Monday, February 25, 2013

Dr. Larry's letter responding to Broward County's Breed Ban

 February 24, 2013

Dear Broward County Commissioner,

I am writing to encourage you to OPPOSE agenda item #52, which is on this
Tuesday's commission agenda. The American Veterinary Medical Association
(AVMA) has opposed breed specific dangerous dog legislation for many years.
I know of few veterinarians who would support such legislation. Those of us
in the trenches of private veterinary practice have seen too many happy,
pleasant, docile pit bulls and pit bull crosses to support such legislation..
Breed-specific legislation cuts too wide a swath through the lives of
responsible owners who own non-dangerous animals who happen to be of the
tainted species.

I am attaching a report from Ohio, which eliminated its state breed specific
legislation in 2012. I support the opinion of the majority of the Ohio state

The issue of dangerous dogs is one of responsible ownership. The AVMA policy
on dangerous dogs is as follows:

The AVMA supports dangerous animal legislation by state, county, or
municipal governments provided that legislation does not refer to specific
breeds or classes of animals. This legislation should be directed at
fostering safety and protection of the general public from animals
classified as dangerous.

I served on the Broward County Pet Overpopulation Committee for many years
and as its chair for most of that time. On several occasions the committee
addressed breed-specific legislation, rejecting it every time. In addition,
the Florida Veterinary Medical Association opposed state legislation last
year that would encourage breed-specific dangerous dog legislation.

I appreciate the Commission's desire to address the dangerous dog problem in
our community, but I encourage you to oppose this simplistic approach and to
support those recommendations from the AVMA and other knowledgeable animal
lovers that address this multi-factorial issue.


Larry Dee DVM
Diplomat, American Board of Veterinary Practitioners
Canine/feline practice.
Fellow, National Academies of Practice, veterinary medicine
AVMA Executive Board, District IV
Hollywood Animal Hospital


  1. ONe of the most respected vets around...and one who has alot more experience with dogs than a few commissioners and some angry pet hating tax payers. If the commission MUST listen to the experts in times of making decisions that impact many lives. If this is such a problem, maybe they should look into creating some sort of training or educational requirement in cases of certain breeds..if you attend, you get to have the dog. ANd by the way, there are more small dogs that bite people, but they dont make the news!! Its the people, not the pet!!


    Today the fate of thousands of pit bulls will be decided on my county please sign and share ty

  3. larry, mighty disappointed in you.

    1. So one blog post convinced you?? I could give you many more that are the opposite view of BSL...

    2. i am so glad you asked!

      no. a single blog post did not convince me of anything. the "many more" that you could give me, i have likely already consumed. and i might add, with a critical thinking brain.

      the TRUTH about pit bulls

    3. Thank you for responding. I read the blog. It has some very interesting points - but a lot of the points are made with what I'd like to call "big words". In living memory, I don't believe that many of those terms have ever been used... or are real words. And, the unfortunate thing about this blog is again, it's one blog, with one source. I appreciate what it's saying - but in all honesty I'm having a hard time buying it. Please understand I'm not discrediting it - but I do disagree with a lot of the points made. Here are some that I've read to know more about Pitbulls....

    4. " but a lot of the points are made with what I'd like to call "big words". In living memory, I don't believe that many of those terms have ever been used... or are real words."

      Em ma, there is a very easy test. You can look those words up in a print or online dictionary. You can also google each word to see how many hits it generates.

  4. How many pets do you sew up after an encounter with a pit bull? How many do you put down becuase they are too far gone? How many pit bulls do you put down because they are aggresive?

    I asked my vet how many dog maulings he got daily. One. How many of them were pit bull victims, over 90%. Caching. Average cost, a thousand bucks. Some of the victims live, some don't then you get to euthenize them and dispose of the bodies. Caching. Caching.

    Medical doctors feel differently after they take care of human victims. In this economy, cities can't aford all of the medical care and the expense of life flight helicopters. Maybe you vets would like to subsidize it with the spoils paid in the blood, supplied to you by pit bulls.

    1. Before you go saying a such a strong statement such as what you've ended your post with, I do suggest you do your research. You could (and probably have) make a lot of people angry with such a comment. My mother is a dog groomer. I could ask her opinion on a specific breed and take it for truth - or I could do the research myself. You can't take one person's opinion for gospel and preach it to anyone who will listen - the only way is to do your own research to come to an educated decision about it. If you own a dog or have children, I'd like to think that if someone said something about them that you found offensive, you'd tell them to educate themselves. That's what I'm doing - what you're saying holds no validity.

    2. @Julie Edwards-Matanga aka Meals on Wheels:
      That would be euthanize, I know how much you dislike words not spelled correctly.
      You must live in a real dump of a city if your vet sees one dog mauling per day. I live near DC with a large amount of pit bulls in the area and my five doctor practice only sees about one bite case per week, and the last one was caused by a chow...woops that is the great breed that you own!

  5. Larry Dee, SHAME ON YOU. You have an academic education, so you must know it's a mortal sin in academic circles to pose as an expert on things outside your area of expertise. You know, as do I, that veterinarians are not at all educated in animal behavior, behavioral biology or behavioral genetics.

    You know as well as I do that you are seeing animal maulings in your practice the likes of which were unknown before the pit bull type dog became popular. You know, as do I, that every time an animal comes into a veterinary practice mauled by a pit bull type dog, said veterinarian can retire yet another month earlier.

    It's scandalous and against the oath you took that you are now actively promoting your own financial interests above the general interests of companion animals. You are actively trying to keep the hundreds of savage animal maulings and torturous killings by pit bull going, because you earn a great deal on them.

    With this letter you've shown lack of understanding about your limited areas of competence, but worse yet you've shown a willingess to prostitute yourself and betray your medical oath for the sake of your bank account.

    Again, shame on you.

    1. I'm sorry. Let me understand you. You're saying that a person who deals with an animal on a daily basis has no authority to have an opinion on their general behavior?

      And I disagree that "you are seeing animal maulings in your practice the likes of which were unknown before the pit bull type dog became popular". I think that maybe you should check out why german shephards and rottweilers were banned in previous decades.

      And the financial interests?!?!? Who do you think is paying animal services to track down otherwise healthy and innocent animals (having not attacked anyone or shown aggressive behavior)? Tax payers are paying these people who could otherwise be spending their time in much more lucrative ways, to hunt down and kill pit bulls.

      The last paragraph - I have nothing to say about it. It's just terrible.

  6. Larry,

    I'm a dog owner who has competed in dog sports for 37 years. I have an M.S. in Animal Behavior from the U-WI-Madison, and worked for many years as a dog behavior consultant specializing in aggression. I have spoken at vet schools in the U.S. and abroad.

    After spending years studying aggression and reading police and hospital reports--as well as peer-reviewed research--I am 100% ANTI-gripping breed, and PRO-BSL.

    As you're well aware, pit bull victims include not only 368 Americans so far (with another added every 9-11 days), but a whole heap of innocent non-human animals. Numerous pet dogs and cats are mauled and killed by pits every day of the year.

    Pits chew through chain link, break through plate glass windows, and leap from second floor balconies to maul innocent pets walking on-leash. Pits regularly kill other pets inside those pets' own fenced yards or homes. These are not once-in-a-lifetime "freak accidents," but daily occurences. All it requires is a pit bull spotting an innocent dog, minding its own business, for the mahem to begin.

    I'm guessing that most pit bulls never see a vet in their lives. Pit owners are statistically likely to be felons without insurance. So you may only see the "best" pit bulls in your practice, depending on your prices.

    On the other hand, I'm also sure you see innocent animal victims of pit bulls, whose owners are left having to pay $10,000 in vet bills. The pit owner virtually never pays or even gets a fine. And of course, the pit walks free and mauls again and again. My leashed dogs and I were nearly attacked by 3 pits and a Rottie that jumped over their 6' privacy fence. The police later admitted these dogs had already killed two other dogs, and the owner had $11k in unpaid fines. But laws are so weak that these dogs were allowed to keep on jumping the fence and mauling passers-by.

    If these breeds had been illegal to own--as they should be--two innocent dogs would be alive today.

    Of course vets like you are probably happy to have these gripping mutants in the world, because every pet mauled by a pit that requires $10k in surgery, is another $10k for the vet. Yippee!

    I agree with Sputnik2009. Please stop prostituting yourself for the pit bull lobby. If you are pro-pit, I can tell you right now that you don't know what you're talking about...

    1. Ok. First of all, where are you getting these facts from? I appreciate your credentials that you provided before your rant, however I'm having a difficult time finding a reputable article which states that "Pits chew through chain link, break through plate glass windows, and leap from second floor balconies to maul innocent pets walking on-leash. Pits regularly kill other pets inside those pets' own fenced yards or homes. These are not once-in-a-lifetime "freak accidents," but daily occurences. All it requires is a pit bull spotting an innocent dog, minding its own business, for the mahem to begin."

      And, what Pit bull owners have you talked to that have "never seen a vet in their lives"???? That is a very uneducated statement to post - and it's a guess at best. How often do you take your dogs to the vet? Should we demand to see records to authenticate your abilities as a pet owner?

      Again, with your insurance "statement", where is your proof???

      As someone who has read the articles regarding "pitbull attacks" I can tell you that these dogs don't "walk free and maul again and again". I'm very sorry to hear about your personal experience regarding your dogs.... but that is a single experience. I admit - if I was the victim of something similar, I'd have a predjudice against those dogs too. But I wouldn't go spouting misinformation without the evidence to back it up.

      I take offence to you calling Pitbulls mutants. Almost every dog alive on this earth today is a product of selective breeding. Those which aren't generally are said to have health problems - although that is simply what I've heard and don't have an article on hand to prove it.

      I really don't think that you're an expert on this matter, and find many a problem with your comments here. If you don't like what this vet (who deals with animals every day) says, go read another blog and stop spreading your hatred to anyone who will listen. I will be here to rebuttal ANYTHING that is untrue.

  7. "Those of us
    in the trenches of private veterinary practice have seen too many happy,
    pleasant, docile pit bulls and pit bull crosses to support such legislation..
    Breed-specific legislation cuts too wide a swath through the lives of
    responsible owners who own non-dangerous animals who happen to be of the
    tainted species."

    1. The same thing could be said of nearly anything recognized as potentially dangerous and therefore regulated. For instance, most pet chimpanzees live their lives without harming anyone. Therefore, your reasoning here is faulty.

    2. Perhaps you were using the term "species" in a non-technical sense, but you should know that you were searching for the term "breed" or some other equivalent.

    1. I'm sorry. You're comparing a domesticated dog to a chimpanzee. Your reasoning is faulty.

      Species is probably more accurate when discussing a Pitbull - as it's not a classified breed. Breed Specific Legislation covers an extremely wide array of characteristics in which "Pitbulls" are a victim of. That being said, a common Labrador Retriever also shares many of the characteristics. The term Pitbull is more common because of breed specific legislation - before they were referred to as their actual breeds, such as American Staffordshire Terriers and the like.

    2. em ma, i regret to inform that you are not smart enough to banter with DubV.

    3. What a terrible response. I take it from your comment that you have no reasonable or valid argument.

    4. Em ma,

      No, it is not appropriate here to refer to pit bulls as a species. Believe it or not, there are several definitions for species, and none useful for sexually reproducing species will work for you here. You are correct that pit bulls is a general term for a group of closely related breeds. It would be accurate to refer to them as a breed group or type, but not species.

      I mentioned chimps because I was critiquing the shape of the general argument. The fact that you could insert anything into the argument and it would still (not) work as intended was the entire point of what I wrote. I was not in anyway comparing a domesticated dog to a chimp. I could have inserted into the argument TNT. Most TNT sits harmlessly in a box. I have actually seen well-handled TNT, and I have not personally been exploded by any of it.

    5. I understand. Being someone who is an advocate for these dogs, I have a hard time accepting your comparisons. That being said, I can imagine that if I were on the other side of the argument, I may say similar things. I think that BSL is a waste of people's time because it's not changing much - in Ontario, anyways. Calgary's found a great model which we're encouraging our politicians to take a look at.... we want to stop dangerous dogs and dog related incidents as much as anyone else.

      When people are passionate about something, it's hard to sway them. I don't believe there is a person alive who could convince me that my dog is inherently dangerous and would maul a child. I'm probably not going to convince anyone here of the opposite - but it's just not fair to my dog and the rest of the dogs I've seen taken based simply on appearance if I just be quiet and don't try.

    6. "em ma, i regret to inform that you are not smart enough to banter with DubV."

      I have been perusing your blogs and the comments of your groupies, including DubV, for a very long time.
      Seeing you put him up on a pedestal is quite amusing. Alas, it simply gives validity to this quote from Desiderius Erasmus: "In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king".

  8. Larry, the Ohio law passed in 2012 was written by the animal rights lawyers at the Utah based Best Friends Animal Society. It was promoted to foolish legislators as "finally giving Dog Wardens the tools to deal with vicious dogs." Since passage of the bill in February of 2012 four Ohio residents have been mauled to death by dogs. Epic fail. The law, in actuality, protects vicious dogs and their uninsured openers by making the legal process to declare a dog as dangerous too difficult to use.

    So far this year eighteen Americans have been killed by dogs, 16 of the dead were killed by pit bulls and pit bull mixes. This is a statistic that is hard to ignore.

    The AVMA has forgotten the wisdom included in its own material published in 1991, The Does and Don'ts Concerning Vicious Dogs. You might google it and read what your profession had to say before the AVMA sold out.

    The public understands the pit bull problem very well as evidenced by the overwhelming support by the voters of Miami-Dade for their pit bull ban.

    1. You NEED to read what BSL is all about. It does not protect any dogs. I know FROM EXPERIENCE. Officers come into your home, in front of your children. Yelling, screaming, crying ensues - and they take the dog. They then keep the dog in a shelter until they have time to kill it. The dog I'm talking about was a friend's dog - and she had done nothing wrong, never shown aggression to anyone.

      Any dog that falls under the BSL (which is a much wider array than you'd think) can be taken away without notice or cause, and killed. Any dog that falls under the BSL that happens to scratch a person when they're trying to say hello to them - same thing.

      I won't turn a blind eye to the fact that there are MANY dogs who were aggressive and taken away because of this legislation - and some lives were perhaps saved because of it.

      However, this law is a broad one, and many innocent dogs are affected greatly.

      I won't rebuttal your statistics - I will, however, ask - can you be absolutely certain that these were true "pitbulls" and not the media trying to make a story out of a "regular" dog attack? What makes a pitbull, exactly?

      You'll find that despite the amount of people who don't like pitbulls, there are an equal (if not greater) amount of people who advocate for them. Our voices are washed out due to ignorance and media - but I assure you. Every one of us has either met a pitbull or has the pleasure of owning one, and very few of the people who are for BSL have even met one.

    2. What you know is a friend who brought an illegal dog breed in a ban area. Yeah, if your friend is so selfish that she doesn't care that the pit bull will be killed and brings it into a ban area, yeah, your friend killed a pit bull because she broke the law.

    3. This actually occurred in 2005 just after the ban was put in place in Ontario. The dog in question was born, and was a family pet, previously. She was not illegal. She did not break the law.

  9. I can't believe you people. How many of you have met a pitbull type dog? How many of you have followed up those supposed media reports regarding dog attacks and found them to be an actual pitbull? An attack by pitbull sells more newspapers than any other breed in this day and age, because people like you are jumping on the band wagon before even bothering to educate yourselves. I applaud you, Larry Dee, for taking a stand for the voiceless. I am so tired of ignorant people forcing their unfounded beliefs on the rest of the population. Are all you people saying that dobermans, german shephards and all the other strong breeds that have been banned in the past (some of which are still banned but no one bothers with it any more) should also be murdered???? That's what happened in the 70's, 80's and 90's.... people said they were responsible for most of the attacks on people and other animals - WHAT'S CHANGED?!?!?! Media reports, THAT'S IT!!! Pitbulls were nanny dogs years ago - it takes a group of people to educate the rest of the population with actual FACTS regarding dogs to change these outdated and stupid laws.... then we need something else to focus on - hence a new ban on a new breed begins. Want to read some true facts regarding pitbulls instead of some media garbage?

    If you need further convincing please let me know, I'm happy to educate.

    1. Em ma, I got my education direct from the pit bull and my life will never be the same. Yes, I have met a pit bull dog.

      The newspapers report news, they do not create it. Pit bull attacks happen and they are lethal. This is not "ignorance" or "unfounded beliefs" it is hard personal experience. For someone who feels it is her duty to educate, you should be aware that the nanny dog myth is exactly that, a myth. Pit bulls were never nanny dogs and even BADRAP has made a public statement acknowledging it. To repeat this myth sets families up for a disaster. Pit bulls regularly maul and even kill children, as I recall eleven American children have been mauled to death by pit bulls and pit mixes just so far this year.

      Em ma, you have linked only to breed specific advocacy websites, there is no unbiased information there. Have you ever wondered why there are so many pit bull advocacy websites? Have you ever looked for similar websites for Irish Setters, or Beagles, or Poodles and come up empty? It is because normal dog breeds do not have the atrocious record of death and maulings. Normal dogs do not need the level of blind advocacy that the bully breed dogs require. The criteria for inclusion into the breed/type gene pool was the ability and desire to attack unprovoked and to continue that behavior until death occurs. Pit bulls were bred for an activity that is so violent that it is a felony in all 50 states.

      You are repeating pit bull talking points to people who have been victims of pit bull violence. Please do not offer your "education," the pit bulls have beaten you to it.

    2. NOTHING has changed. the media has always vilified the pit bull. WHY? because the pit bull EARNED its reputation. the media has been reporting on grippers for 200 years.

    3. Em ma, before you can educate, you need to get educated yourself. Find one ban from the 60s or 70s - you can't. Find one instance of someone calling pits the "nanny dog" before 1971. You can't.

      No one was calling for bans of gsds and dobermans and there were no bans on dobermans or gsds in the 60s and 70s. Modern breed bans began being enacted in the 80s and they were banning pit bulls and sometimes bans included some other of the top attackers, but breed bans were prompted by pit bull attacks.

      From 1930 to 1960 the U.S. averaged fewer than one fatal dog attack per year. Pit bulls during that time killed nine people. Dobermans killed two, one in 1955 and one in 1960, and that was enough to create the lasting image of the Doberman as a dangerous breed. (merritt clifton)

      During the 1980's, "the decade of the doberman" pit bulls and their mixes killed 45 people, dobermans killed 8. these numbers are from karen delise's "Fatal Attacks." (via dawn james)

      Since 2010 we have averaged 23 fatalities per year from pit bulls alone. From 1960 to 1985, the U.S. averaged about 600,000 bites per year requiring medical treatment, with a dog population of about 35 million. From 2000 to today, with a dog population of about 70 million, the average number of dog bites per year requiring medical attention has been between 4.7 and 4.8 million. What changed? In 1960 pit bulls were about half of one percent of the U.S. dog population. By 2000 they were about 4%, and now they are 6%. (merritt clifton)

    4. In 1991, the Parliament of the United Kingdom banned the ownership of Japanese Tosa Inus, Argentine Dogos, Fila Brasilieros and Pit Bulls, with many other countries following suit soon after. Banned in Denmark, Singapore and various municipalities, the American Bulldog’s origins are in the deep south, where it was used as a farm dog. The modern bandog is not a purebred, and there are various ‘recipes’ to achieve its creation, including American Pit Bull terriers and various mastiffs. Bandogs are generally prohibited anywhere there are restrictions on its parent breeds. A Neapolitan Mastiff was used to portray Hagrid’s pet Fang in the Harry Potter films. They are illegal to own in Singapore, and to own one in Romania you have to be certified psychologically fit. It is prohibited in Norway. Presa Canarios are banned in Australia and New Zealand. The Fila or Brazilian Mastiff, is a huge dog bred for hunting boar and jaguar, and was even used for tracking down runaway slaves. It has Mastiff, Bulldog and Bloodhound ancestry. It is perhaps the least tractable breed on this list, and is highly prized for its aggressiveness. This personality trait is called “ojeriza”, which translates from Portugese to ‘distrust’. The Fila despises strangers, to the point where Brazilian dog show judges are advised not to touch it, and the standard allows a certain ferocity in the show ring. It is illegal to own a Fila in the United Kingdom. The Tosa Inu is illegal to own in Denmark, Malta and Norway, amongst other countries. There is no dog breed on earth more polarizing than the Pit Bull. Much maligned, the Pit Bull was bred from early Bulldogs and Terriers for the purpose of fighting other dogs. Once a beloved family pet (The Little Rascals’ Petey was a pit bull) the breed began to attract the wrong kind of attention in the 1980s. Poor breeding and training has caused them to be responsible for attacks on humans, many of them fatal. This is somewhat anachronistic of the breed’s history, as Pit Bulls were never bred to be aggressive towards people. In the old days, dog fighters would bathe each others’ dogs before the match (to eliminate the threat of poison on the fur), and a snappy dog would be culled. Whether one considers them sweet-natured pets or deadly monsters, they are illegal to own in Miami-Dade County, Florida; Ontario, Canada; and many countries throughout the world.


      That is one site I found immediately when I searched for banned dogs.

    5. One day, a postman came to my door to deliver something. My dogs were in the back yard with me, and came rushing to greet him. I understand a person's first impression of a Pitbull type dog, so I made sure they stayed in the backyard so as not to scare him. I explained that they were very friendly. His response was that "I'm sure they are - it's just last week I was attacked by a Poodle." That story never made it into the papers.

      It's true that there are many owners out there who give Pitbulls a bad rep, but it's just not the case with every dog. My WHOLE point has been that BSL is a waste of taxpayer's money - and good, family dogs are seized without a reason. Instead of BSL, there should be a law in place for actual dangerous, aggressive dogs. Not a law that allows for family dogs who have never shown any sign of aggression to be taken away and simply killed just because they look a certain way.

      @april 29, the nanny dog is not a myth. I've seen too many pictures, read too many articles, and heard too many people talk about it to accept that it's a myth based on your saying so. Please show me proof before I accept it - and I promise that if there is legitimate proof saying so, I will stop advocating that Pitbulls were nanny dogs. I also appreciate that the websites I provided were advocating - just like any sites you have received your information from are negating. Cesar Milan (renown dog expert) has unbiased information. This veterinarian, who wrote this article, is unbiased based simply on the fact that he see dogs for a living.

      I'm not discrediting or trying to insult ANYONE who has had the misfortune of a negative experience with a pitbull. I can only imagine how scary it must have been and would never try to tell you otherwise. All I'm saying is it's not fair to judge an entire breed based on that experience. If that was true, I'd be advocating for Chihuahuas to be under the BSL.

      @snack sized dog believe me, I have tried to educate myself. I don't believe in spreading rumors or gossip - and if you want to tell me I'm wrong about something then I will absolutely listen to your reasoning.

      You're citing reported (by mainstream media) attacks. To be fair, this is all we'd know about anyways so I can't discredit it. That being said, I know how media works and I can tell you that they pick and choose what they want the public to know. I'm not saying they make anything up, but they certainly choose what goes on the headlines and some facts are occasionally twisted.

      I appreciate your last comments - really I do. I understand the statistics. Those poor families will never be the same. That being said, statistics are what we make them - studies are not always 100% accurate. Are you able to prove that all of those recent dog bites are from pitbulls?

  10. Em ma, are you a veterinarian or a worker at this practice? Just curious.

    1. No, I am neither. I rescued a Pitbull years ago when she was starving and dirty. I was worried that she would turn into a monster - as that was all media stated they were. I then found an insane amount of advocacy groups giving documented facts and information regarding these dogs - along with many people who are against BSL. I've met a lot of "crazy" advocates who shove information down passerby's throats - which actually does nothing to help our dogs. Instead, I opt to ask questions and understand why these prejudices exist in the first place, and hope to change people's minds. I own one of these dogs - and I can honestly say that she's one of the best dogs I've ever met.

  11. What bothers me is the amount of pit bull owners who swear their dog would never hurt a fly. If you really believe that your 60 lb, highly muscled dog couldn't or wouldn't ever hurt a fly or a child because you give it love and cookies, you're part of the problem.

    1. What animal is incapable of "hurting a fly"? None - they all have that ability. To focus on one single kind of dog is a form of discrimination - and to kill family pets based on the way that they look is unfair. Responsible owners such as myself know our dogs. We shouldn't live in fear of having them stripped away one day through no fault of our own simply because someone didn't like the way they look. There are much larger dogs than Pitbulls.... a lot of Bulldogs weigh more than Pitbulls - but they are still the #1 target for hatred and death row.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. Em ma,

      You wrote before that you found all these great places with facts. You need to realize that when someone is emotionally invested in something that they are more likely to believe things uncritically that support their view. I read before you mentioning the nanny dog claim. If you had been cautious in the things you believed, then you would have realized that there is absolutely zero real evidence for the nanny dog claim. It is likely a myth. Dawn James and others were the first to fully research and expose this myth. As a result of their efforts, a few high profile pit folks have stepped back from this claim. You need to realize that some of the people you are having an exchange with now actually know more about these animals than you do and are aware of all your arguments. Now ask yourself, why do seemingly intelligent, humane, and knowledgeable people disagree with you? Whenever I find myself in that position, I mentally prepare myself for the possibility of being incorrect.

    4. I honestly would like to believe that I have an open mind - so I always "prepare myself for the possibility of being incorrect". I'm not such an arrogant person that I assume I know more than anyone else about anything at all - least of all dogs. The problem is that the internet is a wonderful place for research - but it's also a haven for people to rant about things as well. I honestly only brought up the "nanny dog" point because I have seen how good my dog is around all children - babies to any age.

  12. Em ma, discrimination applies only to humans not dogs. Dogs are purpose bred and one must acknowledge this or look the fool. The criteria for inclusion into the breed/type gene pool was the ability and desire to attack unprovoked and to continue that behavior until death occurs. Pit bulls were bred for an activity that is so violent that it is a felony in all 50 states.

    No one has said that every pit bull will attack but they all carry the possibility in their DNA. All animals do have capabilities but we do not see packs of Poodles roaming the streets and mauling passersby. Gangs of Goldens killing without mercy? Nope. Chihuahuas, now that is a much maligned breed but nobody has been killed by a Chi. So far this year pit bulls have mauled sixteen Americans to death. Number of dead from all other breeds combined? Two.

    The most common remark from a pit bull owner after his/her dog has injured or killed is "Gee, he never did anything like that before" (said in Gomer Pyle's voice). You claim to be a responsible pit bull owner. Responsible dog owners do many things to be able to make that claim, they license their dogs, vaccinate, spay and neuter, they insure their dogs. Is your pit bull insured? Honestly?

    The folks that you accuse of failure to understand your fear of "having your dog stripped away" have lost a great deal. We did not go looking for this, we took no outrageous chances, the violence fell upon us while we were going on about the peaceful details of our lives. Do you understand our losses? We have lost a great deal, some lost a pet, or livestock, or had huge vet bills to save animals that are traumatized and and may be permanently injured. Some of us have been personally attacked and suffer PTSD, lasting pain, scarring, possible permanent disability and/or disfigurement. Some of us sat at the ICU bedside of a mauled child or elderly family member. Some us have buried a child or elderly family member. Our lives will never be the same.

    Your dog's appearance does not matter to us. What matters is hard wired genetically driven behaviors that put innocents at risk. It is not hatred that drives public safety advocates. We don't want anyone else to go through what we have gone through. Please try to understand.

    Pit bulls find themselves on "death row" for several reasons. Because they have injured someone, or killed, or they have been surrendered by their owners because of aggression. They have failed their real world temperament test. An alternative reason for pit bull euthanization is outrageous over breeding. The percentage of neuter and spay in pit bulls is the lowest of any breed of dog. Veterinarians did research on this phenomenon and the results appeared in the April 2011 issue of the JAVMA. Only 28 percent of pit bulls were neutered or spayed and these are dogs that the vets saw in their practice. The numbers in the community are likely much worse, many pits never see a vet. Roughly a million pits die in American shelters EVERY year because TOO MANY PIT BULLS ARE BRED. Only pit bull advocates and owners can change this.

    1. Good post, Snack.

      I would say this to Em ma as well. Em ma, you are basing your opinions and drives on your own dogs and experiences with them and a few other pit bulls that are likely in much better situations than the average dog of any breed.

      Em ma, you need to research the number of pets and livestock attacked and/or killed by pits and the manner of the attack. You will find that they routinely do things in number and quality that are unheard of in other common breeds. You might then realize why so many people not emotionally invested in this breed have a problem with them.

    2. Ok. I am not discrediting ANYTHING that either of you has said. I understand that there have been many attacks by many a dog that has been described as a Pitbull and lives have been broken, changed, or even ruin. PLEASE understand I'm not trying to offend anyone, nor say that they didn't happen, or that they're not a big deal - because they absolutely are.

      My issue this entire time has been about BSL. A lot of people are in agreement of this law because they believe that it kills the bad dogs and protects the good. Here, in Ontario, it's not the case. Any dog that any officer believes to have any "Pitbull" qualities can be taken at any time, without provocation. This was my point earlier - family dogs who have done nothing wrong who are within the rights of the law (yes my dog is properly vaccinated, fixed, insured and licensed - since that was called into question) are at risk of being taken and destroyed. The general population (from what I understand) believes that they have an understanding of how BSL works, and it's not actually the case. I love my dog - she is well behaved, legal, and everything good in my life. I don't like living in fear of someone taking her away from me because some complete idiots in the past and present are completely irresponsible and ruin people's lives. I know that there is no easy solution - and it probably makes sense to a lot of people to just get rid of them.

      The breeding problem is out of my control. I'm an advocate for adoption - not backyard breeders. I would love for my dog to have puppies - she is gorgeous and has a wonderful temperament. But, I made the responsible decision when she was 6 months old to have her spayed. There is nothing that I can do when it comes to what other people do in their homes - but I'm trying.

      Please know that I have read every single one of these comments and I truly appreciate the "calm" way in which everyone has been bringing up their valid points. I don't discredit any of it (unless I have done so previously with good reason), and only ask that instead of saying all pitbulls are inherently dangerous and they should all be killed - we ask ourselves is this really going to fix the problem, or should we focus more on responsible ownership? Give insane fines and jail time for ANYONE caught doing anything provoking bad behavior? Right now, that's just not the case.... and it's not working.

      The reason I say that is because many of you have been bringing forward statistics regarding dog attacks etc, even though BSL is in place. Perhaps it's time for a new strategy that we can all agree on?

    3. DubV, you are a good teacher. Very patient and not sarcastic.

      You too, April.

  13. Em ma, communities with BSL do not have pit bull deaths and maulings. Denver and Miami-Dade are well satisfied with their BSL, nobody has died. The question was brought to voters in Miami-Dade and they voted to support their BSL by an overwhelming margin.

    BSL can be anything that a community chooses. This is not a "one size fits all" proposition. It can be mandatory neuter and spay, extra licensing, special containment, required insurance, or it can be an all out ban. BSL is not everywhere and statistics from states that have an anti BSL law statewide have the worst statistics for deaths. Communities in California can't pass any BSL. California has a very high number of pit bull mauling deaths. Texas also has a prohibition against BSL and also has a very high number of pit bull mauling deaths.

    Please correct me if I misunderstand you. You live in fear of the repercussions of BSL, afraid that your dog will be seized. You have a pit bull in an area with a ban? If this is the case then you made your own problem. To obtain a banned dog makes you not only irresponsible but also in violation of the law. It does not matter how much you love your dog.

    Pit bull advocacy has been using "education" for the public as their only suggestion for solving the problem of death and injury. You can't "educate" dogs to ignore their DNA. You can't "educate" the public in ways to avoid being mauled while going on about the peaceful details of their daily life. No one has the right to tell people to remain in their homes as a means of self protection. You can't tell parents that they must keep keep their children in their homes to protect them. Children have the right to play in the sunshine. You can't "educate" your neighbors to nail the dog door to their fenced yard shut to avoid a pit bull home invasion attack on their dogs or cats. People have the right to take their garbage out, walk to the mailbox, work in their gardens, walk their dogs.

    The "education" touted by pit bull advocacy for the last 30 years has not worked. The deaths come faster and faster. If pit bull advocates can't solve the problem then the public has the right to regulate pit bulls.

  14. Em ma keeps talking about her friend in Ontario whose pit bull was taken and of herself in Ontario owning a pit bull fearing it will be taken - I looked it up - Ontario grandfathered existing pit bulls in. Anyone who responsibly owns a pit bull in Ontario that was born and owned before the ban can keep them.

  15. Thanks for being able to follow the thread Snack, I got lost there. Yes, the grandfathering of existing pit bulls is the norm when BSL is passed. There are requirements, possibly containment and registration, possibly insurance as well. If a pit bull owner makes the irresponsible choice to ignore the law, the pit bull owner is responsible for whatever happens.

  16. Alrighty.... this is gonna be my last post because it seems as though I'm banging my head against a brick wall. My dog is legal, my friend's dog was legal. Yes - there are backyard breeders who continue to have Pitbull puppies and they are in danger of being seized because they're going against the ban. YOU are unable to educate me in the realms of BSL as I live it on a daily basis. You're missing what I'm saying.

    Have you ever met a cop on a power trip? Or, perhaps heard about one that was? This is one of the problems. Because my dog is a Pitbull, although a legal one, she is in constant danger of being taken away from me for no reason. Yes - I could probably pay thousands of dollars in court fees that I don't have in order to get her back, but who wants to go through that? Not me - although people do every day in my neighboring communities.

    I will be 100% honest - I don't know how or if BSL differs in the states compared to Ontario. All I know is that Ontario's method isn't working - there are still the same number of dog bites although in theory less Pitbulls roaming the streets.

    Also - there is a whole lot to do with BSL that I'm not sure you're getting.....

    You need to have a sturdy dog house with a door and lock in your back yard. I believe it needs to be a minimum distance of 10 feet from the nearest gate, or fence. When you leave the house, your Pitbull is required to stay in that dog house, locked up, until you return.

    You need to have a minimum of $1,000,000 liability insurance on your home.

    Spayed/neutered, up to date vaccinations, and yearly renewal of licensing.

    Any time the dog is out doors (including your back yard and vehicle) they need to wear a muzzle.

    They are not allowed in dog parks, or off leash any where except your own backyard.

    You are subjected to "checkups" - animal control officers can come by your house at any time, and if you're not adhering to ANY of these rules they have the "right" to take your dog away, put it in the pound, and possibly euthanize it.

    My point all along, and will always be, that BSL is a waste of responsible owner's time, as well as tax payers. The bites in Ontario haven't changed in the last 8 years - and it's incredibly unfair to our well behaved dogs and law abiding owners.

    That is all.

    1. Let me shortens this for you, Em ma. You likely will think I am not "getting it" because I can basically summarize much of your actual point in an unflattering way. Here goes...

      "BSL is a worry and inconvenient for me and my dog and a few other responsible pit owners. It is wrong to worry and inconvenience us because our lives trumps those that the law I am against seeks to proactively protect. I am unaware of how selfish this is."

  17. Em ma, "bite" counts do not change a whole lot in communities with BSL. BSL is not designed to reduce "bite" counts. BSL controls life changing or life ending maulings. A soap-and-water-and-slap-on-a-bandaid nip from a Chihuahua is one statistical bite. Be aware that a fatal attack with hundreds of "bites" and massive soft tissue injury found at autopsy is also one statistical bite. There is a huge difference between bites and maulings and this is something that pit bull advocates refuse to acknowledge. We have not missed a single thing that you have said. But DubV said more clearly.

  18. Emma I agree with you 100% I have read all the threads here and I have read everyone's comments...I am happy the vet is with us to END BSL...THE BULLSHIT LAW...punish the deed and not the dog was ever born aggressive and I will always blame the owner...and I will never believe the media because they tell us what they want us to hear not the way it really happened...there are always two sides to a story and then there is the truth...I WILL ALWAYS BELIEVE THE DOG BEFORE I BELIEVE ANY HUMAN...AND I KNOW THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT FEEL THE SAME WAY WE DO...END BSL....THE BULLSHIT LAW...

  19. Haha! I've taken the time to read each of these little paragraphs that you've all worked so hard on. I must say that I agree with statements made by the people fighting for the dog's rights. But, that won't matter to you folks, so I'll just say this.

    It is painfully obvious to me that "DubV", possibly "Scorched Earth", certainly "Miss Margo" and perhaps even "April 29" are all the same person, using alternate accounts. Either that, or, you're all extremely immature and stupid. It doesn't take a scientist to note that the language you've been using seems to have been strung together in the attempt to sound smarter than you are - so this leads me to believe that you're either very young, or perhaps middle aged and can't see past the end of your nose. The statistics you've been using are outdated and inaccurate, and none of you are "smart enough to banter with FFTROD".

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." -Christopher Hitchens

      FFTROD, it is very easy to simply state that your opponents are trying hard, the same person, pretentious, trying to sound smart, etc. Sentiments like that should not be convincing to people and generally are not.

      Why is this the case? I could have any number of personal defects or conniving manners, but that does not affect whether or not my argument is sound or my evidence convincing. Are you not aware of this concept?

    3. FFTROD:

      Sorry. Thanks for playing.

  20. interesting.

    emma left this blog and went directly to some kind of anonymous/ALF hybrid.

    I can’t tell you how much I appreciate you fighting for the “voiceless”. I’ve been an active advocate for this BSL problem for only a few days, really, and it’s completely tired me out. I’ve tried reasoning, “calm” typing, listening, rebutting, nothing seems to get through to someone who wants to hate Pitbulls. I’m so grateful for people like you who will not give up the fight, and will, hopefully, in the end become victorious for us and our dogs.

    so after "only a few days" on the BSL battlefield, this exhausted pit bull "expert" with an entire year of pit bull ownership under her belt is ready to hand over her power to people who violate the first amendment and want to "kick teeth" in.

    emma, i didn't expect you to burn out so quickly.

  21. Em ma said " read the blog. It has some very interesting points - but a lot of the points are made with what I'd like to call "big words". In living memory, I don't believe that many of those terms have ever been used... or are real words."

    FFTROD said "It is painfully obvious to me that "DubV", possibly "Scorched Earth", certainly "Miss Margo" and perhaps even "April 29" are all the same person, using alternate accounts. Either that, or, you're all extremely immature and stupid. It doesn't take a scientist to note that the language you've been using seems to have been strung together in the attempt to sound smarter than you are"

    Em ma has a problem with "big words" and doubts that they really exist. FFTROD thinks all people with a vocabulary including words that may not be commonly used by breed specific advocates must be the same person? Wow...

    Here is something that I would like FFTROD to consider, dogs do not have "rights" dogs are personal property. Humans have rights, they have the right to walk to the mailbox, or work in their garden, or take out the garbage, or walk their own dogs on public sidewalks without being mauled. Children have a right to play in their own yards and ride their bikes in their communities without being mauled. When the rights of humans have been violated by vicious dogs the victim has the right to expect to be compensated for their medical bills and for their permanent disabilities, compensated for their losses, or for funeral expenses in the cases of sixteen Americans killed by pit bulls since the first of the year.

    1. "Em ma has a problem with "big words" and doubts that they really exist. FFTROD thinks all people with a vocabulary including words that may not be commonly used by breed specific advocates must be the same person? Wow..."

      April, you nailed it.

      I was concerned about how to address this issue on this discussion board without coming across as an intellectual snob. But any intellectual snobbery I have, I earned. I one of several aliases? Very young or middle aged? Immature and stupid, or just can't see past my nose? Could you cast your net any wider?

      Dogs don't have rights. Rights are a philosophical and legal construct. I'm sure your friendly local community college has a Political Theory 100 course with your name on it. You may not like what you learn there, but it is, nonetheless, the basis for much Western jurisprudence...including BSL.

  22. Dawn James has posted this on her 'pit bull haters' blog. She has asked all her sheep to come here and post against this vet. They travel together on blogs like a pack of wild dogs with Dawn as their pack leader.
    Anti BSL people don't waste your time arguing with this group of cowards that use fake names and block anyone from commenting on their blog, they are lonely and pathetic people that keep each other company.

    1. Tanja, everything you wrote could be true (it isn't though) AND we could be correct and you could be wrong.

      Just soak in that for a second.

      If you said that 2 + 2 = 5 and Hitler said that 2 + 2 =4, then Hitler would still be correct even though he is Hitler.

      Now, you most likely think I am comparing those that you disagree with to Nazis and basically conceding, but that isn't the point at all.

    2. Quite right Tanja, we should ignore them, but it's too much fun busting them and showing them up. Besides, as long as some factions in the media still quote some of these people as if they have any credentials or credibility - like Colleen Lynn and Merritt Clifton - we owe it to the dogs to continue exposing their grubby tactics.

      Respected and qualified expert Jim Crosby recently caught them making up stories about fatalities that didn't happen. Foul tactics like that we can't let them get away with.

    3. Merritt Clifton's research is some of the very best to be found on these topics. He is also an excellent and effective writer.

      That is why stakeholders in the policy process--including the pit bull lobby--listen to him.

      He has done more for animals--indeed, for humanity, for the public discourse, etc--than you ever could.

      Have you even read his editorials in Animal People (and elsewhere)? Have you looked at the datasets he makes available to anyone who wants them? Go to his AP website and try to find any inconsistencies in his logic or the application of his moral values.

      Likewise, the research presented on Dogsbite is solid. I know that the pit bull lobby brain trust has a collective IQ of 36, but even still--if you could discredit the evidence of pit bull violence therein (in Dogsbite), you would.

      Keep on chuggin, Little Engine. I know you think you can.

  23. fake names. you mean like em ma, 1gatitamas and stephanie L?

    "lonely and pathetic" is code for ETHICAL. something you know nothing about tanja.

    here is tanja bragging about how she willfully misrepresented her pit bull as a lab mix to skirt the ban where she lives.

  24. Replies
    1. Why do you (and Colleen Lynn) delete anything from your blogs that refutes your propaganda Dawn? Is that because people would soon see what you're really all about? Like claiming that no Pit Bull has ever been a police dog and none ever will be?

      What about Shaaka (described by her police handler as the best k9 partner he's ever worked with - drug detection), Neville (drug detection), Popsicle (who won a significant seizure award as a drug detection dog), and Kris Crawford's three Pit Bulls who were involved in the recovery of the astronauts after the shuttle failed on re-entry and at Ground Zero after 911...there's 6 to start with.

      Kris Crawford also won a Red Cross award for the extensive work she has done educating children on dog safety using her 3 Pit Bulls Cheyenne, Dakota and Tahoe. People can google these names and read for themselves TRUTHFUL accounts of good dogs doing good work even though in the case of Popsicle for example some of them came from such bad beginnings.

    2. As you seemed concerned with character before, then I would encourage you and others to look carefully at Kris Crawford. Dawn can fill you in but she has been convicted of fraud. Also, there is no evidence her pit bulls were at Ground Zero other than her own word. There are so many things dedicated to the dogs of 911, try to find anything other than something stemming from Crawford that shows her dogs there. The easy explanation is that she made it up.

    3. I hope Kris Crawford can identify you and sue you for slander. Your friend Dawn James is another one who should be sued for the things she has posted on her blog and elsewhere about some very respected and respectable people. It's pretty low to cast aspersions on people's good character but then we've come to expect that from you and your fellow trolls and cyber bullies.
      A particularly nasty example was to accuse the world's first face transplant recipient of being a drunk animal abuser who had been told not to touch the dog and deliberately hurt him, to cover for the fact that the dog involved was a Labrador. In fact the poor lady was unconscious and alone at the time of her injury and has no idea why her own dog bit her.
      Very ugly m.o. to further injure someone who has been through her ordeal with defamatory and plain dishonest public statements. Very ugly.

  25. Em ma you obviously know what you're talking about but you're wasting your time trying to educate haters and trolls. They are a truly lost cause as you can see with the deliberate misinformation and even lies, never mind the sneering derision from those cyber bullies who turn up and throw their weight and propaganda around in public forums.

    Here's something to cheer you up:

    It's from the K C Dog Blog and is a nice rebuttal to one of the worst offenders: Merritt Clifton. You'll find a good opinion piece or two on other notorious Pit Bull haters like Colleen Lynn who is not a breed expert either but a web designer. Another good place to visit about these propagandists is Pit Bull Legal News which has a good piece or two also.

    1. Prove some of our misinformation and lies. Disagreeing with your opinion or a pit bull advocacy org is not evidence of either.