• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Let's Ban Pit Bulls

https://www.avma.org/public/Pages/Why-Breed-Specific-Legislation-is-not-the-Answer.aspx

This is from the American Veterinary Medical Association. Vox dismissed them because they didn't support his argument. The reality is that if you can't recognize these as experts...then you don't want facts.

They are they are the organization that provides accreditation for all vet schools in the United States. And they represent about 89,000 people employed as Vets and in the field of Veterinary medicine. They also are responsible for the foremost scholarly journal on Veterinary medicine.

The fact that they are against BSL should be very telling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll accept that breed is not indicative of likelihood to attack, against intuition. In the event of attack, however, results are dependent on strength and other factors. Why not consider that in regulations?
 
I'll accept that breed is not indicative of likelihood to attack, against intuition. In the event of attack, however, results are dependent on strength and other factors. Why not consider that in regulations?



legislate human negligence, not breed.
 
I'll accept that breed is not indicative of likelihood to attack, against intuition. In the event of attack, however, results are dependent on strength and other factors. Why not consider that in regulations?

Because the regulations do not reflect the reality of a dogs strength. As demonstrated: a Labrador can kill. GSD, malamute, Doberman, Danes, Mastifs, st Bernard's...a dog bite is nasty and dangerous. A bad owner is a bad owner and the legislation creates a false sense of security for stupid people and bad owners.

If you were to put 2 people into a situation with an unknown dog...who is more likely to be bit? The one who is afraid of a dog? Or the one who isn't? If you could control for all other factors. That's the problem with BSL. It creates a sense of fear over certain animals for no reason. And that is when people get stupid and bit. And when scumbags start picking those scary looking dogs. Remember that the Dalmatian used to be a guard dog. Disney changed that.

It is like legislating firearms negligence. Someone who does something stupid should not be the standard for which all other users should be held. This is insurance companies writing legislation to avoid paying out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Because the regulations do not reflect the reality of a dogs strength. As demonstrated: a Labrador can kill. GSD, malamute, Doberman, Danes, Mastifs, st Bernard's...a dog bite is nasty and dangerous. A bad owner is a bad owner and the legislation creates a false sense of security for stupid people and bad owners.

If you were to put 2 people into a situation with an unknown dog...who is more likely to be bit? The one who is afraid of a dog? Or the one who isn't? If you could control for all other factors. That's the problem with BSL. It creates a sense of fear over certain animals for no reason. And that is when people get stupid and bit. And when scumbags start picking those scary looking dogs. Remember that the Dalmatian used to be a guard dog. Disney changed that.

It is like legislating firearms negligence. Someone who does something stupid should not be the standard for which all other users should be held. This is insurance companies writing legislation to avoid paying out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know how to interact with dogs, they don't frighten me. If one attacked, for whatever reason, I'd prefer it not be large and strong. As long as I'm giving my forearm to take the eyes of a rabid dog, I'd prefer a more tender nibble.
 
Because the regulations do not reflect the reality of a dogs strength. As demonstrated: a Labrador can kill. GSD, malamute, Doberman, Danes, Mastifs, st Bernard's...a dog bite is nasty and dangerous. A bad owner is a bad owner and the legislation creates a false sense of security for stupid people and bad owners.

This stance is ludicrous and fantastic.

Pit bulls and their many mongrel mixes are just too dangerous and unpredictable to associate with people......especially children.

Banning is the only logical solution. Pit lovers can see them in the zoo.......like other creatures too dangerous to be with people.

:2usflag:
 
It creates a sense of fear over certain animals for no reason. And that is when people get stupid and bit.

This would be funny if it were not so sad.

So you think this victim was stupid?

d2e3b1ec5948243aa296e8ae894a9e21.webp

Shame on you and all pit bull apologists.

"Fear without good reason."

There is HUGE reason to fear the creature called "pit bull."

:2usflag:
 
Today's HORROR.

Another baby maimed and disfigured for LIFE!!!!

Arial is looking at a very long road ahead, and despite the odds of making a full recovery, her father and family are staying hopeful as she continues to fight for her life in the ICU of Riley Children’s Hospital.

Cass County Sheriff Richard Behnke confirming to ABC 57 News that the case is being forwarded to the Cass County Prosecutor’s office for charges where we could see something as early as Monday or Tuesday of next week.

Arial’s brother, Anthony, was released from the hospital and is expected to be ok.

To help with medical expenses, the family has set up a GoFundMe page:

CLICK HERE FOR ARIAL'S GOFUNDME PAGE

Father describes lasting effect of dog attack on daughter - ABC57 News - See the Difference Michiana

:2usflag:
 
I know how to interact with dogs, they don't frighten me. If one attacked, for whatever reason, I'd prefer it not be large and strong. As long as I'm giving my forearm to take the eyes of a rabid dog, I'd prefer a more tender nibble.

Lmao! That was funny in bold.

But seriously though:

Having stuck my hand in the mouth of a few labradors trying to take a duck away? No such thing if the dog is over 30 pounds...really if it is just a dog with intent to hurt you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Lmao! That was funny in bold.

But seriously though:

Having stuck my hand in the mouth of a few labradors trying to take a duck away? No such thing if the dog is over 30 pounds...really if it is just a dog with intent to hurt you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What about the infamous "jaw lock" or lbs/square inch force. I'd guess we see a significant difference between a 30, 50 and 80 lb dog. Presumably also according to breed.
 
Today's horrific pit bull attack on an innocent child.



https://www.dallasnews.com/news/sou...t-bull-bites-10-year-old-face-southern-dallas

:2usflag:




Why wont you answer? Is this a pitbull? you keep saying that people like wendy can easilly identify one, and that only people who are of lesser intelligence who are against BSL cant....

I can tell you if that's a pit bull, the fact you are struggling says what about where you would stand on your own intelligence scale?


View attachment 67216243[/QUOTE]



As for your story, kid was warned not to climb a fence into a backyard, did so anyway, and stick his nose straight into the dogs face.


The breed wasn't the issue here, poor choices were/
 
This stance is ludicrous and fantastic.

Pit bulls and their many mongrel mixes are just too dangerous and unpredictable to associate with people......especially children.

Banning is the only logical solution. Pit lovers can see them in the zoo.......like other creatures too dangerous to be with people.

:2usflag:

No, banning isn't the only logical solution. Pits aren't inherently too dangerous to be with people. My kid's former roommate has one who's eight now, and he's a wonderful doggie. Never an aggressive moment, and he's such a princess that he can't bear to get his feet wet. One of my fave photos is him sitting on top of a large dog house because the ground was muddy.

The kid had one too, and the only time I ever saw him be aggressive was one day when she was helping me in the yard. He was on a chain, and that was a good thing because some neighbor dogs came by and decided to screw with him. He patiently took their baiting and threatening him, and then he lunged in self-defense.

My own doggie is part pit and part black Lab. You'd never guess who her daddy is unless you were the boogeyman.

But you're a damned fool if you have any type of dog, including an obnoxious ankle-biting faux dog that fits in a purse, if you aren't mindful around little kids.

And that goes for cats around little kids too.
 
Pits aren't inherently too dangerous to be with people. My kid's former roommate has one who's eight now, and he's a wonderful doggie.

Well, if your kid's former roommate has a well-behaved pit bull--that DOES prove that pit bulls are no more dangerous than any other dog.

Thanks for your post.

:2usflag:
 
I think any dog or cat is potentially dangerous. They're animals. Not too long ago I accidentally startled my beloved older-lady cat, and as she jumped, she shredded my arm. Also not long ago I tossed my doggie one of her squeaky toys, and as she brought it back and I tried to take it, she accidentally did the same as she tried to bat it away from me. Totally unintentional, but I now have a 5-inch scar.
 
I think any dog or cat is potentially dangerous. They're animals.

Can "any" dog or cat do this?

2753ded2a15a8881d77586face58f340.webp

Your stance is a common one.

It simply has no relevance to the issue.

Pit bulls are genetically programmed by hundreds of years of selective breeding to maim and kill.

They........unlike normal cats or dogs, have both the programming and the physical attributes to maim and easily kill people, pets and children.

And they do it every day........and the owner usually says, "He was such a SWEET dog.....never showed any danger signs."

:2usflag:
 
This little girl was coldly and brutally killed by her "nanny dog" friend and protector.

Another sweet dog.......that never showed any sign of being dangerous.

The cops had to shoot it 13 times to stop it.



npbvad-oct-24-2015-3.webp

Story:

2014 Dog Bite Fatality: Family Pit Bull Kills 4-Year Old Girl in Houma, Louisiana - DogsBite.org

No, pit bulls are not to be trusted......NONE of them.

What we find most disturbing in the past few days is that police want to know why Niko attacked, as if an unpredictable attack by a pit bull is unusual? As if it is not well established in appellate decisions upholding pit bull ordinances that these dogs often show no warning signals before an attack? No such befuddling mystery surrounds why a herding dog herds or why a retrieving dog retrieves. Nor is it a mystery why a dog breed, selectively bred to fight to the death, attacks.

the Pit Bull bites to kill without signal. Starkey v. Township of Chester (1986) ... the American Pit Bull Terrier breed possesses inherent characteristics of aggression, strength, viciousness and unpredictability not found in any other breeds of dog ... pit bulls are especially dangerous due to their unpredictability ... American Pit Bull Terriers have been known to be friendly and docile at one moment, willing to sit on your lap and lick your face, and at the next moment to attack in a frenzied rage ... Such frenzies can occur at any time and for no apparent reason. Garcia v. Village of Tijeras (1988) ... to increase its effectiveness as a fighter, certain pit bull traits have been selected and maximized by controlled breeding, including ... an extraordinary directness in their method of attack that does not include the common warning signs such as barking or growling displayed by other breeds; American Dog Owners Ass'n v. Dade County (1989)

:2usflag:
 
Last edited:
the timidness of the alarmist to not address my post regarding his inability to identify what is and what is not a pitbull is noted.


This guy obviously is a tool of dogbite.org
 
Can "any" dog or cat do this?

View attachment 67216445

Your stance is a common one.

It simply has no relevance to the issue.

Pit bulls are genetically programmed by hundreds of years of selective breeding to maim and kill.

They........unlike normal cats or dogs, have both the programming and the physical attributes to maim and easily kill people, pets and children.

And they do it every day........and the owner usually says, "He was such a SWEET dog.....never showed any danger signs."

:2usflag:

Don't assume that I'm naïve or uninformed; I live in the country and can tell you horror stories of exactly what a pit bull can do to a horse or calf or cow. My red-merle Aussie was a rescue who had been cruelly used to train (drug-dealer) pit bulls. Do you even know what this entails/how this is done?

From JAVMA:

Results—Major co-occurrent factors for the 256 DBRFs included absence of an able-bodied person to intervene (n = 223 [87.1%]), incidental or no familiar relationship of victims with dogs (218 [85.2%]), owner failure to neuter dogs (216 [84.4%]), compromised ability of victims to interact appropriately with dogs (198 [77.4%]), dogs kept isolated from regular positive human interactions versus family dogs (195 [76.2%]), owners’ prior mismanagement of dogs (96 [37.5%]), and owners’ history of abuse or neglect of dogs (54 [21.1%]). Four or more of these factors co-occurred in 206 (80.5%) deaths. For 401 dogs described in various media accounts, reported breed differed for 124 (30.9%); for 346 dogs with both media and animal control breed reports, breed differed for 139 (40.2%). Valid breed determination was possible for only 45 (17.6%) DBRFs; 20 breeds, including 2 known mixes, were identified.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Most DBRFs were characterized by coincident, preventable factors; breed was not one of these. Study results supported previous recommendations for multifactorial approaches, instead of single-factor solutions such as breed-specific legislation, for dog bite prevention. An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie * The link is fine.

http://radio.pblnn.com/shows/interv...g-bite-related-fatalities-in-the-us-2000-2009
 
Don't assume that I'm naïve or uninformed; I live in the country and can tell you horror stories of exactly what a pit bull can do to a horse or calf or cow. My red-merle Aussie was a rescue who had been cruelly used to train (drug-dealer) pit bulls. Do you even know what this entails/how this is done?

From JAVMA:

Results—Major co-occurrent factors for the 256 DBRFs included absence of an able-bodied person to intervene (n = 223 [87.1%]), incidental or no familiar relationship of victims with dogs (218 [85.2%]), owner failure to neuter dogs (216 [84.4%]), compromised ability of victims to interact appropriately with dogs (198 [77.4%]), dogs kept isolated from regular positive human interactions versus family dogs (195 [76.2%]), owners’ prior mismanagement of dogs (96 [37.5%]), and owners’ history of abuse or neglect of dogs (54 [21.1%]). Four or more of these factors co-occurred in 206 (80.5%) deaths. For 401 dogs described in various media accounts, reported breed differed for 124 (30.9%); for 346 dogs with both media and animal control breed reports, breed differed for 139 (40.2%). Valid breed determination was possible for only 45 (17.6%) DBRFs; 20 breeds, including 2 known mixes, were identified.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Most DBRFs were characterized by coincident, preventable factors; breed was not one of these. Study results supported previous recommendations for multifactorial approaches, instead of single-factor solutions such as breed-specific legislation, for dog bite prevention. An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie * The link is fine.

http://radio.pblnn.com/shows/interv...g-bite-related-fatalities-in-the-us-2000-2009



We have posted this earlier. he will completely ignore you.
 
Don't assume that I'm naïve or uninformed; I live in the country......

Of course.

Well, if you're from the country you couldn't be naive or uninformed.

:2usflag:
 
Don't assume that I'm naïve or uninformed; I live in the country and can tell you horror stories of exactly what a pit bull can do to a horse or calf or cow. My red-merle Aussie was a rescue who had been cruelly used to train (drug-dealer) pit bulls. Do you even know what this entails/how this is done?

From JAVMA:

Results—Major co-occurrent factors for the 256 DBRFs included absence of an able-bodied person to intervene (n = 223 [87.1%]), incidental or no familiar relationship of victims with dogs (218 [85.2%]), owner failure to neuter dogs (216 [84.4%]), compromised ability of victims to interact appropriately with dogs (198 [77.4%]), dogs kept isolated from regular positive human interactions versus family dogs (195 [76.2%]), owners’ prior mismanagement of dogs (96 [37.5%]), and owners’ history of abuse or neglect of dogs (54 [21.1%]). Four or more of these factors co-occurred in 206 (80.5%) deaths. For 401 dogs described in various media accounts, reported breed differed for 124 (30.9%); for 346 dogs with both media and animal control breed reports, breed differed for 139 (40.2%). Valid breed determination was possible for only 45 (17.6%) DBRFs; 20 breeds, including 2 known mixes, were identified.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Most DBRFs were characterized by coincident, preventable factors; breed was not one of these. Study results supported previous recommendations for multifactorial approaches, instead of single-factor solutions such as breed-specific legislation, for dog bite prevention. An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie * The link is fine.

http://radio.pblnn.com/shows/interv...g-bite-related-fatalities-in-the-us-2000-2009

Your "study" link is to a radio show put on by pit bull apologists.

There is no link to the actual study, but from what I can see that study was by vets sympathetic to the pit bull owners and apologists.

It appears to rely on the same false narrative that has been debunked here many times........the lie that you can't identify a pit bull.

Unfortunately for that argument--as has been explained here MANY times--you CAN easily identify a pit bull and the legal definition is clear:

A "pit bull," is defined as any dog that is an American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, or any dog displaying the majority of physical traits of any one (1) or more of the above breeds, or any dog exhibiting those distinguishing characteristics which substantially conform to the standards established by the American Kennel Club or United Kennel Club for any of the above breeds. Dias v. City & County of Denver, 567 F.3d 1169, 1173 (10th Cir. Colo. 2009)

Law trumps the false narratives of pit bull apologists.........every time.

That's why so many of them are serving jail terms.

:2usflag:
 
Last edited:
Your "study" link is to a radio show put on by pit bull apologists.

There is no link to the actual study, but from what I can see that study was by vets sympathetic to the pit bull owners and apologists.

It appears to rely on the same false narrative that has been debunked here many times........the lie that you can't identify a pit bull.

Unfortunately for that argument--as has been explained here MANY times--you CAN easily identify a pit bull and the legal definition is clear:



Law trumps the false narratives of pit bull apologists.........every time.

That's why so many of them are serving jail terms.

:2usflag:





So lets review, you don't know what a pitbull is, and now you don't even know what a peer reviewed study is.


ACo-occurrence of potentially preventable factors in 256 dog bite–related fatalities in the United States (2000–2009)


That's science, bro. What you have is hysterics, misinformation, and anecdotal.
 
Here's a good explanation of just exactly why you can identify a pit bull.

Pit Bull FAQ - Dangerous Dogs - DogsBite.org

"Pit bull dogs possess unique and readily identifiable physical and behavioral traits which are capable of recognition both by dog owners of ordinary intelligence..." - Ohio v. Anderson, Supreme Court of Ohio (1991)

:2usflag:
 
Back
Top Bottom