Jump to content

Vicious Dog Buy Back


Andisa
 Share

Recommended Posts

This might open a can of worms but just walked in the door to hear on the TV - should the Gov introduce vicious dog buy back like Howard did with the Gun.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/lets-destroy-these-deadly-animals-once-and-for-all/story-fni0cwl5-1226692411504

EVERY time a mere human is killed or mauled by a pit bull-type dog, all the professional apologists line up to declare: "It's not the breed, it's the deed".

It's the same mantra spewed by the gun lobby after every massacre in the US: "Guns don't kill people. People kill people".

Rubbish. The horrible death this week of two-year old Deeon Higgins in Deniliquin has to mark the end of the line for dangerous dog breeds as household "pets".

Deeon had just stepped outside his grandmother's back door to get an icecream from an outdoor freezer when his 24-year-old cousin's bull mastiff cross attacked him. For more than 15 minutes.

Deeon's frantic grandmother Joyce Higgins, and then his mother, Vicki Higgins, tried in vain to save him. But he died in Deniliquin hospital of "serious head and facial injuries".

You can only shudder.

Pit bull-type dogs are inherently dangerous.

They are responsible for a disproportionately large share of the most serious dog attacks, and yet politicians continue to bow to the dog lobby. Enough. A dangerous dog is a weapon which can be every bit as lethal as a gun.

It's time for a "dog buyback", similar to John Howard's gun buyback. There can be an amnesty of a few weeks before the owner of every pit bull, or similar vicious breed, is required to relinquish their dogs to the local council.

They can then choose a safer breed from the tens of thousands waiting for a new home in pounds and animal shelters. The owner can be recompensed by the taxpayer for the small costs incurred. The dangerous breed is then humanely put to sleep, while a dog on death row is saved.

A life for a life, you might call it.

Those owners who choose not to relinquish their dogs should be subject to draconian laws, including mandatory manslaughter if anyone is killed by their animal.

"Kingston", was a 57kg bull mastiff cross. We don't know what it was crossed with, but a bull mastiff is a big powerful breed considered akin to a pit pull because it is has been bred for the same aggressive traits and muscular, stocky build.

Pit bull is a term generally used for the American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier and Staffordshire bull terrier. Along with similar breeds, they pose a clear and present danger to humans.

For instance, in May, jogger Rob Nelson, 49, was savagely mauled by three American Staffordshire Terriers in Liverpool. When paramedics arrived, his heart was visible through his wounds, his abdomen was "hanging out", his bicep had been eaten and his armpit had been ripped out. He only survived because of the intervention of bystanders.

The dog's owner is due in court later this month, to face a charge of owning an attacking dog, which carries a paltry maximum fine of $5500.

In nearby East Hills last October, a 19-year-old man had his ear bitten off by two American Staffordshire terriers as he walked his dog down the street.

In 2011 District Court Judge Michael Elkaim described two pit bull-type dogs that killed four-year-old Tyra Kuehne as "trained killers". He awarded Tyra's family $120,000 in damages after they sued Warren Shire Council for negligence. S adly, the Court of Appeal overturned the decision.

In 2005, after three such attacks, then premier Bob Carr lashed pitbulls as "killing machines on a leash", but stopped short of banning them.

He declared certain pit bull-type breeds "restricted", which means they cannot be imported, or bred and should be desexed, muzzled in public, and live in a secure enclosure.

The idea was that they would die out and, hey presto, problem solved.

But, almost a decade later, dangerous breeds are still killing and maiming people.

Now Barry O'Farrell isn't even trying to sound tough, saying dog owners need to be more responsible. Sure, but plenty aren't.

Compare O'Farrell's response to that of Victorian Premier Denis Napthine, who is also a vet, and is planning a crackdown on after four-year-old Ayen Chol was mauled to death by a neighbour's pit bull.

"Let's get rid of American pit bulls. They're just bred for attacking and they can do enormous damage," he said.

Unfortunately, in NSW the Australian Veterinary Association view holds sway, that it is the "deed not the breed" and that breed-specific legislation is illogical.

But there's plenty of evidence to dispute that view.

For instance, a paper in the Annals Of Surgery journal in 2011, found: "Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs".

A study in the Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery journal found more than half the serious dog bites treated over five years at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia were pit bulls.

Celebrity vet Dr Robert Zammit, of Vineyard Veterinary Hospital, near Windsor, admitted on ABC radio yesterday that: "Certain breeds are worse than others Certain breeds are very sharp and apt to attack."

He also said that any dog "in a bad situation, can attack," and that no child under 12 should be left alone with a dog.

Sensible advice, but sometimes children wander, and sometimes dogs escape. We need to minimise the risk.

So, if 1000 pit bulls have to die, that's a small price to pay to save one child.

edited to add the whole article.

Edited by Andisa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Holy Cow this is a bit off.

They talk about the disproportionate amount of attacks of 'these types of dogs' sadly there are a disproportionate amount of irresponsible humans who are drawn to such breeds for the look without putting in the socialising, training or considering the temperaments of the parents :(

Any dog attack is just devastating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah because bull mastiffs look so much and act so much like pit bulls. I agree that certain breeds are built like tanks and have the weaponry to attack but are no more likely to use that than another breed if raised correctly.

That is written by someone that doesn't even know the basics about dogs. This is going to be like the time GSDs were banned. RIDICULOUS!

Edited by mixeduppup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miranda Devine is a tool on many topics, and this is yet another one. I shouldn't be surprised.

If she truly cared about reducing dog attacks she would do the research in to what is PROVEN to do so and not spout such absolute rubbish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah because bull mastiffs look so much and act so much like pit bulls.

Are you being sarcastic?

Mdevine is a tool, and has written this kind of drivel before.

How is the government going to cope with "bull mastiff crosses" Ban all bull mastiffs, or ban all crosses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can imagine people using a buyback as an excuse to get rid of their unwanted dogs, regardless of whether the dogs have actually shown aggression or not.

This article reminds me of the discussion on the mix 101.1 facebook page now, but Chrissie Swan has taken it even further by questioning the need for any large breed dog. Chrissie's comments in the past indicate she's not an animal lover anyway, but she's another one that really needs to do a bit of research before she speaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah because bull mastiffs look so much and act so much like pit bulls.

Are you being sarcastic?

Mdevine is a tool, and has written this kind of drivel before.

How is the government going to cope with "bull mastiff crosses" Ban all bull mastiffs, or ban all crosses?

I would presume do exactly what Victoria did and put together an arbitrary 'standard' that is so broad and inclusive that almost any large purebred or mixed breed dog are caught up in it. Then spend $100,000 per dog trying to kill them.

Sigh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah because bull mastiffs look so much and act so much like pit bulls.

Are you being sarcastic?

Mdevine is a tool, and has written this kind of drivel before.

How is the government going to cope with "bull mastiff crosses" Ban all bull mastiffs, or ban all crosses?

Yep. I couldn't find an eyerolly emoticon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can imagine people using a buyback as an excuse to get rid of their unwanted dogs, regardless of whether the dogs have actually shown aggression or not.

This article reminds me of the discussion on the mix 101.1 facebook page now, but Chrissie Swan has taken it even further by questioning the need for any large breed dog. Chrissie's comments in the past indicate she's not an animal lover anyway, but she's another one that really needs to do a bit of research before she speaks.

Isn't this the same idiot who thought the story about the woman who died and arranged to have her guide dog PTS was hilarious? Enough said really - total nonentity looking for some relevance.

The article is playing on the principal of banning deadly weapons because of the potential for misuse. Its the way our society is structured really. The problem - as always - is with people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This might open a can of worms but just walked in the door to hear on the TV - should the Gov introduce vicious dog buy back like Howard did with the Gun.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/lets-destroy-these-deadly-animals-once-and-for-all/story-fni0cwl5-1226692411504

EVERY time a mere human is killed or mauled by a pit bull-type dog, all the professional apologists line up to declare: "It's not the breed, it's the deed".

It's the same mantra spewed by the gun lobby after every massacre in the US: "Guns don't kill people. People kill people".

Rubbish. The horrible death this week of two-year old Deeon Higgins in Deniliquin has to mark the end of the line for dangerous dog breeds as household "pets".

Deeon had just stepped outside his grandmother's back door to get an icecream from an outdoor freezer when his 24-year-old cousin's bull mastiff cross attacked him. For more than 15 minutes.

Deeon's frantic grandmother Joyce Higgins, and then his mother, Vicki Higgins, tried in vain to save him. But he died in Deniliquin hospital of "serious head and facial injuries".

You can only shudder.

Pit bull-type dogs are inherently dangerous.

They are responsible for a disproportionately large share of the most serious dog attacks, and yet politicians continue to bow to the dog lobby. Enough. A dangerous dog is a weapon which can be every bit as lethal as a gun.

It's time for a "dog buyback", similar to John Howard's gun buyback. There can be an amnesty of a few weeks before the owner of every pit bull, or similar vicious breed, is required to relinquish their dogs to the local council.

They can then choose a safer breed from the tens of thousands waiting for a new home in pounds and animal shelters. The owner can be recompensed by the taxpayer for the small costs incurred. The dangerous breed is then humanely put to sleep, while a dog on death row is saved.

A life for a life, you might call it.

Those owners who choose not to relinquish their dogs should be subject to draconian laws, including mandatory manslaughter if anyone is killed by their animal.

"Kingston", was a 57kg bull mastiff cross. We don't know what it was crossed with, but a bull mastiff is a big powerful breed considered akin to a pit pull because it is has been bred for the same aggressive traits and muscular, stocky build.

Pit bull is a term generally used for the American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier and Staffordshire bull terrier. Along with similar breeds, they pose a clear and present danger to humans.

For instance, in May, jogger Rob Nelson, 49, was savagely mauled by three American Staffordshire Terriers in Liverpool. When paramedics arrived, his heart was visible through his wounds, his abdomen was "hanging out", his bicep had been eaten and his armpit had been ripped out. He only survived because of the intervention of bystanders.

The dog's owner is due in court later this month, to face a charge of owning an attacking dog, which carries a paltry maximum fine of $5500.

In nearby East Hills last October, a 19-year-old man had his ear bitten off by two American Staffordshire terriers as he walked his dog down the street.

In 2011 District Court Judge Michael Elkaim described two pit bull-type dogs that killed four-year-old Tyra Kuehne as "trained killers". He awarded Tyra's family $120,000 in damages after they sued Warren Shire Council for negligence. S adly, the Court of Appeal overturned the decision.

In 2005, after three such attacks, then premier Bob Carr lashed pitbulls as "killing machines on a leash", but stopped short of banning them.

He declared certain pit bull-type breeds "restricted", which means they cannot be imported, or bred and should be desexed, muzzled in public, and live in a secure enclosure.

The idea was that they would die out and, hey presto, problem solved.

But, almost a decade later, dangerous breeds are still killing and maiming people.

Now Barry O'Farrell isn't even trying to sound tough, saying dog owners need to be more responsible. Sure, but plenty aren't.

Compare O'Farrell's response to that of Victorian Premier Denis Napthine, who is also a vet, and is planning a crackdown on after four-year-old Ayen Chol was mauled to death by a neighbour's pit bull.

"Let's get rid of American pit bulls. They're just bred for attacking and they can do enormous damage," he said.

Unfortunately, in NSW the Australian Veterinary Association view holds sway, that it is the "deed not the breed" and that breed-specific legislation is illogical.

But there's plenty of evidence to dispute that view.

For instance, a paper in the Annals Of Surgery journal in 2011, found: "Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs".

A study in the Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery journal found more than half the serious dog bites treated over five years at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia were pit bulls.

Celebrity vet Dr Robert Zammit, of Vineyard Veterinary Hospital, near Windsor, admitted on ABC radio yesterday that: "Certain breeds are worse than others Certain breeds are very sharp and apt to attack."

He also said that any dog "in a bad situation, can attack," and that no child under 12 should be left alone with a dog.

Sensible advice, but sometimes children wander, and sometimes dogs escape. We need to minimise the risk.

So, if 1000 pit bulls have to die, that's a small price to pay to save one child.

edited to add the whole article.

EACH YEAR IN AMERICA:

-410,000 people are killed directly from smoking cigarettes

-35,000 are killed from second hand smoke

-26,000 are killed by illegal guns

-25,000 are killed by drunk drivers

-3,500 are killed in backyard swimming pools

-17 are killed by dogs

-3 of those are killed by Pit Bulls, so Pit Bulls must be banned.

Given the overwhelming abuse Pit Bulls endure, and the undesirable people who too often own them, it’s astonishing that number is so low.

PIT BULLS AREN’T DANGEROUS TO HUMANS.

OWNERS ARE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This might open a can of worms but just walked in the door to hear on the TV - should the Gov introduce vicious dog buy back like Howard did with the Gun.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/lets-destroy-these-deadly-animals-once-and-for-all/story-fni0cwl5-1226692411504

EVERY time a mere human is killed or mauled by a pit bull-type dog, all the professional apologists line up to declare: "It's not the breed, it's the deed".

It's the same mantra spewed by the gun lobby after every massacre in the US: "Guns don't kill people. People kill people".

Rubbish. The horrible death this week of two-year old Deeon Higgins in Deniliquin has to mark the end of the line for dangerous dog breeds as household "pets".

Deeon had just stepped outside his grandmother's back door to get an icecream from an outdoor freezer when his 24-year-old cousin's bull mastiff cross attacked him. For more than 15 minutes.

Deeon's frantic grandmother Joyce Higgins, and then his mother, Vicki Higgins, tried in vain to save him. But he died in Deniliquin hospital of "serious head and facial injuries".

You can only shudder.

Pit bull-type dogs are inherently dangerous.

They are responsible for a disproportionately large share of the most serious dog attacks, and yet politicians continue to bow to the dog lobby. Enough. A dangerous dog is a weapon which can be every bit as lethal as a gun.

It's time for a "dog buyback", similar to John Howard's gun buyback. There can be an amnesty of a few weeks before the owner of every pit bull, or similar vicious breed, is required to relinquish their dogs to the local council.

They can then choose a safer breed from the tens of thousands waiting for a new home in pounds and animal shelters. The owner can be recompensed by the taxpayer for the small costs incurred. The dangerous breed is then humanely put to sleep, while a dog on death row is saved.

A life for a life, you might call it.

Those owners who choose not to relinquish their dogs should be subject to draconian laws, including mandatory manslaughter if anyone is killed by their animal.

"Kingston", was a 57kg bull mastiff cross. We don't know what it was crossed with, but a bull mastiff is a big powerful breed considered akin to a pit pull because it is has been bred for the same aggressive traits and muscular, stocky build.

Pit bull is a term generally used for the American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier and Staffordshire bull terrier. Along with similar breeds, they pose a clear and present danger to humans.

For instance, in May, jogger Rob Nelson, 49, was savagely mauled by three American Staffordshire Terriers in Liverpool. When paramedics arrived, his heart was visible through his wounds, his abdomen was "hanging out", his bicep had been eaten and his armpit had been ripped out. He only survived because of the intervention of bystanders.

The dog's owner is due in court later this month, to face a charge of owning an attacking dog, which carries a paltry maximum fine of $5500.

In nearby East Hills last October, a 19-year-old man had his ear bitten off by two American Staffordshire terriers as he walked his dog down the street.

In 2011 District Court Judge Michael Elkaim described two pit bull-type dogs that killed four-year-old Tyra Kuehne as "trained killers". He awarded Tyra's family $120,000 in damages after they sued Warren Shire Council for negligence. S adly, the Court of Appeal overturned the decision.

In 2005, after three such attacks, then premier Bob Carr lashed pitbulls as "killing machines on a leash", but stopped short of banning them.

He declared certain pit bull-type breeds "restricted", which means they cannot be imported, or bred and should be desexed, muzzled in public, and live in a secure enclosure.

The idea was that they would die out and, hey presto, problem solved.

But, almost a decade later, dangerous breeds are still killing and maiming people.

Now Barry O'Farrell isn't even trying to sound tough, saying dog owners need to be more responsible. Sure, but plenty aren't.

Compare O'Farrell's response to that of Victorian Premier Denis Napthine, who is also a vet, and is planning a crackdown on after four-year-old Ayen Chol was mauled to death by a neighbour's pit bull.

"Let's get rid of American pit bulls. They're just bred for attacking and they can do enormous damage," he said.

Unfortunately, in NSW the Australian Veterinary Association view holds sway, that it is the "deed not the breed" and that breed-specific legislation is illogical.

But there's plenty of evidence to dispute that view.

For instance, a paper in the Annals Of Surgery journal in 2011, found: "Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs".

A study in the Plastic And Reconstructive Surgery journal found more than half the serious dog bites treated over five years at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia were pit bulls.

Celebrity vet Dr Robert Zammit, of Vineyard Veterinary Hospital, near Windsor, admitted on ABC radio yesterday that: "Certain breeds are worse than others Certain breeds are very sharp and apt to attack."

He also said that any dog "in a bad situation, can attack," and that no child under 12 should be left alone with a dog.

Sensible advice, but sometimes children wander, and sometimes dogs escape. We need to minimise the risk.

So, if 1000 pit bulls have to die, that's a small price to pay to save one child.

edited to add the whole article.

FOR OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS AMERICANS KNEW PIT BULLS FOR WHAT THEY DID BEST. BABYSITTING.

http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=676

RICH OR POOR, AMERICAN PARENTS KNEW EXACTLY WHAT PIT BULLS WERE FAMOUS FOR. BEING GREAT WITH KIDS.

http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=1103

THE CRUELEST TRICK EVER PLAYED ON A BREED OF DOG

http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=604http://

YOURE FACING A GERMAN SHEPHERD, A ROTTWEILER, A DOBERMAN PINSCHER, AND A PIT BULL

http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=853

THERE’S ONLY ONE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE 2 DOGS. THEIR OWNERS.

http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=837

Edited by Runamuk_AST
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...