MD law says pick between house or dog

[Dylan]

It's an owner problem, not a dog one. There are plenty of well raised pits that will never attack.

Anecdotally I've seen one bad bite in my years of working with dogs, and It was indeed a yellow lab. f**k tore a middle aged mans ass near off and gored his wrist. My current dog is considered a bully breed and wouldn't harm a fly. He runs around my little nephews and is loose in parks all the time.

[Fishstyx]

The one that got me was properly raised family dog. Owners did great with her. In fact, I frequently played with the dog, rolled around on the ground with me and was friendly. Just snapped one day. They were panicked that my folks were gonna ask them to put her down. In hindsight, they probably should have as the 6 month old would have never been attacked.

[Dylan]

[Dylan]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2 ... oblem.html

[Fishstyx]

Still doesn't change the fatal attacks statistics. Are you touting the numbers? Because I guarantee that there are more labs in the US compared to pits.

They're agressive, were bred for that trait. I know there is a huge fight against this label but doesn't change they were and still are a popular fighting dog.

[The Comrade]

no they're raised to be aggressive by people who try and live vicariously through the toughness of their dog. they're used in fighting because they're very muscular and have large jaws. no other reason.

[Dylan]

[Fishstyx]

Well, we can agree to disagree as the history of this breed is someone in debate by their advocates and their opponents. And the article you listed is a puff piece on pitts. Their ancestory does come from fighting dogs and common sense would indicate that when breeding them, they'd look for aggressive traits. Just like they do with any other breed traits. And I've interacted with perfectly friendly pitts as well.

I do agree that the owner can ruin the dog. But in reality, that further supports the anti-pitt ordinances.

My main decision for putting my rental's lease was liability. The other being my neighbor, who I was good friends with, had small kids. Its simple risk management.

[eynon81]

[Mo~]

Excuse me, but I'm not really getting where this law is such a BFD except in that it targets a specific breed. I just checked my local newspaper and 12 of the 16 ads for rentals specifically say "NO PETS". 10 say "NO PETS/NO SMOKING". The other 4 ads don't give jack for info except the BR/BB situation. Most landlords don't allow pets because of the responsibility to them, whether in property damage or civil fines. They don't usually differentiate between a Pit Bull and a Pomeranian though. If pets are allowed, you will usually pay out the butt.

I was a landlord for awhile and freaking hated it. It was bad enough having to deal with the kids of shit parents. Shit pet owners and their "fluffy little balls of shit", I would never put up with. And the worst are roaming cats. I might have bent the "NO PETS" rule for someone with a really decent dog that I already knew would not be a problem...maybe. But, I would never allow a cat in.