Simviation Forums

This is a very interesting topic that has cropped up. The Ontario government will be introducing pitbull legeslation in November. If it passes the house, Ontario will be the first province in Canada to ban the breed.

Several cities across the country such as Winnipeg and Kitchener/Waterloo  had already baned the doges in the early 90s and have seen dog attacks go to almost zero. Pitbulls make up less than one percent of the dog population but are responsible for nearly 50% of all attacks.

Putting the politics of the issue asside, I've talked to many people who think we should do away with the dogs. Other people claim their pitbulls are no threat at all. All this despite the rash of attacks by them in the past month. People seem to be split 50/50. Just wondering what you guys think.

Pit Bulls are animals.  Any animal has natural instincts that you can only hope to supress through domestication.

Pits are very popular pets.  They are very trainable dogs.  You can use that talent to train your pet responsibly, or you can use it to make them vicious and undiscriminating attackers.

My question is this.  If ALL Pits are so violent, why is it the only time you hear about attacks, the attack was done by a dog belonging to someone in a less desirable neighborhood?

Answer:  Because the animals you see on the news were trained to be violent animals, thus enhancing the natural instinct to kill that all animals have.

Any dog of size and even some "puntamutt foo foo dogs" can be trtained to be visious blood hungry hounds. Rotts, Dobies, Shepherds, etc can all be mean mo-fos if trained that way, and sadly it tends to not be the fault of the dog.

Seems each decade or so there is another breed that is blacklisted. I have seen some Pits that are pussycats, and extremely friendly, and i have seen some I would not get near, but then again I had a friend once that had a Sitz-zu that was hell on paws, and the meanest little ****er this side of planet Mars

A lot of times its due to way too much inbreeding, and a gene pool that has gone wrong.

Dont ban the dog, ban the way its trained. nothing wrong with training a dog for protection, but sometimes the training goes way too far.

..I can see what this thread is going to turn into.... ...!
I've got my opinion....guess...but I'm keeping quiet... ...!
Tee-Hee... ... ... ...!

Paul....heads down... ...LOL...!

Why not banning all kinds of dogs?  ;D

Really it does come down to the owner, just like Scott and Stephen say. We've had dogs in my family all my life, and because we trained them properly as puppies we've had v.few problems (barring the occassional chewed shoe).
Personally I think all dogs like people have the potential to be good or evil depending upon their enviroment. One of my friends has the biggest German Shepherd I've ever seen, the only thing kids are in danger from with it is being licked to death, its so affectionate (but has a worrying boot-polish habit)

Hi Ozzy...!

...as a keen motorcyclist I seem to radiate an aurora which means that every time I look at a flippin' dog they bark and want to tear my bleedin' head off...!

Do I like dogs.... ::)... ::).... ::).....?

LOL...!

Cheers all... ...!

Paul.

...you would not believe the grief I have with "other peoples" flippin' dogs....apart from the everlasting crap and the constant barking... ....!
AArrrgggghhhh..... ....!
LOL...LOL...LOL...!

P.S.....just voted.... ... ... ... ...!

...you would not believe the grief I have with "other peoples" flippin' dogs....apart from the everlasting crap and the constant barking... ....!
AArrrgggghhhh..... ....!

A sawed-off shot gun or a electrified hydrant trap might do the trick.

I can't really vote, I guess the people who keep their dogs and don't train them to be vicious (or mistreat them, with the same outcome) should be allowed to keep them. It seems like a hard to fight argument. Some of them are no threat and others are...well, big threats (especially to the paperboys).
Another way of answering I guess:
Should we ban sharks from the beaches? No, because it's their natural environment (if someone banned me from my pc, I'd be pretty peeved). We hardly belong in the sea anyway (we have to wear diving equipment to swim way down underwater, we have to train to be really good swimmers (and, from personal experience, I know that takes a long time) and look at the sunburns we get). Also, Sharks can't help attacking us if they smell our blood or see our outline and mistake us for a seal. You have to remember, they act by instinct, not by reason and therefore you can't hold them accountable for what they've done. They were made to be able to hunt.
I'm pretty sure if my parents brought me up attacking my food, I'd be aggressive towards meat.
The same goes for dogs, they're animals and have as much right to be on the earth, where they belong (there is no giant pen where you can go and let your dog roam wild). Just like sharks are to the sea, dogs are to the earth, they act by instinct and t is their habitat as well as ours.

As I said before, I think it's fairly unanswerable, all depends on the owner and the dog. I guess a once a year test could be used.

Some more details have come out about the law since I posted it.

Pitbulls will be banned. From what I gather it will be illegal to sell or breed them. All existing dogs will have to be fixed. I suppose they'll let the current generation die out naturally instead of moving them or putting them down. The law might be expanded to include dobermans and rotwilers. Under the current plan they will only be clasified as dangerous dogs. The details are expected to be worked out in the comming month.

Also, any dog owner could be charged if their dog attacks someone. It doesn't matter what kind of dog it is. This could result in fines of jail time depending on the circumstances. (Jail time if you sick the dog on someone, using it as a weapon.)

I personally think that the dogs should be banned. They've attacked far to many people. There has been almost 100 pitbull attacks in Toronto alone this year, most of them violent. It's really in the interest of public good. The fact is the dogs have a genetic disposition to fight. It's a bit like a mental disorder. Any one of them could turn at the snap of a finger, without provocation. They're very strong dogs too so they can easily do a lot more damage than most others.

Hi Iroq... ;D...!

It's not just Pit Bulls....
Tiny little "three-legged" Fox Terriers always want to eat my flippin' ankles every time I pass them in the street.... >:(...!
...and they always make sure they are just out of range whenever I aim a kick at the little sods*.... >:(...!
...Buggar... ::)...!

LOL...LOL...LOL... ...!

Cheers all... ...!

Paul.

* and that includes their bleedin' owners... ....!
LOL... ...!

Like many other examples there are are two separate camps here that will never agree. Either you're a dog-lover or you're not. I'm not a dog-lover & never wanted to own one but most animals seem to like me & there are some particular dogs I like very much. There seems to be a spate of banning things these days. The answer seems to be, if you don't like something ban it. Banning things is not the answer as has been proven time after time. Maybe the Ontario government should look at what happened in the UK over 10 years ago.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2499649.stm

Under the the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 some breeds are effectively banned, in theory anyway. This is the relevant part.

The act was also supposed to ban the breeding, sale and exchange of the dogs.

Dealers know how to avoid it and that it takes lengthy, costly procedures for police to genetically test dogs to prove that they are banned breeds.

There is always a loophole that the dealers & owners are well aware of. As I understand it the term Pit Bull covers various breeds of dog. The point is how do you decide which particular animal falls within the legislation. It's impossible. IMHO

Should we ban sharks from the beaches?

I think this is a different argument Grimmy. Sharks are wild creatures that live in the wild. It's not possible to ban them unless you kill every one. Dogs are supposed to be pets & the responsibility must lie with the owners.

PS. I'm against all this talk of banning things purely because you don't agree with them. It never works & just sets one section of the community against another.

They've attacked far to many people. There has been almost 100 pitbull attacks in Toronto alone this year, most of them violent.

How many other breeds have bitten someone?  You probably don't know, because the media doesn't report those.  I had a patient a few weeks ago who was bitten by a Dalmation.  Never heard a word on the news.

It's really in the interest of public good. The fact is the dogs have a genetic disposition to fight.

All animals have a genetic disposition to attack, when provoked.  Pit Bulls that attack are specifically trained to do so.  Any dog who receives that type of training (which is usually quite abusive in itself) is going to react the same way.

....All animals have a genetic disposition to attack, when provoked.....

Hi Hyp...!

I don't have to provoke the little sods...
I just look at them, and they want to flippin' eat me... ...!

LOL...LOL...LOL... ...!

Cheers Mate... ...!

Paul.

I have this association with dogs....
...we hate each other... ...!
LOL...LOL...LOL... ...!

Well I agree with Doug...banning is not the answer.

All creatures great and small play an important part in this little old universe including humans.(I would have said mankind but in the colony here they say that is politically incorrect )

Pet owners need to be educated along with pets or training if you prefer.

I also think a government bond should be compulsory for people who are in possession of what the general public has deemed dangerous.

Also, not just a fine but a stiff jail sentence to anyone who allows their pet to randomly run loose or attack someone without provocation.

NOW...if you want to talk about banning...here we go...those that do not feel that the Cessna 152 or the deHavilland single engine piston Otter are not the GREATEST