Saw this on a friend's LJ.

[Eliza Hodgkins 1812]

And it's really, really upsetting.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_86_3768197,00.html

[Not Afraid]

OK. I cannot read the rest of this article.

[Mousey Girl]

omg!

I don't know why this surprises me. When we bought our house and were shopping for insurance there were several breeds of dogs we couldn't own if we wanted full HO insurance. If I remember correctly the list was pitts, rots, dobies and something else. For as many times as Poohdog has had incidents (all caused by people sticking their hands/fingers into his dog run or backyard) I wouldn't be surprised if bassets join the list. The guy across the street from us has inbred chow mixes. Chows are not the nicest dogs around either, but I wouldn't report him to animal control simply because he has one.

[Moonliner]

I found this additional comment on this issue:

--------------------
Denver has had a pitbull ban in effect for a few decades. A little bit ago a state law went into effect saying the cities couldn't ban dogs by breed. Denver protested and took it through the courts and the courts said the city has the right of 'home rule' and can ban dogs by breed if they want to.
So ...all those people with pitbulls in the city/county of Denver have only been able to legally own them for several months at most. I personally would not have moved into Denver with a pitbull because it's very clear they aren't welcome there. Denver touches on three other counties where pitbulls are legal and they have a lot more going for them in other ways than Denver does. I would think that anyone who actually loved their pitbull would not have moved into Denver and even if they didn't know of the ban they would have moved out ASAP once Denver began moving this back through the courts. (When I lived there about 10 years ago I did meet people out walking their pitbulls who didn't know about the ban, but it's been so widely publicized this time around it's hard to believe anyone with a brain wouldn't know about it.)

However, I find it interesting that there is a big AKC show in Denver every year, maybe twice a year. Every one with a staffie or a bull terrier ... they are in violation of the pitbull ban. The dogs could be legally seized.

As is going around the Colorado lists ... it does not do much good for out of state and out of county folks to complain, but dollars talk. If that dog show would move to another county ...or if people deliberately went a bit out of their way to shop in other counties then sent their receipts to the Denver Mayor and city council .... that might have some weight.

Online petitions don't help in this case. I hate the ban, but I kind of admire Denver for telling the state legislature to get stuffed. Now, if the people who actually live in Denver would just tell Denver the same, things might shift.
----------------------

[Kevy Baby]

OK. I cannot read the rest of this article.Same here

http://home.mindspring.com/~kevin_elder/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/cry.gif

[Betty]

I'm not sure what the good answer is to this one. Dogs should not be killed simply because they are part of a certain breed... yet something must be done about viscious dogs with irresponsible owners. Note those are not the same thing.

Perhaps they'll seize some dog from the dog show and everyone will freak out and they'll ban the ban.

[FEJ]

http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/AlertPages/California.htm

http://www.badrap.org/rescue/

Help fight this racia/breed predjudice.

My ex-girlfriend has 2 great pit-bulls. I know many onthers that are great. A blanket law is just DUMB.

Where is Senator McCarthy when you need him. (Sarcasm)

[mousepod]

...and now they're trying to bring the law to San Francisco (http://www.sfexaminer.com/articles/2005/06/22/news/20050622_ne04_breed.txt)

[Eliza Hodgkins 1812]

I can't imagine something like this actually getting passed in a place like San Francisco.

What is not being talked about at all is owner responsibility. A pitbull isn't born an attack dog. It's just not a viscious dog by nature, though I've come across a few breeds that seem particularly territorial, and they sometimes make me nervous. But a pitbull has to be trained to attack, from what I understand. And if someone is training a dog to attack, they should be held responsible if his or her dog attacks someone.

If the dog is a guard dog and attacks a burglar? That doesn't seem illegal. If a dog that is trained to attack intruders suddenly chases after a 6 year old girl, killing her, than the dog should be put down, and the owner should be in some way held responsible for the girl's death. People who train pits to fight to the death in pens should be arrested and jailed for a really long time. People who train attack dogs - not necessarily the same thing as guard dogs - deserve the same. Jail. For a long time.

And saddly the attack dogs should probably be put down, because I think it's hard to break those kinds of habits.

So, so, so effin' sad. In most of these cases it's probably the owner's fault and not the animal, certainly not the animal's breed.

Also, some consideration must be given to the possibility of a child or person antagonizing a dog. I have the most docile loving family dog, but if I started whacking him with blunt objects, I wouldn't be surprised if he suddenly bit me. Even good natured dogs can be provoked, especially if they're not used to that kind of abuse.

I was bit by a Chow once, and have been nervous around Chows ever since. They strike me as naturally protective and fierce. I could be wrong. I certainly wouldn't make a law against them, though I prefer to be out of their company. The dog growled at me when I came downstairs while staying at a friend's. She'd warned me to be careful around the dog, but when it growled I panicked and screamed and ran, and the dog came after me. I tried to claw my pathetic way up a wall, but it snapped at my leg, and punctured my calf with one of its teeth. I'm not really sure if it bit me, or if it just snagged me while barking violently. Either way, I was terrified.

Still, I'd save a Chow's life, man. No mass death for Chows!

[wendybeth]

My mom had a chow named Pooh who was the most viscious little bastard around. That thing would bite you if you looked at it wrong, yet she would excuse it with a "He's just protective" or "He was provoked". The only thing Pooh had going for him was that he had the good sense to only bite family members- I used to pray that some poor non-relative would get bit so she would have to do something about him, but it never happened. (Mostly because she never let him around anyone else). The dog was gorgeous, but a real asshole.

I think the big concern with pitbulls is the locked-jaw thing. When they bite, they often lock up their jaws and they have to be beaten senseless or killed before they let go. That's scary, but then so is the tendency for Akita's to go for the throat. If everyone just took care of their animals and used caution when around other dogs, the problem would be a lot less severe. Never assume your sweet little pup would never attack someone, because any of them can, at any time, for a variety of reasons. We make sure Mellie- our lovebug large model dog who has never even nipped at anyone- is always restrained when anyone new comes over, and then is introduced to the new person before we let her loose. When she started jumping the fence we had to get a long lead and hook it up to the deck. You get to know your animal as best you can, and make sure they don't get into a situation where something bad can happen.

In additon, I think these laws are asanine- they are overreacting in a major and very innapppropriate way. Hold the owners liable for their dogs actions, and it's amazing how quickly most will conform. Educate the public to report aggressive dogs, and notify the owners that the dogs will be put down and the owners severely fined for any infractions. Criminalise deliberate animal neglect, especially if it leads to any injuries. Going around and slaughtering 'profiled' dogs is just so wrong, on so many levels.

[Eliza Hodgkins 1812]

Wendy, this is exactly what I would have written if I could write as well as you. Lovely and intelligent and rational. Thanks.

[Prudence]

Of course, in many places animal control units are underfunded almost to the point of non-existence. There's no one to enforce leash laws and license requirements or take reports on dangerous dogs. It's a service many taxpayers are unwilling to fund, and therefore the only viable control mechanism is silly laws regulating breeds.

[tracilicious]

I found this additional comment on this issue:

However, I find it interesting that there is a big AKC show in Denver every year, maybe twice a year. Every one with a staffie or a bull terrier ... they are in violation of the pitbull ban. The dogs could be legally seized.

I don't think so. Pitbulls are a breed unto themselves, and although staffies and terriers are related, they aren't pitbulls by any means.


What is not being talked about at all is owner responsibility. A pitbull isn't born an attack dog. It's just not a viscious dog by nature, though I've come across a few breeds that seem particularly territorial, and they sometimes make me nervous. But a pitbull has to be trained to attack, from what I understand. And if someone is training a dog to attack, they should be held responsible if his or her dog attacks someone.


I halfway agree. The problem with several breeds right now is that they are being overbred. If someone has a pit with a genetic tendency to be vicious and they breed them, chances are the pups will have the same trait. Then someone breeds those pups, etc. etc. until eventually a good percentage of the breed has aggressive tendencies. With pit fighting being as common as it is, the fighters are going to breed the most vicious dogs that they can. Pitbulls aren't an AKC registerable breed, so nearly all the breeders are backyard breeders, meaning they have no understanding of genetic traits and won't thoroughly screen their dogs.

So, yes, I think pits generally have a tendency to be aggressive. However, they certainly aren't the only breed to have that tendency. An owner of any dog with an aggresive breed history needs to be cautious in the way they train their dogs and watchful for any signs of aggression. I think that more often than not, the aggression has to be brought out of the dog through neglect or training. So, rereading your post, it seems like I completely agree with what you are saying.

I think generally with dogs that kill, it has very little to do with breed. My first dane, Thanos, was the sweetest dog you could imagine. However, he had hidden neurological issues that eventually made him very aggressive. The day he bit me it was clear he wasn't in control of himself. I was lucky that he bit me first and not my son, but he just snapped and wasn't in his right mind any longer. I knew a two year old girl that was viciously attacked by a lab that was raised with kids. She pulled his tail and the next thing you knew she was in the hospital for weeks.

I think the strict regulations we need have more to do with breeders than with dogs. A license to breed would be a godsend to all the dogs in our pounds. I feel for the owners whose dogs are being taken and killed.

I think the big concern with pitbulls is the locked-jaw thing. When they bite, they often lock up their jaws and they have to be beaten senseless or killed before they let go.

As far as I know, pitbulls are like dobermans in that if you insert a hard stick at a certain point on their jaw then it releases their jaw. I could be wrong. One would at least think that you could give a tranquilizer instead of killing it.

[wendybeth]

Most people don't go out on walkies armed with tranquilizer darts, Traci.;)

We've had several really bad pit bull incidents here this year, and the breed is associated with gang-bangers, etc, so it's not unreasonable that they are becoming feared in the general population. It's just unfortunate, because I know many people that raised them the right way and they are very kind, loyal dogs. You make a good point about them being bred for violence, which is where owner liability should come into play. The police departments across the country are largely funded by traffic citation fines, so why couldn't the animal control industry do the same? They could make some bucks, innocent dogs won't be slaughtered, and the ones responsible for the dogs would be held accountable. At the same time, they should toughen up animal cruelty laws- it's ridiculous that people can be so evil to animals and have little or no repercussions, yet an animal can be put down simply for being the 'wrong' breed.

(Btw- you are too sweet, Eliza- if I had 1/10th your writing ability, I'd be a very happy girl!)

[tracilicious]

Most people don't go out on walkies armed with tranquilizer darts, Traci.;)



Good point. :p You are right about owner responsibility. I love pits. I doubt I would own one, but I think nearly any dog can be a good dog if they are treated well.