Nancy Grace has gone too far

That part is the simple part. There is no other way to keep pit bulls out of the hands of people that should not have them. You cannot say one person can have a pit bull and tell their neighbor they cannot have the same dog. Again we are at a place when some one has to judge who can own one of these dogs. We cannot go by a person by person basis. Who is qualified to make that choice? We can't let a person belonging to either fanatic group choose who will have the breed.
Each group of people think their group are the only ones who should own the breed. This isn't true but neither side will give an inch. Neither side is completely right or completely wrong. Both sides will continue to fight with each other rather than do anything constructive.
I have yet to meet a pit bull owner that didn't blame the bans on another group. It doesn't matter which side you talk to. Their excuses are very similiar, just coming from different sides. When was the last time you had a person tell you they were part of the reason the pit bull is being banned? I am sure you know a few that could be put in this group. They come from both ends of the pit bull world.
Many other animals have been banned in many different areas. Pit bulls are not the first. If the owners of any species are not doing what is needed to be done it is left to others to protect the welfare of the population. It is that simple. If an animal causes problems and the problem continues to get worse the answer is to remove that animal from the area. It has happened to monkeys, birds, exiotics, wild animals, insects, fish, etc. The problem was not really with the animals but rather the owners. We cannot ban people therefore we must ban what people own that is causing the problem.

The owners have the option to do something to change what is heppening. Just like the owners of any of the other banned animals had the choice. If they would rather blame others, give excuses, and argue between themselves others will have to step in and make decisions to protect the welfare of others. They choose to ban the breed. It isn't the fault of the non owners, it isn't the fault of those damaged by the animal, it is the fault of the owner who chooses not to control the animal.

A ban is the only thing that has a chance of working. It will remove the animal from the areas. Problem solved.
The animal is not the problem, the owner is but the only way of controlling the animal is to ban the breed. It has happened before and it will happen again.

Who can make that choice? The same person who tells you who can own a gun or the same person who will tell you whether you can drive a car. Even who can practice medicine or law. In our society we have no problem telling people no and others yes, it would be based on qualification.

There are ways to keep Pit Bulls (and all dogs) out of the hands of some people. We just need to reach down and check the proverbial "balls" and see if we have the desire to enforce a needed and just law. Should we always surrender to the lowest (worst) common demoninator and let them destroy the life of many wonderful dogs and people?

You may disagree. That is your right.
Now listen to the arguments from some people from the other end.
The main problem with the pit bull is the owner who thinks they can change hundreds of years of selective breeding with love, socialization, and education. The pit bull has been bred for animal aggression for hundreds of years. You can educate others but that does not change the dog. It does let others know of the danger and the problems the dog can become. You can even educate the dog but you cannot be there every minute of the day with your dog. They, much like children, may misbehave when you are not around.
You can love a dog but that does not change the instinct the dog was born with.
You can socialize the dog but you are not going to be there to enforce the rule of not being aggressive. When you are not around it is left up to the dog whether it is aggressive, passive, or friendly.
You can pen, chain, kennel, or crate your dog but that will not change the dog. That only prevents the dog from doing what he really wants to do in the first place. You are not changing the dog, you are preventing problems. Which is always a very good idea but doesn't happen often enough.

It may be true that a pit bull raised in such an enviroment does not cause problems. Neither does the champion fighting dog. They are raised very similiar but the owners are directly opposed to each other.

I will agree with all of the above. Now who is going to be the judge on who gets to own a pit bull? What would be the qualifications to own a pit bull? Do we have some kind of test? You have to pass a test to legally drive a car. Who is going to make up the test to decide who can own a pit bull? You have to have an education to practice law or medicine. Is there going to be college courses in the ownership of the pit bull? Who is qualified to teach such a course?

Excuse me, but I don't think you know me well enough to presume about me.
I have been a vet tech for 10 years and worked with MANY MANY pit bulls as well as volunteering hands on with shelters and rescues involving pit bulls, so please don't assume I've known a "few" dogs.

And I will tell you where my thoughts come from. The pit bulls who came in obviously cared for, were NOT problem dogs. The pit bulls who came in with the crackhead wanting a status symbol, or the pitbulls dragging a chain, or the pit bulls full of scars. THOSE had issues the majority of the time.

Sorry again, but BS. You don't even know what video I am speaking of. If these people weren't "real" dogfighters, then they did a **** good job faking it because it sure looked like fighting and real blood and death to me.

And the shelter pits picked up by A/C in my area totally tell a different story than what you're talking about. I guess the freshly bloodied muzzles, on top of old scars, ripped ears and broken limbs surely couldn't indicate that the dog had been fought. I'm SURE those dogs got away from their responsible loving owners, right?

How very patronizing of you. What accusation against dog fighters did I make that was not true? FYI, I'm not even a pit owner at the present. And WTF? No serious pit owner would let a stranger near their dogs? Well, I guess I didn't "seriously" own my pit then, because strangers petted her all the time with my permission and no one ever lost an arm and no babies were eatin.

And BSL supporters aren't?


Keep supporting BSL if you'd like. It will target your breed on day too.

duplicate post....

I have read and reread your statements and still don't see anything that would come close to supporting BSL. The fact is (as you acknowledge) that an owner who knows what he is doing keeps his dog from hurting others, whether it be through training or just keeping them out of situations where they can. In your response to my dog show question you even explained why.

I also believe (though exposure to my dogs and a lot of dogs who come through shelters I have volunteered at) that many Pit Bulls are human lovers and are by nature not aggressive to humans..period. Before you jump on me..I also believe that any breed should be supervised when with small children.

Not to get off topic...but the dogfighter might keep his dog from attacking children but he is teaching his child cruelty and might be doing more psychology damage than the dog would do in physical damage.

Wow. I am in disbelief right now at some of the statements that have been made. Plain and simple BSL DOES NOT WORK! This is not my opinion, it has been shown in areas that have implemented BSL that bites have not been reduced, another breed picks up where the banned breed left off. More so, the banned breed does not disappear, only the responsible owners stop owning the breed leaving the irresponsible owners to go further underground while continuing to corrupt the breed. But all of this has been said. We can all choose to believe what we want, but I will stick to the stats on this one.

And give me a break on the PB not being able to be a working breed that could ever live in a house as a companion animal. Lets go back a long long time ago and have a look at the Mastiff, the 'Dog of War'. Breed to guard and protect. Hundreds of years went into these working dogs to make them the fearless guardians that they were. But lets take a look at them today, they sure can guard a couch well, and lets not get them angry for they might sling some drool your way. Because of responsible breeding programs and not irresponsible thugs suffering from short penis syndrome, the Mastiff is a wonderful companion animal, docile, and loving, but still able to guard if necessary, NOT A TICKING TIME BOMB!

It terrifies me to think of the breeds that they could corrupt after all of the PB's are gone. Maybe the next thug fighting dog of choice will be a lab. You can laugh at this suggestion, but back in the '80's they attempted it with Saint Bernards, the gentle giants of the dog world. Because of the irresponsible owners looking for the optimal junkyard dog they began inbreeding fierce and aggressive Saints together and created a very unstable tempermented dog. To this day Saints are still on the top ten list for breeds of dogs with human fatality bites. This is what MAN can do to DOG. BSL is not an answer, it is only a bandaid solution that eventually will leak. Another solution has to be figured out, and it is going to be left up to the government if the dog lovers can not unite and come up with a reasonable solution.

I don't think you addressed any of the points that Pancho made. So I will repeat the question, who is going to determine who is fit and who isn't to get a Pit Bull. Are you going to go into the inner city yourself and walk up to a gang member and tell them they can't have a Pit Bull because you decided they weren't worthy of it? If the answer is no, which it probably is, then who is going to make the decision? The police, the mayor, animal control, .... come on and be realistic. In Georgia for instance, where the good old boys make the laws, all you have to have is a few dollars and be able to sign your name and tell the gun dealer your aren't crazy, and he will sell you an assault rifle. I would imagine getting a PB would be alot easier than that. If you ban the breed, and your neighbor sees one chained up in your yard, then a call to the authorities is all that is needed. No Dr Laura evaluations of the prospective owners attitude iis necessary. That is why many people are asking their legislatures to pass these bans.

And by the way, I think your use of foul language on this forum where kids view the posts, speaks volumes about where your head is at......

I won't jump on you. I think you have excellent ideas and hopes for the future of the pit bull. If more people were like you there would not be a problem with pit bulls. I am just giving another opinion.

I agree, most of the pit bulls are not aggressive to people. Never have been, even though it is becomming more common in the last 20 years to find HA pit bulls. Like it has been stated many times the pit bull is a very popular breed. The more pit bulls bred and raised the more chance of one becoming HA. Just a matter of numbers.

I will agree that a person who contains their dog or spends the time training their dogs will have very few if any accidents. That type of person will have no problems with their dog at all, no matter what the breed. They work at keeping anything from happening, not making excuses and blaming others when something happens. The problem is people getting the breed and believing they can raise the dog just like other breeds. Some will read on this forum if they love, socialize their dog, and educate others that the dog will not attack other animals. In a very few cases it may be true. Just remember the number of pit bulls no as pets only. Only a very small fraction of problem dogs will get the attention of non-dog owners. It may also be true their dog isn't a pit bull. But what happens to those who believe that is true and treats their pit bull like other breeds and when it gets 2 years old it turns on. It may not be a danger to people or it may, but it will be a danger to other animals. Attacks on humans is just one reason people are putting bans on the pit bull. There are several other reasons.

A dog fighter teaching his children cruelty and doing psychological damage to them does not have anything to do with pit bull attacks. That is another discussion, one which we both agree on.

We were discussing the pit bull bans. I gave a few reasons for the ban, not that I agree with them. I am not sure what I believe at this time and as I stated if it comes to vote in my area I will not vote either way.
Everyone knows there has to be something done.
Some want to breed out the natural aggressiveness of the pit bull. What do we do in the meantime and what do we do with those dogs that happen to retain some of the natural aggression or are throwbacks to an earlier type of dog? How do you tell if a pit bull will turn on when it becomes 1 year old or 5 years old.
Some want to restrict the ownership to only those who are experienced pit bull owners. Of course they are in that very select group. It doesn't matter if they have ever really owned a pit bull or not.

You are not one of the problem pit bull owners, never will be. I am not, nor was I ever. Just look at some of the post on this thread alone. They are not experienced pit bull owners. They have not researched the breed. They know nothing of the history of the breed. They have seen a few pit bulls, knew some person who said they had pit bulls, or may even work for a vets office. This does not make them experienced with pit bulls, no matter how hard they argue and complain. These people cause more problems with the pit bulls than the dog fighters. In this group I also put those young kids who think they are dog fighters. Those making videos of dog fights. Which any experienced dog fighter would laugh at if shown the video.
Remember just driving fast does not make you a race car driver. Allowing a dog to fight and videoing the match does not make you a dog fighter either.

The discussion is about pit bulls. A mastiff cannot be compared to the pit bull. That is just another of the reasons there are bans in certain areas. People think the pit bull is just like other breeds.
A penis has nothing to do with anything. Many experienced pit bull breeders do not even own one.

It has been shown that making it a crime to use a gun to commit a crime does not work. The numbers have increased. This does not mean we will now decide that using a gun to commit a crime is not a crime.
Robbing banks is a crime. The numbers are up, do you think the laws are not working and we need to aboilish bank robbery from our list of laws?
We need laws, whether they work or not. Just think where we would be if every law was abolished if there was an increase in that crime after the law was enacted.

I don't know you at all. I am making a judgement call after reading your posts.
You stated you went up to strange dogs owned by strange people and let those dogs off the chain and they played with you. This shows severe lack of experience. It shows bad judgement on both your side and those strangers who allowed you to do that. Those people were not experienced pit bull owners. The fact you think otherwise shows your lack of experience.
I said you are not an experienced pit bull owner and by your own statements you prove it.

i don't think this is the *main* problem with the pit bull right now (i think pit bulls acquired for status and not owned, loved, and trained as pets but as symbols of some kind of machismo are much more dangerous), but i agree with everything you wrote here. i love this breed for what it is, and i respect my dogs as the dog-aggressive, athletic, intelligent, opinionated little beasties that they are. you will never see my dogs running at a dog park and you will never see me agreeing that you can socialize the dog aggression out of them.

it makes me crazy that people think it's acceptable to take pit bulls to dog parks. it makes me crazy that they argue that other dogs are dog-aggro too so that makes it ok. i don't give a crap about the dog-aggression level of other dogs. what i care about is that pit bulls have been selectively bred to be the ultimate dog-fighting machines. it's instinct for them. and i don't CARE if your personal dog hasn't gotten himself into trouble yet. keep giving him the opportunity, and he will. and then you'll have put *my* dogs, who have never and will never see the inside of a dog park, at even more risk because you've just allowed your dogs to become more proof that pit bulls are dangerous to society.

because the public sees the dogs, they don't see the idiots on the other end of the leash.

I agree with this statement very strongly. I agree! I agree! I agree! I will never trust my dog with another animal, I do not trust him with children... and very rarely do I trust him with adults who are strangers to him. Not because he is human aggressive, but because people at large want to treat him like they do a labrador. He's not a labrador. He will never be a labrador... he is just a weird little pit mix.

Mojo is not going to tear your face off, but he is strong willed with people he does not respect. I've watched him ignore a lot of different people when they try to give him a command like "sit" and he will just look at them. Then he will look back at me to see what he should do. He can hear them fine. He knows the command... but he won't obey just anyone like a lab will. People get angry at that and tell me that Mojo must be stupid. I shrug, hold my temper, and just say "He's not a lab."

:hail: :hail: :hail: Same here, elegy... same here. Although I *WAS* stupid at one point. Mojo has seen the inside of a dog park - but when we got rushed by a lot of dogs who didn't even know their own names, I got the hell out of there. We haven't been back since.

Okay, again, the whole presuming thing.

The dog on the chain had been left chained to the front steps of an old camper. The idiot who owned him had left him there and had not been seen for days. The dog had no shelter, no food, and no water. It was snowing. So I did what I felt what was right and tried to befriend him. Eventually I was able to remove the heavy logging chain from his neck and leash him properly so I could remove him from the sty he was kept in for a little bit of attention and long enough to make him a shelter of some sorts. At no point was this dog ever unsupervised or off lead endangering anyone.

Bad judgement? No. I was cautious, and took my time. I am very comfortable with my ability to read a dogs body language and posture. That has come from my experience.

And yes, I have owned and fostered pit bulls, so please don't keep ASSuming you know me or my experience.

I never claimed to be an expert, and I'm oh so sorry that I missed the post where you stated the prerequisites for being allowed to share my opinions and experiences.

If there was just some way we could get many of the pit bull owners to think this way we would not have any pit bull problems.
It is bad that all have to pay for the actions of some pit bull owners.

The first thing that happens when the conservation comes around to pit bulls is some one will say, it is not the dog but how he is raised. That is not true but you cannot convince the unexperienced that it is false. The main problem is there is a lot more inexperienced pit bull owners than there is experienced owners. Many people have experience with other breeds and will always use the argument that others do not know their breeds. This is even more true with the pit bull. A person can have 90 years experience with other breeds. They can teach veterinary medicine, they can memorize the standards of other breeds, they can doctor, sew up, pet, release, play, breed, raise, train other breeds. This does not make them experienced pit bull owners. This does not make them any more understanding about the breed than a cat owner.

The experienced pit bull owner is not the problem, the problem is those who think they are experienced.

The only thing I had to go by is what you had posted. You posted you had went up to MANY strange dogs and after a few minutes let them off their chain to play with you.
Now the story is changing. Again I will say that is one of the main problems with some people. You stated you released the dog to play with you. Now you are changing that statement.
Your experience was with one dog chained to a camper. That is a lot different than many dogs unchained to play with you.
You can post your experiences anytime you want and others should read them. They can only read what you post and when it keeps changing your inexperience shows.
There isn't anything bad about not having experience with the pit bull. Very few really have it anyway. Posting your very limited experience with a very few dogs and telling others how experienced you are with the pit bull will surely cause others to make the same mistake. Now you can begin to see why there is a problem to begin with.

i've only had luce for three years, but i think i did not come into this with too many illusions. i got her as an adult from the pound, mannerless, dog-reactive, dog-aggressive, screaming, and totally nuts. she gave me no opportunity to think of her as anything but dog-aggro (though she's always lived with another dog without significant problem and has done fine with every one-on-one playmate i've chosen for her).

mushroom i got as an adult, too.

i've had countless people come up to me in public and tell me how my dogs are so nice and how it's so true that it's all in how you raise them. i tell them i had nothing to do with "raising" either of these dogs. it's all their basic temperaments (lovely and affectionate with humans) and a bunch of training and respecting what they are (aggressive and untrustworthy with strange dogs, but obedient and well-trained enough to be safe in public on leash around other dogs).

i had a coworker ask me a few weeks ago what my dogs do if they run up to a strange dog. i said my dogs have never EVER been allowed to run up to strange dogs. she was just utterly flabbergasted by that. i own PIT BULLS for crying out loud. i was nearly as flabbergasted by the question, i think.

THAT is what I stated.

How you got:
from what I stated I am unsure.

I don't wish to argue this. But you are stating my story has changed when it has not. I just went into more depth since it was questioned. You are implying that I have changed my story and I have not. YOU are the one changing my "story".

You do not know me. You do not know my experience. Yet you keep assuming.

Anyways, as this has gone far away from what I intended with my first post in this thread, I'm done. You believe what you'd like, and I'll believe what I'd like.