Replies

1. As I pointed out Dogs are big money...Some of these folks are just misguided fighting breed fanciers, some are breed pushers. The position that Breed and genetics has no influence on the propensity to attack and kill is laughable. Retrievers retrieve, Beagles take off and chase rabbits for days, Pointers point, lap dogs sit on your lap and fighting breeds fight and attack...That's what they were selected for. You may be able to control it, but it is always there lurking.

For an example of the Pit Cabal, let's take your Canadian buddy(just look at his page), desperately seeking information on BJ's local US legislative issue. That's US local matter not one for Canadian Pit pushing globalists. Certainly no lawyers from Kanawa's Pit organizations will descend down to BJ's town and try to affect a local matter, will they?

2. Unfortunately, the Pit Bulls are failing the real world test as pets and it has become a public safety issue. Any restrictions are possibly unfair to some, but weighed against the interest of public safety. Local restrictions on dangerous property are not Unconstitutional and there are plenty of examples of restricted items and behaviors.
Unfair...maybe, UnConstitutional, No.

3.Ahh.... the ole there is no such breed talking point... I'll leave the ID of a Pit Bull up to local Law Enforcement and animal control personnel as they seize, and shoot many of these animals. Additionally, these are the number one shelter dog in many communities. These professionals handle live and dead Pits all the time.... Fair enough... or are only certified Pit Bull community DNA specialists acceptable?

4. Are you seriously contending that the media is generating these reports when no such attacks actually took place? Why haven't the Pit owners identified in these stories sued for libel? Please point out these libel suits if there are any? I think most people know that the "Pit Bull" is the commonly accepted term for APBTs and AST.

As far as debating, you've seldomed posted any factual information, merely feelings of persecution, unfairness and spin from the Pit Bull community. Then a few insults when you are stumped. Yet, not a single time have you expressed concern for the victims of these attacks, nor the overbreeding of these dogs and how many thousands are born just to die in the shelters. That's where you lose all credibility, lack of concern for things that cause real suffering. Like others have said the deceitful denial campaign is setting you back.

Now, Do you offer any constructive solutions or maintain the head in the hand approach? If you have no solutions, I award you an F minus and an "Incomplete" for lack of effort.

Re your post #363:

Your point #1:
'Pit bull' type dogs are a very small part of the overall canine population so, those which attack are a minuscule portion. Yet, your shotgun 'solution' penalizes the 99+% of dog owners who aren't part of the problem. Concentrating control efforts on the relatively tiny, by comparison, number of specific irresponsible / negligent dog owners is prima facie common sense. Further, the arbitrary & subjective nature of so-called 'breed ban" laws make them both unworkable & grossly unfair to far more owners / dogs than there is any logical basis to target.
As far as genetic predisposition is concerned, forget DNA, your 'solution' harasses even benign owners / dogs where there's at best & merely in someone's opinion a vague 'pit bull look' present - see my still unanswered post # 338.

Your point #2:
Even if there were an agreed definition as to what constitutes a 'pit bull' - which there plainly isn't - by definition any law which punishes the vast majority for the sins of a tiny few is unfair & arbitrary (ergo, unconstitutional where applicable)
BTW, although very obviously the vast, vast majority of owners / dogs aren't part of the problem, all statistics are fatally flawed by their lack of any agreed 'pit bull' definition while public perception of it is manipulated by sensationalized & agenda-driven biased msm coverage (e.g. msn on SUV's - sheesh!)

Your point #3:
What sort of 'conservative' puts his trust solely in the arbitrary & subjective perceptions governmental authorities ???
Plus, owners / dogs are 'guilty until proven innocent' under your 'solution' - and with no meaningful or cost-effective means of appeal (again, see my still unanswered post # 338)
Forget any body's DNA experts as well as the perceptions (AKA 'feelings') of civil servants and take the far simpler route of going directly after irresponsible / negligent dog owners !!!

Your point #4:
No one has said dog attacks (even by 'pit bull' type dogs) don't occur.
However, all who disagree with you firmly believe that the msm sensationalizes & over 'reports' them just as it does with SUV's & virtually in every other area where it has an open agenda.
"I think most people know that the "Pit Bull" is the commonly accepted term for APBTs and AST."
Couldn't disagree more! Most people (and reporters!) have some vague notion of the host of crossbred dogs, which often look only remotely similar, responsible for most 'pit bull' related dog attacks.
As example, news footage of the supposed 'pit bull' involved in the Ontario, Canada attack this week portrays an animal perhaps half German Shepard (?) but certainly with lots of something other than any sort of terrier in its genetic make-up.

Your concluding statements:
Arguing that my post #314 (as but one example) which documented the opposition of responsible animal welfare bodies to the 'breed ban' approach somehow didn't more than counter - by any criteria! - the host of msm "news" stories you & others have posted, quite plainly speaks volumes as to your complete lack of any objectivity.

As to me not mentioning human or animal victims, nowhere have I denigrated their - to me plainly self-evident - misfortune.
I've merely concentrated - as one does in debate - on the far greater, in terms of obvious overall numbers - problems your statist approach inflicts upon otherwise good citizens & their pets.
If we're pointing the finger of denial, aside from your cavalier rejection of the host of expert bodies which completely disagree with you, there's still been no real response to the issue of the likely tens of times more dog owners & their pets whom your approach harms by comparison to the tiny number it may police. (once again, see my post #338)

"Constructive solutions" ?
I posted (my #314) a full page of them, authored by legitimate experts & likely endorsed by every single FReeper on this thread who disagrees with you.

If I'm to receive an "F minus", how far off the scale are those who've advanced PETA's position and smugly 'feel' they've backed it up with cheap emotionalism, blatant denial, and selective liberal media "news" clippings ???

That's US local matter not one for Canadian Pit pushing globalists. Certainly no lawyers from Kanawa's Pit organizations will descend down to BJ's town and try to affect a local matter, will they?

The lieberal government in Ontario justified their actions in part on Ohio's breed ban
and the testimony of dog-catcher...err...sorry... dog warden Skelton.
Just as now other nanny-staters are looking to Ontario to justify their intrusive and ineffective attempts to ban whole breeds and dog types on the basis of a few media-hyped incidents.
Bud wake-up, you're part of a trans-national socialist attempt to engineer a perfectly safe leftist utopian society governed by seemingly benevolent but power hungry and controlling nannies.
Individual freedom, responsibility and accountability are foreign concepts to them.

If your happy and you know it, rattle your chains.

When they come to take away your hunting and fishing rights and your dog,
or whatever else you hold dear, give me a shout.
I'll be glad to stick up for you.