Pit bull Mickey mauls child; Judge lets dog live but it can't be adopted - Baltimore Post-ExaminerBaltimore Post-Examiner

Pit bull Mickey mauls child; Judge lets dog live but it can’t be adopted

Anyone who has read my previous articles, follows me on Twitter or Facebook, will be surprised by my opinion in this column.

Kevin Vicente, a four-year old child in Phoenix, was severely mauled last month by a Pit Bull named Mickey. While under the care of a baby sitter, the child went in the backyard where the dog was chained and picked up the dog’s bone. The dog attacked him leaving him with a broken eye socket and jaw as well as torn facial skin. He will need years of reconstructive surgery.

Screen shot from YouTube video of newscast

Screen shot from YouTube video of newscast

Guadalupe Villa filed the vicious dog court petition starting the case against Mickey. Her boyfriend’s mother was watching the child at the time of his being attacked and stated that Mickey had previously killed one of her dogs.

A Facebook page was set up called “Save Mickey.” There is a comment below a photo of the sad looking Pit Bull behind cage bars: “Mickey is facing death because an unsupervised child went into Mickey’s property while Mickey was enjoying his bone. The child tried to take his bone.”

The page has 70,884 likes and over 65,000 people have filed a petition to have Mickey spared from being put down. More than $6,000 has been raised in support of keeping Mickey alive.

Last I checked, there were three lawyers representing Mickey. One said in an interview that he wouldn’t suggest that the dog be adopted by a family with small children, but people who have experience with Pit Bulls. If an ideal childless couple adopted Mickey, couldn’t this same situation happen again? They could let him out in the back yard and a child could jump the fence to retrieve a ball accidently thrown over the fence or numerous other scenarios.

I love that so many people have come forward in support of a Pit Bull. As I stated before I’ve chased numerous Pit Bulls I’ve seen loose in traffic, endangering myself running in front of cars to prevent them from hitting the dog, sometimes chasing them for more than half an hour until I finally caught them and carried them to my car to get them help without an ounce of fear that they would turn on me. I’ve adopted numerous dogs that were supposed to be put to sleep after rescue groups had given up on them for being too vicious. I kept the ones I felt would be too dangerous to be adopted and found homes for the rest.

Mickey, the pit bull (Screen shot from YouTube video of newscast)

Mickey, the pit bull
(Screen shot from YouTube video of newscast)

Most dogs can be rehabilitated. But children’s safety needs to come first. I wanted to explain why I fell putting this dog to sleep is the right decision from my own experience with a Rottweiler I rescued that was supposed to be put to sleep for attacking people.

When I adopted her she had already attacked a woman right before I got there. I convinced animal control let me take her, after signing numerous paperwork declaring that I knew she was a danger to myself and others and wouldn’t hold Animal Control responsible for anything she could do. Like everyone supporting Mickey, I didn’t feel it was fair for her to be put down because her owners made her mean. I felt had to adopt her.

Mine was the “perfect” home for a dog like her. No children, big fenced in back yard, experience with dangerous dogs. I was the type of person Mickey’s lawyer is suggesting he go to.

She always acted like a puppy toward me; she was very sweet, loved tummy rubs and playing fetch. She gently played with my three-pound cat and small dogs, even though the cat would constantly scratch her across her nose. She acted like a mother dog to a pit bull I rescued that was raised to fight. She would pin her like a mom dog would pin her puppies when the pit would play too rough with the other dogs. I loved her very much. But no amount of training or socialization was able to remove her drive to attack other people.

Photo above: Gabby, my rottweiler that had to be put down. (Christine Smith)

Photo above: Gabby, my rottweiler that had to be put down. (Christine Smith)

My best friend was staying with me when I got her and had to move out for her own safety. If I were in the room, the dog was just as nice to her as she was to me. The second I left the room she would go for my friend’s throat. Everyone who met the dog was terrified of her and wouldn’t be in my house with her. But she loved me and I wasn’t afraid she ever would hurt me.

When my parents would visit I had to keep a metal leash. Even the “bite proof” leashes she would bite through in one snap of her teeth and go after anyone visiting. She weighed almost as much as I did and I’d have to hold her back with all my strength, she wanted to attack them so badly. She also ate through a bedroom door trying to get to someone who stopped by.

Kevin Vicente (Photo from Facebook)

Kevin Vicente
(Photo from Facebook)

For years I was able to keep her from hurting anyone. When she was older she was diagnosed with cancer and her aggression turned worse. I let her out in the back yard to go to the bathroom. When I went to let her back in I saw she had knocked down the fence and was gone. I can’t tell you what a horrible terrifying feeling it is driving searching for your dog praying with all your heart she hadn’t found a child or person to injure or worse. My dog would have injured a child or adult like Mickey did in a second given the chance.

Twice more she head butted the fence so hard the whole panel fell. She saw a neighbor outside and wanted to go after them. Every time I let her in the backyard I stayed with her the whole time after her first escape so I caught her instantly, but if she had wanted to run I wouldn’t have been able to catch her in time if a child was next door or across the street.

The third time I had to take her to the vet to get her head stitched. The vet asked, “You have children in your neighborhood right?”

It was heartbreaking. I knew for the safety of the children there was no choice but to put her down. I couldn’t live with myself if a child was disfigured or killed because I loved my dangerous dog too much to think about living without her.

It still took me at least a month of watching neighborhood children run through my front yard and numerous times she almost escaped when she’d try to push past me to get out the front door, for me to finally accept she needed to be put down.

Christine with a rescued pit bull. (Photo by Christine Smith)

Christine with a rescued pit bull.
(Photo by Christine Smith)

For days I stayed home to be with her before taking her to be put to sleep. I was so upset she knew something was wrong and she wouldn’t get out of the car. The vet had to come outside and put her down, with me holding her head in my arms. It was the hardest thing I ever had to do. But I thanked God I wasn’t putting her to sleep after her attacking someone if she had succeeded all the times she tried. I couldn’t imagine facing the parents of a child my dog would have eventually severely hurt. I would have never been able to forgive myself knowing a child was injured and it would have been my fault.

That is why the story about Kevin Vicente touched me so much. I’m not saying this dog tried to get away to hurt people. He was chained in his yard. But when he did have access to a child he severely hurt him. Yes the child took the dogs bone and people are saying Mickey “did what dogs do.” But that’s not what dogs do. Dogs don’t grab a child by the head and shake him.

There are so many Pit Bulls in every shelter across the US that have been proven to be safe, but are put to sleep every day. The money people generously donated to help Mickey would be better spent helping find homes for all the wonderful and safe Pit Bulls. Or to help raise awareness of what a great breed they usually are and help the pubic be aware that in general, they are wonderful family dogs. It’s just the few who make the news from bad owners that make so many people afraid of this breed.

I don’t know what the outcome could be if he is allowed to be adopted out. Is our legal system going to have to keep track of him, that he is with the family that adopted him the remainder of his life? Would that family be legally liable if he injured a child again? Or worse, will his life be spared only to have to stay confined in a shelter the remainder of his life where quantity of years will matter more to people than quality of life?

So many people are blaming the poor woman who was watching the child, saying that it is her fault the child was attacked. He was playing outside with a friend. How many people with children let them outside without visually watching them the entire time? And just rely on hearing them play as a sign they were safe.

Screen shot from YouTube video of newscast

Screen shot from YouTube video of newscast

It’s a horrible situation for everyone. She is going to feel guilty the rest of her life. The child is disfigured, in pain and will have to endure multiple surgeries. The dog, who spent his life chained in a yard, is now caged in a shelter waiting for his fate to be decided. The safest outcome for this dog is to be put down so this doesn’t happen again. The outpouring of love from people toward him can be used to help other Pit Bulls.

********* Update *********

Municipal Court Judge Deborah Griffin decided Mickey will live the rest of his life in an animal shelter without the possibility of adoption.

His canine teeth are going to be pulled out, but now the judge decided his teeth will be ground down. An animal rights group has 30 days to find a rehab center or animal shelter for Mickey to live. After living his whole life outdoors, even though he was on a chain, he will now live the rest of his life in a cage.  Is this a win for anyone?





About the author

Christine Smith

Christine Smith was born in San Dimas California and lived in a few other states but considers Cali the best. She loves biking and rollerblading up the coast and supporting the local beach bars. Her heart has always been with rescuing animals rescue groups gave up on for being too vicious or sick, She'd rehabilitate them and find them homes. She's rescued 114 and counting! After visiting Playboy studios with a friend she was named Playboy’s Miss December 2005. Christine enjoyed traveling all over the US, hosting events and doing autograph signings. She won a Celebrity of the Year award in London for radio interviews. Had fun being in TV shows and movies, Bad Teacher is her favorite; Christine considers working with Cameron Diaz was an honor! She felt very blessed to have the title of Playmate; it allowed her to help countless charities by “using her name.” She received an award from the Veterans Administration for her volunteer work and has been able to help many charities helping the wonderful people who serve our country and many animal rescue groups. Her favorite part of being a Playmate has been meeting her fans, and she’d try to make each person feel special and give them an experience to remember. She is very excited to now be a part of The Baltimore Post-Examiner and be able share her experiences and speak with all the readers! Contact the author.
COMMENT POLICY

44 Comments

  1. Windchyme says:

    I agree with you…we need to kindly let him go. Pull his canines and grind his teeth down? Just let him go for goodness sakes. And required spay/neuter? Like a law? You DO realize that people that can’t afford to comply will go underground and fail to get proper care and vaccinations for their dogs so as not to be found out and breed anyway or will suddenly turn in what are perfectly good pet dogs causing the problem that is supposed to be getting fixed. No thanks. More low cost/free spay/neuter places are what will help….

    Reply
  2. Carl Woodward says:

    hey darrin guess how many of your ridiculous comments anyone read

    Reply
  3. Darrin Stephens says:

    Here’s what dog behaviorist Dr. Radcliffe Robins has to say:

    “Temperament is 100% genetic; it is inherited, and fixed at the moment of the dog’s fertilization/conception/birth.

    Temperament in the dog cannot be eliminated nor transformed from one type to another.

    It cannot change during the dog’s lifetime. It is the permanent mental/neurological characteristic of the individual dog.

    Environment, socialization or training can MODIFY the expression of an individual dog’s temperament, but they cannot transform it nor eliminate it.

    The dog will die with the temperament with which it was born.”

    Reply
  4. Darrin Stephens says:

    MARK WULKAN, MD, surgeon at Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta

    “There is a difference with the pit bulls. In the last two years we’ve seen 56 dog injuries that were so severe the patient had to be admitted to the hospital so this doesn’t count just a little bite and then goes to the emergency room. Of those 56, 21 were pit bulls. And then when we look at our data even further, of the kids that were most severely injured, those that were in the hospital for more than 8 days or had life threatening injuries, 100% of those were pit bulls.

    STEPHEN COHN, MD, professor of surgery at the University of Texas Health Science Center

    “I think this is a public health hazard, this particular dog. We just have to have them contained in a way that protects the general public. I don’t want to see another kid come in dead.”

    JOHN BINI, MD, chief of surgery at Wilford Hall Medical Center

    “There are going to be outspoken opponents of breed legislation, who say: ‘My pit bulls lie with my baby and play with my rabbit.’ And that’s fine. I just think we’re seeing something here, and I think it does warrant a discussion as to whether this is a risk that a community wants to take.”

    MORTALITY, MAULING, AND MAIMING BY VICIOUS DOGS, April 2011 Annals of Surgery

    “Fortunately, fatal dog attacks are rare, but there seems to be a distinct relationship between the severity and lethality of an attack and the breed responsible,” they wrote in an article published in the April issue of the medical journal Annals of Surgery. “These breeds should be regulated in the same way in which other dangerous species, such as leopards, are regulated.”

    DAVID E. BLOCKER, BS, MD, Dog Bite Rates and Biting Dog Breeds in Texas, 1995-1997

    Bite Rates by Breed page 23

    One out of every 40 Pit Bulls (2.5%) and about one out of 75 Chow Chows (1.4%) generated a reported human bite each year (Table 29; Figure 7).

    One out of 100 Rottweilers (1%) caused a reported bite, and less than one out of 250 German Shepherds (0.37%) bit a human each year, not statistically different from the average for all dogs combined (0.53%).

    Huskies, Dobermans, and Australian Shepherds had bite rates slightly lower than German Shepherds but higher than Labrador Retrievers.

    Less than one in every 500 Labrador retrievers (0.15%) was associated with a reported bite each year. All other breeds examined individually, including Poodles, Cocker Spaniels, and Dachshunds, had bite rates lower than Labrador Retrievers.

    Odds ratios for each of the five most commonly biting dog breeds versus all others presented similar findings (Table 30). The odds of a Pit Bull in Bexar County causing a bite were 5 times greater than the odds for all other breeds combined, at 4.9 to 1.

    Chow Chows and Rottweilers also had odds ratios significantly greater than the average, at 2.9 to 1 and 1.8 to 1, respectively. The odds ratios for German Shepherds and Labrador Retrievers were significantly lower than the average, at 0.67 to 1 and

    0.26 to 1.

    PETER ANTEVY, pediatric E.R. physician, Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital

    Dr Antvey sees at least five dog-bite victims a month in his emergency room. Unfortunately, he said, “the biggest offender is the pit bull.”

    MELISSA ARCA, MD

    The reality is that any dog can bite, and statistically speaking, a child is most likely to be bitten by the family dog or a dog that they know. When you’re talking about bite severity resulting in life-threatening and even fatal injuries, pit bulls and Rottweilers are the main culprits.

    Experience absolutely colors our perception, and in this case I can’t help but be affected by what I’ve seen. I will never forget a young child I treated in the ER during my pediatric residency. She suffered severe facial lacerations and tears to her face after a pit bull attack in her local park.

    Reply
  5. Darrin Stephens says:

    Dog Control Act for our protection

    Mar 27, 2014

    I have been astonished by the ignorance and misunderstanding of many Trinidadians in relation to the Dog Control Act 2014.

    I have been hearing about the poor pitbulls and the poor treatment they have been receiving.

    However, have we ever stopped and listened to the voices of the victims? Oh, wait, we can’t—many have been mauled to death.

    The Dog Control Act doesn’t ban dangerous dogs. That was the act of 2000. This act regulates dangerous dogs and, thus, you are allowed to own, keep and love dogs deemed to be dangerous, but under various regulations which act as protective measures.

    Let’s ask and answer some simple questions:

    1. Do I have to give up my dog (pitbull)? No, you don’t have to give up your dog. However, you have to follow some regulations such as getting a licence, having proper surroundings (secured fence), micro-chipping, registering your dog. So you can keep your dangerous dog, ie, pitbull. Just follow some guidelines.

    2. Why does this law target pitbulls and not all dogs? These dogs were chosen based on empirical evidence which shows they are capable of the most vicious and deadly attacks.

    It is noted when a pitbull attacks and bites someone, it doesn’t let go. One may recall when the 76-year-old grandmother was feeding the family pitbull, it attacked her and mauled her to death.

    And despite bricks and wood being thrown at it, the dog had to be shot four times before it retreated.

    Those who argue these deadly attacks are as a consequence of ill-treatment of uncaring owners ignore the fact many of these attacks have occurred when there is no such allegation—meaning most, if not all, of the pitbull attacks have occurred or have involved pitbulls which were loved and treated well, giving truth to the claim these dogs are highly unpredictable.

    3. Why not target all dogs? It is impractical for the State to pass such a law, as it doesn’t have the resources to monitor and evaluate all dogs and their owners.

    In any event, there is no evidence that suggest all other dogs are a threat to life, as there have never been cases of mauling by pompeks, golden retrievers or “pothounds”.

    This law is not the first of its kind in the world. It is just following through on a globally set standard. As a matter of fact, in Canada and certain states of the US, along with New Zealand, dangerous dogs are banned. However in T&T, you are allowed to keep your dog—just simply follow the regulations.

    These regulations have become important because too many owners have not taken the proper steps to protect the public, hence the many deaths—and one death is one too many.

    The pitbull has been described as the poor man’s gun, but just as one is required to licence a gun, one must licence this dog, as it too has caused injury and death.

    How often do the owners of pitbulls not compensate the victims of attacks? Well, the time has come for owners to prevent attacks and also compensate those injured.

    The reports of over 200 dogs being abandoned are totally false. If a family loved a dog enough to kick up against the law, they certainly wouldn’t abandon the dog.

    This law is for the many children who were deprived of growing up due to death at the jaws of a pitbull.

    Adil Ali

    Reply
  6. Darrin Stephens says:

    LETTER: Pit bulls still a problem

    Published: Monday, March 17, 2014

    Pit bulls killed my dog. He suffered. I knew nothing of fighting breed dogs. I found dogsbite dot org with links to hundreds of attacks. I wrote a commentary posted in The Gadsden Times armed only with the knowledge of my dog’s tortured death and dogsbite dot org.

    I am part of a group organizing to demand laws protecting citizens from random attacks by the types of dogs bred to fight in gaming pits.

    I met the Solesky family from Maryland, whose son suffered a severed femoral artery. He underwent a femoral-popliteal bypass at 10 years old.

    I met the Borchardt family from Wisconsin, whose 14-month-old was held by his babysitter as she let her pit bulls in. They rushed her, pulled Dax to the ground and attacked him until he was dead. His body looked like a bomb had exploded on him.

    I met Ms. Rutledge from Georgia, whose 8-year-old pit bull decapitated her 2-year-old son when she went to the bathroom. When she began screaming, the pit bull picked up his body and shook it. It was so gruesome that police covered the front door.

    I met the Baker family in Sacramento, whose 3-year-old daughter lost half her face to her father’s pit bull.

    I met the Kim family from Maryville, Tenn,, whose son’s face was mutilated. His father strangled the pit bull with his hands before it let go.

    My father in Whorton Bend has a neighbor pit bull that killed one dog, severely injured another and chased residents into homes, yet animal control told them pit bulls are great. My 85-year-old father is endangered every time he walks in his yard, yet nothing is being done to protect him or his wife.

    Articles saying attitudes toward pit bulls have softened are giving a false sense of safety. They attack, they kill, they do what they were bred to do.

    This is a national problem not getting better even with articles saying it is.

    I mentioned only a few people who have buried their children, have repeated surgeries, were devastated financially, who buried a parent — all from pit bull attacks.

    Pam Ashley

    Gadsden

    Reply
  7. Darrin Stephens says:

    Aurora, Colorado
    Population 339,030

    Also in March, Aurora released statistical data showing a significant reduction in the volume of pit bull attacks and pit bulls euthanized after adopting a pit bull ban in 2005.

    “Since the ban has been in place, bites are down 73 percent from pit bulls,” said Cheryl Conway, a spokeswoman for the city’s animal care division.
    She described various problems the city encountered before enacting the ban in 2005 that included irresponsible owners letting the dogs run at large, and owners using pit bulls to taunt pedestrians.

    She added that the dogs placed a tremendous burden on city staff. According to city documents, before the ordinance was enacted in 2005, up to 70 percent of kennels in the Aurora Animal Shelter were occupied by pit bulls with pending court disposition dates or with no known owner. That number is now only 10 to 20 percent of kennels.

    “There hasn’t been a human mauling in many years. Complaints and requests related to pit bulls are down 50 percent. Euthanasia of pit bull dogs is down 93 percent. Of those few that are put down, they are primarily those that come in as strays and their owners don’t come to claim them,” she said.
    ************************************************************
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Population 415,068

    After the City of Omaha adopted a pit bull law in 2008, Mark Langan of the Nebraska Humane Society, who opposed the law, said in September 2009 that pit bull biting incidents were down 35% since its adoption:

    “Despite the attack of Haynes, The Humane Society’s Mark Langan says pitbull bites are down since new laws went into effect last year. Langan says so far this year 54 bites have been reported compared to 83 last year.”

    In September 2010, the Nebraska Humane Society provided bite statistical data to city council members and an evaluation of the effectiveness of the pit bull ordinance adopted by the City of Omaha in late 2008.

    “It is the position of the Nebraska Human Society that this ordinance has been effective in reducing bites involving dogs defined as “Pit Bulls” in the ordinance.”

    Judy Varner, President and CEO, Nebraska Human Society
    Varner’s attached statistical data shows that bites by pit bulls dropped 40% after one year of the adoption of the ordinance, 121 bites in 2008 down to 73 bites in 2009. The bite rate dropped even further in 2010.

    2008 Pit Bull Bites: 121 Total
    2009 Pit Bull Bites: 73 Total
    2010 Pit Bull Bites (through August): 28 Total

    In January 2013, the Nebraska Humane Society reported that pit bull bites dropped to 31 in 2012, down from 121 in 2008 (a 74% reduction), the year that Omaha enacted a progressive pit bull ordinance.

    2008 Pit Bull Bites Total: 121 (pre-breed specific ordinance)
    Level 2: 52; Level 3: 58, Level 4: 8; Level 5: 3 (69 were Level 3-5 attacks)

    2009 Pit Bull Bites Total: 73
    Level 2: 49; Level 3: 17; Level 4: 4; Level 5: 3 (24 were Level 3-5 attacks)

    2010 (through August) Pit Bull Bites Total: 28
    Level 2: 19; Level 3: 6; Level 4: 2; Level 5: 1 (9 were Level 3-5 attacks)

    2012 Pit Bull Bites Total: 31
    No bite level break down provided
    ************************************************************
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Population 51,230

    In November 2012, Saginaw reported a reduction in dog attacks eighteen months after enacting a “Light” BSL ordinance1 requiring owners of the top 5 dangerous dog breeds2 to comply with new regulations.

    Eighteen months after Saginaw created its dangerous dog ordinance, put into effect in June 2011, Saginaw City Chief Inspector John Stemple said it has helped to lower the amount of dog attacks in the city.

    “It was the government reacting to a problem,” Stemple said. “And if you look at the numbers, it’s been very effective.”

    The ordinance requires residents to register dogs whose breeds are deemed “dangerous” at the City Clerk’s office, post a “Dog on premises” sign in the front of their homes and when outdoors, keep their animals either on a leash or within a 4-foot-high fenced area or kennel.

    The breeds included in the ordinance are pit bulls, presa canario, bull mastiffs, rottweilers and German shepherds.

    Stemple said he has heard from employees at Consumers Energy and the U.S. Postal Service that the signs and tethering rules have made their work safer. The number of reported dog bites fell in 2011 to nine, from 24 in 2009.

    Reply
  8. Darrin Stephens says:

    Ottumwa, Iowa
    Population 24,998

    In July 2010, Police Chief Jim Clark said there had been no recorded pit bull attacks since the city’s 2003 pit bull ban. Between 1989 and 2003, the city had a pit bull ordinance, but still allowed pit bulls as “guard” dogs.
    “Police Chief Jim Clark says since the ban, there have been no recorded attacks by the animals.

    “We haven’t had any attacks since then for one thing because it is illegal,” said Clark. “Most people are keeping their dogs inside their house or inside their basement and not letting them out loose so therefore they’re not around other people to attack them.”

    “In the two-and-a-half years before the 2003 ban, Ottumwa police recorded 18 pit bull attacks, including the death of 21-month-old Charlee Shepherd in August 2002. There were at least three other attacks on children during this time.”
    ************************************************************
    Little Rock, Arkansas
    Population 189,515

    When the City of Indianapolis was discussing a pit bull sterilization law in April 2009, Little Rock Animal Services Director Tracy Roark spoke about Little Rock’s successful 2008 pit bull ordinance:

    “There was a day when you could walk down any street in center city Little Rock, you could see several pit bulls chained up. You don’t see that anymore,” said Tracy Roark with Little Rock Animal Services.

    Roark told Eyewitness News over the phone that pit bull attacks have been cut in half and credits their new law with getting them there.
    “This is the most abused dog in the city,” said Roark.

    The Little Rock law passed last year and requires pit bulls to be sterilized, registered and microchipped. Also dogs – regardless of the breed – are also not allowed to be chained up outside.”
    ************************************************************
    Fort Lupton, Colorado
    Population 6,787
    When the City of Fort Collins was mulling a pit bull law in March 2009, Fort Lupton’s Police Chief spoke about Fort Lupton’s successful 2003 pit bull ban, including zero pit bull biting incidents since the law’s adoption:

    “Fort Lupton Police Chief Ron Grannis said the city hasn’t had a pit bull bite since the ban was enacted, but it still has the occasional pit bull that is picked up and taken away.

    Although he said the ban has not been well-received by every resident, he thinks it was the right decision for the city.

    “I believe it makes the community safer,” he said. “That’s my personal opinion. Pit bulls are not the kind of dogs most people should have. They are too unpredictable. … These dogs have been bred for thousands of years to be fighters.

    You can’t take it out of them. A lion cub may be friendly for a while, but one day it can take your head off.”
    *************************************************************
    Reading, Pennsylvania
    Population 80,560

    After an 8-year legal battle, pit bull advocates dismantled a pit bull law adopted by Reading in 1998. It was reported in the same news article, in February 2008, that the law had significantly reduced biting incidents:

    “Reading’s 1998 law required that aggressive or dangerous dogs, when outside the home, be muzzled and kept on a leash shorter than three feet long with a minimum tensile strength of 300 pounds.

    The law also punished violators with fines of up to $1,000 or 30 days in jail.
    The law is credited with helping to reduce dog bites from 130 in 1999 to 33 in 2006. As a result, the law – or at least elements of it – were not being actively enforced, the Reading Eagle reported last year.

    Reply
  9. Darrin Stephens says:

    In Calgary, by Bill Bruce’s own admission and documentation, pit bulls lead the serious bite count with 13% of the city’s serious bites attributable to pit bulls, yet pit bulls account for less than 1% of the city’s dogs.

    In fact, pit bulls are responsible for nearly as many serious bites (13%) as the ENTIRE sporting breeding category (15%), which includes all of the most popular breeds (Labs, Goldens, Poodles, Spaniels, etc) and houses 70% of Calgary’s dogs.

    Why aren’t these breeds attacking in the face of irresponsible ownership?

    An example of why leashing and licensing laws don’t work to solve the breed-specific problem of pit bulls:

    Pitbull supporters always point to Calgary Model as the perfect solution when dealing with dangerous dogs. The city introduced its responsible pet ownership bylaw in 2006.

    Calgary’s bylaw department emphasizes responsible pet ownership through intensive licensing, hefty fines and owner education.

    Has their model worked? The statistics from the past four years would indicate a resounding “NO”. For the past four years dog bites have risen steadily every year, and over 350% in the past 4 years, from 58 in 2009 to 203 in 2012.

    And In 2010 Pit bulls led the ‘bite’ count. Meanwhile in Toronto, four years after implementing Breed Bans, dog bites were down 32%, from 486 to 329.

    Bites in Toronto blamed on the four banned breeds fell sharply, from 71 in 2005 to only six in 2010.

    Considering these breeds regularly inflict the most serious damage, this is an undeniable win for the citizens of Toronto.

    Reply
  10. Darrin Stephens says:

    17 Barks

    Sunday, July 28, 2013

    Pit shelter and euthanasia stats
    Merritt Clifton, Editor at Animal People recently shared some pertinent information about the number of pit bulls in shelters and their ultimate disposition.

    I think it bears repeating because it refutes the idea that “BSL” is somehow to blame for all the pit bull deaths.

    The current U.S. pit bull population is about 3.2 million, and it has been about three million for about 10 years now, according to the annual ANIMAL PEOPLE surveys of classified ads offering dogs for sale or adoption.

    About one million pit bulls per year enter animal shelters, about two-thirds surrendered by their keepers, most of the rest impounded for dangerous behavior.

    Most of these dogs have already been through three homes — their birth home, the home that bought them, and a subsequent pass-along home, before they arrive at shelters.

    An average of just over 900,000 pit bulls per year over the past 10 years have been killed in shelters after flunking behavioral screening, with a peak of 967,000, a low of 835,000, and 910,000 killed last year.

    This is about 60% of all the dogs killed in U.S. shelters today, up from about 50% in 2003. The average age of pit bulls killed in animal shelters is about 18 months.

    So what we have at any given time is a third of the pit bull population having not yet reached maturity, a third (at most) in homes they will still occupy at the end of the year, and a third flunking out of homes and being killed — which translates into a 50% failure rate among adult dogs in homes each & every year. Among all other dog breeds combined, about 5% enter shelters each year.!

    Animal people news

    Reply
  11. Darrin Stephens says:

    Merritt Clifton Editor OF Animal People:

    Of the 4,576 dogs involved in fatal and disfiguring attacks on humans occurring in the U.S. & Canada since September 1982, when I began logging the data, 3,094 (68%) were pit bulls; 549 were Rottweilers; 3,899 (85%) were of related molosser breeds, including pit bulls, Rottweilers, mastiffs, bull mastiffs, boxers, and their mixes. Of the 541 human fatalities, 281 were killed by pit bulls; 86 were killed by Rottweilers; 408 (75%) were killed by molosser breeds.

    Of the 2,755 people who were disfigured, 1,862 (68%) were disfigured by pit bulls; 320 were disfigured by Rottweilers; 2,316 (84%) were disfigured by molosser breeds.

    Pit bulls–exclusive of their use in dogfighting–also inflict more than 70 times as many fatal and disfiguring injuries on other pets and livestock as on humans, a pattern unique to the pit bull class.

    Fatal and disfiguring attacks by dogs from shelters and rescues have exploded from zero in the first 90 years of the 20th century to 80 in the past four years, including 58 by pit bulls, along with 22 fatal & disfiguring attacks by other shelter dogs, mostly Rottweilers & bull mastiffs.

    The only dogs rehomed from U.S. shelters to kill anyone, ever, before 2000 were two wolf hybrids in 1988 and 1989. 33 U.S. shelter
    dogs & one U.K. shelter dog have participated in killing people since 2010, including 24 pit bulls, seven bull mastiffs, and two Rottweilers.

    Surveys of dogs offered for sale or adoption indicate that pit bulls and pit mixes are less than 6% of the U.S. dog population; molosser breeds, all combined, are 9%.

    Reply
  12. Darrin Stephens says:

    About 31,400 dogs attacked about 61,500 other animals in the U.S. in 2013, killing 43,500 and seriously injuring 18,100.

    The animals killed included about 12,000 dogs, 8,000 cats, 6,000 hooved animals, and 17,000 other small domestic animals, primarily poultry.

    The seriously injured included about 12,400 dogs, 4,000 cats, and 1,700 hooved animals. Few small mammals and poultry survived reported dog attacks.

    Pit bulls inflicted 99% of the total fatal attacks on other animals (43,000); 96% of the fatal attacks on other dogs (11,520); 95% of the fatal attacks on livestock (5,700) and on small mammals and poultry (16,150); and 94% of the fatal attacks on cats (11,280).

    About 30,000 pit bulls were involved in attacks on other animals, many of them killing multiple other animals.

    There are about 3.2 million pit bulls in the U.S. at any given time, according to the annual ANIMAL PEOPLE surveys of dogs offered for sale or adoption via online classified ads.

    Thus in 2013 about one pit bull in 107 killed or seriously injured another animal, compared with about one dog in 50,000 of other breeds.

    Complete details of the year-long epidemiological survey that produced these estimates will appear in the January/February edition of ANIMAL PEOPLE.

    Reply
  13. Darrin Stephens says:

    The TRUTH About Pit Bulls: The Nanny Dog Myth Revealed
    thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspot dot com
    Myth: Pit Bulls have been called the Nanny Dog

    Truth: This myth was started by statements made by two people. Mrs. Lilian Rant, President, Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of America, magazine editor said they are referred to as a nursemaid dog in an interview published in the New York Times in 1971.

    Second in 1987 Toronto Star article where Breeder Kathy Thomas, president of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Association said “In England, our Staffies were called the nanny-dog”.

    No sources, citations or evidence just two biased people heavily invested in trying to change the image of Pit Bulls made these statements and started this whole myth.

    The “nanny dog” is a complete historical fabrication. The sole known published reference to the “nanny dog” notion, before the rise of opposition to breed-specific laws in recent decades, came in a 1922 work of fiction, Pep: The Story of A Brave Dog, by Clarence Hawkes, a blind man who wrote by dictating his stories and, though able to spin a gripping yarn, routinely muddled his facts.

    This work of fiction also appears to be the point of origin of many of the other popular myths about the history of pit bulls. Indeed some dogfighters did photograph their pit bulls with their children, to help advertise the sale of their cull dogs as pets, but that hardly means pit bulls were safe pets.

    One of the most notorious of these gents, professional dogfighter John P. Colby, of Newburyport, Massachusetts, produced his first pit bull litter in 1889. The Boston Globe on December 29, 1906 reported that police shot one of his dogs, who mauled a boy while a girl escaped. On February 2, 1909 the Globe described how one of Colby’s dogs killed Colby’s two-year-old nephew, Bert Colby Leadbetter

    Reply
  14. Darrin Stephens says:

    BADRAP surrenders to facts

    “A lie can run around the world six times while the truth is still trying to put on its pants.” ~Mark Twain

    on May 20 @ 9:00am PST, BADRAP made the following proclamation:

    It’s Dog Bite Prevention Week. Did you know that there was never such thing as a ‘Nanny’s Dog’? This term was a recent invention created to describe the myriad of vintage photos of children enjoying their family pit bulls.

    While the intention behind the term was innocent, using it may mislead parents into being careless with their children around their family dog – A recipe for dog bites!

    Reply
  15. Darrin Stephens says:

    Wapato, WA residents safer because of ban:

    In 2008, the City of Wapato passed an ordinance that bans new pit bulls, rottweilers and mastiffs. Nine months after its adoption, in March 2009, Wapato Police Chief Richard Sanchez reported successful results:

    “Nine months into the ban and police calls about vicious dogs have been cut in half. The Wapato Police tell Action News they’ve gone from 18 reports in January, February and March of last year to seven so far in ’09. “Seven calls in three months… that’s nothing,” says Chief Richard Sanchez, Wapato Police Department.

    Chief Sanchez credits local cooperation for the decline of dangerous dogs.”

    Reply
  16. Darrin Stephens says:

    he ASPCA has no obligation to share safety issues about pit bulls with the public. On their “Pit Bull Information” web page, they write: “Sadly, pit bulls have acquired a reputation as unpredictable, dangerous, and vicious.” Yet, spelled out in the ASPCA Shelter Guidelines — designed to protect shelter workers — are the unique risks attributed to pit bulls. One of them is that they “attack without warning,” which is equivalent to unpredictable behavior.

    From the ASPCA’s The Care of Pit Bulls in the Shelter Environment:

    There are “cases of experienced handlers who had developed good relationships with the dogs over a period of months still being attacked without warning or obvious provocation.”

    Pit bulls “ignore signs of submission from other dogs” and “give no warning prior to attack.” They add that this is “different than normal dog behavior.”

    “Today’s pit bulls” have multiple names including: “Staffordshire Terrier (AKC 1936), American Staffordshire Terrier (AKC 1972, Am Staff), American Pit Bull Terrier or Pit Bull Terrier.”

    “These dogs can be aggressive towards humans and more likely to cause fatal attacks to people than other fighting type dogs.”

    “Pit bulls will climb fences, chew up stainless steel food and water bowls, destroy copper tubing of automatic water systems and conventional cages, and attack other animals through chain link fences.”

    “Pit bulls can break through conventional cage doors and destroy typical epoxy paint on the floors and walls.”

    “Pit bulls require special housing considerations” and “isolation from other animals if dog aggressive or have a high prey drive.”

    “Install a panic button in rooms housing pit bulls along with other restraint equipment in any room housing pit bulls.”

    It seems unlikely that the ASPCA or shelters participating in the “Adopt-A-Bull Contest” will tell potential adopters to install a panic button in their home or that pit bulls attack without warning.

    Reply
  17. Darrin Stephens says:

    Coverage to End For Bites by Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, Wolf Hybrids
    Farmers Group, Inc., will stop covering homeowners for bites by three breeds, saying they are responsible for a quarter of all claims in California
    By Sharon Bernstein
    Tuesday, Feb 12, 2013

    America’s infatuation with canines has led to a breathtaking rise in the number of dog bites – and in the amount of money that insurance companies pay to compensate the bitten.

    In California, one major insurer is growling back.

    Farmers Group, Inc., has notified policyholders that bites by pit bulls, Rottweilers and wolf hybrids will no longer be covered by homeowners insurance in the state.

    The move has drawn criticism from pit bull rescue groups and trainers.

    “It is offensive,” said Candy Clemente, who trains pit bulls for the Animal Planet show “Pit Boss.” They are condemning these breeds indiscriminately without giving the home owners a chance to prove their dogs are not vicious.”

    But insurers say that bites from pit bulls and the other breeds have gone up dramatically in recent years – along with the cost of settling damage claims.

    “We reviewed our liability claim history and we determined that three breeds accounted for more than 25% of dog bite claims,” said spokeswoman Erin Freeman. “In addition, these three breeds caused more harm when they attacked than any other breed.”

    The move by Farmers, which will go into effect for California homeowners as their policies come up for renewal, is one of several efforts nationwide by insurance companies to limit an ever-increasing level of liability for dog bites.

    Across the U.S., insurance companies paid out $480 million to people who were attacked by dogs in 2011 – a 50% rise in just eight years, according to data from the Insurance Information Institute. In California that year, insurers paid more than $20 million to settle just 527 claims.

    Just last week, a 91-year-old Desert Hot Springs woman died after she was attacked by her two pit bulls. In San Diego on Monday, a woman and her daughter were convicted of involuntary manslaughter in another attack, after their two dogs attacked a 75-year-old woman who later died.

    Emako Mendoza stepped outside her home to get a newspaper in June of 2011 when she was mauled by the two dogs. She suffered a heart attack and her left arm and leg had to be amputated. Mendoza died six months later.

    To deal with the skyrocketing claims and attendant expense, insurers have adopted a number of new measures, the insurance institute said. Some, like Farmers, are asking customers to sign waivers acknowledging that bites will not be covered under certain circumstances.

    Others are charging people extra for breeds like pitbulls, or refusing to cover dog bites altogether.

    Still more insurers use what they call the “one-bite rule,” saying they’ll cover an attack the first time it happens – not if the animal bites someone else at another time.

    Two states, Pennsylvania and Michigan, do not allow insurers to cancel or refuse coverage to owners of specific breeds.

    Reply
  18. Darrin Stephens says:

    Royal Oak Ordinance Requires $1 Million ‘Dangerous Dog’ Insurance Policy
    May 15, 2013 6:13 AM
    Reporting Ron Dewey

    ROYAL OAK (WWJ) – Royal Oak is about to unleash new regulations on dog owners.

    The new rules, which go into effect Thursday, require owners of “dangerous dogs” to carry $1 million in liability insurance, post signs, complete an obedience class with the dog, and keep the dog in a locked, fenced-in area. Owners must also comply with seven pages worth of other requirements to keep their pets in the city.

    Officials say a dog is deemed dangerous if it bites or attacks a person, or causes serious injury to another domestic animal. Exceptions include dogs protecting an owner or a homeowner’s property.

    City leaders say they created the ordinance after receiving 32 reports of dog bites and attacks during 2012 in Royal Oak.

    Royal Oak resident John Scott said the ordinance is a good move for the city, putting the responsibility on the owners instead of the dogs.

    “If you’re a dog owner, you know that dogs are protective of their territory. There’s an old saying that there’s no bad dogs, just bad owners,” he said.

    Lori Wosnicki, who has a Bernese Mountain Dog, she understands the reason for the new ordinance, but still thinks that it goes too far.

    “Look at this dog, who goes to schools and has kids lay all over him. I have a really hard time with [the ordinance] because how do you decide what’s dangerous,” she said.

    Violation of the dog ordinance is a misdemeanor offense, punishable by a fine up to $500 and 90 days in jail

    Reply
  19. Darrin Stephens says:

    Barbara Kay: Study proves pitbull ban is justified

    There’s nothing more humiliating for a journalist than pontificating on a subject with ardent conviction, and then being proved wrong. But there’s nothing more gratifying for a journalist than pontificating on a subject with ardent conviction and being proved right.

    At the moment I am doing a modest little victory dance as I type. One of the first columns I ever wrote for the Post (December 10, 2003) argued that pit bulls were a danger to society because of their nature. Naturally I backed up my claim with plenty of statistical ammunition. And today I feel vindicated.

    I was, even as a newbie, aware that readers who disagree with you can get pretty hot under the collar, but I had no idea how exponentially explosive the response is when you diss a dog breed. My column was distributed to dog-owner sites and I received a tsunami of hate mail the like of which I have never seen before or since. I was called unprintable names – and more than one pitbull owner spelled out in graphic detail what he would like to see a trained pit bull do to me. (One responder, curiously enough, expressed the hope that I would get all my fingers chopped off while playing the piano. Not sure what the connection to pitbulls is there.)

    Anyway, reasonable people shared my opinion.

    Well, all those pitbull owners can now turn their wrathful attention to Dr. Malathi Raghavan, a University of Manitoba epidemiologist, and author of a new study of dog bite cases between 1984-2006 in the journal Injury Prevention that suggests the controversial bans are having a positive effect. After “breed-specific legislation” was passed, Manitoba’s overall provincial rate of bite-related hospitalizations dropped from 3.5 to 2.8 per 100,000 people. A spokeswoman, commenting on the study, conceded that pitbulls “genetically hard-wired” to be combative, but diplomatically added the usual refrain that all dogs have the capacity to be nasty if they are ill-trained.

    The idea that pitbulls owned by nice people are no more dangerous than any other breed is a myth, of course. Dogs bite four to five million Americans every year. Serious injuries are up nearly 40% from 1986. Children are victims of 60% of bites and 80% of fatal attacks. Nearly half of all American kids have been bitten by the age of 12. Pitbulls or crosses alone account for more than a third of dog bite fatalities.

    Sure all dogs bite, but most dogs let you know before they bite that they have hostile intentions, and they let go after they bite. As I noted in my previous column, “Unlike other biting dogs, pitbulls don’t let go. They are impervious to pain. Neither hoses, blows or kicks will stop them. Other dogs warn of their anger with growls or body language like terrorists, pitbulls attack silently and often with no perceived provocation.

    The breeders, trainers and Kennel Clubs know all this. Yet dog civil libertarians resist “profiling” or penalties that impinge on the dog’s “right to due process” (their actual words). Gordon Carvill, (at the time of my 2003 column), president of the American Dog Owners’ Association, is implacable on breed profiling, falsely claiming, “There is no dog born in this world with a predisposition to aggression.” This is canine political correctness run amok. Disinterested experts overwhelmingly disprove this claim with ease.

    Just so pitbull owners shouldn’t feel lonely, Rottweilers aren’t always so cuddly either. In 1998 there were 1,237 reported dog attacks in Canada, and a full half of them were accounted for by pitbulls and Rotties. Some jurisdictions in Quebec ban both, and it doesn’t cause me a single minute’s loss of sleep.

    It’s a pretty strange society that imposes speed limits on cars (because we all know it isn’t cars that kill, it’s bad drivers) and doesn’t allow guns to be carried in the street (because we all know it isn’t guns that kill, it’s bad people), but (even though we all know it’s pitbulls that kill, whether their owners are good or bad), won’t take the simple step of reducing harm to our citizenry, especially children, their easiest prey, by banning high-risk dogs

    Reply
  20. Darrin Stephens says:

    Toronto dog bites fell after pit bull ban
    Patrick Cain, Global News : Monday, November 14, 2011 02:12 PM

    The number of dog bites reported in Toronto has fallen since a ban on pit bulls took effect in 2005, public health statistics show.

    A total of 486 bites were recorded in 2005. That number fell generally in the six years following, to 379 in 2010.

    Provincial laws that banned ‘pit bulls,’ defined as pit bulls, Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and dogs resembling them took effect in August 2005. Existing dogs were required to be sterilized, and leashed and muzzled in public.

    Bites in Toronto blamed on the four affected breeds fell sharply, from 71 in 2005 to only six in 2010. This accounts for most of the reduction in total bites.

    The fall in bites blamed on the four breeds tracks a reduction in the dogs themselves, data obtained separately by globalnews dot ca under access-to-information laws shows. Some 1,411 Toronto dogs were in the four breeds in 2008, as opposed to 798 in mid-2011.

    “It is encouraging to hear that fewer people are victimized by dangerous dogs,” Ontario Attorney-General John Gerretson said in a statement.

    About 1,000 Ontario pit bulls have been put down since the ban took effect.

    With totals of Toronto dogs by breed and ten years of bite data, it is possible to see which dogs are most likely to bite in Toronto based on a ratio between dogs of a given breed in 2011 and reported bites over the decade between 2000 and 2010. Below are the 20 most bite-prone dogs. The four prohibited breeds all appear in the top eight slots

    Reply
  21. Darrin Stephens says:

    Council Bluffs, Iowa.
    Pit bulls are not only problematic in large cities; they threaten mid-sized cities and small towns as well. Located in the heartland, Council Bluffs, Iowa has about 60,000 citizens.

    After a series of devastating attacks, beginning in 2003, Council Bluffs joined over 600 U.S. cities and began regulating pit bulls.

    The results of the Council Bluffs pit bull ban, which began January 1, 2005, show the positive effects such legislation can have on public safety in just a few years time:1.

    Council Bluffs: Pit Bull Bite Statistics.

    Year Pit Bull Bites % of All Bites.
    2004 29 23%.
    2005 12 10% (year ban enacted).
    2006 6 4%.
    2007 2 2%.
    2008 0 0%.
    2009 0 0%.
    2010 1 1%.
    2011 0 0%.

    Reply
  22. Darrin Stephens says:

    From the CDC (1998 report, page 4):

    “Despite these limitations and concerns
    (about identifying the exact ‘breed’ of pit bull type dog responsible for a
    killing), the data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted
    for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998.

    It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the
    United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a
    breed-specific problem with fatalities.”
    ****************************************************************
    In June 2013, after a Bay Area child was killed by a family pit bull, San Francisco Animal Care and Control cited the decrease in pit bull bites and euthanasia since the adoption of a 2005 pit bull law.

    After 12-year-old Nicholas Faibish was fatally mauled by his family’s pit bulls, the city adopted a mandatory spay-neuter law for the breed. The reasoning was that fixed dogs tend to be calmer and better socialized.

    Since then, San Francisco has impounded 14 percent fewer pit bulls and euthanized 29 percent fewer – which is a “significant decrease,” said Rebecca Katz, director of the city’s Animal Care and Control department.

    Another significant indicator, she said, is that there have been 28 pit bull bites reported in the past three years – and 1,229 bites by other breeds during the same period. In the three-year period before that, there were 45 pit bull bites and 907 incidents involving other breeds.

    Results of mandatory breed-specific S/N in SF: success in San Francisco, where in just eight years there was a 49% decline in the number of pit-bulls impounded, a 23% decline in the number of pit-bulls euthanized, and an 81% decline in the number of pit-bulls involved in fatal and disfiguring attacks.

    When the City of Auburn debated enacting a pit bull law in January 2010, Sgt. Bill Herndon of the San Francisco Police Department weighed in about the success of San Francisco’s 2005 pit bull law:

    “Since requiring all pit bulls to be neutered, they say they are finding fewer pit bulls involved in biting incidents.

    Sgt. Bill Herndon, of the San Francisco Police Department’s vicious dog unit, said the numbers and severity of pit bull attacks are down since San Francisco enacted an ordinance in 2005 after the mauling death of 12-year-old Nicholas Faibish.
    “The number of complaints of mean pit bulls has dropped dramatically,” Herndon said.

    San Francisco’s animal control department reports more than 30 percent fewer pit bulls at the shelter or being euthanized.”
    ****************************************************************
    Ed Boks, Executive director, Yavapai Humane Society (responsible Jan 2004 as director City Center for Animal Care & Control in NYC for trying to rename pit bulls New Yorkies; is pb owner)

    Pit bull type dogs represent 3000% the actuarial risk compared to other types of dogs.
    Insurance companies will have calculated the risks the other listed breeds represent based on what they’ve had to pay out through the years.

    This isn’t ‘prejudice’, this is cold statistical reality. Actuarial realities don’t yield to sentiment or a feeling of entitlement — they just are what they are

    Reply
  23. Darrin Stephens says:

    SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA in LA
    Lancaster’s dog ordinance is cited in helping to drive down gang crime January 21, 2010

    A Lancaster ordinance imposing stiff penalties on owners of “potentially dangerous” and “vicious” dogs is reaping positive results, and may have even helped to drive down gang crime in the city, officials said.

    The law, adopted in January 2009, was primarily aimed at preventing gang members from using dogs, such as pit bulls and Rottweilers, to bully people or cause physical harm, officials said.
    City officials said that 1,138 pit bulls and Rottweilers were impounded last year by the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control. Of those, 362 were voluntarily surrendered by their owners in response to Lancaster’s ordinance.

    “A year ago, this city was overrun with individuals — namely, gang members — who routinely used pit bulls and other potentially vicious dogs as tools of intimidation and violence,” Lancaster Mayor R. Rex Parris said in a statement.

    “These individuals delighted in the danger these animals posed to our residents, often walking them without leashes and allowing them to run rampant through our neighborhoods and parks. Today, more than 1,100 of these animals have been removed from our city, along with the fear they create. Lancaster is now a great deal safer because of it.”

    Parris believes there is a correlation between the results of the dog ordinance and a drop in the city’s gang crime rate. Lancaster’s violent gang crime, which includes homicide, rape, robbery and aggravated assault, fell by 45% last year, and there was a drop in overall gang crime by 41%, Parris said, citing statistics from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.

    Under the dog ordinance, a hearing officer can deem a dog to be potentially dangerous, for example, if the animal becomes aggressive when unprovoked.

    The dog can be impounded, and the owner must have it properly licensed, implanted with a microchip and vaccinated at his own cost before the animal’s release.
    Dogs deemed to be vicious can be destroyed if they are determined to be a significant threat to public safety, according to the ordinance.

    It also requires owners of potentially dangerous dogs to ensure proper leashing and muzzling, complete a dog obedience training course, spay or neuter their animals, and pay a fine of up to $500 for each offense.

    Owners of dogs deemed to be vicious face fines of up to $1,000 per offense, and they could be prevented from possessing any dog for up to three years.

    Though city officials praise the dog law, some residents continue to challenge its fairness. They argue that “breed-specific” legislation is an injustice to canines, because irresponsible owners are to blame for a dog’s behavior, not the dog.

    Reply
  24. Darrin Stephens says:

    Over 600 Cities, Towns & Counties in the US currently have BSL against pit bull type dogs.

    Animal Planet

    Pit Bulls Already Banned in a Dozen Countries

    By Terrence McCoy Wed., Feb. 27 2013

    Pit bulls have been banned the world over as well as 0ver 600 cities, towns and counties in the US alone.

    The prohibition on the pit bull type dog wouldn’t be anything unusual.

    In 1989, Miami may have been one of the first communities to ban pit bulls — but it sure hasn’t been the last, raising questions as to whether it’s only a matter of time before every municipality imposes some sort of regulation on the animal.

    Already, more than a dozen countries have banned pit bulls, making it, quite possibly, the most regulated and feared dog in the canine world.

    Composed from various online resources, here’s a breakdown of the bans and regulations:

    Countries that have enacted regulation on pit bulls (or some deviation):

    **In 1991, Singapore prohibited the entry of pit bulls into the country.

    **In 1993, the Netherlands banned pit bulls.

    **In 1997, Poland enacted legislation enforcing pit bull owners to display “clear warning signs” and keep the animal behind reinforced fencing.

    **In 2000, France banned pit bulls. The goal was to let the breed “die out.”

    **In 2001, Germany banned pit bulls.

    **In 2001, Puerto Rico banned pit bulls.

    **In 2003, New Zealand banned the importation of pit bulls.

    **In 2004, Italy banned pit bulls.

    **In 2009, Australia prohibited the imports of pit bulls.

    **In 2009, Ecuador banned pit bulls as pets.

    **In 2010, Denmark banned pit bulls and pit bull breeding.

    **In 2014, Venezuela will ban pit bulls.

    Nationwide, a ban on pit bulls is also far from exceptional.

    Cities that have laid down some sort of legislation:

    Sioux City, Iowa

    Council Bluffs, Iowa

    Independence, Missouri

    Royal City, Washington

    Denver, Colorado

    Springfield, Missouri

    Youngstown, Ohio;

    Melvindale, Michigan

    Livingston County, Michigan.

    Reply
  25. Darrin Stephens says:

    Last Summer, Riverside County supervisors unanimously passed an ordinance requiring pit bulls older than 4 months in unincorporated areas of the county to be spayed or neutered. Registered breeders, law enforcement and therapy dogs are exempt from the ordinance, which takes effect next month.

    In 2010, San Bernardino County supervisors passed a similar ordinance for unincorporated areas of the county, such as Mentone. Owners of non-sterilized pit bulls can be fined $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second and $300 for subsequent offenses.

    Highland and Yucaipa adopted the same ordinance, according to Brian Cronin, chief of the county’s animal control division, which handles animal control in those two cities.

    The San Bernardino County ordinance said pit bull breeds account for about 20 percent of the dogs at animal shelters and are put down more often than any other breed.

    Cronin emailed figures showing the county’s intake of pit bulls has decreased 28 percent since the ordinance took effect and that euthanization rates have dropped by 56 percent.

    In August 2011, San Bernardino County Animal Care and Control, which oversees unincorporated areas and Highland and Yucaipa, reported a 9.6 decrease in dog bites after enacting a pit bull sterilization law in 2010.

    The law, approved unanimously by the Board of Supervisors last week, expands upon an ordinance approved last year that requires pit bull owners to spay or neuter their pets.

    Supervisor Neil Derry introduced the original proposal in response to an increasing number of attacks by pit bulls in recent years that resulted in four deaths — two of them young children — in the last five years.

    The county saw a 9.6 percent decrease in dog bites in the year since the spay/neuter program was instituted, said Brian Cronin, the county’s animal care and control division chief.

    The ordinance was passed to reduce the number of dogs destroyed at taxpayer expense, Cronin said.

    HAS MANDATORY S/N FOR PITS WORKED FOR SAN BERNARDINO, CA?
    YES!!

    The following is the six (6) year trend for Pit Bull admissions and euthanasia of this specific type/breed of dog in County owned or operated animal shelter facilities:

    FY 2007-08 Admissions 1,623 Euthanized 1,276 (78.6% of intake)

    FY 2008-09 Admissions 1,705 Euthanized 1,321 (77.4%) of intake)

    FY 2009-10 Admissions 2,066 Euthanized 1,593 (77.1% of intake)

    FY 2010-11 Admissions 2,523 Euthanized 1,632 (64.6% of intake)

    FY 2011-12 Admissions 2,265 Euthanized 1,085 (47.9% of intake)

    FY 2012-13 Admissions 1,815 Euthanized 727 (40% of intake)

    You will note, the percentage of Pit Bull type dogs euthanized has been significantly reduced since the implementation of the San Bernardino County Mandatory Pit Bull sterilization ordinance.

    The ordinance was implemented in fiscal year 2010-11 in which Pit Bull admissions hit an all time high of 2,523. Last year Pit Bull admissions were at 1,815.

    This is a significant reduction in admissions for this type of dog after the ordinance was passed. You can not argue that spay/neuter hasn’t had a positive impact

    Reply
    • Ashleigh says:

      It would be great if owners of all dog breeds, not just pit bulls, and cats too were required to spay and neuter their pets.

      Reply
      • StolenSadie says:

        if they do that then no one would ever have an animal again because there would be no dogs left to breed to make for people in later years so dogs would go extinct irresponsible owners maybe but not everyone should have to spay and neuter their pets especially when spay and neutering and animal to soon can cause serious health conditions later on

        Reply
  26. Darrin Stephens says:

    “The LA Times (and other advocates) are fond of mentioning that many pit bulls live without incident as gentle pets. These advocates ignore more compelling facts.

    321 humans have been killed or disfigured by dogs during calendar year 2013; 316 of those attacks were by pit bulls.

    16 of the attacks have caused human fatalities, 15 of those deaths were caused by pit bulls.***.

    California leads the nation in fatal pit bull attacks with 25% of the nation’s total.

    To omit this essential information in an editorial opinion on pit bulls is tantamount to a lie of omission.”

    Pit Bulls Lead ‘Bite’ Counts Across U.S. Cities and Counties.
    Dog Biting Incidents: 2008 to 2012.

    Animal control departments in at least 25 U.S. states report that pit bulls are biting more than all other dog breeds. These states include: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin.

    The oft-quoted myth by pro-pit bull groups that pit bulls “do not bite more than other breeds” is categorically false. In addition to leading bite counts, the pit bull bite is also the most damaging, inflicting permanent and disfiguring injury.

    Reply
  27. Darrin Stephens says:

    9/10/2013

    Bites by pit bulls have dropped dramatically since 2004
    Hearing on Alix’s leash law violation put off to Sept. 20

    PAWTUCKET – The city has seen a dramatic decline in the number of attacks by pit bulls since a 2004 ban on the breed went into effect, according to data released by local officials.

    In response to an open records request by The Breeze, the Pawtucket Police Department and Pawtucket Animal Control, through City Solicitor Frank Milos, provided documents showing just how rarely pit bulls have attacked people or animals in the city since the ban was enacted.

    For the four years leading up to the ban, from 2000 to 2003, officers responded to 71 incidents of biting or scratching involving pit bulls in Pawtucket, a majority of those, 51, involving attacks on people.!

    In the 10 years since the ban was put in place, police responded to 23 total attacks involving pit bulls, with only 13 of those involving attacks on people.

    For three years, 2008, 2010, and 2012, there were no attacks by pit bulls reported, according to the information provided by the city.

    The following are the 71 pit bulls attacks separated out by year for the four years before Pawtucket’s pit bull ban went into effect:

    * 2000 – 20 incidents, 18 involving attacks on people, two involving other animals.

    * 2001 – 14 incidents, nine involving attacks on people, five on animals.

    * 2002 – 17 incidents, 14 involving attacks on people, three on animals.

    * 2003 – 20 incidents, 11 involving attacks on people, nine on animals.

    The following are the 23 pit bull attacks in the city for the 10 years since Pawtucket’s pit bull ban was unanimously approved by the Rhode Island General Assembly:

    * 2004 – Eight incidents, five involving attacks on people, three involving attacks on other animals.

    * 2005 – One incident involving a person being attacked.

    * 2006 – Three incidents, one involving an attack on a person, two on animals.

    * 2007 – Four incidents, one involving an attack on a person, three on animals.

    * 2008 – No incidents.

    * 2009 – Two incidents, both involving attacks on people.

    * 2010 – No incidents.

    * 2011 – Two incidents, both involving attacks on people.

    * 2012 – No incidents.

    * 2013 – Three incidents, one involving an attack on a person, two on animals.

    John Holmes, Pawtucket’s veteran animal control officer and the key proponent of the 2004 ban, said the numbers before and after 2004 “speak for themselves.”

    “The law’s worked,” he said. “We didn’t put this law in to destroy pit bulls, in fact, quite the opposite.”

    The last serious pit bull attack in Pawtucket was the day the bill was signed into law, said Holmes. Residents have been safer because of the ban, he said.

    “Public safety has always been the issue,” he said. “They’re just missing so much of what this is all about. We’re going backward here.”

    Reply
  28. Darrin Stephens says:

    Wichita, Kansas

    In January 2009, the Wichita Department of Environmental Services released a number of pit bull statistics. The figures are based upon the Wichita Animal Control department’s investigation of 733 dog bites in 2008.

    Included in the data are pit bulls encountered by the Wichita Police Department. In the 1-year period, 95% of police encounters with aggressive dogs were pit bulls.

    The report also showed that the percentage of pit bull encounters had increased from 66% in 2004 to 95% in 2008. Subsequently, four months after the release of this data, the City of Wichita enacted a mandatory pit bull sterilization law.

    55% of all dogs deemed dangerous were pit bulls (41 pit bull dogs deemed dangerous).

    34% of attacks and bites involved pit bull dogs (246 pit bull attacks/bites).

    28% of dogs found running at large were pit bulls (1,279 pit bulls found running loose).

    25% of dogs impounded were pit bulls dogs (1,575 pit bulls impounded).

    37% of all dogs euthanized were pit bull dogs (1,255 pit bulls euthanized).

    23% of dog complaints involved pit bull dogs (2,523 complaints involved pit bull dogs).

    Reply
  29. Darrin Stephens says:

    In a discussion of the Denver ban, Assistant City Attorney Kory Nelson recently told the San Francisco Chronicle that:

    “Since 1989, when that city instituted a pit bull ban, ‘we haven’t had one serious pit bull attack,’ said Kory Nelson, a Denver assistant city attorney. His city’s assertion that ‘pit bulls are more dangerous than other breeds of dog’ has withstood legal challenges, he said.

    ‘We were able to prove there’s a difference between pit bulls and other breeds of dogs that make pit bulls more dangerous,’ he said.”

    Sources: Denver Post
    ***************************************************
    Toronto:

    In a November 2011, public health statistics published by Global Toronto showed that pit bull bites dropped dramatically after Ontario adopted the Dog Owners Liability Act in 2005, an act that banned pit bulls:

    The number of dog bites reported in Toronto has fallen since a ban on pit bulls took effect in 2005, public health statistics show.

    A total of 486 bites were recorded in 2005. That number fell generally in the six years following, to 379 in 2010.

    Provincial laws that banned ‘pit bulls,’ defined as pit bulls, Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and dogs resembling them took effect in August 2005. Existing dogs were required to be sterilized, and leashed and muzzled in public.

    Bites in Toronto blamed on the four affected breeds fell sharply, from 71 in 2005 to only six in 2010. This accounts for most of the reduction in total bites.
    ***************************************************

    Salina, KS

    Rose Base, director of the Salina Animal Shelter who lobbied for the ordinance, told the Salina Journal:

    The ordinance has made a difference, she said. Records at the Salina Animal Shelter indicate there were 24 reported pit bull bites in 2003 and 2004, and only five since — none from 2009 to present.

    Salina has 62 registered pit bulls, Base said. Before the ordinance she guessed there were “close to 300.” Since the first of this year three of the registered pit bulls have died of old age.

    “We definitely haven’t had the severity of bites that we had in the past,” Base said. “Our community has been somewhat safer because of the law that was passed
    ***************************************************
    Prince George’s County, MD
    Prince George’s County passed a pit bull ban in 1996. In August 2009, Rodney Taylor, associate director of the county’s Animal Management Group, said that the number of pit bull biting incidents has fallen:

    “Taylor said that during the first five to seven years of the ban, animal control officials would encounter an average of 1,200 pit bulls a year but that in recent years that figure has dropped by about half. According to county statistics, 36 pit bull bites, out of 619 total dog bites, were recorded in 2008, down from 95 pit bull bites, out of a total of 853, in 1996.”
    ***************************************************
    Salina KS (a second article)

    Note that they admit that the pit bull ban did not reduce the number of bites, but it did reduce the severity of bites reported by all breeds. Proof that when pit bull deniers find a jurisdiction that banned pit bulls, but reported no decrease in overall bites, is a moot point. Its death and dismemberment we are focusing on, not bite counts.

    In the monthly city newsletter, In Touch, published in September 2006, the City of Salina reported that the pit bull ban adopted in 2005 significantly reduced pit bull biting incidents in just a 12 month period.

    The number of pit bull bites depicted in the “Salina Pit Bull Bites Reported” graph shows 2002 with 13 pit bull bites, 2003 with 11 pit bull bites, 2004 with 15 pit bull bites and 2005 with only one bite. The newsletter notes that “animal bites reported have remained constant, but the severity of bites have decreased dramatically” since the enactment of the pit bull ban

    Reply
  30. Darrin Stephens says:

    Springfield, MO

    In April 2008, the Springfield-Greene County Health Department released data to a local TV station – following the City of Springfield’s adoption of a 2006 pit bull ban:

    “The Springfield-Greene County Health Department reports that dog bites and vicious dog complaints are declining since the implementation of the Pit Bull Ordinance in the City of Springfield two years ago. In 2005 the health department fielded 18 vicious dog complaints, but only eight in 2007. Bites were down from 102 in 2005 to 87 in 2007.”

    “The ordinance, which requires pit bull owners to register their dogs annually, has also resulted in fewer pit bull dogs being impounded at the Springfield Animal Shelter.

    In 2005 there were 502 pit bull and pit bull mixes impounded, compared to only 252 in 2007.

    According to statistics taken from the Springfield-Greene County Health Department, as reported in the News-Leader March 12, for the three-year period beginning in 2004, there were 42 “vicious” animal attacks recorded in the jurisdiction covered.

    After passing the local ordinance banning or strictly controlling the ownership of pit bull or pit bull types, the number of attacks has dropped dramatically.

    For the five-year period from 2007-2011, there was a total of 14.

    “Because we are impounding fewer pit bulls, we’ve also seen overcrowding in our shelter subside,” says assistant director Clay Goddard. “It is the natural tendency of pit bulls to fight, so our animal control staff are forced to segregate them in individual pens.

    When we have several pit bulls in the shelter simultaneously, this severely limits space for other dogs.”
    ***************************************************
    Washington

    In 2008, the City of Wapato passed an ordinance that bans new pit bulls, rottweilers and mastiffs. Nine months after its adoption, in March 2009, Wapato Police Chief Richard Sanchez reported successful results:

    “Nine months into the ban and police calls about vicious dogs have been cut in half. The Wapato Police tell Action News they’ve gone from 18 reports in January, February and March of last year to seven so far in ’09. “Seven calls in three months… that’s nothing,” says Chief Richard Sanchez, Wapato Police Department.

    Chief Sanchez credits local cooperation for the decline of dangerous dogs.”
    ***************************************************
    Rhode Island

    When the City of Woonsocket was debating a pit bull ordinance in June 2009, the animal control supervisor in Pawtucket, John Holmes, spoke about the enormous success of Pawtucket’s 2003 pit bull ban:

    “Holmes says he predicted that it would take two years for Pawtucket to experience the full benefit of the law after it was passed, but the results were actually apparent in half the time.

    “It’s working absolutely fantastic,” said Holmes. “We have not had a pit bull maiming in the city since December of 2004.”

    Holmes says the law also capped the number of legal pit bulls in Pawtucket to about 70 animals.”

    In July 2013, Pawtucket Mayor Donald Grebien and City Council President David Moran sent a joint letter to Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee asking that he reject a statewide anti-BSL measure before him.

    While they agree that some pit bulls can make good pets, said Moran and Grebien, “the number and severity of pit bull attacks against people and other animals in the early 2000s required us to take the action we did.”

    Prior to the 2004 city ordinance, Pawtucket Animal Control officers responded to many calls about serious pit bull attacks against people and animals, according to the letter. Two of the worst cases involved a nine-month pregnant woman and a child.

    While proponents of the bill argue that breed-specific bans don’t work, said Grebien and Moran, “the results in Pawtucket dramatically prove that they do work.”

    In 2003, the year before the local ban on pit bulls went into effect, 135 pit bulls, all from Pawtucket, were taken in at the Pawtucket Animal Control Shelter for a variety of health and safety reasons, with 48 of those dogs needing to be put down.

    In 2012, 72 pit bulls were taken in, only 41 from Pawtucket, with only six needing to be euthanized, according to the two officials.
    “That’s a tremendous improvement,” they state in their letter.
    ***************************************************
    Per section 8-55 of Denvers pit bull ban:

    A pit bull, is defined as any dog that is an APBT, Am Staf Terrier, Staff Bull Terrier, or any dog displaying the majority of physical traits of anyone (1) or more of the above breeds, or any dog exhibiting those distinguishing characteristics which substantially conform to the standards set by the AKC or UKC for any of the above breed.

    Over the course of 22 years, the Denver ban has withstood numerous battles in state and federal courts. It has been used as a model for over 600 USA cities that legislate pit bulls, as well as US Navy, Air Force, Marine and Army bases ( so much for Sgt Stubby).

    without it, we’d see just what we see in Miss E’s lame replies. Every pit owner would claim their land shark was anything but a pit bull.

    Miami Dade county voted 66% to keep their pit bull ban, just as it is worded, last year.

    Reply
  31. Darrin Stephens says:

    Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to May.25, 2013.

    By compiling U.S. and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2013, Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, shows the breeds most responsible for serious injury and death.

    Study highlights

    Pit bull type dogs make up only 6% of all dogs in the USA.

    The combination of Pit Bulls, rottweilers, their close mixes and wolf hybrids and other Pit Bull Type Dogs:

    84% of attacks that induce bodily harm.

    75% of attacks to children.

    87% of attack to adults.

    72% of attacks that result in fatalities.

    80% that result in maiming

    Reply
  32. Darrin Stephens says:

    The Myth:
    “There’s no such breed as a pit bull.” “Pit bulls aren’t a breed; they are just a ‘type’ of dog.”

    The Reality:
    The term “pit bull” in lower-case letters refers to three closely-related breeds. The original breed was the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, a dog bred for pit fighting in the 18th and 19th centuries in the UK.

    After importation to the U.S. in the late 19th century, they continued to be used for fighting, but were bred to be taller and heavier.

    These larger cousins were then registered in the UKC as “American Pit Bull Terriers” (1898) and in the AKC as the “American Staffordshire Terrier” (1936). Note that these are identical breeds under two different names, and many individuals hold conformation championships in both registries.

    In addition, some of the original, smaller dogs were reimported from the UK and were recognized in the AKC as the original “Staffordshire Bull Terriers” (1935).

    A recent ASPCA study revealed that 93% of shelter workers were able to properly identify a “pit bull,” meaning one of the three closely-related (or identical) breeds above (click here to see the study).

    The American Pit Bull Terrier is actually one of the purest and oldest of registered breeds. The second-largest national kennel club in the world, the UKC, was originally founded in 1898 for the express purposed of registering fighting pit bulls.

    For approximately the first 50 years, a pit bull not only had to be purebred, but had to win 3 dog fights in order to be registered with the UKC. Today, these dogs’ descendants compete to win prizes in conformation, weight pull, and other sports.
    Thousands have earned the title of UKC Conformation Champion.

    Verdict: The three “pit bull” breeds, including the American Pit Bull Terrier, are just as purebred as St. Bernards, Schnauzers or Dalmatians.

    Reply
  33. Darrin Stephens says:

    IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO IDENTIFY A PIT BULL

    The Myth:
    No one can correctly identify a pit bull. Fighting breed advocates claim that most people shown a collage of dog photos online can’t tell which one is the pit bull.

    The Reality:
    Many pit bull advocate groups post a collage of dog pictures online and ask the public to “identify the pit bull”.

    What the public does not know is that the majority of dogs pictured are shot from camera angles deliberately designed to mislead. In addition, they show heads only, so size cannot be considered—this would not be the case when seeing the dog in real life.

    They also feature many rare breeds that are related to pit bulls, but which are extremely uncommon in the United States (e.g., the Dogue de Bordeaux, Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldog, and Ca de Bou).

    And one of the dog breeds that is included is an American Staffordshire Terrier which is the exact same breed as the American Pit Bull Terrier, but registered with another organization. Click here for an in-depth, illustrated article about this misleading test.

    It should also be noted that many humane societies offer discounts on spaying/neutering of pit bulls. If pit bulls are so difficult to identify, then how do shelter workers identify who qualifies for the discount?

    There are also many pit bull rescues with the term “pit bull” in the organization name. How do these groups know which dogs to rescue?

    Reply
  34. Darrin Stephens says:

    “OTHER BREEDS BITE MORE OFTEN THAN PIT BULLS”

    The Myth:
    Fighting breed advocates often erroneously claim that other breeds (Chihuahuas, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, etc.) bite, and even kill, more often than fighting breeds.

    The Reality:
    The statistics vary depending on breed popularity in a particular area. However, Chicago IL, Las Vegas NV, and New York NY all verified that pit bulls were the #1 breed for reported bites in 2013.

    We believe that the focus shouldn’t be on the number of bites, but on the severity as well as the fatalities. Dog “bite” victims usually endure a brief attack lasting seconds, while dog “mauling” victims often endure lengthy attacks should they survive.

    One of the longest dog attacks on record was in Cary, Illinois and involved 6 peopled being mauled for an hour and half total. Nationwide, pit bulls rank as the #1 breed whose attack is likely to result in the victim’s death.

    Unfortunately, many communities do not record the severity of reported bites. Both a single shallow puncture from a Chihuahua and a fatal mauling by a 100 lb. Cane Corso are officially reported as a “bite.”

    It is important to understand that fighting breeds have a completely different bite profiles than most other breeds. They are bred to bite down, clamp and shake, causing severe tissue damage.

    Many attacks can go on for 10-30 minutes, even as passers-by try in vain to remove the attacking dog by choking it, kicking it, beating it with shovels or baseball bats.

    There are cases of fighting breeds continuing to maul their victim even after the police have shot the dog multiple times at point-blank range.

    Reply
  35. Darrin Stephens says:

    No matter what you identify them as or what you choose to call them if any dog has pit bull genetics in it then the outcome of said genetics are always the same, death, mauling’s, crippled and disfigured victims when their DNA is expressed into reality which it invariably will be the case.

    So you can call them something else to protect them but they are still pit mixes who are what they are and do what they do, who as a result have no right to ever come into human contact.

    Pit bull or Pit bull cross, same difference same outcome same reality as to what they are.

    And all Pit bulls or restricted dogs including pit bull crosses by law should have leashes and Muzzles which they never have and all to often you seem them running around as such unmuzzled, this is an even greater problem then them being unleashed and that is bad enough.

    Certain breeds like Pit bulls etc.are fundamentally evil in nature and action and do not deserve the freedom of action to carry out their DNA.

    The point is, other dogs bite, Pit bulls and Pit bull crosses and others like mastiffs, Rotts etc. attack and kill and maim, that is the big difference in the outcome and should result in a completely different attitude towards these dogs and why they should be banned outright. The stats are very clear and accurate and show this reality even if you want to put your head in the sand, it still is what it is.

    2/3 of the fatalities by pit bull type dogs in 2013 were the actual family members of the pit bull who had been raised from a pup in optimal conditions, these are facts that are documented.

    Reply
  36. Darrin Stephens says:

    The pit bull drooler’s don’t get it, they are in effect demanding that they be able to walk around with a loaded.

    hand gun, round chambered, safety off with a hair trigger & that we all smile when they point it at us.

    Pit bulls or Pit bull cross, same difference, same outcome, same reality as to what they are.

    And all Pit bulls or restricted dogs including pit bull crosses by law should have leashes and Muzzles which they almost never have, this should become the law everywhere, and all to often you see them running around as such unmuzzled, this is an even greater problem then them being unleashed.

    Pit bulls and Pit bull crosses and others like mastiffs, Rotts etc. attack and kill and maim while normal dogs bite, that is the big difference in the outcome and should result in a completely different attitude towards these dogs and why they should be banned outright.

    The stats are very clear and accurate and show this reality even if you want to put your head in the sand, it still is what it is.

    Certain breeds like Pit bulls etc.are fundamentally evil in nature and action and do not deserve the freedom of action to carry out their DNA.

    “Pit bulls are different; they’re like wild animals,” says Alan Beck, director for the Center for the Human Animal Bond at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, West Lafayette, IN. “They’re not suited for an urban environment. I believe we should open our eyes and take a realistic approach to pit bulls.”

    A 1993 Toronto study found pit bulls accounted for 1 percent of licensed dogs but 4 percent of bites. More ominous is a 2000 study by the Centers for Disease Control looking at 20 years of data on fatal dog attacks in the U.S.

    Of 238 such incidents in which the breed of the attacking dog was reported, “pit bull-type dogs” were involved in 32 percent of them while being 1% of the population.

    Pit Bulls should be banned from inside city limits anywhere.

    Reply
  37. Darrin Stephens says:

    A pit bull BSL works EVERYWHERE it is useful in almost eliminating all serious dog attacks that maim, disfigure, dismember, maul, cripple.
    or kill, this is a simply proven fact in all cases.The number of pit bulls is dramatically reduced as are the numbers of them put to death.

    The need to have BSL is to have a preemptive capability to avoid a pit bull attack from happening due to it’s extremely savage consequences.

    It is enacted against all pit bulls as they all have the genetic DNA propensity to carry out these horrific attacks that are non existent in 99% of all other breeds, ban the breed and you ban the deed, simple as that.

    Dealing with an attack after the fact is simply not acceptable due to the horrific nature of said attacks.!

    With any other breed other then Rottweiler’s, wolf hybrids and Akita’s and a few others in very small numbers it is not a naturally genetic reality for them to carry out such horrifying attacks.

    Hence they need to be dealt with in an aggressive reactive modality where all of the breed are not looked on as one but rather based on the actions of the individual misbehaving dog.

    This can be done in a very aggressive proactive manner so that as soon as a dog like a lab lets say starts behaving inappropriately severe consequences can be brought to bare on the owner and their dog in an escalating manner as needed to deal with a situation that has developed.

    This duel track approach can deal with the pits issue as other normal dog breeds can be dealt with as well so vicious dogs of other mainstream breeds are also held accountable for their actions.

    There should be mandatory Spay/Neuter programs for all breeds but clearly the one that needs it the most and where the most change would be effected would be with the Pit Bull type dog

    Reply
  38. Darrin Stephens says:

    Simply put, border collies do not herd sheep because they are raised on sheep farms; rather, they are raised on sheep farms because they herd. In addition pointers point, retrievers retrieve, and mastiffs guard, all because those traits are part of their breed expectations, meaning strong and continuous selection in the underlying breeding program ”

    Simply put Pit bulls do not attack because they are raised with dog fighters and drug dealers, dog fighters and drug dealers use pit bulls because they attack!

    It is their nature, their genetic truth and reality.!!

    It is not how you raise them rather it is simply what they are.!!

    Just like sled dogs run and pull, it is just their nature.!

    A pit bull type dog is what it is and does what it is.You can no more alter it genetic makeup then you can a collies to herd, a hounds to track, a retriever’s to retrieve, a labs to swim, a pointers to point, a sled dog to run and pull.

    They do what they are and a pit bull type dog is a mauling violent killer that has been bred to be a land shark, nothing you do can change that, even if you have them from birth.

    No matter if you love them, or how you nurture, train, rehabilitate, raise them optimally as normal dogs from birth, you can not change their Genetic reality to Kill, Maul, Maim, Disfigure, Dismember, cause Life Flights or trips to the Intensive Care Unit.

    For over 600 years the current pit bull type dog was brought into being through careful selective genetic breeding to create the most violent murderous fighting dog possible.

    Reply
  39. Darrin Stephens says:

    Sadly one does not even have to search for the many attacks of these savage mutant undog’s on humans and pets, there are literally hundreds of new incidents every day carried out by these disgusting creatures, here is another.

    These are all major daily newspapers and network TV station accurate factual reports with direct access to Doctors, ER’s Animal control officers, Police, the victims family, witnesses, the guilty pit nutters, all in news reports from major city newspapers and TV stations, as legit therefore as it possibly can be.

    There is only one breed that has every been or is a threat to public safety and that is the pit bull, the sooner they are exterminated the sooner tragic attacks like the one below will be ended.

    Ban the breed and end the deed

    Dogs are not humans, there is every reason to be threatened by a pit bull just because of what it is, no different then it would be to feel threatened by ANY bear, lion, tiger, wolverine, cobra etc. that you encountered, if they charged you then there would be justification to kill any of them if you were carrying, same thing with a pit bull, any pit pit bull.

    You can no more be biased or prejudiced against any pit bull then you can be so against any bear, lion, tiger, wolverine, cobra etc. so that is an absurd argument on the part of the nutters.

    That 6% of the dog population carries out 70%+ of the killings, mauling, crippling, disfiguring and dismembering attacks to such a disproportionate extent speaks for itself and to the genetic truth and reality that exists in any pit bull type dog, it is what it is and does what is in it’s DNA.This has been breed into them over 600 years and is their truth, they must therefore become extinct.

    Any other dog will bite and run giving you a few stitches, a pit bull will not stop till you are DEAD.What about that do you not understand, the difference between another dog’s bite and a pit bulls mauling and dismembering, disfiguring and killing.

    Reply
  40. Darrin Stephens says:

    My Legislation Proposal to be enacted by all states,
    cities and counties in the US & Canada.

    All dogs must be:
    Or all dangerous dogs must be:
    Or all dangerous molosser breeds, including pit bulls (Staffordshire bull terriers, American pit bull terriers, and any dog generally recognized as a pit bull or pit bull terrier and includes a dog of mixed breed with predominant pit bull or pit bull terrier characteristics), rottweilers, presa canarios, cane corsos, chow chows, Doberman pinschers, German shepherds, mastiffs, dogo argentinos, fila brasieros, and their mixes must be:

    * Licensed
    * Micro-chipped with any bite history in database
    * Insured: All dogs must be covered by mandatory liability insurance of $100,000 min. generic and $500,000 after a skin breaking bite with insurance companies based on actuarial statistic’s determining said rate.
    * Spayed/neutered (except for limited approved show dog breeders)
    * All breeds involved in any bite incident must be kenneled in a locked five-sided enclosure with concrete bottom.

    For all other dog owners language can be written that enclosure such as fences must be capable of containing your dog period, such generic language puts the onus on the owner, have the fines be so onerous that said owner will ensure this they make this so.

    1,000 the first time, double the second time and permanent confiscation the third time with a ban on said person from owning any dog within city limits, this will create an effective outcome directly or indirectly.
    * All dogs must be on leashes outside of home enclosure
    * All molosser breeds must also be muzzled outside of home enclosure

    * No transport of declared dangerous dogs for the purpose of re-homing. (Dangerous dogs must be dealt with where their history is known.)
    * All of the rules listed above also apply to rescues: rescued dogs must be licensed and subject to inspection.

    $1,000 fine for noncompliance
    Elimination of the one-bite rule in all of the 50 U.S. states
    Manslaughter charges for owner of dog that kills a human
    Felony charge for owner of dog that mauls human, dog, or other domestic animal.

    Reply
  41. Darrin Stephens says:

    13 People dead by dog attack in 2014
    Pit bull type dogs killed 11 of them.
    Eight of the dead are children.

    Stars indicate people killed by a ‘family’ pit bull – ones that had
    been raised and cherished as an indoor pet, ‘never showed aggression
    before’, and knew the victim.

    Child fatalities by pit bull type dog (7)
    Kara E. Hartrich, 4 years old, Bloomington, Illinois. **
    Je’vaeh Maye, 2 years old, Temple Texas.
    Braelynn Rayne Coulter, 3 years old, High Point, North Carolina. **
    Kenneth Santillan, 13 years old, Patterson, N.J.
    Raymane Camari Robinson, 2 years old, Killeen, TX
    Mia Derouen, 4 years old, Houma, Louisiana
    Christopher Malone, 3 years old, Thornton, MS **

    Adult fatalities by pit bull type (4):
    Christina Burleson, 43 years old, Houston, Texas.
    Klonda S. Richey, 57 years old, Dayton, Ohio.
    Nancy Newberry, 77 years old, Phoenix, AZ. **
    Unknown Woman, 85 years old, Kaufman, TX **

    That’s 85% killed by attacking pit bull type dogs.
    Pit Bull type dogs are only about 6% of the entire dog population.

    Summer Sears, 4 years old, Tallassee, AL by Husky/German Shepard Cross

    89-year-old Annabell Martin, Corona, CA. by her grandson’s three Rottweilers.**
    *******************************************************************
    33 People dead by dog attack in 2013.
    Pit bull type dogs killed thirty of them. sixteen of the twenty-nine dead are children.
    Stars indicate people killed by a ‘family’ pit bull – ones that had been raised and cherished as an indoor pet, ‘never showed aggression before’, and knew the victim.

    Child fatalities by pit bull type dog (16):
    Christian Gormanous – 4 yrs old Montgomery County, TX
    Isaiah Aguilar – 2 yrs old Sabinal, TX
    Ryan Maxwell – 7 yrs old ** Galesburg, IL.
    Dax Borchardt – 14 mos old ** Walworth, WI.
    Monica Laminack – 21 mos old ** Ellabelle, GA.
    Tyler Jett – 7 yrs old Callaway, FL.
    Jordyn Arndt – 4 yrs old ** Prairie City, IA.
    Beau Rutledge – 2 yrs old ** Fulton County, GA.
    Ayden Evans- 5 yrs old ** Jessieville, AR.
    Nephi Selu – 6 yrs old ** Union City, CA.
    Arianna Jolee Merrbach – 5 yrs old Effingham, SC.
    Daniel (surname as yet not revealed) – 2 yrs old (Gilbert, Arizona) **
    Samuel Eli Zamudio – 2 yrs old** Colton, CA
    Jordan Ryan– 5 yrs old Baker city, Oregon
    Levi Watson-Bradford-4 years old** White County, Arkansas
    Jah’niyah White – 2 years old ** Chicago, Ill

    Adult fatalities by pit bull type (13):
    Betty Todd – 65 yrs old ** Hodges, SC
    Elsie Grace – 91 yrs old ** Hemet, CA
    Claudia Gallardo – 38 yrs old Stockton, CA.
    Pamela Devitt – 63 yrs old Littlerock, CA.
    Carlton Freeman – 80 yrs old Harleyville, SC.
    Linda Oliver – 63 yrs old Dayton, TX.
    James Harding – 62 yrs old -Baltimore, MD
    chased into traffic by two attacking pit bulls
    Juan Campos – 96 yrs old Katy, Texas.
    Terry Douglass 56 years old. **Baltimore, MD
    Katherine Atkins-25 years old ** Kernersville, NC
    Nga Woodhead-65 years old Spanaway, WA.
    Joan Kappen, 75 years old Hot Springs Ark
    Michal Nelson, 41 years old Valencia County, New Mexico **

    (1 non-pit type killing) [Rachel Honabarger – 35 yrs old – mauled to death by her own GSD mix] Coshocton, OH.

    (1 husky-mix killing, unknown if the other half of the dog was pit bull) [Jordan Lee Reed – 5 yrs old] Kotzebue, AK

    (1 Shiba Inu killing) Mia Gibson – age 3 months, of Gibson, OH – mauled to death by family Shiba Inu.

    Three of the pit bull type dogs were BULL mastiffs, ie 40% pit-fighting bulldog.

    If 27 of 33 dead were killed by pit bull attack, that’s 82% dead by pit attack, 9% dead by ‘molosser’, 3% by some kind of GSD mix, 3% by a husky + possibly pit mix, 3% by Shiba Inu.

    If you count the pit-mix mastiffs as pit bull types, that’s 91% killed by attacking pit bull types. Pit types are only about 6% of the entire dog population.

    The man who ran into traffic kept pit bulls himself. He knew perfectly well what the two stranger pit bulls that were chasing him would do if they caught him, so he preferred to risk a swift death by oncoming car.

    534 maimed by pit type dogs 2013 (as of November.28).

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Comment Policy

HOME / ABOUT / CONTACT / JOIN THE TEAM / TERMS OF SERVICE / PRIVACY POLICY / COMMENT POLICY