The recently-passed PIT-BULL restriction bill: My two cents

I read with much interest about the pit-bull restrictions bill that was recently passed by the Boston city council. I believe it's a good idea whose time has come, and support it for the following reasons:
A.) Given the fact that PIT-BULLS are primarily bred for fighting, no matter how well trained it may be, pit-bulls are even MORE likely than many, if not most other dog breeds to become confused, and therefore exhibit unprovoked aggression out of the blue. This has resulted in many a serious injury or death to other dogs, or even people.
B.) Unlike the vast majority of dog breeds, including the GERMAN SHEPARD, ROTWEILER, and the DOBERMAN PINCER, PITBULLS have what are sometimes called "steel-trap" jaws. Once they bite, their jaw clamps AND locks onto the person, animal, ETC, that it has bitten and doesn't let go.
Having said all of the above, I not only re-iterate my support for the pitbull restriction bill, but I believe that these pitbulls must be muzzled when they're out in public, AND on a good, sturdy leash, and NOT on one of those long extending leashes, either. If people violate the law, they should be penalized for it by being fined or whatever.
Thanks for listehing. Just an opinion.
One final thing: I believe that the pit-bull restrictions bill should be applied STATE-WIDE, and NOT just Boston.

My father had a pitbull mix (my mother hated that dog) when I was about 7 and she attacked me for no reason one day, biting me on my face and grabbing me on my nose between my eyes! The dog would not let go and I couldn't get her off me. Both my parents had to do it, imagine if she was a purebred pitbull. Of course my mother was more than furious and ordered my father to get rid of the dog, which he did promptly.

Around Chelsea back in the late 90's it was extremely popular for certain groups of people to parade around w/ their pitbulls in various colors and ages. On top of that, not even caring to pick up the mess the dogs left behind. I know I complained to City Hall, I am hoping others did too. That fad faded thankfully.

Working at the airport, I see people traveling w/their dogs, which must be paid for at our counter and then TSA has to open the dog kennel and visually inspect the dog. Three weeks ago, one family was traveling w/ their pitbull. It was agitated enough w/ being in that cage, the confusion of the airport on a Saturday morning, and other people peering at it. So when it came time to take it out of the cage, the dog was already wild. Growling isn't the word for it and the man of the family didn't even want to touch it, he wanted the TSA people to do it but they refused. Everyone, people in line, people walking by, we at the counter could hear that dog and it was vicious! It took three people to manage that dog. Why people like this type of dog is beyond me.

Hi, Denise:
Thanks very much for your reply, which I read with much interest.
The fact that the pitbull attacked your and your family out of the blue(even though it was quite a long time ago) is yet another reason that a pitbull is so risky to own. I still recall an incident that occurred in my OLD hometown, on my street, many, many years ago while me, my sister and the other kids were waiting for the schoolbus one crisp fall morning. One of the families on our street had a dog that was constantly picking fights with other dogs in the neighborhood without provocation. This incident occurred with our extremely affectionate "mutt" dog, DUSTY. The aggressive neighbors' dog pushed DUSTY into the path of an oncoming car, which ran over one of DUSTY'S paws. After that, DUSTY was never the same--he began having all sorts of health problems, and, one day, the vet called to say that DUSTY died--his stomach had turned over. Although my sister and I were very young kids and were unaware of the existence of pitbulls, the more I think about it, the more I suspect that the dog who picked fights with other neighborhood dogs and ultimately pushed our dog, DUSTY into the path of the car was, indeed a pitbull, I kind of remember what the dog looked like, too. It had a face and jaw that looked like a pitbull. Why people would want to own such a dog boggles MY mind, too.
That must've been rather scary for you, seeing that pitbull at the airport being so aggressive and vicious that nobody wanted to handle him. It's also disgusting that nobody cares to clean up after them. I sympathize with you for what happened, even though it was so long ago. Having said all of the above, I'm sure that all the people who are deadset AGAINST the pitbull restrictions would change their tune really, really quickly if they or their pet were mauled by one of those supervicious dogs. Thanks again for your reply, Denise. Hope to talk to you again soon.

By Fred Sennott - Jul 11, 2004, 4:45 PM
Post #4 of 296 [In reply to]

I have mixed emotions about owning pit bulls.When I was about 10 years old a neighbor had one and I walked him every day for several years for the princely wage of $5 a week.Mike was one of the greatest dogs I ever met,friendly and well trained,I used a choker leash and had no trouble managing him .Other than mysrelf the owner was the only one who took him outdoors.The only time I had a problem was when one of my buddies ,being a clown feigned hitting me I thought Mike would go crazy and it took over a half hour to calm him down.That kid ewent the other way when he saw Mike coming.
The only other connection I have ever had is my son in law has one.He keeps him caged in the house or in a pen in the yard and only he and my grandson (Who Is 20) take him for walks.Captain would probably lick someone to death before he would bite them,and again is well trained,and abour the friendliest dog I have ever met.He is great with young children,but usually in his pen when they have visitors.My daughter even will let him out in the house for company when she is alone.she says he is great company.
Then I read the horror stories in the paper and it seems therre is at least one incident a week.I realize that training has a lot to do with how they act and some of these animals are trained to be vicious.I stillHave a lot of reservations about them and can find no fault with the new regulations Boston has on ownership of these beautiful animals.
Trust in God and sin not.Don't blame me I'm like Sparky I voted for Sarah to.

Thanks for your input, Fred. I read your reply with much interest, and, although I'd never want to own a PITBULL myself if I ever got a dog, your neighbor(s) and brother-in-law displayed much good common sense by keeping the dogs penned up in the house, and/or when there were visitors, and by limiting who took the pitbull(s) for walks. Since PITBLLS are specifically bred for fighting, I still believe that owning a pitbull is MUCH too risky, and still believe that people who own them have to keep them under control.

Sorry to hear about your dog! poor thing.
I quite agree with you regarding people who oppose pitbull restrictions. Some people don't think things matter until it happens to themselves.

And I'd like to add that aside from the abuse the dogs dish out to people and other animals, a lot of pitbulls suffer abuse as well. With their "owners" training them for fighting and then letting them suffer their wounds with no attention; not socializing the animal to ANYone (although that proves to be of little help in calming the dogs' tempers anyway), not feeding them; just all around neglect. Granted this type of dog is truly undesirable, but still they should not be abused.

By Comm. Ave - Jul 12, 2004, 11:51 AM
Post #7 of 296 [In reply to]

Why restrict it to Pit Bulls? Why not have muzzles on all dogs over a certain weight (15 lbs., 20 lbs.) who are out in public?

I am so tired of obnoxious dog owners who insist on approaching my daughter with their dog. they always insist the dog loves people and never bites. Aren't those the quotes we always read in the paper? There are a few who are respectful, ask if it is okay if they approach, and keep their dogs on a very short leash when coming over to children.

Unfortunately, the majority of them are the former, and think it is wonderful for their dog to get in my child's face.

I love dogs, we always had at least one and often two or three when I was a kid (boxers). But I would never have let one of my dogs near a small child.

Miki, you know that "jaw-locking" thing is popular myth, right? It's completely untrue.

Since most attacks are by unleashed, unlicensed, and often unneutered dogs, it's unlikely that this ban will do anything but sound good to people who don't know much about the issue. Boston should enforce the laws already on the books, not create more.

Also, "pitbull" is now the catchall phrase for any medium-sized, stocky dog with a big head. There is little way to tell at first glance what is a pitbull and what is not (it's a mutt breed to begin with).

Can you spot the pitbull?

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

Thanks very much for your input and sympathy, Denise. While it's true that NO dog or any other animal should suffer abuse, I believe that it's still important the restrictions are in place and that these particular dogs(pitbulls) be kept under special control.
For COMM AVE. and ANDREA, I beg to differ here. I'm sorry to say, but PITBULLS do pose a special problem, NOT just because of their breeding(and it also has to do with the dog, not the owner) but also because the "steel trap" jaw is definitely NOT a myth--it's TRUE! The PHYSIOLOGICAL STRUCTURE of the pitbull's face and jaw is such that when a pitbull bites a person, dog, or other animal, it inflicts much, much heavier damage, because it clamps down on its prey in a VERY VISELIKE grip,
and DOES NOT let go.

Miki, can you identify a pitbull on sight? How?

Also, you might want to brush up on your semantics. Having a strong grip does not translate to "locking jaw". This is a dog, not an alligator.

By eeka - Jul 12, 2004, 1:21 PM
Post #11 of 296 [In reply to]

What Andrea said regarding it being a mutt breed and it not being physically any more viscious than most good-sized dogs with a similar snout.

And I don't get why the restriction is by breed. Sure, some breeds are more predisposed to certain temperaments, but, like people, the way a dog behaves depends much more on how it has been raised and is treated than on any innate tendencies. This would be like saying that since people of a certain ethnicity or who were born in a certain neighborhood or who have certain physical features are more likely to assault people, we should arrest them.

Why not have mandatory leash and spay/neuter laws instead? As well as having animal-treatment laws (FYI there are very few laws actually governing the way one may treat an animal that s/he owns).

Andrea, yes, I have seen a pitbull. I distincly remember what the dog who attacked our dog, DUSTY, all those years ago looked like: Medium sized-muscular--sort of a lightish brown in color, and, the jaw looked much more like a shovel, and like it could clamp down on its prey without letting go. Andrea, I just want you to know that I stand by my opinions, which are NOT kneejerk opinions.

I'm sorry, Eeka and Andrea, but I beg to differ with you both, and stand FIRMLY by my opinions. Again. the PITBULL is bred SPECIFICALLY for fighting, and therefore is even more likely to attack when confused, or whatever, or even without provocation. Also, I stand by my opinion that the "steel trap" jaw is NOT a myth. In my opinion, given the above reasons, PITBULLS are NOT meant to have as pets. I believe it's too risky. Also, while certain other dog breeds, such as the GERMAN SHEPHERD, can become aggressive, it's rarer, and it's not on the same scale--only when provoked, and their bites are generally NOT fatal or cause as much damage as the PITBULL. ANOTHER thing, Eeka and Andrea, is the fact that GERMAN SHEPHERDS are NOT bred specifically for fighting the way PITBULLS are: GERMAN SHEPHERDS are often employed as "seeing eye" dogs for blind people, as fire and rescue dogs, and, have been known to rescue people. PITBULLS, on the other hand, have never been used for ANY of the above-mentioned purposes.

A lot of dogs fit your description. How many dogs on this site are pitbulls? Can you identify them all?

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html


This ordinance is a joke. If the city can't enforce leash laws, how will this help matters?

By eeka - Jul 12, 2004, 4:42 PM
Post #15 of 296 [In reply to]

I think we should arrest people who randomly capitalize words in the middle of sentences. In my opinion, they aren't any good for anything.

Again, Andrea, I beg to differ with you: I'm not saying that anybody who owns a PITBULL should be ARRESTED, for crying out loud. What I'm saying is that if somebody owns a dog such as a PITBULL, s/he should be prepared and willing to take the responsibility that goes along with it, which means keeping their dog muzzled AND on a short, sturdy leash when they go out in public, plus keeping the dog penned up and muzzled when guests are around, especially infants, small children, and elderly people. Now, I hear what you're saying, and I disagree with you, and stand by my opinion.

I agree totally that dangerous dogs ought to be controlled, but the way in which the legislation mentions a specific breed is stupid and probably unenforceable, because you can't come up with a way to determine whether or not a given dog is a pitbull

Cop: You've got to muzzle that dog. It's a pitbull.

Owner: No it isn't

Cop: Yes it is.

Owner: No it isn't.

....

By Fred Sennott - Jul 12, 2004, 7:54 PM
Post #18 of 296 [In reply to]

I'd like to add to my earlier comments.I think its cruel to keep larger dogs in urban areas where its impossible for them to get the proper exercise.These Dogs need open spaces where they can run.They are largely bred to herd cattle or sheep or as hunters.It is in their nature to want to run.To keep them confined to a small apartment in the city seems cruel to me.
Trust in God and sin not.Don't blame me I'm like Sparky I voted for Sarah to.

By Ron Newman - Jul 12, 2004, 7:58 PM
Post #19 of 296 [In reply to]

Would you need to test the dog's DNA to be sure?

In general, I agree, but the fault doesn't lie with the "urban environment". I know someone who kept a very active hunting dog in a small city dwelling, but he took the dog out and ran with her for 2 hours every day, rain or shine. The dog (and the owner) were both in excelent shape and the dog was quite happy with her situation, judging by her sweet temperment and long healthy life.

Since there's no specific definition of a pitbull, a DNA test is not going to tell you anything interesting. I suppose you could find some genetic marker that corresponded to a stocky dog with a big head, and rewrite the definition of pitbull to account for that, but it seems that would be rowing the boat in the wrong direction....

Do you mean "capitalized words in the middle of sentences aren't good for anything," or "people who capitalize words in the middle of sentences aren't good for anything."

And is not being good for anything the same as being good for nothing?

Enquiring minds want to know.

Anyhow, maybe PITBULL is an acronym, like RADAR or LASER.

By Comm. Ave - Jul 12, 2004, 8:24 PM
Post #23 of 296 [In reply to]

I never thought I would agree with Fred, but here I am.

When we had boxers there was a dog run set up in the yard, so they could get all the play/excercise they needed. Plus it allowed us to not have to worry about them getting out, letting them off the leash when taken for a walk, etc.

If I understand correctly, a HUNTING dog is NOT the same as a dog that has been bred specifically for fighting, the way a pitbull has. A HUNTING dog is FAR less likely to attack another dog or other animal, or for that matter, a human being if it becomes confused, or frustrated or whatever. Also, a hunting dog, by nature, is also easier to train and to manage. My sister and her kids have a pure-bred beagle named OTIS, who's quite friendly and affectionate. Since Beagles are hunting dogs, they do tend to walk with their noses to the ground. Anybody notice. Anyhow, back to what I was saying earlier;
I don't buy into the notion that saying pitbulls are more likely to attack out of the blue when confuse or whatever is comparable to saying that people of a given ethnic group are more likely to go into crime or whatever. Sorry, that comparison doesn't hold water.

Miki, if you could tell the difference between a pitbull and an American Staffordshire terrier, I'd be very impressed.


And to Fred, the size of a dog has nothing to do with where it should live. A lab living in an apartment with an owner who is committed to its exercise needs is far better off that a big dog left alone in a yard all the time. Did you know that greyhounds actually make superb apartment dogs?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 12  View All