steamboat Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 M-Sass,On one hand you argue in favour of B.S.L as a solution and tell us the parameters won't be changed or broadened.That people who do the right thing have nothing to fear as long as they are ANKC members,or only buy ANKC Reg. dogs.On the other hand,you show us just how easy it is to use that fear to broaden the parameters and include dogs that were never intended targets and have done nothing wrong. So the government has definitely listened to the THAT'S NOT A PITBULL but a CROSSBREED cry and with the collection of data where Pitbull types have been falsely registered as crossbreeds.......what??, you can't understand why they are targeting crossbreeds??.........I surely can!! Do those worried about their dogs of unknown heritage really have as much to fear as the owners of the pure breeds most commonly nominated in the pit bull masquarade? The amstaff & staffy in particular & to a lesser extend the bull mastif, rhodesian ridgeback, the labrador etc. Some of these breeds have already been banned in various locations simply by the association. Do they even really care about the fate of the at risk pure breeds? I'm guessing the coroner of this thread recognised the M.O. of the owners of suspected restricted breeds & made her suggestion to place the onus of identification on the owner rather than them claiming "xbreed'' & challenging the authorities to prove otherwise. The easiest option is impose a blanket ban to cover all the possibilities. As has happened O/S If it came to pass here, your ANKC papers wouldn't be your saviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 M-Sass,On one hand you argue in favour of B.S.L as a solution and tell us the parameters won't be changed or broadened.That people who do the right thing have nothing to fear as long as they are ANKC members,or only buy ANKC Reg. dogs.On the other hand,you show us just how easy it is to use that fear to broaden the parameters and include dogs that were never intended targets and have done nothing wrong. So the government has definitely listened to the THAT'S NOT A PITBULL but a CROSSBREED cry and with the collection of data where Pitbull types have been falsely registered as crossbreeds.......what??, you can't understand why they are targeting crossbreeds??.........I surely can!! Do those worried about their dogs of unknown heritage really have as much to fear as the owners of the pure breeds most commonly nominated in the pit bull masquarade? The amstaff & staffy in particular & to a lesser extend the bull mastif, rhodesian ridgeback, the labrador etc. Some of these breeds have already been banned in various locations simply by the association. Do they even really care about the fate of the at risk pure breeds? I'm guessing the coroner of this thread recognised the M.O. of the owners of suspected restricted breeds & made her suggestion to place the onus of identification on the owner rather than them claiming "xbreed'' & challenging the authorities to prove otherwise. The easiest option is impose a blanket ban to cover all the possibilities. As has happened O/S If it came to pass here, your ANKC papers wouldn't be your saviour. 1) Obviously ATM they have more to fear. 2)Of course they care about the fate of at risk pedigrees.Its a point you have been ignoring till now.Seems you might be starting to see a little more than you were about why we don't see B.S.L as a solution.You haven't cared about anyone else,but now you bring up who cares about you. 3) I don't contest at all that a lot of people have been directly responsible for these measures being brought in.I do contest "The easiest option" as you put it,is the right one,or even the effective one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) M-Sass, Though I can understand your logic and even to some degree sympathise,I think its simplistic. You are clearly of the opinion that there is no place or need any more for dogs of unrecognised breeding,and that pedigee dogs offer all that we can or should ever want. I disagree on both those points. I am not anti pure breed/pedigree.Its a wonderfull thing for a person who has a very specific understanding of what they want in a dog to be able to say "I can get it here",and know their choice is the right one that ticks all the boxes.Its healthy,bred for specific purpose and /or traits,has good conformation and is bred to be the very best it can be for those qualities. Used to be 1st point of call for those who wanted something realy special,and they would be right 95% of the time,or more. I would love that to be the case again.Its one of the reasons I come to this forum,because I AM passionate about pedigree dogs.I also happen to think the KCs seem to have it together more than any other group of dog enthusiasts I can think of. On the other hand,I don't think they are immune to the problems faced by any group of dog enthusiasts in trying to keep pace with the changes in society. I believe those problems have far more devastating effect on pedgree dogs,and far more rapid than most seem to believe. It bugs hell out of me to see pedigree dogs fall,and open discussion of how to reverse that,or the causes closed and denied. Pedigree breeders AS A GROUP seem to think they are issolated and persecuted and react by hitting back,but thats not just happening to pedigree dog enthusiasts.Dogs in society are under attack in all quarters.Yes,there are some areas in urgent need of reforms.Welfare issues are a major part of that,partly because society IS changing for the better and looking at the issues. I will even say that breeders of non pedigree dogs are IN GENERAL the worst offenders on most counts.But if no one is willing to addmitt the problems and and calmly look for solutions,picking on the worst offenders and eliminating them one by one is only going to work while theres another mob to pick on. Edited October 21, 2012 by moosmum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 M-Sass,On one hand you argue in favour of B.S.L as a solution and tell us the parameters won't be changed or broadened.That people who do the right thing have nothing to fear as long as they are ANKC members,or only buy ANKC Reg. dogs.On the other hand,you show us just how easy it is to use that fear to broaden the parameters and include dogs that were never intended targets and have done nothing wrong. So the government has definitely listened to the THAT'S NOT A PITBULL but a CROSSBREED cry and with the collection of data where Pitbull types have been falsely registered as crossbreeds.......what??, you can't understand why they are targeting crossbreeds??.........I surely can!! Do those worried about their dogs of unknown heritage really have as much to fear as the owners of the pure breeds most commonly nominated in the pit bull masquarade? The amstaff & staffy in particular & to a lesser extend the bull mastif, rhodesian ridgeback, the labrador etc. Some of these breeds have already been banned in various locations simply by the association. Do they even really care about the fate of the at risk pure breeds? I'm guessing the coroner of this thread recognised the M.O. of the owners of suspected restricted breeds & made her suggestion to place the onus of identification on the owner rather than them claiming "xbreed'' & challenging the authorities to prove otherwise. The easiest option is impose a blanket ban to cover all the possibilities. As has happened O/S If it came to pass here, your ANKC papers wouldn't be your saviour. 1) Obviously ATM they have more to fear. 2)Of course they care about the fate of at risk pedigrees.Its a point you have been ignoring till now.Seems you might be starting to see a little more than you were about why we don't see B.S.L as a solution.You haven't cared about anyone else,but now you bring up who cares about you. 3) I don't contest at all that a lot of people have been directly responsible for these measures being brought in.I do contest "The easiest option" as you put it,is the right one,or even the effective one. Oh dear, Stop being so ridiculous, & stop making such ridiculous assumptions. You lot really are one trick ponies. People make their own choices. Those that chose a dog of indeterminal heritage which bears a striking resemblance to a breed subject to a legislation that demands a strict criterior for ownership made their own choices. BSL has been in place for over a decade. So obviously they have made a conscience decision & chose the ''type'' they wanted. Hey, what do we care?......Let the Devil take tomorrow. Well hello It's tomorrow. So why should those who chose an ANKC registered pure breed have to pay the piper for a jig called by others? There are thousands more ANKC registered family pets than there are ANKC registered "show dogs" ANKC registered dog owners made their choice because they are diserning. They want to know what they will have when the cute wears off. They want to know what they are getting for their buck. Too smart by half. B.t.w. Being ANKC registered isn't some sort of ritualistic secret society that is the secretive realm only for the annointed. All ANKC registered breeders are required to register all surviving whelps. So wipe away the crocodile tears, take the responsibility for your actions & if you are unhappy with the outcomes, take aim at those who instigated the B.S.L Joe Public. If you want support, You should keep this in mind, You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huck house Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 BSL may have been on some people's radar for a decade but most potential new dog owners wouldn't have a clue about BSL . Many bull breed owners still don't . ' Educating ' the public on the illegalities of owning a 'weapon' would only add to hysteria and advertises to the wrong 'type'. So the ANKC isn't for the annointed , just the discerning ?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The legislation goes BEYOND Pit bulls. Have you even looked at the standard! The standard has been around for 5 minutes. People who adopted dogs before it existed had NO IDEA it was going to be made and NO IDEA that it would be done in such a way that their dogs who are NOT pit bulls could be targeted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The legislation goes BEYOND Pit bulls. Have you even looked at the standard! The standard has been around for 5 minutes. People who adopted dogs before it existed had NO IDEA it was going to be made and NO IDEA that it would be done in such a way that their dogs who are NOT pit bulls could be targeted! Good grief, The much lamented 26 point plan has been around in Qld for well over a decade. Of all the states in Australia, Qld has been the most ruthless, & most criticised, destroyer of pit bulls for the longest time. It is hard to imagine anyone in Qld would take on a dog of the "type", sans documentation to the contrary, without knowing the danger they were putting the dog in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 BSL may have been on some people's radar for a decade but most potential new dog owners wouldn't have a clue about BSL . Many bull breed owners still don't . ' Educating ' the public on the illegalities of owning a 'weapon' would only add to hysteria and advertises to the wrong 'type'. So the ANKC isn't for the annointed , just the discerning ?! Only Tommy, the pinball wizard, wouldn't be aware of B.S.L Those selling the dogs to those that seek them certainly know of it. Pretty lame excuse that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) The legislation goes BEYOND Pit bulls. Have you even looked at the standard! The standard has been around for 5 minutes. People who adopted dogs before it existed had NO IDEA it was going to be made and NO IDEA that it would be done in such a way that their dogs who are NOT pit bulls could be targeted! Good grief, The much lamented 26 point plan has been around in Qld for well over a decade. Of all the states in Australia, Qld has been the most ruthless, & most criticised, destroyer of pit bulls for the longest time. It is hard to imagine anyone in Qld would take on a dog of the "type", sans documentation to the contrary, without knowing the danger they were putting the dog in. they aren't talking about QLD..they are talking about the standard that VIC has recently implemented which is very vague and could include a number of not pit bull breeds. Have a look at it. are you actually reading posts or just being argumentative and insulting? Edited October 21, 2012 by Cat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) M-Sass,On one hand you argue in favour of B.S.L as a solution and tell us the parameters won't be changed or broadened.That people who do the right thing have nothing to fear as long as they are ANKC members,or only buy ANKC Reg. dogs.On the other hand,you show us just how easy it is to use that fear to broaden the parameters and include dogs that were never intended targets and have done nothing wrong. So the government has definitely listened to the THAT'S NOT A PITBULL but a CROSSBREED cry and with the collection of data where Pitbull types have been falsely registered as crossbreeds.......what??, you can't understand why they are targeting crossbreeds??.........I surely can!! Do those worried about their dogs of unknown heritage really have as much to fear as the owners of the pure breeds most commonly nominated in the pit bull masquarade? The amstaff & staffy in particular & to a lesser extend the bull mastif, rhodesian ridgeback, the labrador etc. Some of these breeds have already been banned in various locations simply by the association. Do they even really care about the fate of the at risk pure breeds? I'm guessing the coroner of this thread recognised the M.O. of the owners of suspected restricted breeds & made her suggestion to place the onus of identification on the owner rather than them claiming "xbreed'' & challenging the authorities to prove otherwise. The easiest option is impose a blanket ban to cover all the possibilities. As has happened O/S If it came to pass here, your ANKC papers wouldn't be your saviour. 1) Obviously ATM they have more to fear. 2)Of course they care about the fate of at risk pedigrees.Its a point you have been ignoring till now.Seems you might be starting to see a little more than you were about why we don't see B.S.L as a solution.You haven't cared about anyone else,but now you bring up who cares about you. 3) I don't contest at all that a lot of people have been directly responsible for these measures being brought in.I do contest "The easiest option" as you put it,is the right one,or even the effective one. Oh dear, Stop being so ridiculous, & stop making such ridiculous assumptions. You lot really are one trick ponies. People make their own choices. Those that chose a dog of indeterminal heritage which bears a striking resemblance to a breed subject to a legislation that demands a strict criterior for ownership made their own choices. BSL has been in place for over a decade. So obviously they have made a conscience decision & chose the ''type'' they wanted. Hey, what do we care?......Let the Devil take tomorrow. Well hello It's tomorrow. So why should those who chose an ANKC registered pure breed have to pay the piper for a jig called by others? There are thousands more ANKC registered family pets than there are ANKC registered "show dogs" ANKC registered dog owners made their choice because they are diserning. They want to know what they will have when the cute wears off. They want to know what they are getting for their buck. Too smart by half. B.t.w. Being ANKC registered isn't some sort of ritualistic secret society that is the secretive realm only for the annointed. All ANKC registered breeders are required to register all surviving whelps. So wipe away the crocodile tears, take the responsibility for your actions & if you are unhappy with the outcomes, take aim at those who instigated the B.S.L Joe Public. If you want support, You should keep this in mind, You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. If I ever have a pittbull,I'm gonna call it steam roller. :laugh: Edited October 21, 2012 by moosmum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aidan3 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The legislation goes BEYOND Pit bulls. Have you even looked at the standard! The standard has been around for 5 minutes. People who adopted dogs before it existed had NO IDEA it was going to be made and NO IDEA that it would be done in such a way that their dogs who are NOT pit bulls could be targeted! Good grief, The much lamented 26 point plan has been around in Qld for well over a decade. Of all the states in Australia, Qld has been the most ruthless, & most criticised, destroyer of pit bulls for the longest time. It is hard to imagine anyone in Qld would take on a dog of the "type", sans documentation to the contrary, without knowing the danger they were putting the dog in. Different state, different process. You haven't addressed Cosmolo's argument by this analogy, merely put forward another straw man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruin Maniac Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The average person seeking a dog is surprisingly uninformed. My parents had little to no clue when buying my childhood dogs. My friends had no idea about puppy mills when buying their pet shop dogs and BYB puppies. My current friend (who is now cooperating with me ) had no idea, when looking at rescue dogs, that her hour long walks and the size of her yard would be a bad set-up for a german shepherd x english mastiff puppy. I know a lot of people who look at bull-types and think they are the classic Aussie dog. Perhaps the prevalence of staffordshires has helped create that perception among people my age. But almost everyone I've ever spoken to about them, including owners of bull-types, were shocked to hear about Queensland's laws and even more shocked to hear what Victoria is implementing. I don't at all think they know what they're getting into. True, this would be irresponsible after the fact. But they are dog owners and typical ones at that, who keep their dogs at home and take them for a walk to the shops or the beach once in a while. No clubs, forums, sports and showrings. No research beyond what they eat and how big they grow. And when it's those same people that don't desex their dogs, due to costs or beliefs that a bitch needs to have at least one litter or a male will become depressed, we can assume that they aren't going to warn buyers about the restrictions, because they aren't aware of them themselves. I think those of us who absolutely love dogs as an animal, not just as our own personal pets, forget that not everyone who owns a dog is equally as much an enthusiast as we are. I still stand behind the opinion that breed legislation is a poor way to tackle a problem that's caused by irresponsible owners (of which there are far too many). More education for and regulation of dog owners, more regulation of breeding, more public education regarding dog attacks and how to handle a situation involving an aggressive dog. Of course, it's far easier and I'm sure more profitable to ban breeds and impose heavy fines on those who own them :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m-sass Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 M-Sass,On one hand you argue in favour of B.S.L as a solution and tell us the parameters won't be changed or broadened.That people who do the right thing have nothing to fear as long as they are ANKC members,or only buy ANKC Reg. dogs.On the other hand,you show us just how easy it is to use that fear to broaden the parameters and include dogs that were never intended targets and have done nothing wrong. So the government has definitely listened to the THAT'S NOT A PITBULL but a CROSSBREED cry and with the collection of data where Pitbull types have been falsely registered as crossbreeds.......what??, you can't understand why they are targeting crossbreeds??.........I surely can!! Do those worried about their dogs of unknown heritage really have as much to fear as the owners of the pure breeds most commonly nominated in the pit bull masquarade? The amstaff & staffy in particular & to a lesser extend the bull mastif, rhodesian ridgeback, the labrador etc. Some of these breeds have already been banned in various locations simply by the association. Do they even really care about the fate of the at risk pure breeds? I'm guessing the coroner of this thread recognised the M.O. of the owners of suspected restricted breeds & made her suggestion to place the onus of identification on the owner rather than them claiming "xbreed'' & challenging the authorities to prove otherwise. The easiest option is impose a blanket ban to cover all the possibilities. As has happened O/S If it came to pass here, your ANKC papers wouldn't be your saviour. There is no risk to ANKC recognised breeds..........it's already been tested when a court ruled the Amstaff was the same breed as a Pitbull and was fixed immediately. Same applies with the Amstaff's very pointed exemption in the Victorian legislation.........they are after Pitbulls and crossbreed of, or anything that may contain Pitbull that the owners can't prove otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) And If you are seriously advocating the abolition of all non pedigree dogs,bear in mind you better be sure they can stand alone in future. You are losing a valuable part of the evolution of breeds that has acted as a base stock for as long as man has kept dogs.Its only in the last few hundred years that most pure breeds have been so actively isolated from their "feeder stock" and instead become the feeder stock. If you want to finaly sever all ties with a what man collectively acheived over thousands of years in favour of pedigree only,Then you better be damned sure you have it down perfectly because man will be very unforgiving of your mistakes.You will lose any means to measure your sucess or failure except against other increasingly narrowed lines of Pure breeds. You are only beginning to see the results of policies that focus on purity rather than qualities tested and proven in the field against against all commers,that came up trumps time and again and formed types that became breeds.Valued for their specific qualties. All done with out rocket science and pedigrees. The random dogs that might be in more than one pure breed because it hadsome thing unique and valuable in its time,taken for granted now. You can't know what you might lose. Edited October 21, 2012 by moosmum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m-sass Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) The legislation goes BEYOND Pit bulls. Have you even looked at the standard! The standard has been around for 5 minutes. People who adopted dogs before it existed had NO IDEA it was going to be made and NO IDEA that it would be done in such a way that their dogs who are NOT pit bulls could be targeted! To include crossbreeds which appears to be what people claim the offending dogs to be in Pitbull incidents, the characteristics of a Pitbull X dependant upon what it's crossed with will naturally extend the standard beyond the that of a Pitbull. The owners of these targeted crossbreeds have the option to prove otherwise and some have successfully done exactly that, but unfortunately, ignorance of the laws in this country doesn't provide a statutory defence. Every council practically has a list of restricted breeds and a set of rules for dog owners, but I suppose there are people around who didn't know their dogs had to be council registered either so I guess having no idea or researching their aquisition has come to bite some on the bum it seems? And If you are seriously advocating the abolition of all non pedigree dogs,bear in mind you better be sure they can stand alone in future No, I am speaking purely about crossbreed dogs that resemble restricted breeds. Edited October 21, 2012 by m-sass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 You can't prove otherwise though that's the point. This isn't only about ignorance of laws, though i agree with other posters that the average dog owner still has no idea what these laws really mean. It's about new laws being introduced AFTER a dog has been adopted- no one knew they were going to have to prove parentage when they adopted their dog and in actual fact, it wouldn't even matter because if the dog meets the standard, it meets the standard. Doesn't actually even matter if you can prove what their parents were. How do you propose owners of cross breed dogs prove their dogs are NOT restricted? Dogs that are registered with local council can still be identified as restricted breeds and forced to be kept as such so i'm not just referring to people who do not register their dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The legislation goes BEYOND Pit bulls. Have you even looked at the standard! The standard has been around for 5 minutes. People who adopted dogs before it existed had NO IDEA it was going to be made and NO IDEA that it would be done in such a way that their dogs who are NOT pit bulls could be targeted! Good grief, The much lamented 26 point plan has been around in Qld for well over a decade. Of all the states in Australia, Qld has been the most ruthless, & most criticised, destroyer of pit bulls for the longest time. It is hard to imagine anyone in Qld would take on a dog of the "type", sans documentation to the contrary, without knowing the danger they were putting the dog in. they aren't talking about QLD..they are talking about the standard that VIC has recently implemented which is very vague and could include a number of not pit bull breeds. Have a look at it. are you actually reading posts or just being argumentative and insulting? I am reading the posts, but you don't appear to be. When I posted my agreement with the recommendation by the coroner suggesting owners be liable for the proof of breed of suspect dogs, not the authorities. Cosmolo challenged to the opinion was based on her personal position of having taken possession of two dogs, apparently of the "type", within the last seven or eight years. Qld is the most active, unrelenting anti pit bull state in the country & has been for more than a decade. Cosmolo lives in Qld. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Ignorance of the law is not a legitimate defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Sorry but are you even reading the posts. Cosmolo is in Vic where, until recently, PB crosses were nit against the law. She got her dogs years ago and they don't look like pitbulls. However, they tick boxes in a checklist and they can be seized and destroyed as a result of this. They are from shakers and she isn't allowed to use DNA to prove that her dogs aren't pitbull types. In Vic anything that is deemed pitbull TYPE is now restricted, regardless of whether it is a pitbull or not. Cosmolos dogs are the best behaved dogs I have EVER met - I'd trust them over other dogs, even purebred ones. These are dogs that wait on their beds when someone comes into their house and, with permission, calmly greet them. They stay in a drop for 1 HR+ while cosmolo and her hubby train other dogs. Both cosmolo and her husband are accredited trainers and very responsible owners. And yet, because two of them fit a checklist that was brought in revenue (in Vic) they are deemed a risk to the community. Madness. Meanwhile the GSD down the road that goes mental at the sight of another dog is okay. Mad world. They are the most well behaved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Ps as a default DOL shows everyone in QLD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) There is no risk to ANKC recognised breeds..........it's already been tested when a court ruled the Amstaff was the same breed as a Pitbull and was fixed immediately. Same applies with the Amstaff's very pointed exemption in the Victorian legislation.........they are after Pitbulls and crossbreed of, or anything that may contain Pitbull that the owners can't prove otherwise. Wrong, You need to do more homework. Firstly, the court didn't rule the Amstaff was the same as the pitbull. The council withdrew their defense before the court had to rule. The outcome was obvious though, because the plaintiffs own American ''expert'' witness gave evidence that the Amstaff was the "show name" in the U.S.A for the pitbull. She was a APBT breed expert. Obviously the council recognised a pandoras box in the offing & withdrew before a judgement was issued. Can you imagine the repercussions if the court ruled the Amstaff & the APBT were the same breed & the ruling was passed into law.? Amstaffs would then be a banned import & all Amstaffs would be liable to the restricted dog legislations What a mess. The council should be applauded for it's common sense decision. Secondly, if, as has occured O/S, legislation is enacted to declare an ANKC registered breed as ''restricted/banned'', ANKC papers will merely confirm a dog is a ''restricted/banned'' breed & subject to all the ''restrictions'' Edited October 21, 2012 by steamboat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now