Mushaka Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 IF If If lol.What is so hard to understand that this bloke in all probability wouldnt have cared about the RB law? a fine lol look what happened. Are declared RB's monitered 24/7, of course not. That is why he would have been forced to, because on his own he didn't care and the other dog and owner paid the price. If he had to comply with RB legislation the dog wouldn't be escaping. He has just added fuel to the fire, how does this show people these dogs aren't monsters? WOW...that one line just put me WAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY offside! these dogs are NOT monsters,and lines like that help NO ONE! ANY dog,bred,raised to hunt,left in suburbia ,could be a danger unless properly contained,and even then..questionable.. I have known a few people to label their dog a pit when it was just a cross of many sorts.. Why is it a mutt till proven otherwise with papers ,and a pit till proven otherwise.... Not sure how good your reading comprehension is, but I said it was important to show people these dogs aren't monsters. If you don't realise by now that is what the general public think when it comes to pitbulls you need to get out more. How did you think that BSL got passed if ignorant people don't think these dogs are child eating monsters? Joe public may read your statement and think you're in agreeance.. comprehension is fine thanks! If Joe Public reads my post they would see exactly what I said, "He has just added fuel to the fire, how does this show people these dogs aren't monsters?". Bolded it to make it easier for you. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybrax Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I would bet my left knacker that warley knows a pitbull better than the rangers do. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I would bet my left knacker that warley knows a pitbull better than the rangers do. :D I thought you were one of those that were in the camp that believed that one of the problems with BSL is that ranger training is woefully inadequate, and that dogs that are in no way pitbull are misidentified. So you think rangers are better at dog ID now then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStarPits Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Jdavis a Pit Bull club secretary cant even positivly ID a Pit Bull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Jdavis a Pit Bull club secretary cant even positivly ID a Pit Bull. Yes, would be better to name their club Medium Sized Short haired Dog Club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStarPits Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Yes as a traditionally functional breed they do usually come in many shapes and sizes, some smaller than staffy size, some as big as a lab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Yes as a traditionally functional breed they do usually come in many shapes and sizes, some smaller than staffy size, some as big as a lab. As the saying goes....You're flogging a dead horse with that one! Shame Ignorance Is contagious, then maybe the dog world and everything in It... wouldn't be such a damn mess !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybrax Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I would bet my left knacker that warley knows a pitbull better than the rangers do. :D I thought you were one of those that were in the camp that believed that one of the problems with BSL is that ranger training is woefully inadequate, and that dogs that are in no way pitbull are misidentified. So you think rangers are better at dog ID now then? There is no one in Australia with qualifications that can identify an APBT or x and thats being proven in a court of law. Not NSW rangers, Qld, WA or Vic. All they do is go on assumptions and beliefs that the dog is that breed. N.S.W. breed identifiers are not experts. All breed judges are not expert, there are no APBT judges or American Amstaff in Aus. So can someone tell me when an all breed judge has ever id a APBT the answer is never, they do not exist in Australia they are not recognised. So how can they legislate a law thats based on fraud????? tybrax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 The gits who cant manage the dogs cant turn around any sort of perception, and I wouldnt want them to try. And they certainly arent helping in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceilidh Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I have to wonder, how is it that any Joe Blow can see a dog and say 'oh that is a cocker spaniel or jack russell or fox terrier or pug etc etc' but absolutely no one is Australia can recognise an APBT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStarPits Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 (edited) I highly suspect because court challenges rarly involve those other breeds, anyone can guess breeds, for fun and games, along with shelters etc, it happens all the time in pounds. Edited April 1, 2009 by NorthernStarPits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStarPits Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 (edited) The gits who cant manage the dogs cant turn around any sort of perception, and I wouldnt want them to try. And they certainly arent helping in this thread. I dont know of any APBT owner in this thread who can not manage the breed appropriatly, I do know one previous owner in this thread who didnt manage though, 2 dogs dead, or perhaps just the APBT one?. RB laws or not, a gits a git. Edited April 1, 2009 by NorthernStarPits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I love dribbly dogs Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 How can anyone know if BSL works or not if not everyone follows the law? I don't presume to know everything about it and I don't really support it.. But nothing will ever work if everyone just 'does their own thing' and doesn't try... I don't believe any law should be specific to breeds I think it's either an aggressive/dangerous dog, or it's not, regardless of breed.. but that's not the issue here.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mushaka Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 (edited) How can anyone know if BSL works or not if not everyone follows the law? I don't presume to know everything about it and I don't really support it..But nothing will ever work if everyone just 'does their own thing' and doesn't try... I don't believe any law should be specific to breeds I think it's either an aggressive/dangerous dog, or it's not, regardless of breed.. but that's not the issue here.. I assumed the issue was that the people owned a supposed APBT,and it wasnt reported by the neighbours PRIOR to any incident. Again,soo many people change thier breed to suit themselves.. For instance,a friend of mine bought a pup, lab x maltese. This dog was picked up by council after getting out while she had tradesmen on the property.The council holding facility labelled the dog a Lab x Kelpie while in his pen.. my friend decided that kelpie is a far better cross to be in there than a maltese,so she now tells everyone this is what her dog was crossed with.. she stated to me that the council would know better and he must be crossed with that.. Pays no mind to the fact he was sold to her has Lab x Maltese purley cause maltese isnt as "cool". (no offence malt owners lol) ETA: he is a really cute dog..looks like a mini lab Edited April 1, 2009 by Lewis & Lyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mushaka Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?act=...t&id=171404 council has him as an APBT... who here agrees? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 RB laws or not, a gits a git. Yes that is so true. It's a pity there isnt a restricted human law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandra777 Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 1stly - a dog attacked another old defenceless dog in its backyard - seemingly unprovoked - sorry but PTS is the only answer (next time it might be a kid) Back the bus up. Dog aggression does not equal human aggression. Yes every dog should be safe in it's own back yard Yes I think the attacking dog should be PTS and the owner fined & made to pay all the vets bills for the other dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotwyr Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 1stly - a dog attacked another old defenceless dog in its backyard - seemingly unprovoked - sorry but PTS is the only answer (next time it might be a kid) Back the bus up. Dog aggression does not equal human aggression. Yes every dog should be safe in it's own back yard Yes I think the attacking dog should be PTS and the owner fined & made to pay all the vets bills for the other dog. Yes I realise DA doesn't = HA but it's a short step from a loose dog in your neighbours backyard to a loose dog roaming the street and doing god knows what. If a dog can attack another unprovoked then the risk to all is just too high be it dog, cat, kid, sheep that's the next potential victim..... Rae Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 I assumed the issue was that the people owned a supposed APBT,and it wasnt reported by the neighbours PRIOR to any incident. which they regret doing now and was the reason for the thread in the 1st place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rottiadora Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 Around and around it goes again and again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts