Many countries have legislation about dangerous dogs that specifically mentions pit bulls by name, do any state exactly who makes the determination of what a pit bull is? DNA testing?
In my county, the “pit bull” law actually applies to “vicious dogs.” The definition for a vicious dog includes this key phrase:
[QUOTE=Ohio Code]
a breed that is commonly known as a pit bull dog.
[/QUOTE]
That’s it, per the law. No DNA testing, just “commonly known as.”
There’s also a pit bull information page, that says:
Most people think “pit bull” is a specific breed, but it’s not. So yeah, if you make a law banning (or regulating) pit bulls, you need to define what you mean, because the AKC doesn’t.
I had always assumed there was a breed called “pit bull”, with other breeds colloquially included when people used the term, but on searching, I see that you are right.
I used to think so, too, until I did my own searching.
The “pit bull” breed, American Pit Bull Terrier, was listed one reply above. Other similar breeds (known as “bully” breeds among dog owners) get lumped in with legislation, but the American Pit Bull Terrier is what everyone thinks they see when they say they saw a pit bull.
Those dogs who are bred and trained for dog fighting. Look, those types of laws are just used against dudes who bread pit bulls for dog fighting, not against families, etc. Trust me, there is no doubt at all when you have been on a raid into a fighting dog breeding facility.
I think “Staffie” ( Staffordshire/American Staffordshire ) because as a kid only AKC breeds counted in my dog-obsessed brain ;). The AKC still doesn’t recognize the APBT as a distinct breed, even though the term is reasonably venerable ( the UKC apparently originally created itself and the breed name to legitimize/standardize their pit dogs around the turn of the previous century ).
Looking at the AKC Complete Breed List, there is no “American Pit Bull Terrier” listed.
I just dug up a link that gets into the history of this a bit.
Both the ADBA and UKC recognize Pitbulls as a dog breed. The AKC does not but they recognize Staffy Bulls and Amstaffs both of which would be referred to as pitbulls by most people. From my reading Pits and Amstaffs essentially the same dog. The AKC standards for an Amstaff calls for a larger heavier dog then a Pitbull and slightly different rules for coloration. Amstaffs are not showable with red or pink noses for example. My understanding is that they have the same anscestry until the last 50-60 years, when the AKC sought differentiation.
ETA: Beat by Tamerlane.
Here’s a very topical article from a few days ago (here in Ontario).
In this case, it was a Kennel Club judge who decided that the dog was not a pit bull 
(by using some very creative, but life-saving notions about the pup’s lineage; check the link).
I don’t have a dog in this fight but it is interesting how the perception of breeds changes over time. Pit bulls used to be known as ‘Nanny Dogs’ because they were very protective of kids and good at watching over them. It actually still makes sense. One thing that makes them preferred fighting dogs is that they will readily attack other dogs but can still be separated by people because they are generally very discriminatory in their aggression. All of that goes out the window when they are abused to make them as mean as possible however and understandably so.
The media.
This isn’t as simple a topic as some posts might lead one to believe.
Well, that’s not because the APBT isn’t a real breed. That’s because the American Kennel Club decided the American Pit Bull Terrier was a disreputable breed.
Two other breed clubs DO recongize the APBT, and at least one, the United Kennel Club, was supposedly founded specifically to include APBTs (and other “working” dogs).
The AKC isn’t the only authority on what’s a breed.
Many thousands of families have in fact been affected by these laws. And the authorities apparently have a fairly hard time distinguishing a “fighting dog breeding facility” from other sorts of things.
The term “pit bull” is a catchall term usually applied to three closely-related breeds:
[ul]
[li]The American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT)[/li][li]The American Staffordshire Terrier (AmStaff)[/li][li]The Staffordshire Bull Terrier (StaffyBull)[/li][/ul]
There are lots of “bully breeds” of varying relatedness – American Bulldogs, Bull Terriers, even Boxers. Through some sort of conflation of “dogs we’re afraid of,” I’ve even seen people trying to list Rottweilers as a bully breed, but that’s not really correct as the term is usually used.
Many pieces of “Breed Specific Legislation” (BSL) have clauses written specifically to allow law enforcement authorities (even if they know nothing about dogs) to determine what is and is not a “pit-bull-type” dog. The intent is to allow the officers to seize dogs without worrying about legal challenges.
True.
Cite?
Pardon my ignorance but how can someone cite such a thing? If it is a made up definition, it seems that authorities can do whatever they want. If am not a huge Pit Bull fan but I love most dogs and lots of states and localities have restricted ‘Pit Bull’ ownership with consequences to the owners. What if you adopted a couple of mutts from an animal shelter. They are sweet as they can be but your neighbor calls to complain that you are raising dangerous ‘Pit Bulls’. Animal control comes and says, yeah, those are Pit Bulls and you can’t have them even though we know there is no such thing. How can you prove that you have a Boxer/Rottweiler mix or just some random mutts that happen to look like dogs that people see in the media. Talk about stereotyping gone wrong.
This is not a very good legal standard to me and there is too much room for interpretation from people with obvious biases.
It’s simple. All Sailboat has to do is cite that *Many thousands of families have in fact been affected by these laws. And the authorities apparently have a fairly hard time distinguishing a “fighting dog breeding facility” from other sorts of things. * or in other words, that innocent pet owners (who aren’t in reality breeding and training fighting dogs) have been arrested for this. Out here there are restrictions on breeding Pit Bulls, and in every case I saw, it was dudes who were breeding them for fighting.
Dog lovers should respect and want these laws, not the other way around. Those sickos who raise fighting dogs (and then fight them) are the bad guys.
Oh, come on, what everyone is talking about American Staffordshire Terriers. They are dogs. There is nothing wrong with any particular breed of dog. The problem is what people do with them.
“Pit bull” is an easy category for people ignorant of dogs.
They do this with other things.
What exactly do you want a site for? That they go after family pets, too?
Here’s Mark Buehrle’s story. Even a multi-millionaire pitcher had to find somewhere outside Miami-Dade county to live, because his family pet pitbull wasn’t allowed in.