steamboat 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 Cosmolos avatar indicates Qld. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If I ever have a pittbull,I'm gonna call it steam roller. :laugh: If it isn't a secret, just what breed or mixture of breeds, do you have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 And Steamboat seems unaware that there is no BSL in the ACT. Indeed, the head of the RSPCA has a delightful pitbull called Dahlia. You cannot, though Steamboat (or m-sass mark II/Dougie or whatever new persona is out and about at the moment) tries very hard to transpose laws in one state to another. What happened in Queensland does not translate to NSW or Vic or WA or wherever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) Does it? I am certainly in Victoria, as i would have thought my posts indicated. ETA It did say QLD, underneath where it said Melbourne! Fixed now. And thanks Megan, i think they are pretty special. Edited October 21, 2012 by Cosmolo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 And Steamboat seems unaware that there is no BSL in the ACT. Indeed, the head of the RSPCA has a delightful pitbull called Dahlia. You cannot, though Steamboat (or m-sass mark II/Dougie or whatever new persona is out and about at the moment) tries very hard to transpose laws in one state to another. What happened in Queensland does not translate to NSW or Vic or WA or wherever. I don't know how many times one has to repeat something before it gets through the ingrained bias rife here. But, again. I agreed with the coroner that owners of the suspected restricted dogs should be liable to for the indentification of the breed & not the councils which declare them.. That, & "bad laws are still laws" are the sum totals of my crimes against the rabid mob mentallity. While you all rail against crimes against the ''innocent'' yet practice exactly the tactics you complain about. Starts with an aitch folks a capitol AITCH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Does it? I am certainly in Victoria, as i would have thought my posts indicated. ETA It did say QLD, underneath where it said Melbourne! Fixed now. And thanks Megan, i think they are pretty special. Yes it did say Qld. Just another example of being resposible for your own actions when you get right down to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 And Steamboat seems unaware that there is no BSL in the ACT. Indeed, the head of the RSPCA has a delightful pitbull called Dahlia. You cannot, though Steamboat (or m-sass mark II/Dougie or whatever new persona is out and about at the moment) tries very hard to transpose laws in one state to another. What happened in Queensland does not translate to NSW or Vic or WA or wherever. I don't know how many times one has to repeat something before it gets through the ingrained bias rife here. But, again. I agreed with the coroner that owners of the suspected restricted dogs should be liable to for the indentification of the breed & not the councils which declare them.. That, & "bad laws are still laws" are the sum totals of my crimes against the rabid mob mentallity. While you all rail against crimes against the ''innocent'' yet practice exactly the tactics you complain about. Starts with an aitch folks a capitol AITCH. Which is a response to ... I don't what the hell it's the response to but it sure ain't a response to my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aidan3 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 And Steamboat seems unaware that there is no BSL in the ACT. Indeed, the head of the RSPCA has a delightful pitbull called Dahlia. You cannot, though Steamboat (or m-sass mark II/Dougie or whatever new persona is out and about at the moment) tries very hard to transpose laws in one state to another. What happened in Queensland does not translate to NSW or Vic or WA or wherever. I don't know how many times one has to repeat something before it gets through the ingrained bias rife here. But, again. I agreed with the coroner that owners of the suspected restricted dogs should be liable to for the indentification of the breed & not the councils which declare them.. That, & "bad laws are still laws" are the sum totals of my crimes against the rabid mob mentallity. While you all rail against crimes against the ''innocent'' yet practice exactly the tactics you complain about. Starts with an aitch folks a capitol AITCH. Which is a response to ... I don't what the hell it's the response to but it sure ain't a response to my post. No, no, some good points there. A capitol AITCH, I hadn't thought of it that way before. Kind of makes you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) Where is this rabid mob that you speak of? You have yet to answer the question re: how people prove their rescue dog isn't a pitbull given that Victorian law doesn't allow for DNA testing. Most (all) people here believe that the owner of the dog in question should have been given a jail term. I believe he should have been charged with manslaughter and jailed accordingly. However, the laws at the time of the offence didn't cater for this. Sadly, the new laws don't either - only owners of restricted breeds can be subject to a jail term if their dog attacks someone else. Other owners will only be given a fine - even if the person dies. PS: DOL defaults states to QLD. It has been said many times in this thread that we're talking about Victoria, which is where the killing occurred. PPS: As for the ingrained bias, please don't make assumptions. I love my dogs and like their friends, but I'm really not a fan of other dogs. I don't have a "I wuv pitbulls" bias at all. I don't like stupid laws that don't address the root cause of problems. Edited October 22, 2012 by megan_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Steamboat, Won't let me reply directly to your question re what breeds or crosses do I own. Its no secret,but not relevent to this thread.Working companions with no bull breed will do.Various breeds. Last Bull breed I had was 30 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 And Steamboat seems unaware that there is no BSL in the ACT. Indeed, the head of the RSPCA has a delightful pitbull called Dahlia. You cannot, though Steamboat (or m-sass mark II/Dougie or whatever new persona is out and about at the moment) tries very hard to transpose laws in one state to another. What happened in Queensland does not translate to NSW or Vic or WA or wherever. I don't know how many times one has to repeat something before it gets through the ingrained bias rife here. But, again. I agreed with the coroner that owners of the suspected restricted dogs should be liable to for the indentification of the breed & not the councils which declare them.. That, & "bad laws are still laws" are the sum totals of my crimes against the rabid mob mentallity. While you all rail against crimes against the ''innocent'' yet practice exactly the tactics you complain about. Starts with an aitch folks a capitol AITCH. Your "Crimes" (your words not ours) are not that you don't agree,but you refuse to answer fair questions or read evidence presented. You call any reasoned defense to your arguments "rabid mob mentality" Your arguments are based on ridicule, insults and irrational statements.You seem incapable of disagreeing with out ridicule.That looks pretty "rabid" to me.The only ingrained bias is your own. I will be ignoring you from here on.You're too irrational for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumosmum Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 In 3 recent hearings in VCAT, where the fate of dogs declared Restricted Breeds is decided, the Barristers for the councils have tried to bring into the cross examinations the fact that APBT and Amstaffs are one and the same dog. So don't go getting too comfy. It will be interesting to see how this plays out if they persist in bringing in comments like this. There are now 5 dogs appealing to the Supreme Court to have their declarations which were affirmed by Vcat, overturned. The sire of the dog that attacked Ayen Chol isn't as far as we know declared a restricted breed. It doesn't fit the Victorian Standard. The dog that did the attack, well who knows if it would have been declared a restricted breed according to the standard. It's weight doesn't fit the standard. No photos will be released. You see, these dogs had to be CALLED pitbulls in the report, so that everyone can think that BSL will fix everything, and make us all safer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 And Steamboat seems unaware that there is no BSL in the ACT. Indeed, the head of the RSPCA has a delightful pitbull called Dahlia. You cannot, though Steamboat (or m-sass mark II/Dougie or whatever new persona is out and about at the moment) tries very hard to transpose laws in one state to another. What happened in Queensland does not translate to NSW or Vic or WA or wherever. I don't know how many times one has to repeat something before it gets through the ingrained bias rife here. But, again. I agreed with the coroner that owners of the suspected restricted dogs should be liable to for the indentification of the breed & not the councils which declare them.. That, & "bad laws are still laws" are the sum totals of my crimes against the rabid mob mentallity. While you all rail against crimes against the ''innocent'' yet practice exactly the tactics you complain about. Starts with an aitch folks a capitol AITCH. Which is a response to ... I don't what the hell it's the response to but it sure ain't a response to my post. Yeah it was. What I replied was sum total of what I said that somehow managed to get the rabid juices flowing. I have not mentioned any ''laws'' per se, nor have I mentioned pit bulls specifically. Nor do I care who has pitbulls, their crosses or their lookalikes. My ''crime'' against the mob mentality is that, IMO, if owners are called to account the onus should be on the owner to provide indisputable proof of breed. Me?, if i'm called? I have a piece of paper provided by the breeder that says my little guy is registered with the the ANKC as a pure breed. It has a brief description, a M/C number listed that will verify the authenticity of dog it represents & three generations of ancestors, all registered with the ANKC. And I make nom apologise for my choice. Maybe those accusing me of insults would like to show where? What questions haven't I answered? Who are these other persons I am supposed to be? Talk about paranoid central. So far the only good thing to come out of this rubbish is that moosmum will no longer harass me with her lynch mob, look at me everyone I'm on fire, mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackJaq Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 In Vic that piece of paper will be useless to you unless it says your dog is an AmStaff, no other breed papers are accepted. So now what do you do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) In Vic that piece of paper will be useless to you unless it says your dog is an AmStaff, no other breed papers are accepted. So now what do you do? Not really, There are about 150 recognised pure breeds on the ANKC register. So there's plenty of choice. But it certainly wont say it's a pitbull or any mixture of x breeds & that's a fact If your dog has come under the notice of the authorities & been I.D. as a restricted breed? As I said earlier. The dog is your responsibility & therefore it's your problem. Who elses would you consider is to blame for the your dilemma? Edited October 22, 2012 by steamboat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Steamboat, Won't let me reply directly to your question re what breeds or crosses do I own. Its no secret,but not relevent to this thread.Working companions with no bull breed will do.Various breeds. Last Bull breed I had was 30 years ago. Not relevent to the thread? That's a matter of opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackJaq Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 (edited) None of the other breed papers are accepted as proof in Vic. Only AmStaff. So theoretically any dog, pure bred or not, EXCEPT AmStaffs with papers can be declared pitbull types and destroyed if they tick enough of the boxes on the guide. Your response didn't really make much sense. What, so it is your own fault if your labrador has a fat head and measures in as a pitbull type? Since your dogs don't have AmStaff papers they are not safe either (in Vic) Edited October 22, 2012 by BlackJaq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aidan3 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 In Vic that piece of paper will be useless to you unless it says your dog is an AmStaff, no other breed papers are accepted. So now what do you do? Not really, There are about 150 recognised pure breeds on the ANKC register. So there's plenty of choice. But it certainly wont say it's a pitbull or any mixture of x breeds & that's a fact Irrelevant. If you tried to register your dog in Vic, presented the documentation you have as proof, your dog would most likely be seized and destroyed. I think part of your feeling attacked is because you don't seem to understand the ramifications of the legislation in Victoria today, and how much worse it will get if the coroner's recommendations are enacted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 No - you are incorrect. The Victorian legislation specifically says that only AMSTAFF papers can be used to prove a dog isn't a piutbull. It doesn't say that any ANKC breed is exempt - only Amstaffs. You still haven't answered the question re: people who bought dogs that don't look like pitbulls but could fall under the description of pitbull TYPE before the laws in Victoria changed. In Vic that piece of paper will be useless to you unless it says your dog is an AmStaff, no other breed papers are accepted. So now what do you do? Not really, There are about 150 recognised pure breeds on the ANKC register. So there's plenty of choice. But it certainly wont say it's a pitbull or any mixture of x breeds & that's a fact If your dog has come under the notice of the authorities & been I.D. as a restricted breed? As I said earlier. The dog is your responsibility & therefore it's your problem. Who elses would you consider is to blame for the your dilemma? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I think the chances of you losing an appeal or not having a council see sense upon presentation of your ANKC papers and corresponding chip is next to zero. Once again stop the scare mongering. Own a cross bred that fits the type and ticks the boxes and you are up poo creek 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