I would also like proof of the areas included in each of the studies khall has produced and swears by.
Unless they cover the entire US of A…they are inadmissible as proof.
In lieu of a reply, I plugged this: “10 yr study by JAVMA showed that there were 20 breeds and 2 mixed breeds that were the offending dogs in dog bite fatalities.” into a google search and some info came up–but not this alleged and apparently elusive study. But here’s one that lists the PIT BULL and subsequent mixes, as leading, by the thousands, in human fatalities.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2014/07/report_pit_bulls_responsible_f.html
https://www.scribd.com/document/233288240/Dog-attack-deaths-and-maimings-U-S-Canada-September-1982-to-Dec-31-2013
So khall, please link to your favorite study as I cannot find it, or at least cannot find the alleged “20 breeds” listed anywhere.
I found this study, http://www.marylanddogfederation.com/uploads/1/6/6/0/16605940/javma_dbrf_factors_00-09_dec_2013.pdf
but no list of 20 breeds. No breeds mentioned at all.
https://www.avma.org/Advocacy/StateAndLocal/Documents/javma_000915_fatalattacks.pdf
I found this study by the AVMA that lists Pit Bulls as the top breed responsible for human fatalities in all categories over a 20 years period, and separately lists pit crosses in their own category, who’s numbers themselves are impressive. Add those two numbers together and the stats are staggering.
Sswor here you go: Quote from JAVMA study on ALL dog bites fatalities in US from 2000-2009.
Overall,breed status was assigned for dogs in- volved in 45 of 256 (17.6%) DBRFs from documented pedigree, parentage information, or DNA test results or on the basis of concordance among media breed de- scriptor, animal control breed descriptor, and the vet- erinarian-assigned breed from a photograph. These 45 DBRFs involved 20 recognized dog breeds, including 2 dogs of known mixed breed.
Here from JAVMA: summary http://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs…ma.243.12.1726
I’ve been out feeding horses, so have not replied quickly to your request, so sorry but ponies wanted their breakfast.
Sswor that study was by the CDC and should be noted it was before year 2000 and This:
- This study was NOT conducted by the American Veterinary Medical Association, but by individual investigators from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Humane Society of the United States, and the American Veterinary Medical Association. The report underwent the standard review process required for publication of scientific reports published in the Journal of the AVMA.
- In contrast to what has been reported in the news media, the data contained within this report CANNOT be used to infer any breed-specific risk for dog bite fatalities (e.g., neither pit bull-type dogs nor Rottweilers can be said to be more "dangerous" than any other breed based on the contents of this report). To obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States. Such information is not available.
- Data in this report indicate that the number of dogs of a given breed associated with fatal human attacks varies over time, further suggesting that such data should not be used to support the inherent "dangerousness" of any particular breed. More than 25 breeds have been involved in fatal human attacks over the 20-year period summarized in this report.
- Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs.
- Strategies that can be used in an effort to prevent dog bites include enforcement of generic, non-breed-specific dangerous dog laws, with an emphasis on chronically irresponsible owners; enforcement of animal control ordinances such as leash laws; prohibition of dog fighting; encouraging neutering; and school- based and adult education programs that teach pet selection strategies, pet care and responsibility, and bite prevention.
1 Like
No worries, khall, feeding comes first.
I found that site but the breeds aren’t listed. The AVMA lists the breeds responsible for fatal human attacks though and the preponderance of evidence cites the PILL BULL at the top of the list, by far and away from the second listed breed, the Rottweiler. Pit crosses are listed separately from “purebred” pit bulls, incidentally. Adding those two data sets to compile ‘pit bull/types’ squarely places that breed/type head and shoulders out in front, outnumbering all other breeds combined.
Sswor, no again it was NOT and AVMA study but one done by CDC. Here is both of their statements about that study:
Given many media sources incorrectly reported that this study suggested that pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers are disproportionately more dangerous than other dog breeds, the American Veterinary Medical Association whose journal published the original article released a statement detailing that this study “cannot be used to infer any breed specific risk for dog bite fatalities”.[SUP][13][/SUP]
The CDC acknowledges that many factors contribute to a dog’s tendency to bite, that dog breeds responsible for fatalities vary over time, that visual identification of a dog’s breed is problematic, that there are no statistics on how many dogs of each breed are currently living in the United States, that any breed can be trained to be aggressive, and that irresponsible owners can simply move on to another breed if one is banned.
You and other pro BSLs are incorrectly and misguided in the use of the study, which again was done prior to 2000. JAVMA study was done 2000-2009, over 10 yrs.
The breeds are not listed because that really is the least of the issues when it comes to dog bite fatalities.
This is more important than breed of the dog, usually more than one of these factors where found in each dog bite fatality, often as high as four if not higher. Focusing on breed is not doing a damn thing to make anyone safer IMO and what the studies have shown.
from JAVMA
- In 87% there was an absence of an able-bodied person to intervene
- 45% of the victims were less than 5-years old
- 85% of the victims had only incidental or no familiarity with the dogs
- 84% of the dogs were not neutered
- 77% of the victims had compromised ability (age or other conditions) to interact appropriately with dogs
- 76% of the dogs were kept isolated from regular positive human interactions
- 38% of the dog owners had histories of prior mismanagement of dogs
- 21% of the dog owners had a history of abuse or neglect of dogs
- In 81% of the attacks, four or more of the above factors were involved
- 31% of the dog breeds differed from media reports
- 40% of the dog breeds differed from both media and animal control reports
- Only 18% of the dogs had validated (DNA) breed identification
- 20 breeds and 2 known mixed breeds were represented in the attacks
2 Likes
CT wrote: I would also like proof of the areas included in each of the studies khall has produced and swears by.
The JAVMA study was over 10 yrs and included all dog bite related deaths in that 10 yr period. Just over 200 for that time period. That is the dog bite fatalities for the entire US for that time period.
This puts dog bite fatalities in perspective and also covers dog bite injuries:
http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/sites/default/files/Dog-Bites-Problems-and-Solutions-2nd-Edition.pdf
[h=3]Italy repeals ban on specific breeds[/h]
A new law in Italy is about to replace the country’s long-standing ban on particular breeds of dogs. Several years ago, Italy narrowed its law from what used to be 92 banned breeds to only 17. Now, beginning in April, no breeds will banned in the country.
THE DUTCH REPENT
The Dutch implemented a “Dangerous Dog Act” in 1993 in the same knee-jerk response towards dog bites we have seen all over the world when Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) is implemented: 3 dog bite incidents - one lethal - made the news in a short timespan. The aim of the Act was to decrease the number of dog bites, and to eradicate pitt bull type dogs. In short, when you looked like a pit bull you were in trouble.
In 2009, when the Dutch found out the only statistic that was changing were the pit bull type dogs killed in the pound, they repented, concluded their Breed Specific Legislation didn’t work and lifted their ban on pit bull type breeds. The Act was replaced with a new one, in which it was not allowed anymore to discriminate on breed to depict a dog as dangerous, but focus on the deed instead.
http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2013/04/failure-of-breed-specific-policy-in-the-uk-1.html
[h=2]Why does the RSPCA believe BSL to be ineffective?[/h]
- Studies show that BSL has not reduced dog bite incidents in Ireland, Spain, Italy, Netherlands or Belgium.
- Since 1991 in the UK, 36 people have died in dog-related incidents - 27 of which involved dogs not prohibited by BSL.
- In England, dog bites recorded by the government have increased by over 76% over the past 10 years despite the prohibition of certain types of dogs.
Whether or not a dog is aggressive can be influenced by factors such as how they are bred and reared and experiences throughout their life. Breed is not a good predictor of risk of aggression.
2 Likes
CT and Sswor, here is the full JAVMA study:
http://www.marylanddogfederation.com/uploads/1/6/6/0/16605940/javma_dbrf_factors_00-09_dec_2013.pdf
That study was done for the times from 2000-2009…there has been many more dog related fatalities from 2010-2017. How many pit bull BSL’s were implemented in the US during the latter part of and after that study was concluded? That study is outdated and now inaccurate as far as I’m concerned.
You insulted me because I count the media as one of my sources of information from which I carefully glean what I believe is factual and pertinent. You also laughed and said the media could not be used as an accurate source.
Directly from your source…
DBRF’s were identified from media reports
So that would make the authors of your preferred study to be willfully ignorant as well, according to your opinion.
I couldn’t load all of the study, many of the pages turned up blank/black. Where I could read the study I did not see a list of the identities of the 20 breeds/2 mixed breeds anywhere. Could you please quote and post that information for me, please and thank you?
But breed is definitely a very good indicator of which dogs can cause the most physical harm and/or possible deaths.
Again, is there a list of the breeds responsible for those 200 deaths? Could you please quote and post that information for me?
According to a quick back-of-the-napkin calculation of annual data provided by DogBite.org (http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics.php), an organization that, based on their website, has a definite bias against certain breeds it considers ‘dangerous dogs’, the mean number of fatalities due to dog bites between 2005 and 2009 was 29.8. The mean number of fatalities due to dogs from 2010 and 2016 was 34.7. I did not do a statistical analysis to see if those means are significantly different, however I don’t believe that they represent ‘many more’ dog related fatalities since 2010… In addition you would have to take into account how much the human and dog population has grown in the areas affected. The increase in mean fatalities could be an artifact of increasing populations of dogs and or people.
And this chart is informative (from http://www.nationalcanineresearchcou…ted-fatalities, have no idea if group has bias one way or another):
1 Like
CT: Sorry you could not read the full study. I was afraid it would not come through. You have to pay to read and I found it at the link so you might google the link itself. It is there when you go to the link.
From the study on dog identification:
Reliability and accuracy of breed identifications- It should be noted that the source of breed descriptors in media reports is usually unknown, potentially be- ing neighbors , first responders , or other witnesses who may or may not have any first-hand knowledge of the dog or dogs involved in an incident. Homicide detec- tives typically made no independent determination of breed for inclusion in their reports. We defined a valid determination of breed as documented pedigree, par- entage information, or results of DNA analysis. With the understanding that the number of such cases would be limited, we also allowed for agreement of news ac- counts, animal control assessment, and the photo- graphic evidence for a given dog involved in a DBRF to conclude that it was reasonable to identify the dog as a purebred dog. In cases without pedigree information, parentage, DNA test results, or photographic evidence, validity of breed attributions could not be determined. As a second level of analysis and to provide additional information about the reliability of media reports, the concordance of the reported breed descriptors among sources were assessed with the understanding it
would still be very difficult to know whether the as- signed breed was correct even if there was agreement among sources.
Concordance was defined on the basis of both a strict and expanded definition. First, for the strict sce- nario, concordance was defined as an exact match in the reported breed descriptor between 2 accounts. There- fore, if one account reported a purebred dog (eg, Rott- weiler) and another reported the same dog as mixed breed (eg, Rottweiler-German Shepherd Dog mix), the reports were considered discordant (not a match). For the expanded definition of concordance, breed descrip- tors did not need to be exact matches. For example, if one account reported a purebred dog (eg, Rottweiler) and another reported the same dog as a mixed breed that included that pure breed (eg, Rottweiler-German Shepherd Dog mix), it was considered to have an over- lap of 1 breed descriptor and was therefore concordant by the expanded definition.
Pit bull-type dogs posed a special challenge be- cause this colloquial designation is not a breed per se but a descriptor of a heterogeneous group whose mem- bership includes various purebred dogs and presumed mixes of breeds; this descriptor varies according to the definition used in various statutes and ordinances and the opinions of the observer.32-4° The 3 breeds most commonly grouped under the term pit bull in US BSL are American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, and Staffordshire Bull Terrier. Thus, for our strict definition to be concordant, the terms used in dif- fering reports had to be: pit bull, pit bull terrier, Ameri- can Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, or Staffordshire Bull Terrier (without the term mix). Thus, pit bull and American Staffordshire Terrier would be concordant, but pit bull and pit bull mix would be dis- cordant, as would American Staffordshire Terrier and American Staffordshire Terrier mix. For the expanded definition, concordances related to pit bull-type dogs were considered when reported as pit bull, pit bull ter- rier, pit bull mix, pit bull terrier mix, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, or any alleged mix thereof.
Single dog incidents and multiple dog incidents were analyzed separately. For multiple dog incidents, we truncated those studied to events involving 2 to 6 dogs because some DBRFs involved an unknown num- ber of dogs or dogs that could not be located (hence lacked an animal control assessment) . Discordance rates for breed reports from differing sources were cal- culated as per 100 dogs.
Finally, in cases without documented pedigree, parentage, or DNA information but where photographs of the dog or dogs involved were available, a veterinary behaviorist (ARM), who was unaware of the breed de- scriptor used in the media or animal control reports, attempted to determine whether the dog could reason- ably be described as a recognized purebred dog but did not attempt to guess at possible breed mixes. Concor- dance with the media report was assigned on the basis of the expanded definition.
What this study and findings around the world is coming to is that BSLs do not work to reduce dog bite fatalities. Again the JAVMA does not identify the breeds of dogs involved in the dog bite fatalities, though the breed could be factually determined to the best of their ability as described above. 20 separate distinct breeds and 2 mixed breeds were determined to have been involved in dog bite fatality in this time period.
Yes. less than one death per state (50 US states) per year is a very small percentage of fatalities compared to the number of people and dogs that live together and come into contact with each other. The other link I provided IMO was also interesting, saying that dog bites in general that led to hospital visits were considered to be level 1 trauma, i.e. very little damage done.
Quote from above link: Ninety-nine percent of dog bites treated in emergency rooms are rated as level 1, the least serious of six levels on the accepted measurement (called an injury severity scale).38 (A level 1 injury is one from which the person recovers quickly with no lasting impairment; a level 6 is one likely to be fatal.) Treated fall injuries, on the other hand, average around a 4.3
Even more: If we look specifically at injuries to children in the single age group (5- to 14-year-olds) where dog bites sometimes appear ranked ninth or tenth in injury frequency, they are always outnumbered by injuries from falls, sharp and blunt objects, insect stings and bites, automobile accidents, overexertion, bike accidents and choking on foreign objects.33 For all children under 14, playground equipment alone accounts for 50 percent more injuries than dog bites. 34, 35 Moreover, dog bite injuries affecting children decreased between 1994 and 2003.36 NEISS data show this trend has continued, showing a 23 percent decline in the 12 years between 2001 and 2012 for which there is continuous data.37
So dog bites in general are declining this is for entire US.
Some more:
When we consider the amount of contact Americans have with dogs, this is surprising. More than a third (36.5 percent) of American households include one or more dogs.29 This means that at least 113 million people are in daily contact with dogs, if we include only the members of the dogs’ own households. Almost anything with that kind of massive exposure is going to carry some hazards. In fact, many other ordinary artifacts of daily life, including tables and chairs, doors, beds, even sneakers and slippers, are associated with more accidental injuries.3
Puts it all into perspective a bit more.
3 Likes
As it says in your last post, they went by photographic evidence that was also in the media.
CT read more closely, Did you not understand the “pit bull” problem? I bolded it just for you. And this:
[B]a veterinary behaviorist (ARM), who was unaware of the breed de- scriptor used in the media or animal control reports, attempted to determine whether the dog could reason- ably be described as a recognized purebred dog but did not attempt to guess at possible breed mixes.
Are you a veterinary behaviorist? Do you have special DNA analysis ability to “see” a dog’s DNA profile? They used a SCIENTIST to POSSIBLY determine a singular breed not any mixes there of. [/B]
1 Like
CT regardless of breed identification or not (which most cases no identification was able to be determined) dog bite fatalities are extremely rare, have been stable for many years even with the over population of the block headed dogs (yes I very much so agree there are too many being bred and/or not being altered which leads to unwanted puppies/dogs) and all the many dog/human interactions that go on daily, there is not this great pit bull/human death problem some of the public seem to have decided upon. The media has played a significant role in maligning the “pit bulls” leading to this hysteria. What it all boils down to though is that BSLs are not an effective means to reduce dog bite fatalities. That is what I have been saying over and over again and what is the results of the research on BSLs has been. That is why I jumped into this thread many pages ago, speaking out against BSLs. It is a wasteful use of resources that end up killing dogs who are profiled for their looks not their actions, it is a waste of money and time with no change in the dog bite fatality statistics.
2 Likes
You are actually dismissing the actual deaths of innocent people with your pro pit bull campaign. Your “let’s euthanise the dog after it’s killed someone” doesn’t wash with me. I would prefer to prevent the death from happening in the first place.
You are also promoting the continued abuse and neglect of pit bulls. For the few that you actually manage to “save” by neutering/spaying and rehoming, that number is indeed small in comparison to the much greater number of unwanted, abandoned and abused pit bulls still left. How many pit bulls are left to languish in shelters and for how long? How you’re dealing with the pit bull problem is not reducing it, in many ways you’re actually feeding it and helping it to produce.
You refuse to acknowledge that when enforced properly a BSL does in fact accomplish what it set out to do. Ontario’s pit bull BSL did exactly what it was created to do, it reduced the numbers of “pit bull” bites, attacks, maulings and fatalities. It also greatly reduced the “pit bull” over population, our shelters are no longer brimming over with pit bulls shoved into little cages and left with little or no human contact, rare exercise, loneliness and fear.
2 Likes
[TABLE=“class: waffle, cellpadding: 0, cellspacing: 0”]
[TR]
[TD=“class: s0”]Breed[/TD]
[TD=“class: s0”]Attacks doing bodily harm[/TD]
[TD=“class: s0”]Maimed[/TD]
[TD=“class: s0”]Deaths[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
2 [TD="class: s0"]1. Pit bull[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]2792[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]1677[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]263[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
3 [TD="class: s0"]2. Rottweiler[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]514[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]294[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]81[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
4 [TD="class: s0"]3. Bull Mastif[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]105[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]61[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]15[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
5 [TD="class: s0"]4. German Shepherd[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]102[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]63[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]15[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
6 [TD="class: s0"]5. Wolf Hybrid[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]85[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]49[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]19[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
7 [TD="class: s0"]6. Akita[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]68[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]50[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
8 [TD="class: s0"]7. Boxer[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]62[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]29[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]7[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
9 [TD="class: s0"]8. Chow[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]58[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]39[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]7[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
10 [TD="class: s0"]9. Pit bull/Rottweiler mix[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]50[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]15[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]15[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
11 [TD="class: s0"]10. Labrador[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]50[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]39[/TD]
[TD="class: s1"]3[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
The report states that the numbers are compiled from press accounts dating to 1982. It only includes attacks by dogs of clearly identified breed type or ancestry, as designated by animal control officers or others with evident expertise, which have been kept as pets. All accounts are cross-checked by date, location and identity of the victim, according to the report.
Attacks by police dogs, guard dogs and dogs trained specifically to fight are not included in the report.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2014/07/report_pit_bulls_responsible_f.html
1979–
1998
Total
Purebred
Pit bull-type
2
5
10
9
11*
8
6
5
4*
6
66
Rottweiler
0
0
1
1
3
1
3
10
10
10
39
German Shepherd Dog
2
1
4*
1
1
4*
2
0
2
0
17
Crossbred
Pit bull-type
0
1
0
3
2†
3
1
1
0
0
10†
No. deaths for which
breed was known
*Numbers differ from previous reports because police/guard dogs “at work” were excluded, and 1 new DBRF was identified as occur
ring in 1996. †A purebred dog
and a crossbred dog of this breed were involved in a single fatality; therefore, that breed is counted only once in the total column
https://www.avma.org/Advocacy/StateAndLocal/Documents/javma_000915_fatalattacks.pdf
The above link shows the 20 breeds that khall keeps referring to. Some of them include fatality incidents such as this:
Beagle:
The fatality was a strangulation caused by tugging on a leash which was around a child’s neck.
and
Jack Russell terrier:
Patricia Schneider, 50, of Discovery Bay, Calif., whose spleen had been removed, died in 2/98 of infection, 3 days after receiving infected bite on lip at home of Diane Gardner and Elaine Goodney.
CT: “let’s euthanise the dog after it’s killed someone” doesn’t wash with me. This is NOT what I have been saying at all, get your facts straight. Dangerous dog laws that target problem dogs BEFORE they kill anyone or anything (because in the research most of the dogs that were involved in dog bite fatalities had been a known problem, whether known to AC or not, but known by owners for sure).
Here: Dangerous dog laws should be narrowly drawn to define dangerous dogs as those who have either attacked a person or another animal without justification, causing injury or death, or those who exhibit behavior that strongly suggests the risk of such an attack, as determined by a Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist, a board-certified veterinary behaviorist or another trained and experienced animal behavior expert.
Bullshit: especially the bolded part!!
You are also promoting the continued abuse and neglect of pit bulls. For the few that you actually manage to “save” by neutering/spaying and rehoming, that number is indeed small in comparison to the much greater number of unwanted, abandoned and abused pit bulls still left. How many pit bulls are left to languish in shelters and for how long? How you’re dealing with the pit bull problem is not reducing it, in many ways you’re actually feeding it and helping it to produce.
This: Saving one dog will not change the world, but surely for that one dog the world will change forever.
[I]So you say just kill them all with the BSL? Regardless of their individual temperament? Which is what a BSL or ban does like what is happening in Quebec why the ASPCA will no longer handle the stray dog population because they do not believe in just killing a dog because of their looks.
Again, I KNOW many dogs are killed in shelters EVERY DAMN DAY! NOT just the bullies. I agree that rescue is just a drop in the bucket, I DO NOT agree that in any way shape or form that in any way are rescues perpetuating the problem. Are they the ONLY way to turn the problem around? NO, but spay/neuter laws that are enforced IS, that along with cheaper or free spay/neuter programs (hey like the one that I have supported) are also an integral part of reducing the unwanted pet population. I focus my $ on the bullies because they are my favorite breed and I know the problems they face from people like you and Sswor who maligned them just for their looks.[/I]
Sswor: Umm you forgot to include this bit on your “statistics” from the link you provided: The following is a list of the top 10 dog breeds involved in dog attacks in the U.S. and Canada involving humans from September 1982 to December 31, 2013, based on a larger table compiled by Merritt Clifton, former editor of Animal People, an animal rights charity/news group. Clifton now is the editor of Animals 24-7.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dougla…b_5866176.html
from above article: Merritt Clifton — the “primary source” for people who are feverishly trying to eradicate pit bulls, like Barbara Kay — has falsified his credentials.
[I]ie Merritt Clifton is NOT a credible source.
Sswor: [/I]The above link shows the 20 breeds that khall keeps referring to. Some of them include fatality incidents such as this:
No it does not at all. You are mixing not credible sources (Merritt Clifton which is the source for the “table”) with the old CDC report, if you read the AVMA link it tells you right here:
- This study was NOT conducted by the American Veterinary Medical Association, but by individual investigators from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Humane Society of the United States, and the American Veterinary Medical Association. The report underwent the standard review process required for publication of scientific reports published in the Journal of the AVMA.
I am off the crazy train, carry on CT and Sswor. Your inability to look at each dog as an individual and instead profile based on looks is willful ignorance. [/I]
1 Like
Khall, you disregard every source that exhibits what you don’t want to believe. Every source you will find, everywhere, shows that pit bull/types are responsible for more fatal attacks on humans then all other breeds combined. Your favorite source refuses to divulge breed. Wonder why.
Ps your hysterical name calling campaign makes me laugh.
5 Likes
Khall
When anyone is confronted by persons obsessed with forcing their extreme views on others by supporting BSL, as you are, realize what they are, ignore them and continue saving the few lives as you’re doing. The real danger of BSL is now it’s been successful in Ontario it opens the door to the next breed to face the same fate while existing animal abuse laws are woefully inadequate to protect animal populations. Too bad persons prone to excessiveness can’t put their extremism behind strengthening anti-cruelty laws. But then that would be a perfect world wouldn’t it
There doesn’t seem to be stats kept about the reason the dog bit in the first place, none whatsoever, so until there is those stats are overall useless.
Keep up the good work.
3 Likes
