Canine Ferae Naturae: The Statutory Elimination of Naturally Fierce Dogs

pit bull attack"A 75-year-old woman who had to have her left leg amputated after being mauled by her neighbor’s two pit bulls remained hospitalized Sunday in critical condition and could possibly lose her other leg and an arm, her husband said. Emako Mendoza was attacked around 6:30 a.m. Saturday inside the fenced backyard of her house."

San Diego Union Tribune, June 19, 2011

New phenomena?

Ottawa, Canada, circa 1989, a little 2-year old girl plays with her toys next to an anxious 7-year old family pet, a , white rottweiler. Suddenly, the dog bares his teeth, growls, rises and approaches the girl menacingly. The mother, horrified, jumps into the fray and manages to stop the attack. It had happened in seconds. By pure luck, the mother had been in the room.

The averted attack was a first. The family dog belonged to the couple when the child was brought home from the hospital but as the child got older, the dog became increasingly unfriendly towards her. This was too much. The husband rushed home from his desk job and consoled both child and wife. The dog was put down that afternoon.

In another case, Marie was pushing her toddler in a stroller up a hill in a quiet Quebec residential area. The infant had brought along her new kitten for the ride. Suddenly, a loose pit bull emerges and jumps onto the carriage before the mother can react, grabs the kitten, lunges away and shakes the kitten violently, breaking its neck. The kitten died instantly but the attack left the mother and child with life-long fears.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reports:

"Toronto police fired more than a dozen bullets into two pit bulls that had turned on the man who was walking them as a favour for a friend. Fredericton, N.B.: a family is out walking their Shitzu. A Rottweiler, recently acquired by a neighbour, attacks and kills the dog. In London, Ontario a woman and her seven-year-old son watched in horror as a pit bull latched onto her husband's arm as he tried to keep the family puppy out of the dog's reach."

YouTube has a stock of pit bull attacks caught on tape: viewer caution advised except for pit bull owners who must believe that this is merely the acceptable and occasional price to pay to have such a lovable canine specimen grace Earth.

In the USA in 2009, as of June, there were already 20 reported dog attack deaths according to dogbitelaw.

There are pit bull, rottweiler and bull terrier attacks everyday in our cities, most resulting in minor injuries but some, when death ensues, occupying the headlines for a brief hurrah. In so many more unreported cases, these dogs lunge for a human with serious injury or death prevented only by the sheer strength of the owner or a leash.

These stories play out in homes everywhere these little time bombs are allowed, but kept quiet by owners too embarrassed to speak or too overwhelmed by animal rights to call a spade a spade. The position they hold plays like a broken record:

"The problem is not the dog; it's the owner's neglect of training."

One well-intentioned dog-lover publishes a blog which posts pictures of pit-bulls in calm, puppy poses, over the caption: punish the deed, not the breed.

Another pit bull owner started a Dog Legislation Council of Canada which naively prefers a dog-by-dog approach: wait until a dog has attacked, designate that dog as "dangerous", then control it!

Pit bull attack survivors have set up their own associations. See, for example, Dogbitevictim.com.

Pit bulls, bull terriers and rottweilers are little lions, naturally fierce animals, walking among us; time bombs waiting to go off under circumstances impossible to control or predict. What one dog might ignore would drive another into a berserk killing frenzy. Pit bulls were bred and selected in 1800s for one purpose: to kill.

In Vanater v Village of South Point, Ohio judge Herman Weber wrote:

"Pit bulls ... possess ... the propensity to catch and maul an attacked victim unrelentingly until death occurs, or as the continuing tenacity and tendency to attack repeatedly for the purpose of killing. (T)he unquantifiable, unpredictable aggressiveness and gameness of Pit Bulls make them uniquely dangerous.

"The breeding history of pit bulls makes it impossible to rule out a violent propensity for any one dog as gameness and aggressiveness can be hidden for years."

 

Naturally fierce dogs such as rottweilers and pit bulls can be eliminated within 10-15 years by a simple prohibition. No dog lover's feelings need be hurt as such legislation can grand-father in any such dog then alive. When the last one expires, we've purged ourselves of an animal never meant for neighborhoods.

Far too many owners of pit-bulls or rottweilers own their dogs because they kill, attack, defend and protect. One group of owners can even be stereotyped: male, early to mid-twenties, black leather jackets, baseball caps and curiously unemployed. The dogs are their firearms and are often poorly-cared for.

Funny thing about the law is that it is often municipalities that take the requisite initiative on public safety issues; leading the federal governments and the provincial or state governments. Winnipeg led the way with a ban in 1990 after a young girl was permanently disfigured by a pit bull. The ban reduced the number of attacks in Winnipeg from 25 a year to one or two.Pit bull

Kitchener, Ontario instituted a ban in 1997 on pit bulls and saw the annual attack number go from 18 to 1. Prohibited dogs include pit bulls and bull terriers.

Sioux City, Iowa also banned pit-bulls and bull terriers in 1997, grand-fathering-in existing dogs, but prohibiting further breeding.

Internationally, many jurisdictions have bans, including England, Norway, Iceland, France and New Zealand.

The Canadian province of Ontario introduced a pit bull and bull terrier ban in 2005 which not only prohibited future breeding but requires that all existing dogs be sterilized, leashed and muzzled in public. The law exempts show dogs.

In her 2002 book, Fatal Dog Attacks, author Karen Delise found that most "canine homicides" resulted from attacks by chained dogs or dogs specifically owned for protection, as opposed to family dogs kept in houses. Most deadly dogs were males and almost all the attacking dogs had not been spayed or neutered.

The human wagons are circling pit-bulls and their deadly canine brethren, while the legislators twiddle their thumbs. Home liability insurance policies are now exempting pit-bulls, rottweilers and bull terriers from coverage. The Allstate Insurance website:

"... in general, you may be covered if your dog bites a guest or someone else on your property.... (but) certain breeds of dogs may be excluded from coverage."

Sometimes, nothing quite does the trick like a well-publicized massive judgment against a tort-feasor. It is unfortunate if it has to come to that because in the aftermath of too many dog attacks, as pit-bull fans wag their tongues, real people are left bloodied and dazed, with permanent emotional and disfiguring scars, wondering what Jurassic creature just hit them.

REFERENCES:

 

Posted in Animal Law, Personal Injury and Tort Law
on
by

Attached Images

  • Canine Ferae Naturae: The Statutory Elimination of Naturally Fierce Dogs

Comments

citizen Taxpayer J.

citizen Taxpayer J.
Monday, August 03, 2009 5:17 AM
Banning the deed is okay if they are referring to the deed of owning a disasterously vicious dog ....which seems to be the preferred pet of drug dealers and other anti social types .<br>It's time the B.C. politicians woke up and followed the lead given the superior court allowing the " ban of vicious dogs for the benefit of society at large ."<br><br>j.<br>

eva cobarrubias

eva cobarrubias
Friday, October 16, 2009 6:53 AM
We love dogs because they guard our homes from burglars and enable us to sleep well at night. but not these fierce dogs that terrorize us. allowing these fierce dogs will change the saying that "dogs are man's best friend" to " dogs are man's worst nightmare"

Boris Abramov

Boris Abramov
Tuesday, December 01, 2009 3:27 PM
You are wrong. Staffordshires, pit bulls are the best dogs one can get. So loyal, smart and dependable. I had many dogs in my life - mthese are by far the best. Exellent with kids

Fayclis

Fayclis
Tuesday, December 01, 2009 11:08 PM
A "WHITE" Rottweiler? That a NEW one. LOL

What a pathetic one sided article meant to intimidate and foster hate and fear. Full of stereotyping and comparing a average 65 lb domestic dog to a wild lion weighing in FROM 270 lbs to as high as 500 lbs? Whoa!!!! That's a REAL good one.

OH and may I ASK why YOU did NOT mention that the Netherlands removed their BAN in 2007 after DOCUMENTING for about 20 years that their was NO decease in either dog fatalities or dog bites in ALL that time?

You ALSO forgot to mention Italy, who was UP to 93 banned or restricted dogs, ALSO recinded their BAN after DOCUMENTING same.

WHY did YOU not mention that Labourer Retrievers are NOW the Number #1 biter in DENVER where pit bull type dogs have been banned for years?

It isn't about breeds of dogs, it is about RESPONSIBLE ownership and until IRRESPONSIBLE owners are held to task, and not dogs, attacks will continue to happen NO MATTER the type of dog.

I also think you could have mentioned that GROUPING 3 to 5 different breeds of dogs as "pit bull type" dogs might make the stats somewhat higher. These does NOT include the 20 other totally different breeds of dogs commonly MISTAKEN for them LET ALONE THE MIXES of all these dogs.

BTW, BSL is proving to be a DISMAL failure in both England and Ontario, where their has been more dog fatalities then EVER before, since the BAN and stats were taken some 50 years ago.

Calling for canine genocide is "a bit" much don't ya think?

By the way in the past fifty years in the WHOLE of CANADA there has been 1 documented fatality from the GROUPS of "pit bull type" dogs, in a place where they have been hundreds of thousands, if not a million or more of "these" dogs. Total fatatities? 48. I wonder how many MILLIONS of dogs have been in Canada over 50 years? Again, let's go back to OWNERSHIP.

However YOU did make them "appear" to be very scary.








Fayclis

Fayclis
Wednesday, December 02, 2009 6:14 AM
Surely this article has received more than 2 comments or is it that this are the only two the "author" will post? Maybe because MOST or ALMOST all disagree? This is so one sided. There should be a law about balanced writing.

Mia

Mia
Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:16 PM
You may want to move to Italy where most breeds are banned, you may feel safer there. FYI there is no such thing as a white Rottweiler. If we ban one breed we must ban them all as man is more than able to make any breed vicious. Fear mongering and ignorance is not the answer, shame that you have put together such a page. Breed bans actually do very little in the end but kill dogs and ruin families.

Catherine Kaiman

Catherine Kaiman
Tuesday, December 15, 2009 12:46 PM
I am neither a drug dealer nor a criminal, I have 3 Pitbulls and a Rottweiller.
I also have three sons, one in a wheelchair. My Pitbulls have never shown human aggression, nor has my Rottie.
My dogs are well socialized and trained, they have not been dog aggressive, and even love the family cats.
The ban on Pitbulls is ridiculous, saying all Pits are dangerous, is like saying all Muslims are terrorists, it's just not true!
Not to mention, that Pitbulls have been wrongly accused of attacks as well. Case in point, an attack in Calgary, blamed on a Pitbull, when in fact the dog was a Boxer Lab cross.
Your article is very unbalanced and does nothing but promote fear mongering based on weak evidence at best.
Pitbulls are one of the most gentle, loving, devoted breeds there are, and by characterizing all owners as drug dealers, or criminals, and the breed as dangerous, just goes to show how ignorant some people can be.
jeanS
Thursday, August 05, 2010 5:19 AM
Oh, ya this is so horrible. Maybe dummy, the golden retriever is the highes t dog bitting in Denver (like 1) bcuz pitbulls are gone. I was attacked by one. Ya, they are the best with children, bcuz in order to be strong us kids need to be attacked. So before you all complain about how one sided this is, go to another site, and you might just find that they say the same thing. I thought that it would kill me. and it seems im not the only one. So you know what, sure they are a great dog, but wait till you or one of your kids are attacked. maybe youll be on the other side of the issue. But untill you have you ignorant people wont understand. Maybe im being to harsh, but you have to see this side. Think about it...

-jeanS

Catherine Kaiman

Catherine Kaiman
Sunday, August 08, 2010 5:52 PM
So you think it's fine to wipe out an entire species because of the acts of less than o.ooo1% of the Pitbull population. Pardon me but I don't think I'm the dummy here.
How do you justify the genocide of an entire breed, on those statistics? I have had Pitbulls most of my life, not one of my dogs ever ever displayed an act of human aggression, and all dogs are prone to dog aggression, so please don't be as ignorant to suggest otherwise.
Fact is, based on the stats, you are more likely to be bit by a Golden, or a Chi than you ever will a Pitbull.
A handful of Muslims flew planes into the WTC, would you suggest we lable them all terrorists and wipe them off the face of the Earth too? Nevermind, I already assumed you would give humans a free pass to brutality, since you don't have an issue "murdering" innocent dogs that have done nothing to anyone.
Fayclis
Monday, August 09, 2010 12:43 AM
Name calling? How old are you 5? Golden Retriever are the number one biter in MANY places. Talk about sites how bout YOU go to a FEW and get educated. The author of this "piece" gave the stats from a BSL Lobby group and every single LEGITIMATE professionals organization has stated numberous times it is almost impossible to determine breed mixes on LOOKS. THIS is From a STUDY done by the ASPCA. READ IT!
"Animal control officers across the country have told the ASPCA that when they alert the media to a dog attack, news outlets respond that they have no interest in reporting on the incident unless it involved a pit bull. A quantitative study by the National Canine Resource Council of dog-bite reportage in a four-day period proves that anti-pit bull bias in the media is more than just a theory—it’s a fact."

You might want to look up the TASK FORCE the American Medical Veterinary Association did called "A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention". Get you head out of TABLOID like journalism and into STUDIES and FACTS and YOU might LEARN something. FACT is that 99% of dogs have NEVER bitten and those they have? Look to the owners of THEM.

BTY I have had these dogs in my family around and children and GRANDCHILDRED for over 20 YEARS and KNOW better. Ignorance is NOT blissbut owning great well trained and socialized dogs can be.

Lloyd Duhaime

Lloyd Duhaime
Monday, August 09, 2010 3:55 PM
Wow, I'm popular! Busted for name-calling too! FYI, the capital letter thing makes it hard to read. I'm not shouting, am I? Hmm, with whom do I start! Is this a school project to gang up on me?! But, as the "dummy here", I must reply. In my humble view, I think we should ban pit-bulls by attrition only. That's just me.

Even after having read all the fiesty but well-intentioned comments above, for which I thank each and every one of you, I still feel that way. I think what they've done in Ontario is the right thing to do.

James

James
Sunday, August 22, 2010 1:12 AM
Wow, you are ignorant. You said pits should be banned, i disagree. I was saved by a stray pit. Another dog ( a black lab ) came after me while I was walking down the road and the pit came out of the blue, protected me and my kids. I now own that pit and he is great with my kids. They can do anything to that dog and he wont even glare at them. However my house got broke into and he did what pits do best, he protected his family. He got shot by the would be thief. I spent a lot of money to save him, but I could have lost more than just money. I could have lost my kids. Dogs have minds of there own just like people, if a person get raised with abuse. They most likely be abusive when they grow up. Dogs are the same way. I have been bit by pits and other types of dogs, in fact I have scares from most of them. I still think its all how they are raised and treated.
One more for you to think about when I was about 8 years old my parents had another family living with us. They had a little boy and a germ. shep. and we had one. The little boy was so scared of both of them bcuz his was very bad. He got use to ours and fell in love with it. One day his dog got out of its pin and went after the boy. Our dog snapped his chain and saved that boys life. The sad part of it is his dog did get to him first and ripped his skin off his head from ear to ear. I'm 31 years old and I still remember that like it was yesterday. That proved to me its the owner not the dog. I just think you have a problem letting stuff go.

Lloyd Duhaime

Lloyd Duhaime
Sunday, August 22, 2010 4:48 PM
James: let me get this straight. You’ve survived a raging pit bull attack against a black lab who miraculously saved your and your kids’ lives bolting out of nowhere. Then, your house gets broken into by a thief who is armed with a gun (!) and that pit bull gets shot to death. You’ve been bitten by pitbulls on more than one occasion. When you were 8, again a dog bolted and broke his chain to save a little boy from another raging dog. You and, presumably, the other infant saw one dog chew the face off the other dog, all in the presence of two young children, one being you.

And you vehemently oppose a ban on pit bulls.

Martin Lang

Martin Lang
Sunday, August 22, 2010 6:36 PM
Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, has conducted an unusually detailed study of dog bites from 1982 to the present. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006.

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf )

The Clifton study show the number of serious canine-inflicted injuries by breed. The author's observations about the breeds and generally how to deal with the dangerous dog problem are enlightening.

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.

Clifton's opinions are as interesting as his statistics. For example, he says, "Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all."

From http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

... fairly condemning stuff. But, in the interest of fairness, can anyone point to contradicting evidence or study?

James

James
Monday, August 23, 2010 2:16 AM
Please read again the stray pit saved me from a black lab. The child got attacked by a dog that was not a pit. I had one from the same litter and it saved that boys life. Its how the dog is raised. I now have pit pups just born today ( and yes they are full blooded ) and my 4 year old boy wanted to pet one. I trusted my dog not to bite and she didn't. I have known little family dogs that snapped at children in the same family of the dog bcuz the child came 5 feet from the puppies. Nobody can change my mind on stuff I have seen for myself. I am a country boy so I will quote one of my very good friends. " Don't piss down my back and tell me its raining. '




Catherine Kaiman

Catherine Kaiman
Monday, August 23, 2010 11:25 AM
Then I would say that Clifton is seriously mistaken, or he is completely biased against certain breeds. There are many studies and stats to disclaim Clifton's, but I suppose that doesn't matter to the "anti-pitbull' crowd.

Catherine Kaiman

Catherine Kaiman
Monday, August 23, 2010 11:34 AM
My Pitbull was attacked by two shitzu's , and developed a hematoma which had to have a drain put in. She was laying beside me on our property when these two little savage dogs attacked.
My Pitbull didn't retaliate, she retreated.
The owner of the two little dogs, laughed and thought it was amusing.
In my opinion a bite is a bite is a bite, regardless of the breed. From Chi to Pits if the intention to cause harm is there, one is no different from the other based on intent.
Of course I don't go around screaming for a ban on shitzu's, because they hurt my dog. I don't scream for a ban on them even tho I've been bit by several shitzus and other little breeds many times. Why? Cause I have also met some fantastic ones over the years as well, and I'm smart enough to realize that you can't scream for the genocide of a species because less than 00.0001% of that species has had a problem.

Martin Lang

Martin Lang
Monday, August 23, 2010 12:14 PM
Catherine,

It could well be there is bias in the report - it should be open to peer review.

But, unlike James, I prefer to not make steadfast judgements based on anecdotal evidence - especially where death is involved.

You need to provide links or results from the studies and stats for your comment to carry any weight.

What needs to be determined is:

1) are certain breeds *innately* given to attack more than others, and
2) when they attack, how likely will the breed cause hospitalization or death.

Bear with me a sec - there are millions of un-regulated bb guns in the world because they pose low health risks (for arguement sake). Versus regular guns where significant damage can be done very quickly.

As a result, BB guns have minimal regulation, long guns have much more, hand guns more still, and fully automatic guns are banned outright. The degree of risk and damage guides the legal response. (I know dogs and guns are very different so don't pick apart the details; this is just an analogy for illustration)

To tie this back to dogs: a toy chihuahua might be the BB gun, the pit bull might be the hand gun, and a poorly raised, “mean” pit bull might be the fully automatic gun ... or perhaps better, a hand gun in the arms of a criminal.

If something like this was assessed by the authorities, then some level of prohibition or control would be warrented.

But, I await your proof...

James

James
Monday, August 23, 2010 2:24 PM
I think what I have seen in my life, counts a lot more than what I read about on this. No matter what the size of a dog is, a bite is a bite, no matter any reports say. A lot of times nobody reports dog attacks, they would rather deal with it without the police, and save tax payers lots of money. All I am saying is what you have been saying some pits where bred for killing and some still are. You need to punish those who breed them like that. ' Punish the deed not the breed ', is not just for the dog its for the owner as well. Thats why when a dog of any kind bites and/or kills the owner is punished as well as the dog. If you just want to punish the dog, you shouldn't be able to punish the owner. I don't agree with that and I'm sure you don't feel that way either.


Martin Lang

Martin Lang
Monday, August 23, 2010 6:10 PM
"I think what I have seen in my life, counts a lot more than what I read about on this."
Only to you which is no basis for law. Hundreds of others have had the opposite experience which is why you find yourself defending your pet now. If personal experience was allowed to be a valid basis for law, then society would be rampid with racism and other injustices.

Instead, we should seek truth through proper, peer reviewed, study (I haven’t seen any on this topic that live up to good scientific method) – maybe then we could develop appropriate measures to reduce dog attacks.

Oh and sorry, a bite:
http://www.alphadogk9consultants.com/0_0_0_0_250_188_csupload_21074903.jpg?u=634159278165465000

is NOT a bite (warning: not for the timid... and I went easy):
http://www.trauma.org/images/image_library/11178666085Pitbull_Bite_3.JPG

Indeed, it is the potential for large dog bites to do great damage that this is a topic at all. I will grant you, it is probably just as likely any dog will bite at any given time. The big difference is severity. Pit bulls are especially severe and the en vogue breed of those with dangerous minds.

Catherine Kaiman

Catherine Kaiman
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:13 AM
So then why are you not calling for a ban on all dogs over 18" then, if the issue is big dog bites.
If there is an intent to cause harm, the intent is just as intense in a Chi as a Pit, pound for pound the bite will differ, however the "intent" is the same across the board. So therefore, we should be seeking the ban of all dogs.
Martin, I am not computer savvy, I know the basics, how to type and hit enter basically. But if you were even remotely interested in the truth about Pitbulls, I'm sure you could find those studies yourself, the problem is the "anti Pitbull" folks don't want to hear the truth, they rely on media sensationalism, which many times have mistakenly identified dogs as Pitbulls.
Again I ask, how is it we can ask for the genocide of an entire species, based on the deeds of a few? I am all for people having to have extra insurance to own a dog, any dog not just a Pitbull.

James

James
Wednesday, August 25, 2010 2:12 AM
I don't want to band any type of dog, they have every right to be here too. Thats why I live out in the middle of the nowhere now so I can have what I want. If I'm hunting and a wild bore comes at me I dont think a 5 lb dogs going to protect me that well. If someone breaks into my house again do you think a 5 lb or even a 20 lb dog is going to stop a thief breaking into my house. No I want a dog that can kill if it comes down to me or the thief. However if a dog does hurt or kill someone the dog and the owner should be charged for the crime by law. I dont care about what kind of laws or bans they have in any other country. I am american I have the right to protect myself by any means. If I want a pit to guard my house while I sleep. Sure I have guns, but a gun cant hear somebody breaking into my house. The gun would not help in time I lock them up unloaded bcuz I have kids. I would have to get my key out of the safe, unlock the gun case, grab the clips and bullets out of the lock box load the clip, put it in the gun take the safe off point and shoot. By the time I do all that I would be dead and so would my family. My dog would go in there and at the very least scare him away at the most kill the thief. ( He is in my house I have every right to protect my life and my family by any means.)

James

James
Wednesday, August 25, 2010 2:19 AM
Pit Bulls score an 83.4% passing rate with the American Temperament Test Society. That's better than the popular Border Collie (a breed who scores 79.6%).

Fayclis

Fayclis
Wednesday, August 25, 2010 8:28 AM
There has always been fear mongolers, bigots, prejudice, discrimination, profiling and holocausts are and have been a part of the "human" history.

As my friend Cindy has said "ALWAYS knew that the search for intelligent life on other worlds was based on the shortages here".

Catherine Kaiman

Catherine Kaiman
Wednesday, August 25, 2010 3:49 PM
With all due respect James, part of the reason the Pitbull is getting a bad rap is because they are being used by people for the wrong purpose.
Pitbulls are not and never were meant to be a guardian breed. By nature Pitbulls are not human aggressive, and using one for the purpose of protection and intimidation only serves to create more problems for the breed.
I have 4 Pitbulls at the moment, human aggression isn't and would never be tolerated. I would suggest a guardian breed for protection and perhaps a Pitbull for companionship.

Brad Phillips

Brad Phillips
Friday, September 03, 2010 8:20 PM
I've been raising your so called Pitt Bulls for 12 yrs now. My first one was named Frank strong beautiful animal although he had a bad name because of his breed, he had a love that couldn't be denied and a soul that was more pure than yours or mine. I have raised more than 75 of them and all of them never had a problem with aggression. My dog's are Stafford-shire Terriers, and American Stafford-shire Terriers not once have I ever been so cold, so sick, so ignorant, that I would put these fragile innocent creatures of God in a pit for your pleasure. How dare you call them Pitt Bulls! If ever you could find a better more loyal partner, then you must have died and gone to heaven. These animals are to be compared to our children; they will learn and live what we teach them. If we teach our children to lie and steal then they will grow up to be liars and thieves. If we teach our dogs to kill then that’s what they will do, if we teach them to love then they will. It’s not the animal it’s the people that discriminate against them, all dogs have teeth it just so happens that bully breeds have the strongest physical traits in the K9 family. People gave them their names during a cruel past-time of American history, well get over it and quit being prejudice. Chances are that somebody in your family has done something bad over the course of history. Maybe killed somebody or many people but you’re not being condemned for what they have done. So I ask you; why you condemn the innocent, is it out of fear most people fear what they don’t under-stand, and can’t control like their own ignorance. It’s not the dog it’s the owners. Don’t put down the innocent put down the incompetent owners. Bully Breeds deserve to be love just the same as any of our K-9 companions.

Post Comment

CAPTCHA image