Petition to end dog breed-specific legislation - please sign

[mustrumr]

Hi fellow yakkers! I would like to ask you to sign this petition http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/end-BSL-in-Australia .

It is calling for ending breed-specific legislation that bans ownership and breeding of American Pit Bull Terriers in Australia. This legislation is bad legislation - there is no good evidence that APTBs are more dangerous than other breeds, and similar legislation around the world has NOT resulted in reductions in the rate of dog attacks. In fact, The Netherlands have recently repealed their breed specific legislation for exactly that reason http://www.expatica.com/nl/news/local_n ... l-ban.html

In the last 20 years in Australia, there have been NO verified fatal attacks by a dog that has been positively identified to be an APBT, and very few non-fatal attacks. This may surprise you - after all, aren't the papers full of attacks by killer Pit Bulls? Check out this article for a good discussion of the issues surrounding the media hype and the lack of evidence that APBTs are particularly dangerous http://www.dapbt.org/collier.htm .

(quoting from the conclusion to the article above)
Dog attacks are a significant public safety issue in Australia, as elsewhere. However, a tiny minority of the dogs in our communities bite people in any given year. The available data show clearly that the American Pit Bull Terrier is not involved in more attacks or serious attacks on people than other breeds - indeed, it is well down the lists of frequency of attack by breed ...

... The case that the APBT is an especially dangerous dog is not convincing. Though American data lend some support to this view, they are so seriously flawed as to be unreliable, and the sociology of the human-dog relationship is probably more important than inherited breed disposition. In Australia the available data show the APBT to be less dangerous than several other breeds in absolute numbers of attacks on people. There are no data available to assess breed attack rates relative to breed populations, so a definitive judgement on the relative danger of various breeds must be suspended. What emerges clearly from analysis of available data is the fact that attacks are committed by a small proportion of individuals of any breed.

Thanks for your help!

[keza]

i'm keen to sign a partition to have some dog owners put down.

Funny how people get obsessed with a particular breed, when in fact the problem is the type of person that can be attracted to that certain breed.
Staffies seem to get a raw deal around our park, but i have never known one to be any trouble.

Don't know much about the APBT's but as i said the problem is the owners.

[theclick]

i'm keen to sign a partition to have some dog owners put down.

Funny how people get obsessed with a particular breed, when in fact the problem is the type of person that can be attracted to that certain breed.
Staffies seem to get a raw deal around our park, but i have never known one to be any trouble.

Don't know much about the APBT's but as i said the problem is the owners.

100% agreed. The law should be that the owner or keeper of any dog involved in injuring someone outside of their property should be held 100% responsible for it.

So if you leave the gate open or it is poorly maintained so your dog gets out and mauls a kid to death, the owner should be up for manslaughter charges IMHO. That way it doesnt matter what breed of dog it is.

[YakN00b]

also charge the schoolkids that go around teasing dogs and opening gates.

[theclick]

also charge the schoolkids that go around teasing dogs and opening gates.

Again. Agreed.

But a 3 year old a) wouldn't know better and b) shouldnt be able to open a gate.

If a 15 year old dickwad opens the gate, what else would ya expect?

[Dallas]

I wont sign it

http://www.dogsbite.org/newsroom-releas ... 042209.htm
"The report shows that 19 dog breeds contributed to 88 fatalities. Pit bulls accounted for 59% of these deaths, the second leading breed, rottweilers, accounted for 14%."

"Of the 88 fatal dog attacks recorded by DogsBite.org, pit bull type dogs were responsible for 59% (52). This is equivalent to a pit bull killing a U.S. citizen every 21 days during this 3-year period. The data also shows that pit bulls commit the vast majority of off-property attacks that result in death. Only 18% (16) of the attacks occurred off owner property, yet pit bulls were responsible for 81% (13)"

** These stats also only record attacks on humans, there would be many more instances of attacks on other animals (often peoples pets)

[bazzoo]

No signature here either , i love dogs and have a lovely collie ,and staffies are really cute and good kids dogs , Great danes are sweet and placid , but no way american Pitt bull terriers that are bred to fight and kill and their record in this country is shocking .You only have to ask your local vet or the RSPCA who by the way have wanted the breed banned for many years . You may have a very good natured Pitt Bull , and if you do , i congratulate you on your training , but i believe the breed will revert very quickly to what they were bred for . Sorry , but no way

[ArWeTherYet]

I wont be signing it either.....and I think it should be extended to include Labradoodles. Yes since this abomination of cross breeding has been thrust upon the world, no soft toy is safe . Rubbish bins are constantly violated .....although they are pretty good at cleaning the dishes if the dish washers on the blink .
So can we please start a petition to have this breed band before its too late.

[eth93]

I wont sign it

http://www.dogsbite.org/newsroom-releas ... 042209.htm
"The report shows that 19 dog breeds contributed to 88 fatalities. Pit bulls accounted for 59% of these deaths, the second leading breed, rottweilers, accounted for 14%."

"Of the 88 fatal dog attacks recorded by DogsBite.org, pit bull type dogs were responsible for 59% (52). This is equivalent to a pit bull killing a U.S. citizen every 21 days during this 3-year period. The data also shows that pit bulls commit the vast majority of off-property attacks that result in death. Only 18% (16) of the attacks occurred off owner property, yet pit bulls were responsible for 81% (13)"

** These stats also only record attacks on humans, there would be many more instances of attacks on other animals (often peoples pets)

I love how they say ‘pit bull type dogs’. So in reality most of them were probably muts that just happened to look like an APBT or Amstaff.

I’ll be signing it, as no doubt my puppy will be next on the to kill list.

[bazzoo]

paul your puppy looks soooooo cute , very cheeky

[patwah]

I wont be signing it either.....and I think it should be extended to include Labradoodles. Yes since this abomination of cross breeding has been thrust upon the world, no soft toy is safe . Rubbish bins are constantly violated .....although they are pretty good at cleaning the dishes if the dish washers on the blink .
So can we please start a petition to have this breed band before its too late.

[mustrumr]

Actually, Bazzoo, the RSPCA is opposed to breed-specific legislation.

Quoting from their policy document at http://kb.rspca.org.au/RSPCA-Policy-A7- ... t_212.html

7.8.3 RSPCA Australia considers that any dog of any size, breed or mixture of breeds may be dangerous and thus dogs should not be declared dangerous on the basis of breed.

I actually don't own a pit bull - I haven't got the space for a dog of that size, so I've got a very nice little pug. Mind you, he's a killer

My brother Peter does own a pit bull, and I'd have to say he is one of the nicest dogs I've met. Peter has trained him beautifully, and he is totally obedient and has never caused any problems. He is very territorial though, and he has twice seen burglars off my brother's property - they left at high speed, judging by the fact that they broke the fibro fence getting over it .

I agree with those of you who say that ownership is crucial. There's no doubt that some idiots want the baddest, meanest dog they can get. Nowadays that seems to be the pit bull; 10 years ago it was the rottweiler; 10 years before that it was the dobermann or the german shepherd. None of these dogs is bad in themselves, but with a bad owner and bad training they certainly can be dangerous.

I'd support compulsory licensing of owners and compulsory dog training classes for all dogs, not just APBTs.

Cheers,

[Dallas]

Actually, Bazzoo, the RSPCA is opposed to breed-specific legislation.

Quoting from their policy document at http://kb.rspca.org.au/RSPCA-Policy-A7- ... t_212.html

7.8.3 RSPCA Australia considers that any dog of any size, breed or mixture of breeds may be dangerous and thus dogs should not be declared dangerous on the basis of breed.

Are you sure about that? - maybe the policy document says one thing, but those within the organisation believe another

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,26 ... 77,00.html

Also, I dont buy into the 'my brothers dog wouldnt hurt a fly' argument - as we could probably point you in the direction of a number of cases where the owner had the same opinion - that is before the dog killed their child

To be fair - all dogs have the potential for aggression towards humans (and other animals) - the difference with the Pitt Bull is that they also happen to be equipped with physical and tempermental characteristics which are inherant in the breed that result in a much much higher potential for serious injury or death - thats the reality

[Dallas]

I wont sign it

http://www.dogsbite.org/newsroom-releas ... 042209.htm
"The report shows that 19 dog breeds contributed to 88 fatalities. Pit bulls accounted for 59% of these deaths, the second leading breed, rottweilers, accounted for 14%."

"Of the 88 fatal dog attacks recorded by DogsBite.org, pit bull type dogs were responsible for 59% (52). This is equivalent to a pit bull killing a U.S. citizen every 21 days during this 3-year period. The data also shows that pit bulls commit the vast majority of off-property attacks that result in death. Only 18% (16) of the attacks occurred off owner property, yet pit bulls were responsible for 81% (13)"

** These stats also only record attacks on humans, there would be many more instances of attacks on other animals (often peoples pets)

I love how they say ‘pit bull type dogs’. So in reality most of them were probably muts that just happened to look like an APBT or Amstaff.

I’ll be signing it, as no doubt my puppy will be next on the to kill list.

Pitt Bull type dogs is the only way you can describe the breed - they don't have a 'pure' blood line as they have been cross-bred (repeatedly) for higher and higher levels aggression for the purpose of fighting over a relatively short period of time in comparison to other breeds evolutionary timeline.

I think this will be my last post on the topic - its just one that I feel strongly about.

There are a multitude of other breeds (ie: ANY) which are far more appropriate for domestic situations than this breed - you have to ask yourself what draws some people to the breed?
I would say there are much better ways to prove ones masculinity.

[kayaksportsmark]

I'd support compulsory licensing of owners and compulsory dog training classes for all dogs, not just APBTs

Thats interesting. I have always thought that way about parents and their children.