Man fatally mauled, dog killed, by pit bulls on dog walk

[khall]

quote from AF:

"Well then, put me on ignore… because clearly you are making a choice to be obtuse and rude to boot.

If this is how you advocate for people to be anti-BSL, I can see why it’s a losing battle for ya’ll.
Calling people who don’t agree with you dog haters. Nice."

AF, first of all not once have I called anyone names, slung mud or said anything disparaging about any poster here whether I agreed with them or not. Never did I call you or anyone else dog haters. You and other pro BSL posters,on the other hand are slinging slights around. Calling me obtuse and rude when all I did was wanted clarification on your beliefs in BSLs, how will they work, how will they magically be enforced leading to no more bites and maulings by dogs (not just PB types) when even the most basic leash law is often not enforced? That is how you have dogs roaming, people dumping their animals, not taking responsibility for them and being good stewards.

Not one of the posters who are pro BSLs have shared a link to any reputable organization that agrees with BSLs. I have a science background and I am married to a lawyer I base my beliefs on my personal experience but also backed up with scientific evidence. That is why I go to veterinarian based organizations or dog behaviorist organizations or government run but science based organizations like the CDC for information.

CT has shared over and over again the Ontario law, insisting it has worked. It may have reduced the number of PB type attacks but has not reduced dog bites in general. That to me is not a law that works to protect it’s citizens overall.

Sswor, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steffe…b_8112394.html

I would not believe every story you read on the internet or paper, there is definitely a media bias against pit bull types because they sell stories.

Again, I have no trouble PTS any dog regardless of breed that is found to be human aggressive.

What IMO dog bites/fatalaties/maulings boil down to is this quote from a dog behaviorist: the only reliable indicator of future behavior of a dog is past behavior. Not breed, not looks, not hair coat.

quote from Sswor:
“Seems the only breed/type getting any outcry of protection is the breed/type responsible for the glut of these brutal killings–and to me, that is wrong. The poodles and chi’s and other fluffy mops of the world that get called vermin and blamed for their own utterly IN-humane killings deserve to live in peace, unmolested, un-menaced, not prisoners in their own homes, yet their plight flies completely under the radar of the social media warriors scream from the rooftops about saving the poor pitties. It’s wrong.”

First of all, I have never once called any dog vermin or blamed them for being attacked ever. I love all breeds of dogs, big or small, I just prefer large dogs to own usually. Though I do have a 28 lb Manchester terrier X. I will not tolerate any dog that is human aggressive regardless of breed. I base my actions on my personal experience with individual dogs, not by breed or looks or type. In my personal experience as a tech and in my life I have run into several seriously dangerous dogs. One was a Rottie, one was a Sharpei, one was a chow, one was a GSD and one was pit bull type that I had found, one is a chi X, one is a cocker that my parents own. The only one of these dogs that was euthanized for their aggression was the PB type that I had rescued and worked with, finding out within two weeks of his human aggression to men and children. The others are/were owned by individuals except the GSD was a police dog who bit his handler. The others as far as I know were kept as pets, never heard of any issues except with the GSD and I do not trust my parents cocker at all.

Sswor’s extreme rhetoric and bias against pit bulls as evidenced by his/her posts show an unwillingness to look at PB types objectively and as individuals.

[CanadianTrotter]

[B]

Originally posted by khall
[/B]

CT has shared over and over again the Ontario law, insisting it has worked. It may have reduced the number of PB type attacks but has not reduced dog bites in general. That to me is not a law that works to protect it’s citizens overall.

Khall, you’re deflecting. It is a “Pit Bull/Pit Bull Type BSL”…we are talking about a breed specific ban, not "dog bites in general.

It isn’t a matter of “It may have reduced the number of PB type attacks”…it most definitely did reduce the number. Whether it has reduced the number of dog bites in general is besides the BSL point and purpose. There also is absolutely no proven data that overall dog bites haven’t lessened or not.

The Ontario Pit Bull BSL has succeeded and achieved exactly what it set out to do. Because of this strict BSL I have discovered in my experience and in the areas I have lived or frequented that the majority of owners are keeping much better control of their dogs when in public.

[khall]

CT I was not deflecting I am disagreeing with your assessment of the success or lack there of with the BSL in Ontario.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/25/bsl-and-dog-bites/

from the article: Restricting breed ownership has not reduced the incidence of dog bites. A survey of reported dog bite rates in 36 Canadian municipalities found no difference between jurisdictions with BSL and those without. Likewise, a 2010 Toronto Humane Society survey found no change in dog bites in Ontario in the years before and after Ontario’s BSL.

[DogIsMyCopilot]

@CanadianTrotter

The reason I asked for more information from the pit bull advocates on here is because there’s a difference between paying lip service and actually doing something that might make a difference. Another pit bull owner on here was raving about her dogs and when the suggestion of a law requiring all pit bulls to be properly leashed and muzzled in public, she vehemently disagreed and said she wouldn’t muzzle her dogs. To me that is a classic case of a pit bull fanatic paying lip service and then not stepping up to the plate. That is a person that makes themself seem to be an advocate but then they are not willing to do whatever they can to help, in short…irresponsible.

I believe you are referring to me, I’m pretty sure I made such a statement a while ago on another thread. No, I would not willingly single out my dogs by muzzling them in public just because they are the breed they are. I keep my dogs contained and leashed where leash laws are applicable. I pick up my dogs’ poop, and I make sure my dogs don’t approach or contact anyone who doesn’t want it. I am not opposed to carrying/using a muzzle when it applies to all dogs, such as in some public transit. I don’t believe in the narrative of every large dog being a liability. I am sorry that apparently you seem to have either made really bad experiences or you’re a pretty fearful person. To me, a large mastiff type dog that sniffs my hand in a store is not an “accident waiting to happen”, and a dog that accidentally gets out of its yard and is promptly retrieved by its owner doesn’t warrant the cops being called.
Frankly, if I thought the margin of error on my dogs is so small that at any given time they could go off and hurt someone, I most likely would not have them.
If I remember correctly, in the same thread I said if a proper assessment is conducted and a big enough dog bite problem is identified in a community, I am ok with legislation that applies to everyone. I.e. if there is a problem big enough that warrants a muzzle law for everyone, I would put one on my dogs too. Upon which other users were saying “why should I muzzle my dog when he/she is not the problem?”, which is exactly how I feel too.

I have an obligation to keep my dogs and the people in my environment safe, and to work with the laws that apply to my community. I have done that for many years and still do. But I don’t have an overarching responsibility for every Pit Bull owner or PB dog that has ever walked the face of the earth.

If we took to heart everything any stranger on the internet ever thought was irresponsible, unsafe or stupid, we wouldn’t be doing much at all anymore.
I wouldn’t have my dogs (cause sswor thinks it’s “borderline criminal” to adopt adult rescue PBs), or any dogs at all for that matter. You should hear the stuff people think is the “responsible thing to do” when you’re pregnant and have kids.

[CanadianTrotter]

@khall

CT I was not deflecting I am disagreeing with your assessment of the success or lack there of with the BSL in Ontario.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/25/bsl-and-dog-bites/

from the article: Restricting breed ownership has not reduced the incidence of dog bites. A survey of reported dog bite rates in 36 Canadian municipalities found no difference between jurisdictions with BSL and those without. Likewise, a 2010 Toronto Humane Society survey found no change in dog bites in Ontario in the years before and after Ontario’s BSL.

I see it as deflecting away from the success of the Ontario pit bull BSL by stretching it into all dogs overall. The Ontario pit bull BSL worked, that cannot be denied, I won’t speak for other Canadian provinces and their cities because I am not fully informed about them.

I have it on good authority that the Toronto Humane Society is rather biased in their reports. That may or may not be true but I have heard it from several animal control officers that work there. Also that claim was made in 2010, much has happened since then.

There are a lot more than 36 municipalities in Canada, so I would see that as an inconclusive survey. I’m a bit disappointed with that Snopes article, I usually take their word for what they report.

[CanadianTrotter]

@DogIsMyCopilot

I believe you are referring to me, I’m pretty sure I made such a statement a while ago on another thread. No, I would not willingly single out my dogs by muzzling them in public just because they are the breed they are. I keep my dogs contained and leashed where leash laws are applicable. I pick up my dogs’ poop, and I make sure my dogs don’t approach or contact anyone who doesn’t want it. I am not opposed to carrying/using a muzzle when it applies to all dogs, such as in some public transit. I don’t believe in the narrative of every large dog being a liability. I am sorry that apparently you seem to have either made really bad experiences or you’re a pretty fearful person. To me, a large mastiff type dog that sniffs my hand in a store is not an “accident waiting to happen”, and a dog that accidentally gets out of its yard and is promptly retrieved by its owner doesn’t warrant the cops being called.
Frankly, if I thought the margin of error on my dogs is so small that at any given time they could go off and hurt someone, I most likely would not have them.
If I remember correctly, in the same thread I said if a proper assessment is conducted and a big enough dog bite problem is identified in a community, I am ok with legislation that applies to everyone. I.e. if there is a problem big enough that warrants a muzzle law for everyone, I would put one on my dogs too. Upon which other users were saying “why should I muzzle my dog when he/she is not the problem?”, which is exactly how I feel too.

I have an obligation to keep my dogs and the people in my environment safe, and to work with the laws that apply to my community. I have done that for many years and still do. But I don’t have an overarching responsibility for every Pit Bull owner or PB dog that has ever walked the face of the earth.

If we took to heart everything any stranger on the internet ever thought was irresponsible, unsafe or stupid, we wouldn’t be doing much at all anymore.
I wouldn’t have my dogs (cause sswor thinks it’s “borderline criminal” to adopt adult rescue PBs), or any dogs at all for that matter. You should hear the stuff people think is the “responsible thing to do” when you’re pregnant and have kids.

No, I was most definitely not referring to you, I have no memory of you saying any such thing.

I was speaking of a law for all pit bulls to be muzzled in public like our laws here in Canada, the person I’m speaking of said they wouldn’t if it were a law.

I am not fearful of dogs at all, I am educated and experienced enough to recognize dog body language and the capability of each dog’s owner. The mastiff I met was very friendly with me, his owner weighed less than he did and he admitted to the dog “hauling him around”. If an owner is not physically strong enough to control their dog…that is an accident waiting to happen.

I don’t agree that a dog that gets out of its yard is an accident, I consider it an irresponsibility. You may not think it warrants animal control being called…I definitely do. If the dogs I called AC on had been smaller and less aggressive breeds I would have attempted to find their owner or home as I have in the past. I have nothing against pit bulls as a breed. There are still many pit bulls here in Ontario that are being raised in responsible and competent homes and because of our newer laws they will never be in a position to bite or attack any person in public.

[DogIsMyCopilot]

@CanadianTrotter

No, I was most definitely not referring to you, I have no memory of you saying any such thing.

Ok. I do remember having this same discussion a while back on another thread.
I would definitelt disagree with such a law, but do not believe in ignoring it. It directly puts the dog in jeopardy, which is the last thing I would want to do. I want to do things legally.

There are still many pit bulls here in Ontario that are being raised in responsible and competent homes and because of our newer laws they will never be in a position to bite or attack any person in public.

Well, there must be something wrong about your story. According to the laws in Ontario, the only Pit Bulls that can legally be kept are the ones that were legally there before the ban and were grandfathered.
Here is a link to the summary:

https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/dola-pubsfty/dola-pubsfty.php#TOC_04
[/quote]

Since the law is now almost 12 years old, all of these dogs are old by now. It is not legal to buy, breed, or import any younger dogs. The law is there to eliminate the breed type from Ontario, not promote responsible ownership. There are no Pit Bulls being “raised in responsible homes” in ON, because it is not legal. After last summer’s fire in Ft. Mac, Albertan families weren’t even allowed to drive through ON with their dogs in order to stay with relatives in the Maritimes.
So either you are not properly identifying the dogs you see (i.e. confusing them with Am Bulldogs, Cane Corso, OEBs, Dogos etc) or the law is not enforced as it stands.

[Angela_Freda]

@rubles

Maybe I didn’t answer the way you expected. In that case it happened and it’s too bad it did. Don’t think I’m nor sympathetic to the victims.
Some seem to fear dogs at every turn and seek incidents to support their outlook. Try instead to seek incidents proving how dogs prove their worth in service to mankind.

I choose to embrace the reality that there are both… dogs that in good hands are solid citizens, and dogs that in the wrong hands are not.
Because legislating that those who are not ‘good hands’ somehow step up and take responsibility is a failure from the start, I believe that the only way to protect the breed or type from the bad reputation and further incidences that are inevitable if the status quo continues, is to limit their number.

It’s far easier to enforce a ‘no one is allowed to have this’ law, than it is to enforce a ‘every dog of this type/breed must be ___ and ___ and ____’ law.
With so many criteria there are to many opportunities for breaking them.
None is pretty simple… it means ZERO. Less criteria, less room to skate.

I choose to accept that reality, that there are dogs who are less well managed and more attractive to those who are less likely to manage them well [including or maybe especially wrt those zealots who make excuses for when it does go horribly wrong] because to do otherwise only leaves dogs getting the short end of the stick.
.

[khall]

[QUOTE=Angela Freda;n9673190]

It’s far easier to enforce a ‘no one is allowed to have this’ law, than it is to enforce a ‘every dog of this type/breed must be ___ and ___ and ____’ law.
With so many criteria there are to many opportunities for breaking them.
None is pretty simple… it means ZERO. Less criteria, less room to skate.

AF this is your opinion but does not jive with the studies that show BSLs don’t work, they don’t work to reduce dog bite/fatalities/maulings overall which is the focus for governing bodies.

CT the Ontario BSL was not only to reduce bites/attacks by pit bulls but to reduce dog bites overall, which it did not as time went on. That is what every community, city, nation has found over and over again. BSLs do not work to reduce dog bites. Looking at the stats from the Ontario ban, the dog breed that caused the most bites when the BSL was enacted, GSD, and the dog breed that today is still implicated in the most bites, GSD. That makes me scratch my head. Where is the outrage over GSDs if they are the ones causing the most bites for over 10 yrs now? Shows the bias against PB types, the breed some love to hate and cannot look at as individuals and with objectivity.

AF and CT neither of you have provided links to back up your beliefs and feelings about BSLs. All you are giving is your opinions, which is fine but goes against what studies, statistics and well respected organizations have found. BSLs have been given a chance in some areas, some are still tooting that horn, but as one poster who has lived in countries that have banned PBs has said, dog bites/maulings/fatalities have not gone down even with the banned breeds not in evidence. That is why many are realizing that education, stricter enforcing of dangerous dog laws leading to civil and criminal litigation is a much better tool for reducing dog bites overall.

[CanadianTrotter]

@DogIsMyCopilot

Ok. I do remember having this same discussion a while back on another thread.
I would definitelt disagree with such a law, but do not believe in ignoring it. It directly puts the dog in jeopardy, which is the last thing I would want to do. I want to do things legally.

Well, there must be something wrong about your story. According to the laws in Ontario, the only Pit Bulls that can legally be kept are the ones that were legally there before the ban and were grandfathered.
Here is a link to the summary:

https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/dola-pubsfty/dola-pubsfty.php#TOC_04

Since the law is now almost 12 years old, all of these dogs are old by now. It is not legal to buy, breed, or import any younger dogs. The law is there to eliminate the breed type from Ontario, not promote responsible ownership. There are no Pit Bulls being “raised in responsible homes” in ON, because it is not legal. After last summer’s fire in Ft. Mac, Albertan families weren’t even allowed to drive through ON with their dogs in order to stay with relatives in the Maritimes.
So either you are not properly identifying the dogs you see (i.e. confusing them with Am Bulldogs, Cane Corso, OEBs, Dogos etc) or the law is not enforced as it stands.
[/QUOTE]

When I said “raised” I was directly referring to those pit bulls that were here legally before the ban took effect. This included any puppies born within 90 days after the ban took effect. Maybe I should have used a different word other than “raised”?

Yes, the law was created to eliminate the pit bull breed in Ontario and that will eventually happen. The law also helped to promote responsible ownership because of the strict rules put into place in order to keep a legal pit bull. Owners that wanted to keep their pit bull had to suddenly:
[h=2]Grandfathered/Restricted Pit Bulls — Owners’ Responsibilities[/h]

• Pit bull owners are required to ensure their pit bulls are in compliance with the amendments and regulations.
• The full text of the regulations can be found on the e-laws website. The text below summarizes certain key elements of the regulations and is not authoritative.
• By October 28, 2005, pit bull owners will have to have their pit bulls leashed and muzzled in public and comply with sterilization requirements.
• The regulations stipulate that restricted pit bulls be muzzled and leashed unless the dogs are on their owners' enclosed property or on enclosed property occupied by another person who consents to the pit bull being without a muzzle or leash.
• Among other specific requirements, a leash may be a maximum of 1.8 metres long.
• Muzzles should be humane, but strong enough and well-fitted enough to prevent the pit bull from biting, without interfering with the breathing, panting, or vision of the pit bull or with the pit bull's ability to drink.
• All pit bulls must be sterilized by October 28, 2005.
• If this would require a pit bull to be sterilized before it reaches 36-weeks of age, the owner may wait until the dog reaches that age to have it sterilized.
• There are limited exemptions to the sterilization requirement if, in the written opinion of a veterinarian, a pit bull is physically unfit to be anaesthetized because of old age or infirmity. See the regulations for further details.

These regulations forced any and all pit bull owners to become totally responsible with their dogs in public. People had a choice, either step up to the plate in order to keep your dog or surrender it.

[CanadianTrotter]

@khall

AF this is your opinion but does not jive with the studies that show BSLs don’t work, they don’t work to reduce dog bite/fatalities/maulings overall which is the focus for governing bodies.

CT the Ontario BSL was not only to reduce bites/attacks by pit bulls but to reduce dog bites overall, which it did not as time went on. That is what every community, city, nation has found over and over again. BSLs do not work to reduce dog bites. Looking at the stats from the Ontario ban, the dog breed that caused the most bites when the BSL was enacted, GSD, and the dog breed that today is still implicated in the most bites, GSD. That makes me scratch my head. Where is the outrage over GSDs if they are the ones causing the most bites for over 10 yrs now? Shows the bias against PB types, the breed some love to hate and cannot look at as individuals and with objectivity.

AF and CT neither of you have provided links to back up your beliefs and feelings about BSLs. All you are giving is your opinions, which is fine but goes against what studies, statistics and well respected organizations have found. BSLs have been given a chance in some areas, some are still tooting that horn, but as one poster who has lived in countries that have banned PBs has said, dog bites/maulings/fatalities have not gone down even with the banned breeds not in evidence. That is why many are realizing that education, stricter enforcing of dangerous dog laws leading to civil and criminal litigation is a much better tool for reducing dog bites overall.

Khall, the pit bull BSL was created separately and solely for the purpose of getting the pit bull problem in Ontario under control…it was not designed in any way to target any other breeds or bites/attacks from other breeds. That is in black and white in the government link, it’s not my opinion. I’m not sure why you are confusing/overlapping the two.

BSL’s do indeed reduce the number of bites and attacks from the dog specified in the specific BSL. The mandatory and strict regulations and the reduction in the pit bull population numbers lowered the number of pit bull bites, attacks, maulings and deaths.

GSD’s are at the top of the list for the number of bites…I stress bites, not attacks, maulings or deaths. If pit bulls were just biting people and other animals(not outright attacking, mauling,killing) the Ontario pit bull BSL would have never come into effect.

The GSD is not overpopulated like the pit bull/pit bull types. The GSD is not being used in dog fights. Fatalities caused by GSD’s is much lower compared to the pit bull fatalities. The GSD personality and behaviour is quite different from the pit bull’s. GSD’s and pit bulls are two entirely different dogs personality and behaviour wise. I say this from personal experience and knowledge, not from any bias against pit bulls.

That being said, I would love to see a BSL created for the GSD as well as for other aggressive/potentially aggressive large dog breeds. Again, this is not a biased opinion because my preference has always been large dogs. A BSL for GSD’s to regulate and monitor breeding practises would be fantastic in my opinion. It would get rid of the irresponsible breeders pushing out genetically compromised dogs. I have owned many shepherds but never a German Shepherd, it goes against my strong beliefs that no dog should ever be bred to live the short and painful life of a GSD.

I would also love to see BSLs created for the dogs that can barely breath, eat, carry their own body weight, etc… These BSLs would target breeding practises and the sterilization of certain dogs that just shouldn’t be able to reproduce because of their own physical problems. It would stop people like the man that created the “designer pit bull” in another thread.

[rubles]

[QUOTE=khall;n9673223]

[QUOTE=Angela Freda;n9673190]

It’s far easier to enforce a ‘no one is allowed to have this’ law, than it is to enforce a ‘every dog of this type/breed must be ___ and ___ and ____’ law.
With so many criteria there are to many opportunities for breaking them.
None is pretty simple… it means ZERO. Less criteria, less room to skate.

AF this is your opinion but does not jive with the studies that show BSLs don’t work, they don’t work to reduce dog bite/fatalities/maulings overall which is the focus for governing bodies.

CT the Ontario BSL was not only to reduce bites/attacks by pit bulls but to reduce dog bites overall, which it did not as time went on. That is what every community, city, nation has found over and over again. BSLs do not work to reduce dog bites. Looking at the stats from the Ontario ban, the dog breed that caused the most bites when the BSL was enacted, GSD, and the dog breed that today is still implicated in the most bites, GSD. That makes me scratch my head. Where is the outrage over GSDs if they are the ones causing the most bites for over 10 yrs now? Shows the bias against PB types, the breed some love to hate and cannot look at as individuals and with objectivity.

AF and CT neither of you have provided links to back up your beliefs and feelings about BSLs. All you are giving is your opinions, which is fine but goes against what studies, statistics and well respected organizations have found. BSLs have been given a chance in some areas, some are still tooting that horn, but as one poster who has lived in countries that have banned PBs has said, dog bites/maulings/fatalities have not gone down even with the banned breeds not in evidence. That is why many are realizing that education, stricter enforcing of dangerous dog laws leading to civil and criminal litigation is a much better tool for reducing dog bites overall.

[/QUOTE

[rubles]

Why I disagree with BSL is because it blames all equally. This year ban this breed, another couple of years ban another breed. Why not just ban every breed and get it over with. A cab driver in Toronto was allowed to refuse a customer with a service dog. He needed to be educated about service animals, paid a fine and not been allowed to drive his cab for several days. He got away with it. Totally unacceptable behaviour and it’s happened more than once. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Where will all this end?

[CanadianTrotter]

@rubles

Why I disagree with BSL is because it blames all equally. This year ban this breed, another couple of years ban another breed. Why not just ban every breed and get it over with. A cab driver in Toronto was allowed to refuse a customer with a service dog. He needed to be educated about service animals, paid a fine and not been allowed to drive his cab for several days. He got away with it. Totally unacceptable behaviour and it’s happened more than once. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Where will all this end?

It would be impossible to ban every breed at the same time and unfair to treat each breed under the same regulations. There is no need for a muzzle regulation for smaller dogs is one example among many other differences between all the different breeds and sizes of dogs. Each breed would need to be dealt with separately with possibly a blanket law change with indiscriminate breeding?

I would like to know where the irresponsible dog ownership, the horrible effects of indiscriminate breeding and the number of abandoned dogs will end? It’s out of control and fixing it has to start somewhere, but it has to start in the first place.

[PDDT]

@CanadianTrotter

Khall, you’re deflecting. It is a “Pit Bull/Pit Bull Type BSL”…we are talking about a breed specific ban, not "dog bites in general.

It isn’t a matter of “It may have reduced the number of PB type attacks”…it most definitely did reduce the number. Whether it has reduced the number of dog bites in general is besides the BSL point and purpose. There also is absolutely no proven data that overall dog bites haven’t lessened or not.

The Ontario Pit Bull BSL has succeeded and achieved exactly what it set out to do. Because of this strict BSL I have discovered in my experience and in the areas I have lived or frequented that the majority of owners are keeping much better control of their dogs when in public.

But you keep claiming it is also a dangerous dog law. Sadly it has failed in that aspect as the number of dog bites in Ontario has increased.

It seems to me that there are two issues that make pit bulls dangerous. 1) unlawful use in dog fighting - that needs to be dealt with by law enforcement, not civic law and we (Ontarians) need to put our full support behind law enforcement (police and SPCA enforcement officers) in that effort and 2) people who like aggressive breeds and tend to use training methods which bring out aggressive tendencies - no law is going to prevent that - when there are no pit bulls (whatever a a pit bull might be because that is a hard definition to pin down) these people will move to the next large “scary” breed. I live near you (Hamilton area) and there are sure a lot of huge mastiffs around here - just saying…

And as to what Ontario rescues are doing about Pit Bulls - many of them transport them to the US to be adopted. That is one of the effects of our BSL.

[khall]

CT in response to your question as to why I keep pointing out the ban did not reduce dog bites: here is a quote by the AG in 2005 in his address to the governing body who enacted the BSL

“Over time, it will mean fewer pit bull attacks and, overall, fewer attacks by dangerous dogs,” then-attorney general Michael Bryant told the Ontario legislature in 2005.

Pulled from this article about the failure of the Toronto BSL http://globalnews.ca/news/2527882/to…tes-than-ever/

So I am concluding from the above quote that not only was the BSL supposed to address bites from PBs (which it did) but from other “dangerous dogs”, which it did not since the highest dog bite incidence when the BSL was enacted and today is still from the GSD.

Again, BSLs are not needed when strong dangerous dog laws are in place and enforced. BSLs targeting breeders, as in singling out certain breeds have no place in government but should be addressed by the Kennel Club and Breed club like what happened after Crufts last year.
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/pres…erd-dog-(gsd)/

Now as I have said repeatedly I have no problems with strong laws targeting breeders in general, especially BYB and puppy mills. Which may be an issue here in the US with the new administration’s policy changes regarding health and well being of animals in our country.

I fully support spay neuter laws and that they be strongly enforced. For two reasons, one to help reduce the unwanted pet population overall, not just PBs/types, two because in all of the studies shown that the one factor that statistically has been linked most often in dog bite fatalities is that the offending dog is an intact male dog. Determining whether a male dog is neutered or not should be pretty easy to do visually, with little errors made in that determination. Unlike visually determining a dog’s breed when it is a mixed breed or unknown dog without breed papers from the owner or DNA testing them.

Edited to add that I also fully support and am happy to see the targeting of dog fighters and the sometimes long sentencing that is being handed down to them criminally. They often are also made to pay large sums to help support the dogs that have been confiscated from them. Good.

http://dogtime.com/trending/20705-se…-fighting-raid

[CaliforniaDreamer]

No matter how many times some people insist that the Pitbull Ban in Ontario is working, it doesn’t make them right or the authority on all things Ontarian. Perhaps if Dangerous Dog laws were enforced there would be no need to have the breed ban discussions. Anyone who thinks that banning any specific breed works, is extremely narrow minded. I also live in Ontario, no I’m not an expert, just an ordinary person who sees Pitbulls and Pitbull advertisements daily…in the banned, there are less of them now…not, area.

[rubles]

CD
I’m just curious. Where do you encounter advertisements for pit bulls?

[Sswor]

One thing I’ll add that seems to be widely ignored is this: there is a vast chasm of difference between a dog bite and a mauling.

Protests to BSL that state repeatedly that the laws fail to reduce the number of dog bites are glossing over this important fact which is forefront to the debate. I am loathe to bring back up the phenotypical traits, combined with the breed-specific personality [tenacity] that makes a pit bull “bite” a whole different ball of wax then narrow muzzled dogs, or block headed dogs that lack the fortitude required to sustain a prolonged attack.

Sigh. All dogs [can] bite. We all agree on that. All dog bites are not the same.

[PDDT]

rubles - here is one example of ads for pit bulls in Ontario:

http://www.kijiji.ca/b-ontario/pit-bull/k0l9004

A lot of people in Ontario don’t realize that they are a banned breed. The ban is sporadically enforced. I’ve had people tell me that one city for example is pit bull friendly - meaning not that the authorities are not following the law but that people are not upset to see pit bulls.

I had someone tell me that they were getting a new dog and that it is a pit bull. I asked if they were aware of the bsl legislation and they weren’t.