PORTER
Well-Known Member
I would not loose any sleep if Pits went extinct. That is all.:corn:
03RUBICON said:Well to answer the question simply I think all breeding of them should stop immediatly. With that they existing ones should be fixed. End the breeding of these highly inbread trigger happy dogs now. Thats my solution.
BustedPinion said:So since were all here experts on this subject (:haha: :haha: ) whats the solution? what does everyone think the solution is? personally my thoughts are:
Dangerous INDIVIDUAL animals (not breeds): that have agressed or bitten should be required to be tested like the SPCA, they will try to provoke the animal, if it attacks, its destryed immedialty, i think the general public should do the same and it should be required.
Breeds deemed a deadly threat (defined as an animal that CAN lethally kill a human as easy as a firearm, without taking breeds history into consideration as to avoid discrimination, yes i mean a 1 size fits all law):
to make them a liscensable ownership requiring a liscense to own, breed, etc.. so that every retard cannot own a certain breed. gee, just think what a law like this could do for the APBT breed name if they were only owned by responsible owners!!
:cool:
i meant all should be pretested, and attackers should be exterminated. period, no red tape, kiss em goodbye and put them to sleep.H3RESQ said:I think testing them after they have attacked is light. Dog attacks it's dead!
BustedPinion said:i meant all should be pretested, and attackers should be exterminated. period, no red tape, kiss em goodbye and put them to sleep.
BustedPinion said:i meant all should be pretested, and attackers should be exterminated. period, no red tape, kiss em goodbye and put them to sleep.
2pwrlftrs4u said:your solution :rolleyes:
03RUBICON said:Thats the solution to the problem.
Totalled said:What breed is my roomate's, girlfriend's dog cloey?
03RUBICON said:You the owner do not know what happens inside these dogs heads. Something gets fowled up and thats when it happens.
03RUBICON said:Great comeback probably took you an hour to come up with that huh?
Thats the solution to the problem. The dogs are to in-bread now and have to many loose wires. It's time to stop the breeding of them. Just as the cross breading of wolfs was made illegal. It's only a matter of time before this happens.
NotMatt said:The problem is that your opinion is ignorant. "Loose wires" and "fowled up" brains are not what cause domesticated animals to attack humans. Fear, abuse and improper training and restraint by the owner, combined with an animal that already has a "gamey" disposition are the causes of dog attacks. Calling it anything other than the science of how the animal's brain works is ignorant. There are people who have spent years learning how a dog's mind works, and here you are arguing that all pit bull type breeds should be irradicated based on your funny logic involving "loose wires".
Go tell that to a dog trainer, they'll laugh at you.
New rules place greater responsibility on owners
By Jeff Switzer
Herald Writer
New rules give sharper teeth for cracking down on dangerous and barking dogs in Snohomish County.
Last week, the County Council approved the rules that declare a dog dangerous once it attacks another animal. Before, a dog had to kill another animal to be labeled dangerous.
Dogs continue to be labeled dangerous if they severely injure a person.
Under the new rules, such dangerous dogs must be spayed or neutered, live in a locked kennel with a roof and be muzzled in public.
Owners also must pay $200 to register dangerous pets and tag the dog with a microchip. State law still requires owners to have a $250,000 insurance bond for such dogs.
If owners don't comply, their dogs can be confiscated.
"This is an improvement to our code and appropriately targets the bad behavior of dogs and their owners," County Councilman Dave Somers said.
The changes put more responsibility on animal owners, "and makes the owner think twice about keeping a dog that has attacked or bitten a human or animal," said Vicki Lubrin, county licensing manager in charge of animal control services.
"Ultimately, we feel it gives us the proper tools to restrict or contain those dogs to the owner's property and hopefully increase public safety," she said.
The changes update regulations that in some cases were 30 years out of date, Lubrin said.
The rules come as a relief to the Williams family of Lake Stevens, whose greyhound Megan was viciously attacked by a neighbor's pit bull a year ago.
Brian Williams lobbied the County Council for stricter rules and brought Megan, now 9 years old, to visit politicians.
"I think these regulations make owners responsible for their dogs' actions," Williams said. "I think what it does is permit common citizens to take back the streets."
Williams said he was on a walk in January 2006 when his neighbor's pit bull attacked and sank its teeth into Megan's abdomen. He pepper-sprayed the pit bull without effect and had to kick the dog four times to get it to let go.
Surgeries to repair muscle injuries to his dog cost about $1,500, the family said.
After the pit bull was linked to another attack on a dog in the neighborhood, the county filed criminal charges. The pit bull's owner eventually surrendered his dog to a pit bull rescue operation in King County.
But the Williamses were frustrated by vague county regulations that labeled dogs as dangerous if they attacked humans, but not other animals.
"These laws about muzzling are important," Michele Williams told the County Council.
The council also decriminalized offenses for barking dogs, unlicensed and off-leash pets, which used to require a trip to county Superior Court and cost up to $250 in fines.
Now, leash and license citations are considered code violations and cost $50 for the first offense and $100 for the second offense.
"There will be a quicker turnaround in the enforcement," Lubrin said.
Under the new regulations, animal control officers also can enforce noise rules on troublesome barking dogs, something only sheriff's deputies could do before, Lubrin said.
Fearing a raft of tickets, farmers with herds of dairy goats lobbied for protections for their barking farm dogs.
Dairy goat farmer Katharine Hendrickson of Arlington said she bought farm dogs because she was losing poultry and barn cats to a cougar or coyotes.
"I've felt a lot more peace when my children are doing chores in the back pasture," she told the council.
She's had to answer complaints from a neighbor about barking dogs and handle visits from animal control officers. Even though she hasn't received a ticket, she said she worries a proposed housing development nearby might bring more complaints.
"Without some changes at the county level, the problem will only escalate," she said.
Wendy Glunt of Stanwood said her barking farm dogs are "livestock guardians."
The county's Right to Farm law protects farm activities but doesn't protect barking farm dogs from possible prosecution, Glunt said.
Animal control officers said they have never given a ticket for a barking farm dog.
Even so, the County Council wrote a special clause that exempts farm dogs from noise rules.
County staff called it the Working Dog Protection Act of 2007.
piece of cake, got em on first try. that boxer was fugly:wtf: wrinkled beaty eyed fukker looked half charpai:haha:2pwrlftrs4u said:i dont even try to guess anymore... look here you'll see why
*note, there is not even a Staffy or AMSTAFF on there
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
hey busted, check out the boxer on there
Grommit327 said:I can't wait for the next breed...
"Chihuahua takes down jogger" :haha:
NotMatt said:The problem is that your opinion is ignorant. "Loose wires" and "fowled up" brains are not what cause domesticated animals to attack humans. Fear, abuse and improper training and restraint by the owner, combined with an animal that already has a "gamey" disposition are the causes of dog attacks. Calling it anything other than the science of how the animal's brain works is ignorant. There are people who have spent years learning how a dog's mind works, and here you are arguing that all pit bull type breeds should be irradicated based on your funny logic involving "loose wires".
Go tell that to a dog trainer, they'll laugh at you.
03RUBICON said:Well in my opinion you have just shown your ignorance on the matter. Fact is these dogs even with proper training no abuse ect ect just loose it one day. I have seen it on a personal level twice now. So know your facts before you call somone ignorant asshat.:looser:
BustedPinion said:piece of cake, got em on first try. that boxer was fugly:wtf: wrinkled beaty eyed fukker looked half charpai:haha:
2pwrlftrs4u said:you are right... any dog over 30lbs could do that to a child so they all should be put down. then we can ban people from owning any other "dangerous" animals. next lets take away guns, becasue i know somebody's child had a bad experience with one before... oh, i guess cars should be next since kids have been hit by them in the past. dont forget about harmfull chemicals or medications that kids have gotten into before ban them too... even toys, lets take them away along with coins because kids have choked on them. :rolleyes:
skrause said:Are you defending the owner? Are you saying they couldn't possibly have done anything wrong before/during/after the incident? Imagine putting your son in a cage outside because he got into a fight at school. I hate using that kind of example but that is basically what they did to the dog and it does absolutely nothing to help the situation. It is all too common for a dog owner to hit their dog when it misbehaves, but they don't see it as abuse.
Boomer said:I read that. Assuming it is correct, pit bull terriers are responsible for more attacks causing bodily harm than all other breeds COMBINED. :omg: