Comments on: Not Content With Attacking Pit Bulls, Brian Rudman Now Turns on Americans

By: Brendan H.

Brendan H. — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 18:35:04 +0000

Good lord Lisbeth. There you go lumping us all into one category, treating us like you would if we were a breed of dog! I never swore at you. Not that I know of anyway. You may feel you have the right to your opinion and that’s fine. But others too have the rights to correct you where it is needed. Yes I agree calling each other names lowers the tone in a conversation and it doesn’t contribute at all – but please try and appreciate where Pit Bull and Staffordshire owners are coming from here. It is not you who has to face breed specific legislation and the ignorance and the bigotry that Pit Bull owners tolerate everyday. And if people who own Staffordshire or Pit Bulls are going to vent at this, who else to vent towards than those people who are already targeting their dogs? Maybe the insults weren’t entirely personal.

By: Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen

Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 18:07:38 +0000

First of all I have not called any of you by a swear word nor have I told any of you to have a diffrent opinion. I do not agree with any of you and I have a right to my opinion without being insulted for it.If this is the kind of arguement to present in a discussion how can you ask anyone to listen or indeed feel anything but contempt for what you have to say.Ihave the experiences which are sadly negative. I wish I could see it from a diffrent perspective but alas. If you read my statement from beginning to end you would not be so primitive and uncivilized in your statements. I hope you don´t think I will respond in any way to that kind of twaddel than I have here.

By: staffielover

staffielover — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 13:30:37 +0000

Let me just put you straight NOT all of us brits are closed minded about pitbull i personally think they’re great dogs they are 3rd in my top 20 so just like pitbulls and other breeds that have bad press don’t tart all us brits with the same brush because there are more of us who like pitbulls than the PRATS who don’t.

By: staffielover

staffielover — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 13:23:25 +0000

@Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen and Gary, OH shut up your both hypocrites and you have no clew what your talking about go share your made up knowledge somewhere else. D your homework and research the breed because human aggression was not tolerated in the pitbull breed and the dog aggression is easily gotten rid of with socialization from a young age. PRATS

By: staffielover

staffielover — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 13:15:37 +0000

@Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen, I’ve also seen first hand what pitbulls can do and also what staffies can do AND i’ve also seen first hand what a LABRADOR can do pretty much the same amount of damage BUT i still maintain my views which are they are the best family pets you can have in this order, staffie, pitbull, labrador. Labradors are the top biters and they can be just as savage as ANY dog, you should judge a dog by the individual that owns the dog because the dog is only as good as the owner NOT ‘only because i’ve seen what they can do first hand’ thats not a reason thats an excuse and a pathetic 1 at that why don’t you give Brian Crudman a call or send him an e-mail I’m sure you two will get on like a house on fire your just as ignorant and as blinkered as each other.

By: Brendan H.

Brendan H. — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 13:13:46 +0000

I never left the subject matter, Pit Bulls were always my focus. Whether you are supporting Pit Bull bans or opposed to them, you have to be able to put things into perspective by comparing them to other dogs otherwise you have no argument. It’s not good enough to say Pit Bulls should be banned because there were a lot of attacks this summer, when there were next to zero attacks 30 summers ago. The dogs didn’t change, the owners did, and the media did everything they could to encourage it. You can’t say Pit Bulls are unpredictable if you don’t compare them with other dogs. And when you do compare them with other breeds, Pit Bulls are a lot more predictable than your average dog. Please see ATTS for their statistics. We can’t say Pit Bulls should be banned because of their history as a fighting dog when other breeds were also bred for attacking animals, and in some cases humans. We can’t say Pit Bulls are only good for fighting when you know yourself people are starting to channel their energy into therapy work and search and rescue. They’re also being used as narcotics dogs and historically starred in children’s films. The traits that made them great at fighting, also make them very versatile dogs.

I didn’t directly call anybody ignorant for having a differing view. But it’s also quite apparent most vocal in their support for a Pit Bull ban are also those least qualified to do so. I’m assuming you like dogs since you’re here, but if people were calling for your breed to be banned without having known one before, I’m sure you would want them to have a good understading of what they’re talking about. Pit Bull – only one t.

By: Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen

Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:26:24 +0000

You are entitled to your opinion but to say that others are ignorant just because they do not agree with your point of view is not very productive. To start on other dogbreeds when the subject is pittbulls and fighting breeds then why not stick to the subject matter. yes I believe a ban of these breeds is the way forward simply based on the manny attacks by these breeds during this summer. It has been great being abel to read and discuss other points of view. I have not changed my mind about these dangerous dogs nor am I likely to in future. You are right in saying that all dogs regardless of breed need to be handled carefully and with respect. It is our duty as dog owners to see to it that our dogs do not harm anyone else animals or humans. I applaud the pitts used as search and rescue + handicap helpers. I applaud the owners of these breeds when they have the aquired respect and knowledge for their chosen breed. Dogfighting must be stopped because it is exeedingly cruel and should never have been allowed to take place anywhere for any reason. Owners of any breed who attacks other dogs should be prohibitted from keeping dogs of any breed and no dog should be let of leash unless it is in a fenced in padoc and no one else is present. In this way episodes like the ones I have witnessed first hand would not take place. It is a question of both knowledge respect and compassion.

By: Brendan H.

Brendan H. — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 14:14:36 +0000

Lisbeth:

When you said you had seen first hand the damage Pit Bulls can do, I guessed you were refering to an attack on another animal and not a human. What were the origional reasons for introducing a ban on Pit Bulls in Denmark? I understand they introduced the ban in the UK after someone was killed by one. In my country they introduced breed specific legislation after looking at what other governments were doing. We never had a fatal Pit Bull attack and many more less serious attacks were comming from other breeds. So did they ban the Briard in Denmark after a fatal attack a couple years ago?

And what level of defence does a Galgo have anyway? You mention the Pit Bull owner doesn’t seem to care what happens to other people’s dogs. Well I do. If that owner didn’t have a Pit Bull he may have another powerful breed that could have done the same thing. I once knew an old lady with a Pekingese that was killed by a farm dog. I have also seen a cat ripped open by another dog. It doesn’t mean farm dogs are dangerous, it just means the Pekingese had less ability to defend itself. Dogs do sometimes fight animals and other dogs.

You say your friend’s dog was on a leash and the Pit Bull wasn’t. It’s law to keep dogs on a leash where I live and it’s law to keep your dogs under control no matter where you live. Why should you expect responsible owners to pay with their dogs because one irresponsible owner happened to keep the same breed?

You may think Gary wrote a good post. But unless Gary’s internet has been disabled, he also can’t back up what he wrote. You wrote you have never met a real Pit Bull and then mention you have seen aggressive 10 week old Pit Bull puppies. Where were the puppies?

First you say Pit Bulls should be banned and then finnish by changing your tone by saying you have no problems with Pit Bulls in the right hands. I don’t get it. If you’re saying Pit Bulls should only be kept in the right hands, then we agree. All dogs should be kept in the right hands irregardless of breed. If you’re saying Pit Bulls should be banned? then bans are ineffective and rooted in ignorance.

By: Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen

Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:19:20 +0000

Since there is more than 300 diffrent breeds of dog to choose from the least likely choice for me would be that group of dogs the fighting terriertypes.However that being said any breed of dog has an element of unpredictabillity. However they are not all highly dangerous as is the case of the fighting breeds.Therefore all I ask is that people who choose to have these breeds respect what they at the other end of the leash and know how to handel these dogs. yes I have seen first hand what kind of damage a pittbull can inflict not through the media but in real life. A friend of mine has some galgoes she was walking in the park all of her galgoes were on leash when out of the blue this pittbull came flying into a direct attack. The result was devestating for the galgo in question half his ear was chewed of he had long gashes in his neck region he was stictched back together the owner of this pittbull was know for not caring what kind of harm his pitt did to others he has as yet not been perscecuted. not lack of evidence but time. This Galgo had his ear sewn back on and his neck stitched with more than 50 stitches the galgo is now fear agressive towards other dogs because of this attack. I have seen pittbull puppies aged 10-weeks so agressive that it leaves me in little doubt as to what traits these dogs have. It is sad that some individuals breed for agression but it is a fact therefore It is best all around that they banned and strict rules for keeping them in future is insisted upon. This is unfortunatly not media hype but facts sights like this is hard not to remember when you see these dogs. However to be fair If people know how to handel them and they respect what they are dealing with I have no objections to them having these breeds but the ones who are using them in the ways mentioned above should not be allowed to keep any dogs much less these dangerous breeds.

By: Brendan H.

Brendan H. — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:38:43 +0000

You say they’re not “Disney dogs with sad eyes” because of how you perceive them to be. History has a different view. Some of Hollywood’s earliest canine stars were Pit Bulls, and Buster Brown’s dog Tige is considered to be the first cartoon animal to be given a human’s voice. The most affectionate dogs I’ve known have been Pit Bulls, and many dogs from large to small have been bred for fighting other animals including Pit Bulls and the Jack Russell Terriers Gary mentions. Yet this is only brought up about Pit Bulls. Yes some Pit Bulls are used for therapy work, and they’re often used to demonstrate how prejudice and discrimination can be flawed. And what is the very good reason to ban Pit Bulls? To make sure nobody gets biten by a Pit Bull ever again? In New Zealand, 7 percent of people receiving medical treatment annually for dog bites are biten by Pit Bulls, with German Sheppards being responsible for slightly more attacks and Labradors slightly less. I bet if you search the archives of this here New Zealand newspaper you would find a whole bunch of Pit Bull attack stories and next to nothing on Labrador attacks. There’s a reason for that ban, and no doubt it has more to do with political point scoring than a geniune attempt at making the streets of Denmark safer. You say you have seen the damage Pit Bulls can do, and yet many MORE people have seen the damage other breeds can do, and yet their attacks are often trivialized in comparison. The part that I agree with you on, is these dogs aren’t for everyone. The last 20 years has proved that.