PDA

View Full Version : The other side of Pit Bull bans


vailpass
01-20-2006, 01:36 PM
URL: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_86_4370854,00.html
Johnson: No just ending to pit bull's tale
January 7, 2006

Sometimes is there no happy ending. The good guy dies, the star-crossed lovers never meet, those terrible flying monkeys in The Wizard of Oz finish off poor Dorothy.

The only good thing to come out of this update about Sheryl White and her dog, Sherman, is that Sherman still isn't dead.

I wrote of Sheryl White two weeks ago, of her struggle to save Sherman, a pit bull-Rottweiler mix, from Denver's reinstituted ban on the breed and what seemed his almost certain date with the euthanasia needle.

Scores of people responded both to me and Sheryl White in the days after the column appeared. They were moved by her desperation to save the dog that had been confiscated by animal control officials, how she had moved from her Denver condominium just before Christmas.

Sheryl White, the story went, began calling and e-mailing anyone and everyone she could think of who might help her rescue Sherman. She had adopted the dog after a court struck down the city's pit bull ban, when it was still under review.

"We took our chances," she said of the decision to bring Sherman home. "I thought we would be OK."

Three women involved in animal rescue finally answered her e-mail pleas and managed to free Sherman from the dog pound last Friday. Sheryl and her husband, Dana, decided they would rent out their condo and find an apartment outside Denver.

In the meantime, they spent Christmas with Sherman at the Littleton office where Sheryl White works, which her boss made available to the couple for the holidays.

She called on Tuesday. She had just returned from New Mexico. She had driven there two days earlier to drop Sherman off with her former husband.

Sheryl said she and her husband had filled out many applications for apartments, but nobody would rent to them if Sherman was part of the package.

They placed newspaper ads, knocked on doors. And with the holidays coming to a close, they couldn't stay at her office much longer. What to do?

"We took Sherman to animal control in Boulder County, praying we could find someone to adopt him. It was one of the hardest things I have ever done," Sheryl White said.

Her story is one that plays out every week. Toni Phillips, who runs Mariah's Promise, an animal rescue organization in Divide, says she has seen at least 100 similar situations since Denver outlawed pit bulls last May.

Twenty of the Denver pit bull owners actually moved out of the city to keep their dogs, Toni Phillips said. The other 80 animals she adopted out.

"I'm not trying to be a hero," Toni Phillips said, "but I had 14 pits in May. Now I've still got 55 I need to find homes for. I get at least one or two a day and, sometimes, as many as five.

"I'm dancing as fast as I can."

Every day her telephone rings with calls from owners wanting to know if she has found a home yet for their pet.

"People just bawl," she said. "Anybody who has taken the time to drive two hours to my house to drop off their dog has not left dry-eyed.

"I've had tough, roughneck biker guys just lose it. I have had too many children cry in front of me. That has been the hardest part."

The day after Sheryl and Dana White dropped off Sherman in Boulder, they were told his being part pit bull meant he was not adoptable. They would have until 7 p.m. to pick him up. Otherwise, he would be put to sleep.

It was her daughter who called her father in New Mexico. He agreed to take the dog, Sheryl White said.

"I have an interview on a place in about an hour," she said. "I'm packing up my stuff from the office right now.

"Everything has been so hectic, so busy, I've had no time to sit down and reflect. But I know it's going to hit me."

It is truly amazing how one person, emboldened by an unthinking, fear-based city policy, can affect another person's life, Sheryl White said.

That is how it all started, with a neighbor calling animal control to report Sherman. How that one call changed her life, she said.

Her former husband has promised to keep Sherman as long as she needs him to. She thinks it will be a year before "the dust of it all settles."

She figures she will be finished with her bachelor's degree in business management in October. Maybe she will buy a home outside of Denver then, she said.

But what if the city where she buys also passes a pit bull ban?

"It is why my life is so on hold," she said. "Still, I would rather him be in New Mexico than dead.

"But I have a great memory. We spent New Year's Eve in my office. Me and Sherman, drinking sparkling cider together."

johnsonw@RockyMountainNews.com

BIG_DADDY
01-20-2006, 01:54 PM
It's some ****ed up shit. Somebody should euthanize Korey Nelson that POS is the one initiating this BS legislation across the country right now.

kcfanXIII
01-20-2006, 02:09 PM
here we go again. bsl is bs. everyone argue for a while, then move it to dc.

MOhillbilly
01-20-2006, 02:11 PM
heads up to the dog fanciers.

http://www.lsu.edu/deafness/deaf.htm (http://www.lsu.edu/deafness/deaf.htm)

penchief
01-20-2006, 02:30 PM
It's some ****ed up shit. Somebody should euthanize Korey Nelson that POS is the one initiating this BS legislation across the country right now.

BIG DADDY, I have not had an opinion on this pit bull thing other than a bias against those who breed dogs to maim. I am officially open minded on the subject. Explain to me why, when it appears that one breed in particular, seems to be aggressive toward humans and other dogs, why you believe that particular breed is being unfairly maligned.

As I said, I am open to both sides of the debate at this point. First, I am a dog lover and have owned several dogs in my life. Second, I am also a bleeding heart liberal (as well as a civil libertarian). So, I am torn between two lovers. I believe that dogs are a reflection of their master but also my heart goes out to those families that have lost precious loved ones, especially children, because of pit bull attacks.

I am asking you for a solution. Do we ban the breed or do we hold the owner accountable for his pet's actions as we would hold him accountable for his own actions?

MOhillbilly
01-20-2006, 02:37 PM
why dont you do a search retard?

Simplex3
01-20-2006, 02:45 PM
BIG DADDY, I have not had an opinion on this pit bull thing other than a bias against those who breed dogs to maim. I am officially open minded on the subject. Explain to me why, when it appears that one breed in particular, seems to be aggressive toward humans and other dogs, why you believe that particular breed is being unfairly maligned.

As I said, I am open to both sides of the debate at this point. First, I am a dog lover and have owned several dogs in my life. Second, I am also a bleeding heart liberal (as well as a civil libertarian). So, I am torn between two lovers. I believe that dogs are a reflection of their master but also my heart goes out to those families that have lost precious loved ones, especially children, because of pit bull attacks.

I am asking you for a solution. Do we ban the breed or do we hold the owner accountable for his pet's actions as we would hold him accountable for his own actions?
The insurance industry's own statistics show that pit bulls are no more likely to attack than any other breed. It's all a bulls**t scare-fest brought about by society's need to be scared of something and the media's frenzy to feed that stupidity.

Bacon Cheeseburger
01-20-2006, 02:48 PM
BIG DADDY, I have not had an opinion on this pit bull thing other than a bias against those who breed dogs to maim. I am officially open minded on the subject. Explain to me why, when it appears that one breed in particular, seems to be aggressive toward humans and other dogs, why you believe that particular breed is being unfairly maligned.

As I said, I am open to both sides of the debate at this point. First, I am a dog lover and have owned several dogs in my life. Second, I am also a bleeding heart liberal (as well as a civil libertarian). So, I am torn between two lovers. I believe that dogs are a reflection of their master but also my heart goes out to those families that have lost precious loved ones, especially children, because of pit bull attacks.

I am asking you for a solution. Do we ban the breed or do we hold the owner accountable for his pet's actions as we would hold him accountable for his own actions?

I think the latter is approprate, this reeks of feel-good legislation. The city of Bellevue, NE requires "breed-specific" dog owners to carry $1,000,000 liability policies on them.

ENDelt260
01-20-2006, 02:49 PM
It's all a bulls**t scare-fest brought about by society's need to be scared of something and the media's frenzy to feed that stupidity.

Heh... my all time favorite example of this is West Nile virus. I have to hear this shit every year on the news. Look out for West Nile. Oh no! Not West Nile! The disease that killed a whopping 100 people in this country last year? My God, what will we do?!?!?!

Rausch
01-20-2006, 02:51 PM
The insurance industry's own statistics show that pit bulls are no more likely to attack than any other breed. It's all a bulls**t scare-fest brought about by society's need to be scared of something and the media's frenzy to feed that stupidity.

Really?

I think what people don't get is that pit bulls have become the pet of choice for trash.

When you give anything to someone stupid they'll abuse it. Almost all of the attacks around here have been by pit bulls. Almost all of the large breeds around here are pit bulls.

Almost all of the large breed owners around here are ****ing white trash.

Instead of a ban they should require a background test, or a ****ing IQ test or something.

ENDelt260
01-20-2006, 02:52 PM
Can we just ban the WT?

ENDelt260
01-20-2006, 02:53 PM
"I'm sorry... you're wearing a Skoal hat and used to f*ck your first cousin. I'm afraid we're going to have to put you down."

kcfanXIII
01-20-2006, 02:55 PM
its pretty simple, if we're afraid, the government has a job to do, which is keep us safe. the media feeds this need by creating things for you to fear.
so in conclusion, FEAR DRIVES THE SYSTEM!!!!

Rausch
01-20-2006, 02:55 PM
Can we just burn the WT?

I'm working on it...

BIG_DADDY
01-20-2006, 02:56 PM
The insurance industry's own statistics show that pit bulls are no more likely to attack than any other breed. It's all a bulls**t scare-fest brought about by society's need to be scared of something and the media's frenzy to feed that stupidity.

Exactly. Channel 2 news out here is into this selling fear thing big time. They have never talked about any other breed biting someone and will report on anything that even resembling a pit biting anyone even if it is a nip. The whole time they are doing the story they have a huge picture of a pit behind them foaming at the mouth and showing his teeth.

When we did the big protest in Sacramento at the capital none of the big media out here showed. MOF a number of the channels do a morning report from the capital but they all did their morning report down the street on the back side of the Capital so nobody would know there was a big protest there. 4 hours later they were all there for only 4 people protesting the war though. I hate our media out here. It's amazing the lengths they will go to in order to make things look a certain way. I have basically quit watching the news other than business. I do glance at the news online though every day.

redhed
01-20-2006, 02:56 PM
The insurance industry's own statistics show that pit bulls are no more likely to attack than any other breed. It's all a bulls**t scare-fest brought about by society's need to be scared of something and the media's frenzy to feed that stupidity.

Nail(Blam)head
He's enfuego today!

When will people learn to control their animals?
I know, never.

duncan_idaho
01-20-2006, 03:03 PM
I think the latter is approprate, this reeks of feel-good legislation. The city of Bellevue, NE requires "breed-specific" dog owners to carry $1,000,000 liability policies on them.

I think required insurance is the best solution. If those dogs ARE as harmless as their owners say they are, taking out an insurance policy shouldn't be a big risk.

It sucks to have to buy insurance, but it's the same thing as having a car. It's a luxury, not a right, and if you want the luxury, you have to pay a little extra for it. For example: when I bought my new car, I had a choice between a boring, economic, safe sedan and a fast sports coupe. I bought the coupe, and pay higher insurance because some people drive those types of cars like morons. People could make the same choices about pit bulls, etc. And just like there are good owners of perceived "dangerous" cars(pit bulls), there are bad owners of perceived "safe" cars (smaller breeds). But those are the breaks.

I'd also like to see something that makes people subject to prosecution if their dog attacks someone, unprovoked.

penchief
01-20-2006, 03:05 PM
why dont you do a search retard?

Excuse me? I'm asking a respected member of this community to give me his personal response out of sincere interest in his answer. If you have a problem with that then I suggest you detail your reasons for acting like an asshole in more detail.

If you have a problem with my positions or my questions I'd be glad to answer them more thoroughly if you are decent enough to ask those questions of me in a more respectful manner.

BIG_DADDY
01-20-2006, 03:06 PM
BIG DADDY, I have not had an opinion on this pit bull thing other than a bias against those who breed dogs to maim. I am officially open minded on the subject. Explain to me why, when it appears that one breed in particular, seems to be aggressive toward humans and other dogs, why you believe that particular breed is being unfairly maligned.

As I said, I am open to both sides of the debate at this point. First, I am a dog lover and have owned several dogs in my life. Second, I am also a bleeding heart liberal (as well as a civil libertarian). So, I am torn between two lovers. I believe that dogs are a reflection of their master but also my heart goes out to those families that have lost precious loved ones, especially children, because of pit bull attacks.

I am asking you for a solution. Do we ban the breed or do we hold the owner accountable for his pet's actions as we would hold him accountable for his own actions?

Holding owners accountible is the answer. You are twice as likely to die from being struck by lightning as being killed by a dog. The second answer is if a dog ever bites a person that is not breaking in or assaulting the owner it gets put down. There are no 2nd chances. Lastly for every dog that does serious damage to a human there are 10s of thousands that successfully defend their households. Just recently we have had a series of door to door assaults/rapes/robberies out here initiated by people posing as magazine sales people. When most people come to my house they are greeted by Taz before I get there. By the time I am there they are gone 90% of the time.

MOhillbilly
01-20-2006, 03:19 PM
Excuse me? I'm asking a respected member of this community to give me his personal response out of sincere interest in his answer. If you have a problem with that then I suggest you detail your reasons for acting like an asshole in more detail.

If you have a problem with my positions or my questions I'd be glad to answer them more thoroughly if you are decent enough to ask those questions of me in a more respectful manner.

I dont have a problem w/ your stance,but jesus christ theres gotta be atleast 2K posts on this subject.

vailpass
01-20-2006, 03:25 PM
Holding owners accountible is the answer. You are twice as likely to die from being struck by lightning as being killed by a dog. The second answer is if a dog ever bites a person that is not breaking in or assaulting the owner it gets put down. There are no 2nd chances. Lastly for every dog that does serious damage to a human there are 10s of thousands that successfully defend their households. Just recently we have had a series of door to door assaults/rapes/robberies out here initiated by people posing as magazine sales people. When most people come to my house they are greeted by Taz before I get there. By the time I am there they are gone 90% of the time.

BD-
I can't pay attention to a single thing you say and I have a funny feeling like when I used to climb the rope in gym class. Could you remove your avatar?

Bacon Cheeseburger
01-20-2006, 03:28 PM
Excuse me? I'm asking a respected member of this community to give me his personal response out of sincere interest in his answer. If you have a problem with that then I suggest you detail your reasons for acting like an asshole in more detail.

If you have a problem with my positions or my questions I'd be glad to answer them more thoroughly if you are decent enough to ask those questions of me in a more respectful manner.

Frankly, I don't know why you even dignified that with a response. Everyone knows the search function on this site is virtually worthless.

penchief
01-20-2006, 03:40 PM
Holding owners accountible is the answer. You are twice as likely to die from being struck by lightning as being killed by a dog. The second answer is if a dog ever bites a person that is not breaking in or assaulting the owner it gets put down. There are no 2nd chances. Lastly for every dog that does serious damage to a human there are 10s of thousands that successfully defend their households. Just recently we have had a series of door to door assaults/rapes/robberies out here initiated by people posing as magazine sales people. When most people come to my house they are greeted by Taz before I get there. By the time I am there they are gone 90% of the time.

I completely agree with your overall assessment of dogs, their loyalty, and their protective nature. After all, I have stated my love for dogs based on my previous ownership.

However, my questions are direcected more toward the pit bull breed, specifically. What is the answer to solving the problem that seems to surround that breed concerning accusations about over-aggressiveness and owner abuse (i.e. training to maim, fight, etc.)

penchief
01-20-2006, 03:54 PM
I dont have a problem w/ your stance,but jesus christ theres gotta be atleast 2K posts on this subject.



Well, it's a proud day for you.

First off, I have no stance. That is the purpose of my picking BIG DADDY's brain, initially.

Second, I'm asking a sincere question about a topic that I have not involved involved myself before. Because I remember threads that I have previously ignored out of disinterst, I'm asking someone intimitely involved with the issue about his side of the debate.

Instead of criticizing those who might have a renewed interest in the topic it might behoove you to not comment on the subject or completely ingore the thread altogeter.

Simplex3
01-20-2006, 04:04 PM
Instead of criticizing those who might have a renewed interest in the topic it might behoove you to not comment on the subject or completely ingore the thread altogeter.
Dude, you can't just ignore a thread.

Can you?

penchief
01-20-2006, 04:14 PM
Dude, you can't just ignore a thread.

Can you?

Why should I?

I'm not interested in criticizing anyone. I'm interested in BIG DADDY'S response to my question.

I didn't start this thread, I only responded to it.

Is that a problem for you?

ENDelt260
01-20-2006, 04:15 PM
This thread would really kick ass if someone got penchief a couple shots.

BIG_DADDY
01-20-2006, 04:17 PM
I completely agree with your overall assessment of dogs, their loyalty, and their protective nature. After all, I have stated my love for dogs based on my previous ownership.

However, my questions are direcected more toward the pit bull breed, specifically. What is the answer to solving the problem that seems to surround that breed concerning accusations about over-aggressiveness and owner abuse (i.e. training to maim, fight, etc.)

Real Pit Bulls (fighting dogs) don't bite people. They have 3 people handling them in the pit and if they ever have a human aggresive animal it is put down. Dog fighters are not the issue or are real pit dogs. So to answer your question there are no issues with the real breed. The real issues stem from a couple different things. One is the breed is very popular right now. What they have classified as pits are now the second most popular breed in the bay area after labs. BTW labs are the top biters in the bay area but that gets dismissed because of their popularity, a courtesy not extended to the pits. Because the breed is so popular there is money to be made breeding them and consiquently that attracts bad breeders. We have seen bad dogs of every breed when it has become popular and that can create biters. The second issue is the loose term pit bull. There are many breeds now considered to be pit bulls and that is not fair to the breed. I can combine any number of other breeds to create a desired negative representation too and that is exactly what the media, polititians and legislaters are doing right now. There is only one pit bull and that is an American Pit Bull Terrier and it rarely ever bites people but to feed the fear frenzy you need label the dog a fighting pit dog. When the media was selling that fear you bought and it is still in your head.

Simplex3
01-20-2006, 04:17 PM
Why should I?

I'm not interested in criticizing anyone. I'm interested in BIG DADDY'S response to my question.

I didn't start this thread, I only responded to it.

Is that a problem for you?
ROFL

Dude, I'm on your side here...

I meant that MO should have just read the starter and moved on if he was so hell bent on not reading about dogs any more.

ROFL

Relax, Francis.

penchief
01-20-2006, 04:44 PM
Real Pit Bulls (fighting dogs) don't bite people. They have 3 people handling them in the pit and if they ever have a human aggresive animal it is put down. Dog fighters are not the issue or are real pit dogs. So to answer your question there are no issues with the real breed. The real issues stem from a couple different things. One is the breed is very popular right now. What they have classified as pits are now the second most popular breed in the bay area after labs. BTW labs are the top biters in the bay area but that gets dismissed because of their popularity, a courtesy not extended to the pits. Because the breed is so popular there is money to be made breeding them and consiquently that attracts bad breeders. We have seen bad dogs of every breed when it has become popular and that can create biters. The second issue is the loose term pit bull. There are many breeds now considered to be pit bulls and that is not fair to the breed. I can combine any number of other breeds to create a desired negative representation too and that is exactly what the media, polititians and legislaters are doing right now. There is only one pit bull and that is an American Pit Bull Terrier and it rarely ever bites people but to feed the fear frenzy you need label the dog a fighting pit dog. When the media was selling that fear you bought and it is still in your head.

Thank you.

penchief
01-20-2006, 04:45 PM
ROFL

Dude, I'm on your side here...

I meant that MO should have just read the starter and moved on if he was so hell bent on not reading about dogs any more.

ROFL

Relax, Francis.

Okay, thanks.

Hydrae
01-20-2006, 05:10 PM
This is certainly not a hot topic for me but I would like to throw a couple of things out there.

First of all, the author did a poor job in my opinion in picking this person to write about. He states that " She had adopted the dog after a court struck down the city's pit bull ban, when it was still under review." Now I don't know the specific timeframe but this tells me she has only had the dog for a few months. This is not the same as a situation where it is a family losing a pet they have had as a family member for years. The author missed the boat on this one, IMO.

Secondly, BD you go on about how pits are misidentified a lot. I agree that this is probably the case but where do you draw the line? If we are going to target pitbulls for legislation (bad idea but that is another subject), is this only purebreds? Half and halves? What percentage of pit is acceptable for legislation or even identification? I know my two large dogs are basically mutts but one sure looks like a Malamute and the other like a Rhodesian Ridgeback (who was marketed to my wife as a Golden Retriever). That does not make them part of that breed necessarily though. So how is this determination made?

BIG_DADDY
01-20-2006, 06:52 PM
This is certainly not a hot topic for me but I would like to throw a couple of things out there.

First of all, the author did a poor job in my opinion in picking this person to write about. He states that " She had adopted the dog after a court struck down the city's pit bull ban, when it was still under review." Now I don't know the specific timeframe but this tells me she has only had the dog for a few months. This is not the same as a situation where it is a family losing a pet they have had as a family member for years. The author missed the boat on this one, IMO.

Secondly, BD you go on about how pits are misidentified a lot. I agree that this is probably the case but where do you draw the line? If we are going to target pitbulls for legislation (bad idea but that is another subject), is this only purebreds? Half and halves? What percentage of pit is acceptable for legislation or even identification? I know my two large dogs are basically mutts but one sure looks like a Malamute and the other like a Rhodesian Ridgeback (who was marketed to my wife as a Golden Retriever). That does not make them part of that breed necessarily though. So how is this determination made?

You just identified why BSL will never work. They are going after dogs that are no only other breeds they call pits their going after anything even resembling a pit. They really don't care though as they want to go after many breeds the pit is just the breed they chose to demonize in order to get the legislation through. These laws are NOT pit bull laws. What they are passing is vicious dog legislation and then banning the breed from there. This leaves open the possibility of banning other breeds in the future. There are now 22 diferent breeds banned in different parts of our country. With your chosen breeds you should be VERY CONCERNED about this trend. Dog owners need to unite for all breeds and hold the owners accountible or they we will lose most real dogs in this country eventually. We are unbelievably strong if we unite though as 47% of the households in the US have at least one dog in it. We can't let a bunch of Europhags bring their candy ass legislation in our country and wipe out mans best friend.