Y
That has been started today by several of us. To neuter a 6 month old shepherd like Yukon $175, to neuter a 6 month old pit bull same place $600. Hmm. We are going to go and get estimates in writing so we can publish them. One going in and asking about the shepherd, one asking about the pit bull, and one asking about a lab. Getting it in writing and going to have the newspapers around publish it. Also have the local tv station is very interested in our results. They have agreed to report it on the news and run their own investigation if we can get some proof.
Did you see how much pm martin spent on his 2 day trip to washington.It was approx $418 000,they could have used that money to creat a better system for dogs that bite.Hire more OSPCA officers to be able to get these dangerous dogs away from these crappy owners and ban them from ever having another.No way spend money on dogs they would rather blow it on needless crap.I dont like pitbulls but dont agree with any of this crap.I have a friend with 3 2 are good dogs one has a crappy temperment caused by in breeding of its parents.I wonder how many Pits and pit crosses the humane society here has now.
Y
Normally I feel bad when I post things that start hornets nests but in this case it is good. The more people who disagree with this and do something to change the better. For anyone who agrees with the ban I am sorry for offending you but I want to get all the help I can to try and make a difference here.
It's the provincial government that pushed this piece of idiocy through, not the federal. And yes, it was very much media fueled. Why is it when a Pit Bull bites it's front page, "Pit Bull Attack"? Sells papers and it's the bandwagon du jour. "Chihuahua Attack" just doesn't have the same (forgive the pun) bite to it. Ok, so it's an extreme example, Chihuahua's bites aren't usually lethal. Yes, I know it's a terrible thing that attacks happen at all, but, with any breed, it's the owners who are responsible. And it's not just drug dealers and punk kids, add Neanderthal throwbacks of the "Me big tough, me have big tough dog. Big tough doggy with big tough bark..." club. They really probably aren't all that bothered by this legislation, Rotties are still legal after all.
Btw, also, your average Joe did not get a vote on this, our elected representatives did, and supposedly voted in our best interests. Voting for a breed ban is SO much safer for their careers, isn't it? I've already signed many petitions, and will sign many more, but it's probably not worth the paper it's written on. No politician is going to be the one to stand up and disagree with a breed ban. All it would take is for one irresponsible Pit Bull owner to lose control of his/her dog and the fingers would be pointing at not the owner, but the politician who went against the ban. Career suicide and they know it.
I agree, but it won't be too widespread. They're not just banning Pit Bulls, they're banning anything that LOOKS like a Pit Bull. Anyone who owns one will have to raise it in a pretty isolated environment. Which, in turn, because of the inherent irresponsibility and lack of accountability, will probably make for a less socialized, more dangerous breed of dog.
Ack, sorry for the long-winded post, but this just bothers me on so many levels. Legislation isn't the problem, simplistic thinking, over legislation and taking the path of least resistance by politicians and the media is the problem. Whatever happened to education as a solution?
Btw, the days of "Independent News" is gone. So something reported with a definite slant in Toronto is given the same slant throughout Ontario, regardless of the demographics. Designer news. A Pit Bull attack is usually front page, today the ban is page two, tomorrow it'll probably be back page amongst the classifieds.
Btw, also, your average Joe did not get a vote on this, our elected representatives did, and supposedly voted in our best interests. Voting for a breed ban is SO much safer for their careers, isn't it? I've already signed many petitions, and will sign many more, but it's probably not worth the paper it's written on. No politician is going to be the one to stand up and disagree with a breed ban. All it would take is for one irresponsible Pit Bull owner to lose control of his/her dog and the fingers would be pointing at not the owner, but the politician who went against the ban. Career suicide and they know it.
Renee750il said:
Oh, and might I also suggest that there might be quite a black market developing in 'papers' for all sorts of Staffordshire Terriers, etc. 
Ack, sorry for the long-winded post, but this just bothers me on so many levels. Legislation isn't the problem, simplistic thinking, over legislation and taking the path of least resistance by politicians and the media is the problem. Whatever happened to education as a solution?
Btw, the days of "Independent News" is gone. So something reported with a definite slant in Toronto is given the same slant throughout Ontario, regardless of the demographics. Designer news. A Pit Bull attack is usually front page, today the ban is page two, tomorrow it'll probably be back page amongst the classifieds.
Yes very true,now the pitbull owners I know dont even want to take their pits for a walk because of how some people say get that pitbull away from me.These dogs are going to get alot worse,muzzles sometimes make normal dogs more aggressive.They cant see the bigger problems that this ban will cost.I can see this ban going Canada wide and that really pisses me off.
Y
Already done in Winnipeg, I believe the last known pit bull just died there. Of course they say it has worked because there have been no pit bull bites....well doh what do ya think. If there are no pit bulls there will be no bites but hey the bite numbers in general have gone down by about 2-3 a year. HMMM worked well didn't it?
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 165
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
I think what bothers me the most is the false sense of security these kinds of bans create. Why do people think banning pit bulls (or even dogs that "look" like pit bulls, which is laughable) makes them safe? What about all the other breeds that have been involved in maulings? When i was working in a veterinary clinic I read in veterinary textbooks of DOCUMENTED cases of infants being mauled by Yorkies, Dachshunds, and even ferrets - so do we look at banning those, too? Or do we recognize that so much of it has to do with the owner, not the dog? Do we finally begin to see dog ownership as a huge responsibility and make people accountable for the actions of their dog?
One veterinarian I worked for sat on the Animal Control Advisory Committee for a major Canadian city. The city was proposing breed bans, so my boss and I did some research - REAL research on stats and numbers - and discovered that breed bans DO NOT WORK. Yes, pit bull bite incidents in places with a pit bull ban fell - but they were quickly replaced with other breeds and incidents of bites and mauling with those breeds (and often breeds that were previously quite rare) quickly became an issue. People who want to own an agressive dog will find a way to buy one (or make one, sigh). People who refuse to socialize their dogs will continue to do this whether they own a pit bull or not. People who want to own a dog that "looks mean" or intimidating have many breeds to chose from - so we either ban every breed that doesn't look like a kleenex-box cover (sorry, no offense meant to kleenex-box cover owners!) or we begin to treat dog ownership as a serious responsibility, and we have expectations of dog owners so that these incidents of maulings don't become an issue.
Worst attack I ever saw in a vet clinic? Golden Retriever that attacked a co-worker so badly she required sutures and ended up with a blood infection. It can happen with ANY dog - it depends on how that dog has been handled, socialized, and treated.
Sorry for the diatribe, but after working in vet clincs for so long I'm pretty passionate about this whole issue. I think the province of Ontario has made a huge mistake with this ban, and I wish them luck in trying to fight the court cases it is going to create (as people will argue what constitutes a 'pit bull" look and whether or not their individual dog conforms to that look).
One veterinarian I worked for sat on the Animal Control Advisory Committee for a major Canadian city. The city was proposing breed bans, so my boss and I did some research - REAL research on stats and numbers - and discovered that breed bans DO NOT WORK. Yes, pit bull bite incidents in places with a pit bull ban fell - but they were quickly replaced with other breeds and incidents of bites and mauling with those breeds (and often breeds that were previously quite rare) quickly became an issue. People who want to own an agressive dog will find a way to buy one (or make one, sigh). People who refuse to socialize their dogs will continue to do this whether they own a pit bull or not. People who want to own a dog that "looks mean" or intimidating have many breeds to chose from - so we either ban every breed that doesn't look like a kleenex-box cover (sorry, no offense meant to kleenex-box cover owners!) or we begin to treat dog ownership as a serious responsibility, and we have expectations of dog owners so that these incidents of maulings don't become an issue.
Worst attack I ever saw in a vet clinic? Golden Retriever that attacked a co-worker so badly she required sutures and ended up with a blood infection. It can happen with ANY dog - it depends on how that dog has been handled, socialized, and treated.
Sorry for the diatribe, but after working in vet clincs for so long I'm pretty passionate about this whole issue. I think the province of Ontario has made a huge mistake with this ban, and I wish them luck in trying to fight the court cases it is going to create (as people will argue what constitutes a 'pit bull" look and whether or not their individual dog conforms to that look).
A new ban should be put into place for all politicians. They should be considered armed and dangerous. They should be muzzled so they cannot speak anymore untruths, handcuffed so new laws can be written. After november 26th they should be deemed as criminally insane and given to research or pts.......period.
No, no, no! We can't do that! Their pictures make such darned fine dartboard cozies!
Seriously, anybody ever see "Liar Liar"? Create an anti-lying drug, give it to politicians for a day. It would be an amusing thing. Oh wait, make that a week. A politician is capable of hiding for a day, but keeping their faces out of the media for a week goes against the grain for them.
Seriously, anybody ever see "Liar Liar"? Create an anti-lying drug, give it to politicians for a day. It would be an amusing thing. Oh wait, make that a week. A politician is capable of hiding for a day, but keeping their faces out of the media for a week goes against the grain for them.
They have enough pictures taken(they are vain) to give everyone dart boards for years to come. If we sell them for research that is a lot of money. Not to mention how much money would be saved if they were gone. Politicians cost us an enormous amount of money each year. Even retired. If used wisely....think of the possiblities. However, some call girls and mistress's may have to get a job.
No more animal testing needed.
No more animal testing needed.
Like Showpug said, its all about control - and it is VERY scary. People who don't have pit bulls don't get involved because it doesn't affect them. What they don't realize is when we open that door, when the government can say what kind of dog you are allowed to have, where will it end? Like already mentioned, what breed will be next. Everyone needs to get involved.