Kill all the Pit bulls in Ohio - H.B. 568

State Representative Tyrone Yates, (D) of Cincinnati, has introduced legislation that would ban pit bulls from the state of Ohio.

But the bill doesn't seek to just outlaw the breed from state lines, it goes much further:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/hb-568-ohio-pit-bull-ban


Now I don’t own a pit but have 3 dogs and this is crazy to take someone’s loved pet and kill it because it’s a certain breed.

If you love/like dogs e-mail this guy and let him know what you think no matter where you live. Lets get this as much publicity as possible to put a stop to it

The problem has always been the owners. Some mean well but should not own any large dog as they really do not understand them. Some owners are just dumb in general and need to serve some time for being a dumb*ss.

Speaking of a dumb*ss State Representative Tyrone Yates meets that criteria even with all his education.

District: 33
Term: 3rd
Term Limit: Eligible to run for another two-year term
Address:
77 S. High St
11th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215-6111
Phone: (614) 466-1308
Email: district33@ohr.state.oh.us


Daddy, Cesar Milans pitbull below.

 

Damn.
Pitbulls are banned in the UK but at least they got to live out their lives naturally after the ban came into force (albeit registered neutered, muzzled and pilloried in the press).
Just wholesale killing dogs like that is mental.
Truly sad.

(And I think that's Daddy, Cesar Milans pitbull...a better example of a well balanced dog you'd be hard pressed to find..of ANY breed)

 

Yes it’s Daddy I forgot to put that. I’ll edit it thanks.

 

i signed a petition against this bill of doggy genocide. I'll post a link soon so you can sign as well.

-dog lover

 

http://www.petitiononline.com/10121985/petition-sign.html

forementioned link. please sign

 

This is good for Ohio residents but everyone else still needs to send him a e-mail so he knows this is being spread world wide. Maybe it will but pressure to pull that out of his bill.

 

it also helps to call or email your state representatives.

 

I am a huge dog lover...but not pit bulls. I DO NOT believe they should all be destroyed though. I just dont want them around..I have personally witnessed pits raised inloving homes, and not bred for fighting still attack other animals, and even children..I just dont trust them.

People might argue, well what if a toy poodle...etc, etc..

The problem is most dog attacks are from pits.

 

The problem with Pits is they are a powerful breed like boxers and such so when they bite they do more damage. Just because people love a dog does not mean they are handling it correctly to assure the dog is happy, healthy and has social skills. For proof of this watch Caesar Malons show.

 

The problem is most dog attacks are from pits.

Care to cite statistics on that?

Every statistic sample I've seen throughout my years of being involved with bull-breeds have shown high incidence of dog attacks from alsations, collies and the like.
Bull breeds have always figured pretty low. Even when statistically high in number of actual individuals.

 

No.

 

I think they're ugly, lol. I just don't want to see them exterminated.

 

Whatever you thoughts on owning a Pit yourself this guy should be called down on this and this bill stopped. How about next time some politician decides that German Sheppard’s or for that matter Golden Retrievers are dangerous and because a child is mauled by one all of them they all need to be taken from their owners and killed.

 

That is so wrong im gonna cast a petition to do something about that stupid man, watshisname? Tyrone? HE IS GOIN DOWN pit bulls deserve to live just like humans. Whats the difference between a human and dog? Many things, but what do we have in common? We're both living creatures, we learn from our mistakes, and we all have rights from God. I know many people may disagree with my religious fact but think of it this way, We can all talk, We can all choose what we want to do, Why can't we all live? Killing a pit bull is just as bad as killing a human, regardless of how agressive the animal is. Animals only attack when they're scared remember that! Pit bulls must be the most frightened animal in the world...

 

I own two Lab's, and while they would be in no danger of ever being put down the thought of losing either of them before their time is unthinkable. They become part of the family and to have to surrender them to be euthanized would hurt bad.

That said, some people should not own dogs, especially dogs that are prone to aggression and have the ability to hurt people. It is all well and good to love a dog (it is hard not to when you start to get to know them), but you have to have control of your dog. I have started working with people with problem dogs (have only help a handful of people), but most of the problems come from the owners loving the dog too much, not establishing a good dominant role, and not being consistent in praise and discipline, leaving the dog confused about their position in the pack structure, and what is and isn't acceptable.

I think if people want to own breeds like a pitbul, they should be required to take a responsible dog ownership course, that will teach them the correct way to deal with these dogs.

 

You may feel that animals and humans have the same God-given right to life, but the law doesn't agree. Cannibals go to jail. Ranchers and butchers don't, even though they kill animals who have done no wrong just so that people can eat their meat.

As for the original post...

Note that people who own pitbulls and don't want the pitbulls put down can have the dogs adopted by an owner outside of Ohio, or can move outside of Ohio. Euthanizing the pitbull is not the only option.

 

There's more to it than that. Mastiffs are immensely dangerous if they attack, yet mastiff attacks are far, far, FAR less frequent than pitbull attacks. The "problem" with pit bulls is not just that they are extremely dangerous if they do attack, but also that they have a much higher statistical probability of attacking than any other breed I can think of (for whatever reason).

EDIT: Here's the requested statistics:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/06/23/MNGRODDH561.DTL

http://www.dog-bite-law-center.com/pgs/stats.html If you run the numbers, that means that, per capita, pitbull homicides are 24 TIMES more likely than non-pitbull homicides.

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html#Thedogsmostlikelytobite

EDIT 2: All that said, I think a better solution would be to make it illegal to breed pitbulls, or to refuse to spay/neuter a pitbull, and to let the existing pitbulls eventually die off from old age. I think that forced euthanization is a whole lot more traumatic for dog owners than forced sterilization.

 

Good research there Mitlov, glad you put that last bit in, I agree that euthanizing the dog would be more traumatic for the owners than the dog. It's never good to see any life go to waste, but when you see the destruction these dogs can cause it obvious there needs to be restrictions places on these dogs. I'm not sure how but it would be good if there where a way that you could prove your dog does not have aggressive tendancies, outside of their territorial or protective nature.

I still think that a lot of the problem lies in the owner. Just think of the type of people that own pitbulls, and the reasons and ways in which they are raised.

 

blah blah blah. Care to cite anything?
theyre bloody dinosaurs with please don't swear collars.

 

Unfortunately, many serious or fatal pitbull attacks are from dogs with no prior history of violence, so I don't think a system where you certify your pitbull as nonviolent would do much good.

Some of the problem does lie with the owners. Some doesn't. Dogs aren't clean slates when they're born. A labrador that has never seen a lake before will have a deep desire to chase a stick that is thrown into that lake, whereas a Pomeranian will not. Why? Centuries of being used as a gun dog, retrieving falling birds, has led to. Similarly, my grandfather ran a chicken farm, and he would always use german shepherds, not labradors, to protect his chickens from foxes. Why? Because labradors have a fundamental drive to chase birds and carry them in their mouths, whereas german shepherds do not.

I have read reports of Newfoundlands who have never before seen water being brought to the beach or a lake, and jumping in and pulling people out of the water. Why? Centuries of being used as a water rescue dog. You will never see a greyhound, upon its first visit to water, jumping into the lake to pull people out though. No genetic predisposition to such activity.

I have read numerous stories of border collies who have never been used for herding purposes herding housepets or even herding groups of toddlers. Why? Centuries of herding has given them a genetic tendency to herd. But I've never heard of a basset hound exhibiting such herding behavior.

People admit that various breeds of dogs have genetic tendencies toward all sorts of behavior. Why, then, do many people resist the slightest possibility that certain breeds have tendencies toward violence? Pit bulls have been used for fighting as long as labradors have been used for retrieving and newfies have been used for rescue. The use continues to this day (not with every dog in the breed, of course, but with enough to keep the genetic tendencies alive in the breed).

If no one ever used pitbulls for dogfighting, I suspect that in a couple centuries, the breed might lose those genetic tendencies, becoming well-armed-but-docile, like British bulldogs or like mastiffs. However, enough dogfighting continues to this day so that a statistically significant portion of pits carry a genetic trigger for violence--one which sometimes goes off unexpectedly and catastrophically, with no prior warning.