone to own an agressive breed of dog? Are you going to argue that next my right to vote or right to free speech is going to be taken away?You guys are ridiculous!
I did’nt feel that I attacked you in that post Amway. And I can see why the CDC wouldn’t take a position on the issue of breed. It really isn’t their issue…it’d be kindof like them taking an issue with what kind of toilet paper you should buy, unless it had been tainted with a disease, like rabies which is why the CDC ever got involved with the dog issue in the first place. Now if one were more likely to carry communicable disease, but that isn’t likely.
Mary,
Where is the disconnect here?
On one side, you have people like my father and I who are arguing for reasonable “dangerous dog” legislation which will target the problem dogs and not just some very poorly defined dog like a Pit Bull.
Why is it that you and others must insist on a “pit bull” ban?
Why is my fathers posisition on this so unreasonable that you can’t agree?
Yes, PMom…THEN what happened?
What we see from many CONtributors to this forum is the truth about libertarianism gone mad.: MonkeyHawk
Wow Monkey! You get all that out of Pit Bulls?
I think the pit bull lovers are the ones being emotional. But Hank pointed out a good point about the definition of the breed. Interestingly, no other cities seem to have problems defining the breed. Sometimes in mixes, yes, but that can be defined as well.
Political Mom,
For every pit bull that attacks someone there are at least a 100 more who never hurt a soul.
Calling them all loaded weapons about to go off is indeed a knee jerk emotional play.
Nathan,
Did you see my post on Lawrence and Leavenworth? Without getting into detail, I participated in a very direct sort of way in the formulation of a “dangerous dog ordnance” in those cities.
Why can’t the people calling for a ban at least CONSIDER what has worked in other Kansas Communities?
What is wrong with that???
I guess from experience..I see pit bulls all the time in the poorer parts of the city…and I’ve known people who actually fight them. I don’t think that resposible dog owners purposely own dangerous dogs. The ban on pit bulls is for those who would own a dog simply because it’s mean. Anyone else doesn’t need the legislation in the first place. They could simply get a dog that wasn’t banned if they want a family pet.I’m really not concerned about the rights of pit bulls or any other breed that’s breed to be aggressive.
I am not sure American way.
That is why I call it a knee jerk emotional reaction.
I have yet to see anyone engage my father in a discussion on this.
My father is a member of the AKC club here and was instrumental in defeating the legislation before.
He can intelligently, logically, and rationally discuss the subject beyond simply saying:
UGH, All Pit bulls bad, must ban UGH
As a matter of fact, “American Way” –
I do.
You and “Nathan” and “Max” and others of your ilk demonstrate the utter irresponsibility of the libertarian mindset just about every subject you comment on.
“For every pit bull that attacks someone there are at least a 100 more who never hurt a soul.”
How many incidents have there been, Nathan? Howe many children (and adults) have been attacked and seriously injured? My friend almost lost her arm. One time is too many. One time is enough not to allow the breed the “benefit of the doubt.”
Mary,
Any comment on what my father is saying beyond:
Pit bull bad, must ban all, I don’t care…
Mary,
Let me cookie cut your logic…
How many incidents have there been, Nathan? Howe many children (and adults) have drowned in swimming pools. My friend almost drowned in one. One time is too many. One time is enough not to allow people swimming in a swimming pool the “benefit of the doubt.”
I don’t think Hank and I are too far apart on what we think about dog legislation.
I went so far as to include “large” dogs of all breeds to be included in a public safety ordinance.
A large animal must be controlled, trained, housed and the owner must be held in compliance with local regulations to include liability insurance.
A large animal such as a dog needs to be regulated. There should be an expense to the owner of a large dog who wants to keep one in a municipality.
Why Kansas?
Is there some outbreak of “large dog” violence that warrants such an intrusive government interference in owning one?
Just like I expected, Nathan…the argument of extremes. Let me ask you this, Nathan: Why would you own a dog who has been bred to be aggressive?
My father is a member of the AKC club here and was instrumental in defeating the legislation before.
We had a member of I think the AKC speak in the commission chambers. This was a lady with something like forty years experience with dogs – and she was a professional judge in some dog event (I’m not real familiar).
But she testified that even with all her years of working with dogs, training dogs, and judging dog shows – she was not sure which dog is a pit bull. Very professional and believeable lady.Senior citizen with years of experience. She looks the audience in the eye when she talked.
It got very quiet in the chambers when she sat down. Calm again.
But imagine what the emotional group is asking of our law enforcement officers: identify and PICK UP THE PIT BULLS.
Again, years of experience.
That is a loaded question Mary.
“JM Walker,
Why are you so heartless to all those who have lost someone to a swimming pool?
We should ban them all.”pOSTED BY NATHAN.
Nathan, it doesn’t get much more ridiculous than that. swimming pools are neutral: they can’t think, attack, load guns . . . they just sit there.
Guns don’t shoot people, people do.
Fighting dogs, if not trained, or are mistreated, will attack, and kill as they have done numurous times in the past.
Use real world, revelant examples please.
“Is there some outbreak of “large dog” violence that warrants such an intrusive government interference in owning one?”
Yes, pit bulls in particular, Nathan.
Mary,
It is not an argument of extremes, it is an argument pointing out the extreme lack of reasoning in your argument by pointing out the absurdity of your logic by simply using it in a different context.
O, and Nathan, labeling those who wish for laws limiting fighting dog breeds and liberal is just plain stupid. No one wants their child attacked by a fighting dog breed . . . NO ONE! Unless, of course, you want to label any that do as conservative? Is that what you’re trying to say?
In my rounds, I see so of these dogs on short chains, with little or no shelter, whose owners obviously own them just because they are known to be aggressive dogs. It’s an ego trip for the owner, a way to feel powerful and mean by having a dog that people fear. They are also fought on a routine basis. It’s pathetic…we have to start somewhere to stop not only the animal abuse, but the tragic results of animal abuse.
Gotta go, work calls.
A large animal must be controlled, trained, housed and the owner must be held in compliance with local regulations.
Why just a large dog? Define “large”. All dogs owners should be held accountable! Did you bother looking at my links?
The problem is not a dogs weight in pounds or grams – the problem is aggressive dogs.
If you adopt an aggressive dog ordnance you will get what you are after AND MORE. This covers all breeds! (you didn’t read my earlier response to you)
ALL BREEDS can be aggressive. So formulate your ordnance to cover ALL breeds.
That’s even better for the community. Take the breed out, and you will have a better ordnance.
But that’s still just a piece of paper. Put your money where your mouth is: Increase the city budget/Police/Animal Control to cover ENFORCEMENT and resources.
You’re the only one here who is illogical, Nathan.I really fear for your child should you ever become a parent.
Gotta go.
I’m not defending this breed, I’m defending responisble people who own this breed. I own a female pitbull, if anybody would like to meet it, take it for a walk, or play fetch with it, or watch it play wrestle with my other dogs (golden retriver, chocolate lab, and german shepard), in my backyard, or see it take a nap with the kittens, let me know. Its well socialized.
This is knee jerk reactions, a tradgedy happens, and the liberals swarm to take freedoms away in the name of saftey. Some kid dies in a motorcycle crash and he wasn’t wearing a helmet, then the mother scrambles to get a mandatory helmut law. Maybe the kid shouldn’t have been driving 70 in a 40. There are tons of laws like this, that only punish the responsible people, does anybody honestly think that an iresponisble pit bull owner is going to comply by a new law or ban? When they enact those bans, they go after the pitbulls that are vaccinated and registred. Guess what, people who are abusive, or negletful to their dogs do not get them vaccinated or registred. It happend in Denver, the City came to peoples houses with a list of pitbull names collected from vet clinics, and forcibly took their dogs out of their houses to put them down. Well guess what, the neglected, and agressive pitbulls wern’t on that list, because the irresponsible owners don’t take them to the vet to begin with, and guess what, attacks from pitbulls in Denver barly decreased at all. In fact, the ban is still inacted, and theres been two recent attacks. Wow, look how good that knee jerk law worked.
Mary,
Talk to my father. Respond to his comments.
Instead you simply post the same argument over and over again…
Pit bulls bad, ban them all.
JM Walker,
Not all Pit bulls are agressive and fought with. They are kind loving dogs with owners who love them.
So your argument labeling the entire breed of pit bull as an aggressive fighting dog is just as absurd.
Which is why I say:
Swimming pools are bad, ban them all.
I really fear for your child should you ever become a parent.Posted by: Mary Caruso
Hey Nathan!
For that special woman in your life. You want children, get her the gift that will make her happy to make your baby:
http://womenandguns.com/
(Max: You might find something for your collection too!)
Why Kansas?
Is there some outbreak of “large dog” violence that warrants such an intrusive government interference in owning one?
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 10:28 AM
It’s a matter of physics and the potentially of trauma and risk assessment Nathan.
A five pound dog is not going to be much of a threat to most humans.
If one looks at a risk assessment analysis of anything hazardous one has to consider the factors that would put humans at risk.
For dogs, size is one factor that would put humans at risk.
Defending oneself against a small dog versus a large dog has different consequences.
The same evaluation can be used why we don’t keep poisonous snakes in elementary schools. :)
The risk assessment for the snake would include its toxic bite.
The risk assessment for a dog would include the potentiality to cause harm based on biting pressure, the size of the dog compared to the human being attacked and the knowledge knowing that a two inch canine tooth can cause more damage than a 1/4 inch canine tooth. :)
In evaluating public safety Nathan, one has to throw risk assessment in the batch. Otherwise, we are just spitting in the wind.
Kansas,The statistics indicate otherwise. It’s not just physics.
All breeds and sizes of dogs bite. All can and have killed.
Yes, PMom…THEN what happened?
Posted by: Mary Caruso | November 28, 2007 at 10:15 AM
Nothing, we did like we would any other dog, the girl who played with it all the time was brought over by her dad, the dog did it right in front of him. He didnt’ think the dog would have bit her either.
I help my parents with rescue dogs, I routinely deal with dogs who have poor social skills.
I love and care for dogs and promote responsible dog ownership.
I am a Marine Corps marksmanship instructor. I have tought over a thousand Marines in Marksmanship and firearms safety.
I have also taught Hunters Safety and children how to shoot as well.
I am probably one of the most responsible and safe dog owner and gun owner any of you will ever know or talk to.
Yet somehow Mary fears for my child?
Yet another example of the complete control of someones emotions over their ability to reason and logically think about something.
Which is why I say:
Swimming pools are bad, ban them all.
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 10:58 AM
You just answered your own question about risk assessment Nathan.
An unguarded, unsupervised pool of water puts humans at more risk than a swimming pool that is supervised with responsible people.
Also, the users of the pool should be trained with proper safety swimming techniques and know such things as running on slick concrete around the pool can cause injury. Or that diving into the shallow end of the pool head first is not a good idea.
There are rules, regulations and safety reasons for a lot things Nathan.
Setting aside risk assessment for any potential danger is in my opinion, reckless.
Hey political_mom,
I really don’t have a dog in this fight. (literally!) I don’t love pit bulls. I generally don’t hang around the same type of people that own pit bulls.
If you make breed specific legislation that is stupid, historically the solution is to make it even dumber.
You’re wrong. Other cities do have problems defining ‘pit bulls’. Their legislation is generally poorly written and inefective.
Here’s a good website to go to if you are truly passionate about this subject and would like to be better informed:
http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/
Kansas,The statistics indicate otherwise. It’s not just physics.
All breeds and sizes of dogs bite. All can and have killed.
Posted by: American Way | November 28, 2007 at 11:02 AM
American Way, go read up on risk assessment and you might get an idea where I’m coming from.
A small, five pound dog will not chart out to be at the same hazard level as a one hundred and ten pound Mastiff.
Risk assessment is where it’s at bro, one cannot make decisions about Public Safety or Safety in general without it. :)
ATTS Breed Statisticsas of December 2006
Page 1: Afghan Hound – Belgian MalinoisBreed Name Tested Passed Failed Percent
AFGHAN HOUND 161 116 45 72.0%
AIREDALE TERRIER 98 75 23 76.5%
AKBASH DOG 14 12 2 85.7%
AKITA 447 329 118 73.6%
ALAPAHA BLUE BLOOD BULLDOG 6 4 2 66.7%
ALASKAN MALAMUTE 187 158 29 84.5%
AMERICAN BULLDOG 136 113 23 83.1%
AMERICAN ESKIMO 78 65 13 83.3%
AMERICAN FOXHOUND 2 2 0 100.0%
AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER 542 456 86 84.1%
AMERICAN STAFFORDSHIRE TERRIER 521 437 84 83.9%
AMERICAN TUNNEL TERRIER 2 2 0 100.0%
AMERICAN WATER SPANIEL 6 5 1 83.3%
ANATOLIAN SHEPHERD DOG 26 21 5 80.8%
AUSTRALIAN CATTLE DOG 162 127 35 78.4%
AUSTRALIAN KELPIE 6 5 1 83.3%
AUSTRALIAN SHEPHERD 571 461 110 80.7%
AUSTRALIAN TERRIER 16 13 3 81.3%
AZAWAKH 1 1 0 100.0%
BASENJI 159 106 53 66.7%
BASSET HOUND 33 28 5 84.8%
BEAGLE 59 47 12 79.7%
BEARDED COLLIE 45 24 21 53.3%
BEAUCERON 11 8 3 72.7%
BEDLINGTON TERRIER 19 18 1 94.7%
BELGIAN LAEKENOIS 4 4 0 100.0%
BELGIAN MALINOIS 214 194 20 90.7%
First Previous Next Last
Many other dogs have worse test statistics than the “Pitbull” which is a generalized name for 5 or 6 different breeds combined. Which breed of “Pitbull” is it that everyone wants to ban? They can’t answer because to them any dog that is short, stocky and has somewhat of any aggressive appearance must be a Pitbull. I only own Boxers but many stupid people have mistaked them as “Pitbulls”. Funny that the dog in the article is listed as a Pitbull-Boxer mix. I guess we just don’t know what kind of a dog were talking about do we?
Kansas,
I probably know more about Risk Assessment than you do.
Implementing overbearing, unneeded, and intrusive government controls on “large dog” ownership for a problem that is non existent is not Risk Assessment.
Kansas,
I probably know more about Risk Assessment than you do.
Implementing overbearing, unneeded, and intrusive government controls on “large dog” ownership for a problem that is non existent is not Risk Assessment.
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 11:10 AM
Maybe Nathan, but I wouldn’t be so sure about that. :)
My degrees may state otherwise as well as my national certification in said assessments. heh
But, let’s not go there, unless you want to talk about Risk Assessment in the open forum. Which I can address anything from USDA Risk Assessment to Industrial applications of risk assessment. I would be happen to talk shop about what I know. :)
Using the same logic you used here, shouldn’t we take away your dangerous guns too?
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 07:25 AM
Nathan, that’s patently stupid. My guns aren’t going to run out and maul or kill someone. The only way they’ll kill anybody is if I’m on the trigger.
I have experience with Pits, and I know they’re a dangerous breed. They’re a disaster waiting to happen.
Which I can address anything from USDA Risk Assessment to Industrial applications of risk assessment. I would be happen to talk shop about what I know. :)
Posted by: Kansas
Doesn’t mean squat. A poodle can and have killed humans. The potential risk is there. Period.
Northern Neighbor, on here you mentioned that Golden retrievers sometimes attack, but they are not aggresive by nature.
Now you should know that pit bull fighting dogs were actually selectivly bred to show no human agression. Most of the thugs that fight these dogs have to stay in the ring when the dogs are fighting, so human agression has actually been bred out of the pitbull. Pitbulls only show same sex agression towards other dogs. Now the pitbulls that attack people are usually not fighting pitbulls, they are pitbulls that are owned by thuggish trash that want a tough looking dog, and the attacks on people usually happen because of negligence or abuse from the owner. I absoutly despise people who fight dogs, but pitbulls were bred to be loyal, friendly and complying to people, they were only bred to be aggresive towards other dogs.
And, wow, I own 4 dogs, all different breeds, and my pitbull gets along handsomely with all my other dogs.
Doesn’t mean squat. A poodle can and have killed humans. The potential risk is there. Period.
Posted by: American Way | November 28, 2007 at 11:19 AM
mmmmkay,
I’ll await your mortality report caused by poodles then. :D
Hank off subject but relevant. My son has a yellow lab, registered with papers, house trained just over a year old. Due to circumstances he has to find a good home for him. Do you know of any groups like yours for bearded collies for labs? Any suggestions on who to contact about this. He wants to find him a good home.
It’s not so much whether a Pit is more or less likely to attack; it’s what happens once a Pit is triggered. They’re almost impossible to pull off of their victim. I have the scars to back that up.
We have many, many awful causes for death and injury in this country. We need local regulations NOW to stop all these preventable deaths and injuries!
http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_odds.htm
(Vic,
Taxidermists could make money stuffing cats heads for hunters to hang over their mantel?)
“So your argument labeling the entire breed of pit bull as an aggressive fighting dog is just as absurd.”Posted by Nathan.
Reread my last post. I stated fighting dog breeds. That includes any dog breed that was bred for fighting. If that includes all pit bulls, which were bred for fighting, then so be it.
Your analogy using swimming pools is really, really dumb. I have yet to have a swimming pool jump up and attack me. I have been attacked by a loving, well cared for fighting breed dog.
Let me put it another way: Anyone owning a dog prone to attack should have the dog trained, carry insurance on the dog in the amount equal to paying for any attack on another person, and, if the dog attacks anybody, shoot the damn thing on the spot. Then sue the owners of the dog.
The damage fighting dogs do to a human does not even come close to making them a family pet. They should, all of them, be banned. Anything else amounts to terrorism on the attacked person. Ask them if you don’t believe me.
It has nothing to do with politics, religion, ethics, etc.. It does have everything to do with public safety.
Hell, using your analogies, lions, tigers and bears should be made family pets because not all of them will attack, if trained. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
using your analogies, lions, tigers and bears should be made family pets Walker
No, using your analogy, Sahara Lions, White Tigers, and Grizzly Bears should be controlled.
“The damage fighting dogs do to a human” Walker
Ohh Boy. Now we are moving logic to “fighting” dogs. Better to illustrate NON breed specific, wouldn’tcha think?
I love America, at least speech has not been banned!
I love America, at least speech has not been banned!
Posted by: American Way | November 28, 2007 at 11:46 AM
Dixie Chicks Syndrome
Dixie Chicks Syndrome
Posted by: ghotiphaze
Oh but I still enjoy the Wide Open Spaces of Kansas where at least I FEEL I’m free.
Hey ksgrm,
‘Rehome’ is a little different than ‘rescue’. Generally a rehome is fun. A lot of the dogs I rescue need work before I can find them a home.
Here’s a good place to start for labs:
http://thelabradorclub.com/rescue/searchrescue.php
I have more info at home, let me know if you need some help,
hank@pixius.net
Hank
JM Walker,
So you don’t want to just ban Pit Bulls, you want to ban all “fighting dog” breeds.
Could you explain what you classify as a fighting dog breed?
Anyone who sees a pit bull running lose, outside a fence, without a leash, should have the right to shoot the pit bull, or otherwise put it down.
I have owned two Old English Mastiffs.
The dogs are huge, one of the largest breeds, but kids could sit on them or step on their tails without risk of injury.
Kids rode them like horses all the time.
Mastiffs were raised to break up fights between sheep dogs. They were also used in combat, by the ancient Brits and Romans.
Even so, the breed is not dangerous in nature. Mastiffs are protective. Grab a Mastiffs owner and the dog will break the two of you apart. But the dog is not viscious.
I am a dog lover.
Pits are dangerous.
Neighbors of people who own pit bulls should have the right to shoot the pit bull, if it gets loose, with no legal recourse by the owner and no risk of any firearms violation for firing a gun in the city.
I think your suggestion would cure the problem. People shouldn’t have to keep their kids in a fenced yard, just because the neighbors won’t keep their mean dogs in the fence.
“mean dogs”
What exactly is a “mean dog” now?
We have everything from banning a “pit bull” which no one has defined yet, to “large dogs”, to “fighting dogs, to “mean dogs”
Everyone is talking about this “potential” risk for them attacking someone…
Well, lets just ban all dogs then.
Any dog has a potential to be violent or hurt someone.
“Hank off subject but relevant. My son has a yellow lab, registered with papers, house trained just over a year old. Due to circumstances he has to find a good home for him. Do you know of any groups like yours for bearded collies for labs? Any suggestions on who to contact about this. He wants to find him a good home.
Does he dig, or chew everything up?
Thanks Hank.
He does dig but doesn’t chew anymore. Did as a pup. Great disposition just loves to lick everyone in sight.
I have owned two Old English Mastiffs.The dogs are huge, one of the largest breeds, but kids could sit on them or step on their tails without risk of injury.
Kids rode them like horses all the time.
Mastiffs were raised to break up fights
Even so, the breed is not dangerous in nature. Mastiffs are protective. But the dog is not viscious.Posted by: Econ101
Econ, your gentle Mastiffs are documented killers. They have killed 4 people and maimed 9 others (that we know about).
Mastiffs should be banned – or shot on sight.
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf
Paul,
You’re a fool.
But I still love ya,
Could you explain what you classify as a fighting dog breed?
pOSTED BY nATHAN
http://www.bulldoginformation.com/fighting-dog-breeds.html
Econ, your gentle Mastiffs are documented killers. They have killed 4 people and maimed 9 others (that we know about).
Mastiffs should be banned – or shot on sight.
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf
Posted by: Perfectly illustrates the problem | November 28, 2007 at 01:01 PM
Actually there have been 16 Mastiff attacks!!
Ban the suckers. Petition the city.
LOL!
Did you even read that link JM Walker?
Some of the highlights:
“BTW, it may come as a surprise to many, but biting statistics in terms of frequency are breeds usually described as child-firendly, such as Labradors. Whether this is due to overreporting of the Labrador owners or to a lack of obedience training of dogs pertaining to a breed that has the reputation of being ‘harmless’ is not clear.”
“Indeed, these breeds *Fighting breeds* were bred for centuries precisely for thier fearfulness and courage and as a result may be considered as being less prone to exhibit aggressive behavior than other more stress-sensitive breeds.”
“Dog aggression is more a HUMAN behavior problem, than a canine behavior problem that could be ‘predicted’ just because of a dog’s breed”
LOL
Thanks for supporting my case, not yours.
Walker cites all the “ancient” fighting dog breeds.
But it’s a start. Ban them all – even if extinct!
Now, shall we get back to Kansas and ban the LARGE dogs (any dog over 5 pounds is heavy).
Will have to think about the “mean” dog category someone dreamt up. I’m thinking if the dog can look at you cross-eyed, it’s game for banishment!
Fighting dogs,and large dogs,mean dogs, and……
Do you like my hat?No I do NOT like that hat!
Good-byeGood-bye
Go Dogs Go!
And more from your link JM Walker:
“However, in a loving environment, providing a fair and consistent education, these dogs make the most adorable companions which provide great satisfaction to their owners.”
Some more from your link JM Walker:
“If the breeding, raising, living, and training conditions created and provided by the owner/breeder are in line with the requirements of the dog species in general, and the dog breed and individual dog in particular, one will rarely encounter problem behavior. And this it true for ALL dog breeds, not just for the dog breeds descending from ancient fighting dog breeds.”
Wow, too rich this is.
Still want to ban all the “fighting dogs” JM Walker?
If you describe a pitbull without mentioning that its a dog.
Tough, couragoues, loyal, stoic, unwavering, stubborn, and loving.
Don’t our soldiers fighting in our Wars for us fit the same description. I truly believe our soldiers are strikingly similar to the All American Pit Bull Terrier. The epitome of being top dog.
Oops, I forgot the word tenacious.
I never said that there were NO reports of a Mastiff attack.
Your own numbers support MY case, that the Mastiff breed, while one of the largest and strongest, is not the most aggressive.
16 mastiff attacks, while over 11,000 pit bull attacks?
I amend my previous idea.
I think people should be allowed to shoot any dog, running loose, outside of a fence and not on a leash.
I love dogs, but defense of humans is more important.
sorrytoo many zerosPit bull 1110 compared to mastiff 16 is still a wide spread.
Lets ban the War mascot Dog of World War I, and II. Instead lets replace our feared All American Pit Bull Terrier with a kindler, gentler, more liberal dog, the Cocker Spaniel. Yes, lets represent America with a little yappy spaniel with a worse temprement than a pitbull. Sounds like what America has turned into. Or maybe the long weiner dog that hunted badgers, lets have a goofy looking Dauschaund as our mascot dog for America.
Econ,
So 16 human beings being attacked by YOUR breed of dog is acceptable loss of life? I suppose the 4 deaths are acceptable as well as the 9 human beings who are maimed for life, by your gentle giants?
BTW, I do agree with you that you have a right to defend your life and family against any intruder onto your property. That would include MAN or DOG. Shoot first, ask questions later.
However, to just shoot a dog for “running at large” is not right. In fact. It is darn sick.
Dogs running at large. If you see one, you call the appropriate law enforcement agency to come get it. Animal Control will respond eventually.
Dogs do get loose. It happens. I hear that all the time.
But we owned our family dog 15 years and not once – not one single time, did she ever get loose. To say ALL DOGS GET LOOSE
(I’m thinking heaven), is like making an excuse for a wrongdoing.
Dog owners are STILL responsible and liable.
In our city, it seemed our dog catcher was responding to the same houses all the time for loose dogs.
We solved that. To get the dog out of the pound:
First Offense: $75.00Second Offense: $100.00Third Offense: $150.00Fourth Offense: Dog is declared dangerous and locked up pending it’s court date.
People started locking their doors and gates – and being more responsible.
Do dogs still get loose? Yep. But not as often and RARELY repeat offenders.
Still no excuse to just shoot a dog running by your property.
I’ve returned a few loose dogs to their owners. I’m also greatful that a cop picked up my chocolate lab when it escaped from the backyard 3 years ago, the officer returned the dog to my house.
Still no excuse to just shoot a dog running by your property.
Posted by: American Way
But if it’s a cat it’s probably worth a few points as the city has declared them varmint (carry disease and kill song birds).
Amway wasn’t it just YOU who were complaining on the other threadabout govt mandates? So you admit it was a good thing when the local govt cracked down on the dogowners.
I have never been challenged in my own yard by any other breed of dog than pit bull. It has happened on two occassions, one was a neighbor’s dog, the other a stray I’d never seen before. That dog would not let anyone out or our house, if you went to the back door, he’d be there if you went to the front door, he’d come right around. Tried to scare him off by shooting a 22 rifle into the ground next to him, didn’t phase the animal. He eventually left guess to terrorize someone else.
Hi Hot Momma!
I fought and worked AGAINST the government deciding to kill a particular BREED of dog.
(When you ban a breed, it means killing them. There is no place for them to go. The shelters are overrun/full. The neighboring cities/counties have their own problems and bans – so these dogs get put down. Genocide an entire breed of God’s animals)
The compromise was a reasonable solution which involved holding the irresponsible dog owners – responsible (the responsible dog owners were not affected).
So no, I do not see this as a contradiction of beliefs. The less government interference in my life (and yours) the better for all of us.
Less is too much, but always have to accept those compromises.
I used to hunt feral hogs in Texas with bay dogs and catch dogs. The catch dogs were generally pit bulls. I’ve never had a pit bull go off on me or my kids. I’ve bred pit bulls that are papered for hog catching. Their grand daddy was a show champion and that dog’s father was a hog and bear dog. The breeder who sold me the female that I based my breeding program on no longer has pit bulls because the sheriff’s son kept stealing them for dog fighting (in South Carolina) and that punk kid wouldn’t even go near her catahoula dogs. He knew the catahoulas would try to kill or bite him. He stole pit bulls that had never met him before because he knew that pit bulls weren’t people aggressive by nature.
That alone should tell you the pit bulls’ reliability. My dogs were excellent with children. They were always supervised and under control at all times. I never allowed my catch dogs loose. I had three pit bull pups stolen from me simply because the guard dog was in the house getting his nails trimmed. Guess who stole the pups and sold them for $500 each unpapered? An illegal immigrant kid who was only 12 years old! I caught up with him and gave him the hiding of his life. His family moved out in less than 15 mins when the cops were called. Never recovered the pups.
People who haven’t had pit bulls think the worst of them and those who have had them but not trained them and kept them outside unsocialized are the ones to blame. Simple enough.
He eventually left guess to terrorize someone else.
Posted by: The Phantom
You were justified, but you needed a bigger (louder) gun. Heck, a small fire-cracker would have been more effective if scaring the beast away was your goal.
Scratching my head: Why on earth not call the animal control? The dog must have been a nuisance to someone after you?
PS: Get a bigger house too. Can’t run from front to back as fast.
That was yrs. ago, do have a bigger house now, and fenced yard. I believe I did call the animal control, but they take forever to come out. Incidentally, If you ever see an urgent incident involving a dog, you need to call the police
If you see a loose pit bull call Animal control immediately. Ask your neighbors to call and keep calling.
When one was loose in my neighborhood, it took almost 3 hours for animal control to arrive. For those who don’t know, the dog was charging my son when the animal control van came up the street.
Other loose/lost dogs I always try to help. There is nothing sadder than a lost dog. But with a pit bull you’d be asking for trouble.
Hey legal eagles? beagles?
I’ve a question. I know a gal had a pit bull. For many reasons discussed here and others I won’t go into, she had to get rid of it.
She put the dog online and in LESS than half an hour, had a rescuer.
My question is this. I’m all for rescuing dogs. But if someone rescued or was otherwise responsible for a pit bull being in a home, would that good intentioned person be in legal peril if the dog attacked anyone?
I’m thinking city bred pitbulls, are more likely to be bred for their bad temperment than those in the country used for hunting.
Nathan, you asked what breeds are considered fighting breeds. I supplied the link.
Frankly, Nathan, I really don’t give a crap about loving homes for fighting breeds. What I do care about are the humans these dogs attack. That is the end all. Any dog can be dangerous, however fighting dogs were bred to be aggressive, and will be so in a given situation. Once they attack, they are very difficult to stop. Hurting them makes them fight harder: it’s what they do.
Give me one good reason why a family needs a fighting dog as a companion, other than they like the breed. There is no reason for fighting dogs to exist in a civilized society . . . none. If that hurts your feelings, go get your chap-card punched at the base.
The majority of fighting breed dogs kept by people are done so for their protective ability. You want protection, get a gun. A gun wont reach out and attack you, unless wielded by some idiot.
As I stated earlier, if you want a fighting breed dog, and it’s legal, you should have to train the dog, and get major insurance covering any injury or death caused by the dog. You are the owner, it’s your responsibility. Anything less is just plain moronic. And from the attacks by fighting breed dogs, there are a lot of morons out there.
Perhaps you should read the link you posted JM Walker.
It is rather informative and disspells many of the false impressions about “fighting dogs” you are trying to push.
I read the link, Nathan. My opinion still stands: fighting dog breeds need to be eliminated. They serve no purpose, were bred for fighting, and cause too many problems to be useful in any way. Kinda like republicans:-)
Well agreed to provisionally J M.
English bulldogs were once bred for bull baiting.
People have come up with some really sick ideas for entertainment.
In bull baiting, the dog would grab the nose of a bull and hang on.
What fun huh? Sometimes I think TV was a good idea.
English bulldogs were bred specifically for this….activity. Their physical appearance bred in remains. But more than a century ago, good folks worked with this breed toward bred in gentleness.
Now they are some of the most gentle dogs there are.
There may be a few good folks to do this with pit bulls. But their work would be hopeless given the current situation. They couldn’t make a dent in the population much less alter them.
This why at LEAST spaying and neutering of most of this breed would be helpful.
Dog lover…splitting hairs doesn’t make for a valid argument. What difference does it make what sort of Pit Bull attacked my brother or my friend?
Posted by: Mary Caruso
Sorry, just got back and posting.
Mary you missed the point. I asked you twice if you could identify (pick out) which dogs were the pit bulls in the link provided by someone else.
You never answered. But you said your brother said it was a pit bull. So I asked you – how do you know HE can identify a pit bull when even dog professionals have a problem making that determination. So I asked you to ask your brother to take the test too. See if he REALLY got attacked by a pit bull.
I’m not splitting hairs, I’m making my point. Most people do not and cannot pick out the pit bull in the sample population given at the link.
In your case, the dog “ran away” so we will never know.
Yet, you make a judgement call to ban pit bulls, and used your brothers case as rationale to support that judgement call.
“Sort” of pit bull makes all the diffence – in a legal document and the law. You want to ban a specific breed, you have to be specific.
Then, you have to find humans capable of making that same determination, make them a law enforcement official, and put them on patrol in the streets.
A very, very difficult task to do, “if” you insist on a breed specific ban.
Regards
My opinion still stands: fighting dog breeds need to be eliminated.
Posted by: J M Walker
Well Nathan, no need to get worked up on Walkers last post. The city council did NOT ban one breed – they will never listen to his cry to ban sixteen breeds (that’s the count I got at his weblink to fighting dogs).
We can argue with him until blue in the face, but he is firm (albeit all alone). It ain’t a gonna happen.
It cannot be enforced without hiring an army of dog catchers and trucks.
They cannot even pick out the pit bull in the line up -
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Findthebull/findpitbull_v3.html
and he wants them to pick out SIXTEEN Breeds. Council would be crazy to even listen.
Not even to mention mixed breeds!!!
Hey J M Walker,
Read my link now.
http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/
The simple truth of the matter is that we have a people problem. Not a dog problem.
The simple truth of the matter is that we have a people problem. Not a dog problem.
Posted by: Hank | November 28, 2007 at 03:29 PM
That’s why my suggestions have been geared towards people who want to keep large dogs in a municipal environment. :)
Why do dogs hafta scratch the ground after every poop?
Tracy,
I was hoping that you would bring the same type of thoughtful posting which you guys promote on your blog to this one.
If you see a stray pitbull, its best to call animal control. But if you cross its path, don’t run, or show fear. All animals have a prey instinct, and you might activate that prey instinct, if you act like prey, so in other words, don’t show weakness, or the dog might think you are weak prey that needs to weeded from nature. Remember, everything in nature, even us humans can detect weakness in other humans or animals. The only difference, is we have compassion, and the people that prey on other people are usually scam artists. Remember, a pitbull normally weighs under 60 pounds, they aren’t the biggest dogs, they are well muscled, and they have short muzzles giving them better leverage and grip when they bite, No their jaws do not lock, that is a myth. A healthy adult should be able to fend off a pitbull, unless your scared or paniking, remember its just a dog, its not a mutant creation. Now if the pitbull is charging you, you do not want to run, you want to get the pitbulls head under control then sit on it. If you have control of its head, its not going to tear you to pieces, now if you have the dog under control don’t slam its head into the pavement, that will kick in the dogs andrenaline then it might over power you, you want to hold the dog as still as possible and call it a nice little puppy they don’t have claws like a cat, they have nails. Now if its two pitbulls that are running wild and charging you in an aggresive way, your screwed, climb the nearest tree as high as you can, because some pitbulls have the ability to climb trees. This announcment isn’t meant to be taken too seriously, if you see an aggresive pitbull or any dog for the matter, run to the nearest house, shelter, or store, and call animal control. Remember, if you come across any aggressive dog don’t be scared, animals with an activated prey drive feed off fear, its not far fetched to say a dog can smell fear, they can certainly sense it. Now I’m not saying to be macho or bravado, just don’t give an aggresive dog another reason to attack you, and that reason would be to run scared for your life.
One of the most vicious dogs I ever ran across was a Lhasa Apso; small but very sharp teeth, resulting in quite a few stitches.I also have a friend who owns a Pit Bull, one of the most affectionate dogs I’ve been around. His teeth don’t worry me a bit, just his tongue (which is about as large and as soggy as Lake Erie)! I really hate to see the same kind of prejudice we use on each other extended to whole breeds of dogs.
Help me people!
“When one was loose in my neighborhood, it took almost 3 hours for animal control to arrive. For those who don’t know, the dog was charging my son when the animal control van came up the street.”
Posted by: J R | November 28, 2007 at 02:56 PM
Don’t think it’s a people problem? Help me here! Does any one else see the example of complete irresponsible stupididty in J Rs post?
Pit Bull loose in J R’s neighborhood. J R calls animal control. Almost three hours later, J R has allowed his son to be in a situation that he could be mauled by a pit bull (”. . . dog was charging my son when the animal control van came up the street.”)
So tell me J R, how old was your boy when you allowed him to start playing in the street?
Idiot.
Yea, J.R. left himself wide open on that one. Open chest J.R., wham.
Shouldn’t have to live your,or your children’s lives around, is it safe for them to go outside yet?
Tracy, I believe they do it after pissing too, to scatter their scent wider.
One of the most vicious dogs I ever ran across was a Lhasa Apso; small but very sharp teeth, resulting in quite a few stitches.I also have a friend who owns a Pit Bull, one of the most affectionate dogs I’ve been around. His teeth don’t worry me a bit, just his tongue (which is about as large and as soggy as Lake Erie)! I really hate to see the same kind of prejudice we use on each other extended to whole breeds of dogs.
Posted by: Jed | November 28, 2007 at 03:58 PM
Yes, that’s why security firms around the world use Lhasa Apso as security dogs.
:D
Outlander,
Pay attention to the question I asked you: Do you agree with Nathan’s threats of murder and property destruction? Yes or no? It’s pretty simply asked, even for you.
Try again.
. .. and tom’s just trying to be helpful
Well Scott, Tom,
You seem to be butting in to something that really isn’t your business. A threat that was not directed toward you.
You merely use it as an excuse to bash a Marine and a Christian.
Nathan is a fine young man and a good Christian. Loves his fellow man and tries real hard to live a Christian life.
That being said, every Christian is a constant work in progress. We’re still working on that “turn the other cheek” stuff.
Don’t mess with my family. Don’t mess with my dogs. Don’t mess with my horses. Don’t mess with my property. We’ll get a long real fine.
How many of those different dog breeds aren’t the result of crossing some kind of terrier with some kind of bulldog?
. .. and tom’s just trying to be helpful
Posted by: ken | November 28, 2007 at 05:07 PM
Bull
“Wasn’t there a case recently in Wichita where someone got arrested for discharging a fire arm in City Limits because they were trying to scare off some dogs”My wife got scared after the neighbor’s dogs got after my son & his grandson (they had to jump in the back of his truck) and wanted me to shoot them. I didn’t because it was after tha attack, and figured I’d get arrested for discharging a firearm in town.
“Wasn’t there a case recently in Wichita where someone got arrested for discharging a fire arm in City Limits because they were trying to scare off some dogs”My wife got scared after the neighbor’s dogs got after my son & our grandson (they had to jump in the back of his truck) and wanted me to shoot them. I didn’t because it was after tha attack, and figured I’d get arrested for discharging a firearm in town.
i never felt threatened
You confuse “wanted” with “ridiculed.”
All sorts of arm flailing going on now.
Let’s us stand back out of the way of the Liberal Windmill. It could go “plaid” any second now. :D
Kans,”Yes, that’s why security firms around the world use Lhasa Apso as security dogs.”
No, security firms want dogs that won’t attack their owners! Lhasas are the canine equivalent of meth heads.
Well it looks like a pack of wild dogs ran through the blog neighborhood after 4, and took bites at everyone here!
None of the were shot, apparently, and Scott doesn’t need to get his dander up over a post made hours before his grand entryway.
Come on guys! This was a really good thread until about 4. Lot’s of open discussion – different opinions:
and not one attack or insult.
So who let the dogs out?
Now go change your wet panties.
Posted by: XXX | November 28, 2007 at 08:17 PM
No that would be yours XXX.
My parts are in working order and in no need of pharmaceutical assistance. :)
That would be one Hank Price that opened fire at 4:10 with a nasty shot at me.
It would also be earlier with one econPual revealing that he is as usual a nut and Nathan over reacting to the fact.
AmWay I had to take time out to prepare a meal and share it with my husband. Things went a little downhill but appear to be normalizing. Thanks for the concern.
AmWay I forgot to mention that poor JR has once again been maligned and we all know how innocent he always is. Never has anything negative to say about anyone and always open to hearing others opinions and being tolerant of their differences.
“No where did I say I was going to shoot anyone or actually make a threat on their life.”
Econ101,
If you ever shot any of my dogs, you would disappear.
Your car would disappear.
No one would ever find you or know what happened to you.
Sorry, but owning dogs and taking care of them has led to dogs getting loose on several occasions.
I feel sorry for the person who decides they are going to shoot any of my dogs simply because they were running loose.
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 01:32 PM
Sounds like a death threat to me !!!
ken always starting crap and running away.
I wonder if a visitor should post one of ken’s favorite websites here?
“No where did I say I was going to shoot anyone or actually make a threat on their life.”
Econ101,
If you ever shot any of my dogs, you would disappear.
Your car would disappear.
No one would ever find you or know what happened to you.
Sorry, but owning dogs and taking care of them has led to dogs getting loose on several occasions.
I feel sorry for the person who decides they are going to shoot any of my dogs simply because they were running loose.
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 01:32 PM
Sounds like a death threat to me !!!
Normal? O.K….
Anyway, just curious if anyone went to the link with the test andhonestly could pick out the pit bull?
I couldn’t. Hence, I don’t know what I’d be banning. Better to work toward a solution of dealing with agressive dogs.
Lot’s of professionals and experience out there on that one.Until the city adopts this approach, the pit bull issue will boil again, next time a look-a-like attacks again.
Kansas or someone said early today there is no excuse for inaction. I’d agree with that.
The 1 yr old was alone with the dog on the couch, while his mother was cooking in the kitchen! The dog belonged to the mother’s-boyfriend’s-ex-girlfriend and was just visiting! They didn’t even know the dog, and the dog didn’t know them! The owner of the dog was not present during the attack, and neither was the “owner” of the kid. These are factors in a lot if not most dog attacks. This is clearly human error, and if it would have been any other breed it would have been the same story, except it wouldn’t have been in the news!And another thing……..was there not just as much BOXER in the dog as pit bull? Let me guess, one more strike on the pit bull statistics, and nothing for the boxer stats. Bias much?
I looked at that test. There were at least 15 of those dogs that were CLEARLY not pit bulls. The test was not clear how to pick out the pit bull.
Some of you, you’ll have to have the expereinces I have before you will get some sense as to this.
Hank’s ridicule and such aside, what I desribe really happened. It was one of those moments where time just seemed to freeze. 2 seconds one way or the other and my son could have been seriously injured or killed. I still remember the look in his eyes and the look in the dogs eyes.
For those who don’t know, the owner was not home. Animal control caught the dog after an hour or so. Ultimately, a hearing with the owner and several neighbors and animal control decided that the dog could not be properly contained. The dog WAS destroyed.
This was not the case with the attack on my mom. The owners took the dog back inside the house. So animal control could not take the dog. Upshot is those folks are being evicted by their landlord.
Legal eagles another question: Is a landlord answerable for a dog attack on a rental property?
If you ever shot any of my dogs, you would disappear.
Your car would disappear.
No one would ever find you or know what happened to you.
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 01:32 PM
——
That’s what happened, “American Way.”
You never did have much did you Steven Davis? :)
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/11/face-reality-ce.html#comment-91448324
I thought this was about the dumbest comment of the day… But then, I read this >>>
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/11/face-reality-ce.html#comment-91470940
And now THIS >>>>
“No where did I say I was going to shoot anyone or actually make a threat on their life.”
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 07:21 PM
If you can read those posts, Nathan, and claim you didnt say you would shoot anyone or make a threat on their life, then either you got a strange idea of reading, or you are in a parallel universe, or you need some new meds!
It’s all there in Blue and White.
The posts above mine here are for everyone to see what losers Libs are.
They would rather attack a poster than post opinions on an opinion blog.
Like the cowards they are, they dogpile and make excuses for their behavior, then run away like the cheese eating surrender monkeys they are.
Go ahead ahead Libs, show the world what you are made of.
We’ll watch.
An just in case you forgot….
“Econ101,
If you ever shot any of my dogs, you would disappear.
Your car would disappear.
No one would ever find you or know what happened to you.”============= Nathan ===========1:32 PM
Thanks Monkeyhawk I caught up on my reading.
Took a break and was actually looking forward to coming back to the weblog to read the good discussion.
Disappointed again at the activities of a few. There were a few new arrivals after 4 PM and things went downhill.
Easily got feelings upset. I had read the Jarheads post when it happened. It was a threat – only if Econ shot Nathan’s dogs.
Was not a threat to anyone else, and only applied because Econ said he would shoot dogs running at large.
I disagreed with Econ on that point, but agreed if attacked.Maybe handled it differently than Nathan did. But there is not a running threat, that I see from Nathan to ANYone on this blog.
Only if someone shoots Nathan’s dogs. Not likely, and certainly not by Econ. But comments like Steven Davis just fans the flames. I wish we could just contribute to the ongoing thread discussion, without resurrecting it over and over again.
What was said was said. It was between Nathan and Econ. I didn’t see Econ get all worked up over it. Why should anyone else?
Dogs at large. What should be done about them? I posted earlier what we did in our city. It didn’t end the problem (kids always will be kids), but it definately cut down on repeat offenders.
Chas what is your role is all of this? What are you attempting to do? Do you have any kind of a belief system that would tell you that what you just did was trying to stir anger of some of the posters on this blog.
Again what are you attempting to do?
I guess ZI will be very careful when I am driving out around in our great city… and make sure no swimming pools jump up, and attack me, and pull me into the depths of their waters, so I cant get loose!! ROFL I needed a really good laugh today… I really did!!
Equating swimming pools with pit bulls!! That will get some good mileage at my next gathering of my fellow clergy!! ROFL
Thabnks Nathan!! LOL
Chas forget my last post. AmWay has the right idea. Back to the subject at hand. Econ and Nathan moved on I guess we should also.
I havent seen you add anything to the discussion, Ksgrm… I’ve had a good laugh today… LOL… attacking swimming pools… LOL… Now I have some serious things to accomplish!!
Y’all have a good night now!!
Blessings All!!
Equating swimming pools with pit bulls!! That will get some good mileage at my next gathering of my fellow clergy!! ROFL
Thabnks Nathan!! LOL
Posted by: Chas. | November 28, 2007 at 09:02 PM
When does your haven meet Chas?
Now go change your wet panties.
Posted by: XXX | November 28, 2007 at 08:17 PM
No that would be yours XXX.
My parts are in working order and in no need of pharmaceutical assistance. :)
Posted by: Kansas | November 28, 2007 at 08:24 PM
My, what a cunning come back.
Hope you didn’t strain yourself.
That’s it. I’m gone.
This discussion will happen again in a later thread, after another person is hurt.
Forget banning the breed – work on ordnance which applies to any and all mean, large, or aggressive dogs.
Lot’s of weblinks to info. And if you insist on pushing a ban, please go to SAVE PITBULL on google and find the animals a home. They will have no place to go and the pound is full.
You are sentencing them to death, without it.
If you ever shot any of my dogs, you would disappear.
Your car would disappear.
No one would ever find you or know what happened to you.
Sorry, but owning dogs and taking care of them has led to dogs getting loose on several occasions.
“I feel sorry for the person who decides they are going to shoot any of my dogs simply because they were running loose.”
Posted by: Nathan | November 28, 2007 at 01:32 PM
Well Nathan, what if they’re running loose and poop in my yard?
Your dogs do that on a regular basis..they have no respect for my property whatsoever..I thought you trained them to have better manners!
And they scarf down my cat’s food while they’re at it!
Holy crap, I don’t pop in here very often, but this is probably the most inflamatory WE Blog thread I’ve ever seen. Over 300 posts. Anyways, dogs are dogs, whatever breed they are, they are domesticated animals that can’t live effectivly without humans. Thats why we don’t see stray dogs in the numbers that we see stray cats, because dogs can’t effectivly survive on their own. Most of the time there is a dog attack, the reasons building up to attack are always to blame on people. Look, if you don’t train a dog, it will do whatever the hell it wants, just like if you don’t raise a kid. We have wild kids running the streets right now, they were raised poorly or not raised at all. I’m sure wild ass kids running around the streets joining gangs cause more deaths a year than a decades worth of pitbull attacks combined. Tradgedy happens, and specific people need to held responsible, not the whole population. I know its old, but punish the deed, not the breed, and sometimes the deed is not properly caring for a dog, you may be able to have a poodle and feed and water it, and thats all. But other breeds like pitbulls need heavy training and exercise, they are very active dogs, and their motor never stops running, you can ask a cop that has shot a pitbull four times, the dogs loves life so much it will run a mile before it drops dead.
My kitties are public servants, Pat. They keep the mice, mole, and snake populations down. My neighbors love them, and they’ve never attacked a human. Plus, they bury their poop.
If that WAS Mary.
And I’ve no reason to think it wasn’t.
Seems Hank is not a terribly responsible dog owner.
Ya have to keep your cats inside Mary! And don’t walk in your yard. It’s reserved as toilet for the Price family dogs.
And an interesting new development….
Pat…bluebirds…feral cats..
American way is always posting as to that.
And Pat is always stalking me….
Um, Ewwww..
In the United States, there is debate about how to deal with feral cat populations – many municipalities make it legal to kill them and classify them as vermin or pests, while others might consider killing them to be cruelty.conservationists argue that feral cats contribute greatly to the killing of songbirds and other endangered birds, with estimates that bird loss is at 100 million a year due to predation.Some [attribution needed] advocate culling feral cat populations by hunting, arguing that it is the most cost-effective method of population control. However, a proposal in the U.S. state of Wisconsin to legalize the hunting of feral cats in an attempt to reduce their population (April 2005) was blocked by the state’s lawmakers. South Dakota and Minnesota allow wild cats to be shot. The U.S. spends over $50 million a year to shelter some of these cats.[citation needed]Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) programs, presented as a humane method of feral cat population control, are facilitated by many volunteers and organizations in the United States. These organizations trap feral cats, sterilize them through neutering, and provide inoculation against rabies and other viruses and sometimes long-lasting flea treatments before releasing them. Frequently, attending veterinarians notch the tip off one ear during spay/neuter surgery to mark the individual as being previously caught. Volunteers often continue to feed and give care to these cats throughout their lives. Many animal care experts believe that it is prohibitively difficult if not often impossible to domesticate and adopt a feral cat unless it is trapped and socialized before six weeks of age.
I have a patient whose miniture chihuahua tries to bite me everytime I head for the door because he doesn’t want me to leave. Any dog can be aggressive, but the damage done depends largely on the breed. A pit bull will lock their jaws onto a person and not let go…”Rosco” the chihuahua just snags my pantyhose.
I think that last clinches it.
Pat Herron = American way.
No JR, Hank is a very responsible dog owner…he is always with his dogs when they decide to use my yard for their personal toilet…truth is I don’t care..I love Hank’s big ‘ole wooley dogs!My cats are outside and inside cats. We live in cat paradise out here, so I would never deny them their freedom to do just as they please.
Pussy Paradise!
Can hear the purring now!
JR, (directly!)
Thanks for the laugh! That was a good one! You do good work!
Posted by: lindainks55 | November 28, 2007 at 09:25 PM
How many nicks does JR have?
My dogs run loose a lot. However, I have verbal control over them at all times unless I’m at Mary’s house.
Samson poops in her yard, her husband told me it was OK. Samson also knows where all the cat food is in the neighborhood. He eats Mary’s cat’s food when ever he can.
It gives him the shits so I guess we’re even on some sort of scale.
Mary’s cats poop in her neighbor’s yard and they don’t always bury it. Once when I was talking to her neighbor Boo Bear rolled in cat shit. I spent the next hour shampooing, drying and brushing Boo Bear out.
I like Mary’s cats. Samson likes Mary’s cat’s food. Boo Bear has a annoying connection with Mary’s cats also.—–
sigh…
Can’t tell the cons without a program and a psych ward….
While I don’t see Nathan’s earlier as a direct threat, it IS disturbing in light of some posts Hank has made.
“My guns are everywhere…etc”
I should go look for that one.
The only one who thinks of you, Pat, is you.
Now excuse me while I go collect my welfare check.
You are such a wonderful example of Christianity, except for your disregard of the 8th comandment.
I’ll have to have a talk with my cats, they have always assured me that they bury their poop, especially when they go in the neighbor’s yard.
Give Samson a big ‘ole wet kiss for me!Goodnight y’all.
Nathan is a 29 year old combat tested Marine. He doesn’t live with us. I don’t consider him to be a child that I would have to lock up and hide my guns from.
OK children, concentrate. One more attempt to bring a little reason to the discussion before I go to bed.
From the American Kennel Club
CANINE LEGISLATION POSITION STATEMENT
“DANGEROUS DOG” CONTROL LEGISLATION.
The American Kennel Club supports reasonable, enforceable, non-discriminatory laws to govern the ownership of dogs. The AKC believes that dog owners should be responsible for their dogs. We support laws that: establish a fair process by which specific dogs are identified as “dangerous” based on stated, measurable actions; impose appropriate penalties on irresponsible owners; and establish a well-defined method for dealing with dogs proven to be dangerous. We believe that, if necessary, dogs proven to be “dangerous” may need to be humanely destroyed. The American Kennel Club strongly opposes any legislation that determines a dog to be “dangerous” based on specific breeds or phenotypic classes of dogs.
The AKC has a legal department that will help communities write effective “dangerous dog” legislation. Legislation that is based on tried ant true legislation that has worked in many other communities.
They will review proposed legislation and make recommendations to make it more effective and enforceable.
That being said, I don’t love pit bulls and dangerous dogs. The changes I proposed to the city council would have made the law more severe and more effective than the breed specific legislation they were considering.
Not one major national canine organization is for breed specific legislation, not one. They don’t think that breed specific legislation is effective in protecting the community from dangerous dogs. Even the CDC is against breed specific legislation.
The American Humane Association, The American Veterinary Medical Association, The National Animal Control Association to name a few. All oppose breed specific legislation because it has proven to be ineffective.
All of these organizations have credibility because of their experience and because of their work in the communities to educate and protect the public.
The Wichita Kennel Club has been active in Wichita for over 75 years. We do a lot more than just put on a dog show every year.
I personally have been to every recreation center in the city putting on a demonstration for the AKC Canine Ambassador program. I have taken my Bearded Collie that was therapy dog and educated the children on the responsibility of dog ownership and care. I have taught them how to act around strange dogs.
Every school in the city has books and educational material in their libraries donated by the WKC and the AKC. I am available to put on programs for schools and I do several every year.
I am willing to meet with anyone and explain exactly why we fought against and will continue to fight against breed specific legislation. Fortunately we were able to bring sanity into the political discussion long enough to convince the counsel members it was poor legislation. Unfortunately they didn’t pass a low that we thought was tough enough.
We’re still working and we welcome informed debate. When emotional bias is removed from the debate we win with our facts every time.
Good night all.
Had to rescue a dying kitten yesterday. Cost way too much just to save it’s life and get it medicine.
my neighbor has an orphan cat on his front porch now for 3 days…he has 4 BIG DOGS
JM,” don’t believe in cruelty to animals, but animals that attack have no right to share space on this planet.”
I used to have a friend who owned one of the friendliest German Shepards I’ve ever known. One day a neighborhood kid climbed the fence, went after the dog with a baseball bat and the dog defended himself. Of course it was the dog who was put down instead of the kid who deserved it.
“Jed” –
Was the kid’s name “Nathan?”
http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/getStatuteFile.do?number=/21-4004.html
1-4004Chapter 21.–CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTSPART II.–PROHIBITED CONDUCTArticle 40.–CRIMES INVOLVING VIOLATIONS OF PERSONAL RIGHTS
21-4004. Criminal defamation. (a) Criminal defamation is communicating to a person orally, in writing, or by any other means, information, knowing the information to be false and with actual malice, tending to expose another living person to public hatred, contempt or ridicule; tending to deprive such person of the benefits of public confidence and social acceptance; or tending to degrade and vilify the memory of one who is dead and to scandalize or provoke surviving relatives and friends.
(b) In all prosecutions under this section the truth of the information communicated shall be admitted as evidence. It shall be a defense to a charge of criminal defamation if it is found that such matter was true.
(c) Criminal defamation is a class A nonperson misdemeanor.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-4004; L. 1992, ch. 239, § 187; L. 1993, ch. 291, § 135; L. 1995, ch. 251, § 14; July 1.
You can kiss my kittie’s butts, Pat. They are the best pets, clean, quiet, don’t crave a lot of attention, and they don’t chew up the furniture when they’re bored. They politely use the toilet outside and usually (I guess) bury their turds.All my cats are too old to catch birds, they prefer mice, moles, and snakes because they’re easier prey. They cause no problems at all with the exception of a snake in my living room every once in awhile. If anyone want’s an easy, loving pet..I suggest a cat.I love dogs, but mostly when they belong to someone else. I have an ongoing love affair with Hank’s dog Samson..he’s my guy, but he’s a lot of care..just ask Hank how long it takes to brush his hair. I’m glad he belongs to Hank, cuz he’d have big knots in his hair if he was mine.
“The sad fact is pit bulls were bred for fighting.”
Yeah, fighting other dogs. Not biting people. Any fighting dog that showed human aggressive behavior was useless and culled.
M. Hawk,I have no idea who the kid was, which is probably in his best interests. I really dug that dog!
Mary,” If anyone want’s an easy, loving pet..I suggest a cat.”
To quote George Carlin, “People pet dogs; cats pet themselves on people.”
According to my cat, people were bred up from apes to have opposable thumbs and run can openers.
I too, think it would be “sick” for someone to just shoot a dog running loose, for no reason.However, if that person felt any fear for himself/herself or others, I think that person should feel free to put down the dog, without risk of prosecution.
That is what I meant.
I still say that my prefered large dog breed, the Mastiff, is very gentle, in most casses.
ANY dog can be trained to be hostile.
Those who are deliberately cruel to animals, in any way, should be punished.
However, I remember awhile back, a kid, a boy, was stealing gasoline out of a neighbors car. The neighbor shot him. I think that the man doing the shooting was out of line. However, that man won in court. He claimed that he felt threatened.
Large dogs scare people.
Yes, my large dogs dig get loose a few times. The worst they ever did was pop a basketball when one picked it up with his mouth.
However, I accept the responsiblity: If you are affraid of any animal, running wild, you have the right to kill that animal.
I have been shot at before.
No big deal.
If I see a dog running wild, and I believe it might be a threat to me or anyone else, I might shoot it.
I do not feel threatened by Nathans post. He is showing his affection for his dogs. I understand.
However, the immediate threat of the dog in front of me will be more important than figuring out if Nathan owns the dog.
I will not search out Nathans dog, just so that I can shoot it.
By the way, I live just off of South Rock Road. Cherry Creek area. Divored, trying to stay close to the kids.
One pit bull attack was very close by, it would take me or my kids a 3 minutes to walk there.
Sorry if emotion got the best of me, but I still stand by what I said: Dog lovers must understand that people are more important than dogs.If I am allowed to use deadly force against a person who threatens me, especially on my own property, I can certainly use deadly force against a dog.It would seem that most people who love large dogs, on this thread, also own guns or have a military background.
Nathan and Hank, please understand, I have nothing but contempt for anyone that would harm a dog with no reason.
However, those who feel threated by a dog, especially a dog on their own property, have a right to self defense, a right you folks cherish and protect and defend when it comes to shooting threatening people, instead of shooting threatening dogs.
Nathan, I took no threat from your post.
We understand each other.
Your dog bites my kid, I shoot your dog.
You shoot me.
OK
Even trade.
LOL
(Been awhile since the shooting range, for me, but I might not just sit there and take it like the bullseyes in target practice.)
Anyway, I understand how Marines talk.
My point is that dogowners need to take some responsibilty.
My dogs would never have hurt anyone, but if one had gotten shot, because someone was affraid of it, I think I would have understood.
Dear Paul,
Thanks for your post. I know Nathan wouldn’t shoot anyone over a dog. I wouldn’t either. If someone broke into my house and shot my dog. . .
I would, have no problem shooting a dangerous dog that threatened me or mine.
I missed you last Monday night, I thought I might see you at the Diamond W.
Hey Capn,
I know its a little late, but I just noticed you gave my boy a little cover up thread.
Thanks.
In the grand scheme of the BLOGusphere, I owe ya one. Let me know when ya need some cover,
Hank
ROTECT YOUR NEIGHBORHello fellow American. I will keep this short. The American Pit Bull Terrier is a proud part of American history. Remember “Our Gang”? Spanky and friends had a dog named Pete. He was an APBT. They represent everything that is is to be American. This is “to be smart, strong and family orientated”. Please do not let the actions of a few punish the many. I spoke with a man who delivered a Fed Ex package to me. He liked my dog (although she looks intimidating as well as friendly). With 30 years of delivering packages for Fed Ex he had NEVER come across a vicious APBT.Do some cold calling and surveys of delivery people. See what kind of experiences they have had with the APBT.PUNISH THE DEED, NOT THE BREEDJust as Hitler came for those who could not stick up for themselves, BSL is trying to eradicate (as well as take away rights never to be brought back – rights Americans and theirs dogs fought and died for) an entire species.Please vistit The Connecticut Military Department web site at http://www.ct.gov/mil/site/. There you will find an article to read about Stuby the war dog. It is under “History and Adventure”.May god forgive us for the attempt to kill off a species (1,ooo+ killed off in Colorado with a 1 year jail term for dog owners). To limit one APBT per family is like China limiting people to one child. A limit like this WILL create puppy mills. This breed loves to play. To watch two American Pit Bull Terriers at play is pure joy (especially a momma and her pup). This is a property right issue. If property rights continue to be limited, owners are forced to leave and seek a new life else where.Remember, the rights that are “THE MOST IMPORTANT TO PROTECT, ARE THE RIGHTS YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN”. Sincerely, Another American under constant attack
And good old econ will be right there to sell dog owners that expensive insurance that he’s lobbying the city to require.
JedP and C, “Property and Casualty” is not my line.Life and Health?Maybe.
Pall,I’m sure you’ll find a way. After all, you’re a born-again capitalist who’d lose your street creds if you didn’t.
We can’t create knee-jerk legislation over isolated incidents. People try to cite numbers of “pit bull” attacks but they are lumping 10+ breeds of dogs and infinite mixes into that figure. These numbers don’t accurately portray anything except for the fact that the people citing them don’t feel like putting in the effort to do real research. If a dog shows violent tendencies towards humans, it should certainly to be put down. In fact, to me the main contributing factor that I see with these attacks is that we have watered down some of these breeds and brought negative characteristics to the forefront. If we are going to have any kind of legislation, it needs to focus on the breeding of the dog, and not the ownership. The American Pit Bull Terrier and many variants that come from similar bloodlines (Staffies, Mastiffs, etc) are extremely friendly to people by nature. When you have a dog that shows violent tendencies towards people, that is a genetic flaw, and it is the exception, not the rule. It comes from the so-called “backyard breeding”. These bad traits are getting passed down and they become more prominent. But any logical person knows the the type of attack that occurred at the Brookwood Apts is the equivalent of getting struck by lightning.The overwhelming majority of attacks come from dogs that aren’t properly secured, or have been treated in an ill manner.
I’m starting to really like you Tom!
What kind of dogs do you own/like.