It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

OP/ED: Toronto to Ban Pits... Could the ban be Spreading?!

page: 10
0
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2004 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
Well there you go. One bite and it kills another dog. And it bit a postman. And this is supposedly a good Pit. This is the measure of good? Then what is average or below average?



One thing people have to learn is animal behavior. A tail wagging is not aways a sign of happiness. Dogs produce pheromones (sp?) and wag their tail to emit the odor. When my chi goes into attack mode, he wags his tail.

Secondly, never pet a dog OF ANY BREED without the owner's permission especially on the head as this puts the dog in a submissive position. The postman was completely at fault! My mother has a mini dachsund and little kids always want to pet and hold her because they think she is a puppy. Mom has to tell them no. This dog WILL bite.




posted on Oct, 23 2004 @ 07:02 PM
link   
It looks like they are holding a rally against the pit bull ban.


cbc.ca
TORONTO - About 300 angry dog lovers staged a rally in Toronto Saturday to protest Ontario's proposed pit bull ban.
Protesters waved signs calling Ontario's attorney general an 'inherently dangerous beast.'

The gathering was supposed to be "humans-only," but many brought their pets with them to Queen's Park.

The ban was proposed on Oct. 15 by Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant in response to some recent shocking pit bull attacks on people and dogs.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.



posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Indeed, and the rally went okay.

Nobody was hurt, and no riots broke out.

[edit on 25-10-2004 by MacKiller]



posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 06:32 PM
link   
I wonder what the stats are like for dog attacks from places where they ARE banned. That would be good ammunition for either side....


From article.... Pit bull bans have been successfully introduced in a number of Canadian cities. Winnipeg was the first in 1990, with Kitchener-Waterloo and Windsor following suit.




posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lady Lily
One thing people have to learn is animal behavior.


Pit bulls do have a diffrent behavior than most dogs. My father raised pit bulls all of my life, leaving me well within range of the dogs. I've walked these dogs in bad neighborhoods....

First thing: What do you expect when you upset a dog and they want to attack? How do they warn you? Most dogs lay their ears back and growl meanacingly. You know, as soon as you see that, that you need to be careful. Dogs do this because they are scared of the fight that they are about to get into.

Pit Bulls don't. They put their ears forward and go to that, "I'm paying attention to you," look. Their tails don't wag, and they often have to be taught to bark and growl. Animals are not particularly dangerous when you can read them, but if you assume that Pits act like normal dogs, you are going to do something stupid and get bit.

Frankly, if you are an adult, and you don't know this about the dog, it's partially your fault that you got bit when you try to pet it. If you don't teach your kids to not play with the strange doggie, it's just as much your fault. Take some responsibility for yourselves people.

We've raised at least 5 full grown pits and around 20 pups. None have ever bitten anyone. All were sweethearts.

To make matters worse, people do not cull or selectively breed their animals. Not only do you kill off those animals with major physaical genetic problems, but also those with evil tempers, or who are continually scared. Cowardly dogs bite, period. (Do you have any clue how many times I've HAD to kick a chihuahua?) Most of the bad tempered pits out there are raised to be mean, starved to near death...you take out the chance of those with bad tempers by having bad breeding practices, period. Papered Pit Bulls are the safest pits you can get. Look for those papered under the Staffordshire Terriers.

(By the way, the reason Dalmations are so evil now is because of a genetic disorder, their skulls don't grow fast enough for their brains, giving them chronic headaches, making it not worth keeping them after about 3-4 years of age.)

Sorry for the rant, it's just a sore spot for me, lol...

[edit on 25-10-2004 by jlc163]



posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
Well there you go. One bite and it kills another dog.


Yes , thats right. My dog was attacked by someone elses dog, being walked off the lead. If the other owner had have been a responsible dog owner and complied with the local laws, the incident would not have happened.


Originally posted by Indy
And it bit a postman.


As I explained, the postman got off his bike, then reached over my 5ft fence to pat her. On the fence is a large sign which states,"Caution, Guard dog on duty. Enter at your own risk."

My house and yard is my dogs territory. It is her job to keep people out, not lick the burglars to death.


Originally posted by Indy
And this is supposedly a good Pit.


Not a good Pit, a good dog. A good watch dog. This is what is expected of a watch dog, to protect the premises.


Originally posted by Indy
Actually we've seen enough pics in the past to know what a Pit could and would do to a little child.


I don't see how this statement relates to my dog. The yard is fenced, and a small child could not get in.

In fact, I would question the ability of a person to be a parent, somebody who would let a small child to roam anywhere it pleased unsupervised. Dog or no dog, that child is already in danger.



posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Love your answer jlc! You have hit the nail on the HEAD!

Another thing I heard about dalmations acting "crazy" is that because of 101 Dalmations, they were inbred and over bred and many are deaf. They can't hear your commands and, if I'm not mistaken, the Dalmation Society advocates putting down deaf puppies. (If I am wrong, please correct me!) They can be taught sign language and are then very good dogs.



posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Toronto to Ban Pit Bulls? Outrageous! UPDATE: It's Official!

Well I would say the solution to this would be to have the dogs Tagged and registered and when out being walked they have to be muzzled at all times if not face a fine of $100.

If someone is hurt when on the owners property depending on the situation then the owner should take full responsibility for it and if that means a fine then pay it. If the dog has to be put down then it should be.



posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   
SE7EN, it wouldn't work because the people who are not responsible for their dogs probably don't pay their bills, neglect their dogs, their kids, themsleves, have expired driver's licenses and are generally crappy citizens.

It's NOT right that everyone suffers for a few.



posted on Oct, 26 2004 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Oh come on this is getting plain silly....
Pro pit bull proponents are telling us to "blame the owner not the dog"
Now the owners are trying to move the responsibility to the victims themselves....

Talk about trying to aviod responsibility for their actions.
This is similar to saying, "Hey its YOUR fault you got shot, why were you standing at the end of my gun?"

So you think that maybe the VICTIMS should be banned from the cities because they cannot second guess YOUR vicious "pets"? Would this argument be acceptable for any other life threatening situation? I doubt it...

Next time you see some kid with their face ripped off because of a dog attack, be sure and tell them it was their fault. I am sure that will go down well. Such avoidance of responsibility is really pathetic



Originally posted by jlc163

Originally posted by Lady Lily
One thing people have to learn is animal behavior.


Animals are not particularly dangerous when you can read them, but if you assume that Pits act like normal dogs, you are going to do something stupid and get bit.

Frankly, if you are an adult, and you don't know this about the dog, it's partially your fault that you got bit when you try to pet it. If you don't teach your kids to not play with the strange doggie, it's just as much your fault. Take some responsibility for yourselves people.

[edit on 25-10-2004 by jlc163]



[edit on 26-10-2004 by Netchicken]

[edit on 26-10-2004 by Netchicken]



posted on Oct, 26 2004 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Once again, there is no GENE that makes a pitbull naturally human aggressive. This is a complete falsehood. These dogs are not 'man-eating, blood thirsty carnivores, waiting to rip the flesh from your bones'. People are so confused/ ignorant to the fact that Pit Bulls are human friendly, but may be animal aggressive. Please don't confuse the two. If a pit, or any other breed, is human aggresive, they were either a) not properly socialized, b) trained to be so, or c) genetically damaged.

I reiterate....If I wanted an aggressive dog, I would have got a Poodle or Chow-Chow.

I always, always, walk my Pit Bull on a leash. I am more afraid of other peoples dogs, that are not leashed. If an unleashed dog runs at mine, and a fight ensues, I will be held responsible. My dog won't start the fight, but he bloody well will finish it. I will be at fault, and looked to be the 'bad' guy. This is a crock.

A sad day for an American Icon, who was once the adopted mascot of America........











Helen Keller with Pit Bull







Yes, the "big, bad" Pit Bull IS a man-eating monster!!!!



posted on Oct, 26 2004 @ 08:03 AM
link   
I kind of agree with this ban, no offence to the pit-bull, but it is not suitable to be left to roam around in human society. It is far too violent, and violence for a pitball need not to be provoked. They are naturally fighting creatures, and very vicious ones at that.

I recall this very nasty dog, I think it was a pit-bull(if I recall right) one of the neighbours had. They were so outrageously irresponsible, they left it outside the door, without a leash and without supervision, what I guessed might have been for hours at times. Everytime I walked past, this dog would pace towards me, in a vicious stance, in an obvious attempt to intimidate me. I would just shuffle away, and my heart would be beating rapidly.

One day, while in was walking courtyard, it appeared out of nowhere, charged for me and tried to attack me, I fell backwards and was on the floor. Thank god for me, he had a bite guard on.

I don't know what happend to that dog now. Either, the family moved out, or the dog was taken away.

We cannot always hold the owners liable, if their dog is unleashed, it is probably because they are confident in it. A lot of dog owners, with the same confidence, take their dogs on walks off-leash. Personally, I think it is a very dangerous and irresponsible practice. It only takes a split-second for things to go wrong.

A few months ago, while taking my dog for a walk, this two dogs suddenly ran across the main road to meet him. Their owner was left stunned, she told me they don't do that usually. Thank god for them, there were no cars in the road at the time. My dog is also the same, hence why I always have him on a leash outside(unless it in an enclosed space, or the nearby street) because he cannot control his urges to meet other dogs sometimes.

In the same way I never leave my dog chained to a post when going out. Even though he is chained, anything could happen, without my supervision. I have full responsiblity of his safety.

Getting a dog, entails a lot of responsbility. You are not just getting a dog, you are adoping a child, a new member of the family, and the only one to protect them, is you. The only one to take responsbility for them is you. Getting a pit-ball means accepting responsibility for what it can do, thus getting one, is very irresponsible indeed. A ban is a good idea.

I do, however, have a problem with this ban, for those who do own pit-bulls already. It can be really heart-shattering to have a family member taken away from you, it's like losing a limb. So I suggest that those who do own pit-bulls should be able to prove that their dog is not a danger to society, and if it's not, it would be inhuman for the authorities to take it away.

Someone once told me, a rescued pit-ball, who was very happy, friendly and licking a cop in his face etc, was later shot by the same cop, because he was considered illegal and needed to be disposed of. That is truly disgusting and evil in every sense of the word.

[edit on 26-10-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Oct, 26 2004 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Its common knowledge that Pits are dangerous dogs. Some just choose to ignore that fact to protect their pet. Sure a poodle can bite. I can also give it a swift kick and thats the end of the confrontation. That is far from the truth with a pit. Most people can survive a dog attack with nothing more than stitches. When a Pit attacks you are dealing with massive injuries. If a Poodle bites your hand you are dealing with stitches. If a Pit bites your hand you are dealing with man stitches and a crushed hand. If a Poodle attacks a 2 year old you can give the dog a good kick and it will release. The Pit will keep attacking until its darn near killed the kid. The stats were posted earlier in this thread. The dog makes up like 1% of the population but around 2/3rds of all fatal attacks. Not a coincidence. Comparing a Poodle to a Pit is nuts. Thats like trying to justify having a hand grenade because someone else has a firecracker. Yeah they both explode but the similarities end there.



posted on Oct, 26 2004 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Pits are not dangerous animals. Not dog is inherently dangerous. They are a product of the sick people who trained them to be that way. There are over 60,000 pits in Chicago alone. If they were that dangerous, we would be seeing a heck of alot more attacks/fatalities.

Just like people trying to blame the gun for the murder, and not looking at the person pulling the trigger.

Pure ignorance



posted on Oct, 26 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
Oh come on this is getting plain silly....Now the owners are trying to move the responsibility to the victims themselves....


I never said it was fully the "victim's" fault. I was just saying that if you do something stupid, like go onto someone else's property (which is illegal here, as it is part of the house), just to play with their pet, without them being around, no wonder you got bit. You went somewhere you wern't supposed to be, and were a threat to that dog, the property, or the owners of that house in that poor dogs mind. You are supposed to be the creature of reason, NOT the dog. There are times when the victim is just a victim of their own stupidity, and no one's at fault but THEM.

Have you ever seen a child with a dog? If they are young enough, they pull the dog's ears that most dogs yelp in pain (that IS NOT the worst they do). If a person doens't have a child, they often never see that happen to their dog, and so won't train the dog for tolerance. That is the owner's fault. The two year old child left running the neighborhood without the thraining to know not to touch a strange animal is the PARENT'S fault. Parents whom through NEGLECT had their child mauled shold have the child taken away from them, period. They should also be steralized (me being arogant here). They are unfit.

Now, I did not go into what should be done to a dog that bites. Did you assume that I just want these dogs running free? God forbid! If the dog is a threat, put it to sleep, IMMEDIATELY. The person who owned that dog, before they EVER get another dog, should be put through training as to HOW to raise their dog. The stupidity on the part of EVERYBODY needs to stop.

Did you not read further about going to a reputable breeder for your Pit? Did you not read about culling the dogs that are wrong in the head BEFORE they get to adulthood? I'm just tired of reading about people who deserved to be attacked (not the children, they are honestly victims) getting a dog put to sleep for DOING IT'S JOB.
ANY dog misbred is a problem. ANY dog misraised is a problem. ANY fool that sneaks around your house and gets bit for being stupid is not a problem, and never will be.

I've NEVER had a problem with my pit bulls. We got dogs with good disposition, socialised them, taught them proper behavior, and learned to read when they were upset. For God's sake, I had a pit bull that could climb pines some 17-25 ft before it would grab a hold of a branch and hang there. I was 12, and it obeyed me, and did not maul anyone, thank you very much.


XL5

posted on Oct, 26 2004 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Its like parents who give thier 12yrs old a motor scooter. The parent knows the kid could get hurt and tells them to be safe, but they never tell the kid the reason they could get hurt. They never say to the kid that they could follow every sign and rule there is but others don't! Then what happens, they ban them. They take the simple way out and ban them and not regulate them in a fair way just because a few people were careless!

Pits are like cops, some will go for blood and others are fair, but most are protectors depending on how they are brought up and trained - try and refute that!



posted on Oct, 26 2004 @ 11:30 PM
link   
Well where do we start with jlc's latest post.

1 Why is it assumed that the victim is doing something stupid? There are MANY instances both here in this thread and in the media where the victims are totally innocent, merely in the wrong place at the wrong time. What you are doing is taking a sub group of victims (those who come onto your property) and generalizing that to be ALL the victims.

2. Next, its the Parents fault. Gee, if its not the victim, then lets find another scapegoat to pass the blame to. Anyone but the true source of it will do. So parents are supposed to tell their kids that small ugly white dogs are dangerous and to run like hell when they see them? Just how is a kid then to differentuate between that descruiption and the friendly corgi (another small ugly dog) next door? Of course then if the kid gets mauled on his way to school, it MUST be his fault.

3. So even if the dog is "doing its job" and attacks someone on its property it is OK? If you carried a loaded gun around with you and you shot an innocent person coming on to your property, say to retrieve a ball, or to sell girl guide cookies, just point blank, .."Excuse me mister would you like to buy ... BAM" then the person is at fault because you are doing what you are trained to do? Rationalizations abound among the pit bull owners.

If you had bear traps hidden around your house, on the path between the fence and the door, and someone lost a leg by innocently stepping in them, could you claim that it was the persons fault? Its the same argument.

What amazed me about your post was its not "Oh dear how unfortunate for the poor kid, gues he's screwed for the rest of his life now" its "They DESERVED to be attacked." Am I reading you right, if somone comes onto your property legitmatly, then they deserve to die? or to be mauled and scared for life? So there is a body of the population who just deserve death by coming onto your property, by making an honest mistake? Because THAT is what you are saying.

What you are doing is not examining the facts in total, but instead are taking a small proportion of dog bites, those of people inncently coming on to the dogs property, and using that as justification for blaming ALL attacks on the victims. Its a deliberate selective choosing of the cases to support your view.

At the end of the day, what is easier... get rid of the kids / adults who are innocnetly attacked, or just get rid of the source of the problem... the dogs.




Originally posted by jlc163
I never said it was fully the "victim's" fault. I was just saying that if you do something stupid, like go onto someone else's property (which is illegal here, as it is part of the house), just to play with their pet, without them being around, no wonder you got bit. You went somewhere you wern't supposed to be, and were a threat to that dog, the property, or the owners of that house in that poor dogs mind. You are supposed to be the creature of reason, NOT the dog. There are times when the victim is just a victim of their own stupidity, and no one's at fault but THEM.

The two year old child left running the neighborhood without the thraining to know not to touch a strange animal is the PARENT'S fault. Parents whom through NEGLECT had their child mauled shold have the child taken away from them, period. They should also be steralized (me being arogant here). They are unfit.

I'm just tired of reading about people who deserved to be attacked (not the children, they are honestly victims) getting a dog put to sleep for DOING IT'S JOB.
ANY fool that sneaks around your house and gets bit for being stupid is not a problem, and never will be.


[edit on 26-10-2004 by Netchicken]



posted on Oct, 27 2004 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Parents whom through NEGLECT had their child mauled shold have the child taken away from them, period. They should also be steralized (me being arogant here). They are unfit.


That wouldn't happen if the dog was muzzled now would it?

Okay, so the dog's are going to be muzzled outside the house, now we are going to hear stories about people being attacked inside the house...



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Okay, in response to Toronto's proposed ban on Pit Bulls and on behalf of all other "vicious" breeds (Rotts, Dobies, etc.), please read an excerp from the article below...

Dog saves woman's life by calling 911
Friday, October 29, 2004 Posted: 7:26 AM EDT (1126 GMT)
RICHLAND, Washington (AP) -- Leana Beasley has faith that a dog is man's best friend.
Faith, a 4-year-old Rottweiler, phoned 911 when Beasley fell out of her wheelchair and barked urgently into the receiver until a dispatcher sent help. Then the service dog unlocked the front door for the police officer.
"I sensed there was a problem on the other end of the 911 call," said dispatcher Jenny Buchanan. "The dog was too persistent in barking directly into the phone receiver. I knew she was trying to tell me something."
Faith is trained to summon help by pushing a speed-dial button on the phone with her nose after taking the receiver off the hook, said her owner, Beasley, 45, who suffers grand mal seizures.
Guided by experts at the Assistance Dog Club of Puget Sound, Beasley helped train Faith herself.
The day of the fall, Faith "had been acting very clingy, wanting to be touching me all day long," Beasley said Thursday.
The dog, whose sensitive nose can detect changes in Beasley's body chemistry, is trained to alert her owner to impending seizures.
But that wasn't what was happening on September 7, and Faith apparently wasn't sure how to communicate the problem. During Beasley's three-week hospital stay, doctors determined her liver was not properly processing her seizure medication.


www.cnn.com...

ONE POINT FOR ROTTIES!



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
1 Why is it assumed that the victim is doing something stupid?

This had nothing to do with assumptions, lol. THey were bannned where we lived up north beause someone who broke into a house was bit. (It was the owner of the house breaking in while his tennants were away. There are laws against just going into your tennant's home, it requires permission.) Some people are innocent, as I made reference to several times.


2. Next, its the Parents fault.
PARTIALLY! PARTIALLY! PPARTIALLY! Can you say that word??? Yes, parents that don't raise their kids responsibly are at fault. I made it clear to my youngest borther that he should NEVER mess with a dog he did not know without an adult present. It's rather stupid not to. This is the same child I told not to mess with our rooster (more of a danger than any dog we met, and I wanted that pain in the butt killed the first time the damned thing spurred me). I say this with having a cousin who was mauled after going in his grandmother's backyard, by his grandma's Rottwilers, after being told SEVERAL times to NEVER go back there, for ANY reasons. He still says it's his fault, his broters say it was his fault, and his parents say it was his fault because he didn't do as he was told. I still feel sorry from him, his parents were worried sick while he was in the hospitol, I don't wish it upon him or any other child, but he was still at fault for disobedience. If the dog has a real problem with biting, it should be put to sleep, always, no questions asked. (and yes, those two rotts need to be put to sleep...they were habitual biters and had a wolfpack mentality. NOT GOOD.) I never said that that the dog was ABSOLUTELY NOT AT FAULT FOR EVERY SIGNLE CASE where a child gets bit. In my cousin's case, the dogs were at fault too, and should have been put to sleep, and eventually were. FAULT IS NEVER 100%.


3.If you carried a loaded gun around with you and you shot an innocent person coming on to your property, say to retrieve a ball, or to sell girl guide cookies, just point blank, .."Excuse me mister would you like to buy ... BAM" then the person is at fault because you are doing what you are trained to do?
Actually, in some areas around here, as long as there's a fence up, and there's a no-tresspassers sign up, yeah, you could get away with that, lol...When they mean no tresspassing, they mean it.
I didn't want to take 3 hours to discuss in detail where and when this applies. I was thinking about where there was a fence and a dog behind it, and idiots jumping the fence, expecting to cut across my yard, for whatever reason (usually to break into the house). There is a fence and a big dog, you are an idiot for jumping the fence, period. You get a hunk of tailbone missing from doing something ILLEGAL, that's your bsuiness, not mine. As for the bear traps, if they are illegal to use, then you have fault... but if there's one on your property and some fool does something illegal, they are at fault. And you can't train a bear trap, so that's a bit of a strain for an analogy. Get one that fits, please.


What amazed me about your post was its not "Oh dear how unfortunate for the poor kid, gues he's screwed for the rest of his life now" its "They DESERVED to be attacked." Am I reading you right, if somone comes onto your property legitmatly, then they deserve to die?

As I said, I didn't want to write for 3000 years, so I kept it abbreviated. I was making the point that in this state it is illegal, and if you break the law, it's on your own head. It is, no matter if you feel bad for someone's "mistake" or not.


What you are doing is not examining the facts in total, but instead are taking a small proportion of dog bites, those of people inncently coming on to the dogs property, and using that as justification for blaming ALL attacks on the victims. Its a deliberate selective choosing of the cases to support your view.
When your point is that SOMETIMES things are not what it seems, you have to select a few to show your side of the argument, which is all I was pulling from for the moment. Oh, and it's not selective choosing when they write up these banns??? Often times, when they decide to do a ban, they relate the deatails of the perfect cases (2-3), where the dog was totally at fault, and it's such a sob story, and then use the basic statistics in the form of this type of breed was bit this many adults and kids, irrelevant of what went on. That is not right either. This is why I'm grumpily saying things on this thread. (Do you also realise that a lot of the dogs labeled as pit bulls are often mix breeds and few have any pit bull blood whatsoever. They looked like a pit, and are reported as a pit. You can't say it's all this breed when you can't prove it was all done by this breed. Do you know how many diffrent PAPERED breeds LOOK like pits???) The data's a bit more misconstued than people would realise, mostly because they refuse to look. Don't ever tell me that we are going to bann mongrels/mutts now, lol...just becase they have the higest biting rate out of all dogs?



At the end of the day, what is easier... get rid of the kids / adults who are innocnetly attacked, or just get rid of the source of the problem... the dogs.
EASIER IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT. It was honestly easier to keep blacks and whites seperated in the segregation ALREADY IN PLACE than it was to right the wrongs of segregation and FIGHT for equality. It was easier to STAY OUT of WWII and let Hitler kill the Jews than for america to get up and fight. To just say we're going to bann the whole breed because the statistics (which are often NOT fully checked out) says they are bad, becuase the word of mouth is that they';re evil, oh boy, what a LAZY way to go about it! Reminds me of most politicans, lol....Quick fixes *shakes head sadly...*



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join