PITBULL ban is happening today

[Tim and Julie B]

Aggression with most animals is learned. Yes some are more aggressive than others by nature, but it's not genetics that makes them this way. To say that is to say that serial killers and other criminals are jsut simply born that way due to bad genetics. C'mon, that would be a load of crap. No one would ever buy into that. It's not plausible.

Destoy bad dogs, or fine the owners, whatever!! But why on earth ban the WHOLE breed?

Julie

[mykee]

BoAddict: Where did I mention or reference me being better than anyone? Get your head outta your a....I use my dogs as 'devils advocates' becaue they're both Labs, and febble-minded individuals continuously attack Labs as an opposition to pittbulls. Stoopid comparison, I know but hey, that's their prerogative. I'm bringing irrefutable facts to the table, as a few others are, commendably I might add, not opinion or biased views.
Julie: So, we should do something about an individual "bad" dog AFTER it eats a baby? Brilliant thinking!
Point is, we can argue this point until we're all blue in the face, FACT remains the province is stepping up to the plate, and though skewed, I'm pleased action is being taken.

[Vengeance]

Originally posted by Tim and Julie B
C'mon people, how often do people report bites from thier own dogs or cute little yappy fuzz balls????

You most likely don't hear about it because the damage caused isn't severe enough to warrant public knowledge. Personally I'd take the bite of a cute little fuzz ball over that of a pitbull anyday. Sure there may be many more reports of other breeds of dogs and the attacks that happen. But mabye the reason we don't hear about it is because the attacks arn't as devistating as that of a pit bull attack. I don't have any numbers to support anything but if anyone can find them that be great, but how many other breeds of dogs have killed as many people as pit bulls? A death will allways hit the news and allways has to be reported so I can assume that their has to be accurate information somewhere about it. To me that would be an interesting comparision. But here are some interesting facts, old and unreleated to my above point but interesting none the less.

The most recently published statistics are from 1994. Other statistical sources provide estimates of dog-related injuries.

In 2001, an estimated 68 million dogs were pets in the United States.

In 2001, an estimated 368,245 victims were treated for dog bite related injuries.

In 2001, children ages 5-9 had the highest dog-related injuries.

In 2001, an estimated 42% of dog bites (or 154,625) occurred in children age 14 and younger.

Approximately 7.9% of dog bites (or 16,476) were work-related.

Dog bite injury sites for all victims include:

45.3% to the arm/hand

25.8% to the leg/foot

22.8% to the head/neck.

For children 4 years and under, 64.9% of injuries were to the head/neck.

For those 15 and older, 86.2% of injuries from dog attacks were to the extremities.

Types of dog-related injuries recorded in Emergency Rooms:

26.4% as "dog bite"

40.2% as "puncture"

24.7% as "laceration"

6.0% as "contusion/abrasion/hematoma

1.5% as "cellulitis/infection"

0.8% as "amputation/avulsion/crush"

0.4% as "fracture/dislocation"

From 1979 through 1996, dog attacks resulted in more than 300 human dog-bite related deaths in the United States. Most of the victims were children.

In 1997 and 1998, at least 27 people died as a result of dog bite attacks (18 in 1997, and 9 in 1998). Of these, 19 were young children between zero and 11 years of age, and 8 were older children and adults between 17 and 87 years of age.

Of the 27 people who died as a result of dog bite attacks in 1997 and 1998, 67 percent (18) involved unrestrained dogs on the owner's property; 19 percent (5) involved unrestrained dogs off the owner's property; 11 percent (3) involved restrained dogs on the owner's property; and 4 percent (1) involved a restrained dog off the owner's property.

60 percent of the fatal dog bite attacks by unrestrained dogs that occurred off the owner's property in 1997 and 1998 involved attacks by more than one dog.

Of the 27 people who died as a result of dog bite attacks during 1997 and 1998, 67 percent (18) involved an attack by one dog; 19 percent (5) involved an attack by two dogs; and 15 percent (4) involved an attack by 3 dogs.

17 states accounted for the 27 dog bite fatalities that occurred in 1997 and 1998. They were: California (4 deaths); Georgia and North Carolina (3 deaths each); Kansas, Texas, and Wisconsin (2 deaths each); and Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New York, South Dakota, and Tennessee (1 death each).

Rottweilers and Pit Bulls were involved in 60 percent of the 27 dog bite fatalities that occurred in 1997 and 1998. Rottweilers were involved in 10 deaths, and Pit Bulls were involved in 6.

From 1979 through 1998, at least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in 238 human dog bite related deaths. Pit Bulls and Rottweilers were involved in more than 50 percent of these deaths.

Between 1979 and 1998, 58 percent of human deaths involved attacks by unrestrained dogs who were on their owner's property at the time of the attack.

It has been estimated that about 4.5 million people (nearly 2 percent of the American population) are bitten by dogs each year.

In 1994, of the estimated 4.7 million people who were bitten by dogs, 800,000 sought medical care. Of these, 332,000 sought treatment in emergency rooms, and 6,000 were hospitalized.

It has been estimated that nearly 334,000 dog bite injuries are treated in emergency departments each year.

Of those hospitalized for dog bite injuries in 1994, 55 percent were male.

The average hospital stay for a dog-bite injury has been estimated at 3.6 days.

In 1994, hospital charges for dog-bite victims was estimated at $62.5 million.

In 1994, emergency department charges for dog-bite victims was estimated at $102.4 million, and direct medical care charges incurred as a result of dog bites was estimated at $164.9 million.

Statistical Sources: Nonfatal Dog Bite-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments - United States, 2001. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5226a1.htm. Vet Med Today: Special Report, Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998 (JAVMA, Vol. 217, No. 6, September 15, 2000); Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Dog-Bite-related Fatalities - United States, 1995-1996 (MMWR, Vol. 46/No. 21, May 30, 1997).

[RFB]

I wouldn't mind seeing Rottweillers banned as well. There are some breeds that no longer have a place in society today.

[Kimo]

Ok i'm just gonna chime in here one last time, and pose a question to all you yuppies who think these dogs are so bloody agressive...

Recently here in ottawa as a matter of fact, Police were investigating the replacement of their German shepards for a breed that would surpass them for, agility, endurance, and intellignece, of all the dogs selected, screened and crossed off the list, they were left with but one breed, The american pitbull terrier, however later on, a vote was passed to keep their existing breed of german shepards for one, reason and one reason alone, of the 100 pittbulls trained all 100 passed the testing required except for one small part....all 100 refused to bite human, wich was required by their dogs, in order to take down, potentially harmful criminals.

now aint that somthing? all 100 refused to attack? wonder why that was? OH RIGHT I KNOW! because this breed was selectively bred to not be agressive towards humans, right from day one, starting back in the 1800's!!! but all you hate mongerers must be right!!! But alas, Invictus, and so many other Intelligent people have already stated, if you support this ban, you might aswell support a reptile ban, the problem is not with the breed, but with the backyard breeders who are intermixing this species up and creating HYBRIDS! and well know how much Hybrids are frowned upon in the herp community, but do we ban them? or destroy them? do i have the right to tell you, your not allowed to own a HOT snake? even if you take all the proper percautions? no i dont, so get off whatever pedastool your standing on, thinking your better then the rest, because your a speacial case and grow up! NOBODY has the right to take away MY freedom to own this beautiful Breed!

[crucified]

well said kimo..

and as for your comment RFB about banning rottweillers because they have no need in society today..
there are alot of dogs that have no need then..
what the hell do we need a shih tzu for? or a poodle? a pekenese? maybe cuz rottweillers are pretty high up on human affection and companion.. like pit bulls are...
its just the backyard breeders with their inbreed dogs or trying to mix a bit more mastiff or terrier into the genepool and just messing it up..
there should be no reason to ban a breed cuz its not "needed" in society..

like i said.. ban anyone from owning pets if you're gonna pick on one breed.. because eventually everything will be banned then..

[gonesnakee]

As stated it's not about Pitbulls, its about freedom from oppression. Those of you who think its OK to lose your rights & freedoms because someone else knows whats best for you, had best be contempt when you have none left. I won't. Mark

[crucified]

well stated mark..

[marisa]

Reptiles are next.

That's really all I can say. Anyone who is for a ban on any animal cannot possible miss the connection this will have later for reptiles.

I hope you are all getting ready...ANY DAY NOW a burmese could "hurt" someone, and guess what? We banned Pits and everyone was in favor of that, we are now banning snake keeping.

Marisa

[mykee]

I'm getting sick and tired of all these children mentioning that when you allow for a breed of dog to be banned, that maybe all reptiles should be banned too. Let's straighten this out once and for all: A reptile is kept indoors and rarely if ever let outside, in this case, most anyone a reptile is going to injure is their own stoopid owners, not an unsuspecting passerby, a child playing in the street, or a dog being walked on the sidewalk. A dog, you catch my drift....
Kimo; I would LOVE to see some hard fact to your fairy tale that you weave. Are you sure you didn't misread Basset hound for Pittbull?

[marisa]

I never ever said anyone would let a reptile outside. Ever.

In fact, it's obvious that's not what I was implying.

The minute you allow the goverment to do one thing with animal ownership with one species, the minute something "scary" happens with another, it's all the more easy to take the same easy way out.

And we can mention whatever we wish on a public forum. Come on. We all know its FOR discussion. That;s why you even opened the thread up. You didn't click on it hoping to see "Wow this is wonderful...everyone is great and we all agree" You clicked on it to battle your opinions out just like we did.


Marisa

[Shad0w]

Cummon now..,,

How often do you see a burmese charging down the streets after neighbourhood kids?? :P

LOL

BTW... Burmese are already banned in toronto and quite a bit of the surrounding area (laws against snakes over a certain length)

Hey,

Im not bashing the responsible owners / breeders.. but how does one police it when there are SO many bad apples in the bunch? easier to ban..

BTW.. the govt already says U cant own things like wolf's, tigers.. etc... yet u dont see them trying to take away house cats or other harmless dogs...

[Shad0w]

How many of you pitbull fans have actually been involved in an attack / mauling or witnessed one??

If you have not.. then I dont think you really know what yer talking about....

Ive been there.. and done that... And I dont wish it on ANYONE

[marisa]

"but how does one police it when there are SO many bad apples in the bunch? easier to ban.."

Same thing they say about reptiles. How can one police all the bad burmese owners/retic owners/hot owners? Easier to ban. That's exactly why they are not allowed in Toronto. Because someone originally brought the species to the attention of the local government by being a jackass and so on. That's how it always works. Now people who are actually capable and willing to adopt burmese and care for them properly in toronto city limits, cannot. Because of someone else. Just like Pit Bulls.

Marisa

[marisa]

http://www.cnw.ca/fr/releases/archiv.../15/c0895.html