Another pit bull thread?

[sumthin fishy]

Actually it applies to all "potentially dangerous dogs". I saw on the news last night that California is going to implament a law requiring owners of large, scary dogs to take a class and get a special licence. It was on the news laast night but I can't seem to find a link at this time. A by-law also requires convicted fellons to specially request the licence for any dog over 25 lbs, and may be turned down based on the nature of thier offense. This is a step in the right direction, and 100% better than an all out ban.
:dog:
Let me clarify that this is exciting news and should not be turned into an argument. Positive replies only PLEASE

[Larissa]

Well, I certainly don't support bans, however as far as I can tell without all the specifics, this sounds like a very good idea to me. Unfortunately, we can't rely on most people to be responsible with their animals on their own so I think this might be a good idea. Like I said though, I can't say for sure without knowing all of the specifics.

[Larissa]

Oh and Fishy, this will probably end up becoming an argument anyway, seeing how all threads with "Pit Bull" in the title have become very heated arguments.

[StreetCypher]

a law requiring owners of large, scary dogs to take a class and get a special licence.
This may be a good way of educating irresponsible people who don't know how to properly care for dogs. But i don't agree with the "large scary dogs" part. If anything i think if they implant this law then it should apply to ALL dog owners.
Just because a dog is large doesn't mean it'll rip you to shreds, and the "scary" part is all subjective, i think small chihuahua is scary, they look like El Chupacabra.
A by-law also requires convicted fellons to specially request the licence for any dog over 25 lbs, and may be turned down based on the nature of thier offense.
Sure, maybe if the offence was something like "using dogs to kill people", but felons are hardly the people to worry about when it comes to irresponsible dog owners. Its your normal everyday person.

[mechanic]

Since convicted felons have no difficulty aquiring guns, I don't think a law to prevent them from getting a certain type of dog will work either.
E

[Leopardess]

I don't think you can request that positive replies only be posted LOL. That leaves little room for anyone to disagree.

For the record, my sister got her eyebrow bitten off by a 10lb. terrier:)

[sublime1184]

ok ok I'll be nice, forget banning pit bulls, can we ban Leo? :sim:

[nursie]

I think the dog class is a good idea..maybe allow a "proficiency exam" for those who know what they are doing to bypass the class.
But how are they going to define who has to take it? How do you know a dog is going to be 25 lbs or not when you get it as a puppy? Not all dogs run true to breed stats: boxers are 50 to 70 lbs on average..my big boy is 105. I'm sure the same holds true for the smaller breeds...so do you throw the guy in cuffs who's pekineese got a little hefty? Mixed breeds are such a cr*p shoot...you think it will be small, and it turns into a monster.
Safer to give it to all owners.

[aknif]

Newest Pit Bull legislation in Colorado:

This was just on our news last night. Residents of Aurora, Colorado have 30 days to comply with the following laws if they own a pit bull within city limits:

"Pit bull owners must be at least 21 years old. They have to pay $200 a year to license their pet. They must carry $100,000 in liability insurance. The dogs must be spayed or neutered. And, visible warning signs must be posted in their yard.

The rules apply to nine types of dogs that are either pure pit bulls, or closely related to the breed.

Owners who violate the law face hundreds of dollars in fines and risk having their dog euthanized."

I don't live in Aurora, nor do I have a pit bull, just adding the info!

Amy

[Leopardess]

Ouch! :sad:

That's okay. I can always come back with a new name;)

[sumthin fishy]

I don't think you can request that positive replies only be posted LOL. That leaves little room for anyone to disagree.

For the record, my sister got her eyebrow bitten off by a 10lb. terrier:)
Positive disagreements are fine, as some above have been.
See we can disagree without getting mean about it :thm:

[Holly9937]

too bad all dog owners aren't required to take a class of some sort before owning a pet. It might mean that the idiots who are too lazy to do so won't end up with a dog chained in their yard for the rest of its life.

I'm guessing (hoping) the weight limits are just b/c a dog of that size has a shot at knocking down a person and could be harder to fend off. My jack russell is a force to be reckoned with, assuming you are within a foot of the ground, or brave enough to let her on your lap ;)

[oscar119]

I think the aurora, co. law is good, and is a step to make sure that dogs stay out of the wrong hands. But I don't agree with the CA, because I doubt they will have someone requesting to see liscense's for all "big and scary dogs"(how do you legally define that term anyways?) and think it should be for all dogs even under 25lbs. Just my .02

[Chill]

Just causes me to wonder why dog owners should be better trained than parents.

[sublime1184]

Ouch! :sad:

That's okay. I can always come back with a new name;)

Leo, you mean to tell me that you weren't Bob? :p:

[Larissa]

Just causes me to wonder why dog owners should be better trained than parents.
Well, parents should be better trained, too.

[sumthin fishy]

Leo, you mean to tell me that you weren't Bob? :p:
Thanx sub, you have confirmed my suspicions!!

As for the "large scary dogs" that was a bit of my own color. I think the term used was "potentailly dangerous breeds". Of course any law is going to have some negative effects, but at least they are considering education over a ban.
There will always be folks who break/get arround the law, but they should not be the reason law abiding citicens should suffer. If one bad apple ruins the barrel, can I just buy mine in the bag? :idea2:

[mandimoron]

Any dog is potentially dangerous. I agree with mandatory classes, but I think ALL dog owners should go. When I worked at the vet clinic, the only dogs that ever wanted to tear my face off were the Shih-Tzus and Dalmations. I've come to the conclusions that Dalmations are just glorified inbred hicks, and some owners of smaller dogs tend not to treat their pets as dogs. As a result, the animals get coddled, and lack proper socialization. So they get nippy.

(Note, I said some small dog owners. I've met some very nice little doggy dudes, and own a Cockerspaniel-ShihTzu cross myself. But the crazy aggressive little dogs at the clinic were invariably treated more like fashion accessories by their owners than dogs. Some of the dogs never took walks-- their owners carried them everywhere and yelled at me if I put a leash on their baby. Those are the owners that desperately need the lessons.)

[nursie]

LOL..sounds like they need a real life!

[Leopardess]

I've been found out:(

[Holly9937]

My jack russell really likes other dogs once she convinces them that she is the boss :thud: !! It seems to me that alot of little dogs are nippy b/c they feel the need to show that they're not to be walked all over just b/c they're little!!

[Larissa]

My jack russell really likes other dogs once she convinces them that she is the boss :thud: !! It seems to me that alot of little dogs are nippy b/c they feel the need to show that they're not to be walked all over just b/c they're little!!
they have "little dog" syndrome.

[SnakeIce]

I doubt treating any dog like a fashion accessories would help make them docile. An animal consistently made to do things it might not chose to do on its own would be more likely to be aggresive about haveing uncomefortable things done to it by a stranger.

Small dog syndrome could also be called fashion accessory syndrome.

[Snake Eyez]

That Colorado law seems a bit heavy handed. I have no problems with criminal charges or fines against people whose dogs commit crimes, but those requirements go to far. Like was said before, none of these things are required to have children, yet children do far more damage to society.

[sublime1184]

I've been found out:(


It was fun while it lasted, but hooray! now we got the no-troll Leo! :)

[Chill]

... yet children do far more damage to society.


It's probably neck and neck - society does a lot of damage to children as well