Pit bulls are around 70 % of the breed shot most by police but all breeds and ages and sizes have been shot. It is not about pit bulls it is about police not knowing and using non-lethal control skills and frequently trespassing on someone's private property just because they think they can. If you think your dog is not at risk too...you are dead wrong. http://www.petsadviser.com/...

I just read todays article. The Police Officers broke the law by trespassing and shooting an innocent dog. These cops are out of control and need to be accountable for their actions. I am filing several complaints on them for breaking the law. You can go above Internal Affairs heads if need be.

I don't know why they all carry on about the Pits killed by BSL. There are hundreds of thousands more pits killed by not having BSL under the system they support.

These Nutters have supported mass genocide for years with their inaction and promotion of the breed.

Considering they grandfather Pitbulls out when BSL is introduced, she should be mad at those who deliberately break the LAW and bring an illegal dog into a BSL community knowing the dog may be destroyed by LAW. They will never take responsibility for the suffering they inflict on the Pitbull breed with their misguided advocacy.

They keep looking for someone to shift the blame onto, Pitbulls suffer because of them, not because of any other reason. Sadly, they don't have the ability to see the big picture or their own complicity in the suffering of the breed they supposedly love.

They are like drug addicts blaming everyone else for their addiction, until they take responsibility for the suffering they have created, the breed will continue to suffer.

Pit bulls, descendants of the bulldogs used in the nineteenth century for bull baiting and dogfighting, have been bred for “gameness,” and thus a lowered inhibition to aggression.

Most dogs fight as a last resort, when staring and growling fail. A pit bull is willing to fight with little or no provocation. Pit bulls seem to have a high tolerance for pain, making it possible for them to fight to the point of exhaustion.

Whereas guard dogs like German shepherds usually attempt to restrain those they perceive to be threats by biting and holding, pit bulls try to inflict the maximum amount of damage on an opponent. They bite, hold, shake, and tear. They don’t growl or assume an aggressive facial expression as warning.

They just attack. “They are often insensitive to behaviors that usually stop aggression,” one scientific review of the breed states.

“For example, dogs not bred for fighting usually display defeat in combat by rolling over and exposing a light underside. On several occasions, pit bulls have been reported to disembowel dogs offering this signal of submission.”

In epidemiological studies of dog bites, the pit bull is over represented among dogs known to have seriously injured or killed human beings, and, as a result, pit bulls have been banned or restricted in several Western European countries, China, and numerous cities and municipalities across North America. Pit bulls are dangerous.

Pit bulls are dangerous.

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.

Revelation 9:1 “And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key to the Pits.“

Revelation 9:2 “And he let loose the Pits; and there arose a smoke from the mouths of the Pits, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke from the Pits.“

Revelation 9:4 “And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only eat the loins of the wicked and slay their children with claw and gnashing teeth.”

American Temperament Test:
The ATTS test, was NOT created to evaluate dogs for “pet” suitability.

In 1977, Alfons Ertel designed the American Temperament Test in hopes of creating a uniform temperament test for dogs. Of the 75 million dogs that populate the U.S. today,20 about 933 are tested per year (0.001% of all dogs).

And he was a printer, NOT an animal behaviorist. He owned German shepherds and was involved in the sport called shutzhund, which involves training dogs in the same manner in which police dogs are trained.

The ATTS was intended to test working dogs for jobs such as police work and it favors bold animals, i.e., dogs that face danger head-on without hesitation or fear.

Courage was a desirable trait, timidity an undesirable trait. Thus, German shepherds did much better on the ATTS than did collies and other timid breeds.

In fact, 95% of the dogs that fail the ATTS do so because they “lack confidence,” e.g., when approaching a weirdly-dressed stranger.

Of course, pit bulls are going to score well on a test geared toward aggressive behavior because these monsters were bred for the purpose of fighting and killing other pit bulls and nothing deters them, certainly not weirdly-dressed strangers!

The temperament data published by the group is not based upon scientific random sampling of any dog breed. It seems it would be virtually impossible to develop such a reliable study, as the base population source group is unidentifiable.

Due to the temperament data being objectively statistically unreliable, it is also highly misleading. Pit bull advocates frequently use this misleading data to point to the breed's good temperament and to advocate against breed-specific laws ("Pit bulls pass the ATTS test more often than beagles!").

Yet anyone one who has a minimal understanding of critical statistical analysis should be able to see that the ATTS "breed statistics" temperament data21 is essentially valueless.

The 12-minute test stimulates a casual walk through a park with a range of encounters. The test focuses on stability, shyness, aggressiveness and a few other factors. According to the group, the overall pass rate (the combination of all breeds) is 81.6%.22

Unlike the AKC's Canine Good Citizen test, no part of the ATTS test is performed without the dog owner present. It also fails to evaluate the most basic scenario that leads to aggression: How a dog reacts when it sees another dog.

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!

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

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

L.A. NOW
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA -- THIS JUST IN
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.

-- Ann M. Simmons

Miss Universe Canada has joined the fight for a pit bull ban in B.C., and plans to make the effort a major part of her reign.

Sahar Biniaz, 26, was crowned Miss Universe Canada on May 19, and thinks the provincial government should adopt either a pit bull ban or at least require that pit bulls must be leashed and muzzled at all times.

The Richmond resident was a victim of a pit bull attack herself at the age of 14, a year after her family adopted a five-month-old pit bull from a breeder.

The pit bull "came from a really nice environment," she said, but "then I ended up getting 16 stitches." Biniaz still bears the scars on her chest to this day.

"I was just sitting down and it just kept staring at me, and I don't know what aggravated it," she said. "It just all of sudden... went off."

Biniaz said her parents ended up getting rid of the pit bull as opposed to putting it down, but every time she hears of a pit bull attack she remembers that day.

"This is something you hear all the time, over and over again," she said, noting that with her Miss Universe Canada title she now has "a voice... to bring more awareness to this [issue]."

Biniaz said recent pit bull attacks — like the one on Emma-Leigh Cranford, 4, on Aug. 23 in White Rock — spurred her to act.

Cranford survived with 40 stitches across her jaw, but not before a two-hour surgery at B.C. Children's Hospital.

Biniaz said she has already spoken with White Rock Coun. Alan Campbell, who said he would bring up the possibility of a ban when council reconvenes Sept. 17.

The simple reality is that small dogs bite more but restricted large dogs like pit bulls maim and kill more & do all for more then any other breed proportionally speaking % wise.

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, versus 18 percent for rottweilers and rottweiler mixes.

and 11 percent for German shepherds and mixes.

one study found 94 percent of pit bull attacks on kids were unprovoked, as opposed to only 43 percent of attacks by other breeds.

In Sept.2012 in only 5 days there were 4 children attacked by Pit Bulls for no reason in four separate areas of the Prov. and badly mauled with severe facial injuries, a child's throat was literally ripped open, another child's face looked as if it had been ripped off.

Calls from their parents, Miss Universe Canada once attacked by a Pitt Bull as a child and others have come for a Prov. ban

on all Pit Bulls and Pit Bull crosses in BC.

The Prov. Govt. will be presented with these concerns with the intent being that said ban be in acted throughout the Prov. as soon as possible.

The facts below illustrate the positive outcome of such a ban for all members of society and their safety.

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.

Bites in Toronto blamed on the four affected Pit Bull 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,

Some 1,411 Toronto dogs were in the four breeds in 2008, as opposed to 798 in mid-2011.

The severe mauling's & crippling attacks almost disappeared after the Pit Bull ban took effect.

You can't walk a Lion, Tiger, Bear or a Wolverine down a street, neither should a Pitt Bull be allowed in public or within city limits.

Pit Nutters say it is the owner, crazed gangster types that create monsters, the vast majority of Pit Bull owners are everyday dog owners, the Pit Bull creates itself and is what it is, a Genetic Monster & it needs to go now.

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

Pit bulls need to be controlled
Friday, February 14, 2014

I think I feel about pit bulls the way some people feel about gun control. It makes me feel completely frustrated and not a little angry. Once again, Calaveras County is visited by another pit bull disaster. Yeah, it was only someone’s little Pomeranian-Chihuahua pet. So should anybody except the owner be upset? Well, I sure as heck am.

The description of what happened, at least as it appeared in the Calaveras Enterprise, didn’t bring cheery visions. Words such as “torn apart” are actually pretty sickening. I hope every dog owner in the county envisions their pet being torn to pieces, and then realizes they probably can’t stop what is happening.

Or perhaps imagine risking your life to save your pet and being seriously and permanently injured. Or maybe it might bring the point home a little more strongly if you imagine your family attending your funeral.

How do you suppose they might feel? Ask the family of Mountain Ranch resident Jerry Yates, who was killed in a pit bull attack, how they felt.

Somehow pit bull owners think that they have the right to bear pit bulls, just like some folks believe they have the right to bear guns. That is guns of any kind. Currently there are 1,125 models in the California Department of Justice’s roster of handguns certified for sale. I wonder if that is enough? I’m glad there are probably not that many breeds of pit bulls available to own.

I even know an owner of a pit bull and, of course, he is in love with his dog. I have gotten down and hugged Twig. He seems like a quite nice dog. That is all well and good. I am sure there are thousands of pit bulls that are sweet and gentle and wouldn’t harm anyone or anything.

All I can say is, “So what?” So what if there are thousands of gentle nice pit bulls. This is something that can be addressed both locally and nationally. This latest attack has prompted me to suggest that we need to do something with these dogs. Many other countries have recognized that pit bull breeds present a danger that is different than many other breeds of dogs.

Pit bull owners are anxious to point out that other dogs are also dangerous. While this is true, since pit bulls seem to rank No. 1 on most lists of dangerous dogs, it is a good place to start.

Please make note of when these officers went to the REQUIRED training for dealing with dogs in Colorado, what the protocol is for this type of situation, and whether they followed that protocol.

There is a lot to consider here.

Pit bulls are certainly involved in a disproportionate number of attacks. There is some added responsibility involved in owning one.

People probably choose a dog like that for the very reason that it will protect their property.

Too many dogs are needlessly killed by law enforcement. In many of these cases the dog is simply barking in it's own yard when police shoot it. That must change.

A firm verbal warning can be very effective with pit bulls. It's always good practice to give a loud verbal command before escalating the situation.

Once again, a taser would have done the job. People are gonna think twice about calling 911 for their neighbors...Looks like dispatch screwed up the nature and address where help was requested. As always, we'll never get to the bottom of this story, for tomorrow there will be a new one and the news will move on.

Tasers have been proven time and again to be utterly inefffective against pit bull type dogs, hence the use of fire arms.

Coming from someone that knows nothing about guns or even which end the bullet comes out! Anti-gun cowards should stay out of this debate. If a dog attacks you a bullet is the best way to teach it an everlasting lesson. This also going for those anti-gun Democrats [criminals] robbing and taking the lives of good citizens!

Even on "your own property" your dog should not act that aggressive. Barking is one thing, attacking for no reason is not excusable.

Wrong. That's the dogs primary job - protect. If a burglar won't stop at a bark, then the bite is justified. This dog didn't bite by the way, just "took an aggressive stance". The police force needs to have a practical defined procedure and training on how to deal with property owner animals. Not just pull and shoot. Especially when there's no official warrant for any arrest.
On the other hand, pit bulls are particularly dangerous animals and should be treated the same as a lion or tiger regarding private ownership. The law is too lax and too many owner's of these types of dogs are too irresponsible to own such an animal.

The only time a "guard" dog turns into an "attack" dog, is when the owner orders it to do so. When a dog attacks on it's own (at any time) it's just too aggressive and dangerous.

People are the dangerous animal. Pit Bulls are just loyal dogs, that have a lock down bite, and they do whatever their "people" have trained them for, or act out, by how they were raised. That IS the dogs primary job....protect...but compare one of the GREATEST, and most MIS represented dog breeds to having a lion or tiger, I don't believe to be fair. These dogs are Nanny dogs. I wouldn't leave my children with lions, or tigers, but my Pit had 16 loving, and loyal years of a life, with Children.

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!

Did you know that my Pit Bull was My Nanny Dog? 16 years, and no threat.

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 Leadbetterhttp://disqus.com...

If pit bulls are so great, why are they in the top four dog breeds that insurance companies will not insure? Insurance companies policies are based on statistics, not feelings. And, BTW, people are not animals.

Some people can be considered animals, just saying.....
:-)

Seems to me that People act more like animals than any Pit Bulls I ever met. Let us pat all people on the back, and leave the bullets for the Pits, I guess, huh? That Is what they get, for being born Pit, according to people, thanks to people.

Pit Bulls are so great, because: They are intelligent, and loyal, athletic, and personable, and I could go on. They will do WHATEVER they have been trained to do, to please their "master". Now, we have to trust all the "masters", and hey, maybe all the insurance companies, too. Those are my feelings.