Pit Bulls: Can Permits Protect Dogs from Bad Owners?
On August 9, 2010, a routine traffic stop was made by Buena Park, CA, police officers for a van without a front license plate. Investigation revealed it was transporting 12 pit bulls to Mexico, apparently for dog fighting.
The animals were all young and described by South East Area Animal Control (SEAACA) Captain Aaron Reyes as “beautiful dogs,” some identified as coming from “notorious dog fighters—some with prior felony convictions.” With the help of The Humane Society of the U.S., microchips were traced to locations across the country. Orders showed that the driver, who appeared to be an employee of a “legitimate animal transport service,” had picked up pit bulls ranging in age from puppies to three years in Alabama, Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, New Jersey, Kansas City, Seattle and Long Beach, CA. Further investigation is being conducted, but the dogs are now safe and receiving special care at an undisclosed location provided by South East Area Animal Control (SEAACA). www.seaaca.org
The federal Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007 provides felony penalties for interstate transfer of animals for fighting. http://www.hsus.org/legislation_laws/federal_legislation/cruelty _issues/animal_fighting_law_signed.html
Although the van’s driver and passengers were not charged and “seemed to be caring for the dogs the best they could,” according to Ca pt. Reyes, the reason given for the police inspecting the van was the “god-awful smell.” This would indicate that the conditions for the animals were less than sanitary and certainly less than should be reasonably expected by a professional service.
Does this mean we need stricter laws and requirements for businesses that transport dogs across the country (which is also becoming a common practice for “rescued” and shelter pets)?
The most notable motto for pit bull sites (rescuers/breeders/clubs) is “Punish the deed, not the breed.” Or, we are admonished to “Punishthe owner for the deed, and the dog involved [this presumably refers to an attack or other errant behavior], but never the breed!” How does this fit into the fact that it is often the OWNER who punishes the breed? Unless sending a van load of dogs to be torn apart and die in a bloody pit is not considered “punishment.” How does punishing the owner AFTER the pain and torture of a staged dog fight help the dog(s)?
Dog fighting and fighting-dog-breeding busts are now a regular occurrence in every state in the U.S. The animals are often kept in horrific conditions and are found wounded, infected, starved or brutally killed either by a dog in combat or by the owner (remember Michael Vick?)
So why do proclaimed pit bull lovers and rescuers oppose any type of special protection for these helpless dogs FROM THEIR OWNER? What’s wrong with being “breed specific” to protect a breed that is routinely chained in yards, neglected and abused? Isn't it time to enact special provisions for owning pit bulls so that the dogs can be assured a quality life?
If a city or state adopted the policy of a “protection permit” for every pit bull--requiring notification of any change of ownership or relocation of the dog, PLUS an annual veterinary check to assure the animal was well treated--would YOU support it?
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
No they can't, nor can they protect them from anyone else.
Link: http://spcalapresident.blogspot.com/2010/08/dont-hate-me-because-im-pit-bull-breed.html
Just what do you think, Ms Bernstein, is the answer? You probably subscribe to "Blame the Deed, Not the Breed". Well, Ms. B. that allows for more victims, more families in ruin from pit attacks, more closed casket funerals. What would be your purpose in doing that? Just so you can move the pits out of your shelter, outta sight, outta mind? I bet you even subscribe to No Kill by Weird Winograd. Pits don't get a "bad rap" they earn it, everyday. You can't care about all those beloved pets killed by pits or the innocent people destroyed by pits. Here's some education sites you need to visit.
www.cravendesires.blogspot.com
www.pitattacksbystate.blogspot.com
http://bslforpitsmakessense.blogspot.com /
http://pitbullsattackpeople.blogspot.com /
http://www.destroypitbulls.com /
And the best one of all www.DogsBite.ORG . Educate yourself Ms. B and work to stop the slaughter of people and animals by the pit bulls.
Why is it that, no matter how many of these posts I read, no one ever speaks about how unsocialized American dogs are? Yes, I am American, but I know for a fact that other countries with low attack/bite rates have extremely socialized dogs who are allowed in many public places.
We are allowed to bring our canines to certain parks, pet stores, and, um...........well, that's about it, When we do take them someplace, we limit their exposure because we're all afraid of biting and law suits. We don't allow them to play with strange dogs, we don't allow kids to pet them, we keep them tethered to us, and I've even seen some people look at me in fear because I am walking 3 dogs.
Here's the point; dogs do best when they are familiar with many situations, many different people, other animals, etc. If they only ever get to see us at home, then everythng else is a potential threat to their way of thinking ( i suppose, I'm not a dog, just a fan of them)
Has it ever ocurred to anyone that, one of the reasons Pits attack so often is that people see them and get scared immediately? Dogs recognize weakness/fear and they don't stand for it. As soon as a human shows a dog fear they're in trouble. That's one of the ways that dogs insure a strong breed in the wild; kill the weak.
Harsh but accurate.
No, I'm not blaming the people for being attacked. But a preconceived notion that leads to fear is not helping this situation.
I'm simply saying that we seem to always look for the government or "someone else" to slove the worlds' problems. When do people start solving problems on their own? Get to know your neigborhood dogs. Try to force better socialization in general with our animals and, while you're all at it, get you kids to have better manners too!
Everyone wants to point the finger but no one wants to take responsibility. Put those idiot breeders in a pen with a pack of hungry Pits and let them be dinner; maybe that'll deter the behavior of the humans causingthe problem.
So BSL doesn't work you say? Well I disagree with you and so do lots of others. Cities and counties in at least 11 U.S. states report successful results after enacting a breed-specific pit bull law. These states include: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Washington. The providence of Ontario also reports successful results since it's 2005 adoption of a pit bull ban. Pro-pit bull groups frequently say, "BSL doesn't work." The city and law enforcement officials disagree.
http://blog.dogsbite.org/2010/06/cities-with-successful-pit-bull-laws.html
Ottumwa, IA In July 2010, Police Chief Jim Clark said there had been no recorded pit bull attacks since the city's 2003 pit bull ban. Between 1989 and 2003, the city had a pit bull ordinance, but still allowed pit bulls as "guard" dogs.
Council Bluffs, IA "We passed a ban and started enforcing it in January of 05, at the end of 05 our numbers had dropped down to 19 people injured by pit bulls. In 06, the numbers dropped to 7 people injured by pit bulls. In 07, 2007 we only had two people injured by pit bulls and we haven't had a person injured by pit bulls since. So in 2008 and 2009 we had zero attacks. As of March 5th, 2010 we have yet to have a pit bull injury here in Council Bluffs."
San Francisco, CA Sgt. Bill Herndon, of the San Francisco Police Department's vicious dog unit, said the numbers and severity of pit bull attacks are down since San Francisco enacted an ordinance in 2005.San Francisco's animal control department reports more than 30 percent fewer pit bulls at the shelter or being euthanized."
Lancaster, CA "Parris believes there is a correlation between the results of the dog ordinance and a drop in the city’s gang crime rate. Lancaster’s violent gang crime, which includes homicide, rape, robbery and aggravated assault, fell by 45% last year, and there was a drop in overall gang crime by 41%, Parris said, citing statistics from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department."
Omaha, NE After the City of Omaha adopted a pit bull law in 2008, Mark Langan of the Nebraska Humane Society, who opposed the law, said in September 2009 that pit bull biting incidents were down 35% since its adoption:
Prince George's County, MD "Taylor said that during the first five to seven years of the ban, animal control officials would encounter an average of 1,200 pit bulls a year but that in recent years that figure has dropped by about half. According to county statistics, 36 pit bull bites, out of 619 total dog bites, were recorded in 2008, down from 95 pit bull bites, out of a total of 853, in 1996."
Pawtucket, RI "Holmes says he predicted that it would take two years for Pawtucket to experience the full benefit of the law after it was passed, but the results were actually apparent in half the time."It's working absolutely fantastic," said Holmes. "We have not had a pit bull maiming in the city since December of 2004."
Little Rock, AR "There was a day when you could walk down any street in center city Little Rock, you could see several pit bulls chained up. You don't see that anymore," said Tracy Roark with Little Rock Animal Services.Roark told Eyewitness News over the phone that pit bull attacks have been cut in half and credits their new law with getting them there.
Springfield, MO "The Springfield-Greene County Health Department reports that dog bites and vicious dog complaints are declining since the implementation of the Pit Bull Ordinance in the City of Springfield two years ago.The ordinance, which requires pit bull owners to register their dogs annually, has also resulted in fewer pit bull dogs being impounded at the Springfield Animal Shelter.
Toronto, Canada In a March 2008 Toronto Sun article, Toronto animal services reported that pit bull biting incidents had dropped significantly since the adoption of the Dog Owners Liability Act 2005, an act that banned pit bulls:
Shall I go on? And this doesn't include entire countries that are doing BSL and banning. Nah, this is enough to dispell your myth that BSL doesn't work. There's more if you care to open those closed eyes and look. Are you even aware that pits are now banned on military bases?
Pit bulls are the only breed where "pit bull rescues (Savior rescues) as well as breeders recommend carrying a break stick in case of those "accidents". What other breed can you say that about? Imagine carrying a breakstick for poodles!!! You are so off base with this article the only explanation for it is money, just like NotbornYesterday said. Do you even have an idea how many people have been killed by pits in CA? Well, I'll tell you TOO DAMN MANY!!! Prevent the Deed and Save Lives by Regulating the Breed. We've had too many closed casket funerals from these monsters already. Hope those donations from the pit nutters, dogmen and pit bull breeders leave a sour taste in your mouth.
All this article is hoping to do is move all those pits out of her shelter and thus put the public in danger. Purely selfish, Madeline. What do you want, to let them continue to maul and kill while you gather donations from the dogmen and pit bull breeders for telling the public their lies and propaganda about pit bulls? Yeah, Madeline, we have your number. We hate pits because of what they are doing daily, killing beloved pets and people. Today a man was killed in Northern CA by pits, two weeks ago a 2 year old was killed by pits in CA. How many deaths will it take before you and your kind realize the truth about pits? Here's a site you need to visit and visit often, the site the dogmen and pit bull breeders don't want the public to see
www.DogsBite.ORG Look at the faces of the victims, read their stories, look at the stats if you have the guts to do so. How dare you defend a breed of dog that was bred to do one thing and one thing only-to kill. A breed of dog that has destroyed so many lives and families? What kind of person are you to do that to people? Pits weren't bred to be of service to mankind like shepherds or hounds, they were bred for a bloodsport that is now illegal and you need to be working to make them illegal.
Along with registration and microchipping. Its high time the so-called "humane advocates" put their own egos aside and did what is best for the animals. The vast majority of people breeding pit bulls are criminal;s, thugs, drug dealers, gang members, or losers looking to make a quick buck. They are NOT being bred to be stable family pets. The majority of pit bulls lead short brutal lives, yet animal advocates want to blame the general public for not adopting them, rather than put the blame where it belongs...to the people who make money off of the suffering of these dogs.
Even here in Massachusetts, where s/n education worked so well, we import adoptable dogs from high kill shelters down south to fill the demand....pit bulls still flood shelters and rescues. Education worked for owners/breders of virtually all other breeds, execpt for those that own and breed pit bulls.
Its time to stop coddling the dog fighters and animal abusers who are breeding aggressive fighting dogs through legislation. Its a win win for both people and dogs.
When the same is applied to humans, we call that genocide. Or eugenics.
Both have the same goal: eradicate the race .
How is that win/win for people and dogs?
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
I am convinced that you have absolutely no desire to engage in a serious and thoughtful debate about this; I have no idea what your motivation is here, to get attention or simply get page views to your profile. But you can't expect me to take you seriously if you don't understand the definition of genocide, and that it applies to people and not animals. For you to compare the spaying and neutering of a domestic dog breed to the atrocities committed against various ethnic/religious groups throughout history...from the Holocaust to Pol Pots Killing Fields, to the tragedy in Darfur...is extremely offensive. If we have reached this level of sophomoric discourse, there is no point in continuing.
I made it perfectly clear that extinction applied to animals and genocide/eugenics applied to humans.
I asked a specific question: "You don't think that mandatory s/n will lead to extinction?"
Then I pointed out how when the same activity is applied to humans, it is called genocide or eugenics.
How dare you try to insult my seriousness, maturity and intelligence by fallaciously pretending that I somehow don't understand that the latter two apply to humans after I specifically applied them to humans!?
Talk about sophomoric debate techniques.
Now answer the question or admit that your statement was faulty.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
You failed to address the question because you know it makes you look like an idiot.
Your claim was clearly ignorant, and this is how you are protecting yourself.
You know damn good and well that I am one of the most serious commenters on this entire issue, so don't give me that crap.
Run along if you feel outmatched, but don't give me a false 'surrender' just because you don't like the reflection you see when I hold a mirror up to your own argument.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.