john.davey.1960

Animal rights groups equate pet ownership to slavery. They support BSL and MSN as weapons to achieve the elimination of family pets. The No Kill Movement is growing in the US. Pity it hasn't taken hold here, yet.

Shooting the messanger: a clear sign of lack of knowledge of the issues. Please name credible registries which recognise a breed called a Pit Bull :p

Commenting with a confessed lack of knowledge of the subject matter does even less for ones credibility. Ditto. Please show where a pure-bred dog is officially known as a "Pit Bull"? Credibility comes from experience and knowledge, not what the latest journo said.

If the media is true to form it would simply be stock footage. Believing journalists who are anti-Pit Bulls (whatever they are) without verification doesn't add to one's credibility. The Golden's story came with blood and footage. It is now long dead as a story.

Victoria is weel known for it's anti-companion animal stance so I am not at all surprised.

I very much doubt the dog was a pit bull, whatever that is? If it was another "breed" you can bet it would not have even been reported.

There is no evidence animal cruelty leads to human cruelty. Plenty of conjecture and psychologists being paid to say the opposite. Animal cruelty should be punished for what it is, not what some perceive it may lead to.

At least the so-called lynchers are not seizing and killing harmless family pets. Their supporters are also anonymous on such sites as well

Unfortunately they still support BSL which was introduced at there behest. They have never spoken out about repealing it and so continue to kill on looks and anot behaviour. Semantics have changed but end result is the same, DEAD DOGS. I think you'll find you're wrong there, JD. This quote from Michael Linke, RSPCA (ACT) CEO, made on 10 July 2010 under his DOL moniker of RextheRunt: "Hi. Its Michael Linke here, CEO RSPCA ACT. My comments were meant generically to point out breed and colour confusion, one reason (of many) why BSL fails. I am, as is current RSPCA national policy, opposed to BSL." I think that proves my point. Not one word about repealing BSL. Just claims they don't want it extended (for now) despite harassing governments to introduce it. Perhaps it affected their donations? Who knows.

Unfortunately they still support BSL which was introduced at there behest. They have never spoken out about repealing it and so continue to kill on looks and anot behaviour. Semantics have changed but end result is the same, DEAD DOGS.

I don't like them because they seize and kill dogs on looks and not on behaviour, fail to build sufficient kennels to become No-Kill and confuse being a lobby group with law enforcement. Minority views still but growing. I only hope they will find the public will increase it's anger to the level of other AR orgs. All they are interested in is your money, IMHO.

Sounds very much like an HP agreement. The lien is on the animal, not the other goods. If selling the pet doesn't repay the debt they'll then probably go after the car etc.

Despite massive attempts to prevent the inevitable another government wishing to kill harmless family pets is gone. Now just Qld and SA governments and RSPCA convenience killers to go

Sigh, "Trust Me I'm an ANKC Judge" just doesn't cut it. Jews and gypsies destined for Auschwitz were also bound by laws and protocols in place by a democratically elected government! The day anyone can determine an APBT from a dual registered APBT/AST then a case may be made, until then, not a chance. Innocent dogs will continue to die.These laws only work because we allow them to. Ignore them and the system would have to change. Can't give a sensible answer to a simple question so off you go again on the Nazi thing. What piece of work you are. BTW. There are no duel registered ASTs. The UKC won't register ASTs these days & the AKC has never registered APBTs. So that rationale is a no brainer. Suits your style. edit. The reason there are/were so many ''dead dogs'' is because the brain dead did ignored the laws. Still are, which is why the breed assessors have a job. There are many thousands of dual registered APBTs and ASTs and even SBTs in the US where they are considered quite rightly to be the same breed. Every 30 odd years AKC has had to open it's stud books to APBTs due to the small gene pool resulting in hideous genetic conditions. If they choose not to in the future then it is the dogs who will suffer. The dead dogs result from a form of racism where US citizens don't want "those" people living in their community. ie lower socio-economic types like blacks and Hispanics who are disproportionately attracted to the breed. In Sydney even the most liberal types will say it's the Lebs who give the APBT a bad name. Unfortunately they can't see they are all in the RSPCA's and PETA's sights!

I think you totally miss the point.they want their cake and eat it too.If there was no bsl then maybe but bsl still stands and now they want to chip away at what is left.Reread what is proposed.It is not just temperament.It states exhibit or carry.What does carry mean?It means the triats that they have as a breed.So if it is breed x y z bred ofr the intended purpose it will carry certain traits.Who deems that inappropriate.SAy dog barks at another dog at the vets while getting its blood taken.Said vet deems that inappropriate and you have done your money.Dog takes exception of strange man sticking cold thermometer up his bum and growls,vet deems that inappropriate you have done your money.Dog barks at someone in quarantine.Vet dems that inappropriate says dog should be deemd dangerous and desexed before release from quarantine.Where does that leave you.i think this is bs.People need to contact their vet and express there concerns before April 15th. The way it reads to me is, that before approval for individual dogs to be imported into the country they should have to pass a health & behavioural assessment (there's that word again) What is the problem with that? Good idea. Don't we have enough savage &/or sick dogs here as it is? Who would wish to import a dangerous &/or diseased dog anyhow? Breed is not mentioned. Although I would imagine banned breeds & sperm/ova from same would still be banned. Same scenario as switchblades, drugs etc,etc etc. People still try it on though. If they are caught they are prosecuted. That's fair enough isn't it. Not everyone agrees with every law but everyone is still bound by all of them. Any prospective import must be quarantined before departure anyhow. All the tests can be done then & the paper work accompany the dog from is place of origin. Wouldn't an animal that displayed cronic health problems while in quarantine be disbarred from importation anyhow. Behaviour could easily assessed during the quarantine period. Would any ethical breeder wish to import semen/ova from a diseased dog/bitch? Not bloody likely. Humans with criminal convictions aren't issued visa. If they do land here & are detected they are put on the next plane back from whence they came. Imigration is a subject for a different type of forum. Not a valid argument here. Unless of course the boat people start bringing their dogs with them. In which case the dogs would be put down immediately. Which would be something else for the bleeding hearts to whinge about no doubt. That all depends whio is doing the behavioural assessment and what the criteria is doenst it.Know one can import a diseased animal now so that is nonsense talk and I dont know why you bring it up.Dangerous by whose assessment?That is the problem.By reading a breed standard?that is how the Presa Canario got added to the list.No breed is not mentioned but as I said it states exhibit or carry and like I said if they do not want a particular breed to enter that is not already on the list it leaves it open to interpretation. You mustnt have read what I said becuase this is being put forward as an alternative to BSl and that is fine an dandy but if the government runs with this and doesnt rescind bsl it will make it harder for those trying to import current breeds as well as new breeds.If you cant see that I cant help you and yes I have dealt with AQIS and I know what the process is all about. Actually the Presa Canario was added because of the Diane Whipple death and accompanying media circus. They are neither naturally aggressive nor behaviourally or genetically unsound. Meanwhile GSDs and Rottis aren't added despite the numbers they've killed, through idiot owners I might add.

Do you import? NB: The assessment would take place prior to the dog arriving in Australia I haven't yet. Only those who would seek to import dangerous &/or diseased dogs, banned breeds, ova/sperm from diseased dogs or banned breeds would be affected by this recommendation. Talk about making mountains out of mole hills. For the honest, the ethical & the responsible it would business as usual, with little or no extra expense. We start off by banning one breed, now extended to 5 and look alikes, and now genetically unsound ones (eg brit. bulldog?) Where will it end? The enforcers excuse - I was only following the law, like at Auschwitz. Sigh, will the ill-conceived naive animal haters at heart never learn?

We already know that non-APBTs are being labelled APBTs and what constitutes a genetically unsound dog, one with no hair? Open to abuse by those who equate pet ownership with slavery. When AVA members stop killing healthy pets I'll take them seriously.

Sigh, "Trust Me I'm an ANKC Judge" just doesn't cut it. Jews and gypsies destined for Auschwitz were also bound by laws and protocols in place by a democratically elected government! The day anyone can determine an APBT from a dual registered APBT/AST then a case may be made, until then, not a chance. Innocent dogs will continue to die.These laws only work because we allow them to. Ignore them and the system would have to change.

There are many determinants of aggression, breed not being one of them so sounds OK to me. Perhaps a fail should simply result in mandatory behavour modification of the offending dogs, rather than death, a better outcome all round. I thought all imports had to undergo some form of testing already?

Due process in Australia is a common law right which governments can extinguish at any any time and have done so in the past. The UK police use a series of measurements to decide the breed of a dog and whether to kill the dog or not. I have not been able to find out what exactly they are and whether they are scientifically based or not. THE CDC in the US don't list breed (if they ever really did) as a determinant of canine aggression. They know that it is scientifically impossible to prove. The only way to end BSL is to vote it's supporters out of office and refuse to donate to organisations which wanted it introduced. Sooner or later they'll get the picture. If they don't, then no loss.

It was also the law to discriminate against Jews in Hitler's Germany. In 1946 at Nuremburg "following legitimate orders" was found not to be reason enough to exculpate the perpetrators of race hate and neither should it be reason enough to allow breedism to flourish in Australia, especially as one can become a breed assessor beyond their own competence without even seeing a banned breed. In the US SBT=AST=APBT = Pit Bull, in the UK and Europe APBT=AST=Pit Bull. In the only court case which looked at the AST and APBT in Australia the latter was found to be the case. A corrupt government in decline decided to change the law to save it's own neck. That is why "it's the Law" arguement doesn't work. Laws are ignored all the time by police and others and killing people's dogs simply because "it's the law" is not just bad, it is wrong, especially when one is paid to do so. It shows how badly we have declined as a society and view each other. People and organisations which support such archaic and offensive views should not be supported in any way shape or form.

Thanks for that

Politicians are using dogs as a form of social control. It started by restricting one breed, now includes five and will eventually grow as it has done in Europe. Using stereotypes means they don't have to come up with a valid reason.

I wonder if this will include seizing and killing harmless family pets based solely on their looks. Queensland government knows it's Kaput and will try anything to stay in power. Perhaps enforcing the current laws would be a good start!

Yes for 2 years then its adios if your dog fit the "standard" whatever that is. But at least it's something for already existing lookalike dogs. Edit, just read your other post about there not being a standard yet..! crikey. Thanks for posting, I am a follower on facebook. It's good to se someone taking steps forward to improve dog ownership, laws etc..! After two 2 years you will still be able to register dogs that were in Victoria prior to 1 Sep 2010 if they have been registered (e.g. as a different breed) previously. So, ensuring your dog is registered is the only way to be sure they won't take it and kill it under the current rules. Microchips: ome Victorian Councils are checking the "breed" specified when the microchip details were submitted. Manningham got a warrant and broken into Ouzie's house after seeing 'pit bull' written on her microchip form (provided to them by CAR). Never mind that 'pit bull' is not a restricted breed (because it's not a breed). The ranger went round when the owner was not home and sighted the dog through the laundry window and came back with a warrant. The only way to ensure your dog is safe is to get rid of the dog-haters. Brumby is gone and the coalition needs to be convinced that dog lovers will get rid of them if thy continue down the same path. Is it possible to take legal action against CAR for releasing personal info?