Whether there is or isn’t makes no difference to the point you were attempting to make, which was that if the Obamas thought pits were alright, they should have gotten one instead of the Portugese. Emphasis added:
[QUOTE=cougar58]
(Obama claimed pits were no different than any other breed, and BSL was unfair to them - **yet, despite have 24/7 armed secret service protection for Obamas family, he recently opted not to chose a pit **when he recently adopted a second Portuguese Water Dog named Sunny)
[/QUOTE]
While even the president of the PWD group says there’s no such thing, it doesn’t change what people believe and even what they have experienced. The Obamas had that in mind getting their dogs, rightly or wrongly, and did not believe they had the option of a pit.
Therefore, your basic purpose in bringing up the Obama’s choice of dog, to imply that Obama was secretly too afraid of them to get one, fails. Completely.
We ( readers, media, police, pit owners themsleves) know that each of those 11 fatals were either the family pet, the baby sitters, or the immediate next door neighbors family pet.
In not one case do they not have the murdering pit bull, which was someones family pet 24 hrs prior. No of the family members who owned these captured pit bulls that killed the first 11 humans in the first 4 months of 2013, has yet to suggest they misidentified as anything other than a pit.
In each police / media report, they were labelled as pit bulls.
In the 6 to 9 months since these 11 fatal attacks, none of the owners, their immediate family members, or neighbors, have stated they were anything but pit bulls.
As another wise SDMB poster pointed out, the fact that the pit bull lobby staffed NCRC National Canine Research Council does not have a copy of the dogs paperwork, means only that the the NCRC does not have a copy of the dogs paperwork. It does not mean that they were not pit bulls. Pit were stills pits 200 years ago, prior to paperwork - that wise person added.
FYI I recently gave my Volvo to my niece, that I paid cash for. I can not find the registration papers or title for it. Being that shes my niece, I gave her the keys anyway.
It does not signify that the car is not a Volvo. We (family) can see by looking at it that it is. Even by looking at just a photo. The NCRC may not know that its a Volvo, but the family that owned it since it was made, sure do. The police that pulled her over likewise knew it was a Volvo.
In cases where entire families agree the murdering dog was a pit, and the police who have possession of it, as well as Animal Uncontrol, -and they all report it as a pit bull, the media will in fact record it as a pit bull.
This is far different from a pit bull that runs out of a forest, kills a mans wife, then retreats - never to be seen. That man may describe it detail, and even pick it out from a line up by breed, - that is an example of “breed not verified”.
For clarification - read Denver’s or Miami Dades BSL description of what constitutes a pit bull. They have withstood numerous high court challenges, and have worked so well, Miami Dade citizens voted 2/3rds majority to keep the pit ban BSL, based on 20 plus years of public safety results.
[QUOTE=cougar58]
Again, I truly believe that you were unaware of the latest data from Calgary, showing Animal Service director Bill Bruce’s idea was a complete and utter failure,** as he now admits.**
[/QUOTE]
If you had done what you claim you did, it would have been some version of this: “Bruce says his program is successful, but the data he provides appears to me to indicate failure.”
So what you are now claiming is that *you and Bruce disagree on what the data mean. *That is an entirely different thing that saying Bruce admits his plan has failed.
This just means that nobody came forward to say that the dogs were misidentified. It does not mean that the dogs had never been misidentified.
Analogy fail. Cars tend to have their make & model plastered in various places on the body whereas dog bodies aren’t plastered with their breed and various breeds have continually been mistaken for “pit bull”.
How do you know that all these people were not simply told “pit bull” with no positive verification and the dogs in question are not, in fact, entirely different breeds?
And just what is the most common breed the media reports in these attacks? I bet it’s “pit bull”, just as 30-odd years ago it was “rottweiler” or whatever the “scary dog” was in that era.
Still waiting for you to address the question of how you knew who owned the dog that attacked the 5-year-old Oregonian.
I don’t understand the sentence, particularly the “neither numerous” part. Could you clarify?
Cite? Not for your interpretation of anything, but for the way Bill Bruce counts the bites.
Cite? Not for your interpretation of anything, but for Bill Bruce viewing that as a “nip” (and I think you meant to say Shih Tzu - Shiatsu is a type of alternative medicine massage)
Cite?
Cite?
Specifically for the “was told” part. By whom?
And they have been assessing aggression by severity levels since 2009, as clearly indicated on the chart that both Tom and I linked to. It says right at the bottom:
The changes to the law were made in early 2011.
And Bruce was talking about using the Dunbar scale at least as early as April 2011, so being “told” to use it in October 2011 would be strange.
“release” of what results?
Bruce didn’t hide the truth, along with mentioning the scale here, he also said:
Whether he is or isn’t, unless you can demonstrate that the NCRC is actively deceitful, there’s nothing wrong with being lobbyists for preventing people like you from banning whole categories of dog. Do you feel the same disdain for the lobbying organizations that support breed bans?
Oh my god. :rolleyes:
“Flooded” with 30% pit bulls? Flooded? By itself that’s funny to me, since a walk through a Los Angeles shelter goes something like this:
SEVEN? SEVEN PITS IS A FLOOD???:smack: (Not to mention the reason given has nothing to do with their being aggressive)
After the last few days, do you really think that people are going to accept your interpretation of your cites at face value, skip reading them? :dubious:
If you look at SEVEN pitbulls, representing THIRTY PERCENT of a shelter population, as indicating a program that has failed, your willful need to stick to your position no matter what is clearly cemented in.
Franklin County, Ohio, has a population similar to Calgary, about 1.2 million.
Guess how many pitbulls were impounded just through July of this year? 1,554 And that is roughly 23% of the total number of 7,008.
That you could call seven pitbulls a flood and point to it as a failure of the Calgary policy is a joke, and exposes you as exactly what I said earlier: impervious to facts, reason, experience, logic… you have an agenda, and it’s pretty clear that your agenda is the complete and total annihilation of an entire category of dog, and you will accept nothing less. And what is also clear is that it does not, cannot, have anything to do with the fact that this particular category of dog can and does maim and kill people, because other dogs do as well and have done so in very high numbers in the past.
I don’t know why you are on this sad mission that make you blind, but I do know you’re on it and you are.
Ref: the cite I listed where the family pit bull attacked 3 members of the family in Calgary, hospitalizing all 3…The pit attacked them because the family members were fighting.
Lets see what Bill Bruce does -
"The pitbull that attacked members of its owner’s family when they started fighting has passed a behaviour assessment and will now live with other relatives, bylaw officials said Monday.
Alphie, an American Staffordshire Terrier, bit three people Aug. 15 when they started fighting at their Pinemont Rd. N.E. home.
Animal control officers seized the dog as all three were sent to hospital to have bite marks treated.
“The dog had a clean record otherwise,” said bylaw head Bill Bruce.
(Other than that, Mrs Lincoln, how was the play??? !!!)
“It happened inside a family unit and we met with the family and the dog owner and another family member who felt he could provide a more stable environment for the dog.”
So Bill Bruce gives a pit bull that just hospitalized 3 of the family members that owned it, an assessment test???
**What about the real life test they just failed miserably, Bruce?
**
And now Bill Bruce wants to rehome them to another family. What happens if the kids there start to rough house?
Well, OK. Carry On. I see nothing wrong here.
FYI this is very similar to my first first-hand experience with a pit bull. A lady neighbor had just gone thru a divorce, had 2 daughters and a pit bull (well, OK she and her daughters, as well as her ex, who worked at the shelter, considered it a pit bull, but without the papers - who knows, right?)
Anyway, this was in 1999, the girls had another girl over for the night. They were rough housing on the bed with the visiting girl. Zeus joined the fun, and mauled the girls face, detaching her nose. I held her in my arms until 911 arrived. Blood was everywhere.
That was also my first experience with a pit owner claiming “he’s never acted aggressive before”
Did Bill Bruce, or did Bill Bruce not, admit that he was:
“concerned to see pitbulls as champions of the chomp because the knee-jerk reaction is usually the call for a breed ban”
PS My Ipad auto corrected " Humorous" to "Numerous " when you questioned where I meant to type “Humorous”.
Did Bill or did Bill not say pit bulls were the Champion of the Chomp - referring to them passing retrievers and shepherds, who held that title in years past?
That is an admission of failure, no matter how hard he tried to explain the root cause.
Opinions on Root cause and possible corrective action can be debated for decades, -the fact that Pit Bulls lead all other breeds in Calgary’s Chomp Championship contest isn’t up for debate.
Ah…so you are under the impression that dogs, pitbulls specifically, should never have a violent reaction to anything under any circumstances. That they should be robotic masters of their emotions and responses under all circumstances, and any failure to meet that standard indicates that none of them can be tolerated anywhere, ever.
Well that is an ignorant, ridiculous, unreasonable position to hold. So there’s that.
He was right. Your ignorance of dogs is becoming clearer all the time.
By the way, how many human beings do you know who have absolutely perfect mastery over their responses to highly stressful, frightening, and violent situations? If an unusually large and strong 8 year old boy with a perfect record of peaceable goodness saw his parents fighting and ended up stabbing his father and putting him in the hospital to protect his mother, would you assume that he had been hiding this insanely violent nature all his life and he could never be trusted to be among people again?
And if not, why would you judge a far less cognitively aware creature more harshly?
Nothing. Because while dogs are not as intelligent and cognitively aware as 8 year olds, they are generally extremely aware of difference between emotions of anger and playfulness in human beings, just as they are among dogs.
And he might not have been acting aggressive then, either. There’s a **boatload **of information missing in this tale, but it does cause me to ask: is this the incident that turned you into a crusader against pitbulls?
If people who want to present themselves as scary badasses choose pits and encourage them to be out of control and aggressive, that has no bearing on the fact that they succeed in creating uncontrolled, aggressive dogs? It’s the dogs’ fault?
Your logic…well, calling it logic is to be polite.
Well that wasn’t very nice. I am cancelling the 800-flowers I was sending you.
FYI here is the title of that very report
Pit Bull influx at Calgary Humane Society
Then it goes on to point out, Thirty per cent of the dogs currently up for adoption at the Calgary Humane Society are either Pit Bulls or Pit Bull crosses.
According to representatives of the shelter, the seven animals waiting to find their forever homes is the largest number of Pit Bulls the shelter has had in recent memory.
Cite: ( same as you used)
30% is 30%. And it is worth noting that this “the largest number of Pit Bulls the shelter has had in recent memory”
If Bill Bruce’s program in Calgary was a success, why would this years total and % of pits in the shelter be higher than in any other time in recent history?
Hmm. Pit bulls , per Bill Bruce, are now the “Champions of the Chomp” - surpassing all other breeds, including retrievers and shepherds - who held that title prior to Bruce - and pit bulls also are at their highest total and overall % in the shelters, and this isn’t a failure?
How so?
Interesting to note that Calgary’s Humane Society is sounding the alarm that they have possible evidence that Calgary may have its first pit bull fighting ring, on the south side of Calgary:
“In the last six months we’ve heard rumours of a potential dog fighting ring starting up south of Calgary, so again, we’re extremely interested in that information,” says Bill Bruce.
The article shows a pit bull named Sunni with blatant scars and minus one eye.
Cameron, of the Humane Society in Calgary, is worried dog fighting is going on in the area and says online advertisements support her theory. “Animals advertised with words like ‘monster size’ and ‘high drive.’ An animal that is a pet in the city should not be having a high drive. That’s a problem. It means it has a high prey drive or a guarding drive.”
The Calgary Humane Society say, in the past, mistreated and abused dogs have been seized from grow-ops. Officials also say dog fighting is often associated with gang and drug activity.
Did you read the letter penned by former pit bull owner/ baby sitter Susan Iwicki?
Susan did not desire to present herself as a bad ass. She ran a baby sitting business from her house.
She did not encourage her 2 pit bulls to be out of control and aggressive.
She had both pits spayed and neutered at the earliest age the vet would allow.
She did not chain them - in fact Susan was letting them out to run in a fenced area, with Dax, the baby, in her arms, like she had so many times prior.
Susan had socialize the pit bulls - they had played with children many times prior. The father of Dax also wrote a letter, confirming all of Susans claims.
Susan was not unique.
Mike Cook of Tuscon. Mr Hines of Indiana. Multiple amputations and death, and neighbors and friends and relatives all said both men loved their pits more than life itself (major understatement, IMHO) and all said both men walked their pit bulls daily - friends and neighbors said their own kids played with both mens pit bulls.
Darla Napora - BADRAP member.
Many, many others, disprove what you just listed as root causes and corrective actions. They were pit owners who proved it with their lives.
And trends will tell you that Calgary is trending on the fast track to be like Ohio (which by the way, thanks to State Rep Barb Sears overturning Ohios state wide designation of pit as bad by default, had 75% of DBRFs that year by pit bulls the following 12 months…and Pits flood the shelters there as well.
Scroll back to the State Farm ranking of the top 5 states in dog attack payouts.
Drama. Not data. Not research. Not reliable, unbiased, vetted information from disinterested parties. It never is with you. Because if it was, you’d have to back off your position.
And insurance stats don’t matter, either, for all the reasons we’ve covered about a dozen dozen times.
You bleat that 30% means something. If you are sincere about working with stats, then you know that isn’t true outside of teaching the concept of 30%.
If Location A has 1 million people, 10,000 dogs in shelter, 3,000 of which are pits, while location B has 1 million people 100 dogs in shelter, and 30 pits, it does not, by any twist of the determined imagination, mean the same thing in terms of genuine animal control.
You are wedded to your beliefs, to your drama, to your irrational insistence on the deletion of “pitbulls”, (whatever that means to you). Banning is bullshit. And I believe that you know that but simply don’t care, because you have an issue with certain types of dog, if not all dogs.
Amazingly, you cannot crossbreed a Chevy Astro and a Jetta Sportwagen to get something that looks somewhat like a Volvo despite not being one in any meaningful way.
Interesting to note, that this very debate just ended in Burnaby Canada.
The city heard from the pit bull lobby, and they heard from the residents.
The residents were the majority. The “Silent Majority”. The residents in Burnaby, after specifically reviewing the data from Calgary, as well as the USA, opted for public safety . Barnaby “Councillors said the “silent majority” supported harsher rules against pit bulls, which were responsible for at least 12 per cent of the 477 reported biting incidents in Burnaby since 2007. Repeatedly stating they didn’t want to be responsible if someone was attacked, the councillors passed the tougher rules based on U.S. research.”
Pit bulls must be muzzled off their owner’s property and, if their owners are away, kept in a locked enclosure.
"The bylaw defines a vicious dog as: “a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, an American Pit Bull Terrier and any dog generally recognized as a pit bull or pit bull terrier and includes a dog of mixed breed with predominant pit bull or pit bull terrier characteristics.”
The report also notes the number of incidents involving dogs biting humans and other animals has risen by 17 per cent, from 69 six years ago to 81 last year.
“The number of bite incidents involving pit bulls in Burnaby is concerning, and further compounded by this breed’s potential to inflict significant injuries,” the report states.
Staff recommended strengthening the bylaw after statistics showed that pit bulls were responsible for 24.7 per cent of dog bites where the breed could be identified, while 14.6 per cent were attributed to German shepherds. The amendments passed unanimously.
One more anecdote of people reacting to fears of Pit Bulls, (or dogs that might vaguely be associated with Pit Bulls) instead of actual facts establishing that the breed in question has even been accurately identified when complaints have been lodged against it.
Enough.
This is not a debate, but simply a campaign by you to demonize a breed of dogs.
The next time you want to carry on a months-long rant, open it in The BBQ Pit.
