Need To Update List Dogs That Kill In Aust

[tybrax]

Thanks guys second entry was not in Aus.. tybrax

[TheCoat]

I'm curious why you are posting this? To prove pits aren't on the list? To highlight the number of breeds involved in deaths? I fail to grasp the rationale for the thread.....

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.

Edited November 12, 2011 by TheCoat

[jacqui835]

I'm curious why you are posting this? To prove pits aren't on the list? To highlight the number of breeds involved in deaths? I fail to grasp the rationale for the thread.....

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.

I am not necessarily fighting to save pitbulls. Although I certainly think people should be allowed to own them, because they're not my breed of choice well it's slightly distanced if you know what I mean. But what I am fighting is BSL. Because if we allow the precedents, what is to stop them one day implementing BSL against any other breed? You might think let the pitbull fall, but if BSL doesn't stop the dog attacks, which it won't because the problem isn't even dogs in the first place, but they're committed to BSL policies so they keep introducing new ones for new breeds, well I would worry that one day we will only have very few breeds to choose from - if any at all

[TheCoat]

I am not necessarily fighting to save pitbulls. Although I certainly think people should be allowed to own them, because they're not my breed of choice well it's slightly distanced if you know what I mean. But what I am fighting is BSL. Because if we allow the precedents, what is to stop them one day implementing BSL against any other breed? You might think let the pitbull fall, but if BSL doesn't stop the dog attacks, which it won't because the problem isn't even dogs in the first place, but they're committed to BSL policies so they keep introducing new ones for new breeds, well I would worry that one day we will only have very few breeds to choose from - if any at all

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 ;)

Edited November 12, 2011 by TheCoat

[klink]

I read regularly posts re BSL and I am continually amazed at some of the positions taken on this subject by fellow DOLers. EVERYBODY with half a brain knows that it is not the breed that is the problem, it is US< period.

Until councils,govt. etc .pull their collective heads from you know where and address the cause of the problem ( US ) and do something constructive about it instead of political responses to this subject a lot of breeds are doomed.

Many breeds are not my choice but I will defend the right to own any breed that I choose.( I do not own apts ) We all need to look past the apt and realise that our rights are gradually being eroded away from us while we all sit around and whinge amongst ourselves

The bottom line is and always should be, you are responsible for your dogs' behaviour, If you control the situation that your dogs get into you minimise your risk....simple.

If you dont' contain your dog securely and any other animals you own you deserve to suffer any legal penalty as a result of your inability to do so.

My only other comment would be that all those people that think BSL is not going to worry them ....think again, that what was said early days' with the prospect of a ban on tail docking, and so it moves on and on and on.

[tybrax]

I am not necessarily fighting to save pitbulls. Although I certainly think people should be allowed to own them, because they're not my breed of choice well it's slightly distanced if you know what I mean. But what I am fighting is BSL. Because if we allow the precedents, what is to stop them one day implementing BSL against any other breed? You might think let the pitbull fall, but if BSL doesn't stop the dog attacks, which it won't because the problem isn't even dogs in the first place, but they're committed to BSL policies so they keep introducing new ones for new breeds, well I would worry that one day we will only have very few breeds to choose from - if any at all

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.

[TheCoat]

I am not necessarily fighting to save pitbulls. Although I certainly think people should be allowed to own them, because they're not my breed of choice well it's slightly distanced if you know what I mean. But what I am fighting is BSL. Because if we allow the precedents, what is to stop them one day implementing BSL against any other breed? You might think let the pitbull fall, but if BSL doesn't stop the dog attacks, which it won't because the problem isn't even dogs in the first place, but they're committed to BSL policies so they keep introducing new ones for new breeds, well I would worry that one day we will only have very few breeds to choose from - if any at all

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.

[TheCoat]

I read regularly posts re BSL and I am continually amazed at some of the positions taken on this subject by fellow DOLers. EVERYBODY with half a brain knows that it is not the breed that is the problem, it is US< period.

Until councils,govt. etc .pull their collective heads from you know where and address the cause of the problem ( US ) and do something constructive about it instead of political responses to this subject a lot of breeds are doomed.

Many breeds are not my choice but I will defend the right to own any breed that I choose.( I do not own apts ) We all need to look past the apt and realise that our rights are gradually being eroded away from us while we all sit around and whinge amongst ourselves

The bottom line is and always should be, you are responsible for your dogs' behaviour, If you control the situation that your dogs get into you minimise your risk....simple.

If you dont' contain your dog securely and any other animals you own you deserve to suffer any legal penalty as a result of your inability to do so.

My only other comment would be that all those people that think BSL is not going to worry them ....think again, that what was said early days' with the prospect of a ban on tail docking, and so it moves on and on and on.

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

[RottnBullies]

I'm curious why you are posting this? To prove pits aren't on the list? To highlight the number of breeds involved in deaths? I fail to grasp the rationale for the thread.....

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.

No one needs any other bloody breed either as a matter of life or death!!! What kind of a statement is that? You talk about Pit Bull enthusiasts taking down "Other" breeds in their fight which Is absolute non sense, but then It's always ok to sacrifice the Pit Bull to save these "other" breeds is It? Lets keep the government happy by giving them the APBT and lets all lie low and take It in the chin that way It'll just fade Into oblivion and no other breeds will be added........ The APBT has been fed to the wolves so to speak on numerous occasions but hey It's ok It's not my breed of choice who cares, certainly not people such as yourself who have the audacity to tell people to just move on coz there are plenty of other nice breeds out there, tell me where do you get off on making such heartless comments Just because you would give up on your own breed if the going got tuff doesn't mean everyone else should!

Because It's law doesn't make It right either, if we all stood back and accepted everything how far will that get humanity. Laws are not exempt from being flawed and people have the rights to challenge them. I suggest you read up on the QLD case from start to finish before you finger point and blame certain party's of any wrong doing.

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 tell you what I don't get, what Is BSL actually doing apart from killing off loved family pets because they look a certain way?

Now we are being told to STFU and tread carefully in fear of other breeds being added, and if one day that happens the APBT will cop the blame yet again!

Just wonderful

Oh and the rationale for the thread is that we're sick and tired of people attributing the APBT to fatalities here, I don't know about you but I don't like lies and rumors being spread when in actual fact IT IS NOT THE TRUTH

[tybrax]

Well said Rottnbullies.. :clap:

[bulldogz4eva]

I read regularly posts re BSL and I am continually amazed at some of the positions taken on this subject by fellow DOLers. EVERYBODY with half a brain knows that it is not the breed that is the problem, it is US< period.

Until councils,govt. etc .pull their collective heads from you know where and address the cause of the problem ( US ) and do something constructive about it instead of political responses to this subject a lot of breeds are doomed.

Many breeds are not my choice but I will defend the right to own any breed that I choose.( I do not own apts ) We all need to look past the apt and realise that our rights are gradually being eroded away from us while we all sit around and whinge amongst ourselves

The bottom line is and always should be, you are responsible for your dogs' behaviour, If you control the situation that your dogs get into you minimise your risk....simple.

If you dont' contain your dog securely and any other animals you own you deserve to suffer any legal penalty as a result of your inability to do so.

My only other comment would be that all those people that think BSL is not going to worry them ....think again, that what was said early days' with the prospect of a ban on tail docking, and so it moves on and on and on.

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 other breeds it is soley to highlight the fact that the American Pitbull Terrier has never been responsible 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 they should provide anecdotal evidence to support and justify the legislation.But they cant when the facts simply dont support it, so as breed supporters we have every right to show that evidence and blow holes in their argument.

Edited November 13, 2011 by bulldogz4eva

[TheCoat]

Oh and the rationale for the thread is that we're sick and tired of people attributing the APBT to fatalities here, I don't know about you but I don't like lies and rumors being spread when in actual fact IT IS NOT THE TRUTH

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.

[GeckoTree]

I view dog fatalities lists in Australia as I do shark fatality lists in Australia, I just wish some one would do an actual website on it as they do the shark fatalities file.

Reasons

• To chronicle all known information on shark attacks( in this case dog fatalities) from Australian waters past, and present and to record future attacks.
• To provide source material for scientific study to identify the common factors relating to the causes of attacks on humans.
• To provide summary information for public education and awareness and/or publication by the media.
• To publish information resulting from analysis of the acquired data.

J.

Edited November 13, 2011 by GeckoTree

[TheCoat]

I read regularly posts re BSL and I am continually amazed at some of the positions taken on this subject by fellow DOLers. EVERYBODY with half a brain knows that it is not the breed that is the problem, it is US< period.

Until councils,govt. etc .pull their collective heads from you know where and address the cause of the problem ( US ) and do something constructive about it instead of political responses to this subject a lot of breeds are doomed.

Many breeds are not my choice but I will defend the right to own any breed that I choose.( I do not own apts ) We all need to look past the apt and realise that our rights are gradually being eroded away from us while we all sit around and whinge amongst ourselves

The bottom line is and always should be, you are responsible for your dogs' behaviour, If you control the situation that your dogs get into you minimise your risk....simple.

If you dont' contain your dog securely and any other animals you own you deserve to suffer any legal penalty as a result of your inability to do so.

My only other comment would be that all those people that think BSL is not going to worry them ....think again, that what was said early days' with the prospect of a ban on tail docking, and so it moves on and on and on.

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.

[bulldogz4eva]

Oh and the rationale for the thread is that we're sick and tired of people attributing the APBT to fatalities here, I don't know about you but I don't like lies and rumors being spread when in actual fact IT IS NOT THE TRUTH

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.

Edited November 13, 2011 by bulldogz4eva

[geo]

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.

I think that time has long passed and all anyone Pro APBT people are trying to do now is campaign about responsible ownership and how BSL doesn't work. I wouldn't take this thread as the whole argument, it's just a thread on what has happened.. Whenever i have spoke to anyone pro pitbull, they never start to sslate other breeds..

I'm not sure how old the AKNC is, and i don't know why they didn't ever recognise it, but they recognise the Amstaff..?

[bulldogz4eva]

I read regularly posts re BSL and I am continually amazed at some of the positions taken on this subject by fellow DOLers. EVERYBODY with half a brain knows that it is not the breed that is the problem, it is US< period.

Until councils,govt. etc .pull their collective heads from you know where and address the cause of the problem ( US ) and do something constructive about it instead of political responses to this subject a lot of breeds are doomed.

Many breeds are not my choice but I will defend the right to own any breed that I choose.( I do not own apts ) We all need to look past the apt and realise that our rights are gradually being eroded away from us while we all sit around and whinge amongst ourselves

The bottom line is and always should be, you are responsible for your dogs' behaviour, If you control the situation that your dogs get into you minimise your risk....simple.

If you dont' contain your dog securely and any other animals you own you deserve to suffer any legal penalty as a result of your inability to do so.

My only other comment would be that all those people that think BSL is not going to worry them ....think again, that what was said early days' with the prospect of a ban on tail docking, and so it moves on and on and on.

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.

How are other breeds being dragged into it?By posting facts.The majority of attacks and fatalaties are caused by crossbreeds as they are the most owned dog in this country.Other purebreeds that are ANKC registered are not going to be in the spotlight.The recent debacle with the amstaff in QLD was heading for a confrontation before that and it had to happen.No I dont beleive they are going to say they are wrong because governments/big brother never admit when they are wrong but I will rub their noses in it every chance I get because I know the cold hard truth.Fact.

Edited November 13, 2011 by bulldogz4eva

[TheCoat]

Oh and the rationale for the thread is that we're sick and tired of people attributing the APBT to fatalities here, I don't know about you but I don't like lies and rumors being spread when in actual fact IT IS NOT THE TRUTH

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. ;)

[RottnBullies]

Oh and the rationale for the thread is that we're sick and tired of people attributing the APBT to fatalities here, I don't know about you but I don't like lies and rumors being spread when in actual fact IT IS NOT THE TRUTH

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.

Please tell how stating a fact makes me naive?? or how by stating this fact It's dragging other breeds down, you like to see what you want to see, no anti BSL person wants any other breeds to be added to the list and to have to go through what the APBT is going through. If that's what you think then I seriously think you are the naive one here.

If your own dogs head were on a chopping block from a crime it did not commit would you not defend it? Or would you class It as not worth the bother It's done and dusted and move on to another dog. The dog's aren't the problem here, the humans are

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.

Not even going to bother with a response to that one!

I'm not buying into your take on it all and thank god for people who are willing to defend their dogs no matter the breed or whether they own a RB or not

[bulldogz4eva]

Oh and the rationale for the thread is that we're sick and tired of people attributing the APBT to fatalities here, I don't know about you but I don't like lies and rumors being spread when in actual fact IT IS NOT THE TRUTH

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. ;)

Then you have nothing to fear do you?Havent you just contradicted yourself?You say they are draggin other breeds into the spotlight then you say you dont fear an ANKC breed being targeted,so you have nothing to worry about.You dont have to preach to the converted I know how to keep my dogs safe been doing it for a long time but that is besides the point.Things just dont go away or fix themsleves and they need to understand that becuase they are not going to eradicate them from this country which is there objective.Not to mention if I wish to walk my dog down the street I f***** well will and wont be treated like a criminal becuase of it.