Ontario To Ban Pitbulls

[Darth Wong]

In Germany, the various states have banned what most consider "fight dogs", like pit bulls.
The funny thing about it is that "normal" dogs like shepperds, rottweiler, or dobermänner, lead the bite statistic.
It's only because the media has a sort-of frenzy for pit bulls, that the public is so afraid.

It isn't bites we're worried about, it's life-threatening or fatal maulings. Most dogs are capable of biting, but very few actually go for the kill. And whenever it happens, the owner is always in the paper saying "he's such a loving dog, this is so totally unlike him, I don't know what happened" ... the story has been repeated too many times.

[Iceberg]

Stupid people shouldn't own dogs. And by "stupid" I mean those new-agey dumbfucks who don't realize that dogs are basically wolves, albeit wolves with generations of behavior-modification.

Dogs are great animals but they ain't human and never will be. To pretend otherwise is purest delusion.

[Sir Sirius]

In Germany, the various states have banned what most consider "fight dogs", like pit bulls.
The funny thing about it is that "normal" dogs like shepperds, rottweiler, or dobermänner, lead the bite statistic.
It's only because the media has a sort-of frenzy for pit bulls, that the public is so afraid.

Did those statistics give the ratio of bites per a dog of a particular breed or just the number of bites by dogs of a particular breed? If the later the statistic is kinda meaningless, since most likely there are a whole lot more "normal dogs" in Germany then there are "fighting dogs".

[Korvan]

General unpredictability. Pitbulls are the only breed that has been known to attack their owners.

I agree with your other points, but I wanted to discuss this one a bit. A properly bred and raised pit bull will be anything but unpredictable. Back in the days when dog fighting was legal, the night before a fight the owners would exchange dogs, inorder to check to see if there were any inbedded objects in the dog (usually steel plates). If the dogs acted aggressively towards the other owner, they were put down.

In fact, any aggressiveness towards people would result in the destruction of the dog and the end of it's bloodline. Since most of the fights were not to the death (although a dog often died from its woulds later), a referee would have to set in and stop the fight once a winner was obvious. This ref would seperate the dogs, usually without incident. Again, any attack on a ref would result in the dog being put down.

Rather than viciousness being the primary trait sought, the most highly desired trait in pitbulls (and pokemon) is gameness. That is a dog that will not give up until absolutely forced to. The breeding of pitbulls was well regulated and resulted in a dog that was safe around people, but death to other dogs. This all changed when fighting was outlawed.

The careful breeding of the past is no longer done, and some of the dogs are just not being raised properly. This, coupled with the degeneration of the bloodlines can result in unpredictable dangerous dogs.

A friend of mine has a pitbull, she was rescued as a puppy from a crackhouse. As a pup, her previous owners sicc'd other dogs on her. Today, she is fine around cats, and people, including tail-pulling, ear-tweaking children, but other dogs make her extremely anxious, to the point that she will attack if they get too close to her.

To people, her most dangerous act is her exuberant tail-wagging. Against bare skin, it will draw blood if she gets too excited (not to mention knock over anything not secured). Her pain thresshold is amazing. I've seen her bash her head on the corner of a coffee table, making a loud thump, and not even react at all.

Basically, a properly bred and raised pitbull will not be unpredictable, but unfortunately, this breed draws assholes like shit draws flies. Beware the owner, cause the dog will likely be an extention of their own personality. If you can trust the owner, you'll likely be able to trust the dog.

I'd be against the ban, but in favour of strict licensing and harsh penalties if the dog does attack anyone, though as existing dogs will not be destroyed under the ban, I wouldn't be protesting too hard.

[His Divine Shadow]

People complaining about pitbulls should look at this, be warned though, very graphic, also has statistics for pitbull violence and such:
http://www.deviantart.com/view/11454716/

[Bob the Gunslinger]

I don't understand how the owners of violent animals have the gall to protest the destruction of their animals. If I had a dog that viciously attacked a little boy, I certainly wouldn't love it anymore.

I think that most vicious animals are vicious because of the owners. Pit bulls are actually a pretty friendly breed when they are not raised to be fighting dogs. Rottweillers and Chows are naturally both more aggressive and more dangerous, but they are less likely to maul people because they are usually socialized. Often the problem is that the kind of people who buy pit bulls are the kind of people who want vicious-ass monster dogs. And guess what they end up with.

[Cairber]

part of me understands this band...but then theres the other part...I grew up with a pitbull, a family pet pitbull named Boswell....from the day i was born. (and there were 2 other babies running around during that period as well). He never laid a paw or tooth on any of us. It would suck to be in a family that has a family pitbull and have to give it up.

Boswell was pure bred, and he was the third pitbull my father owned. He never had a problem with any of them. I guess it just goes to show that theres exceptions to every rule.

On a sad note Boswell was "dognapped" out of the backyard and, from what we could gather by what they left on our front yard, forced to fight. he lost...

[Cairber]

of course, if i would have read more carefully i would have noticed the families who have pitbulls DONT have to give them up...but they do need to muzzle them and whatnot