Manhattan Kansas going after anything even resembling 12 different breeds.
 

I got to pat myself on the back, some of you said I was crazy. WTF is going on out there in Kansas and Missouri? The mass majority of the country is throwing out BSL but you guys are catering to PETA and HSUS like nobody else by far. Fast track to the slaughter of man's best friend. :shake:

Sec. 6-25. Dangerous dogs.
(a) As used in this section, “dangerous dog” shall mean and include any of the following:
(1) Any dog, whether purebred or mix, which is more than ninety (90) days
old, and has the appearance and characteristics of any one or more of the
following breed(s):
i. American Pit Bull Terrier
ii. American Staffordshire Terrier
iii. Bull Terrier
iv. Staffordshire Bull Terrier
v. Argentine Dogo
vi. Cane Corso
vii. Dogue de Bordeaux
viii. Dogo Cubano
ix. Dogo Sardesco
x. Fila Brasileiro
xi. Perro de Presa Canario
xii. Wolf hybrids
(2) Any dog which has attacked a human being or domestic animal without
provocation; or
(3) Any dog, while at-large, that, without provocation, exhibits aggression or
combativeness toward a person or another domestic animal in an apparent
attack, whether or not said person or animal is actually attacked, bitten, or
otherwise physically injured; or
(4) Any dog kept or harbored primarily, or in part, for the purpose of dog
fighting, or any dog trained for dog fighting; or
(5) Any dog, not owned by a governmental or law enforcement unit, used
primarily to guard public or private property; or
(6) Any dog which is known to his keeper or harborer, or reasonably should
be known to his keeper or harborer, to have a propensity, tendency or
disposition to attack unprovoked, to cause injury or to otherwise endanger
the safety of human beings or domestic animals. It is hereby declared to

These dogs aren't being banned, right? :shrug:

They are basically making it so hard to own them it's basically impossible. This stuff was written HSUS people it's obvious. It also includes mandatory nuetering of all these dog types or anything tht even looks like them in an effort to make these breed extinct. You want to know how bad it really is, here you go:

DRAFT
2
be the policy of this city that keepers and harborers of dogs that are of a
size and breed that allow the animal to be capable of inflicting lifethreatening
injuries upon human beings are hereby held to a very high
standard of care regarding their knowledge of such propensity, tendency
or disposition as to their animal. The court, in determining whether or not
a keeper or harborer of such an animal reasonably should know about such
propensities, tendencies or dispositions shall apply such very high
standard.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person to keep or harbor a dangerous dog, unless the
keeper or harborer complies with all of the following requirements:
1) Confinement: Any keeper or harborer of a dangerous dog shall keep such dog
confined, except as set forth hereinafter. “Confined,” as that term is used in
this section, shall mean such dog is securely kept indoors or in a securely
enclosed and locked pen or dog-run area made of, at least, nine-gauge chain
link with no more than one-inch spacing. Said pen or run must be locked with
a key or combination lock whenever such dog(s) are within the structure. Said
pen or dog-run area must have sides at least six (6) feet high and be secured
over the top. If the pen or dog-run area has no bottom secured to the sides, the
sides must be embedded into the ground no less than one (1) foot deep.
2) Leash and Muzzle: Any keeper or harborer of a dangerous dog shall, when the
dog is not confined pursuant to subsection (b)(1), securely muzzle and restrain
the dog with a leash, chain, rope, or harness having a minimum tensile
strength of three hundred (300) pounds and not exceeding three (3) feet in
length.
3) Notice: Any keeper or harborer of a dangerous dog shall display, in a
prominent place on the premises where the dog is kept, a sign easily readable
by the public using the words “Beware of Dog.” In addition, a similar sign
shall be posted on the pen or run of such animal.
4) Registration and Reporting: It shall be unlawful for any person to keep or
harbor a dangerous dog, unless such dog is properly licensed pursuant to
section 6-36 of this code, and pursuant to the provisions set forth in this
subsection. In addition to having, or obtaining, the license required by section
6-36, a keeper or harborer of a dangerous dog shall submit a completed
application for a dangerous dog license to the city clerk or his/her designee, on
or before May 1, 2007, or within five business (5) days of the date upon which
the dog would be deemed to be dangerous under the provisions of this section,
if such occurs after May 1, 2007. The application for a dangerous dog license
shall be submitted on forms provided by the city clerk, and to be considered a
completed application it shall be accompanied by all documents and other
information required hereunder. Upon issuance, the dangerous dog license
shall be effective for one (1) year from the date of issuance, or for the duration
of the liability insurance required by this section, whichever is shorter, and
shall be reapplied for prior to its expiration. Such dangerous dog license shall
not be transferable, and shall expire whenever changes occur that would make
DRAFT
3
the keeper or harborer ineligible to obtain a license. The keeper or harborer of
the dangerous dog shall pay a $50.00 annual registration fee for each
dangerous dog, and such fee shall be submitted with the application for a
dangerous dog license. No dog shall be considered to be unlicensed under the
terms of this subsection, if the owner or keeper has timely filed a completed
application, until such application has been denied. The keeper or harborer of
the dangerous dog shall maintain with the city clerk or his/her designee the
address where the dangerous dog is primarily kept or harbored. The keeper or
harborer shall notify the city clerk or his/her designee within five (5) business
days if any of the following occurs:
i. A change in the primary address where the dangerous dog is kept
or harbored, whether in or out of the city limits.
ii. A change in the person who is keeping or harboring the dangerous
dog.
iii. The death of the dangerous dog.
iv. Any change in the information supplied in the application for the
dangerous dog license, or in the information submitted along with
such application.
5) Insurance: Any keeper or harborer of a dangerous dog shall maintain liability
insurance in the single-incident amount of $100,000 for bodily injury or death
of any person(s), or for damage to property which may result from actions of
the dangerous dog, or from actions or inactions of the keeper or harborer
related to the dangerous dog. The application, or reapplication, for a
dangerous dog license, pursuant to subsection (b)(4), shall include a certificate
of liability insurance that indicates the required insurance level and is valid for
the intended registration period.
6) Neutering: Any keeper or harborer of a dangerous dog shall have the dog
spayed or neutered by a veterinarian licensed by the state of Kansas. The
application, or reapplication, for a dangerous dog license, pursuant to
subsection (b)(4), shall include documentation showing that the dog has been
spayed or neutered.
7) Identification: Any keeper or harborer of a dangerous dog shall have an
identification microchip inserted into the dog, which shall not be removed
during the dog’s life. The application, or reapplication, for a dangerous dog
license, pursuant to subsection (b)(4), shall include documentation showing
that such microchip has been properly inserted. Any keeper or harborer of the
dangerous dog must, prior to the issuance of the dangerous dog license, make
the dog available to the City to take photographs to be used to depict the
animal’s size, coloring, and distinguishing features. Failure to make the dog
available, when reasonably requested by the City, shall be grounds for denial
of the application.
(c) In the event that an animal control officer or law enforcement officer has probable
cause to believe that a dog is dangerous as defined by section 6-25(a), such officer shall
file an affidavit with the municipal court judge, setting forth the facts upon which such
officer relies to support such probable cause. Upon receipt of such affidavit, if the judge
DRAFT
4
determines that the facts set forth in the affidavit are sufficient to establish such probable
cause, the judge shall schedule a hearing for the purpose of determining whether or not
the dog in question should be deemed dangerous as defined by section 6-25(a). The
judge shall also, upon request of the city prosecutor, issue a search warrant, pursuant to
Charter Ordinance No. 34, to seize the dog, and to impound the dog at the municipal
animal shelter pending the determination of whether the dog is dangerous. The court
shall provide notice of the hearing to any known harborer or keeper of the dog. Such
notice shall be served on such harborer or keeper in the same manner as the service of a
subpoena. The hearing date shall not be less than five (5) days nor more than twenty (20)
days following the date of service upon the harborer or keeper. At the hearing, the city
shall have the burden, by clear and convincing evidence, to prove that the dog is
dangerous pursuant to section 6-25(a) and shall present evidence to that effect. The
keeper or harborer of the dog may present evidence to rebut the city’s evidence. The
failure of the keeper or harborer to attend or participate in the hearing shall not prevent
the judge from making the appropriate determination concerning the dog. After the
hearing, the keeper or harborer of the dog shall be notified in writing of the judge’s
determination. If a determination is made that the dog is dangerous, the keeper or
harborer shall submit a completed application for a dangerous dog license and shall pay
the costs of impoundment as set forth in section 6-53 of this Code within the time frame
established by the court, which shall not be more than twenty (20) days. If the dog has
been impounded pending the determination by the court, the dog shall remain impounded
until the harborer or keeper has complied with this subsection. If the keeper or harborer
fails to comply with the provisions of this article within the time frame established by the
court, and the court has not granted an extension of such time, the keeper or harborer
shall be deemed to have abandoned the dog and it shall become the property of the city.
The city shall have the right to dispose of the dog in any manner it determines to be
applicable, including the destruction of the dog. Either the city or the keeper or harborer
may appeal the judge’s determination to the Riley County District Court, by filing an
appeal, and posting the appropriate bond, pursuant to Article 46 of Chapter 12 of the
Kansas Statutes. If the dog is not determined to be dangerous, the court may determine
whether the keeper or harborer shall pay any, or all, of the costs of impoundment, taking
into consideration whether other reason(s) existed for impoundment and such other
relevant factors as the court determines.
(d) In addition to any penalties the court may prescribe for violation of this section, if the
court finds, after notice to the keeper or harborer and an opportunity for hearing, that
such dangerous dog represents a continuing threat of serious harm to human beings or
other domestic animals, either because the court finds that the keeper or harborer is
unlikely to comply with the provisions of this section, or because the court finds that,
even with compliance with this section, the dangerous dog poses a threat to the public
that is unreasonable, the court shall order such animal destroyed.
(e) No person who has been convicted of a violation of this section shall keep or harbor a
dangerous dog, nor shall such person be eligible for a dangerous dog license for a period
of five (5) years following such conviction. In addition, no dangerous dog shall be kept
or harbored, and no license shall be issued for any dog, if the primary location where
DRAFT
5
such dog is to be kept or harbored is the residence of a person who has been convicted of
a violation of this section within the previous five (5) years. Except that, if the court
permits the person who has been convicted of a violation to keep or harbor his or her
dangerous dog(s) existing at the time of the conviction, the person may keep and harbor
such dogs and apply for or re-apply for a dangerous dog license only for those particular
dog(s).
Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its publication in
the official city newspaper.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF
MANHATTAN, KANSAS, THIS __ST DAY OF ____, 2007.
CITY OF MANHATTAN, KANSAS

TOP

Hey, it's kinda like how they want to ban "assault rifles", but really they are banning anything that kinda looks like an "assault rifle".

Looks fine to me. Bad animals are bad. Be gone with them.

When they were handing out brains you thought they said trains ans asked for a slow one didn't ya?

But not all dogs are bad. If you have a dog in your house and he barks at someone approaching your door, he is considered a guard dog and therefore banned by the outlined criteria.

I just figure it this way...

A guy wants a dog....many kinds of dogs out there

So he says, what kind of dog do I want...

Big dog, little dog, companion dog, hunting dog what have you..

So hes doing his due dilligence and arrives at a choice. And he chooses a breed that has demonstrated time and time and time again that they are unpredictable, mean spirited and have been involved in this very community in attacking other dogs, other people, kids, owners....Now what makes him want such an animal...would he have a snake that is poisionous for a pet? Probably not a wise idea.

So now said pet owner moves into a neighborhood full of kids and neighbors and nice other kinds of dogs with this animal....is it somehow out of the question for these folks who have seen the news, been well informed of the attacks in the community...in KC we have had a killing by a pit bull and numerous attcks by pit bulls...that they dont care to have that kind of animal in their midst?

Bottom line for me is they are what they are and there is no need for such an animal in a setting where they can do what they are bred to do.

In time, this too shall pass and we wont have to deal with it. Ban the Pitbulls and move on. Its not a big issue and life will proceed.

Either you are the biggest idiot here or you're baiting me. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's the latter.

OK So we hear of every time a pitbull attacks...what about all of the other breeds? Do we hear of those attacks? Pits are not the only dogs that have gotten aggresive. My neighbors pomeranian attacked a little girl but did you hear about that one? Hell, he still has his damn dog. Would he if it were a Pit Bull? If you ban Pits then ban them all. Cats too. They scatched my daughter once.

WTF?? - (5) Any dog, not owned by a governmental or law enforcement unit, used primarily to guard public or private property

Hell, I have two Australian Cattle dogs and since I have no cattle for them to earn their keep, their job is to guard the house. If I wanted a dog just to pet, feed, pay medical etc. I would get a Yorkie. Nothing against Yorkies folks! Just that I don't think one would be a good guard dog, alarm dog yes. My inlaws have one and boy does she go off whenever someone comes to the door!

Dude is just baiting, don't waste your time.

Its certainly not baiting to have an opinion on the issue that is contrary. I just see no need for pit bulls as a pet.

I understand the pet owners desire to have them I just dont think they are a reasonable choice..I know if one lived near me Id do whatever i could to be rid of it legally.

And if a community decides to ban them, thats fine with me. I dont see banning pit bulls as the next assault on our way of life.

It's just that stupid people irritate me and I'm suffering from lack of sleep.

Why not ban Poodles too?

Go to the JMART thread, you should participate douchebag.

Either just plain stupid or a PETA member, maybe both. Either way not really worth your time or mine.

The Planet is in rare form today.

I got an Australian Cattle dog last year. He is little hyper and out of control sometimes, but he might be the smartest dog I have ever owned. One of the best decisions I've made.

We are just waiting for football season to start. We are suffering from withdrawl symtoms.

yepper, normally one can have a different view but this issue seems to polarize the pro pit bull side.

Im not out trying to ban the damn things but I can understand why people do feel they dont want them around their kids.

But then I have been declared stupid by the pro side so what do I know.

The wording of this proposal is off the reservation and will never pass. Getting worked up over it gives it undue legitimacy.

I don't have a problem with pit bulls right now, but in all honesty, I wouldn't want them around my kids, if I had them, or my dog. I'm not saying that they are bad dogs all the time, but to assume that they weren't bred for fighting and that they aren't more aggressive than your run of the mill dog is a little absurd.

However, the problem stems from the fact that a good portion of the people who get pit bulls are bad owners, and only get them because of the aura of machismo surrounding the breed. When you have a volatile dog whose owners are poor, you're going to get a menace. That's not saying that there aren't other breeds that have this problem (Akitas, Chows even come to mind), but you also can't ignore the problems that pit bulls have had.

I'm sure that they can be perfectly well adjusted dogs with good owners, but not every owner is a good owner and the risks you run with fighting-type breeds are very high if the owners aren't responsible.

Personally, I'm on the fence on this issue. BD, I admire your passion for the breed, and I'm sure that if there were more people like you who had pit bulls, they wouldn't have the reputation that they do, but there aren't.

well said

I don't want them around my kids but then there are alot of people I don't want around my kids too. Last time I checked they haven't banned any bleeding heart liberals anywhere.

They're called Promise Keeper events.

Much of their reputation is created. We have went over this many times. They are not more likely to bite people than any other breed. MOF they are less likely. Problem is when they are taught to be human aggressive or don't have exposure to kids you can have a problem. Last B-day party my buddy had for his daughter that turned 6 there were lots of kids there with 2 pits. Nobody said a word because they were her friends and had a lot of exposure to the breed. I have found that people who say things like HCF have had zero exposure to the breed and have just bought into the PETA & HSUS agenda being pushed through the media meaning their opinion is based upon ignorance.

You are statistically much more likely to be bitten by a Chihuahua than a pit bull. I see no need for anyone to own’em, why shouldn’t they be banned also?

That's what I was thinking. By that criteria, a chihuahua or poodle could be considered a dangerous dog. Plus, I don't care for the breed specific parts.

Can you argue without personal attacks? I agree with your position here, but you aren't defending it very well.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ............. haaaaaaaaaa!!!!


Not really. That was stupid.


But I do agree with your previous post. A lot of irresponsible owners who want to look like a badass with their pitbulls. I don't agree with banning the breed outright. That punishes the good owners. I think they could come up with something that would make it less tempting to own a pit just to be another thug with a tough looking dog.

The issue is not that pitbulls are more likely to bite humans. I don't think they are any more likely to do that than most other breeds. A lot of it is in how the owner raiser the dog. The issue is how strong a pitbull's jaws are and how much damage they are capable of. That being said, there are plenty of well balanced pitbulls that should not be included in this type of legislation. BSL is stupid, IMO.

LOL

Awesome!!

not sure I understand the promice keepers comment at all

Manhattan Kansas going after anything even resembling 12 different breeds.




Does this include people too?

Keep pondering.

I've really only had contact with two pits (well, one was an American Staffordshire Terrier) and they were two of the sweetest, best behaved dogs I've ever met.

Interesting perspective here...seems the data says something rather different than we are often led to believe...

http://www.city-journal.org/html/9_2_scared_of_pit.html

I hear ya. Mine are just now starting to show signs of settling down and they just reached 4 years old. The first two years they were really crazy. One thing that really cracks the wife and I up is when ever they want something, like to be let outside or to be fed, they will try to herd one of us to the back door or where we keep the dog food. You will end up with one on your right and one on your left, then they work as a team guiding the stupid human.

Back on topic. I am also on the side that it is ignorant owners that cause the problems with what ever breed a dog may be. I have friends that raised two pits from pups to be inside lap dogs and man they are the coolest dogs. All they want is to be petted and snuggled with.

Look dude if you don't want to look like fear mongering clown I have posted endless facts on this subject in several threads since they started proposing BSL. I am not going to repost them all here you can just go back and look if you are really interested and not baiting.(I am still not convinced you are not baiting) In short this has never been about pit bulls it has been about tying to end the domestic ownership of all dogs. That's why they pass vicious dog legislation then add breeds as opposed to just passing pit bull legislation. That's why in this case they are already starting out with 12 different breeds and anything that even resembles them. Some places are now going after any dog above a certain weight because they are losing the BS battle based upon going after pit bulls. Pit bulls are NOT human aggressive. MOF if they show any sign of human aggression they are immediately put down as 3 people have to handle them in the pit. PETA and the HSUS are currently infiltating all areas of animal control. THe experts are stepping up though and the great majority of all BSL is being defeated across the country right now based upon those facts and experts. I have a lifetime of exposure to the breed. I have tons of friends with them and they have kids and their kids have friends. Not once has anyone ever been bitten. I am speaking from experience and not from zero exposure trying to find somthing on the internet to to grab and create fear. If you do your due diligence on this subject you will see I am correct if you are really interested and not just baiting.

I love Aussie Shepherds. My family had one on the farm and she was incredible as a cattle dog.

Most affectionate breed I have ever been around. I nicknamed mine velcro because he always wants to be attached to you.

You see these new caucasion shepherds the Russians developed and are shipping over here right now. 160 pounds. I would post a picture but the planet isn't doing so well in that department right now. here is a link.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...%3Den%26sa%3DX

bd those are some neat lookin dogs... wonder why they named him demon
http://www.vbocaucasian.com/ huge is right!
do you happen to know what people here are payin for them?

No I don't. They are supposed to be great guard dogs. They are rolling them in Russia but I haven't heard anything about the results.

I guess you are right. I'd hate to believe a subversive outfit like Center for Disease Control. They are just bunch of known radicals....

I dont have a problem debating with you but if you are just going to run off with this "I have all the facts" ans "everyone else is wrong" approch...then forget it. The fact is You may have the right to own such an animal...I have the right to not want the animal in my neighborhood.

I am not now or at any time ever been a "fear mongering clown"...your words. What I will submit is there is and has been a ton of work done that demonstrates the antisocial behavior of the breed. The article i linked you to goes directly to that issue of the breeds tendency to be violent. Now you may choose to frame that in whatever manner you like but dont call everyone who takes this issue differently than you a "fear mongering clown" or you really dont come across as having a valid point, just a strongly held opinion. I respect your right to your views, Id at least expect the same from you.

As to the move to ban many breeds, that is currently the favorite tactic of the pitbull proponants as a means to enlist the support of dog owners in general...and its clearly not working. Few Labradore owners are going torush out to help a pitbull owner who tries to link the two breeds as somehow equally docile. Its just not so.

To equate a bite by poodle to an attack by a pitbull is foolish and carrys no relative weight in this issue.

I will also state that you try somehow to align PETA with people who oppose your views. Well, that has little merit. PETA is a group that I would catagorize as fringe wackjobs...They have few stands that I can agree with. If they are involved in a pit bull ban its certainly not from a protection viewpoint so dont try to paint all people who view pitbulls as a menace with the PETA brush.

:spock: Maybe I missed something, where did you quote the CDC and what are they supposed to know ‘bout dog breeds? :shrug:

I have already posted tons of information on the subject. If you don't want to look at it that's on you. Most people here at the
Planet have already seen it or had exposure to the breed which is why you are receiving no support right now. Your article was nothing but a lot of rhetoric. Pit bulls taking over the parks, give me a break. The aggression is animal related, NOT HUMAN. PETA and the HSUS have people everywhere. You can even tell when they have put together the proposed legislation as is the case here. In California when they proposed our BSL they straight up admitted alliance with the HSUS. Their goal is the elimination of the domestic ownership of all animals whether you believe it or not. Here is a quote for you:

“One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding...We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding.”
Wayne Pacelle, HSUS, former director of the Fund for Animals, Animal People, May 1993

As far as your labradore owners are concerned did you know labs bite more people in the bay area than any other breed? Truth about pits is they really don't bite people, that why they had to start refering to many different breeds as being pits so they could actually attain some numbers. The great majority of reported pit bull attacks are not even pits.

As far as dog owners not working with each other or pit owners not getting support from other breeds you are dead wrong on that too. Jackie Speier wrote our proposed legislation. I went from dog park to after dog park making people aware of what she was doing. I received overwhelming support from approximately 95% of the owners. People who were like you were shunned and corrected by the others. Yes they vote over party lines in a second as well. Jackie just lost the last election BTW. Proposed BSL is failing nationally as well. Very little is actually going through. Kansas and Missouri are by far the worst states now, even worse than Colorado.

Truth is the pendulum is swinging back the other direction right now. Such proposed legislation is failing because the case against pit bulls is failing. Of course that has to be substantiated by experts to kill said legislation. For this reason the strategy is changing and the true colors of those proposing this type of legislation is being exposed. That's why they are starting to go after dog sizes, or weight now. I have posted threads on that too if you care to look (I'm sure you don't)

Alabama
Montgomery - decides against BSL

Arkansas
Bald Knob-decides against BSL
Shannon Hills-decides against BSL
Searcy-decides against BSL
Mulberry-decides against BSL
Fort Smith - decides against BSL
Crossett - decides against BSL

Colorado
SB054-doesnt pass
Golden-decides against BSL
Estes Park-decides against BSL
Northglenn-decides against BSL
LaJunta-decides against BSL
Layfayette-decides against BSL
Longmont-decides against BSL
Rocky Ford-decides against BSL
Federal Heights-decides against BSL
Westminster-decides against BSL

Delaware
New Castle County-decides against BSL

Florida
Coral Springs - decides against BSL
Deltona - decides against BSL

Georgia
Rockmart--decides against BSL
Floyd County - decides against BSL

Illinois
Kewanee-decides against BSL
Waukegan-decides against BSL
McHenry County-decides against BSL
Normal-decides against BSL
Paxton-decides against BSL
Forest-decides against BSL
Bloomington-decides against BSL
Will County-decides against BSL
Chicago-decides against BSL
Lincolnshire-decides against BSL
Hodgkins-decides against BSL
Northlake - decides against BSL
Minooka - decides against BSL

Indiana
Anderson-decides against BSL
Indianapolis - decides against BSL
South Bend - decides against BSL
St. Joseph County - decides against BSL

Iowa
Mason City-decides against BSL
Waterloo-decides against BSL
Washington - decides against BSL
Humbolt - decides against BSL

Kansas
Leavenworth-decides against BSL
Witchita-decides against BSL
Emporia - decides against BSL
Merrium - decides against BSL
Olathe - decides against BSL

Kentucky
Frankfort -decides against BSL
Lietchfield-decides against BSL
Milton-decides against BSL
Lincoln County-decides against BSL
Spencer County-decides against BSL
Middlesboro-decides against BSL
Oldham County-decides against BSL
Paintsville- decides against BSL
Park Hills - decides against BSL
Corinth - decides against BSL

Louisianna
Lake Charles-decides against BSL
Sulpher-decides against BSL
Gonzalez - decides against BSL

Massachusetts
Methuen - decies against BSL
Gloucester - decides against BSL
Waltham - decides against BSL

Michigan
Detroit-repealed
Oxford - decides against BSL
Milford - decides against BSL

Mississippi
Brandon - Repealed BSL

Missouri
Belton-repealed
Oak Grove-decides against BSL
Bellfontaine Neighbors-decides against BSL
Unionville-decides against BSL
Jennings-decides against BSL
Raytown - decides against BSL
Sedalia - decides against BSL
University City - decides against BSL

New Jersey
state-TABLED

North Carolina
Watuga County - decides against BSL

Ohio
Lancaster-decides against BSL
East Palestine-decides against BSL

Pennsylvania
Wilkes Barre - decides against BSL
Hazelton - decides against BSL
Erie - decides against BSL

Tennessee
Woodbury- decides against BSL
Tullahoma - decides against BSL
Shelbyville - decides against BSL
Putnam County - decides not to pursue BSL

South Carolina
Bamberg - decides against BSL

Texas
Killeen-decides againt BSL
DeSoto - decides against BSL

Washington
Richland - decides against BSL
Federal Way - decides against BSL

West Virginia
Wheeling - decides against BSL

Wisconsin
Horicon - BSL vetoed

Jodi Preis
Bless the Bullys Pit Bull Rescue & Education
Defending Dog ~ Fight Breed Discrimination!
Visit us on MySpace

That's not a half bad idea... especially male poodles who are dressed up in girly-dog outfits and named "Tootsie."

Aw, heck--don't ban those dogs, just the owners who cause those monstrosities...

I put most of the blame on the pit bull community. Don't sell your pit bull pups to a thug and you wouldn't have half the problems you do.

Don't worry everyone, the govt is here to keep you safe and sound.

American-bull-terriers are a cross between English & Manchester bull-dogs..both breeds were breed to control varmits and work livestock..they do both of those jobs when trained to perfection..problem is most owners of these dogs today don't have a clue how to control them....

My dog stepped between me and some men I didn't know that came up to my house many years ago. She didn't show her teeth, growl or bark. She simply made it clear to get to me they'd be going through her. She was acting in her natural role as a guard dog. She should be banned for that? Thats the day she earned her keep.

A bull terrier? How freaking sad. I had 2 of these guys and they were the most playful loving dogs ever. One was a certified therapy dog who I used to take to the children's hospital. Fooking pathetic. :(

I don't know BD, I agree that this ordinance is effectively so cumbersome as to prohibit ownership for most, but it could be amended and I don't think I would have a problem with sections 1 or 2. The rest, though should go.

So you are saying you agree with labeling all those breeds vicious across the board irregardless of an individual dogs history?

I'll say one thing, god bless the The Dog Whisperer. Individually he is changing that mentality more than anyone else in this country. Fortunately it looks like the pendulum is swinging the other way now. Even areas where they have passed BSL are having it challenged. Dog owners against this stuff are just beginning to get their shit together a well. What I thought was cool was the last election. I received and e-mail about who not to vote for if you care about owning animals. I think we were pretty successful in getting out the word. When I would tell pet owners who not to vote for many of them said they already knew. Jackie who wrote SB 861 went down in defeat with many of her supporters now voting against her. I guarantee you she will never do that again. Between needing a police escort to get to the capital and dealing with the backlash before the last election she lost I think she got the message.

No, I think that they should probably have at least a study to back up the proposed ordinance, but most jurisdictions have regs that require leashing and confinement regardless of the breed. Certainly for dogs with an individual history it makes a lot of sense to keep them from attacking again. I am clearly not as well read as you on the subject, but I guess at least the first two parts of the proposal don't bother me much, since most ordinances already have such requirements (though usually more general) regardless of breed.

Hot off the press, pretty cool for the Twin cities.

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox...Y&pageId=3.2.1

OK I just talked to my buddy out here. Apparently the Russian's he knows are bringing their best out to California to roll them. He confirmed they are supposed to be great watch dogs. He can get pups off of their top dogs but they are $1,500. If you are interested let me know. You could come out see the parents whatever you want. My guess is pups out here would probably be available some time this fall. THey have a pretty short life span averaging 8-10 years.

Nice.

:stupid:

Candidate for post of the year? :hmmm:

My sis-n-law has a Pit and we don't let the kids be around her dog even though it's trained, etc. We're fear mongered. But the statistics aren't really looking too well even though the dog is well trained.

I say get rid of all "large" aggressive compulsive behaviored dogs and life would be that much better.

Sorry BD, but I think they should be banned also. 3 kids & 1 on the way. I don't need to hear about the poodle biting someone's ankles but I DO need to hear about the pitt that killed someone trying to take it back to it's owner. Or the pits that almost killed a man here this winter in K.C. Or the Pit (in the same week) that mauled a K.C. elderly woman to death.

I don't give a shit who their owner was. I don't give a shit if the Pit grew up without a father figure, etc. I'd just rather get rid of the breed.

You're just gonna have to lump me in the idiot pile.

~Pittbull hype believing idiot.

I have two pits I use every year to break people in. I go to a park and put up a sign that says pet a real pit bull. I converted countless people. The kids love them. My buddy that fights them had his dog Hellboy out the other day running it. Some guy yelled at him about having a pitbull when he ran by the a bakery. Before it was over all the kids were petting it an it was licking their faces. Did you see the thread I just posted? Top search and rescue team in the bay area are pit bulls. Yes they go after lost kids. http://www.forpitssake.org/sar.html People have tried to kill these life saving dogs more than once.

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petb...s/sarpits.html

http://www.pitbullpress.com/ARTICLES...nd.rescue.html

Occasionally someone teaches their dog to be human aggressive but it's a huge exception to the rule and is not breed specific. Most of them are not real pit bulls either. I would challenge anyone to find an article where a dog man had his pit bite a human ever.


Exposure is usually the key, you are a very rare exception. Like I said I have converted coutless parents and kids.

what about the H5N1 hype?

anything that isnt considered a socialy viable domesticated animal has come under scrunity from govt. and mediahype type outlets.

One more thing. Most of the people I know who have kids and pits have the dog sleeping the their kids bed with them. Never an incident. I will have a kid this year. Mine will eventually sleep the child as well.

He has already tucked his tail and ran. I think he's a cat guy.

i got me a treeing walker pup. ntch on top and bottom(dog is acouple from being gr ntch and SS). little ****er is head strong but whip smart. Moxie just seems to ignore him,though she did let it be know her pig ear was hers and Homers was his.

Edit- id like to add that the same types that are after bulldog types are also after hound and to a lesser extent gundog types.

NICE. YOu know anything about those caucasion shepherds I posted about in this link?

Im still in shock that they lumped bull terriers in there. :shake:

Behold, the child killing, infant eating Lincoln...

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...9/lincoln2.jpg

Give me a fooking break.

bigger blockier have a dualcoat. smart,strong willed. not for the novice.

i actually like the look better than the GSD. more of a rough country type imo.


heres pics of the gyp mines the second tail from the left.

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j3...6/HPIM0591.jpg

Looks like a child killing man eater to me dude. :)

Cool, I love them pups.

I guess I should also note that the Westminster Kennel Club championship was won by Rufus in 2006....Rufus, the Bull Terrier.

And Lincoln's father, by the way.

I really don't want to ask this ? but curious as to what your response would be. But let's say that something happened to child while your pit was sleeping with it.

Would you change your stance or how would you bring some sense to the situation?

It really didn't feel good typing it out (and carefully choosing words) but like I said... I want to know your answer.

BD my bad i was thinking about these.

http://www.thebreedsofdogs.com/EAST_...N_SHEPHERD.htm






i honestly havent heard of them others.

i would suspect if any dog bit you child or someone elses you mind would change.
that being said, all dogs and all owners are not created equal.
i have a pitbull and id trust her w/ anyone. wouldnt think twice.

All I have to go on is history when trying to make sense of a situation. Would I feel horrible, absolutely. Likewise I would feel horrible if anything happened to them for any reason. I should know my dog and know the situation. My dog has been exposed to young children since being a pup. He has never given me any reason to question him. On that note I have many friends with kids and game pit bulls and none of them has ever had an issue. Unfortunatley life comes with some inherent risk whether you are driving down the street, getting on a plane or boarding a ride at the amusement park. I've known many people killed in cars, I don't know one that has had an issue with their pit and kid.

For the record a friend of mine's wife walked their 4 year old through a yard with approximatey 30 fighting dogs on it. She just kept saying "these dogs are really nice" That's the exposure she needed to have in order to feel good about brininging in a pit into their house with a young child. Same guy that now has his 6 year old sleeping with that dog. This is very game Mayday stock. That dog is as tollerant as you will ever see any dog be of young children. She is the one that had her 6th birthday and all her friends over when we had both dogs out and about. NOt one parent questioned anything an it was a pretty good sized group.

Some of the posts I see here really amaze me. Yours being one of them because it seems you have had some exposure. Exposure in my experience to real pits with good owners has eliminated fear on a consistant basis.

I gotta go train, I'll be back later.

I have exposure, but I also am exposed to the trends, media, & facts.
Not saying that the majority of them aren't good.

Here's an analogy. My mother asked me why I wouldn't stop at a store on 31st & Prospect while in my car but I'd do it where I live (In Raytown) suburb of K.C.

Prospect is the worst street in K.C. With thugs, bystanders, & loiterers on every corner. I'm not saying that something would happen to me if I took my car there but I dislike the probabilities of something more apt to happen on Prospect than at a store stop in Raytown.

Same with Pits. Something is more apt to happen then with other types of dogs. Chihahua bite I & the kiddies can handle, but Pit attack is too brutal for the kids to endure. Why chance it?

In your case... you feel comfortable and I hope & pray that everything turns out as you'd expect. In reality, unless I owned one myself, I'd be scared shitless for my kids.

To each his own I guess.

I raised my oldest around our Min. Schnauzer (if that makes me a soldier). Had to get rid of him because he had A.D.D and more of a headache than a joy. Gave him away for free (paid $1k for him) to family that had a disabled child. So I'm not against dogs & kids it's just those prone to attack that can mortally wound a child) and have a history of it.

Also, I was raised with my white German Sheppard (Cocaine was her name). I'd raise my kids around one of those before a pit and would trust it also. My grandparents had a Boxer (Sapphire) we were ALL brought up with.

It's just something about those Pits.

you got rid of your youngest child cause it had ADD?

thats horrid you bastard!