----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------


"Rep. Wesselhoft said the proposed bill will also include provisions designed to bring about an eventual ban of pit bull dogs in the state.
The grandfather clause contained in the bill would allow for the continuing existence of pit bulls currently in Oklahoma. However, pit bull owners would have to have the dogs spayed or neutered, and the animals would need regular rabies shots.
In addition, a pit bull owner would have to be age 21 or older and would be required to have a $100,000 liability insurance policy on every pit bull.
Also, each pit bull would have to be tattooed or otherwise marked when it is registered with the state. Owners would not be able to sell or transfer the dogs to other individuals in Oklahoma, excluding family members. And a person living in Oklahoma will not be able to bring in a new pit bull from out of state.
After those pit bulls that are allowed to remain in Oklahoma under the grandfather clause of the proposed bill die of old age, Wesselhoft said there should be very few pit bulls remaining in the state, if any."

Hi,
I fully agree with what you have posted. Responsibility of Pitt Bull owners have to be enforceable by law. There are too many documented cases, United States wide, of injuries and harm caused by this breed of dog.

I agree that people should take responsibility for their animals however this affects the ones who never caused any harm also. That's just like someone coming up to me and saying " off to the electric chair miss. we have too many brunettes burning down houses." Why should everyone else have to suffer? If people would learn not to train these dogs to be mean then it wouldn't be that way.

You know what. Hear in Canada, Province of Ontario. Our Liberal government put a bill through to completely ban them all together. That all owners will have to turn them in. Complete ban because in the last three years there have been many children killed to death or mulled by one.

Yes, the owners need to take responsibility as well. As well as proper training.

What do you think about this?

Proper insurance and responsibility is so important, There are more types of dogs that need similar control and stricter laws for those who's "pets" attack people.

I was bitten by one some years ago, the owner of the pet denied owning the dog. The chain by the side of the house, the pet dish by the door and the dog... in the yard was just non related.
The police could do nothing since they could not prove he actually owned the dog. The dog had to be destroyed because the owner would not take responsibility.

I did sue them in civil court and won, but they had no money, and no insurance, so I got nothing anyway.

Electric chair.No,no! We need you here on AMHD :D
Here in the UK pit bull's make me uneasy,even when on a lead.I'd hate one to take a "likeing" to my arm,or worse.I have four cats,and love animals,but certain species,which are basically hunting animals,as pets?

This whole thing just saddens my heart that a breed of dog will be eventually be destroyed because of bad people.

Why can we not just ban bad people?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lilfyre

This whole thing just saddens my heart that a breed of dog will be eventually be destroyed because of bad people.

---

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that we rarely, if ever, hear about crazed poodles or labs tearing a child apart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that we rarely, if ever, hear about crazed poodles or labs tearing a child apart.

---

Still sad,

Agree with Need.A pit bull is bred to hunt.Why own a dangerus animal.Just stick to faithful fido.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nez

Agree with Need.A pit bull is bred to hunt.Why own a dangerus animal.Just stick to faithful fido.

---

You're right but I also agree with them that often the problem lies in the reason behind the owner selecting that breed of dog (the pit bull). Often it's because they are an individual on the fringe of society who want to either appear tough. The hefty insurance fee is designed to weed out that particular type of owner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nez
Agree with Need.A pit bull is bred to hunt.Why own a dangerus animal.Just stick to faithful fido.

---

I have a fido, Miss Piggy a pit-bull, she had a sad life of mistreatment, by not so nice people it is not the breeds fault. If we made the people that breed these dogs for this do hard time for real, rather than releasing the with a mister meaner offence. Take the house the car and what ever else they own this would stop. It is sad,

Pit bulls don't have to be dangerous if they have proper owners.

The problem is, even 5 bad owners means 5 cases of death or mutilation, and even 1 is really unacceptable.

As Joe said, here in Ontario, our government has banned pit bulls all together. Was it the right decision? Well, with all the cases we had, I say yes. If we could simply just get rid of the bad owners, that would have been better, but that is kind of impossible to do.

I agree that people who mistreat animals should be locked up,and the key thrown away.All I'm saying is that to me a pit bull is not the sort of dog that I believe should be a house pet.As you say,your dog was rescued,so I applaud you for that.But the fact remains they can/are a breed which can prove tricky.If you are an experienced handler,who understands the pit bull 100%,then you are wonderful.But,neglected,and mistreated,they can/will turn nasty.For me,a pit bull is a no-no.I have a five year old son,often he asks,can we have a pet dog? We have four cats,so it's out of the question now.If we had no cats,would I buy a pit bull.No way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainForest

Pit bulls don’t have to be dangerous if they have proper owners.

The problem is, even 5 bad owners means 5 cases of death or mutilation, and even 1 is really unacceptable.

As Joe said, here in Ontario, our government has banned pit bulls all together. Was it the right decision? Well, with all the cases we had, I say yes. If we could simply just get rid of the bad owners, that would have been better, but that is kind of impossible to do.

---

You are right, and if you spent time in the shelter as I do watching these dos that are good dog, tested as safe, put to sleep because people are afraid of them, it breaks my heart, I have played with them spent time with them. I took them out walked them. Thousands of them are put to sleep each year because of dog fighting and these pits never ever not once ever fought a fight. They are only fighting for their life. So in a shelter they have 30, 60, 90, 120 days to find a home. Simply because of intercity meanness. as I will try hard to not look at this post again.

We sat and answered question here on this forum a month ago, to a person that was asking dog fighting question in a round about, we all answered him and helped him out. To the one that answered him including myself, we are all part of the problem.

Red flag Questions that have been answered on this site.

Thing that should alert you that something is not right would be questions asking about

Red Cell is a food supplement used by fighters to increase the stamina of a fighting dog. Also used for race horses

Tread mills used to build up mussel and stamina.
Sled or weight pulling used to build up mussel and stamina.

Weight question, how to put weight on my dog.

Breeding of Pit bull

Blood line questions; pertain to older dog such the gator blood line,

Any one who owns a pit-bull that is a good dog owner will do their best, to maintain a positive image with their dog, and will not flaunt them with big collar and such to draw attention to them in a negative way. Miss Piggy our pit-bull has toured with our giniea pig rescue and equine rescue, trying her little heart out to change the stereo type of this killer breed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nez

I agree that people who mistreat animals should be locked up,and the key thrown away.All I'm saying is that to me a pit bull is not the sort of dog that I believe should be a house pet.As you say,your dog was rescued,so I applaud you for that.But the fact remains they can/are a breed which can prove tricky.If you are an experianced handler,who understands the pit bull 100%,then you are wonderful.But,neglected,and mistreated,they can/will turn nasty.For me,a pit bull is a no-no.I have a five year old son,often he asks,can we have a pet dog? We have four cats,so it's out of the question now.If we had no cats,would I buy a pit bull.No way.

---

1 have 1 bunny 2 cats 32 guinea pigs in my home the cat and bunny free roam with the dog, even when I am not home, no dead bodies here, in my small animal rescue. (O:

I agree that a lot has to do with the way the dog is trained. PitBulls by nature are more of an aggressive breed. But that doesn't mean that they all will attack someone.
The problem is that most dog owners that own a PitBull never have it properly trained and they become dangerous.
I don't blame the dog because there are dogs like Rotties and Dobermans that are more naturally aggressive also but not all of them will hurt someone.
People who don't take responsibility for there pets shouldn't be allowed to own them. Too many people are getting attacked many of them children and its all due to poor responsibility on the owners

This is absolutely useless stupidity. Ban Pit Bulls, and the idiots will go to Dobes, Rotts, Shepherds, etc. What we need are laws that puts people with dogs trained to be vicious in jail. Your dog injures somebody, you do time.

Excellent idea.

That's interesting that Ontario has banned pit bulls all together. They are still allowed in my province, but where I live we have something called a "Dangerous Dog" Bylaw. There is a list of breeds that are considered dangerous (I imagine pitbulls, rottweilers, dobermans, etc are on the list), and people owning those breeds need a special license on top of the usual dog license, must spay or neuter their dogs, and of course not allow their dogs to run free. It is also against the law to have any more than 2 "dangerous dogs" per household. Breeding is banned unless you are a board certified breeder. There are stiff penalties for any infringement of these laws. Recently a little girl was mauled in a town close to here, by a rottweiler/german shephard cross. The dog was never dangerous prior to this. The owner of the dog had 5 dogs, not sure what breeds, but they were all destroyed.

That's very unfortunate. For the owner of those dogs and very sad for the little girl and her family. Why were the other dogs put down when they weren't the dogs who did the attack? Unfortunately I think these laws are in place because although unfair, no one can tell who has a dangerous dog or not. By not letting them run free , etc. No one knows what a dog is capable of until it attacks someone, that's why breeds end up getting such a bad rap. But I don't agree with putting a dog down when it didn't attack anyone, that's wrong.

Here in Ct, during the summer there was a couple that had two little boys and a golden retriever. The dog had attacked there tfour year old son while he was playing outside in the yard for whtever reason. Then the dog two weeks later attacked the two year old. All the reasons that were given were unprovoked. The dog ended up being put down because of the attacks. But it makes you wonder why the dog became aggressive all of a sudden, Supposedly these people had the dog for about five years. But if anything it just proves the point that it doesn't have to do with a breed but maybe with just the individual dog or maybe this dog had been abused. You just never know. But it was a Golden Retriever, how many of those do you hear attacking people?

My sister has two pit bulls and an akita. They're all sweeties. One of her pits is extremely protective of her family, but even when it comes down to it, she's a chicken and would never fight. This is a really sad thing that's going on. It's my firm opinion that it has so much more to do with the owner than the dog in situations like these. Although, in cases like the post above mine, who is to blame? When a dog that has always been so nice and loving that all of the sudden attacks his own family. That certainly is cause for alarm. But it isn't a breed specific occurrence either. I, too, think that people who breed pits for aggressive traits will just turn to other "aggressive" dogs. Really, you can take a dog of a breed with a reputation of being family friendly and turn it into a fighter. Obviously, these laws are being passed by people that are afraid of what they don't understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bizygurl

That's very unfortunate. For the owner of those dogs and very sad for the little girl and her family. Why were the other dogs put down when they weren't the dogs who did the attack? Unfortunately I think these laws are in place because although unfair, no one can tell who has a dangerous dog or not. By not letting them run free , etc. No one knows what a dog is capable of until it attacks someone, that's why breeds end up getting such a bad rap. But I don't agree with putting a dog down when it didn't attack anyone, that's wrong.

---

Apparently, the man who owned the dogs was a next door neighbor, and one of the dogs was pulling a sleigh with the little girl in it (who was 2, I just found out!). The sleigh went by the attacking dog and that's when he bit her in face. She was in the backyard with all 5 dogs, and I assume not much supervision! The other dogs were put down because their shots weren't up to date, and there was a question of rabies. The dog that did attack her was kept alive for rabies testing. When the testing was over and came back negative, the dog was put down too.

I think it was awfully stupid on the part of the owner and the parents of the little girl, allowing such a little child in the backyard with 5 big dogs! Like what were they thinking? :confused:

Quote:

---

But it was a Golden Retriever, how many of those do you hear attacking people?

---

Yes exactly! We have a yellow lab, and we didn't have to get the special licensing for him. However if we mistreated him or let the child we're expecting kick or tease him or be mean, etc, he might attack too. Of course we'd never do that, and I strongly believe in supervision for little kids with dogs, for both the dogs and the child's protection. My dog is also in obedience classes. I don't think any breed should automatically be labeled "dangerous".

Your right Orange, that was really stupid on the parents fault for not keeping an eye on the little girl, and she was 2? Anytime you have a young child with bigger dogs especially more than one dog you need to keep an eye out beecause you don't know what can happen. Being a mother this would have been just common sense since it would be dealing with dogs that were'nt mine.

There was another situation like this that happened here a few weeks ago. The dog didn't attack the child but it was an accident and this is just to prove the point why children need to be supervised with big dogs.

A little girl had been playing with her aunts dog in the backyard of her aunts house, I think the girl was four. She had been wearing a scarf, what happened was the dog had been playing with her and grabbed the end of the scarf and dragged her aroung the yard. She wasn't able to get the scarf off while this was happening and the dog ended up choking her to death. I believe this dog was a German shepard.
But because no one was keeping an eye on the little girl this unfortunate accident happened.

I was browsing www.avma.org and found this: http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/da...egislation.asp

''The AVMA supports dangerous animal legislation by state, county, or municipal governments provided that legislation does not refer to specific breeds or classes of animals. This legislation should be directed at fostering safety and protection of the general public from animals classified as dangerous.''

I agree labman... it shouldn't be based on breed! Dogs are like people IMO. There are good and bad in every breed. ;)

OMG though... there was another dog attack in my province. This time a Rottweiler and a 5 year old. The 5 year was supervised, and had played with the dog before, but he and the dog were "fighting" over a ball and he was attacked on his arms, legs and torso. It was just on the evening news.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bizygurl

a little girl had been playing with her aunts dog in the backyard of her aunts house, I think the girl was four. She had been wearing a scarf, what happened was the dog had been playing with her and grabbed the end of the scarf and dragged her aroung the yard. She wasn't able to get the scarf off while this was happening and the dog ended up choking her to death. I beleive this dog was a German shepard.
But because no one was keeping an eye on the little girl this unfortunate accident happened.

---

Ugh that's a horrible story... like an episode of CSI almost... blah. And so pointless. If she'd been properly watched, it never would have happened.

You know, this has me thinking... I live in an agricultural area, and I know a lot about cows, pigs and horses. You would NEVER leave your small child alone and unsupervised with those animals... horses, for example, can be very unpredictable, and could kill a child. So what's the difference, with a big dog? Actually parents should be careful of any animal capable of seriously harming or killing a child! I'm even going to supervise my child with our cat, so the cat doesn't hurt the baby, and the baby doesn't torture the cat... my friend's cat scratched her baby so bad that the child has a permanent scar on his cheek. Yet we never hear about a "dangerous cat" bylaw!

Try searching on the internet for all dog attacks and see what the statistics are. People are more likely to report a bite by a pitbull because they are already scared of them because of the people who train them to fight or just don't train them at all. Take a look at how many other types of dogs attack. How come when humans commit crimes we look at how they were raised and how they were treated and we look for reasons they have become a problem as individuals. And then when a dog attacks or bites you all just say they are bread to be hunters or fighters. If the dog is raised to be a family dog it will be a family dog. If a dog is mistreated and abused, chances are that it will be aggressive, no matter what type of breed. There are no bans on white people because some white people are murderers. I just think that all dogs can attack and bite. It depends on how they are raised. And pitbulls are not more likely to attack than any other breed of dog.

Somebody started a thread asking a technical question on the Ontario ban. Unless there is a long term decrease in dog bite cases, I think that law should be repealed. Those that think it will do any good please raise your hands?

What they are are high energy dogs with not enough spent aggression. People think that having a big yard is enough and you don't need to walk a dog, WRONG! Pits as well as other high energy dogs need walks/runs to use up their energy and calm them down. It's even sadder that the breed is taking the heat and not the owners. I've come across meaner pomeranians and poodles and have been scratched and bitten by more cats than the law should allow.

I own a black chow, who is also a breed with a bad rep. I've had her since she was a tiny black ball of fur, she's now 9 years old and she is a powder puff! Never bitten anyone. She gets along beautifully with my Golden Retriever who is 8 and the new puppy who is 2 months old. I have a very young pit bull mix that I'm working with now. The minute she starts to show aggression I take her out to play and then for a run, the aggression or crying is the only way they have of communicating that they need something. Be it a walk, water, food, or to relieve themselves. At this age she may still be missing the comfort of her mother so I snuggle her in a blankie until she's asleep and put her down. I also have a thick rubber Kong especially for puppies that I stuff with treats occasionally and that will keep her busy and help her with her need to chew. Long walks are best. After that I give her a short training session in certain commands I want her to learn like stay, off, come, take it... She's already potty trained.

My brother has had 4 pit bulls since they were pups and they have all been marshmallows. Never bit or jumped on anyone because they were properly trained and are very submissive. My best friend has a pit bull that belonged to a guy who was mean to him. Hit him, fought him, very negligent. My friend took him home (he already had 2 rottweilers) and introduced them on neutral territory, let them do their dog thing (the sniffing) and they got along just fine. They are all submissive dogs.

I think killing an entire breed is ridiculously ignorant and I don't tolerate idiotic ownership by idiotic people. I think it's a stupid bill. Instead, they need to enforce obedience classes to ALL pet owners. No one should be able to adopt or purchase a pet without first going to training and having all the appropriate tools. The owners are the ones who should be required to have licenses not the pets and these licenses should only be given after proof that the owners have no prior records of cruelty to animals and are financially able to afford not just food and shelter but medical necessities as well.

I think that Rep. Weiselhog or whatever the hell his name is is a dumb jackass looking for brownie points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by momincali

What they are are high energy dogs with not enough spent aggression.

---

That's the part that myself and others have a problem with - the high aggression level.

Hi,
Pit Bulls do have a high Aggression Level, being more Aggressive than some other breeds. I really believe in the saying "There are no bad dogs, just untrained owners".
Any breed can be trained, can be taught to not be so aggressive; not to be "boss" all the time. But, the problem is the owner. If owners do not want to take the time to go to training classes with their Pit Bull and work with them, they should not have one.
The key words are "should not". The law will change it to "shall not" be allowed.
It's a pity some dog owners ruin things for all dog owners. However, that's why laws have to be made. Everyone is not going to do what they should; hence, laws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

That's the part that myself and others have a problem with - the high aggression level.

---

The aggression only gets high if the energy is not spent, that can apply to any breed. That's why you see psycho poodles(not picking on poodles, just an example) barking like mad when you walk by their house. When you see a calm dog, it's not just that they are low energy, but it also means they are getting adequate amounts of exercise and are submissive to their owners. They understand the order of things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by momincali

That's why you see psycho poodles(not picking on poodles, just an example) barking like mad when you walk by their house.

---

Funny though, you rarely hear of psycho poodles ripping an infant to shreds.

*L* there is NOT a complete ban on pitties in Ontario, we can keep our dogs, they have to be registered, spayed/neutured and muzzled when in public.

A pack of chi's attacked a police officer... two labX's just killed a pom, poodles have more aggression than pits do. It's all in the training.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melinda

poodles have more aggression than pits do.

---

Can you provide any proof of that? I'd be interested to see that.

In 2003, 13 years after the ban on 'pit bulls' was implemented, Winnipeg reported 166 dog bites caused by the following dog breeds:

Shepherd cross (38), Terrier cross (11), Rottweiler (11), Lab cross (10), German Shepherd (8), Husky cross (7), Border Collie cross (7), Bearded Collie cross (6), Rottweiler cross (5), Chow cross (5), Lab (5), Great Dane cross (3), Golden Retriever (3), Dalmatian (3), Poodle cross (2), Golden Retriever cross (2), Cocker Spaniel cross (2), Boxer cross (2), Australian Shepherd cross (2), Terrier (2), Pomeranian (2), Chow Chow (2), Boxer (2), Border Collie (2), Samoyed cross (1), Mastiff cross (1), Heeler cross (1), Great Pyrennes cross (1), Doberman cross (1), Dachshund cross (1), Dalmatian cross (1), Corgi cross (1), Akita cross (1), Springer Spaniel (1), Siberian Husky (1), Shih Tzu (1), 'Pit bull' type (1), Miniature Schnauzer (1), Irish Setter (1), Great Dane (1), Doberman Pinscher (1), Dachshund (1), Cocker Spaniel (1), Bull Mastiff (1), Brittany Spaniel (1), Bloodhound (1), Bichon Frise (1), Akita (1).
--------------------------------------------
If I were considering a Standard Poodle...


My major concerns would be:


Unstable temperaments. Poodles are a dime a dozen, and most of them are bred and offered for sale by people who don't have the slightest idea of how to breed good-tempered dogs. Obedience instructors and behavioral consultants see LOTS of Poodles with neurotic behaviors, including aggression, extreme fearfulness, and hyperactivity.
If you have small children, or if you or anyone who lives with you is elderly or infirm, I do not recommend Standard Poodle puppies. The temptation to play roughly is too strong in many young Standard Poodles.



And I know my late grandfather is no expert, he had a pom Kennel, and he boarded dogs also, he would not allow poodles in the yard. Our late pitty was the kindest gentlest dog, but our toy poodle, at age 9 yrs, jumped up from sleeping on my brothers lap (age 15) and tore into his nose, for no reason at all, he wasn't even petting her, this was a dog we allowed to sleep with the grandchildren, my brother received 3 stitches. I like poodles, don't get me wrong, I just couldn't own another, I've very mistrustful of them.

Punish the owners, not the breed please.

Melinda, are you trying to confuse people that have their mind made up with a bunch of facts?

It is interesting that most of them are crosses. Is this a matter of the few problem owners taking what they get free? Somebody is going to have to dig up a big bunch of facts to convince me aggression is a mixed breed problem. I wonder how many non typical purebreds are labeled mixes? A ban is going to be easier to enforce against purebreds. How do you know if a mixed breed really is a Pit Bull? How many of you have looked at https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=22504 Who is to say for sure if the 2 month old Puppy he found really is a Pit Bull?

So has the average number of bites gone down with the ban on Pit Bulls? If not, repeal it.

Melinda, it's interesting that bites by shephard crosses far outnumber bites by the rest of the dog breeds. Yet I have never heard of a ban on shepherds... although where I am living we have a "dangerous dog" bylaw, and shepherds are included in the list.

I agree with you about poodles. I've always found them to be nervous and high strung, and thus more apt to nip and bite. Our next door neighbor has a standard poodle and I am afraid of it when it gets out of the yard.