Decided To Check Nsw Dog Attacks

[justin19801]

Jed states: "When Mrs Stringer was attacked and killed in Toowoomba Q, the headline should have read 'LABRADOR CROSS KILLS WOMAN' - NOT 'pitbull' etc."

I have never hear of Mrs Stringer (I only move do to Oz in 1996) and nothing I can come up with using Google says Labrador Cross .. . I do come up with some "not pit-bull" statements.

Can you give better references?

ok . . . no bites. Is "labrador" just being used figuratively as the epitomy of a dog not thought to be aggressive? Seem to remember a doco that said APBT dogs bred specifically for fighting were exported in the EU by labeling them as Labrador X boxer.

The internet was not as prvasive then as it is now so it's difficult to google info on it. The media and RSPCA called the dog a pitbull but the person who put the dog down said it was a lab x. Unfortunately as usual no photo of the dog was available. The APBT people took the cas to the media council and for biased reporting and were knocked back. Many other people have been killed by other breeds but, of course no sympathy is shown for those victims. There is no mileage to be made.

[WreckitWhippet]

Whilst the glorification of fighting dogs persists on forums etc, the bans have no hope of being overturned.

Bans or No bans, the APBT will always be around and those who love them will always own them.

That sort of comment does your cause no favours either. Those with influence and those who make the decisions care very little for talk like that.

Once again i here what your saying, But its just reality, do you really think the APBT will become extinct because there is a ban on them?

I think that in time, the only bull breeds that you will be able to own without restriction, will be those with ANKC papers.

That is what the APBT supporters should be working on IMO. If the authorities want papers, it's not hard to organise papered breedings to satisfy the requirement.

Are you suggesting that APBT owners undermine the ANKC registry and it's integrity by falsifying documents and applying for papers that do not rightfully belong to that animal ?

That's going to gain a lot of support , amongst the ANKC breeders .

[chrisjc]

Faking papers is not going to help the situation, if it come down the that being the only way to save my dog , i would just go underground. if my dog has done nothing wrong besides be born a certain breed, i decide wheather or not she lives or dies. not some moron who cant tell the difference between my dog and the next.

ANKC would be more interested in the eradication of the breed than helping it they are just too good for us , there are examples of that on this site alone.

[justin19801]

I wouldn't have thought it was possible to do so but I guess in the end people have to do what is in the best interests of their dog, not any organisation that has thrown them to the winds and even helps train breed assessors, for a breed they claim doesn't exist. A better way would be to hit the supporters of BSL in the hip pocket. I resigned from the ALP and will only send funds to Best Friends, not the RSPCA. BSL varies in severity around Australia and the RSPCA wants all APBTs seized and killed as they have finally agreed BSL hasn't worked to eliminate the breed because of outlaw owners. So people will do what is req'd to save their dogs. I might not be happy with it but I find it hard to criticise it.

[tybrax]

for a breed they claim doesn't exist.

This is were the law is fraudulent. So they falsify the documents to state your dog is a pit bull they,don't have a clue.

So how can they legislate a law thats based on fraud?????

tybrax

Edited March 15, 2010 by tybrax

[WreckitWhippet]

for a breed they claim doesn't exist.

This is were the law is fraudulent. So they falsify the documents to state your dog is a pit bull they,don't have a clue.

So how can they legislate a law thats based on fraud?????

tybrax

4 years down the track and nothing has changed. You'd think by now if that was the case, that someone would have successfully challenged it.

[tybrax]

Nothing has changed, SBT123 you are so wrong.

Many dogs that have been siezed in Vic, NSW, have been handed back to there owners.

tybrax

[Jed]

Longcoat

Jed, Schutzhund isn't banned in Australia at all, only in Victoria which in time will be hopefully overturned. In fact it's not Schutzhund titled GSD's that bite people, it's the non titled non tested breeding practices creating faulty temperament GSD's that appear on the bite statistics. Fear biting nerve bag GSD's who can't determine the difference between friend and foe are the GSD's who attack and bite people, not GSD's of sound temperament and nerve that Schutzhund testing confirms. I can't recall how many kids, there has been so many that have referred to my GSD as a "police dog", and most people are fully aware that GSD's are working dogs of a guardian breed and can be trained in protection. You could hardly say that banning Schutzhund removes the stigma of visciousness from the breed when every police K9 unit has them along with every second K9 security officer seen on the street??? Only the best of temperaments with the highest proven and tested obedience levels in Schutzhund get near a bite sleeve. You can't roll up to a Schutzhund club with any mouldy old GSD to do bite work for using to attack people, and the public including you Jed who know nothing about Schutzhund should learn about the sport before passing silly judgements

Firstly, you are correct, Victoria. I have just read some information which leads me to believe that it is no longer banned.

I am not making silly judgements. You have totally misunderstood my post. Whether deliberately, or accidentally, I have no idea. There is no need to write a tirade defending GSD. Please read and try and comprehend what I have written

Sandgrubber

Jed states: "When Mrs Stringer was attacked and killed in Toowoomba Q, the headline should have read 'LABRADOR CROSS KILLS WOMAN' - NOT 'pitbull' etc."

I have never hear of Mrs Stringer (I only move do to Oz in 1996) and nothing I can come up with using Google says Labrador Cross .. . I do come up with some "not pit-bull" statements.

Can you give better references?

ok . . . no bites. Is "labrador" just being used figuratively as the epitomy of a dog not thought to be aggressive? Seem to remember a doco that said APBT dogs bred specifically for fighting were exported in the EU by labeling them as Labrador X boxer.

There will be nothing on the net about labrador x as related to this. The dog was named as a pitbull by the media following the fatal attack. The dog was in fact, a cross bred obtained as an adult from the local pound. After destruction, a pm was done by the poundkeeper, a very experienced dog person (and judge), and he and several other witnesses said the dog was a "labrador x some sort of bull breed"

The rest is as Justin says.

I have no idea whether you can find it by googling. We have told you the facts, what more do you need. Mrs. Barbara Stringer was feeding the animals of a friend, who was on holiday. She stopped and spoke to the next door neighbour, who was the mother of the owner of the dog. The dog, which was in the neighbouring yard with the owner's mother, came up to the dividing fence and barked at her. She was holding a steering wheel lock (not 100% on this, something similar), and she waved it at the dog, saying "oh, you're a naughty boy", at which the dog hurdled the fence and attacked her, causing fatal injuries. The dog was seized by the council, and put down. When interviewed, friends of the owner ( who was a youth), said he boasted that he would make the dog savage.

As far I know, there might have been one photo of the dog published in the paper, but after all this time, I am not sure. So many pictures of pit bulls, maybe pit bulls, and not pitbulls.

the dog the murdoch papers always used as an illustration of a pit bull - brown dog, with a big head, apparently snarling at the camera, all teeth bared, was in fact a cross bred dog, with no pit bull, who was an inmate of a pound (Sydney, I think?) and he wasn't actually snarling, he was greeting the camera man.

But, hell, he sure looked savage in the photo. that photo was trotted out for years.

I very much doubt there would be anything direct regarding this, but you could check

www.edba.org.au

there will be something there, plus more information on BSL

and here

www.pethealth.com.au/Page/elderly-people-and-savage-dogs

Sandgrubber

ok . . . no bites. Is "labrador" just being used figuratively as the epitomy of a dog not thought to be aggressive? Seem to remember a doco that said APBT dogs bred specifically for fighting were exported in the EU by labeling them as Labrador X boxer.

No, labrador, as I used it in my original post referred only to the dog above, who killed Mrs. Stringer. Because he was id by a knowledgable person as a "labrador x some sort of bull breed".

As far as I am aware, pitbulls are not generally referred to as "labrador x" in this country. As there is some diversity in type, owners when registering them with councils tend to name them as a cross bred of the breed(s) they look most like.

And as far as the argument of staffy, amstaff and pitbull being the same, try to register your staffy in the APBT registry. I have no idea whether Amstaffs are accepted but I have a feeling maybe they are not.

We could ask Nigel.

If as much energy went into trying to overturn the bans, and had gone into stopping the bans before they were enacted, as goes into squabbling about whether the breeds are the same, or whether the dogs should be named something else, the bans would never have been enacted.

Even now, no one is doing anything much effective.

APBT owners said they didn't want outsiders, who were owners of other breeds interfering, they would take care of it. And there were more ANKC breeders working against the bans as APBT owners.

What a joke.

Edited March 15, 2010 by Jed

[Longcoat]

'Jed' date='15th Mar 2010 - 10:38 PM' post='4396274']

Longcoat

Jed, Schutzhund isn't banned in Australia at all, only in Victoria which in time will be hopefully overturned. In fact it's not Schutzhund titled GSD's that bite people, it's the non titled non tested breeding practices creating faulty temperament GSD's that appear on the bite statistics. Fear biting nerve bag GSD's who can't determine the difference between friend and foe are the GSD's who attack and bite people, not GSD's of sound temperament and nerve that Schutzhund testing confirms. I can't recall how many kids, there has been so many that have referred to my GSD as a "police dog", and most people are fully aware that GSD's are working dogs of a guardian breed and can be trained in protection. You could hardly say that banning Schutzhund removes the stigma of visciousness from the breed when every police K9 unit has them along with every second K9 security officer seen on the street??? Only the best of temperaments with the highest proven and tested obedience levels in Schutzhund get near a bite sleeve. You can't roll up to a Schutzhund club with any mouldy old GSD to do bite work for using to attack people, and the public including you Jed who know nothing about Schutzhund should learn about the sport before passing silly judgements

Firstly, you are correct, Victoria. I have just read some information which leads me to believe that it is no longer banned.

I am not making silly judgements. You have totally misunderstood my post. Whether deliberately, or accidentally, I have no idea. There is no need to write a tirade defending GSD. Please read and try and comprehend what I have written

Banning schutzhund in Aust may seem like a very nearsighted decision to devotees, but in fact, it does help keep the breeds traditionally involved from charges of "dangerous, savage".

Jed, I responded to what you wrote above???. How does banning Schutzhund help keep the breeds traditionally involved from charges of "dangerous, savage"

[Longcoat]

Faking papers is not going to help the situation, if it come down the that being the only way to save my dog , i would just go underground. if my dog has done nothing wrong besides be born a certain breed, i decide wheather or not she lives or dies. not some moron who cant tell the difference between my dog and the next.

ANKC would be more interested in the eradication of the breed than helping it they are just too good for us , there are examples of that on this site alone.

Some say it helps dramatically when the ranger is demanding that you must verify the breed of your dog

[WreckitWhippet]

Nothing has changed, SBT123 you are so wrong.

Many dogs that have been siezed in Vic, NSW, have been handed back to there owners.

tybrax

I'm talking about NSW, where the BA's are predominately Dogs NSW judges or breeders.

You have claimed for the last however many years that the law is fraudulant, yet no one has challenged it. If that were the case and they'd been successfull, every tom dick and harry with a Pit Bull would follow suit.

Now there's talk on a public forum of falsifying papers ( they would have to be ANKC papers ) to prove to rangers that people own a certain breed. Now that really is fraudulant, but for Pit Bull owners, that doesn't seem to matter, it's just a means to an end, that threatens to dump every ANKC Bull Breed in the same basket.

It's about time the Pit Bull owners, changed tact because 4 years on, nothing has changed in this state and the threats of " your dogs will be next " is still the number one catch cry.

[sandgrubber]

I'm having a lot of trouble posting . . .This may come out a mess.

Thanks for details. I tend to like Lab X's but had one very bad experience with a Lab X APBT in kennels.

So I like to get the details. these are probably obscure in this case.

Cross breeds are a crap shoot. the HA/DA problem sometimes gets worse, sometimes gets toned down.

I wish I knew what the system is doing .. . it doesn't allow me to edit anything. bugger, bugger, bugger bugger bugger.

Longcoat

Sandgrubber

Jed states: "When Mrs Stringer was attacked and killed in Toowoomba Q, the headline should have read 'LABRADOR CROSS KILLS WOMAN' - NOT 'pitbull' etc."

I have never hear of Mrs Stringer (I only move do to Oz in 1996) and nothing I can come up with using Google says Labrador Cross .. . I do come up with some "not pit-bull" statements.

Can you give better references?

Is "labrador" just being used figuratively as the epitomy of a dog not thought to be aggressive? Seem to remember a doco that said APBT dogs bred specifically for fighting were exported in the EU by labeling them as Labrador X boxer.

There will be nothing on the net about labrador x as related to this. The dog was named as a pitbull by the media following the fatal attack. The dog was in fact, a cross bred obtained as an adult from the local pound. After destruction, a pm was done by the poundkeeper, a very experienced dog person (and judge), and he and several other witnesses said the dog was a "labrador x some sort of bull breed"

The rest is as Justin says.

. . . We have told you the facts, what more do you need. Mrs. Barbara Stringer was feeding the animals of a friend, who was on holiday. She stopped and spoke to the next door neighbour, who was the mother of the owner of the dog. The dog, which was in the neighbouring yard with the owner's mother, came up to the dividing fence and barked at her. She was holding a steering wheel lock (not 100% on this, something similar), and she waved it at the dog, saying "oh, you're a naughty boy", at which the dog hurdled the fence and attacked her, causing fatal injuries. The dog was seized by the council, and put down. When interviewed, friends of the owner ( who was a youth), said he boasted that he would make the dog savage.

. . .

What a joke.

Seems to me that the facts are hard to come by . . . I breed Labs and find them much more inclined to go under than over fences, and I find very low propensity to HA/DA. Any black, yellow or brown med-large dog with ears that flop down and short coat is a Lab cross -- no? I've had people ask me if one of my girls was a Pit Bull. No intelligent person with any breed will deny that it's possible to have strong aggression in their breed. I think, given an accurate set of statistics, some breed tendencies would show up.

Edited March 16, 2010 by sandgrubber

[rottiadora]

Now there's talk on a public forum of falsifying papers ( they would have to be ANKC papers ) to prove to rangers that people own a certain breed. Now that really is fraudulant, but for Pit Bull owners, that doesn't seem to matter, it's just a means to an end, that threatens to dump every ANKC Bull Breed in the same basket.

Load of crap!

That is "Longcoats" talk. He/she seems to think getting ANKC papers is like buying a packet of cornflakes.

Besides, if people were to try and falsify ANKC papers, one rangers phonecall to the state body would soon fix that up.

Edited March 16, 2010 by rottiadora

[tybrax]

Nothing has changed, SBT123 you are so wrong.

Many dogs that have been siezed in Vic, NSW, have been handed back to there owners.

tybrax

I'm talking about NSW, where the BA's are predominately Dogs NSW judges or breeders.

You have claimed for the last however many years that the law is fraudulant, yet no one has challenged it. If that were the case and they'd been successfull, every tom dick and harry with a Pit Bull would follow suit.

Now there's talk on a public forum of falsifying papers ( they would have to be ANKC papers ) to prove to rangers that people own a certain breed. Now that really is fraudulant, but for Pit Bull owners, that doesn't seem to matter, it's just a means to an end, that threatens to dump every ANKC Bull Breed in the same basket.

It's about time the Pit Bull owners, changed tact because 4 years on, nothing has changed in this state and the threats of " your dogs will be next " is still the number one catch cry.

Dogs NSW judges/breeders are not experts, there are no judges in Australia qualified to id an APBT. As for pit bull thats a mixture of breeds so they must be

pretty good to id a pit bull.

There are know Amstaff judge's in Aus all you have is your all breeds judges, who have never owned the breed,judged the breed as the breed is not recognised.

The law is fraudulent, and there documentation is false and has been proven many times.

People have challenge the law and they have had there dogs returned the last two cases being NSW and that was this year, l might add.

l hardly post any cases on here anymore because there are to many pro BSL people on here!!

your comment "your dogs will be next is still the no.1 catch cry" Come on you made a statement that your dogs are safe you made a deal with the ANKC.

Yep and lets send the pit bull and apbt to the slaughter. l don't agree with papers been falsified,but like others have said it's to save there breed so be it.

Of course it's fraudulent, but so is the law.

[chrisjc]

what a load of crap, for so many people who claim to be against the bsl laws a few of you seem to be almost rubbing your hands together waiting for them to be eradicated. one of you even claims to have owned one in the past.

you claim "the pitbull people wanted no help yada yada yada" what a load of crap for starters there are no "pitbull" people in this country, however there is the APBT club of victoria who have done all in their power to do what they can with limited resources, but it doesnt help when if they decide to do anything media related, their words get twisted around and edited beyond belief. as an estimation the club probly has less than 300 members over australia and new zealand. probly less than 30 of those members would realy have anything to do with giving aid to the cause. and most of those would be commitee members. so i would very much doubt that they would have ever knocked back any offers of help if they knew it was genuine.

it doesnt help that the people who cause the most negativity towards us responsible owners are the ones are the exact same type of owners who give rottys and other similar breeds the same image, they do little research into the chosen breed and generally have insufficient space, socialisation, or training and would spend little time with the dog after it grows out of puppy stage.

these are the owners that blame the breed and when they are on the news they say" its never happened before it just snapped" making joe public think they can be unstable breeds who are a danger to everyone.

it is only very recently that because of a very small amount of media exposure giving a positive outlet telling the story of the dogs being the victims kept in unsatisfactory conditions and then rehoming abused animal and showing a few good dogs that a very small % of people are not changing their minds but are open for discussion with the proper owners why they have been painted in the wrong light.

i dont think we would ever knock back help

[Tarmons]

Just to clarify some facts that are getting in the way of a good story:

I knew Mrs Barbara Stringer. I used to purchase items at the lovely Gift Shop her daughter owned. Over time we became friends.

Secondly, I know the mother of the young man who owned the Labrador cross involved in the attack. The dog was registered with the local Council as a Labrador -cross. It was not a vicious dog. It was a very friendly dog. Looking at it you would be hard pressed to identify the cross. According to the family the suggestion was that it was crossed with a bull terrier type.

After the attack it was brought by the Police to my Vet to be put down. The dog walked into that Clinic with a wagging tail and was pleased to see the Staff and gave each of them a lick. Even when he was being put down, his tail was wagging and he licked the Vet on the hand. The Vet said that it was incredible to associate such a friendly dog with such an horrific attack.

What actually happened on that terrible day. Barbara was in the Gift Shop when she took a phone call to say that the alarm in her nephew's house was going off. She was keeping an eye on the house while he was away.

Barbara had a key to the front door of the house but because the burglar alarm had gone off she took the steering wheel lock with her just in case while she checked the outside of the house to see if any of the windows had been forced open.

Rose, the next door neighbour, was in the yard hanging out the clothes and called out to her. As Rose walked towards the fence the Labrador-cross raced up to the fence and barked at Barbara..... the dividing fences in that part of town were chain mesh -no more than 1.2m high.

She stopped and spoke to the next door neighbour, who was the mother of the owner of the dog. The dog, which was in the neighbouring yard with the owner's mother, came up to the dividing fence and barked at her. She was holding a steering wheel lock (not 100% on this, something similar), and she waved it at the dog, saying "oh, you're a naughty boy", at which the dog hurdled the fence and attacked her, causing fatal injuries. The dog was seized by the council, and put down. When interviewed, friends of the owner ( who was a youth), said he boasted that he would make the dog savage.

Rose actually threw herself on top of Barbara in an effort to stop the Labrador-cross from doing more damage. The attack happened so quickly. Another neighbour who heard the screams and Rose's cries for help, phoned the Police.

Rose's son was 19 years old.

It was amazing how the local press ran with the suggestion that it was a Pit Bull cross. Anyway... that fatal attack changed the Local Laws forever. The resulting Court case was horrendous for both Barbra Stringer's Family and for Rose. That's where the quote that the 19 year old was going to make his dog a killing machine originated and every Pit Bull Terrier in Queensland paid the price for that brag.

[Howl]

Nothing has changed, SBT123 you are so wrong.

Many dogs that have been siezed in Vic, NSW, have been handed back to there owners.

tybrax

I'm talking about NSW, where the BA's are predominately Dogs NSW judges or breeders.

You have claimed for the last however many years that the law is fraudulant, yet no one has challenged it. If that were the case and they'd been successfull, every tom dick and harry with a Pit Bull would follow suit.

Now there's talk on a public forum of falsifying papers ( they would have to be ANKC papers ) to prove to rangers that people own a certain breed. Now that really is fraudulant, but for Pit Bull owners, that doesn't seem to matter, it's just a means to an end, that threatens to dump every ANKC Bull Breed in the same basket.

It's about time the Pit Bull owners, changed tact because 4 years on, nothing has changed in this state and the threats of " your dogs will be next " is still the number one catch cry.

Dogs NSW judges/breeders are not experts, there are no judges in Australia qualified to id an APBT. As for pit bull thats a mixture of breeds so they must be

pretty good to id a pit bull.

There are know Amstaff judge's in Aus all you have is your all breeds judges, who have never owned the breed,judged the breed as the breed is not recognised.

The law is fraudulent, and there documentation is false and has been proven many times.

People have challenge the law and they have had there dogs returned the last two cases being NSW and that was this year, l might add.

l hardly post any cases on here anymore because there are to many pro BSL people on here!!

your comment "your dogs will be next is still the no.1 catch cry" Come on you made a statement that your dogs are safe you made a deal with the ANKC.

Yep and lets send the pit bull and apbt to the slaughter. l don't agree with papers been falsified,but like others have said it's to save there breed so be it.

Of course it's fraudulent, but so is the law.

Tybrax, where has this been proven? You have provided opinions and commentary, but never have I seen a judgement made by the Courts that the law is fraudulent. Dogs may have been returned - was that on the basis that the law was fraudulent? Or some other reason such as weak evidence or procedure not being followed?

[Jed]

I'm having a lot of trouble posting . . .This may come out a mess.

Thanks for details. I tend to like Lab X's but had one very bad experience with a Lab X APBT in kennels.

So I like to get the details. these are probably obscure in this case.

Cross breeds are a crap shoot. the HA/DA problem sometimes gets worse, sometimes gets toned down.

I wish I knew what the system is doing .. . it doesn't allow me to edit anything. bugger, bugger, bugger bugger bugger.

Longcoat

Sandgrubber

Jed states: "When Mrs Stringer was attacked and killed in Toowoomba Q, the headline should have read 'LABRADOR CROSS KILLS WOMAN' - NOT 'pitbull' etc."

I have never hear of Mrs Stringer (I only move do to Oz in 1996) and nothing I can come up with using Google says Labrador Cross .. . I do come up with some "not pit-bull" statements.

Can you give better references?

Is "labrador" just being used figuratively as the epitomy of a dog not thought to be aggressive? Seem to remember a doco that said APBT dogs bred specifically for fighting were exported in the EU by labeling them as Labrador X boxer.

There will be nothing on the net about labrador x as related to this. The dog was named as a pitbull by the media following the fatal attack. The dog was in fact, a cross bred obtained as an adult from the local pound. After destruction, a pm was done by the poundkeeper, a very experienced dog person (and judge), and he and several other witnesses said the dog was a "labrador x some sort of bull breed"

The rest is as Justin says.

. . . We have told you the facts, what more do you need. Mrs. Barbara Stringer was feeding the animals of a friend, who was on holiday. She stopped and spoke to the next door neighbour, who was the mother of the owner of the dog. The dog, which was in the neighbouring yard with the owner's mother, came up to the dividing fence and barked at her. She was holding a steering wheel lock (not 100% on this, something similar), and she waved it at the dog, saying "oh, you're a naughty boy", at which the dog hurdled the fence and attacked her, causing fatal injuries. The dog was seized by the council, and put down. When interviewed, friends of the owner ( who was a youth), said he boasted that he would make the dog savage.

. . .

What a joke.

Seems to me that the facts are hard to come by . . . I breed Labs and find them much more inclined to go under than over fences, and I find very low propensity to HA/DA. Any black, yellow or brown med-large dog with ears that flop down and short coat is a Lab cross -- no? I've had people ask me if one of my girls was a Pit Bull. No intelligent person with any breed will deny that it's possible to have strong aggression in their breed. I think, given an accurate set of statistics, some breed tendencies would show up.

I'm not vilifying labs, I am defending the pitbull, which was widely blamed for this attack, but wasn't responsible.

It's about deed, not breed.

The people who did the id did think that was what the dog was. The attack, imo (and that of a lot of other people) had nothing to do with the breed, the problem was the owner decided to |"make the dog savage" and he certainly succeeded.

there should be something on the edba website about it. There used to be. Otherwise, you would have to access hard copy, probably Courier Mail or Toowoomba Chronicle, but what I've said is about all there is -- and more with the pm and breed id

[Jed]

SBT123

You have claimed for the last however many years that the law is fraudulant, yet no one has challenged it. If that were the case and they'd been successfull, every tom dick and harry with a Pit Bull would follow suit.

No one has the bottle to do the hard yards to challenge it. If it is able to be challenged. Is it? Yes, it probably is, depending on the laws, so the people with APBT, if they feel strongly about it, have the means to do something about it.

Banning schutzhund in Aust may seem like a very nearsighted decision to devotees, but in fact, it does help keep the breeds traditionally involved from charges of "dangerous, savage".

Longcoat, if you don't understand the above, you will never understand it, no matter how I rephrase it.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Jed

[justin19801]

for a breed they claim doesn't exist. :D

This is were the law is fraudulent. So they falsify the documents to state your dog is a pit bull they,don't have a clue.

So how can they legislate a law thats based on fraud?????

tybrax

4 years down the track and nothing has changed. You'd think by now if that was the case, that someone would have successfully challenged it.

.

Few people I know of have $50,000 + dollars to spare in case they lose a court case. One of the reasons APBT owners were targetted, they are not the affluent white middle-class capable of fighting such cases.

The Victorian RSPCA is on record as wanting all APBTs seized and killed. Lobbying is no doubt occuring behind the scenes and will eventually occur. Most victims will be Staffy, Ridgeback and Lab crosses but that doesn't seem to bother them.

Australia does not have a Bill of Rights so governments can basically pass whatever laws they want. As they are political laws they need to be fought politically. By hitting BSLs supporters in the hip pocket it is a start. Tas and SA have elections this w/e and dog owners could have played their role. The "My Dog Votes" campaign in the US four years ago helped unseat a US Senator who could have successfully challenged Obama last year. Unfortunately the woman running the campaign has had to stop and get on with her life. The media couldn't believe she was a successful business woman who decided to fight BSL off her own bat and tried to discredit her as a front for more powerful interests. So it can be done, it just takes time and money.

Edited March 16, 2010 by justin19801