Where I live, there have been laws brought in regarding Pit Bulls. I don't own one, but I understand the concern about the breed considering some of the cases I've heard about.

Does anybody here have a Pit Bull affected by new laws?

I have 3 Pit Bulls right now & am about to get another one. I have been fortunate enough that I haven't been affected by any of the laws that have been passed around the country. But My husband & I want to move & having this breed does make it more difficult to pick up & move because we have to check into all the different laws in the areas where we want to go. They're really not bad dogs...it's a shame what they have to go through.

I think breed banning laws are awful, and that they are just negative stereotypes perpetuated by subpar owners. Pit bulls are very loyal, friendly dogs, and I have known many that were sweeter than most other dogs. People purchase them just to fight them, though, or to intentionally make them "mean," whether because they want a guard dog or just to look macho, and it's disgusting. Pits aren't the only victim of this -- I have a rottweiler and my family was once denied homeowner's insurance because of it.

Originally Posted by PitBullLvr

I have 3 Pit Bulls right now & am about to get another one. I have been fortunate enough that I haven't been affected by any of the laws that have been passed around the country. But My husband & I want to move & having this breed does make it more difficult to pick up & move because we have to check into all the different laws in the areas where we want to go. They're really not bad dogs...it's a shame what they have to go through.

WELL SAID.
I LOVE THESE DOGS.

here where i live you must MUZZLE the dog..and you can't even get a license to own a pitbull.
may i say this is *$@#% STUPID.

thank you television and media.

I think the laws are disgusting! I am such an animal lover that if I owned a Pit Bull and the laws changed, I would move to keep my dog safe. It is not the breed; it is all the owners fault how the dog turns out, in my opinion.

So has any action been done to address the supposed owners who turn the dogs into killing machines for all the wrong reasons?

I have made this post in another thread but seems that it may belong here too.
I have an Akita, who is very well mannered and bahaved but because of some "poorly behaved" akitas around we are copping a wrap too.

From my other post!

I suppose I have become relatively passionate about it all. Ive seen people cross to the other side of the street when we are walking because they are afraid of what might happen.
I am a strong believer that so many of the attacks by dogs could have been prevented if the owner\ handler has been more responsible.
so much of it seems to come down to stupid things like (this is example only)
Young fella wants a "tough dog" to put the studded collar on and look cool. He gets a rottie as it fits the physical criteria he wants met. Dog starts biting and it is instantly written of as "its in his breed" but if the same fella had a labrador and it bit he would be thinking what on earth is wrong with my dog, what can i do to stop this.
It seems that too many people accept undesirable behaviour from certain breeds as they beleive that there is no other way for that breed to behave,
the story earlier in this thread about the lady who lost her pom and was left with the impresion that the owner of the Akita thought that it was Ok for this sort of bahaviour. he was soooooo wrong.........ALL dogs of ANY breed can and SHOULD be well mannered and social, they may just need to be trained a little diffrently, just like us humans, we all learn diffrent ways.
IMO there is no such thing as a bad dog, just a bad owner. A dog will only behave the way they have been taught to, or how they think they are expected to behave.

So has any action been done to address the supposed owners who turn the dogs into killing machines for all the wrong reasons?

That's where all the banning comes in to play. The law makers think they're doing a great deed by taking all the dogs off of the owners. I guess what they don't realize is that all the bad owners still have their dogs & that they just took a 5yr-olds best friend away from it. But the 5yr-old is still gonna get mauled because they took the good dog away that would have protected hm from the bad owner's dogs.

Originally Posted by nattiej1976

so much of it seems to come down to stupid things like (this is example only)
Young fella wants a "tough dog" to put the studded collar on and look cool. He gets a rottie as it fits the physical criteria he wants met. Dog starts biting and it is instantly written of as "its in his breed" but if the same fella had a labrador and it bit he would be thinking what on earth is wrong with my dog, what can i do to stop this.

YES, YES, YES. I agree 100% with what you have written here, it is absolutely true. There's no excuse for this behavior, and it's SO COMMON. Biting and attacking are definitely not in a rottweiler's "breed" or any other breed for that matter -- it's in the stupidity of their owners.

When there has been a dog attack you hear that the dog has been put down but you don't very often hear of what punishment the owners get if any!
The owners are to blame here not the dogs!

This is just a thought but would it be feasible that along with licensing a dog that people opting to have certain dogs be put through a "profile" of some sort? What I'm trying to suggest is if a person wants to raise (or adopt) a certain breed they should be under some kind of scrutiny that would weed out the owners that shouldn't have them? It would be similar to gun control, not everyone could own (an Akita, Rottweiler) etc. without undergoing a profile. I realize this is something not many people would want to do but I'd prefer knowing that a rottweiler is with someone who knows his temperment and respects the dog. I know all dogs are capable of biting and causing pain, but it's different when a poodle gets loose and is coming at you -- vice a pit bull. I love dogs -- please don't think I'm pointing the fingers at any breed of dog - but I don't feel everyone is equipped to own all breed of dogs.

I completely agree with you. But you can't make all breeders do that. It's virtually impossible. And regardless of what anyone says, someone's got to breed or the breed will die out. I know a lot of the shelters around here do home inspections & everything before they let anyone take home a Pit Bull, Rottweiler, Boxer, etc. So, basically the shelters here have already started doing what you're talking about & most of the responsible breeders that I know of have also started doing something similar, but what about the bad breeders? They just want to get rid of the puppies. But I totally agree with what you're saying...it's a good idea, but how?

There is something to be said for being a responsible dog owner. Honestly, I don't believe that Pit Bulls are born more agressive than any other dog. It is the stupid owners fault.

However, I do live where there is Pit Bull legislation. When my GSP, Bo, was just a little guy (12 weeks old) I did have a run in with a Female Pit Bull who jumped a three foot fence as she was protecting her puppies. My husband managed to get Bo off the ground before she got to us, but it sure scared the heck out of me. By the way, we were walking on a public path that this house happened to back onto, so we weren't walking off the beaten path or anything.

I really wish politians would wake up and smell the coffee.

Originally Posted by PitBullLvr

That's where all the banning comes in to play. The law makers think they're doing a great deed by taking all the dogs off of the owners. I guess what they don't realize is that all the bad owners still have their dogs & that they just took a 5yr-olds best friend away from it. But the 5yr-old is still gonna get mauled because they took the good dog away that would have protected hm from the bad owner's dogs.

Here is an idea-- What if they made people have to go through a testing process to find out if they are educated and sane enough to own a dog?

although it would be really hard to enforce and would come up against alot of arguments, but i would like to see forced desexing for anyone who cant provide reason for keeping a dog or bitch whole (ie registered breeding programs etc) and then pass on the responsibility of selecting eligible homes to breeders or sellers. In handing over this responsibility and liablility sellers of dogs would have to be more selective in where they place the dogs to avoid a certain responsibility for any future problems, it would also make people think about getting a dog more if there is some sort of compulsory sutibility selection program that they have to enter before getting their pup, it would also assist in weeding out "what the hec" impulsive pet buying.....IMO.
We had to go through suitability interviews with our breeder before getting our pup, and I thought this to be very responsible of the breeder but also forced us to research the breed and present relevent training plans to the breeder.

Here is an idea-- What if they made people have to go through a testing process to find out if they are educated and sane enough to own a dog?

LOL That would be good. The biggest part would be to see if the person is sane enough to own a dog.