Say NO to pitbull ban

[janalta]

No, of course you are so right...if you did not personally see something, it does not exist.

[JLives]

I don't see why we don't legislate on what is proven to work, such as Calgary's laws, and not on what scares some people. Municipalities worldwide are following their model. Let's go with the facts and get some positive results.

[Captain Awesome]

If 'fighting breeds' are such a danger to the public and are so prone to 'going off'...how do you explain the fact that they only account for 5% of all reported dog bites ?

That's because you look at absolute numbers, and not percentages. You'd have to look at number of incidents (severe injuries as opposed to simple bites) per dog. Then you'll see which breeds (although small numbered) tends to cause more severe injuries or death, as opposed to absolute numbers.

For example, number of motorcycles on the road are fairly low, but they are more dangerous to ride as opposed to cars - even though most road incidents are car-related. But when you classify all incidents per vehicle type, you'll see which vehicles are more likely to cause sever injuries - motorcycles. Also car-related incidents don't cause sever injuries in most cases while when riding a bike you're much more likely to get injured.

That's why certain breeds only account for 5% of the reported dog bites but are classified more dangerous than others.

[JLives]

You also have to identify the breed properly and show how many are owned. If there is a large population of one breed you may see more reports of incidents from that breed. For identification you need to ensure the dog is being classified properly such as classifying a lab/pitbull cross biting as a cross breed and not as a pitbull cross or lab cross. You can not separate which part of the cross breed is doing the biting.

[janalta]

Exactly...Calgary's model has proven effective.
A dangerous or aggressive dog is based on the history of that individual dog...not on breed or type. Which is how it should be.
http://www.defendingdog.com/id38.html

[Roadster]

Exactly...Calgary's model has proven effective.
A dangerous or aggressive dog is based on the history of that individual dog...not on breed or type. Which is how it should be.
http://www.defendingdog.com/id38.html

The problem in my mind is Going on "history" means that before anything is done the dog has to attack someone so someone has to get hurt,,, if thats ok then how about still making some legislation on those proven to do the most damage too so initial attacks are prevented... You all seem ok with no protection till someone pays a big price,,, even if Calgary's idea is so great it still means those most dangerous can still hurt someone Once,,, I never did like the free first bite rule anyway, now if it was a pit bull we would likely lose any chance at calling it a pit bull attack after a viscious bite happens,,, it would be just a dog bite while there is a difference between dog bites and viscious attacks...
Show me a model that prevents as well... Again,,, three known attacks in West Bank alone in a very short time,,,
And if its being taken on "World wide", can you show me places "around the world" that have taken it on? Looks like the Aussie plan is moving along quite nicely too and is working. Personally I like it better so far and until the Calgary one looks like it prevents as well as slows bites down is not a stopper by any means yet... I dont think I should have to be a pit bulls first bite just because there is a law that may fine the owner and yet you pit owners seem happy with that. Plus I dont think the fines are nearly enough, if you walk around with a dangerous weapon and I get hurt you could do jail time,,, what about the dog? They need a classification still so if some jerk buttheaded owner lets his dog loose and it bites me the owner pays more then just a fine. Fines are forgettable, we make more money, we move on,,, there needs to be time somehow to think about those actions with dogs who can do so much damage...
I have a feeling if BC decides to take on the Calgary mode I will fight it just because its not enough in my mind. Maybe an awareness walk would be in order then.

[Roadster]

Off topic/Trip

[Roadster]

If 'fighting breeds' are such a danger to the public and are so prone to 'going off'...how do you explain the fact that they only account for 5% of all reported dog bites ?

That's because you look at absolute numbers, and not percentages. You'd have to look at number of incidents (severe injuries as opposed to simple bites) per dog. Then you'll see which breeds (although small numbered) tends to cause more severe injuries or death, as opposed to absolute numbers.

For example, number of motorcycles on the road are fairly low, but they are more dangerous to ride as opposed to cars - even though most road incidents are car-related. But when you classify all incidents per vehicle type, you'll see which vehicles are more likely to cause sever injuries - motorcycles. Also car-related incidents don't cause sever injuries in most cases while when riding a bike you're much more likely to get injured.

That's why certain breeds only account for 5% of the reported dog bites but are classified more dangerous than others.

Thank you CA,,, looking at all of the numbers makes more sense then just the stat number,,, population numbers, severity and so on but they dont want to see that,,, just what some idiot was paid to write down on paper and suck in a pay cheque. There is much more then a stat number to tell the whole story but sometimes simple is better for some.

[Roadster]

You also have to identify the breed properly and show how many are owned. If there is a large population of one breed you may see more reports of incidents from that breed. For identification you need to ensure the dog is being classified properly such as classifying a lab/pitbull cross biting as a cross breed and not as a pitbull cross or lab cross. You can not separate which part of the cross breed is doing the biting.

I would say if the cross breeding has pit in it then it comes in the pit class of dog attack. If none leave then the pit part out totally,,, right? No pit no pit bite or attack in the count then, that is pretty easy... Now same with shepard bites,,, no shepard cross then leave the shepard part out of the count.
If I read what you were saying right, that is.

[Roadster]

Will respond to this bit instead

No, of course you are so right...if you did not personally see something, it does not

Or if I dont hear of it through the news,,, people talking about it, having someone I know having dealt with it,,,
If I ever see it happen for myself something baaaad will happen.

[janalta]

Calgary Sun 2010

Bites as per breed group


1. Terriers (pitbulls account for half of total terrier bites) - 26 bites
2. Working dogs (includes Rottweilers and mastiffs) - 22 bites
3. Herding dogs (includes shepherds) - 17 bites
4. Sporting dogs (includes retrievers) - 16 bites
5. Non-sporting - 14 bites
6. Toys - 5 bites
7. Hounds - 2 bites

Note - Pit Bulls registered in Calgary make up HALF of the terrier group's recorded bites....therefore those who take these numbers to claim that Pits have the highest bite rate in Calgary are WRONG. The terrier group is a very large group of dogs....but it makes for better anti-pit drama to state that Pits bite more than any other dog, despite Calgary's dog bylaws.
The correct number would be:
Pit Bulls - 13 bites....less than the sporting breeds...the good old labs and retrievers. Less than all other groups with the exception of toys and hounds.
I would bet my life that the number of bites from toys is astronomical...but not serious enough to require any medical attention, therefore, not counted.
As for the hounds....not a whole lot of hounds to be found in the city.

[Roadster]

Calgary Sun 2010

Bites as per breed group


1. Terriers (pitbulls account for half of total terrier bites) - 26 bites
2. Working dogs (includes Rottweilers and mastiffs) - 22 bites
3. Herding dogs (includes shepherds) - 17 bites
4. Sporting dogs (includes retrievers) - 16 bites
5. Non-sporting - 14 bites
6. Toys - 5 bites
7. Hounds - 2 bites

Note - Pit Bulls registered in Calgary make up HALF of the terrier group's recorded bites....therefore those who take these numbers to claim that Pits have the highest bite rate in Calgary are WRONG. The terrier group is a very large group of dogs....but it makes for better anti-pit drama to state that Pits bite more than any other dog, despite Calgary's dog bylaws.
The correct number would be:
Pit Bulls - 13 bites....less than the sporting breeds...the good old labs and retrievers. Less than all other groups with the exception of toys and hounds.
I would bet my life that the number of bites from toys is astronomical...but not serious enough to require any medical attention, therefore, not counted.
As for the hounds....not a whole lot of hounds to be found in the city.

Ok, lets say half of the terrior group bites are from pit bulls as is stated there then, so thats 13 bites? Now the herding dogs, which "Includes" shepards but must not be limited to shepards is 17,,,, so how many of those are actually from shepards,,, maybe half? Who knows because again this is just for stats and again does not explain as well as it should,,, either this person possibly likes pit bulls and wanted to point out that only half are pit bites,,, or they hate shepards and want us to think 17 bites is the number of bites for them,,, see what we are saying about stats? If they took the time to mention the pits are Only half of the terrior bite count then why not tell us what the number is for shepards in the herding count, we know herders are not always shepards,,, my grandfather used many other dog breeds for his sheep herding. He never used shepards.
Stats are never meant to be accurate but you are trying to claim they are here. So now it looks like shepards have bitten 17 times, thats 4 more then pit bites according to this but since the herding dogs list only includes shepards there might just be say five bites from shepards alone and lets say collies or other herders made up the rest of those 17 bites,,,,
You have to quit trusting stats,,, they are just a visual on paper done by someone with nothing better to do

[juz516]

I would say if the cross breeding has pit in it then it comes in the pit class of dog attack. If none leave then the pit part out totally,,, right? No pit no pit bite or attack in the count then, that is pretty easy... Now same with shepard bites,,, no shepard cross then leave the shepard part out of the count.
If I read what you were saying right, that is.

Who is to decide, in the case of any crossbred dog, what the cross is?? How are you going to tell that a dog has pitbull in it? A lot of people guess what the cross is, as proven over and over with the SPCA pictures and pet of the week....crap, even hamsters and guinea pigs are crosses to them! If a crossbred dog bites, and it is not obvious at least what one of the breeds is, who is to say what the breeds are? But, if what you are saying is correct, then if it is a rip, tear, mauling, then it MUST be a pitbull cross cause other dogs, such as shepherds, do not do that? Give me a break. As an example, .... I have a bear coat Shar Pei, (who has been mistaken for a pitbull LOLOL....) who is constantly taken for a Chow cross....yet she is a purebred Shar Pei. But, should she "attack" another dog or a human(I don't believe she would, but she IS a dog, after all), and she is not a papered dog, who would decide what breed she was ? Because shar pei's were also bred to fight eons ago they could, conceivably, do the same things as pitbulls according to you and your definition of the "fighting breeds".

[Roadster]

Who is to decide, in the case of any crossbred dog, what the cross is?? How are you going to tell that a dog has pitbull in it? A lot of people guess what the cross is, as proven over and over with the SPCA pictures and pet of the week....crap, even hamsters and guinea pigs are crosses to them! If a crossbred dog bites, and it is not obvious at least what one of the breeds is, who is to say what the breeds are? But, if what you are saying is correct, then if it is a rip, tear, mauling, then it MUST be a pitbull cross cause other dogs, such as shepherds, do not do that? Give me a break. As an example, .... I have a bear coat Shar Pei, (who has been mistaken for a pitbull LOLOL....) who is constantly taken for a Chow cross....yet she is a purebred Shar Pei. But, should she "attack" another dog or a human(I don't believe she would, but she IS a dog, after all), and she is not a papered dog, who would decide what breed she was ? Because shar pei's were also bred to fight eons ago they could, conceivably, do the same things as pitbulls according to you and your definition of the "fighting breeds".

Maybe the trained authorities should decide. The ears and face often shows a likeness of the breeds being involved. If it looks like one and its a mix breed then maybe it is part pit.
My dog was bred from 20 breeds and only one of them being schnauzer,, ya, she happens to sport a long beard, the long eye brows and moustache, its a dead give away. She also shows shape and smartness of shepard in her, now thats two that can be seen in her and I am not talking simple cross breeding as in part pit part lab. You wouldnt know what part of my dog shows the Russian water dog for sure because they are extinct now but you get my drift.
Cross breeding shows usually a good side of both, after some distance down the line maybe not because much of the pit part might be gone, looks and ability,,,? Thats when they are basically a mutt and there are lots of different abilities and looks involved, in this case people likely wouldnt be so concerned because if it dont look pit its likely hardly a pit with the same abilities by then. I would trust a trained authority when it comes to deciding.
Oh and your shar pei being seen as a pit is truely, not for real and if so the person who thought so has no idea about dogs at all, it likely wont happen again and if it does you got a lot of stupid people in the area.

[juz516]

Excuse me???? You are calling me a liar? It did not happen just one time...and I also had people think my old boxer was a pitbull.....so yes, there are stupid people out there....but definitely not just in my area!!! Just for the record, I do not BS nor run off at the mouth like some on here. What I am saying is......the average person does NOT know one breed from another unless it is obvious. Good lord....are you for real? You would trust the "trained authorities"??? And that would be who in Kelowna? You? The esteemed RDCO dog control? IMO, Cesar Milan would be considered a "trained authority" and yet it seems as though people on this thread have "poo pooed" his beliefs as well as his training methods. That, too, is up to the individual on who they would consider a "trained authority". So.....an agreement to do with this discussion is hooped, big time. No one will ever agree on anything.....and I don't see anyone actually trying to come to some conclusions,.....just mudslinging and right fighters....and anyone that compares owning a dog to walking an alligator....well, enough said. LOLOLOL