justin19801

Why not? It wouldn't matter what breed the dog was. The fact is, unprovoked, it killed a dog, and given the chance, most likely would have done the same to the kids living next door, if not someone in the neighborhood. The killer dog got what he deserved, and now the owner should also get his punishment. Wow, I wasn't there, you obviously were! Was the dog tormented in the past? Where were the parents? Why wasn't there adequate fencing? What breed was the dog? Was it suffering from a brain tumour? Why was the poor dog allowed to suffer for an hour and a half? Dogs are voiceless. If these cases are not properly investigated they are bound to be repeated. But what the heck, no one really seems to care except wear their heart on their sleeve for all to see how caring they are. We don't have dog problems, we have people problems.

In my considered opinion there are plenty of unanswered questions in this scenario. If they remain unanswered then the whole episode is bound to be repeated again. But why should the bleeding hearts care. He killed a Pit that deserved to die. Time we had a special investigative unit to look into dog attacks so we can learn and educate about them. If the dog wasn't called a PB we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

It is my understanding now that the Common Law states they are the same breed it is irrelevant what the Qld govt legislates, unless they are seen to be part of dog club politics, which may be actionable in itself. Councils will support the ruling as it will end future law suits against them. A Mandanus ruling will force them to begin enforcing the law against ASTs immediately. The law has merely accepted what the rest of the world already knows to be true. Rather than arguing over which dog clubs dogs should fall under BSL we should be fighting BSL itself.

Very sensible post, as usual from Souff. It's all very well for people who weren't there to say what the boy should have done - in the heat of the moment one doesn't always think clearly. Poosible the attack DIDN'T last for an hour and a half, but I'm sure it SEEMED like that. Onece again the resident DOL know-it-alls have to carp & criticise - hope none of you are ever in this position. Why did he wait 90 minutes before stabbing the dog? Why didn't he call for help? Parents do shoulder some responsibility here too In my considered opinion.

ANKC makes tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars each year through the various CCs from unpapered dogs competing in Obedience, Tracking, Agility and soon Flyball. By abandoning any breed they are also abandoning their members.

I agree, AST owners will be pi##ed off as they have been in denial for so long they probably really believe their own propaganda. BSL is a threat to all dog owners as has been shown by groups such as R$PCA, H$U$, PETA, animal liberation etc who want to end pet ownership. If ANKC think they can save themselves by abandoning everyone else then they too are in denial as the latest SC case proved. Pressure from the media is also at hand to include SBT and the R$PCA to include Am Bulldogs in BSL.

Lobbying has to be at Qld govt level. Dog owners should be pressuring the parties and R$PCA to overturn BSL not wasting their efforts at local government level. First place to start is the hip pocket nerve.

NRMA fights for car safety for all drivers, not just it's members. The comparison appears specious at first but is in fact the nub of the matter at hand.

APBTs have been bred as family pets since before they were first registered in 1896. In the US fighting strains of both exist and they are dual registered. Claiming they are a different breed when they are one and the same wont help anyone other than the BSL supporters. Fighting BSL and giving something back to the dog community is something which ANKC is about, not just safeguarding their own breeds especially as it is now common law APBT = AST. Papers will mean nothing in a court of law.

I certainly hope that other ANKC breeders are NOT of the same opinion as you SBT123 . So if you had your way all dogs that are not ANKC registered would be thrown to the wolves so to speak. I think this is a very selfish attitude, shame on you. I hope you don't classify yourself as a dog lover I hope you don't classify yourself as a dog lover how true. at least tangos owners love their dog unlike STB123 that can get rid if them without the blink of an eye. Agreed. ANKC is a dog club which does not care for ... dogs. PDE is their looming Tsunami. If they think anyone will support them once the quake hits they better think again. Tail docking should have warned them of what is in store. As for the judgement the case showed, irrespective of papers, APBT = AST. If repeated in NSW, and I have no doubt it will be, their easily falsified papers will be no protection against anything. In Qld it would appear all breed assessors trained by ANKC have been incorrectly trained. I'd be asking for my money back. The issue is not what dog falls under BSL but BSL itself. The worlds biggest APBT registry issues APBT papers to Australian registered ASTs as it is. Why, because they are one and the same and o/s the SBT is classified as a PB as well.

No not really. Rather than fight BSL they are trying to distance themselves from it. Hasn't worked in the UK, hasn't worked in Europe, hasn't worked in Canada, hasn't worked in US and I doubt it will work here as the proponents of BSL have nothing to do with public safety. At least if Qld govt states Amstaffs are excluded common law states that they are the same so an Amstaff without papers is also excluded, ie APBTs.

We are confident that those talks will result in a positive and manageable outcome for our members and their pedigreed registered American Staffordshire Terrier dogs. Unfortunately they are again looking to save themselves at others expense. GTG are confident and maintain they can “accurately identify significant numbers of breeds based on breed specific signatures. The American Staffordshire Terrier has shown to have its own unique breed signature”. They would be the only group in the world which could do so. Fortunately Common Law now states the obvious and the Qld govt will have to deal with that not the nonsense that the breeds are different.

Hugh Wirth is on record as stating that herding dogs headed the list of dog attacks. The Qld govt rep at an UAM conference when confronted with bite stats simply said Breed Discriminatory Legislation was about preventing bites from these types not reducing dog attacks per se.

GCCC doesn't have to change anything. The common law now states APBT=AST, something the world knew all along anyway.

I have some hope, RB. Because the BSL laws are individual State laws. So if there's to be any change to those laws, it would come from influences within a State. It helps, too, when the state organisations with some clout, speak with the same voice. And I notice Dogs Qld's press release about the Tango decision uses the same phrase as RSPCA Qld about the need to look at the deeds which produce dogs of danger to the community....not the breed. I'd be hoping both those organisations sit down with the relevant Qld Minister to stop this futility of pursuing breed alone. Problem is ANKC supplies instructors Australia-wide to tell the difference between an APBT and AST which we are now told legally doesn't exist. R$PCA simply tells anyone who will listen what they believe they want to hear and then ask for money. They should simply refuse to enforce Breed Discriminatory Legislation rather than try and have a bet each way.

Couldn't agree more. Breed Discriminatory Legislation is about controlling and punishing people by killing their pets. APBTs are simply a prism which magnifies people's hates.

The breeds have been seperate for so long (i understand your reasoning though), perhaps it's better if they are all lumped together so BSL can be fought on a united front. As for the rest i totally agree. Fighting strains of bothe exist as do SBTs. The fact remains 99.9% of all these breeds/dogs/whatever are simply harmless family pets. While some residual gameness does exist compared to other breeds, fighting lines are genetically so different as to be a breed on their own even though they look the same. These dogs will never be caught by BSL as they are owned by criminals anyway. BSL can only be won by political means and not by arguing which breeds fall under it's net.

animal liberation is about ending pet ownership and enforced veganism, nothing more, nothing less. The red herring is the dogs put down. If the dogs the R$PCA killed had a voice, I'm sure they would have preferred to remain where they were. Regulation and enforcement is the key to solving puppy farms.

While we quibble Rome burns. AST=APBT=SBT. Get used to it. The world has known this for decades and it will slowly spread Australia-wide. People who see differences in the breeds are only kidding themselves. The good thing is ANKC may now get off it's A** and fight breed discriminatory legislation for all breeds not just theirs, because when BDL starts, as it solves nothing, it only gets worse and worse. Congrats to Chivers for having the guts to stand up for all breeds in this country. We should all be thanking her and Mr Mokomoko. Even if the Qld govt removes the AST from pit bull type, the court decision can be used to label APBTs as ASTs. Ultimately it's about saving harmless family pets from being killed by the likes of the R$PCA who are IMO the real villains here.

BSL has to be fought on the one irrefutable fact that BSL breed discussions tend to ignore. It doesn't work. It has never worked. Targetting "dangerous breeds" fails to protect community from all dangerous dogs. End of story. This is the crux of the problem. Not the breed or even the deed but responsible pet ownership. The AST/APBT/SBT arguement was settled long ago. Now SBTs in Australia will be next in the R$PCA/ALP sights which use divide and conquoer tactics to fund raise for their bloated salaries. They need to be taken head on, not pandered to.

This is really a no-brainer as the judge has simply agreed with what the rest of the world knows to be true including for SBTs. The issue is not what breed a dog is or what it looks like but Breed Discriminatory legislation. Other States will no doubt follow suite to prevent future court cases. Once they see how easy papers can be manufactured they wont be worth anything.

I wonder whether the owners of seeing-eye or therapy dogs would see eye to eye with that view?

You're right! Maybe dog owners in Brisbane need to protest about this ban: Birds can do it. Bees can do it, So why can't well-controlled dogs do it... Visit outdoor cafes, that is.

Both RSPCA & AWL here have activity programs for their dogs in care....& volunteer cuddlers & walkers. RSPCA here, way back, first went public with the fact that lack of early socialisation for puppy farm dogs has long-term adverse effects which can handicap the dogs as much as physical & health defects. Later research at UQ, supported their experience. What is needed is for real-life examples to be got to the general public.... of why & how socialisation (& exposure to real-life experiences) shapes dogs to be successful companion dogs. Best examples I've seen in the media have been the Pet Therapy team from Dogs Vic & the Military Dog training unit in Qld. Many people would think there'd be no comparison. But in socialising their dogs & in exposing their dogs to everyday experiences, both are exactly the same. Person, who represented the Pet Therapy team, described their work on Radio National. The interviewer nearly fell off his chair as she described how the dogs who do the therapy work, are purebred Rottweilers, Great Danes etc (not just tiny fluffy ones). 'How can Rottweilers 'work' among the frail & elderly & sick & young?' The woman (whose own dog is a Rottie in the team) explained how, first, generations of good decision-making goes into producing purebred dogs with temperaments as sound as their good looks. And how raising the puppies & dogs, requires lots of contact with people....& exposing the dogs to all sorts of sights & sounds, within the home & in the wider environment. Yet these dogs still continued their lives as 'show dogs'. In fact, that became a huge interest for the elderly people the dogs visited. They loved seeing the dogs come in....wearing ribbons they'd won, the weekend before, at a show. Overall, she gave the best description of how to raise a companion dog, I've ever heard (as good as that given by the man who raises the military dogs). In doing that, she also shattered preconceptions about BSL. Yes, these wonderful therapy dogs included Rotties....it's how dogs are bred & raised which counts in how they'll interact with humans....not simply their breed. She also shattered the myth that 'show' dogs live a 'cruel', 'undoggie' life. These dogs were the best of showdogs & the best of companion dogs. (I noted the name of this lady....she was brilliant on radio. Calmly spoken & articulate.) The military dog trainer in Qld said all the same things in a magazine here. Military dogs have to foremost be good companion dogs for their handlers. So all the same elements went into their breeding & raising of pups & young dogs....as went into the Dogs Vic therapy dogs. Good decision-making about breeding. Then socialisation from birth....& exposure to real life. First, happy puppy life around an Air Force Base (being pulled off passing ladies' flappy skirts). Then out to be fostered with families in homes.....living a full life as a young family pup. Before returning to the base for full training as military dogs. Some clever producer should make a TV program which highlights both these.... Because both teach brilliantly the need for socialisation/experiences, the follies of BSL, the myths around 'show dogs'...& how companion dogs should be formed (whoever breeds/raises them) http://www.dogsvictoria.org.au/Content.asp?ID=180 Yes an expose on how APBT owners are forced to keep their dogs in cages thanks to R$PCA is high on the agenda. As is their creation of kennels where family pets can be kept without social contact should also be exposed (Lonsdale is SA is a good place to start). As for dog cuddlers et al, pure media spin. They kill dogs, temperment test them to death I believe. More funds for the super programs and pension plans I guess.

Absolutely not true... recognised breeds are banned or restricted in several places, all over the world. Undeniabley Zayda. Longcoat you seem to dwell in a very simplistic world. The APBT was subject to overnight restriction or banning is some places but was never a recognised breed in the first place. It has been raised before about ANKC recognised breeds banned in certain council areas, but the council bylaws of the councils mentioned did not contain any such thing by memory???. A council could easily be sued for damages banning an ANKC recognised breed overnight requiring people to get rid of their dogs...........won't happen in Australia. The APBT was recognised as pure-bred long before the SBT or AST, which derived from the APBT. ANKC and CCs are just dog clubs, no legal standing whatsoever. They simply approve breeds that can be shown at their shows, period.