Nancy Perdue Banning high risk dogs like Pitbull Terriers of course will lead to more dog bites, but less dog maulings. Most dogs do just bite, and not rip you to complete shreads like Pitbulls. Stupid Pit Nutters use all kinds of unintelligent excuses to continue to keep their precious Shitbulls!

Valerie Webber

6 hrs

“If you look at the Ontario numbers, you look at the Winnipeg numbers, they haven’t gone down in bite numbers,” he said. “Yes, they’ve got less bites by pit bulls, but their bite numbers are generally up.”

YES, THIS IS THE PURPOSE OF BSL, TO CURTAIL PIT BULL ATTACKS, NOT DOG BITES.

http://calgaryherald.com/…/breed-ban-would-lead-to-more-dog…

Breed ban would lead to more dog bites, says former bylaw boss

The man who crafted Calgary's bylaw for responsible pet ownership is weighing on a public debate about whether the city needs new restrictions to curb dog biting,...

CALGARYHERALD.COM

Like · Share

• 4 people like this.
• 

  Nancy Perdue Banning high risk dogs like Pitbull Terriers of course will lead to more dog bites, but less dog maulings. Most dogs do just bite, and not rip you to complete shreads like Pitbulls. Stupid Pit Nutters use all kinds of unintelligent excuses to continue to keep their precious Shitbulls!

  5 hrs · Edited · Like · 4
• 

  Joy BruceWould love the Calgary Herald to publish this: by Alexandra Semyonova......The heritability of abnormal aggression in certain breeds of dogs can no longer be denied. 
  We have, first of all, to do with physical conformation. The bodies of these dogs have been selected to be able to execute the killing bite better and more efficiently than other breeds of dogs. These dogs all share a certain physical conformation to the task of killing: the exaggerated jaw muscles, heavy necks and shoulder areas, and body mass that makes defence against an attack much more difficult, often impossible. It remains a fact that if you want a dog who can kill, these are the breeds of choice because they are physically better fit for it than other breeds – no less than the border collie is best fit for herding sheep because of the particular way his body has been shaped by hundreds of years of selective breeding.But breeders also selected for behavioral conformation. For hundreds of years, they have selected these dogs on the basis of performance for their specific task. To perform well, the pit-fighters had to attack without provocation or warning in a sudden outburst of unbridled aggression and to continue attacking regardless of the responses of the other. The bull- and bear-baiters had to be willing to attack in the absence of species-specific signs that normally provoke aggression, responding to the mere presence of another species, again not stopping in the response to any external stimuli. The dogs used to guard extended farmlands in such countries as France (the Bordeaux) or South Africa (the Boerbull), the slave-chasers (Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasiliero), they were all selected for killing performance at the sight of strangers of another species – thus again a willingness to attack in the absence of the normal signals that provoke aggression in a dog and the unwillingness to stop (sometimes even after the other is long dead).As they selected for performance, breeders could not know exactly which physical changes they were selecting for. That has changed now. Research now shows that, through selection for aggressive performance, we have in fact been consistently selecting for very specific abnormalities in the brain. These abnormalities appear in many breeds of dog as an accident or anomaly, which breeders then attempt to breed out of the dogs. In the case of the aggressive breeds, the opposite was true. Rather than excluding abnormally aggressive dogs from their breeding stock, breeders focused on creating lineages in which all the dogs would carry these genes (i.e., dogs which would reliably exhibit the desired impulsive aggressive behavior). They succeeded. Now that we know exactly which brain abnormalities breeders have been selecting, the assertion that this aggression is not heritable is no longer tenable. It is also not tenable to assert that not all the dogs of these breeds will carry these genes. The lack may occur as an accident where selection has failed, just as the golden retriever may
  have
  the genes due to failing selection against the genes. But the failure to have the gene is, in the aggressive breeds, just that – a failure. It is therefore misleading to assert that the aggressive breeds will only have the selected genes as a matter of accident, or that most of them will befit to interact safely with other animals and humans. We have selected intensively for these genes in these breeds, for hundreds of years, and the accident that may incidentally occur is
  lack 
  of the selected genes.The bodies and brains of all these breeds have, just like the pointer, the husky, the greyhound and the border collie, been selected so that certain postures and behaviors just simply feelgood. These dogs will seek opportunities to execute the behaviors they’ve been bred for, just simply because the behavior feels good. The behaviors are internally motivated and rewarded, thus the behaviors are not subject to extinction. Learning and socialization do not play a role and will not prevent the behaviors from appearing. The owner of such a dog might hope that learning and socialization could help the behavior to appear only at appropriate moments, however this is unrealistic. It’s also not realistic to pretend that implusive aggression is not pathological. The environments (the fighting pit, the baited bull, the escaping slave) for which these behaviors were selected as an adaptive response are so extreme that in fact there is no appropriate context for these behaviors in normal life.Functional in the pit or facing the bear, these behaviors must, in all other contexts, be called pathological. In addition, the fact we now know that selection took place for 
  impulsive
  aggressivity (Peremans 2002) means, by definition, that the behavior will always emerge suddenly and unpredictably, thus always escaping secure control by the owner of such a dog.Speculating in favor of the aggressive breeds, let’s suppose that human artificial selection will fail as infrequently in the aggressive breeds as it does in the golden retriever (according to Van Den Berg 2006, in approximately one out of a hundred dogs). Such a similarity is unlikely in reality, since aggression in the GR is probably due to an inadvertent founder effect, whereas the aggressive breeds have been carefully selected for these genes for hundreds of years. But all the same, let’s suppose this favorable scenario for the sake of argument, that selection will fail in one out of a hundred dogs of the aggressive breeds. The figures that emerge remain appalling. They translate into owner of a golden retreiver taking a 
  1% chance of endangering others by choosing this dog, while owners of the aggressive bred dogs are taking (in this favorable scenario) a 1% chance of 
  not 
  endangering others in their surroundings by choosing such a dog.Given the scientific proof that is now emerging about the source of the behavior in these dogs,it is time to stop letting the owners of these dogs deny that they could have known the dog would execute a serious to deadly attack. It is time to hold them – and the breeders of such dogs – fully responsible and liable for the risk they choose to take with others’ lives.Can you breed it out of them?The fiction that, for example, the American Staffordshire terrier is a different dog from the pitbull, just because the breeding has (also fictionally, by the way) been going on separately for about 30 years is just that: a fiction.

  5 hrs · Like · 2
• 

  Nancy Perdue So true every word. That's what knoloedgible owners of blood sport breeds do is deny that aggressive behaivor isn't inheritable in their breed of dog. The dogs them selves have been proving this by attacking even though they've spent their life as a beloved pet.