#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
Montreal passes pit bull ban
Just sad.... http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...ylaw-1.3780335 Quote:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...ebec-1.3743713 Love those breeds. Had Rottweilers growing up and lots of friends with various pit bulls and other "dangerous" breeds. I've been bit several times by dogs and it's always been from small ones. And cats too... Anyway, hope this doesn't open a can of worms on the forum. I know this can be a controversial topic. Just made me sad, thought you should be sad too. Maybe it's not too late to reach out to your local representatives if you're Montreal. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Seems heavy handed but I get where they're coming from. Pitbulls have always gotten a bad rep by the media even when it is the owners who are the source of the issue.
Unfortunately, a few bad apples can ruin it for a collective group. They should be targeting owners and perhaps implementing way more stringent requirements for those who want to own pitbulls but I am sure they've thought of that before passing this law. While I understand that dogs are often members of the family and are treated as such, they are also somewhat of a product as well and I don't mean that in a bad way. Much like vehicle licensing standards, different vehicles classes require different standards. Some may contend that pitbulls are no different from any other dogs but the difference is that their capacity and potential for harm. A pitbull bite is not a chihuahua bite is not a cat scratch. The theme is that stereotypically certain breeds are used for certain functions. IMO "dangerous" and "can be dangerous" are two very different things but often this gets diluted in conversations. I hope that current pitbull owners can retain their furry lovables and that there is a more harmonious way to solve this than just banning them. |
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
Quote:
I believe having a dog, driving, gun ownership, etc are all things that we should prove we are capable of handling the responsibility. If we can't meet those requirements or violate them after the fact then the privilege should be removed, fines, jail, beatings administered, etc. I always hate the collective being punished because of the individual. It's even worse when it affects your pet/fur baby. Sounds like alot of these dogs could get put down. |
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
http://montrealgazette.com/news/loca...ning-pit-bulls
I've spent about 10 years working in the animal world between Veterinary, stores, and dog training... (Other peoples animals are total ass holes, I had to switch to people) My list of dogs I've been bitten by doesn't include a single bully breed. German Shepherd, Cairn Terrier, Kelpie, Border Collie, Golden, Chihuahua, Shih tzu, Daxi, Bichon, Pug, Frenchie, Heck almost every small breed, Basenji, Shiba Inu, Formosan Mtn Dog, husky.... I'm sure I've forgotten half.... Montreal is just following other cities and provinces like a sheep. The BSL is nothing new. I'm in Parksville and we have it, Next door in Qualicum they don't. Nanaimo has it as well, however if your "bully" passes the Canine good neighbour test, Nanaimo will treat them like a regular dog and no muzzle needed. The whole province of Ontario. Burnaby, Coquitlam.... Lots of local cities on the Mainland and all over our country have it. Nanaimo is the only city that I'm aware of that will waive the ban if you have the Canine good neighbour. You shouldn't have to get it, but still... My girls been an Active volunteer at the Royal Columbian Hospital for 7.5 years. Every time I go back to the mainland I have my mother take her in for a visit since I don't have volunteer status anymore, but she does. My favourite thing is when somebody is petting her, and she's pretty much taken over their lap, that person usually starts some sort of dog conversation. "..... Oh those bloody pit bulls, I would NEVER trust one! I will never let one near me or my family!...." Like are you seriously too dense to see whats on your lap? Heres "Vicious" and our Disabled cat as a kitten. https://youtu.be/YRrgFjlUYvk |
#5
|
|||||
|
|||||
The first thing I have to say is that people need to realize what a pit bull is. There are over a dozen breeds of dogs that fall under breed legislation as "pit bulls". The American Pit Bull Terrier is a registerable "purebred" dog. The APBT registration accepts dogs of several other breeds into their registration as "purebred American Pit Bull Terriers". None of these other breed registries accepts American Pit Bull Terriers. In essence, the American Pit Bull Terrier breed is a bully breed mutt. Back in the day, the APBT was much smaller with males being about 40-50 lbs, and females being 30-35 lbs. Now you'll see registered APBT's weighing in over 100 lbs - mutts.
I own an American Staffordshire Terrier which is one of the breeds that falls under breed legislation. She is my second bully breed dog. I do not think bully breeds belong in the hands of irresponsible owners or owners that just don't know anything about dogs. In all honesty, even as an owner of one of these breeds, I am not against breed legislation. I'm not necessarily for it either, but I think it's better than doing nothing. Usually the problem is the owner not the dog, but there are also a lot of really poorly bred dogs (of all breeds) out there, and sometimes for this reason, it's the dog not the owner, which eventually goes back to the owner that bred it I suppose. I am beyond peeved when I see an article online blaming a "pit bull" when it's obvious to me that there is either no pit bull blood in the dog or very little. One good thing that breed legislation does do is it protects the dogs in the long run. People abuse the pit bull breeds more than any other breeds of dogs on the face of the planet. I don't know if my heart can handle one more story of some jerk off dragging a pit bull by a rope behind his truck, or some idiots lighting one on fire, or beating it with a baseball bat. All these things just because it is a pit bull. If the breeds are banned, then people will not be able to abuse them anymore. People will probably focus their irrational hate towards some other breed or animal, but at least the pit bulls will be safe. I don't think humanity in general has the responsibility to own pit bull breeds anymore, and I don't say that because it's a particularly big responsibility, I say that because us humans are regressing more and more with every day that goes by. Pretty soon we'll be cavemen again and we'll be line breeding our Chipoms, Puggles, and Goldendoodles to try to create bully breeds again to protect us from lions, and tigers, and bears. Oh my. Here's our Staffie that we adopted when she was 6.5 years old (now 11.5) snuggling our Chihuahua. Btw, the Chi WILL bite. I just took this pic. Last edited by Myka; 09-28-2016 at 07:55 PM. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
My Chihuahua is reactive.
He hasn't bitten anyone and we work hard on his socialization and he's always improving but if he ever does bite someone, they're not going to die or be permanently disfigured. If he snaps on another dog at the dog park, there will be no vet bills or death. I get that there are good dog owners and bad dog owners. I just never could understand why apologists for breeds that are genetically predisposed to protection or even outright aggression don't understand that the consequences of their dog red lining is far more severe than a dog who was not bred for war, fighting or protection. These dogs are more dangerous than other breeds and because of that, they attract a demographic of ownership that wants that image which in turn just creates an even worse perception for these dogs. If any of you who say I've been bitten by this breed or that breed, for the most part, had you actually been bitten by one of the true bully breeds, you would be hurt much, much worse. Genetics are facts and you can't get rid of them. you can train and control but you can't control triggers or their environment all the time. Many dogs are herders, some are ratters but some are bred to be able to inflict the maximum amount of damage and to take an incredible amount of pain and just keep going. I've known some wonderful bullys but I have also known some that scared me. I can't say that about many other breeds.
__________________
Red Sea Minimum Last edited by corallivore; 09-28-2016 at 09:05 PM. |
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
Quote:
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Are you saying that some were not bred, especially over the last 50-100 years or so, for dog fighting?
here's a bump from good ol wikipedia... Pit bulls were created by breeding bulldogs and terriers together to produce a dog that combined the gameness and agility of the terrier with the strength of the bulldog.[3] In the United Kingdom, these dogs were used in blood sports such as bull-baiting, bear-baiting and **** fighting. These blood sports were officially eliminated in 1835 as Britain began to introduce animal welfare laws. Since dogfights were cheaper to organize and far easier to conceal from the law than bull or bear baits, blood sport proponents turned to pitting their dogs against each other instead. Dog fighting was used as both a blood sport (often involving gambling) and a way to continue to test the quality of their stock. For decades afterwards, dog fighting clandestinely took place in small areas of Britain and America. In the early 20th century pit bulls were used as catch dogs in America for semi-wild cattle and hogs, to hunt, and drive livestock, and as family companions.[3] Some have been selectively bred for their fighting prowess.[4][5] I am genuinely interested to know what you believe they were predominantly bred for?
__________________
Red Sea Minimum |
#9
|
|||||
|
|||||
If wikipedia is your idea of research then I dont even need to respond LOL trusted source right there.
Try your "research" with other dogs too maybe you might learn something? You know about ALL the other dogs bred to hunt, move cattle, protect... or the fact that the amount of dogs used and bred for fighting are so minimal and far removed from the others. Or perhaps all the other breeds used too! Best not own a husky! Their too closely related to wolves. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
so let me get some of your research then if you're saying that they were never bred for fighting...if that is indeed what you are saying...I'm not sure.
Don't go all trump on me. Sorry, this is a debate I have had many times in the past and i have done my research. I'm happy to quote several other sites stating the same, if you like... from bulldogbreeds.com His ancestors were brought to the United States in the mid - 1800's by Boston-Irish immigrants. Originally bred from a variety of bulldogs and terriers, American breeders increased his weight and gave him a more powerful head. A forbearer to the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, they were originally bred to be a fighting dog. from AKC.org (that's the American Kennel Club, which is no Wikipedia). THE ROOTS OF THE AMERICAN STAFFORDSHIRE TERRIER CAN BE TRACED THROUGH EARLY MASTIFF WARRIORS, TO THE ORIGINAL BULLDOGS IN ENGLAND, WHICH WERE USED IN THE BLOODY SPORT OF BULL BAITING. Maybe you can offer some research of your own instead of just blowing off mine? Why do some owners refuse to believe their dogs breed was at some point bred for fighting? The same way that some cattle dogs will try to herd people or kids and nip them, the same way they would a sheep or cattle. It's no different. Genetic instincts are facts you can't avoid. Educate me rather than just refuting my facts. You will find I am very open to reading and discussing them.
__________________
Red Sea Minimum Last edited by corallivore; 09-28-2016 at 11:03 PM. |