Toronto The Coming Pit Bull Ban: Agree? Disagree?

I'm going to go one step further and suggest that in an urban environment, there should be a ban on any animal that is bigger than a bread box.

There will always be irresponsible owners of animals. That's not going to change. But I can fend off an ill-tempered daschund much easier than an irate doberman or german sheppard. Besides, you can't tell me that a large dog like a Lab or Collie is happy cooped up all day in a stuffy one-bedroom apartment. Give those big dogs room to run around. Lots of space between them and other people.

I say - let folks keep their pit bulls but restrict breeds by urban density. Only tiny pups in the big city. Mid sized dogs out in the towns. Big brutes out in the stix.

 

I find this whole thing to be a bit unreasonable. While yes they pose a threat, to ban an entire breed because an alarming rate of individuals being attacked seems a little radical. This attitude seems comparable to individuals or groups that claim other groups of people pose a significant threat. Funny that they are called bigots when they attack other people but humane when they attack a group of animals.

BTW I am in no way advocating bigotry, I just find it a little hipocritical to attack an entire species of dog while condemning others to take the same action against people.

To me Animals and People should be treated fairly and equally. To me thats the bottom line. and while yes I do realize animals do not necesarily function on the same level of intellegence as us they are still living beings and to me are entitled to certain civil rights...like the right to survive.

I would suggest people must apply for a permit and go through an amount of training to appropriately handle the dog and have the dog trained how to behave appropriately. Then at least I can see that there is some control being put on the things. But to ban an entire group seems to me to be radical. Then again I haven't thuroughly explored this subject nor do I have any interest to so this is all mearly opinion and nothing more.

 

well i think its great that some people are trying to post statistics i think i should point out that you can't go by google, yahoo or any other search engine for that matter as reliable information.

Any tom, dick or Harry can post a website that links onto google...try typing well..anything into google and you'll get somebody's homepage somewhere, just because its on the internet doesn't make it so.

Again, how can you verify the toronto start statistics? is this a peer reviewed source? what is their qualitative and quantitative basis for evidence?

a better source would be the SPCA...but i noticed not one person who agreeed with the ban posted their data.

i hate to say it..but seriously folks...if you don't have evidence that would hold up in a judicial proceeding..ie. proof to back up your statement..then what on earth are you basing the oposition from? heresay? an isolated incident?

Yes dogs attack. but one dog attack does NOT a bad breed make. Its rumours like that that cause nasty people to purchase the breed and use it for violence. I'll bet if suddenly everyone thought cocker spaniels were vicious nasty people would go out and buy spaniels for the sake of fighting. Then there would have to be a ban on spaniels due to spaniel attacks.

Its all in how you read it.

When my mom was growing up she was mauled by a cat that got let out of its house...funny how theres no ban on cats..heck i'm seriously allergic to them...ie. my eyes swell shut and i stop breathing. But i don't think they should ban cats because of some reactions. I need to be more careful and cat owners should be concious of the allergies of people around them. Just like dogs should be leashed to prevent adverse reactions of any sort.

i am strongly opinionated on this matter as i am a huge animal rights advocate.

please feel free to discuss any of this with me either here or on PM.

 

I don't think it revolves around the fact that the Pit Bull is a dog. More for the fact on how its bred. They were specifically bred for killing.

Its kinda like that gun argument, but if every dog is a pistol then a Pitbull is a machine gun, and did you know those are banned too?

I'm on the fense of the ban. But I know what its like when people have animals that are not bred for domestic enviroments. Anyone remember the family who tried to raise a tiger?

I'm with Tragic though about space. When we had our huskies we had them in the country land, after a year in the town. Though my mom did end up putting the one down because she lunged at the landowner.

An animal has just as much need to be in an enviroment to be safe for itself as well as the people around it. You have to be careful where you keep a dog and whatnot. I will not get a husky til I live in the middle of nowhere, for instance.

Theres nothing wrong with setting up boundries and rules about pets. Again you're not allowed in Canada to have a pet Mountain Lion or Wolf....thats not animal bigotry but I don't see people taking sides because they are not allowed to have a pet Lion...

 

I think it's pretty silly. Again: look at the owners of the dogs who attack, not the dogs themselves. I will agree that the reputation of pitbulls plays a part, but not the one you might think:

Who buys pitbulls? What does a person who buys a pitbull want from a dog, and therefore, what behaviours will they encourage?

I live in the neighbourhood where that last attack occurred (it was a few streets up from me), and it's a big dog neighbourhood. Just sitting in the park, you can tell a lot about people by what dog they have and have that confirmed by their conversation. The guys with pitbulls around here...well, to put it bluntly, they're waving their dicks around.

How 'bout we ban *******s instead of the dogs who get bought by them?

 

I think was cristalia is trying to say is that some people get a dog for statis or to show they have class or they are mean or tough.

I once worked in a apartment complex that had almost as many dogs as owners. no pit bulls were allowed

I once knew a guy who thought he had lots of class. he had lots of money, lots toys, a fancy truck and his god of choice was a doberman.

One day I was sitting in the park on my break when I was blind sided by the doberman (prince) knocked over and slobbered on and then licked all over my face. the owner was livid, he said that he didnt want the dog to be that way he wanted it to either ignore me or attack if i moved in a threating manner. he wanted the dog to have class and tried to train him that way. he had a suck that he wanted to be a gaurd dog.

I went to get on the elevator one day, and this guy was holding the leash of a giant rottweiler. the dog started whining loudly and giving me that pet me look. the guy said his dog was too soft.

every day I saw this guy take his german sheppard out for a walk alone. he stayed away from other dogs and dragged the dog off quickly if any one approuched. I found out the dog hated other dogs, children, even strangers. why would someone want a dog like that.

I was petting a poodle there once and another owner came out with his poodle and told me not to approuch his or she would snap at me.

many people get dogs that they think are cool or make them look cool. pit bulls were a fad that is calming down.

but in reality they cant really ban a dog. as long as one person owns breeding pairs people will get them. can you say pit bull puppy mills. underground pit bull owners will just keep their pets inside during the day and walk em at night. did they learn nothing from alcohol probition. ban something and they want it more. are we gonna have dog raids. or next are we gonna have to put full rubber suits on our dogs that constrict not only their mouths but feet as well or walk them in a moble cage system. teach them about the breed they want. make it harder to get the breed by getting rid of puppy mills and fixing the animals that leave the spca or pet shops. no pit bull should be sold or given away without being fixed.

here is a fact a breeder once told me that is clearly not being held to becuase people think its cruel.

one pit bull out of ever batch should be kept and the rest killed. that puppy is the one with the biggest head. pit bull heads do not grow along with the rest of their bodies. it stops while the brain keeps growng, the brain constricts inside the skull and they do snap, go crazy. but the breeder I spoke to said that some only now kill runts, becuase that one will be the crazy one.

[/rant]

 

Elewyn, not one person here is being anti humaine.

No one here wants to see all of these dogs put down, but you have to look at the facts, pit bulls are bred to attack.

In case your wondering, they were bred original to be used in the sports of
Bullbaiting: barbarous sport, once popular in England. A bull was tethered to a stake and attacked by specially trained bulldogs.
and of course my favorite Bearbaiting: barbarous spectacle consisting of a contest between a bear chained to a stake and a pack of dogs. The bear was almost invariably torn to pieces by the dogs.


Yes these dogs were BRED for this. Even with the best of owners the dog can snap and attack. Now imagine you had a kid. Do you want a pitbull running towards him or her?

 

if i had a kid i'd hope that ANY dog was on a leash. i grew up with dogs and was taught dog safety young.

i never said anyone was being anti-humaine. but i was saying that the "proof" is not sufficent and subject to media interpretation, speculation and influence of rumour.

Yes. pit bulls were bred as violent dogs...hmmmm....spaniels were bred as hunters. funny..i can't remember the last time my parents dog fetched..well...anything. and he's a pure-bred.

and to be quite frank..****zus were bred as lap dogs..but the last time i was bitten..in fact EVERY time i was bitten it was by an ornery little ****zu with a bad attitude.

i'm sorry...but seriously somebody QUOTE SOME PROOF!

 

Difference is though a ****zu doesn't have a lock iron jaw. If a ****zu bites you, you can fairly easily open it's mouth or pull your hand out. If a Pitbull bites you? Your lucky to get your hand out of its mouth without heavy bleeding and nerve damage.

 

Yep.... things have sure been calmed down since everyone voted in those liberals.... yep.....

No, I do not want this turned into a political debate, but, just thought I'd like to point it out for next term's election .

Alrighty, back to the program. Ok, on one side of the fence I see pit bull lovers (or fans, whatever) who sometimes even go so far as to suggest to "ban owners" and will even compare dogs to people. On the other side, I see people concerned for their own safety and the safety of those they love around them, who yes, may only get their facts from newspapers and the internet, but would rather take immediate action against a "possible threat" than have a "possible threat" turned into a funeral. Oh, and then there's the people standing on the fence, but since no one here gets to make the decision about it anyway, I'm just going with the two opposites.

Now, in Ontario there are the five dangerous dog breeds recognized by law (can't find a list but I remember covering this in law class, so just follow me for a second here). Now, I know one of these is a German Shepphard. If you go up to it with a BB gun and start shooting it, and it mauls you. The owner of the dog is the one that loses (example taken from an actual case I studied. Again, can't find it, so just suspend your disbelief for now, make judgements later). Pretty screwed up, eh? Well, this ban on pit bulls would STOP that from happening to the otherwise careful owners.

I don't personally believe that pit bulls are the most dangerous dogs out there (for me that's rottweilers). And I don't believe that every dangerous breed will attack when provoked or not (my family's dog is a husky/shepphard/coyote mix, and it's the biggest suck in the world). However, I also don't see how there are those out there would compare DOGS to HUMANS. This is where I start to lean towards "banning the pit bulls" group. If there are people out there who can't even make the distinction between an animal and a human being, they shouldn't be able to be in control of either one of them in my book. No offence to anyone here, but please, get your priorities worked out. Incase anyone forgets the Canadian government DID ban a group of people, the most recent and extreme case would be the Japanese being put into camps in the 1940s. Also, don't forget that women couldn't vote until the 1910s, and native women the 1960s. Another ban on people. Bans on people don't work. As humans and Canadian citizens we are EQUAL as stated in our constitution (which nowhere declares animals deserve the rights of a Canadian citizen). However, bans on animals (tigers, lions, bears, oh my) seem a lot more reasonible, and it's only once in awhile that some nut job tries to goes around the law and gets attacked by a tiger in their home.

Now, although I've said I'd be leaning towards the "let's ban 'em!" group because of the PETAish remarks made by the "love 'em! Ban the humans!", I do understand the anti-ban arguments. In MANY cases they do just make sense. However, if I have to choose to either let someone own a pitbull or keep someone I love safe from something declared "dangerous", I'll go for the loved one anyday.

 

[image=http://www.petridish.net/pics/10940/md-IMG_0005.JPG]
Owning a shi tzu myself, I can for one tell you that they can be VERY vicious, can be very dangerous around children, if they have as bad as a temper as mine. If I child ends up trying to pet Yasie (my devil) yasie could eaisly gnaw out a good peice of the kids arm. She's pretty strong for something so small.

Yet this brings me back to Pit Bulls. If they have a rotten temper they can be much more dangerous then my little shi tzu. Same temper, different equipment. Yet I would not go as far to say that it is always the owners fault that the dog has such a bad temper. My dog has just been wacko since she was young. We provided for her, took care of her, yet she's always been a tad crazy (Not all right in that brain of her's). So this could easily happen with any other bread, a few mental dogs will appear, and the owner did nothing wrong to prevoke it.

But I do not agree that there should be a ban on ALL Pit Bulls. If you were to ban Pit Bulls then might aswell ban all poodles aswell, because they have a damn rotten temper and are really quite strong too. This is Doggy-Racism. If the dogs were human the goverment would be considered Rasist.

Just let the law stand as it is now. I am liable for my Killer Shi Tzu just as much as an owner as a Pit Bull should be. Because a Shi Tzu can kill a little child just like a pit bull, and a strength differance shouldn't determin which should be banned.

 

To Elewyn here is some stats. I had to use a very large American study as Canada is not keeping stats on breed specific bites.
dog breed attacks
However here are the results of the injuries which they are keeping stats on.
Toronto stats

I am against pit bulls in the city. We have laws that keep wild animals such as wolves out of the city to protect people and so it should be such with animals such as pit bulls. The difference between dalmations and other dogs that frequently bite is that when pitbulls bite, they kill. There are fatalities and more often than not these fatalities are young children who don't yet have the skillful judgement to recognize which dogs are friendly and which are not.

Pitbulls also act differently when in a group. They may have great owners and be trained but have a group mentality and react aggressively when several dogs are present. According to the stats, the children who are attacted most likely already know the dog that bites them.

 

Wow! It's great to see this much support for the pit bulls, although I knew some people would be in favour of the ban, which is OK. I dunno, I think this is a case of the government acting in the interest of the minority as opposed to the majority. Perhaps there should be a vote from the people on this, a plebiscite or referendum if you will. I know for a fact that a lot of people would vote against it. The dog owners would definitely turn out. Of course, that's probably why they WON'T put it to a vote. They know it would never be made law.

Oh well, that's the style of government we have. Majority governments have a mandate to do whatever the hell they want until we have the opportunity to vote 'em out. Any more silly laws like this and I'll be voting for someone other than my local Liberal next election...

 

A referendum would cost the taxpayers 40 million dollars. What a crazy waste that would have been for what is a pretty straight forward issue and well within the government's mandate.

Did you see the stats? 67% of dog related fatalities in the US are pitbull or rotweiller related - while those breeds of dogs represent a fraction of the overall dog population.

Would responsible ownership result in far less bites and attacks? Well, yeah. Probably.

And I'd bet if you were a responsible owner of a grizzly bear, there'd be little chance of it attacking as well.

But there is no means, checks or balances to weed the responsible owners from the irresponsible. While it's well and good to charge or fine an owner of a pit bull or grizzley bear after the fact, it still leaves someone badly injured or dead. So our government has seen fit to disallow the sale and ownership of grizzly bears to private citizens. And now it has chosen to do the same with pit bulls.

This has to be the craziest non-issue in Ontario politics right now.

 

I am a dog owner and I would vote for the ban. Just because someone owns a dog does not automatically mean they will vote against the ban.



Alex
Styrofoam Guy

 

It's true... people who want to protect their dogs from the Pitbulls will vote for it...

BTW.... the Rottweiler is a guard dog... and bread as a guard dog... and most of it's attacks take place while on duty... It doesn't really make the safest family pet... and to be honest, I've never seen one that was not a Guard dog of a business... and those I did meet were gentle giants... but at night... just walk past the door!!!...

 

I feel like I should weigh in here - You see, I had a Pit Bull once, and she was one of my favorite pets.

Actually, Lexie was a "Staffoshire Bull Terrier": Most common Pit Bulls are mixed breed, but she was purebred. She was one of the smartest dogs I've ever known - and she was very friendly too...Most of the time. The problem is that Wolf is right - Pit Bulls are *bred fighters* - They are balls of solid muscle with an agressive streak. It's not their fault - We made them that way - But it's what they are.

Like I said, Lexie was usually a very good dog; My father is a Veterinarian - he knows how to train a dog. She usually wasn't even that agressive, but at the time, we also had an Airdale Terrier who, believe it or not, would actually pick fights with the Pit Bull. Those fights were scary - I remember my dad once had to throw a chair at them to get them apart - and the Airdale always got hurt.
My point is that Pit Bulls and other dogs like them *are* more dangerous then most other dogs - they're bred to be that way. I've dealt with a lot of dogs in my life, but Lexie was the only one that really worried me when she started to growl.

However, when she wasn't growling, she was as friendly and intelligent as they come.

As you can see, my first-hand experience has just made me more indecisive...
The only thing I can say for sure is that Pit Bulls should *never* be owned by anyone who doesn't know how to handle them - or, even worse, -wants them to fight-. In some ways, I'm starting to think that the ban might be good for the *Pit Bulls*, because it will keep them away from these people...But the truth is, making them illegal will probably just make them more desireable and all the wrong people would be trying even harder to get them...Heck - there's currently a thriving black-market trade in TIGERS! Talk about a creature that should *never* be kept as a pet! (Though I've actually had one of them too...legaly, of course, my Dad was taking care of it; Though it was just a baby, it still scratched really good)

 

I don't agree with the ban more on the grounds that it is just for pitbulls, I don't think grey_starr is correct when he says that rottweillers usually harm while being a "guard dog" according to the stats tracy posted as well as others I've seen, they are quite likely to attack as well, usually children, so why aren't they being banned as well? If there are other breeds that have repeatedly caused injuries, and serious injuries at that, then why is it that we're only banning pitbulls? Because that's been in the news recently, because it's on everybodies mind, and then, in a year or two, we'll have rottweiller attacks, or german sheperd attacks, and all of a sudden we'll be looking at banning another breed. my problem is that they are just banning pit bulls, that's hypocritical from my point of view, just because those are the attacks most recent, doesn't mean that they should be the only ones banned, if you are going to ban things, you have to set down a list of criteria for why they are dangerous, and back that up with studies, they haven't done that and as a consequence are just acting out of fear, which is wrong, this needs to be thought out and researched before anything like a breed-wide ban should be implemented. If this is going to be done at all, which I'm not sure it should, I still believe the owners are more responsible than the dogs, then at the very least do it properly and set out guidelines for what constitutes a dangerous breed or species and put restrictions on all animals on those lists.

 

Its more than that they attack. Every animal attacks, even rabbits. Its the fact that this breed of dog was specifically bred, SPECIFICALLY bred for killing, for being aggessive. Not to just maim, not to just bite or just to look mean, it was bread to KILL.

Thats where the issue arises. Its the same reason why you cannot own any wild animals legally. Wolves, foexes, coyotes or bears...you cannot raise these animals and tame them...what makes you think a pit bull is different?

Rottwiellers and sheppards are TRAINED to guard to protect. Pitbulls are BRED to kill. Do you see the difference? A german sheppard raised by a family as a family dog will have a temperment of a family dog. Yes she'll protect the family if provoked but otherwise is a calm dog. I've had one, I know. The same even with Huskies and Labs.
However a sheppard trained to be a guard dog, to protect will not accept anyone unless told and will give sufficent warning to back off. Now I knew a guard dog sheppard that did not like me and would snip ant me always, and not playfully (name was lucifer...appropiate )

However a pitbull remains the same, because of how its bred, because of the inconsistancy in its mentality its bred. You don't bred pitbulls as a lap dog no more than you'd bread tigers to play with yarn.

Whats worse is that pitbulls take as much as 8 times the amount of fatalities as wolf breed mixes, double rottweilers, 6 times huskies...which are KNOWN hunters and 118 times a cocker spaniel...

There are dangerous animals in this world and its not something we should balk at when one specific breed or type of animal needs to be evaluated to have the potential to be a danger. Its banned in many places already and has been for awhile and yet dog attacks have decreased in those areas.

Futhermore I do not think people just want to rid the dog out of hate. Its general concern for public safety, its genuine. It's real. No one wants to eraticate the breed, and its not about gauging owners to see what breed they are allowed or whether they are fit to have a certain dog.

This is about danger.

Pitbulls are the machine gun of the dog world (to reference my earlier post) and a machine gun has ONE purpose...and its not self defense.

 

Lol please no bad words about Huskees they are a cousin of the Wolf after all. And just for the record Wolves are very family oriented and gental. They only attack when either themselves or their family is threatened.

Most wolves in fact try to avoid humans since they naturally see us a threat. (not an unfounded one since we almost hunted them into extinction)

 

Ban the Pit Bull and all you will get is people wanting the dog more. the attacks may decrees but as time goes on another breed will be up for banning.

every animal has the ability to do harm in some fashion

cat = biting, scratching. they can grow very big. I know I had a 35 pound orange tabby that beat up a german sheppard. I also had a 5 pound black siemese that severly attacked and mamed a cat double the size of her. a friend of mine had a cat that he had to kill becuase she almost sliced and diced his 8 month old duaghter.

every breed of dog can bite, attack, no matter the size of it.

birds can peck and scratch with its talons.

mice and other rodents can bite and transfer decease

ferrets can bite and tear things a part. I one of my ex's ferrets destroy a baby size and likeness dog to shreds.

fish, children can drown in less then an inch of water, they can decide to try to kiss a fish and drown. funny but it has happened

turtles, carry salmanila poison (the type you get from raw chicken) they can also snap.

snakes can bite, wrap around your windpipe now matter if they are little or big.

scorpians can sting

farm animals as pets

horses can bite, Ive been bitten, they can kick. my sister has been kicked.

cattle can kick and bite and run at you no matter if they are bulls or cows. I had a pet longhorn that could chase you all over the barn yard

sheep and goats can kick, bite and ram. been there had the bruises on my butt for weeks to prove it. [enter laughs here]

pigs can bite, yet again been there.

so every type of pet can harm, ban one and before you know it they will ban all pets

 

Matt...I LOVE Huskies, I've had 2...my favorite dog by far

Dan...again this isn't about teh ability to bite to harm....the Pitbull is already banned in more than a couple countries. Its a bred killer, like lions, tigers, komodo dragons...

Agian the proposed ban isn't because it can hurt someone its because it can KILL and 9 times out of 10 it does.

 

I see this thread has hit it's end. no ground is being opened here and everyone is just going around in circles. so I rest my case with these last points. I also intent to ask Crazy mike to close this thread.

banning anything out right, say it be alcohol, drugs, weapons, animals. will do nothing but make it more desireble.

the only proven thing to do is to teach, control and punish.

teach = show the effect the substance can do, teach how to use it properly and dont preach.

control = put proper guidlines and laws in place to limit not only who can have it but how many and where you can have it as well.

punish = send a clear message to infractures that not going with the clear guidlines is wrong and they will be punished, either financial or with jail time, or both.


all to ofton the wrong type of control is used, punishment is to strong for the case and there is no teaching. just recently teaching for smoking, alcohol and guns has arisen and it is the proper teaching. where some drug teachings show the wrong things, using only scare tactics, up to recently the ani-smoking was all scare, but the facts are right. the pit bull should be treated like any dangerous substance. teach about it, control it, and punish offenders. dont punish the dog.

-peace out -Dan

 

I had locked this thread but I am now reopening it...

As far as what my thoughts are on the issue I am really split and are sitting on the fence. I feel that the owners need to be dealt with more severely. While it may be true that Pitbulls are agressive I think that there are people out there that are getting them for that very reason. I think that many dogs could be trained or abused enough to become vicious but there are a small percentage of people out there that are exploiting pitbulls.


From the Attorney general's website:

MCGUINTY GOVERNMENT TO INTRODUCE PIT BULL BAN
Legislation To Ban Dangerous Breed, Increase Dog Owners' Responsibility
TORONTO The McGuinty government is making our communities safer and responding to the concerns expressed by thousands of Ontarians by introducing legislation this fall to ban pit bulls in the province, Attorney General Michael Bryant announced today.

"People want to be protected from the menace of these dangerous dogs," said Bryant. "Some of these dogs are nothing but a loaded weapon waiting to go off and so we are taking action to make our communities safer."

Bryant will introduce legislation this fall to amend the Dog Owners' Liability Act. The legislation, if passed, would:

Ban pit bulls
Muzzle existing pit bulls, impose other province-wide restrictions to improve public safety, and allow municipalities to impose appropriate controls
Increase fines up to a maximum of $10,000 and allow for jail sentences of up to six months for owners of any dangerous dog that bites, attacks, or poses a threat to public safety.

If passed, the legislation would allow for a transition period for existing pit bulls. During this time, owners would be required to comply with strict new requirements for continued ownership.

Bryant said the proposed ban is meant to be supportive of municipal governments, and that this proposed bill respects the municipality's authority under the Municipal Act. This comprehensive approach would avoid a patchwork of bans.

"I support the province's swift action," said David Miller, Mayor of Toronto. "This problem is not exclusive to any single municipality, it is a province-wide issue and therefore the best solution is a province-wide strategy to keep Ontarians safe from dangerous dogs."

"My officers have encountered a number of dangerous situations involving pit bulls," said Julian Fantino, Chief of Toronto Police Service. "This proposed ban will help my officers and police services across Ontario keep our community safe from dangerous dogs."

"The ban of pit bulls that Kitchener has had for the past seven years is helping to keep our community safer from a breed that has demonstrated undesirable, aggressive behaviour," said Carl Zehr, Mayor of Kitchener. "I believe that every Ontarian deserves this level of safety and am pleased that the provincial government will introduce legislation that will, if passed, ban pit bulls province-wide."

"Our experience in Winnipeg has been one of success," said Tim Dack, Chief Operating Officer of the Animal Services Agency of the City of Winnipeg. "We have seen the number of pit bull incidents decline dramatically since introducing a pit bull ban 14 years ago. I applaud the Government of Ontario for their decision to ban pit bulls and deal with this urgent public safety issue."

"I feel safer knowing that the Ontario government has taken steps to protect us from the extreme danger posed by pit bulls," said Diana Fischer, a victim of a pit bull attack. "The particular problem with pit bulls is the inability to stop them once they have started to attack, the viciousness of their attack and the seriousness of the injuries they inflict. I know this based on my experience as a trainer - through which I've dealt with hundreds of dogs - and my experience being attacked by a pit bull who was trying to kill my own dogs."

"I commend the McGuinty government for moving forward quickly on this very important initiative," said Rod Morrison, Mayor of Wawa. "Protecting the public from the me

 

I don't see people taking sides because they are not allowed to have a pet Lion...

Thats because dogs have been bred from the earliest days of man to be pets. We are talking thousands of years of domestication. Lion domestication is a highly rare thing and most often its a wild animal taken from its habitat and put in an urban center...not generations of house lions.