there are irish blue staffordshire bull terriors with pitbull blood even if parents are staffys will they be discrimated against?

or just blue staffs its ridiculous!

This topic is in the Animal Rights forum and the LIFT PIT BULL BAN IN UK petition forum.

OR IS THIS JUST A WAY TO X BREED STAFFIES WITH PITBULLS TO TRY AND FLOUT THE LAW I WONDER? ANYTHING DEEMED TO HAVE PITBULL IN IT SHOULD BE BANNED UNDER THE DANGEROUSDOG ACT.

see small minded people dont understand there a breed like different races of humans!!! it is not fair just to put them down under dangerous dogs act you should look at the owners ! PITBULL is several different breeds of dogs so why are not the rest discriminated against? because the people who force this ban dont know what there talking about and just go on the cases they read about in the papers!!!!!!

BANNING DANGEROUS DOGS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT U READ IN THE PAPERS PITBULLS HAVE BEEN BANNED SINCE 1991, THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER PUBLIC CASES OF DOG ATTACKS IN THE PAPER, BUT WE DONT SEE THEM ON THE LIST, THIS IS BECAUSE THE DOGS CLASSED AS DANGEROUS, CAN BE SPECIFICALLY TRAINED VERY EASILY TO FIGHT, BY BEING PUMPED FULL OF STEROIDS AND KEPT IN SOLITERY PENS ALL THERE LIVES, WHILST THE BITCHES ARE USED AS BREEDING MACHINES TO PRODUCE MORE FIGHTING DOGS, AND IN THE MEANTIME INNOCENT PETS GO MISSING TO BE USED AS TRAINING AIDS FOR THE FIGHTING DOGS.
IT IS VERY FAIR TO SAY IT IS THE OWNER THAT ARE TO BLAME IN EVERY WAY!!! but its not very like that a dangerous owners act will be put in place, so to protect these dogs and the ways in which they can be abused they need to be banned.
PEOPLE OWNING PITBULLS ARE CRUEL KNOWING THAT THESE DOGS HAVE BEEN BANNED SINCE 1991 AND THEY THEY ARE STILL BREEDING AND BUYING THEM AS PETS KNOWING FINE WELL THAT IF THEY ARE FOUND WITH THESE DOGS THEY COULD BE DESTROYED!!!!
THESE DOGS NEED TO BE BANNED TO PROTECT THEM FROM HUMANS NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!!!!

ANY DOG IS CAPABLE OF BEING TRAINED TO FIGHT IF PUMPED FULL OF STEROIDS AND KEPT IN SOLITARY PENS ETC. PITBULLS ARE USED AS PAT DOGS AND FOR CARE WORK IN SOME COUNTRIES. BANNING THE DOG IS NOT THE ANSWER, IT WILL JUST HAPPEN WITH ANOTHER BREED UNTIL SMALL MINDED BIGGOTS WITH NO IDEA ARE HAPPY.

i think its a disgrace the way the goverment is makin the dog the scape goat i was brought up with pitbull all my life not once did he ever harm anyone i think they are the most loylay dog u can find.i jus had a bluepit myself but had 2 sell her 7mnths she was gorgeous.its like saying if a human kills another human then put him down but they wont do that the goverment is crap thanks for reading

Here's a questionaire for you anti-pit bull people:

Breed Ban IQ Test

1. If you were the sheriff in your town and you learned that Toyotas were involved in more auto accidents than any other model, would you:
(a) ban Toyotas and confiscate the Toyota of anyone caught driving one
(b) arrest the drivers responsible for those accidents?

2. Which course of action in Question 1 do you think would:
(a) inconvenience the fewest number of people?
(b) be the more efficient use of taxpayer dollars?
(c) be more effective in preventing future accidents involving Toyotas?

3. If your answer to Question 1 was (a) -- ban Toyotas -- and the sheriff's department learned that, by a statistical quirk, drivers of confiscated Toyotas were now perpetrating further accidents by driving, say, Hondas, would you then ban Hondas? If not, why not?

4. If your answer to Question 3 was, "Ban Hondas, too, damnit, something HAS to be done," then would you propose a ban on ALL car models with names ending in "a," such as Kias and Mazdas, reasoning that all these brands are pretty much made for the same purpose? If not, why not? If so, how would you deal with car brands that end in the SOUND of "a," such as Chevrolet?

5. Are you beginning to understand that:
(a) because most of the tens of millions of pet dogs are NOT registered, "breed" cannot be defined in a meaningful way?
(b) that miscreants employ pit bulls, German shepherds, Rottweilers, Dobermans, Akitas, Great Danes -- that is, whichever dog is handy -- as personal tools of terrorism?
(c) that law enforcement authorities could waste inordinate amounts of time (and, therefore, taxpayer dollars) policing a breed ban, adding to their jobs a task perhaps even more meaningless than enforcing jaywalking laws?
(d) that the people most likely affected by a breed ban -- that is, those inconvenienced, harassed and likely to suffer damage -- are the 99.9% majority of utterly innocent dogs and people?
(e) most important, that breed bans do ESSENTIALLY NOTHING to address the real problem: Human scumbags who abuse animals?

Key: If your answer to any part of Question 5 is "no," I'm afraid you have flunked. Please go back and reconsider your responses.

Hint: The answer to the question, "What shall we do about the bank robber who got away on a bicycle?" is not: Ban bicycles. Real answer: If your dog hurts someone, you -- not the dog -- should be responsible. Anti-cruelty and anti-dog-fighting laws already exist. Tell your mayor, and city or county or provincial council to up the current penalties, and insist that judges enforce those penalties against lawbreakers.

-Test created by Paul Glassner, SF/SPCA

Addressing the issue of severe and fatal dog attacks as a breed specific problem is akin to treating the symptom and not the disease. Severe and fatal attacks will continue until we come to the realization that allowing a toddler to wander off to a chained dog is more of a critical factor in a fatal dog attack than which breed of dog is at the end of the chain.

pitbulls can be very dangerouse or very gentall and so can staffs i should know as ive had both the pit ball kia was very bouncey and could be boustruse and we later got rid of her and i still have my staff now huu is 5 years old and is a sofftiee but is alsoo VERYY protective x just take my advice have what you want its the way you bring them upp !!

r u a member of PETA ? coz their the only people dump enough to believe that banning pitbulls will stop dog fighting! if you had done ur research u would have found that dog fighting reports have double in the last year alone despite the ban! & why because like u saud their useing females to breed more fighting dogs, which is all underground, so they've kept their dogs when they were banned!
the only dogs affect by this ban is family pets that aren't used for fighting! so how is that fair?

For stacey hayes. irish staffs, american staffs as well as the american pit bull terrier are all considered "pitbulls" and are banned. according to DEFRA. also they say that american bulldog is a code for pitbull. which is stupid! no breed should be banned! its doggie racism! dog attacks have risen 25% despite the ban! coz the owners that have more onto other breeds. people should have to pass a test before theycan get a dog, this would prevent bad owners getting any dog!

as 4 people who say people who own pitbulls knowing they are banned are cruel. well here's a few words 4 u? MOST PEOPLE DONT KNOW WHAT A PITBULL LOOKS LIKE! their is also 20+ breeds that r incorrectly idefintied as pitbulls. if it looks like a pitbull and is acused for being a pitbull, THEN IT IS A PITBULL! that is how the law works. i heard stories of people who buy dogs, were told were staffie x and then be surpised when the police knock on the door saying that its a pit. were they cruel?