Do you think we should have a law banning owning a Pit Bull dog?

No,but we should have a law banning criminals from having a dog at all!!!All pitt bulls are not vicious

king Toot has no clue what he is talking about...actually they just released a study saying that the dog breed responsible for the most bites are German Shepherds and Rottweilers...not pit bulls. Also, if they ban pitbulls....you don't think all those irresponsible owners are just going to give up fighting dogs, and being irresponsible pet owners...they will just move onto another breed and make that breed the next "bad" breed. Eventually we would have to ban ALL dogs. ANY dog has the potential to be dangerous...it is how they are trained and brought up by the owner, has NOTHING to do with breed. I have seen vicious chihuahuas. I have worked with hundreds of pitbulls and have never met a mean one yet.

Vicious Killers? I assume you have never personally met a pib bull, but go by strories you read in the paper, and stories your friends and neighbors tell you. Well let me tell you that many of these stories are exagerated and untrue. Pit bulls are one of the sweetest dog breeds. While some of them may have dog aggression problems (which can be prevented by early training and socialization) they are not naturally aggressive to humans. In fact, they LOVE humans. The dogs who attack humans, no matter what breed it is, were either not trained well, abused, neglected, purposely trained to be aggressive, the owners could not handle their dog, the dog was allowed to run free, or their owners kept letting their aggressive tendancies slide, neglecting to seek behavioral help, until the dog attacks someone. And a lot of 'pit bull attacks' were not actually pit bulls. They are usually a dog whose breed is unknown, a dog who might look like a pit bull, or it was someone trying to get attention, so they SAID it was a pit bull. My friend has 5 dogs. One of them is a cocker/lab mix, and one of them is a pit bull. The cocker mix bit her neighbor, and she reported it as a pit bull attack, even though the pit bull was not at all involved. And this happens in a lot of cases. While i think spaying and neutering is absolutely necessary for people who are NOT Reputable breeders who actually know what they are doing. I don't think pit bulls should be banned. I am in love with the breed, and if you actually met a pit bull who is owned by a responsible person, you would be too. And if we start banning pit bulls, what about ALL the other dogs who bite people? I was attacked by a golden retriever who left scars on my face. I know quite a few people who have been bit by labs, golden retrievers, beagles, huskies... An aggressive dog has less to do with breed, and MORE to do with responsible ownership. Rather than banning certain breeds of dogs, we should require people to be licensed to own a dog or become a dog breeder. If we could some how do this, then we would be able to weed out the bad owners, and have less dog attacks.

Great idea

i completely agree with junkie up there!!!!! you go girl!

I think our nation has plenty of ( too many) laws. What we need are the laws enforced that are already on the books.

No. It is the people who own them that cause these problems because they don't take care and they abuse the dogs

this would change your mind. go here > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwI_qlq5vHsBanning Pit Bulls would be like banning cars because people get killed in car accidents! Who's responsible, the car or the driver/manufacturer? Any car can be deadly in the wrong hands or if built with defective parts. Same thing with dogs... Any dog. Pit Bulls are no more responsible for the way they are bred, raised and trained, than cars are responsible for the way they are designed, built and driven.Simply put, the best argument against breed bans is that they are costly and ineffective. Breed bans are often a knee-jerk reaction from politicians who want to say they are "doing something", after a highly publicized dog attack (of any breed). This is a useless exercise. Criminals habitually break laws, so having an "illegal breed" may indeed be attractive to them and might make them want to breed and sell more "illegal dogs". If their dog is confiscated and killed, they really don't care. They will just get another one because breed bans punish the dog, not the owner. On the other hand, law abiding responsible owners, whose dogs love people and have never done anything wrong, can see their homes invaded, often without a search warrant, and their beloved family members dragged away (in front of their children) to be killed. Not because the dogs are unstable or mean, but simply because of their breed. Meanwhile, the owners of truly dangerous dogs (of any breed) escape punishment because their breed is not targeted by legislation and therefor is believed "safe". A 10 Lbs Pomeranian killed a baby a few years ago... Obviously a problem with that particular dog, not the breed. "The baby's uncle left the infant and the dog on a bed while the uncle prepared her bottle in the kitchen. Upon his return, the dog was mauling the baby, who died shortly afterwards. ("Baby Girl Killed by Family Dog," Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9, 2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5.)"Because of a serious lack of regulation in dog breeding, too many dogs inherit defective genes and are sold to irresponsible owners. A breed ban will not resolve the problem. This nonsense will continue with the next macho breed and will become an endless race between breed specific legislators and unscrupulous breeders. A Pit Bull breeder was shut down last year because Pit Bulls were banned in Topeka, Kansas. All his dogs were seized and destroyed, just for being the wrong breed at the wrong place. The man now breeds and sells African Boerboels, a rare breed from the Mastiff family, completely unknown to legislators. Unlike American Pit Bull Terriers, however, who are known for their love of people, Boerboels are serious guard dogs bred specifically as protectors. An irresponsibly bred and owned Boerboel might actually be more dangerous than an irresponsibly bred and owned Pit Bull. This is what a breed ban has accomplished in Topeka... So in light of this, what kind of message are we telling abusive and irresponsible individuals when we make the dogs pay the price for their actions?

NO. That's like asking, 'Should we wipe out a perfectly decent dog breed because of what HUMANS did to them?' If the dogs are trained properly than there is no reason to ban them. Maggie, my friend's pit bull, is a nice little fireball of fun. She never bites because THAT'S HOW SHE WAS TRAINED. The dogs are just doing what they were trained to do their whole life. So whipe out a living creature because we told them to do the things they do? There are ways to prevent chaos involving these dogs other than the first word that pops into peoples heads. Train them properly. Fine people who choose to train these dogs in the wrong ways. People talk about these dogs like they're land minds or weapons instead of innocent LIVING THINGS. It's natural to do whatever the owner says. LOYALTY. Wipe out pit bulls because of the obvious fact, dogs are loyal? Train the dog right, everyone's happy. Much simpler and less cruel than banning. Pit bulls are playful, kind, and love people if trained properly. Even my PUG is more vicious than the PIT BULL next door. Just drop banning dogs for doing what they're told, okay?

no. why would u want to do that. cuz as soon as there gone another breed will take its place. and when that breeds gone then here comes another. and if u dont like dont go near them easy as that. banning only people like u.

www.myspace.com/itsyagyrl in the pics is a one of my pit bull.He is very kind, loving and smiles. I do believe that his agression has lots to do with testostarone so we got him altered.He has been a fun loving pup ever since, he's 1 adn 1/2 years old..It's just how you raise them.. mine was a lap dog until he was too big to sit in my lap.