|03-04-2014 02:36 PM|
|A girl and her dog||
|02-22-2014 09:21 PM|
Another interesting tidbit that builds on your thoughts about perception issues:
"A 2008 report on media bias by the National Canine Research Council (available on their website at http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil...ience-interest) compared the type of media coverage given for dog attacks that occurred during a four–day period in August 2007 with intriguing results:
On day one, a Labrador mix attacked an elderly man, sending him to the hospital. News stories of his attack appeared in one article in the local paper.
On day two, a mixed–breed dog fatally injured a child. The local paper ran two stories.
On day three, a mixed–breed dog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital. One article ran in the local paper.
On day four, two pit bulls that broke off their chains attacked a woman trying to protect her small dog. She was hospitalized. Her dog was uninjured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on the major cable news networks.
It is not a stretch to see how such news coverage could influence calls for breed bans from the frightened public and its legislators."
Note: this is from the same paper I posted at the start of the other thread.
|02-22-2014 09:15 PM|
|02-22-2014 09:13 PM|
|02-22-2014 09:02 PM|
I guarantee there are far less pit bulls in the US than people think. Pit bull means American Pit Bull Terrier, nothing else. The fact it describes a type of dog infuriates me. It is not a "type"... It's a BREED. Same as a GSD. Can we go around calling any dog with pointy ears and a double coat a GSD? Say that "type" of dog started attacking. Would everyone who loves the breed stand around and let the media twist people's thinking to that a GSD can be any any old dog that kind of looks like one? People talk about all of the pit bulls in shelters, but I'd bet money most, almost all of those dogs are mixed and a good portion probably don't have pit bull in them at all. Real pit bulls, papered ones (when the papers are actually legit) are not nearly as easy to get ahold of as the dogs most accept to be pit bulls. American Staffordshire Terriers are not pit bulls.
I try to tell people unless they have papers not to call their dog a pit bull even if it looks like one, because there are a lot of breeds that when mixed with some other breeds look just like a pit. But it isn't. Then the dog bites.... One more dangerous "pit bull" to add to the list. No one says anything about it because it is just accepted that pit bulls are short coated dogs with a brick-like head.
I think I saw a dogsbite.org link in this thread somewhere, that site is garbage and full of misinformation, so I would take anything from there with a grain of salt... They like to make up their own facts and statistics.
I can't stand BSL, I don't agree that GSDs won't be targeted in the future. If "pit bulls" eventually get banned, maybe not immediately but eventually GSDs, rotties, Dobes... they will be next. The same people that couldn't handle their "pit bull" will get another dog they can't handle (like a GSD) and we will have another dog attack pandemic. PEOPLE are the problem!
|02-22-2014 08:01 PM|
Like others who have posted on this thread, I oppose breed bans and other forms of breed-specific legislation.
I really don’t think we are going to see breed bans spread. In fact, I think that we are going to see a lot of municipalities and states repeal bans they currently have in place.
This paper has a lot of good information.
“Pit Bull Bans: The State of Breed-Specific Legislation”
Pit Bull Bans: The State of Breed–Specific Legislation
Re: State of Breed-Ban Legislation
“Hundreds of municipalities of all sizes and geographic locations throughout the country have adopted BSL. (One of the most comprehensive, up–to–date lists of BSL jurisdictions can be found at www.understand–a–bull.com.) Still other towns are repealing existing bans, such as Edwardsville, Kansas, which removed its pit bull ban after the nearby Niko case ended.
In 2009 new statewide BSL bills were introduced in Hawaii, Montana, and Oregon, where there are two BSL bills pending. One would ban “pit bulls” from Oregon unless a person has obtained a permit within 90 days of the bill’s passage; the other would require minimum liability insurance coverage of $1 million for pit bull owners..."
"Interestingly, 12 states have passed laws prohibiting the passage of BSL by local governments: Florida and Pennsylvania (although bills are currently pending to repeal this prohibition in both states), California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia. Like the other 11 states, California has ruled that no specific dog breed mix shall be declared potentially dangerous or vicious as a matter of breed, but it does allow BSL related to mandatory spay/neuter programs, meaning it requires dogs of certain breeds to be “fixed.” The city of Denver has perhaps the most tortured history with BSL Denver passed BSL in 1989, but the Colorado State Legislature outlawed BSL in 2004. Denver later reinstated BSL after the city challenged the state’s BSL prohibition, and a judge ruled that Denver’s BSL could be allowed to stand as a home rule exception..."
Re: Who opposes Breed Bans and BSL?
“National animal organizations such as the American Veterinary Medical Association, Humane Society of the United States, Animal Legal Defense Fund, Best Friends Animal Society, American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the American Kennel Club, and the National Animal Control Association all oppose BSL. Otto sums up their position this way: “If the goal is dog–bite prevention, then dogs should be treated as individuals under effective dangerous dog laws and not as part of a breed painted with certain traits that may not be applicable to each dog. By doing so, owners of well–trained, gentle dogs are not punished by a breed ban, while dangerous dogs of all breeds are regulated and may have their day in court to be proven dangerous.”
Note: This has to be one of the few issues in dogdom where all of these groups are in agreement with each other… LOL!
Re: Is BSL effective?
“Extensive studies of the effectiveness of BSL in reducing the number of persons harmed by dog attacks were done in Spain and Great Britain. Both studies concluded that their “dangerous animals acts,” which included pit bull bans, had no effect at all on stopping dog attacks. The Spanish study further found that the breeds most responsible for bites—both before and after the breed bans—were those breeds not covered by it, primarily German Shepherds and mixed breeds.”
One of the few known instances in which a breed ban’s effectiveness was examined and reported on in the United States occurred in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where a task force was formed in 2003 to look at the effectiveness of its pit bull ban. The task force concluded that the public’s safety had not improved as a result of the ban, despite the fact that the county had spent more than $250,000 per year to round up and destroy banned dogs. Finding that other, non–breed–specific laws already on the books covered vicious animal, nuisance, leash, and other public health and safety concerns, the task force recommended repealing the ban.”
[Note: In addition to these studies, it is also interesting to note that the Netherlands and the Province of Ontario have repealed their breed bans because the legislation was found to be ineffective. [See the NCRC link below for the source of that information]
Re: Options beyond BSL?
“The National Canine Research Council has identified the most common factors found in fatal dog attacks occurring in 2006:
"The ASPCA has proposed a list of solutions for inclusion in breed–neutral laws that hold reckless dog owners accountable for their aggressive animals:
[Note: The AVMA paper and the CDC have made similar community-based recommendations, I posted links to those below]
Other interesting sources of information:
From the AVMA via the CDC site:
From the NCRC
Breed-Specific Legislation (BSL) FAQ I NCRC
From the ASPCA:
Breed Specific Legislation | ASPCA
From the HSUS
Why Breed-Specific Legislation Doesn?t Work : The Humane Society of the United States
|02-22-2014 09:36 AM|
Lexi's story is terribly sad. If that is truly the way it happened, I cant think of any reason why that dog went off his rails.
Sent from Petguide.com Free App
|02-22-2014 09:27 AM|
People may be quick to pull the trigger, while jogging with a lady I did not know well ( jogging group) we were approached by a rather large black and tan dog, looked like a hound mix. He circle barked us before he headed on his way , his bum was in full wiggle mode and his bark suggested hey!!!!! Hellllo !!!! Rather then being aggressive. Well, she froze up, teared up, and went on a tangent about "just being attacked by a big german shepherd " , I ensured her that it was no attack and that dog was the furthest thing from GSD but she was hysterical at that point yelling about animal control and putting the vicious GSD to sleep. At that point the bubbly hound looking mix was long gone, I can just imagine how many of her friends and family got to hear about "the vicious GSD " that day, how many of her friends and family were left with a bad taste in their mouths about GSD s?,
Sent from Petguide.com Free App
|02-22-2014 02:05 AM|
"I wish that the Mirror would get their bloody facts correct about the dog. The dog pictured was not the dog that attacked the child at all. I have a Dogue De Bordeaux as in the picture and they are the most placid dog around kids. I have been yelled at by a woman today saying I should muzzle my dangerous dog all because some idiot reported that it was a Dogue De Bordeaux and not a Bull Dog. Unbelieveable and I am so angry about this. I feel sorry for the child and mother, but this is very bad reporting."
|02-22-2014 01:39 AM|
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|