TheCoat

No Coat, I am saying that people like you will say any dog that looks like a pitbull could not be an amstaff or staffy unless it's ANKC rego'd. A bit hard to mistake a rotti as a pitbull regardless whether is rego'd or not. The fact is that there are many unregistered amstaffs, all of which you will happily see killed under legislation because they had the misfortune to be born without papers. My point is, dogs that look like restricted breeds need to be met with caution in terms of aquiring them and people need to be more responsible in their choices which to me is a simple exercise, don't buy unregistered Bull breeds and crossbreeds of Bull appearance then your dog won't be seized which is common sense. There is no way I would raise a dog and love it knowing the breed is skating on thin ice to be in a position where it could be taken from me and the way to avoid that as I said, don't buy them in the first place, don't support BYB's, buy from registered breeders. A friend a couple of months ago found some supposed Staffy pups in a pet shop and asked my opinion, what I advised her was if she wanted a Staffy I would help her get a papered one from a registered breeder, that she did and all is good, she doesn't have to worry about rangers knocking suspecting her dog is a Pitbull and loose her dog to BSL, make sense???. People breed mongrels in the back yard and play on the compassion of dog lovers to provide a home for their products, sad as it is that lives are wasted in these type of breeding programs, this is not in my opinion as the right way to get a dog, I don't support BYB's and the sooner they make the random breeding of unregistered dogs illegal, the better, dog breeding is a technical process that should be left to people with the passion and expertise to do so who are the people I support when it comes down to adding a dog to the family.

If you don't plan on showing, have you considered a working line GSD, they are dark pigment, dark faced by general default?

Geo, are you saying that Amstaff's do have a predisposition for aggression and can be threatening to community safety in the wrong hands?

Yet another dumb comment. If you think pure breed = safety then you're sadly mistaken!! Show us the attack stats for pure breed ANKC papered dogs supplied by registered breeders then compare that with BYB crossbreed involvement, that I think would be an interesting viewing? If you think stats care about ANKC rego (along with the general public or journo's who report on attacks) then you're again sadly mistaken. I am sure it would be less as you imply, however it doesn't make a dog safe. It can make a dog safe with a better breeding and breeding out fear biters and predisposition to aggression. Dogs escaping the yard and roaming in this case isn't the default behaviour for all dogs to go on an attacking rampage, in fact it would be interseting also to here people's opinion if they think their dog would attack people randomly on the street if they escaped the yard, I know mine wouldn't

Yet another dumb comment. If you think pure breed = safety then you're sadly mistaken!! Show us the attack stats for pure breed ANKC papered dogs supplied by registered breeders then compare that with BYB crossbreed involvement, that I think would be an interesting viewing?

I would like to see the attack stats for ANKC papered pure breeds purchased from registered breeders, anyone have those statistics on hand?

What's new, another Bull crossbreed attack, and people wonder why this type of dog is under the spotlight? No crossbreeds are finely bred animals with years of bloodlines at hand for trait selection to produce a temperament balance to safely fit into the community, crap dogs bred by idiots unfortunately.

I'd rather say,"here is my APBT, trained, sociable and I'm responsible" look at how great he is... Good way to loose your dog I guess, need to be smarter than that ;)

And what do you think that will do, free the Pitbull...........how naive are you seriously The Pitbull was never secured on the table to be thrown off and was only ever a "tolorated" breed why wasn't the APBT ever ANKC recognised can anyone answer that? My opinion is, if you want to engage in only "tolorated" breeds with no community footing, there is a liklihood that the breed can come undone far more easily than an established recognised breed being the sole reason I wouldn't own one or a cross breed that resembles one. Everyone has a choice and playing with fire has the potential to be burned whether it's right or wrong, that's life. There is a very simple answer to that.The APBT is not AKC registered nor is it registered with any othe FCI affiliate therefor it does not meet the criteria for ANKC registration from the get go.Pretty simple really isnt it.Yes people have a choice some make the choice with their heart not their head be that right or wrong.Yes you can get burnt when playing with fire and so can innocent parties.Such is the nature of fire it spreads rapidly and doesnt discriminate,sweeping up all in its path even those those that choose not to make a stand and fight it. I see a massive difference in authorities clamping down on an unrecognised breed than clamping down on breeds that are recognised and active, and personally I have no fear of BSL extending to any breeds on the ANKC register. If the Pitbull was ANKC recognised and then was canned and thown to the wolves so to speak, then and only then would we have reason for concern to the extent of the BSL's power IMHO?. I don't for one second agree with the assumption that unless we fight against BSL other breeds will be next. I think this senario has already been tested with the Amstaff which is not under threat in fact the Victorian law provides that exact exemption. If the Amstaff can be excluded from any Pitbull related matters, other breeds are home and hosed. Personally I think the Pitbull enthusiasts need to be a bit more creative so the breed ticks the right boxes which is not rocket science to work out. "My dog is an Amstaff sir not a Pitbull here are her papers" it's that simple just get on with it and stop complaining, give the box tickers what they want and the problem disappears. ;)

Exactly, so what is the point of this thread, to highlight other breeds who have acted in a lethal manner, highlight that restricted breeds were not involved, I don't get it I think you miss the point.The point is not to highlght othewr breeds it is soley to highlight the fact that the American Pitbull Terrier has never been resonsible for a fatality in this country.As Al Gore would say this is the 'Inconvenient Truth'.When there whole argument verges on how dangerous the dogs are then provide anecdotal evidence.You cant when the facts simply dont support it so as breed supporters we have every right to show that evidence. I understand that, but I don't see any value in it other than dragging other breeds into the spotlight. What are they going to say, "geez you Pitbull supporters are right, the Pitbull isn't as bad as we thought so we will add the other breeds you highlighted on the list too" That is my concern? It doesn't seem to me that the Pitbull supporters care about bringing other breeds down in the process as long as they give it a red hot go to free their's, to me is the wrong attitude with the potential to do more harm than good.

And what do you think that will do, free the Pitbull...........how naive are you seriously The Pitbull was never secured on the table to be thrown off and was only ever a "tolorated" breed why wasn't the APBT ever ANKC recognised can anyone answer that? My opinion is, if you want to engage in only "tolorated" breeds with no community footing, there is a liklihood that the breed can come undone far more easily than an established recognised breed being the sole reason I wouldn't own one or a cross breed that resembles one. Everyone has a choice and playing with fire has the potential to be burned whether it's right or wrong, that's life.

Exactly, so what is the point of this thread, to highlight other breeds who have acted in a lethal manner, highlight that restricted breeds were not involved, I don't get it

I keep remembering the case in QLD that went to court which cast a doubt over Amstaffs being the same breed as the APBT which was an absolute clanger dropped by the very party fighting against BSL, all they did at that point was bring the spotlight onto the Amstaff and I am thinking perhaps it's better to just let sleeping dogs lay instead of stirring it up all the time?. We are really only talking about Pitbull's as the other restricted breeds are not really existant if at all, I am thinking if we let them work on the Pitbull thing and shut up about it the BSL thing may fade into the background a bit? I guess it's human nature when you love a particular breed that is being unfairly condemned that when another breed pops up doing wrong like I said, I suppose it's rewarding to say "well, that wasn't a restricted breed", but I don't think it helps the cause and what we don't want is a backfire where they do start adding more breeds on to the list because fighting for restricted breed relief (anti BSL) keeps inadvertantly highlighting other breeds wrongs in the process? In my way of thinking BSL can either get worse or fade into the background and I am torn between whether fighting against it is the best remedy or letting it go so that it does fade a bit and falls off the agenda? There are ways to keep Pitbull's safe for the breed enthusiasts and wouldn't be overly hard to introduce a working line Amstaff instead of arguing and fighting about it, there are other ways to play the game ;) The Clanger was not dropped by the party fighting against BSL, its was dropped by the Council at the last minute. From the evidence the defence presented, the case had nothing to with Amstaff's, if the dog in question was a papered Amstaff there was no case. Unfortunately they do drop clangers in the fight against BSL it happens often, we all know that and my point is, we need to be careful nominating other breeds IMHO.

I keep remembering the case in QLD that went to court which cast a doubt over Amstaffs being the same breed as the APBT which was an absolute clanger dropped by the very party fighting against BSL, all they did at that point was bring the spotlight onto the Amstaff and I am thinking perhaps it's better to just let sleeping dogs lay instead of stirring it up all the time?. We are really only talking about Pitbull's as the other restricted breeds are not really existant if at all, I am thinking if we let them work on the Pitbull thing and shut up about it the BSL thing may fade into the background a bit? I guess it's human nature when you love a particular breed that is being unfairly condemned that when another breed pops up doing wrong like I said, I suppose it's rewarding to say "well, that wasn't a restricted breed", but I don't think it helps the cause and what we don't want is a backfire where they do start adding more breeds on to the list because fighting for restricted breed relief (anti BSL) keeps inadvertantly highlighting other breeds wrongs in the process? In my way of thinking BSL can either get worse or fade into the background and I am torn between whether fighting against it is the best remedy or letting it go so that it does fade a bit and falls off the agenda? There are ways to keep Pitbull's safe for the breed enthusiasts and wouldn't be overly hard to introduce a working line Amstaff instead of arguing and fighting about it, there are other ways to play the game ;)

I would seriously like to know how you can pursue someone for breaching a desexing contract? Perhaps send the puppy buyer a letter which is returned not at this address, then what?. Probably only good for people who intend to do the right thing anyway?.

The rational IMHO is the never ending fight to save the Pitbull, a fight that will never be won I don't believe, the breed is canned and always will be and is time we moved on. Not that I don't admire the Pitbull supporters in their efforts to free their breed, but the problem I see in the process with posts like this is taking other breeds down with them. In reality highlighting breeds who have killed and saying in the Pitbull's defence "see there are no Putbull's on the fatality list" is not going to free the Pitbull from BSL, all the authorities will do with the information is say "thanks very much, we will add all those breeds onto the BSL list too" No one needs a bloody Pitbull as a matter of life or death, there are many other breeds to choose from to make a great pet. It's not about rights to own a particular breed, it's the law, bit like fighting about the rights to drive drunk, plenty of drink drivers I know of personally who have never had a prang driving pissed, but it's not the point, it's just these anti BSL supporters worry me that they can potentially put their foot in it, I have heard and seen it so many times before highlighting other breeds in defence of the Pitbull, geez, we have to tread so carefully with this I think.

The problem is, the market is flooded with BYB Staffies and crosses and some of these are crap dogs that takes extremely responsible management and training to keep dogs like this under control keep everyone safe. I would like to see BYB's wiped out and address the problem at the roots. Breed isn't the problem, it's the fools who breed dogs with aggressive temperaments mostly because as breeders they haven't got a clue what they are doing or breeding. Dog breeding shouldn't be a God given right to just anyone, dog breeding is a serious business that takes knowledge and dedication to get right, the quicker we leave dog breeding to people who know how to breed a good stable dog, the better off we will all be IMHO???.

There are plenty of Falcon wagons around it's just that from about 2002 to 2010 they pretty well look the same, the Falcon seems to holding their price too now if they are a nice one with low Km's. They arn't making the falcon wagons anymore. It has been replaced by the Territory. Our Wagon is a 2004 (?) & we would be lucky to get $6000 for it in good condition. The later wagons after they discontinued them went up in price like the 07/08 models. Had a friend looking recently said a good 08 wagon of 50,000km's are over 20K in the yards. We paid 15K for an 07 in 09 with 40,000km's and was almost like a brand new car. A new one in 09 was like 36K.

You are so right with that, we were taught from a young age to do the same. My mum used tell us that we have our own dog to pat so leave strange dogs alone. As I said in an earlier post, we had a lot of roaming dogs too, so we saw dogs around all the time and they were not a novelty just part of the landscape. I am personally appauled at the way some parents allow their kids to rush up to strange dogs, lost count of how many times it's happened to me on walks. Luckily if a kid does rush at a leashed dog and the dog bites, you have a chance of avoiding prosecution, but you don't want any of that to happen or kids bitten when the dopey parents could avoid these situations with some dog education.

I agree it was a dumb decision on Ford's part. Towing was good too, the Ford has more power than the Commodore and the tough rear suspension, they are a great wagon hoping to make mine last as long as possible.

There are plenty of Falcon wagons around it's just that from about 2002 to 2010 they pretty well look the same, the Falcon seems to holding their price too now if they are a nice one with low Km's.

The Commodore Wagons from 2000-2007 are the big ones. From 2008 onwards they are useless space wise. Thanks for that, I thought they were lacking in size

I had a look at one a few years ago, they were useless in the back I was shocked, they looked bigger than the Falcon wagon, they are NOT, a lot smaller. I bought a Falcon wagon it's great then last year Ford stopped production of the trusty wagon, the Territory is no replacement. The current Commodore doesn't look too good in the back either compared to the OP's earlier model, anyone sized up the new Commodore wagon???.

Where I grew up, a lot of the neighbourhood dogs would roam around the street, the dog across the road spent more time at our place playing out the front with the kids than at home. He used to follow us to the shop after school learning we bought lollies and we would give him one, but he was a good dog, never remember any aggression from him. There was a bi colour GSD up the corner who would sometimes jump the front fence and bail us up, but just bark at us until the old lady who owned him came out and yelled out to the dog to get inside. We used to call him "socks" he was black with tan legs, but we used to see him laying on the porch and yell out "socks is on the porch" and run, then he would see us, chase us for a bark and hold??. There was a collie X and couple of Labs who would float around the street, they were all ok and we used to pat them, never recall anyone getting bitten. There was one in the street behind us that bit a couple kids on bikes riding past was about the only dog bite we heard of?. When I was about 5 or 6 we had a black Lab, she was a cronic licker, I would lay on the floor and she would would give me bath and slobber all over me, she was bullet proof aggression wise, but I can't remember that I was supervised too much with her?. Mum taught her the command "enough" and if she was silly or giving you a lick attack and yelled "enough", she would stop. Perhaps we were lucky, perhaps the dogs were more relaxed back then???. We used to have a dog catcher I remember, he had a light blue panel van with the whirly bird things on the roof that the dog trailers have used to have a cruise around and pick up the roaming dogs. Not that it kept the dogs in much, they would get picked up, collected from the pound at let out to roam again, but the dog catcher or ranger in the area was common, haven't seen a ranger cruising around for years?? Maybe the aggressive dogs were scooped up by the ranger, there were definitely dog catcher patrols often around the streets all those years ago. There were no leash rules and if a loose dog was with someone, they didn't pick them up. I remember telling the dog catcher the dog from across the road was ours when out the front playing???.

It's all well and good to blame the parents and lack of supervision and training/socialising the dogs, but what if it's just a crap dog with a poor temperament, that happens too? Sure there a precuations to be taken with dogs and kids, but kids not getting bitten by family dogs is not always good management, it can be having good dogs of stable temperament with a high threshold to aggression.