Pit bull terriers

con1888

heretolearn wrote: »

I agree that any breed of dog can be dangerous in the wrong hands, not just the banned breeds.

However, accepting as we must that there are plenty of idiots around who are the 'wrong hands' the law was brought in to try to ensure they can't get those hands on certain breeds who have the capacity to cause the most damage should they turn on someone.

Pit bulls' bites are more powerful than other dog breeds. That's why they are banned.

It stops those 'wrong hands' getting hold of what they turn into a dangerous weapon.

It also stops the 'right hands' getting those breeds, true. That may not be fair, but it's worth it to stop the 'wrong hands'.

I don't believe anyone has the right to own one specific breed - what, if I can't have a pitbull I'm going to stamp and cwy and cwy and cwy until I'm sick.Alright Violet Elizabeth, just get another breed.:rotfl:

So do we ban knives altogether and butter our bread with sporks? As knives get into the wrong hands and become weapons...

Person_one

mumps wrote: »

I love my dog, I have had dogs all my life although I have rescues and none of them have been identifiable as any particular breed, just loveable characters. However, as much as I loved them all I can't justify putting a child at risk of a horrible death, and it must have been absolutely terrifying (the childs grandmother was admitted to hospital with the injuries she got trying to save the poor little soul.) The mother said her brother has never got over it. I thought it was very touching that she said it hasn't affected their relationship, I think it would be easy for a mother to blame the dogs owner and never forgive them.

I'm not sure what your point is?

Responsible dog owners never leave a dog and a child alone together, of any breed or none.

Person_one

heretolearn wrote: »

Pit bulls' bites are more powerful than other dog breeds. That's why they are banned.

More powerful than a mastiff, a great dane, a GSD, an airedale terrier, a husky, a malamute, a st bernard, a staffie, a dobermann, an OES or any number of other big strong dogs that aren't banned?

No, they were banned as a kneejerk sop.

mumps

Person_one wrote: »

I'm not sure what your point is?

Responsible dog owners never leave a dog and a child alone together, of any breed or none.

My point is much as I love dogs I love children more. People are upset about the dog and I am sure it was sad but if Pit Bulls are that dangerous then maybe it was something that had to be done. If you think of the death of that child, and remember he wasn't left alone and it was a dog he knew, is it worth the risk or should dangerous breeds be banned?

I also, for what its worth, don't go along with the theory that it is always the owners fault. I have had six dogs in my life, two of them have lived to 19. One of my dogs was mad, no other way to explain it. He was loving and lovely, it broke my heart but in the end I had to admit I could do nothing to stop the madness. He would just lose it suddenly and it was without provocation or warning. I was bitten quite badly, he turned on my husband and as we had a baby just about to start toddling we couldn't risk it. I could keep him away from the baby but I knew as soon as she was mobile there would come a day when she opened a door and the risk was too much. I have tears in my eyes thinking of him but baby had to come first.

Jay_Tee

con1888 wrote: »

So do we ban knives altogether and butter our bread with sporks? As knives get into the wrong hands and become weapons...

We already ban knives in public places.

vicx

mumps wrote: »

My point is much as I love dogs I love children more. People are upset about the dog and I am sure it was sad but if Pit Bulls are that dangerous then maybe it was something that had to be done. If you think of the death of that child, and remember he wasn't left alone and it was a dog he knew, is it worth the risk or should dangerous breeds be banned?

Was there any evidence to prove the child and dog were not left together? I think it was just the Grandmothers word.

mumps

vicx wrote: »

Was there any evidence to prove the child and dog were not left together? I think it was just the Grandmothers word.

I don't know what sort of evidence there would be? Grandmother can't have been far as I don't think it would take a Pit Bull, or any other strong dog, to kill a four year old and the grandmother was seriously hurt trying to save him so I assume she was involved very quickly.

vicx

Thats what I mean, there would be no evidence to prove she had left the room when the attack happened.

On the programme 'Death row dogs' I am sure the Grandmother said she got two packets of crisps, one for her grandson and one for the dog? (The attack could have happened when she went out of the room to get the crisps, leaving the dog and grandson alone) but on the news article it states "And when John Paul was given crisps [by John Paul’s gran] Uno was obviously thinking, 'where's mine?''.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/09/30/john-paul-massey-killer-dog-uno-was-trying-to-move-up-family-pecking-order-100252-29511668/

mumps

vicx wrote: »

Thats what I mean, there would be no evidence to prove she had left the room when the attack happened.

On the programme 'Death row dogs' I am sure the Grandmother said she got two packets of crisps, one for her grandson and one for the dog? (The attack could have happened when she went out of the room to get the crisps, leaving the dog and grandson alone) but on the news article it states "And when John Paul was given crisps [by John Paul’s gran] Uno was obviously thinking, 'where's mine?''.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/09/30/john-paul-massey-killer-dog-uno-was-trying-to-move-up-family-pecking-order-100252-29511668/

I didn't see this programme, saw the mother on the news. What an awful thing to have to live with. She is running a campaign, I think it is that dogs should always be muzzled or always muzzled when children are around? Not quite sure as I was getting ready for work when it was on. Did it say what the grandmother's injuries were? The mother didn't say on the news.

con1888

Jay_Tee wrote: »

We already ban knives in public places.

We ban carrying them. But they aren't banned in total like pitbulls are. Like it has been said the dogs are banned as a knee-jerk reaction. Just as banning all knives would be as thugs would move on to hammers, metal poles, same as banning certain dogs causes the idiots to move on to different breeds. It isn't a resolution.