# American Pitt Bull



## cathspythons

Like the title says,did anyone own one.They are banned now,but they were lovely dogs in the right hands.My benson was a big softie with the kids.He new right from wrong,was a brill gaurd/house dog


----------



## quilson_mc_spike

i have never owned one but i thought you could have an american staffy hats a cross from pit X staffy...

i think they are lovley and ceser malan has a few in his pack (yeah seen the thread thats why hes on my mind lol)?..... X x X


----------



## LoveForLizards

Technically not banned 
They are birlliant dogs in the right hands indeed .


----------



## cathspythons

quilson_mc_spike said:


> i have never owned one but i thought you could have an american staffy hats a cross from pit X staffy...
> 
> i think they are lovley and ceser malan has a few in his pack (yeah seen the thread thats why hes on my mind lol)?..... X x X


I will try and get a few pics of my ben,i will have to look through the pics.I would like to start a thread about true pit bulls.They are amazing dogs.My baby had a good temperment and american papers.These dogs are amazing


----------



## Meko

LoveForLizards said:


> Technically not banned
> They are birlliant dogs in the right hands indeed .


 
why technically not banned? they were put on the DDA so long ago they'd have all died out. As they're on the DDA you can't breed or import them.


----------



## Zoee

Im sure my next door neighbours got a dog like this shes only allowed to keep it if her house is securly fenced ect and shes not allowed to take him off the lead on walks and has to have a muzzle on at all times when out. Not sure though.


----------



## LoveForLizards

Meko said:


> why technically not banned? they were put on the DDA so long ago they'd have all died out. As they're on the DDA you can't breed or import them.


Its legal to keep them. Its just that by the end of november, 1991 all APBT's were supposed to neutered, insured, registered, tattooed, muzzled when on walks, leashed when on walks, M.chipped etc so there shouldnt be any in england but they are still legal to keep as long as they are all of the above.


----------



## cathspythons

Its hard to keep them,its hard to define whats a pit and whats not.The law is a arse.Im glad to see that theres a lot off people on here that will keep an open mind..An american pit is not a monster ita a joy to own,,


----------



## SiUK

LoveForLizards said:


> Its legal to keep them. Its just that by the end of november, 1991 all APBT's were supposed to neutered, insured, registered, tattooed, muzzled when on walks, leashed when on walks, M.chipped etc so there shouldnt be any in england but they are still legal to keep as long as they are all of the above.


there wouldnt be any left now though, you cant just do all of what you said and keep them, its not that easy


----------



## cathspythons

SiUK said:


> there wouldnt be any left now though, you cant just do all of what you said and keep them, its not that easy


Its the owners that ruined it for pitt bulls.Macho men/women that gave them a bad rep..ive owned them 4 years


----------



## SiUK

yeah definately i fully agree, any dog can be aggressive if brought up wrong, I dont agree with the DDA It needs looking at.


----------



## Mischievous_Mark

We have one in the kennel hers a nutter then we have one whos a mastiff cross but according to the police hes got pitbull in him.

Hes a big softy and hes got half an ear missing lol


----------



## cathspythons

Most ppl say if its big chunky bull looking its pit/trouble.lol...


----------



## Mischievous_Mark

cathspythons said:


> Most ppl say if its big chunky bull looking its pit/trouble.lol...


Yea the police have a"cop out" description of a pit because they basically describe every large block headed dog.


----------



## ami_j

its cos pitbull is more a type of dog than a breed...the american staffordshire was a breed made to standard from pitbulls,,,any dog fitting a loose set of criteria are deemed a "pit" its very stupid legislation seen alot of dogs die with no need i reckon


----------



## Meko

Mischievous_Mark said:


> Yea the police have a"cop out" description of a pit because they basically describe every large block headed dog.


 
when i got Rio 6 years ago there was a dog in the kennels there with a big block head.. absolutely no idea what it was but it was 1 evil looking thing.
Was the build of a staffy with the head of a mastiff, or a tractor.


----------



## ipsilon

I used to work with a woman who owned a pitbull and unfortunately it was everything that gives pitbulls a bad name. She'd rescued it when it was fairly young but it had been taught to attack other dogs and people and she was desperately trying to rehabilitate it last time I heard. She only ever walked it late at night or very early in the morning and at all other times it was secured in a locked run in her back garden. Not ideal, perhaps but you can't fault her dedication to trying to put the dog right after some idiot turned it into an aggressive, dangerous animal. I live in hope that the rehab turned out successful in the end, it's just so damned sad that it ended up that way


----------



## gazz

Pitbull is differant than a American pit bull terrier.A pitbull is a cross breed of any (bull terrier type cross bull terrier type) of differant breeds.Or a (bull terrier type cross bulldog type).A American bull terrier is a pure breed of dog created in America with a long line of history.Pitbulls are all over the UK and are legal as long as they have NO! American pit bull terrier blood.American pitbull terrier are illegal in the UK and pitbulls are often mistaken for American pit bull terriers even by the police the RSPCA and the most of puplic.I'm sure there are SOME pure American pit bull terrier about the UK but they are not as common as most think.Most people ID pitbulls as American pit bull terriers when they are infact pitbull a crossbreed of a (bull terrier type cross bull terrier type) or a (bull terrier type cross bulldog type).Also don't confuse Amstaff's with American pit bull terrier.I've seen load of Amstaff's.And no there not the same breed the American pit bull terriers is a all though American breed.Amstaff wasn't developed ontill UK/Irish immigrats brought there Staffordshire bull terriers to America.The Staffordshire bull terrier was bred to the American pit bull terrier.Plus a bit of selective breeding = Amstaff.= TWO differant breeds.A pure American pit bull terrier are long,lean and leggy IMO having a more pack hound look about them.Staffordshire bull terrers are short,stocky bully power houses.And the American staffordshire bull terrier Tall,stocky bully power house.

American pit bull terrier.









Staffordshire bull terrier.









American staffordshire bull terrier.


----------



## marthaMoo

I get so bored of this..

And I really think people need to read up about APBT's, APBT types and the DDA before they open there mouths :bash:

APBT and APBT types are illegal in this country!
You are only permitted to own one if it is on the register.
Recently due to a high number of type dogs being siezed the register has been opened and certain dogs added. Thats after they have been siezed, they then spend time in an unknown boarding kennel (so you have no contact with your dog, this could be for many months)) then the dog has to be assessed and classed as safe, and only then when you turn up to court to defend your dog will you find out wether your dog can be placed on the register or distroyed (you wont get to say goodbye) 

In my opinion thats a hell of a risk to take with an animal you love.

And I have no idea why people continue to breed them and sell them knowing they could be sentencing that dog to death.

But as they say, its all about the money!


----------



## ownedbyroxy

marthaMoo said:


> And I have no idea why people continue to breed them and sell them knowing they could be sentencing that dog to death.
> 
> But as they say, its all about the money!



here here!


----------



## rakpeterson

This is becoming tedious so forgive my blunt-ness!




LoveForLizards said:


> Technically not banned.


WRONG - ''technically'' very much banned.



LoveForLizards said:


> Its legal to keep them. Its just that by the end of november, 1991 all APBT's were supposed to neutered, insured, registered, tattooed, muzzled when on walks, leashed when on walks, M.chipped etc so there shouldnt be any in england but they are still legal to keep as long as they are all of the above.


WRONG - It is not legal to keep them. All APBT in the country at the time had to be registered, if it wasnt registered in time then its illegal. As martha says, the register is somewhat ''open'' right now but you have to break the law initially before you can get to that stage, and you cant just turn up asking for your pit to be placed on the register, it will be siezed pending an investigation.



gazz said:


> Pitbull is differant than a American pit bull terrier.A pitbull is a cross breed of any (bull terrier type cross bull terrier type) of differant breeds.Or a (bull terrier type cross bulldog type).A American bull terrier is a pure breed of dog created in America with a long line of history.Pitbulls are all over the UK and are legal as long as they have NO! American pit bull terrier blood.American pitbull terrier are illegal in the UK and pitbulls are often mistaken for American pit bull terriers even by the police the RSPCA and the most of puplic.I'm sure there are SOME pure American pit bull terrier about the UK but they are not as common as most think.Most people ID pitbulls as American pit bull terriers when they are infact pitbull a crossbreed of a (bull terrier type cross bull terrier type) or a (bull terrier type cross bulldog type).Also don't confuse Amstaff's with American pit bull terrier.I've seen load of Amstaff's.And no there not the same breed the American pit bull terriers is a all though American breed.Amstaff wasn't developed ontill UK/Irish immigrats brought there Staffordshire bull terriers to America.The Staffordshire bull terrier was bred to the American pit bull terrier.Plus a bit of selective breeding = Amstaff.= TWO differant breeds.A pure American pit bull terrier are long,lean and leggy IMO having a more pack hound look about them.Staffordshire bull terrers are short,stocky bully power houses.And the American staffordshire bull terrier Tall,stocky bully power house.
> 
> American pit bull terrier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Staffordshire bull terrier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American staffordshire bull terrier.


SO WRONG, WRONG, WRONG - 

Crossing a bull breed with a terrier breed does not make a pitbull. There is only one pitbull, the APBT. No matter how you dress it up, or what you call it it is illegal.

The AM staff is illegal. As you say it is a pit x staff, and is of pit 'type' and hence is illegal.



marthaMoo said:


> I get so bored of this..
> 
> And I really think people need to read up about APBT's, APBT types and the DDA before they open there mouths :bash:
> 
> APBT and APBT types are illegal in this country!
> You are only permitted to own one if it is on the register.
> Recently due to a high number of type dogs being siezed the register has been opened and certain dogs added. Thats after they have been siezed, they then spend time in an unknown boarding kennel (so you have no contact with your dog, this could be for many months)) then the dog has to be assessed and classed as safe, and only then when you turn up to court to defend your dog will you find out wether your dog can be placed on the register or distroyed (you wont get to say goodbye)
> 
> In my opinion thats a hell of a risk to take with an animal you love.
> 
> And I have no idea why people continue to breed them and sell them knowing they could be sentencing that dog to death.
> 
> But as they say, its all about the money!


MarthaMoo is the only person talking sense here


----------



## Lover

Saying everyone is wrong isnt exactly going to go on well they could say you are totaly wrong.


----------



## rakpeterson

Lover said:


> Saying everyone is wrong isnt exactly going to go on well they could say you are totaly wrong.


You have confused me now.

What people have said is wrong, its not a matter of opinion.


----------



## KathyM

LoveForLizards said:


> Its legal to keep them. Its just that by the end of november, 1991 all APBT's were supposed to neutered, insured, registered, tattooed, muzzled when on walks, leashed when on walks, M.chipped etc so there shouldnt be any in england but they are still legal to keep as long as they are all of the above.


The register is closed, therefore it is illegal to own one that wasn't registered back in the 90s when it was open. Any dog that fits the "type" is classed as illegal, even dogs of proven legal parentage. Pedigree staffies have been seized, as have staffie and AB crosses and similar. Section 1 of the DDA is rubbish, but I've seen too many dog owners get dragged through the courts for having bullbreed crosses deemed legally of "type". 

Deed Not Breed is an excellent source of info for anyone concerned about the legality of their dogs. Deed Not Breed - Home


----------



## Lover

Tbh people say many things it all confuses me and then someone else thinks there right.. gets people confused on what to believe lol


----------



## SiUK

rakpeterson said:


> What people have said is wrong, its not a matter of opinion.


exactly what you have said is correct, like I said earlier its not as simple as getting an APBT registered then its legal.


----------



## gazz

rakpeterson said:


> Crossing a bull breed with a terrier breed does not make a pitbull.There is only one pitbull, the APBT. No matter how you dress it up, or what you call it it is illegal.


American Pit bull Terrier's are illegal but are a pure breed.Pitbull is thrown around much to often.Pitbull is just a generalisation for a type of dog that undersirable people that fight dogs deem fit and have traits sutible for fighting.Basically if it dosen't have any American pitbull terrier blood it can't be illegal so Pitbulls can be legal dogs to own.The American pit bull terrier is the real Mckoi and illegal.Pitbull is just a cheap copy and legal if it has no American pit bull terrier in it. 



rakpeterson said:


> The AM staff is illegal. As you say it is a pit x staff, and is of pit 'type' and hence is illegal.


When i say has American pit bull terrier blood i mean newly done.The Amstaff has American pit bull terrier blood but that was done along time ago.Amstaff are show dogs and they need show dog traits.(NUMBER 1) show no aggression to nither man or beast and they are still shown today there for there NOT a aggressive breed.Thay have been breed for the show ring for many,meny years and are just not view in the same light as the American pit bull terrier.I mean you deffo can't call a Amstaff no more dangerous than any other large show dog.They are bred to be show dogs,Family pets.Grated they can get mean in the wrong hands but that's nothing to do with the breed that's how they was rased.And this can happen to any other breed and does.


----------



## charliet

rakpeterson said:


> This is becoming tedious so forgive my blunt-ness!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG - ''technically'' very much banned.
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG - It is not legal to keep them. All APBT in the country at the time had to be registered, if it wasnt registered in time then its illegal. As martha says, the register is somewhat ''open'' right now but you have to break the law initially before you can get to that stage, and you cant just turn up asking for your pit to be placed on the register, it will be siezed pending an investigation.
> 
> 
> 
> SO WRONG, WRONG, WRONG -
> 
> Crossing a bull breed with a terrier breed does not make a pitbull. There is only one pitbull, the APBT. No matter how you dress it up, or what you call it it is illegal.
> 
> The AM staff is illegal. As you say it is a pit x staff, and is of pit 'type' and hence is illegal.


A breath of fresh air. Thank you.




gazz said:


> American Pit bull Terrier's are illegal but are a pure breed.Pitbull is thrown around much to often.Pitbull is just a generalisation for a type of dog that undersirable people that fight dogs deem fit and have traits sutible for fighting.Basically if it dosen't have any American pitbull terrier blood it can't be illegal so Pitbulls can be legal dogs to own.The American pit bull terrier is the real Mckoi and illegal.Pitbull is just a cheap copy and legal if it has no American pit bull terrier in it.




You are almost right. American Pit Bull Terriers are illegal and are a recognised breed. The confusion comes in when people talk of the "pit-bulldog", i.e. breeds bred to fight in the (dog)pit. This doesn't necessarily have to refer exclusively to the APBT, and the DDA states that it is the "pit bull type" dog, including, but not limited to the APBT breed. Technically this can include any dog that the police call a "pit bull type" (including Staffordshire bull terriers and American Bulldogs, for instance) and is up to a court to decide whether or not the animal is "pit bull type", with the onus upon the owner to prove the animal is not. 

Quoting the DDA ( taken from Defra, UK - Animal health and welfare - Animal Welfare - The Control of Dogs ):



> It is important to note that, in the UK, dangerous dogs are classified by “type”, not by breed label. This means that whether a dog is considered dangerous, and therefore prohibited, will depend on a judgment about its physical characteristics, and whether they match the description of a prohibited 'type'. This assessment of the physical characteristics is made by a court.


----------



## LoveForLizards

Last I heard from the DDA (whilst making a phone call about a Pit bull "type" dog I might add) was that it wasnt illegal to keep an APBT as long as they are insured, chipped, neutered etc....

And that APBT's can still be registered to date (as long as they can pass a tempermant test blah-de-blah)


----------



## Meko

they may still be able to be registered, but who'd want to hand their dog in to be tested and all that and then possibly have to have it put down.


----------



## LoveForLizards

God knows...............I know I wouldnt.


----------



## marthaMoo

LoveForLizards said:


> Last I heard from the DDA (whilst making a phone call about a Pit bull "type" dog I might add) was that it wasnt illegal to keep an APBT as long as they are insured, chipped, neutered etc....
> 
> And that APBT's can still be registered to date (as long as they can pass a tempermant test blah-de-blah)



You cant just go up to a policeman and ask if he can register your pet Pit for you :whistling2:

For a dog to be placed on the register you have to go through a lenghty process, one of which could mean your dog ending up in a kennel, not seeing you for months and then being distroyed by strangers.
And you will have to pay all court costs.

So no the register is not open for anyone wanting to place there dog on it. It is illegal to own an APBT or APBT type. And as far as I'm aware thats the way its staying and the register will not reopen for members of the public to freely register there dogs.


----------



## KathyM

Yes, to get a dog registered, you have to basically plead guilty to owning an illegal dog (even if it's parents are legal!), and get a criminal record. The onus of proof is reversed in Section 1 and an owner has to prove a dog is "innocent" rather than the courts prove the owner guilty. This makes for an expensive legal process for owners - even if an owner asks for the dog to be registered the courts can decide to destroy them, so once you're in it you're in it good or bad outcome. DNB have done a lot of great work with dogs seized in recent amnesties, covering legal fees in many cases.


----------



## ryanr1987

American staffordshire terrier is the show version of the APBT. the kennel club wouldn't allow the name pitbull to be showed so they changed the name to American staffordshire terrier. since then the breeds have headed into different directions.


----------



## ryanr1987

Who ever said am staff's are illegal doesn't know what they are talking about!


----------



## JulieNoob

ryanr1987 said:


> Who ever said am staff's are illegal doesn't know what they are talking about!



Its a fact - in the US a dog can be reg as an Am Staff with one organisation and APBT with another - the names can be used interchangably ....


----------



## eightsnake

As far as I am aware and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, both the American Pit Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Bull Terrier are not recognised as breeds in this country and so to that ends both are deemed 'pit bull type' and are as such not legal to own, import, show or breed.

I must admit that the so called 'pit bulls' seen around the streets of most major cities are technically mainly crossbreeds or mongrels if you want to call them that.
I would hazard a guess that most do not have any American Pit Bull Terrier blood in them at all and are descended from crossing Staffordshire Bulls with anything they fancy to make a large 'hard looking' dog.

As such I think the authorities are so off the mark in deeming them 'pit bull types' since they are blatently not, they would be far more effective if they treated every dog as an individual instead of tarring anything that resembles a bull breed with the same 'killer dog' brush.

Always Deed not Breed, should never have been looked at in any other way.

Banning certain breeds of dog (recognised abroad not here) such as Dogos Argentino etc is just plain silly, they should instead ban certain types of owner!

Then we may just get somewhere....

Lorraine


----------



## RedGex

eightsnake said:


> Always Deed not Breed, should never have been looked at in any other way.
> 
> Banning certain breeds of dog (recognised abroad not here) such as Dogos Argentino etc is just plain silly, they should instead ban certain types of owner!
> 
> Then we may just get somewhere....
> 
> Lorraine


Brilliant idea!


----------



## ryanr1987

Am staffs are not illegal..but they do not show in this country.

only 4 dogs are on the ban list. loads of people have amstaffs over here. the law could of change now but before they was not illegal


----------



## ami_j

ryanr1987 said:


> Am staffs are not illegal..but they do not show in this country.
> 
> only 4 digs are on the ban list.


yes one of these is pit bull "types"
the amstaff is a pitbull type


----------



## marthaMoo

ami_j is right AM Staffs are illegal in this country.
Anyone who knows there Bull Breeds will know that an AM Staffie is a APBT but the "Show" version of it.


----------



## gazz

marthaMoo said:


> ami_j is right AM Staffs are illegal in this country.
> Anyone who knows there Bull Breeds will know that an AM Staffie is a APBT but the "Show" version of it.


The AKC wouldn't accect pure APBT for the show ring.AKC didn't even give the APBT the light of day.Ontill the Staffordshire bull terrer was bred into them resulting in the Amstaff.So the Amstaff IS NOT the show verson of APBT.They are two breeds of dog.

Amstaff was created for the show ring from two breeds of dog that was created for dog fighting and baiting'etc.But the Amstaff it's self wasn't created for dog fighting or baiting'etc.It's purpose was show dog and pet'etc.

APBT was created in america for Dog fighting and baiting and hunting large game'etc.


----------



## sophs87

we had a red nosed pit called stash, BEST dog ever:flrt:. more well behaved than my shihtzu :lol2:

she was gorgeous, i know that they are illegal. but if it passes a load of temperement tests you get them back spayed/neurered and think they have to retake tests evey year or more. correct me if im wrong.
they are fab dogs but i am glad they are banned as wouldnt want all the little boys with small c:censor:ks trying to look massive with one down the park were my son plays and my dog walks!!!
what also annoys me is when the small child was killed by her uncles pit not so long ago, the police made a big thing going round liverpool and other areas,and killing everyones pits,few people got there babies back  which up till then were just left alone, known to be there but left, and now after there little killing spree are left alone again! this was to make an example, wich people now think more than ever they are horrid dogs, that kill children because some wanker raised his wrong, had one for the wrong reason (penis extention) and it ended up taking a childs life  im sure not so long ago aswell, 2 family dogs , was it a jack russel and rottie or two rotties killed a baby so y rnt they banned???? in my opinion any unstable dog is a dangerous dog!!!! from pit a pit to a poodle

im not sure how it would be worked so that only responisble people owned them as anyone can buy a license, not sure how it would work??


----------



## cubeykc

sophs87 said:


> we had a red nosed pit called stash, BEST dog ever:flrt:. more well behaved than my shihtzu :lol2:
> 
> she was gorgeous, i know that they are illegal. but if it passes a load of temperement tests you get them back spayed/neurered and think they have to retake tests evey year or more. correct me if im wrong.
> they are fab dogs but i am glad they are banned as wouldnt want all the little boys with small c:censor:ks trying to look massive with one down the park were my son plays and my dog walks!!!
> what also annoys me is when the small child was killed by her uncles pit not so long ago, the police made a big thing going round liverpool and other areas,and killing everyones pits,few people got there babies back  which up till then were just left alone, known to be there but left, and now after there little killing spree are left alone again! this was to make an example, wich people now think more than ever they are horrid dogs, that kill children because some wanker raised his wrong, had one for the wrong reason (penis extention) and it ended up taking a childs life  im sure not so long ago aswell, 2 family dogs , was it a jack russel and rottie or two rotties killed a baby so y rnt they banned???? in my opinion any unstable dog is a dangerous dog!!!! from pit a pit to a poodle
> 
> im not sure how it would be worked so that only responisble people owned them as anyone can buy a license, not sure how it would work??


 
it was a staffy x and a jack russel


----------



## gowing238

they are not technically banned. They are a licensed dog. If you can maintain the dogs are for breeding purposes and not for fighting most people can gain a license for keeping them. Its a bit like having a shotgun license. if your character is good you should have no problem. My father is a breeder of the dogs. He is so restricted whilst selling them but for the right owner thy are a qyuality dog. But i will add not really a family dog. Quite unpredictable and unstable.


----------



## gowing238

it was a jack russel and a staffie


----------



## ami_j

there was a girl killed by a pit bull type in liverpool on new years eve a few years ago


----------



## rakpeterson

ryanr1987 said:


> American staffordshire terrier is the show version of the APBT. the kennel club wouldn't allow the name pitbull to be showed so they changed the name to American staffordshire terrier. since then the breeds have headed into different directions.


Dont think this is 100% accurate. The AKC dont recognise the APBT, but the UKC was founded for the purpose of registering them and the ADBA allowed them also. Some people in america did begin to refer to them as ''staffordshires'' to avoid the reputation that was already building but the AM wasnt added until later just to give some seperation from the english staff. And in reality the two breeds have headed very much in the same direction....bigger is better. Originally, the Am Staff was just a normal APBT, then breeders started crossing to develop a dog with much bigger features, as a real pit is quite a small and slender dog, not what most people perceive them to be.



ryanr1987 said:


> Who ever said am staff's are illegal doesn't know what they are talking about!


Uummm, yeah......i do.



JulieNoob said:


> Its a fact - in the US a dog can be reg as an Am Staff with one organisation and APBT with another - the names can be used interchangably ....


This is correct, and supports my point above.



eightsnake said:


> As far as I am aware and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, both the American Pit Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Bull Terrier are not recognised as breeds in this country and so to that ends both are deemed 'pit bull type' and are as such not legal to own, import, show or breed.


This is correct.

quote=eightsnake;3701527] I must admit that the so called 'pit bulls' seen around the streets of most major cities are technically mainly crossbreeds or mongrels if you want to call them that.
I would hazard a guess that most do not have any American Pit Bull Terrier blood in them at all and are descended from crossing Staffordshire Bulls with anything they fancy to make a large 'hard looking' dog.

As such I think the authorities are so off the mark in deeming them 'pit bull types' since they are blatently not, they would be far more effective if they treated every dog as an individual instead of tarring anything that resembles a bull breed with the same 'killer dog' brush.[/QUOTE]

This too is correct. For some reason, with breeds like this, people always think bigger is better. Many people bred abominations, bred to be big and look mean, and called them pitbulls. A pit is a small, terrier looking dog in reality.




ryanr1987 said:


> Am staffs are not illegal..but they do not show in this country.
> 
> only 4 dogs are on the ban list. loads of people have amstaffs over here. the law could of change now but before they was not illegal


There are only 4 banned breeds on the list, but the Dangerous dogs act is alot more that naming 4 breeds of dog. Its all about ''type'' and the Am Staff, is of pitbull 'type'



gazz said:


> The AKC wouldn't accect pure APBT for the show ring.AKC didn't even give the APBT the light of day.Ontill the Staffordshire bull terrer was bred into them resulting in the Amstaff.So the Amstaff IS NOT the show verson of APBT.They are two breeds of dog.
> 
> Amstaff was created for the show ring from two breeds of dog that was created for dog fighting and baiting'etc.But the Amstaff it's self wasn't created for dog fighting or baiting'etc.It's purpose was show dog and pet'etc.
> 
> APBT was created in america for Dog fighting and baiting and hunting large game'etc.


You contradict yourself in this post by first stating that the Am Staff is not bred for show and then that it is.

Anyhow, my understanding of the Am Staff history is that basically owners of pitbulls began to use the name 'staffordshire bull terrier' to avoid the stigma already surrounding the pitbull. iirc they were being recognised as simply staffordshire bull terriers, but 'american' was tacked on to it to give some distance from the english staff. Somwhere along the way people began breedings in an attempt to produce big, muscular, block headed dogs which became a 'show' breed, hence why it is refered to as the 'show' pit. I accept that it may not have been directly bred for show, but thats what it became.



gowing238 said:


> they are not technically banned. They are a licensed dog. If you can maintain the dogs are for breeding purposes and not for fighting most people can gain a license for keeping them. Its a bit like having a shotgun license. if your character is good you should have no problem. My father is a breeder of the dogs. He is so restricted whilst selling them but for the right owner thy are a qyuality dog. But i will add not really a family dog. Quite unpredictable and unstable.



Im sorry but this is pure nonsense, as is much of this thread.

There is no such lisence.

It will most probably fall on deaf ears but lets attempt to clear this AM staff mess up.

Below there are two links to the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991, and the ammendment of 1997.

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (c. 65)
Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Act 1997 (c. 53)

It is a very confusing bit of legislation and vauge, which was probably intentional. If it is not read and understood fully it would be easy to find yourself on the wrong side of it. 

As it happens,the wording of the act could potentially make many 'legal' breeds illegal because of the use and definition of the word 'type'. I myself could well be at risk due to the poor and vague wording of this act, and is something that many dog owners discovered during the implementation of the act, 1991-1992, were many well behaved dogs, staffies and the like were seized and destroyed in full accordance with the law.

Below i have taken the most relavant bit of the act for the case of the AM Staff.

*1 Dogs bred for fighting*

(1) This section applies to—


(a) any dog of the type known as the pit bull terrier;​ (b) any dog of the type known as the Japanese tosa; and​ (c) any dog of any type designated for the purposes of this section by an order of the Secretary of State, being a type appearing to him to be bred for fighting or to have the characteristics of a type bred for that purpose.​ (2) No person shall—


(a) breed, or breed from, a dog to which this section applies;​ (b) sell or exchange such a dog or offer, advertise or expose such a dog for sale or exchange;​ (c) make or offer to make a gift of such a dog or advertise or expose such a dog as a gift;​ (d) allow such a dog of which he is the owner or of which he is for the time being in charge to be in a public place without being muzzled and kept on a lead; or​ (e) abandon such a dog of which he is the owner or, being the owner or for the time being in charge of such a dog, allow it to stray.​Firstly remember that if you owned a banned dog during the time the act was passed, you were able to keep it providing it was added to the Index of Exempt Dogs. This is basically a register kept by DEFRA.

In 1992 the list was closed and any dog that was not on it, thatfell under the DDA '91, was deemed illegal, seized and destroyed. It was not until 1997 that the register was ''re-opened'', as part of the ammendmant of 1997, which meant that dogs could be added to the list by court order.

What people fail to understand is that although it is possible to have a dog added to the register, this is not until after you have broken the law, been prosecuted etc. You then have to know the correct procedure to go through to initiate being considered for exemption. It is not something you will be routinely offered. Usually you'll just be handed a destruction order in the hope you unwittingly sign your dog over for destruction. This process takes many months if not years, the dog is housed at kennels undergoing temprement testing, and you usually arent allowed anywhere near.

Now going back to the Am Staff, firstly take note of 1(a) of the DDA above, highlighted in red. 

Most people here, and anyone who knows what an Am Staff is, agrees that it is the result of crossbreeds using ''pitbulls''. It is irrelavant how long ago these original crossings took place, it is pit bull 'type' as a result of the crossings.

If that still feels a little unsure for you, take a look at part (c), also in red.

any dog of any type designated for the purposes of this section by an order of the Secretary of State

The first part directly above basically gives them power over any dog, of any breed, of any type, that fits in with this section of the act, this section being Fighting Dogs. Basically any dog they deem to be a fighting dog.

being a type appearing to him to be bred for fighting or to have the characteristics of a type bred for that purpose.

Now the second part, possibly the vaguest part and the part that gives them power over any dog they dont like the look of. 

Take note of the use of words such as ''appearing'' and ''characteristics''. It doesnt say it has to be a fighting dog, only that it has to appear to be, or have the characteristics of that of a fighting dog.

So to summarise, the Am Staff is illegal as it is a recognised cross breed of the APBT, and if thats not enough, it can be taken on looks alone if the courts decide they want to, as not only is it of pitbull type, it is also of fighting dog 'type', wich is the subject of section 1 of the DDA 1991.


----------



## ern79

this could have been an interesting thread insted of the boring to-ing and fro-ing arguing over the DDA that its become, id love to see pictures of peoples dogs from a happier time when our dogs werent persecuted.


----------



## Sziren

I agree with most that has been said, and that the act itself is so vague any dog could be deemed as 'pit' type depending on the judge at that particular time (if/when someone would be in court to try and defend their dog's right to live).

I have always had boxers, and mastiffs of some sort, so know what it is like to walk down the street for ol' grannies to cross the road with their tiny dogs because in their mind - My dogs are big and 'evil' looking. I mean God forbid if mine answered back to her wee dog's yapping!.. That would mean mine are fighting dogs, and she could take me to court and have my dogs 'destroyed'...

Who ever wrote the DDA had no idea what dog's are like, and how they work... It's the Deed, Not the Breed.... 

Plus most dog attacks are not by large or 'pit' type dogs.... it's by were yappy things, ankle biters as we call them back home.. I believe it's the daschound that has the most powerful bite of all dogs...?

Just wish there was more common sense in the law, and that people intentially training a dog to be vicious, either towards animals or humans or even both, were given harder punishments... Not just a ticking off and a fine.. The poor dog that was just doing what he/she was told ends up paying with his/her life!!

Oh and by the way, Dogo de Argentino's rock!!


----------



## ryanr1987

People have been trying the challenge the DDA for years to get breeds unbanned but they have none of it. they see it as it's the dogs fault but it's the silly little chavs thbat see the dogs as "hard"


----------



## charliet

rakpeterson said:


> Dont think this is 100% accurate. The AKC dont recognise the APBT, but the UKC was founded for the purpose of registering them and the ADBA allowed them also. Some people in america did begin to refer to them as ''staffordshires'' to avoid the reputation that was already building but the AM wasnt added until later just to give some seperation from the english staff. And in reality the two breeds have headed very much in the same direction....bigger is better. Originally, the Am Staff was just a normal APBT, then breeders started crossing to develop a dog with much bigger features, as a real pit is quite a small and slender dog, not what most people perceive them to be.
> 
> 
> 
> Uummm, yeah......i do.
> 
> 
> 
> This is correct, and supports my point above.
> 
> 
> 
> This is correct.
> 
> quote=eightsnake;3701527] I must admit that the so called 'pit bulls' seen around the streets of most major cities are technically mainly crossbreeds or mongrels if you want to call them that.
> I would hazard a guess that most do not have any American Pit Bull Terrier blood in them at all and are descended from crossing Staffordshire Bulls with anything they fancy to make a large 'hard looking' dog.
> 
> As such I think the authorities are so off the mark in deeming them 'pit bull types' since they are blatently not, they would be far more effective if they treated every dog as an individual instead of tarring anything that resembles a bull breed with the same 'killer dog' brush.


This too is correct. For some reason, with breeds like this, people always think bigger is better. Many people bred abominations, bred to be big and look mean, and called them pitbulls. A pit is a small, terrier looking dog in reality.




There are only 4 banned breeds on the list, but the Dangerous dogs act is alot more that naming 4 breeds of dog. Its all about ''type'' and the Am Staff, is of pitbull 'type'



You contradict yourself in this post by first stating that the Am Staff is not bred for show and then that it is.

Anyhow, my understanding of the Am Staff history is that basically owners of pitbulls began to use the name 'staffordshire bull terrier' to avoid the stigma already surrounding the pitbull. iirc they were being recognised as simply staffordshire bull terriers, but 'american' was tacked on to it to give some distance from the english staff. Somwhere along the way people began breedings in an attempt to produce big, muscular, block headed dogs which became a 'show' breed, hence why it is refered to as the 'show' pit. I accept that it may not have been directly bred for show, but thats what it became.




Im sorry but this is pure nonsense, as is much of this thread.

There is no such lisence.

It will most probably fall on deaf ears but lets attempt to clear this AM staff mess up.

Below there are two links to the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991, and the ammendment of 1997.

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (c. 65)
Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Act 1997 (c. 53)

It is a very confusing bit of legislation and vauge, which was probably intentional. If it is not read and understood fully it would be easy to find yourself on the wrong side of it. 

As it happens,the wording of the act could potentially make many 'legal' breeds illegal because of the use and definition of the word 'type'. I myself could well be at risk due to the poor and vague wording of this act, and is something that many dog owners discovered during the implementation of the act, 1991-1992, were many well behaved dogs, staffies and the like were seized and destroyed in full accordance with the law.

Below i have taken the most relavant bit of the act for the case of the AM Staff.

*1 Dogs bred for fighting*

(1) This section applies to—


(a) any dog of the type known as the pit bull terrier;​ (b) any dog of the type known as the Japanese tosa; and​ (c) any dog of any type designated for the purposes of this section by an order of the Secretary of State, being a type appearing to him to be bred for fighting or to have the characteristics of a type bred for that purpose.​ (2) No person shall—


(a) breed, or breed from, a dog to which this section applies;​ (b) sell or exchange such a dog or offer, advertise or expose such a dog for sale or exchange;​ (c) make or offer to make a gift of such a dog or advertise or expose such a dog as a gift;​ (d) allow such a dog of which he is the owner or of which he is for the time being in charge to be in a public place without being muzzled and kept on a lead; or​ (e) abandon such a dog of which he is the owner or, being the owner or for the time being in charge of such a dog, allow it to stray.​Firstly remember that if you owned a banned dog during the time the act was passed, you were able to keep it providing it was added to the Index of Exempt Dogs. This is basically a register kept by DEFRA.

In 1992 the list was closed and any dog that was not on it, thatfell under the DDA '91, was deemed illegal, seized and destroyed. It was not until 1997 that the register was ''re-opened'', as part of the ammendmant of 1997, which meant that dogs could be added to the list by court order.

What people fail to understand is that although it is possible to have a dog added to the register, this is not until after you have broken the law, been prosecuted etc. You then have to know the correct procedure to go through to initiate being considered for exemption. It is not something you will be routinely offered. Usually you'll just be handed a destruction order in the hope you unwittingly sign your dog over for destruction. This process takes many months if not years, the dog is housed at kennels undergoing temprement testing, and you usually arent allowed anywhere near.

Now going back to the Am Staff, firstly take note of 1(a) of the DDA above, highlighted in red. 

Most people here, and anyone who knows what an Am Staff is, agrees that it is the result of crossbreeds using ''pitbulls''. It is irrelavant how long ago these original crossings took place, it is pit bull 'type' as a result of the crossings.

If that still feels a little unsure for you, take a look at part (c), also in red.

any dog of any type designated for the purposes of this section by an order of the Secretary of State

The first part directly above basically gives them power over any dog, of any breed, of any type, that fits in with this section of the act, this section being Fighting Dogs. Basically any dog they deem to be a fighting dog.

being a type appearing to him to be bred for fighting or to have the characteristics of a type bred for that purpose.

Now the second part, possibly the vaguest part and the part that gives them power over any dog they dont like the look of. 

Take note of the use of words such as ''appearing'' and ''characteristics''. It doesnt say it has to be a fighting dog, only that it has to appear to be, or have the characteristics of that of a fighting dog.

So to summarise, the Am Staff is illegal as it is a recognised cross breed of the APBT, and if thats not enough, it can be taken on looks alone if the courts decide they want to, as not only is it of pitbull type, it is also of fighting dog 'type', wich is the subject of section 1 of the DDA 1991.
[/QUOTE]

:no1:


----------



## gazz

rakpeterson said:


> You contradict yourself in this post by first stating that the Am Staff is not bred for show and then that it is.


I said the American staffordshire bull terrier IS NOT the show verson of the American pit bull terrer.Where have i said the American staffordshire bull terrier was created for the show ring then said it is't ?? .I said the American staffordshire bull terrier originated from two fighting/baiting breeds but the American staffordshire bull terrier it's self was not breed for these purposes as the show ring was there destiny.The American pit bull terrier and the American staffordshire bull terrier are TWO breeds of dogs.American pit bull terrier has NO! Staffordshire bull terrier blood.The American staffordshire bull terrier DOES.



gazz said:


> The AKC wouldn't accect pure APBT for the show ring.AKC didn't even give the APBT the light of day.Ontill the Staffordshire bull terrer was bred into them resulting in the Amstaff.So the Amstaff IS NOT the show verson of APBT.They are two breeds of dog.


----------



## adamdutton

gazz;3708263American pit bull terrier has NO! Staffordshire bull terrier blood.The American staffordshire bull terrier DOES.
[/quote said:


> sorry but this is wrong, the simple fact is that all pit bulls and apbt and staffordshire bull terrier came from the old bull and terrier, they are all technically the same breed if pure its just non are pure they are all crosses its just some crossed them with mastiffs and some with terrier type dogs thats why they are so different.


----------



## adamdutton

American Pit Bull Terrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Staffordshire Bull Terrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

here we are have a look at these links


----------



## adamdutton

thats another reason the dda is totally flawed as there is no real way of identifying it as it is not a pure breed


----------



## adamdutton

have a look at these picture some are apbt and some are staffordshire bull terriers 



































































can you tell them apart enough to say some should be pts (according to law) and some shouldnt


----------



## adamdutton

and here is one of my dogs


























a fully registerd kennel club staffordshire bull terrier


----------



## marthaMoo

:lol2:

And I think this is the main problem, too many different looking dogs (which may of been one thing but are now too diluted which makes it hard to tell them apart) and too many different people with different thoughts. 

Apparently my two dogs are pure Staffies, although I know differently.


----------



## gazz

adamdutton said:


> sorry but this is wrong, the simple fact is that all pit bulls and apbt and staffordshire bull terrier came from the old bull and terrier, they are all technically the same breed if pure its just non are pure they are all crosses its just some crossed them with mastiffs and some with terrier type dogs thats why they are so different.


I know that they share ancestory ofcourse they do coz the british amoung other emigrated to America they ofcourse took there own dogs.But regardless of the ancestory a dog breed created in America is American and that the APBT AND the Amstaff (They evoled differantly Amstaff ancestor is't just the APBT).The really early settlers and so forth from Euorope took there dogs to America including breeds such as mastiff's,terriers,bulldogs'etc.Meny years after the first settlers in America the Staffordshire bull terriers was being deveoped in the UK using bulldogs and terriers that had long been in the UK.In America the APBT roots was already well set by using breeds of bulldog and terrier that was created in America.Though the ancestors of the American bulldogs and American terriers originated from European breeds of Bulldogs and terriers there all though America breeds-(made in America).Amstaff's didn't happen till SBT's was crossed to APBT's for the purpose of the showring as the AKC wouldn't take the pure APBT's.

The breed are just as differant in the same manner that English bull terrier and Staffordshire bull terrier both evoled from Bull & terriers that was created in th UK.But selective breeding turn them into differant breeds.Even though they share the same blood.


----------



## lefty

gazz said:


> Pitbull is differant than a American pit bull terrier.A pitbull is a cross breed of any (bull terrier type cross bull terrier type) of differant breeds.Or a (bull terrier type cross bulldog type).A American bull terrier is a pure breed of dog created in America with a long line of history.Pitbulls are all over the UK and are legal as long as they have NO! American pit bull terrier blood.American pitbull terrier are illegal in the UK and pitbulls are often mistaken for American pit bull terriers even by the police the RSPCA and the most of puplic.I'm sure there are SOME pure American pit bull terrier about the UK but they are not as common as most think.Most people ID pitbulls as American pit bull terriers when they are infact pitbull a crossbreed of a (bull terrier type cross bull terrier type) or a (bull terrier type cross bulldog type).Also don't confuse Amstaff's with American pit bull terrier.I've seen load of Amstaff's.And no there not the same breed the American pit bull terriers is a all though American breed.Amstaff wasn't developed ontill UK/Irish immigrats brought there Staffordshire bull terriers to America.The Staffordshire bull terrier was bred to the American pit bull terrier.Plus a bit of selective breeding = Amstaff.= TWO differant breeds.A pure American pit bull terrier are long,lean and leggy IMO having a more pack hound look about them.Staffordshire bull terrers are short,stocky bully power houses.And the American staffordshire bull terrier Tall,stocky bully power house.
> 
> American pit bull terrier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Staffordshire bull terrier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American staffordshire bull terrier.


 
is it just me or does that first pic look like the worst pit iv ever seen!!!???

my couson used to have pits back in the late 80's and 90's and all had thicker squarer heards than that. it looks like a smooth haired jack russel on stilts:lol2: very poor example

the staffy and the american staffy are gorgeous and fine examples of both but if you think that top pic is a pit bull then you need your eyes testing or your goggle isnt working very well:lol2:


----------



## Dizz

lefty said:


> is it just me or does that first pic look like the worst pit iv ever seen!!!???


 
Depends what you want out of your pit.

Being a type and not a breed, there is a lot of variety, and I'd dare say that dog is of a gamier type than a lot of the ridiculously bulked out dogs produced in the US in this day and age.


----------



## gazz

lefty said:


> is it just me or does that first pic look like the worst pit iv ever seen!!!???


Nop! thats the shape frame of a pure American pit bull terrier long legged/lean/NOT BULLY.What your cousion had was a pitbull(bullterrer type mix) or a Amstaff not a American pit bull terrier if they wasn't this shape.If there bully there Amstaff.Or bullterrier type mix breed-aka-Pitbull. 

A true American pit bull terrier can't really be confused with a UK staffie.The confusion people make is between the UKstaff ans the Amstaff.

American pit bull terriers.


----------



## adamdutton

i think lefty as so do most people think apbt and staffordshire bull terriers are supposed to be built like this

















when infact they should be built like this


----------



## crestiedaz

my mate got a red nose pitbul cross american bull dog and cops wont do note bout him cuz he soft with everyone


----------



## ryanr1987

That pic bove on the bottom pictuyre looks terrible blats been trained to fight or over worked!


----------



## moonstruck

could someone please tell me if an "american bull dog" is just a mis-used name for an "american pit bull" or an actual different breed?

the police don't actually seem to know what they're doing with regards to the ban.

my parents had to go through hell recently regarding Kai, he is absolutely hugely long legged, vaguely resembles a staffy on stilts, complete darling and scared of everything because of being badly treated as a little puppy, he used to hide and whimper whenever anyone new was in the house. They got him as a rescue dog from animals in need and he was meant to be small/medium, but has grown to about the size of a boxer, he's huge.

The neighbours censor:heads) who cause trouble for everyone decided it would be nice to report him to the police as a "pit bull".

There was a full investigation, the police who came to the house measured him in all dimensions and said he didn't fit the size boundaries to be "of pit type" but it wasn't up to the officers who came to look at him, someone higher up than them said it had to go to court, Kai had to go to an unknown kennel - this was around christmas. My mum was going to fight it because he isn't "of pit type" he doesn't have any kind of pit in him - according to animals in need - or he would have been PTS and not rehomed. 

The first judge she saw over it was very much an animal loving judge (luckily) he saw everything and said that Kai could remain in house arrest for the duration, he wouldn't be allowed out to for a walk (they have a good sized garden) but because of his problems as a puppy, and because my parents are really responsible owners (he has proper dog training courses once a week and has done since he was little) it would be in everyones best interests if he stayed under house arrest.

The police then complained about this, they actually took my mother back to court and faught the judges ruling and insisted he was taken into kennels for the whole duration. He was then taken into kennels (poor dog).

She found out that if she faught it, he'd stay in kennels the full duration, could be up to 6 months+ this was over christmas, and he's still only young, and had a lot of problems with trust (although he's never shown aggression to anyone). If she didn't fight it, he was guaranteed to go on to the Dangerous dogs list, would be tattooed, has to be muzzled whenever he leaves the house.... but he would be back to them in a couple of weeks.
It's kind of obvious what my parents chose considering what this dogs like, he couldn't be any sweeter a dog, but he is so scared of everything, my parents had done so much work with him, and he was getting a lot better.

The decided to have him put on the list to get him back to them quicker. The judge (same one as before) was pretty surprised when they went back to court my mother explained why (god she should be a lawyer, she could persuade anyone of anything) he ruled that as soon as my parents had the insurance done he should be tattooed and returned tot hem as quickly as possibly. They got the insurance sorted rediculously fast, then had to wait almost 2 weeks because of delays getting a tattoo artist (you should see the state of the number, i could have done a better job... god knows who tatooed him!)

Since they got him back, he's worse than when he went into the kennels. He scared of thigns that never bothered him before (plastic bags, people picking up big boxes, the mop,_ terrified_ of other dogs) having to wear a muzzle outisde has made him worse, he hides behind my dad and cowers whenever another dog goes near him outside, wimpers, tries to scratch off his muzzle (he's cut all his nose), and he's scared of the dark again, somethign he'd gotten over. His dog trainer was totally shocked at how far backwards he'd gone in the few weeks he was in the kennels. And whenever my parents tried to get him into the car for the first few weeks, he totally refused (moving a dog that big into a car when they're refusing is _not _easy).


So now he can't be off muzzle of lead when outside, my sister isn't allowed to walk him on her own, my parents have to pay the insurance every year, and the porr dog who already had probems has gone really far backwards with his progress. They couldn't have left him in kennels and faught it, god i hate to think what Kai would have been like if they had. He was terrified after a couple of weeks.

If it had just been left alone he'd be the same as he was before, very likely even better as he was improving so much.
If the police hadn't insisted he was taken into kennels it wouldn't have been anywere near this bad.

The irony is, they live in kensington, liverpool - you see kids walking pit bull type dogs _constantly _around their area, to see one without scars is very rare. And the police have managed to put a non pit bull type onto the list sucessfully. 

Well three cheers to them then...


----------



## jcd

I randomly found this thread and i have a pit mix in which the features of my dog resemble alot of the brown dog in that 1st picture in which many feel it is a bad breeding job. Now i know my dog has some pit in him but as stated about certain pits that look like that pic and like mine looks, there is a houndy look to them that throws even the most pitbull experts off the track because they don't have as much a "muscle bound bully appearence" that so many have come to use as a standard to comparison. I have several friends that owns"pitbulls" and they all look different than the other but they look much more pitty or am staff than mine does but when seen in real life vs. pics they all say my Bello is definately pit and maybe hound or gsd or does he just look hound as said in this thread i found.

My vet has no doubts he is a pitbull of some bloodline. His body is so simlilar and head/ears for that matter to that brown version of pit that it makes me believe he is for sure what ever that one is. But pit breeders and people who have a picture of what one is supposed to look like discount my dog as"NO PIT OR R.R. OR HOUND WITH A POSSIBLITY OF PIT SOMEHWERE IN THERE." i KNOW HE IS PART PIT OR MAYBE MORE. The guy i took him from said he owned pits and they would kill this one (who he said was a stray that wandered in his yard). I told my vet the story when i took him there ( he was 14lbs underweight when i took him) and he said i got news for you, he is a pit! I was shocked and was nervous at that point because of what i always had heard but he said give him a chance and that they are great dogs and whether he is part or whole pit or no pit for that matter...i love him and i am addicted to his personality and looks!!

i will try to post a pic of him so you all can decide and give me your opion. one thing to keep in mind is his ears and multiple ear positions will make him look like several different types of dogs in every different position but his body is sleek and beautiful always!!

This is the day we took him at an estimated 3 months old and an underweight 16 lbs.









Here he is at about 60 lbs 1 year ago









Here he is at 2.5 yrs. old and this pic is recent. He is 68lbs here.


----------



## temerist

feel sorry for the OP all they asked was if anyone owned one prior to the ban. my wife had an American Pit Bull Terrier called Angel, she was lovely. She bought her over here with her when she moved back here from working in the states, she was a rescue. Angel came to the UK in 1989 and sadly died in 1994. She was one of the nicest dogs ive known


----------



## Pimperella

LoveForLizards said:


> Its legal to keep them. Its just that by the end of november, *1991* all APBT's were supposed to neutered, insured, registered, tattooed, muzzled when on walks, leashed when on walks, M.chipped etc so there shouldnt be any in england but they are still legal to keep as long as they are all of the above.


 

Why? Do you know anyone that has a APB That is 19 years plus???

So yes, Should be all dead by now which was the point in them all being neutered.


----------



## temerist

yes pimps, we had that with angel. Jan had to get a certificate of exemption. Angel was already spayed when she came to the uk, but she had to be muzzled at all times when out and couldnt be handled walked by anyone under the age of 16 or 18 cant remember and even an adult walking her had to always be with the certificate holder. when i get home ill scan the certificate and put a copy of it up


----------



## girlsnotgray

jcd said:


> I randomly found this thread and i have a pit mix in which the features of my dog resemble alot of the brown dog in that 1st picture in which many feel it is a bad breeding job. Now i know my dog has some pit in him but as stated about certain pits that look like that pic and like mine looks, there is a houndy look to them that throws even the most pitbull experts off the track because they don't have as much a "muscle bound bully appearence" that so many have come to use as a standard to comparison. I have several friends that owns"pitbulls" and they all look different than the other but they look much more pitty or am staff than mine does but when seen in real life vs. pics they all say my Bello is definately pit and maybe hound or gsd or does he just look hound as said in this thread i found.
> 
> My vet has no doubts he is a pitbull of some bloodline. His body is so simlilar and head/ears for that matter to that brown version of pit that it makes me believe he is for sure what ever that one is. But pit breeders and people who have a picture of what one is supposed to look like discount my dog as"NO PIT OR R.R. OR HOUND WITH A POSSIBLITY OF PIT SOMEHWERE IN THERE." i KNOW HE IS PART PIT OR MAYBE MORE. The guy i took him from said he owned pits and they would kill this one (who he said was a stray that wandered in his yard). I told my vet the story when i took him there ( he was 14lbs underweight when i took him) and he said i got news for you, he is a pit! I was shocked and was nervous at that point because of what i always had heard but he said give him a chance and that they are great dogs and whether he is part or whole pit or no pit for that matter...i love him and i am addicted to his personality and looks!!
> 
> i will try to post a pic of him so you all can decide and give me your opion. one thing to keep in mind is his ears and multiple ear positions will make him look like several different types of dogs in every different position but his body is sleek and beautiful always!!
> 
> This is the day we took him at an estimated 3 months old and an underweight 16 lbs.
> image
> 
> Here he is at about 60 lbs 1 year ago
> image
> 
> Here he is at 2.5 yrs. old and this pic is recent. He is 68lbs here.
> image


He doesnt look like hes got a lot of pit in him tbh, although has a slight "pitty" face, doesnt have anywhere near the muscle structure of APBT's, they are generally much more athletic build. Does look like he has quite a bit of hound in him but its hard to say with the backyard pit mixes, they are heinz 57's when it comes to genetics! If you look at my two older boys you get a good idea of what their build should be:whistling2:


----------



## girlsnotgray

*OP*

Our family had quite a few pits before they were banned - i rmember always having them about when I was younger. They are beautifull animals, lovley temperments and very obedient, I would trust a well trained pit over most breeds as they are extremly loyal loving dogs, the sooner we get rid of this crazy ban the better!


----------



## fenwoman

Zoee said:


> Im sure my next door neighbours got a dog like this shes only allowed to keep it if her house is securly fenced ect and shes not allowed to take him off the lead on walks and has to have a muzzle on at all times when out. Not sure though.


 You are wrong. Pitbulls and pitbull types are banned. When the law first came out 20 years ago, it was law then that they had to be muzzled, insured, neutered, and were not allowed to be sold on or given away.So if everyone had abided by the law, the breed would have died out. There are now no laws to state the terms by which a pitbull can be kept because they cannot be kept. They are illegal full stop.



LoveForLizards said:


> Its legal to keep them. Its just that by the end of november, 1991 all APBT's were supposed to neutered, insured, registered, tattooed, muzzled when on walks, leashed when on walks, M.chipped etc so there shouldnt be any in england but they are still legal to keep as long as they are all of the above.


 I do wish people would stop saying they are allowed to be kept. The law is that they are a banned breed and under no circumstances, can one be owned legally. There are no privisions for this. The things you keep referring to is the law which came out 20 years ago. All pitbulls at the time of that law being brought out, had to be neutered, insured, muzzled etc in order for the breed to die out naturally. Since the government assumed that people would indeed neuter their dogs, they never thought that the breed would still be around 20 years on. It is illegal to own a pitbull in this country (and several others). There are no legal terms whereupon owning one was legal. Simple as. You keep stating that they can be kept legally and people keep telling you that they can't and you seem unable to understand this, or ignore it.
Personally I'm glad they were banned. I can't see why anyone would want to own a dog which evolved for it's savagery towards other dogs. Just as the herding instinct in collies, the retrieving instinct in labradors, and the ratting instincts of Jack Russells are there and cannot be bred out, so it is with the aggressive instincts of this vile breed which makes it want to attack and kill other dogs and possible small enough humans too. Anyone who tries to tell me that they are cute little doggies really, and as nuice natured as a spaniel is deluding themselves. The world will be a happier place without them :bash: I hate the bleddy things and question what sort of person would want to own one.


----------



## fenwoman

ryanr1987 said:


> That pic bove on the bottom pictuyre looks terrible blats been trained to fight or over worked!


 They shovel steroids into the poor beggars as it not only bulks muscle but causes aggression.


----------



## girlsnotgray

fenwoman said:


> Personally I'm glad they were banned. I can't see why anyone would want to own a dog which evolved for it's savagery towards other dogs. Just as the herding instinct in collies, the retrieving instinct in labradors, and the ratting instincts of Jack Russells are there and cannot be bred out, so it is with the aggressive instincts of this vile breed which makes it want to attack and kill other dogs and possible small enough humans too. Anyone who tries to tell me that they are cute little doggies really, and as nuice natured as a spaniel is deluding themselves. The world will be a happier place without them :bash: I hate the bleddy things and question what sort of person would want to own one.


*DEEP BREATH* okay im going to try my best NOT to rise to this small minded view ( No offence intended as you know LOADS on other subjects and have been helpfull when iv asked for advice) but PLEASE can people give these dogs a chance? They arent the cold minded killers you all think, not one of the [email protected] we have ever owned (prior to ban) ever bit anyone, or even showed a single bit of agression towards anything or anyone. Its how you raise them, they are not bad dogs its bad people that own them who use them instead of knives and guns and fight them for their own entertainment. Look at CM's dogs, he rehabilitates loads of pits and Daddy is one of the best behaved dogs iv ever seen!!


----------



## girlsnotgray

fenwoman said:


> They shovel steroids into the poor beggars as it not only bulks muscle but causes aggression.


 
This is true, they also make them run on treadmills for hours, starve them for a couple of days before fights and all manners of horrid things. Its no wonder dogs treated like this are agressive but not all APBT's are.


----------



## fenwoman

girlsnotgray said:


> *DEEP BREATH* okay im going to try my best NOT to rise to this small minded view ( No offence intended as you know LOADS on other subjects and have been helpfull when iv asked for advice) but PLEASE can people give these dogs a chance? They arent the cold minded killers you all think, not one of the [email protected] we have ever owned (prior to ban) ever bit anyone, or even showed a single bit of agression towards anything or anyone. Its how you raise them, they are not bad dogs its bad people that own them who use them instead of knives and guns and fight them for their own entertainment. Look at CM's dogs, he rehabilitates loads of pits and Daddy is one of the best behaved dogs iv ever seen!!


 The problem is that the aggression is there. It's in the breed. It's what they were bred for. I lived in Canada where some people I knew had pits. Some of them also had them as family dogs and I'm afraid just about every one had caused a problem during it's life. One killed neighbourhood cats, another had got out of the yard and attacked a neighbours old dog as it lay on it's porch, one had to be put down as it growled at the teenaged son it grew up with. And these were normal families who were responsible dog owners. Add to this the number of dog on dog attacks over there and in the states, by p itbulls and the number of dog on human attacks and while I acknowledge that not every one of them is bad, a large enough percentage is and that makes them a problem. Telling me that they are all really nice dogs, and that only bad owners make a pitbull aggressive, is like me saying that all jack russells are gentle little things which never yap and would't harm one hair on a rodent's head. Sure the odd one might be like that, but in the main, terriers are feisty little yappers with a high prey drive aimed at small rodents etc.


----------



## Pimperella

girlsnotgray said:


> Our family had quite a few pits before they were banned - i rmember always having them about when I was younger. They are beautifull animals, lovley temperments and very obedient, I would trust a well trained pit over most breeds as they are extremly loyal loving dogs, the sooner we get rid of this crazy ban the better!





girlsnotgray said:


> *DEEP BREATH* okay im going to try my best NOT to rise to this small minded view ( No offence intended as you know LOADS on other subjects and have been helpfull when iv asked for advice) but PLEASE can people give these dogs a chance? They arent the cold minded killers you all think, not one of the [email protected] we have ever owned (prior to ban) ever bit anyone, or even showed a single bit of agression towards anything or anyone. Its how you raise them, they are not bad dogs its bad people that own them who use them instead of knives and guns and fight them for their own entertainment. Look at CM's dogs, he rehabilitates loads of pits and Daddy is one of the best behaved dogs iv ever seen!!


 

Sorry? Now your saying you don't have them??? You said last week that you have 2 guarding your horse yard. So which is the lie? 

Have you or haven't you?


----------



## ownedbyroxy

fenwoman said:


> They shovel steroids into the poor beggars as it not only bulks muscle but causes aggression.



i have just spent about 5 minutes mesmerised by your signature! 
Brilliant!!


----------



## girlsnotgray

Pimperella said:


> Sorry? Now your saying you don't have them??? You said last week that you have 2 guarding your horse yard. So which is the lie?
> 
> Have you or haven't you?


Where did I say I dont? Yes I have 2 dogs that appear to look a lot like APBT's, but considering they are irish poundies there is no way to be sure either way. After all the s:censor:t before im not prepared to comment, you can see the photos of my dogs and decide for yourself


----------



## temerist

girlsnotgray said:


> Where did I say I dont? Yes I have 2 dogs that appear to look a lot like APBT's, but considering they are irish poundies there is no way to be sure either way. After all the s:censor:t before im not prepared to comment, you can see the photos of my dogs and decide for yourself


the 3rd dog in your album are you sure thats your dog?


----------



## girlsnotgray

temerist said:


> the 3rd dog in your album are you sure thats your dog?


?? Bizarre question, and yes thats Gunner our 2 year old


----------



## bulldog2010

Its true anything of pitbull type is banned and you cant go get a liscence for owning one their is a few dogs in the country that are aloud i know of a few and they are all netured and have tattoos on the inside of their legs and are tested for temprment and the comment about steroids is true some people do use them but the thing about pitbulls is that its in their genes to be dog aggresive they was bred to be that way and any that was not dog aggressive they would put to sleep ,,,Adam has some of the best dogs ive seen for staffords and i mean amazing condition and look great


----------



## jcd

girlsnotgray said:


> He doesnt look like hes got a lot of pit in him tbh, although has a slight "pitty" face, doesnt have anywhere near the muscle structure of APBT's, they are generally much more athletic build. Does look like he has quite a bit of hound in him but its hard to say with the backyard pit mixes, they are heinz 57's when it comes to genetics! If you look at my two older boys you get a good idea of what their build should be:whistling2:


Thanks for the response. I again say he is multi mixed which is why his muscle is not defined as a pure pit. I do see alot of pit mixes that look similar to mine in body shape and the smaller head but still looks some pitty and some houndy but the color may be different. Bello is 90% sable coloring.

Again pics don't make my point very well. If you seen him walk and move and act you would see the little details that are pit-unmistakeable so i guess i can't expect anymore from anyone since they are just pics. But like i said certain pics it unmistakeable and in other poses or ear positions he is like a different dog. He is Amazing!!

Thanks again!

Here is a couple more of Bello form this Christmas


----------



## temerist

pit mix or not hes a gorgeous dog, almost looks like her has boerboel in him


----------



## LisaLQ

I was going to say mastiff, boxer or rottie in there somewhere, but I'm just guessing.


----------



## jcd

temerist said:


> pit mix or not hes a gorgeous dog, almost looks like her has boerboel in him


Thanks for the compliment. He is way to small for boerboel but i do love boerboels!!


----------



## jcd

LisaLQ said:


> I was going to say mastiff, boxer or rottie in there somewhere, but I'm just guessing.


Wow, does he look that big to you guys?? He is only 68 lbs. and 23" tall. Like i said pics are decieving i guess but thanks!!!


----------



## LisaLQ

He could be crossed with something smaller


----------



## temerist

well if you love boerboels










just to show her off :lol2:


----------



## jcd

LisaLQ said:


> He could be crossed with something smaller


Well he is probably atleast 3 dogs or more. My vets best guess was pit/gsd/hound dog. Noone until today said boerboel or rottie. This proves my point how hard it it to pinpoint this dogs breed mix. He is so handsome and so masculine in appearance yet he is the biggest lapdog i have ever had! I go to our local petsmart for socialization and treats of course and the trainer up there immediately picked him out as a pit mix as did my vet so i don't know i guess. I have to take all the guesses into consideration but i am sure he has either amstaff or apbt or one of the MANY different clasess that make up what we call "Pitbull". I trust my vet since he also owns 2 pits, 1 rottie and a golden retriever so he sees in real time probably what all of you unfortuately can't. I understand though because alot of pics like i said aren't defining.


----------



## jcd

temerist said:


> well if you love boerboels
> 
> image
> 
> just to show her off :lol2:


 I would show that dog off to!! AWESOME!!!!!!!


----------



## temerist

have 3 pups left from a litter, this girl was always my favourite so im keeping her, got a gorgeous chunky fawn girl and a red brindle boy aswell


----------



## jcd

temerist said:


> have 3 pups left from a litter, this girl was always my favourite so im keeping her, got a gorgeous chunky fawn girl and a red brindle boy aswell


If i weren't across the pond......HMMMMMMMM!! I would love one!!


----------



## Pimperella

That'll be posts edited on this thread
http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/other-pets-exotics/450103-dangerous-dogs-article-sun-2.html

but thankfully some haven't edited what you said after you changed it. Some kept the oringinal up.



girlsnotgray said:


> _firstly id like to point out that the dog raj has in the photo is NOT a APBT, not even a cross by the looks of it, looks NOTHING like what a pit should look like.
> 
> I know from personal experience that people do breed and keep these dogs for pets only. Our dogs are pets/guards (they are personal protection trained) and are excellent family dogs. Its idiots like you with attitudes that they can brand all dogs with the same stick just because they are a certain breed, the fact that you go on to say you support breed specific legislation is hilarious. pot kettle?? This is why these dogs have such bad wrap - idiots with views like this believe this sh*! - have you even met a pitbull? Did it try to eat your children the moment it saw them? DIDNT THINK SO.:bash::bash::bash::bash:_


then this reply which by the Poster was edited but again was quoted and not edited.

Originally Posted by *ChokolateLatte*  
_Out of interest, why would people breed these dogs as family pets considering they are illegal? As you obviously know people who own/breed them, doesn't it seem odd when so many other varieties to chose from, they would do something illegal just for a family pet that could be seized and destroyed at any time? 

If you resort to illegal activities to produce the dog, it's hard to believe it's for a family pet. Breeding for temperament must also be a big problem when all underground and it's known many breed for fighting.

*Are you also saying you have pitbulls trained to protect you? Surely you don't need protection and how is the dog going to judge all people correctly? Sounds like a tragedy waiting to happen.*_




girlsnotgray said:


> I have dogs trained for PP as we have a large house with grounds and stables, with horse thefts being what they are i dont want my 10-15k eventers going missing! They are trained to know the diffrence between when they are on duty. . ie when we arent at home or when they are down the yard and im out riding and when people are obviously in our home at our invitation. In 10 years and a few dogs we have never had a problem, probarly due to the fact the guy who we use as trainer is an ex policedog trainer.
> 
> I know poeple who have owner pits before the ban came in, and they were family pets then. personally i think they are beautifull easily trained loyal dogs (we had numerous as guards when growing up) and its easy to see why people would want them as a pet. No diffrent to having any other bull breed as a pet, or rottie gsd for that matter, its just sadly there were a handfull of attacks in the early 90's which the media blew out of proportion and now pits are seen as killers which is FAR from the truth. Look at america, pits dont top the list of dog bite or attacks over there yet they are very popular dogs, and mainly as family pets as thankfully there isnt anywhere near the prejudice towards them as in the UK


----------



## SiUK

fenwoman said:


> You are wrong. Pitbulls and pitbull types are banned. When the law first came out 20 years ago, it was law then that they had to be muzzled, insured, neutered, and were not allowed to be sold on or given away.So if everyone had abided by the law, the breed would have died out. There are now no laws to state the terms by which a pitbull can be kept because they cannot be kept. They are illegal full stop.
> 
> 
> 
> I do wish people would stop saying they are allowed to be kept. The law is that they are a banned breed and under no circumstances, can one be owned legally. There are no privisions for this. The things you keep referring to is the law which came out 20 years ago. All pitbulls at the time of that law being brought out, had to be neutered, insured, muzzled etc in order for the breed to die out naturally. Since the government assumed that people would indeed neuter their dogs, they never thought that the breed would still be around 20 years on. It is illegal to own a pitbull in this country (and several others). There are no legal terms whereupon owning one was legal. Simple as. You keep stating that they can be kept legally and people keep telling you that they can't and you seem unable to understand this, or ignore it.
> Personally I'm glad they were banned. I can't see why anyone would want to own a dog which evolved for it's savagery towards other dogs. Just as the herding instinct in collies, the retrieving instinct in labradors, and the ratting instincts of Jack Russells are there and cannot be bred out, so it is with the aggressive instincts of this vile breed which makes it want to attack and kill other dogs and possible small enough humans too. Anyone who tries to tell me that they are cute little doggies really, and as nuice natured as a spaniel is deluding themselves. The world will be a happier place without them :bash: I hate the bleddy things and question what sort of person would want to own one.


You are very knowledgable about dogs, but you are very much mistaken on this point, if a dog is deemed by a court to be a banned type, there is a way you can legally go on to keep the dog, it definately isnt easy and its likely to cost you alot of money and there are no garantees that your dog would get put on the register, chances of it being PTS are still high, however in the last couple of years hundreds of dogs have been added to the register.


----------



## temerist

jcd said:


> If i weren't across the pond......HMMMMMMMM!! I would love one!!


never shipped to the states, but have to europe, south africa and china :whistling2: :lol2:

would do an excellent deal for our lines to go into american lol2


----------



## jcd

temerist said:


> never shipped to the states, but have to europe, south africa and china :whistling2: :lol2:
> 
> would do an excellent deal for our lines to go into american lol2


I would love to if at another time. I played with Mastiffs before but never a boerboel but i have seen many pics of them. They are really nice! What does a male cost shipped if you can say?


----------



## gazz

jcd said:


> Thanks for the response. I again say he is multi mixed which is why his muscle is not defined as a pure pit. I do see alot of pit mixes that look similar to mine in body shape and the smaller head but still looks some pitty and some houndy but the color may be different. Bello is 90% sable coloring.
> 
> Again pics don't make my point very well. If you seen him walk and move and act you would see the little details that are pit-unmistakeable so i guess i can't expect anymore from anyone since they are just pics. But like i said certain pics it unmistakeable and in other poses or ear positions he is like a different dog. He is Amazing!!
> 
> Thanks again!
> 
> Here is a couple more of Bello form this Christmas
> image
> 
> image
> 
> image


He's the spitting image of a Rhodesian ridgeback/APBT mix that use to live round my area.


----------



## girlsnotgray

Pimperella - whats your point? Trying to start another argument - im really not intrested so your wasting your time. Why do you care so much at what they may or may not be .:bash:


----------



## jcd

gazz said:


> He's the spitting image of a Rhodesian ridgeback/APBT mix that use to live round my area.


I have had several people say pit/R.R. also. He resembles both greatly but neither 100%. Even a R.R up close has similar but not exact features but until he is next to one which he has been you really see a close similarity between the 2 just like some pits. He looks like some but not like others. There are so many different shapes and sizes of "pits" that it impossible to pinpoint 1 that he looks like except full breed of course. That is why i say if aythbing he is taller like an amstaff is, and leaner in build also.


----------



## Pimperella

girlsnotgray said:


> Pimperella - whats your point? Trying to start another argument - im really not intrested so your wasting your time. Why do you care so much at what they may or may not be .:bash:


 
No, Just don't do Liars.

If your gonna lie. Just make sure your not doing it in print. Makes it so much easier to point it out.
And you odviously are interested or you wouldn't have commented or asked what my point was.


----------



## snakewhisperer

There still seems to be some confusion over the terms american pit bull/pit bull type/ pit and whatever else has come about recently. The term pit bull type as in the original legislation was used because noone was reallly sure how to positively identifiy an american pit bull terrier. it was also used to cover crosses and to put the onus squarely on the owner to prove what their dog was as government knew it would be very expensive and time consuming to enact the law as it should be in this country ie; innocent until proven guilty. ( I would have thought nowadays the human rights act could be utilised in some way to fight the unjust persecution of dog owners?!) The term pit or pit bull seems to have been re-created by those wanting to have a 'hard' dog or those wanting to make money selling staff crosses/ mongrels as "pure pit bull". If there are any pure APBTs' I doubt they would be found very often as to keep them concealed and bred only to other APBTs' would take considerable effort by a very few serious dog fighters/fanciers. As for someone saying that they are glad their banned as they were only bred to be savage and fight well thats plain daft. EBTs' SBTs' and several others were bred to fight and some probably still do but the vast majority are good family pets. Licensing for dog ownership should replace the d/d act. If a breed is percieved as a potential problem then a knowledge/ competence test could be introduced. (Should be the same for potential parents these days imo)


----------



## fenwoman

jcd said:


> Wow, does he look that big to you guys?? He is only 68 lbs. and 23" tall. Like i said pics are decieving i guess but thanks!!!


I'd have said boxer cross looking at his muzzle. He looks slightly undershot. I really wouldn't go advertising publically that you have a pitbull cross dog or you might find the police coming to remove him from you.


----------



## ami_j

fenwoman said:


> I'd have said boxer cross looking at his muzzle. He looks slightly undershot. I really wouldn't go advertising publically that you have a pitbull cross dog or you might find the police coming to remove him from you.



they are in the USA says it clearly under location


----------



## jcd

fenwoman said:


> I'd have said boxer cross looking at his muzzle. He looks slightly undershot. I really wouldn't go advertising publically that you have a pitbull cross dog or you might find the police coming to remove him from you.


As said above i am in the usa which except for some states there isn't a ban on pits although as most of you know,there is tons of bias toward anything that looks like one. even my next door nieghbors asked me if he was one when i got him and to not start a troublesome event i said no because they are like all the other ignorant non dog owners, they think they are bad with no exceptions. what is undershot mean?

Her are 2 more AGAIN different looks to him that may warrant even more guess than the previous pics


----------



## gazz

snakewhisperer said:


> If there are any pure APBTs' I doubt they would be found very often as to keep them concealed and bred only to other APBTs' would take considerable effort by a very few serious dog fighters/fanciers.


Agreed i doutb any tom,dick or harry out there really has a American pit bull terrier.The people don't sell there dogs to anyone and such dogs you wouldn't get for £250-£350.Real deals from these people would be in the £1000's.And they wouldn't walk them around the steets and you couldn't buy one knowing bob from the pub.They would want to know your a Pit fighter that you really know your stuff and know how to train'etc.You'll have to turn up at endless meetings.And it would take a hell of a lot of people to say your sound to even get to the first meeting.

All the so called "APBT's" onwed by chavs'etc are legal breed cross DIY Pit bull IMO.


----------



## ami_j

jcd said:


> As said above i am in the usa which except for some states there isn't a ban on pits although as most of you know,there is tons of bias toward anything that looks like one. even my next door nieghbors asked me if he was one when i got him and to not start a troublesome event i said no because they are like all the other ignorant non dog owners, they think they are bad with no exceptions. what is undershot mean?
> 
> Her are 2 more AGAIN different looks to him that may warrant even more guess than the previous pics
> image
> image


what a handsome boy:flrt:


----------



## Shell195

jcd said:


> As said above i am in the usa which except for some states there isn't a ban on pits although as most of you know,there is tons of bias toward anything that looks like one. even my next door nieghbors asked me if he was one when i got him and to not start a troublesome event i said no because they are like all the other ignorant non dog owners, they think they are bad with no exceptions. what is undershot mean?
> 
> Her are 2 more AGAIN different looks to him that may warrant even more guess than the previous pics
> image
> image


 
Hes gorgeous but why the pinch collar??


----------



## xvickyx

Shell195 said:


> Hes gorgeous but why the pinch collar??


He is gorgeous :2thumb: and I was thinking the same about the pinch collar. :whistling2:


----------



## girlsnotgray

Pimperella said:


> No, Just don't do Liars.
> 
> .


What so because iv decided not to comment on what my dogs are or are not that makes me a liar? I just cant be bothered with the hassle


----------



## snakewhisperer

girlsnotgray said:


> What so because iv decided not to comment on what my dogs are or are not that makes me a liar? I just cant be bothered with the hassle


 Lookout:gasp: the witchhunt is back on :whistling2:


----------



## Pimperella

snakewhisperer said:


> Lookout:gasp: the witchhunt is back on :whistling2:


 
How does it work if it's a Witch doing the hunting? :whistling2::lol2:


----------



## Nebbz

image

EW could be cute but is rewend by the HUDGE chest! 


image


EW EW EW HOW THE HELL DO YOU KISS A FACE LIKE THAT LMAO!!!!!
Sorry but ew....those dogs look extremely buffed up! and ugly 

when infact they should be built like this

image

wow the muscle tone on that boy!

image[/QUOTE]

wont see me dead near that........give me a staffy any day! :lol2: just goes to show how different the staffy really is!, such a shame its mixed in to all those pit bull types


----------



## jcd

ami_j said:


> what a handsome boy:flrt:


 Thank you!


----------



## jcd

Shell195 said:


> Hes gorgeous but why the pinch collar??


Well he pulls like a 100 lb dog and cuts off my hand circulation. He is much better now though. I use a harness much of the time now.


----------



## jcd

xvickyx said:


> He is gorgeous :2thumb: and I was thinking the same about the pinch collar. :whistling2:


Doesn't anyone use pinch collar? He doesn't really need it anymore but a year or so ago he was a major puller on a walk. I trained him better now so mostly i use a harness (which he hates by the way).

But thanks for compliments!!


----------



## Emmaj

jcd said:


> Doesn't anyone use pinch collar? He doesn't really need it anymore but a year or so ago he was a major puller on a walk. I trained him better now so mostly i use a harness (which he hates by the way).
> 
> But thanks for compliments!!


 
i love the jumping up pic of your dawgy he is a very handsome lad :flrt:


----------



## jcd

Emmaj said:


> i love the jumping up pic of your dawgy he is a very handsome lad :flrt:


 Why thank you!!!


----------



## Emmaj

jcd said:


> Why thank you!!!


your more than extremely welcome 

he is a lovely dog looks very happy too :2thumb:


----------



## snakewhisperer

Pimperella said:


> How does it work if it's a Witch doing the hunting? :whistling2::lol2:


 which witch? what witch is which??


----------



## diamondlil

Last year I had to have my 14 year old pit/lab/collie, Ellie pts after she had a series of strokes. My vet was happy to list her as a lab mix even though he knew her background, she was nervous of strange people but 100% dog-friendly, socialised and very well-behaved with all dogs, especially puppies, all her life. 
Her litter mate brother (who I was originally meant to have) went to the owner of the pit/lab father. At @ 6months we met briefly out on a walk and it wanted to kill every dog in sight. Which the owner thought was great. I saw it a few times but never again after a year old or so, I'd bet it ended up being destroyed or used for fighting.
My mix led a happy, active life as a family pet and if it was legal I'd have had a similar mix again. She was a joy to own and repaid every second of effort put into her socialisation and upbringing.
Here's Ellie, RIP


----------



## girlsnotgray

Pimperella said:


> How does it work if it's a Witch doing the hunting? :whistling2::lol2:


Insulting yourself? very impressive:no1:


----------



## diamondlil

As for happy memories of owning my pit mix, they are too many to list, but she did get a commendation from the police when she was @ 5. responding to cries of distress outside, I saw an elderly neighbour being mugged. Ellie chased, caught and held the mugger at bay, no teeth involved, she menaced him very convincingly until the police arrived. I just told him to stand still or I'd let her at him. She didn't usually like strangers in the home but was a total tart with the police while they were taking my statement and being told what a wonderful dog she was!


----------



## temerist

photos of angel taken before she came to the UK. dont need comments on the ears they were obviously done as a puppy, nothing to do with Jan she got Angel from a rescue


----------



## KathyM

You know what I think is a bit moronic, or perhaps these people want their dogs taking away and prodding and poking and destroyed...but why say "Oh yeah, I've got pitbulls, I've 'ad 'em trained to tear arms off n allsorts" like a prize chav, then post their poor dogs pictures on their profile on a public forum? Especially when one has bragged about how they knowingly break the law and don't care? How daft does someone have to be? Or perhaps their dog poo-ed in their slippers and they want someone to come and seize them. :bash: Witch hunt indeed. Or something that rhymes with it.

ETA: I despair of these threads where people get to brag about how they put everyone's dog ownership at risk. Why are we allowed to brag about breaking the law on this board?


----------



## girlsnotgray

KathyM said:


> You know what I think is a bit moronic, or perhaps these people want their dogs taking away and prodding and poking and destroyed...but why say "Oh yeah, I've got pitbulls, I've 'ad 'em trained to tear arms off n allsorts" like a prize chav, then post their poor dogs pictures on their profile on a public forum? Especially when one has bragged about how they knowingly break the law and don't care? How daft does someone have to be? Or perhaps their dog poo-ed in their slippers and they want someone to come and seize them. :bash: Witch hunt indeed. Or something that rhymes with it.
> 
> ETA: I despair of these threads where people get to brag about how they put everyone's dog ownership at risk. Why are we allowed to brag about breaking the law on this board?


Have you bothered to read the whole thread honey or just jumping to conclusions as per usual? All the dogs posted on this thread are either DEAD, or living in the USA?!! If your refering to myself if youd bothered to read the thread you'd have noticed I didnt comment on my dogs and made it clear that I wasnt willing to discuss it - as pointed out bu someone else on here the chances of full pits being around anymore is very slim.


----------



## temerist

Yes also hoping my post isnt ment. My wife had the "license" to keep Angel as she was in the UK before the ban came into place.


----------



## KathyM

girlsnotgray said:


> Have you bothered to read the whole thread honey or just jumping to conclusions as per usual? All the dogs posted on this thread are either DEAD, or living in the USA?!! If your refering to myself if youd bothered to read the thread you'd have noticed I didnt comment on my dogs and made it clear that I wasnt willing to discuss it - as pointed out bu someone else on here the chances of full pits being around anymore is very slim.


With all due respect I don't particularly like being called "honey" by strangers, especially those who don't mean it! You were posting about your dogs the other day, saying you didn't care about the law because if you're not asked you won't have to lie about your dogs being pit bulls. You talked about how you get around the law, and how you've trained your illegal dogs. You repeatedly said they're your current dogs, not dead like you're now claiming? Are you saying the dogs you claim to be pit bulls and illegal that you have posted on your own personal profile for anyone to see are dead? No, didn't think so.....honey. For someone who should be being very careful about what they say and where, you're doing a very good job of ensuring their deaths. 

No Temerist, I wasn't meaning you - just the person that perpetuates breed myths and flouts the law that the rest of us have to live by. You care about your dogs!


----------



## girlsnotgray

diamondlil said:


> My mix led a happy, active life as a family pet and if it was legal I'd have had a similar mix again. She was a joy to own and repaid every second of effort put into her socialisation and upbringing.
> Here's Ellie, RIP
> image
> image
> image


Beautifull dog, looks super happy, glad she got a nice home with yourself rather than where her brother ended up. Im glad there are people out there who agree its their upbrining and not the breed thats the problem.:2thumb:


----------



## temerist

KathyM said:


> No Temerist, I wasn't meaning you - just the person that perpetuates breed myths and flouts the law that the rest of us have to live by. You care about your dogs!


you are right about one thing though, he people who do knowingly own them illegally are putting the rest of us in danger with regards to dog ownership. although i think licences for all dog owners is a good idea in thery it is just abit of a nightmare lol


----------



## clairebear1984

we all know its not the breed the point is, there not allowed in the uk cant see y ppl dont understand that. they will never change the law if ppl are still bring in the breed. I have met a pitbul and she was sooooo friendly. i also worked in kennels and met labs that were aggresive so no its not the breed its the atual dog/bitch x


----------



## girlsnotgray

KathyM said:


> With all due respect I don't particularly like being called "honey" by strangers, especially those who don't mean it! You were posting about your dogs the other day, saying you didn't care about the law because if you're not asked you won't have to lie about your dogs being pit bulls. You talked about how you get around the law, and how you've trained your illegal dogs. You repeatedly said they're your current dogs, not dead like you're now claiming? Are you saying the dogs you claim to be pit bulls and illegal that you have posted on your own personal profile for anyone to see are dead? No, didn't think so.....honey. For someone who should be being very careful about what they say and where, you're doing a very good job of ensuring their deaths.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> They were both poundies, both young when bought, who knows what they ACTUALLY are,they may just be big staffies, which is why its not up for discussion, and no they are not dead. I do believe I said that neither my trainer or vet has questioned what they are or even brought it up and yes I do believe the law is stupid (as i do with many laws in this country).
> As for honey - have you ever heard of sarcasm?:lol2:
> So how about you get a life and stop trying to pick fights like a 16 year old?


----------



## KathyM

temerist said:


> you are right about one thing though, he people who do knowingly own them illegally are putting the rest of us in danger with regards to dog ownership. although i think licences for all dog owners is a good idea in thery it is just abit of a nightmare lol


You're absolutely right. I see the old "Those who speak out against illegal dog ownership hate the breed" rubbish comes out too as a defence. If they cared for the breed they wouldn't be laughing about breaking the law that has killed other people's much loved and innocent pets.  How they're brought up indeed - hence why people who train them to "rip arms off" with harsh methods and make them fearful to the point of rolling over in terror shouldn't have them.


----------



## girlsnotgray

temerist said:


> you are right about one thing though, he people who do knowingly own them illegally are putting the rest of us in danger with regards to dog ownership. although i think licences for all dog owners is a good idea in thery it is just abit of a nightmare lol


 
So if you rescue a 6 month old poundie that grows into a dog that looks type what are you supposed to do - hand it in to be PTS? Your dammed if you do and dammed if you dont! Licences would be a great idea, they manage to enforce it in australia and america so I dont see why it should be any diffrent here.


----------



## KathyM

girlsnotgray said:


> They were both poundies, both young when bought, who knows what they ACTUALLY are,they may just be big staffies, which is why its not up for discussion, and no they are not dead. I do believe I said that neither my trainer or vet has questioned what they are or even brought it up and yes I do believe the law is stupid (as i do with many laws in this country).
> As for honey - have you ever heard of sarcasm?:lol2:
> So how about you get a life and stop trying to pick fights like a 16 year old?


Hypocrite. YOU are the one that claimed they were attack trained pit bulls that would rip limbs off until you got some flack for it. You're nothing but a hypocrite, claiming they're innocent AFTER you've already admitted openly breaking the law intentionally, and laughing at the fact. You should have more respect for people who lost their pets because people like you knowingly break the law.


----------



## temerist

girlsnotgray said:


> So if you rescue a 6 month old poundie that grows into a dog that looks type what are you supposed to do - hand it in to be PTS? Your dammed if you do and dammed if you dont! Licences would be a great idea, they manage to enforce it in australia and america so I dont see why it should be any diffrent here.


thats why i was very careful with how i worded it, thats why i said people who knowingly own them, i mean the ones purposely setting out looking for a pit bull


----------



## KathyM

girlsnotgray said:


> So if you rescue a 6 month old poundie that grows into a dog that looks type what are you supposed to do - hand it in to be PTS? Your dammed if you do and dammed if you dont! Licences would be a great idea, they manage to enforce it in australia and america so I dont see why it should be any diffrent here.


You're the one who said you bought illegal dogs knowingly, it's only since people stood up to you that you've changed the story. And let's face it, with the legal situation in this country, regardless of whether they're true pit bulls, you brought in two dogs of potential illegal type into the country thinking they were illegal, and have flaunted their pics on here for anyone to see, report and get them seized. Poor sods never had a chance.


----------



## girlsnotgray

temerist said:


> thats why i was very careful with how i worded it, thats why i said people who knowing own them, i mean the ones purposely setting out looking for a pit bull


 
Sorry that wasnt meant to sound as agressive as it came across, reading it back now lol. Thats what I dont understand, people are getting attacked on here for rescuing animals which unknowingly grow up to look a lot like "type" (whatever that is anyway!!)
Angel looked like a beatifull dog, its a shame this goverment feels it can tell people they arent allowed certain breeds of dogs even though you can apply for a licence for a big cat or taipan!!!!:lol2:


----------



## temerist

girlsnotgray said:


> Sorry that wasnt meant to sound as agressive as it came across, reading it back now lol. Thats what I dont understand, people are getting attacked on here for rescuing animals which unknowingly grow up to look a lot like "type" (whatever that is anyway!!)
> Angel looked like a beatifull dog, its a shame this goverment feels it can tell people they arent allowed certain breeds of dogs even though you can apply for a licence for a big cat or taipan!!!!:lol2:


it didnt sound aggressive i knew what you ment I didnt explain myself very well in the first post. I recently had a dog in our rescue that I advertised on here and she looked very much a pit type. It is very bad that the government/police/whoever has issues with the dogs they call pit types. I can honestly say I very much doubt any supposed pit bull in this country is actually a true American Pit Bull Terrier, they are all man made bull breed and mastiff crosses, yes they are made to LOOK like pit bulls but thats all they just look similar.


----------



## girlsnotgray

temerist said:


> it didnt sound aggressive i knew what you ment I didnt explain myself very well in the first post. I recently had a dog in our rescue that I advertised on here and she looked very much a pit type. It is very bad that the government/police/whoever has issues with the dogs they call pit types. I can honestly say I very much doubt any supposed pit bull in this country is actually a true American Pit Bull Terrier, they are all man made bull breed and mastiff crosses, yes they are made to LOOK like pit bulls but thats all they just look similar.


 
Thats why I dont understand the law at all. I mean what about dogs like wolfdogs? wolfs are illegal, wolfdogs look VERY similar (about as similar as types look to actual APBT's) but yet they are legal? Baffling at the very least!! I definetly think they should have the option of DNA testing in court cases, if the dog isnt APBT and just looks like one, as long as it isnt agressive they should be allowed to keep it.


----------



## girlsnotgray

KathyM said:


> have flaunted their pics on here for anyone to see, report and get them seized. Poor sods never had a chance.


Well considering people on this forum thought an american bulldog looked like a APBT then almost any dog thats bull breed is sc:censor:ed! You and pimperella seem the only 2 people intrested in HARRASSING me when iv already stated that the chances of them being actual APBT's is slim and that loads of people own dogs that are possible type. The fact that you both bothered to join this thread just to "have a go" at me is pathetic.


----------



## clairebear1984

girlsnotgray said:


> Sorry that wasnt meant to sound as agressive as it came across, reading it back now lol. Thats what I dont understand, people are getting attacked on here for rescuing animals which unknowingly grow up to look a lot like "type" (whatever that is anyway!!)
> Angel looked like a beatifull dog, its a shame this goverment feels it can tell people they arent allowed certain breeds of dogs even though you can apply for a licence for a big cat or taipan!!!!:lol2:


 u knew they were pitbuls u brought them in from another country into the uk. do u even know wats true anymore. you said in another thread u brought in illegal pitbulls as PPD


----------



## clairebear1984

girlsnotgray said:


> Thats why I dont understand the law at all. I mean what about dogs like wolfdogs? wolfs are illegal, wolfdogs look VERY similar (about as similar as types look to actual APBT's) but yet they are legal? Baffling at the very least!! I definetly think they should have the option of DNA testing in court cases, if the dog isnt APBT and just looks like one, as long as it isnt agressive they should be allowed to keep it.


i might b wrong but wolves are allowed in zoos with DWA. and i think ppl get wolfbrid hybrid watever called thing have under DWA i dont know


----------



## girlsnotgray

clairebear1984 said:


> u knew they were pitbuls u brought them in from another country into the uk. do u even know wats true anymore. you said in another thread u brought in illegal pitbulls as PPD


 
They were 6 months old and rescues (who may I add KNEW they were coming back to England) yes they looked type but dogs change as they grow. Have you been to battersea? There are LOADS of type dogs up for rehoming there.


----------



## clairebear1984

threads aboiut pitbulls should be banned lol


----------



## girlsnotgray

clairebear1984 said:


> threads aboiut pitbulls should be banned lol


 
I agree!!! :lol2:

As far as im aware you can buy some breeds of wolfdogs without DWA licence, this is what seem odd! Why cant you apply for a licence to keep a apbt? Are they seriously more dangerous that big cats???:lol2:


----------



## KathyM

I think there's a difference between doing so in ignorance of the law and knowingly breaking it, and laughing about breaking it on here until you decided to change your story.

I think this will go around in circles so will leave it there but I really wouldn't go chopping and changing your story to suit and advertising your dogs on here as PP illegal pit bulls brought into the country knowingly and that will tear limbs off people (your words not mine!) if you don't want people to think you did as you said. It's not really brain surgery love.


----------



## KathyM

clairebear1984 said:


> threads aboiut pitbulls should be banned lol


I definitely think those knowingly flouting the law and using these boards to laugh about the fact should be banned, not only for basically promoting lawbreaking behaviour but by in the process disrespecting those that lost their much loved pets because of people flouting the law. :2thumb:


----------



## Pimperella

girlsnotgray said:


> Insulting yourself? very impressive:no1:





KathyM said:


> With all due respect I don't particularly like being called "honey" by strangers, especially those who don't mean it! You were posting about your dogs the other day, saying you didn't care about the law because if you're not asked you won't have to lie about your dogs being pit bulls. You talked about how you get around the law, and how you've trained your illegal dogs. You repeatedly said they're your current dogs, not dead like you're now claiming? Are you saying the dogs you claim to be pit bulls and illegal that you have posted on your own personal profile for anyone to see are dead? No, didn't think so.....honey. For someone who should be being very careful about what they say and where, you're doing a very good job of ensuring their deaths.
> 
> No Temerist, I wasn't meaning you - just the person that perpetuates breed myths and flouts the law that the rest of us have to live by. You care about your dogs!





KathyM said:


> Hypocrite. YOU are the one that claimed they were attack trained pit bulls that would rip limbs off until you got some flack for it. You're nothing but a hypocrite, claiming they're innocent AFTER you've already admitted openly breaking the law intentionally, and laughing at the fact. You should have more respect for people who lost their pets because people like you knowingly break the law.





clairebear1984 said:


> u knew they were pitbuls u brought them in from another country into the uk. do u even know wats true anymore. you said in another thread u brought in illegal pitbulls as PPD


Aye. She bragged about it. How she had bought her Pit Bulls to Guard he apparently top show horses. It's Liars like these that I can't stand.
Proved wrong because they thought they were above the law. 



girlsnotgray said:


> Thats why I dont understand the law at all. I mean what about dogs like wolfdogs? wolfs are illegal, wolfdogs look VERY similar (about as similar as types look to actual APBT's) but yet they are legal? Baffling at the very least!! I definetly think they should have the option of DNA testing in court cases, if the dog isnt APBT and just looks like one, as long as it isnt agressive they should be allowed to keep it.


 
Are you in school? Have you been to school?
Your the one who knows nothing of the law.
Wolves DWA.
Wolf Hybrids F1 F2 DWA
Wolf Hybrids F3 Legal without Licence
WolfDogs. Have never needed a licence.
You can't compare a Wolfdog to a illegal Breed.
You can keep Wolves with a licence you get beforehand. 
Pit Bulls. You can not get a licence for a pit bull can you!

You really are a biggoted little child.
And nice one. Having a go at someones Religion. I could have you in court for that.
And while we are at it and mentioning why and Court finds out you have pit bulls and all the proof that a number of people have saved on here. I hope you have the money for the kenneling costs before they are PTS.


----------



## gazz

clairebear1984 said:


> i might b wrong but wolves are allowed in zoos with DWA. and i think ppl get wolfbrid hybrid watever called thing have under DWA i dont know


I not 100% but i beleave it's.

Wolf = DWA.
F1 Wolf/dog = DWA.
F2 Wolf/dog = DWA.
F3,F4,F5,etc'etc'etc Wolf/dog = No DWA needed.

Any dog or (F-number)wolf/dog bred back to a wolf = DWA.


----------



## girlsnotgray

My point was that wolfdogs LOOK like wolves. Like types LOOK like APBT's, so I dont see why you shouldnt be able to apply for a licence.
Religeon? What are you on about????


----------



## KathyM

girlsnotgray said:


> My point was that wolfdogs LOOK like wolves. Like types LOOK like APBT's, so I dont see why you shouldnt be able to apply for a licence.
> Religeon? What are you on about????


Wicca is a religion to many people. I don't know a lot about it but know some people who practice it, and paganism. So using the term "witch" as an insult, or claiming someone who calls themselves a witch is insulting themselves could be seen as bigotry.


----------



## Mischievous_Mark

Stuff reading all the way back in this but ill try and keep up from now.


----------



## Pimperella

KathyM said:


> Wicca is a religion to many people. I don't know a lot about it but know some people who practice it, and paganism. So using the term "witch" as an insult, or claiming someone who calls themselves a witch is insulting themselves could be seen as bigotry.


 
Exactly my point seeing as I am Wiccan. A religion predating Christianity and many many others.


----------



## diamondlil

girlsnotgray said:


> My point was that wolfdogs LOOK like wolves. Like types LOOK like APBT's, so I dont see why you shouldnt be able to apply for a licence.


That's a very good point. I believe the 'type' clause is so people won't breed homemade pit dogs though. Personally I'd support registration of all dogs, with unregistered dogs of all breeds being illegal. Any dogs shown to repeatedly attack other dogs or to be human aggressive to go on a special restricted clause of the register, being neutered as being of unsound temperament and under control at all times or removed from their owners.


----------



## girlsnotgray

KathyM said:


> Wicca is a religion to many people. I don't know a lot about it but know some people who practice it, and paganism. So using the term "witch" as an insult, or claiming someone who calls themselves a witch is insulting themselves could be seen as bigotry.


 
It wasnt meant to be a religous insult - far from it. Ill happily apoligise if she was ACTUALLY offended. However I dont see how someone who had harassed and stated many total asumptions about myself can claim that they are truley HURT by that comment. I really dont get why you cant just leave it now, iv not mentioned anything about the subject but you go to the effort of joining threads and attacking myself? I didnt realise this was a playground


----------



## gazz

*Found this useful info from the KC.*

*Useful information on Pitbull Terrier Law *

05-Jan-07


Advice from Doglaw concerning Pit Bull Terrier Type dogs

As a result of recent events, we have put together this brief summary of the law together with some practical advice. It is not intended to be a complete review of the law relating to pit bull terriers and you should take legal advice on your specific circumstances. 

If you think you have an unregistered pit bull type dog, it *cannot* be voluntarily registered. *Owning an unregistered pit bull terrier type dog is unlawful and if you have such a dog you are committing a criminal offence. *

An option available to you is, of course, to have the dog destroyed. We appreciate that in most cases this would be unacceptable to a pet owner. If you do not want to have your dog destroyed:-

1. Have a look at the DEFRA guidance on identification of unlawful dogs to see if your dog might fall under the definition of a pit bull type (via the links page on this site – see ‘DEFRA guidance on prohibited dogs’). Alternatively, go to the Police (see 3 below)
2. Take your dog to your vet to ask for an opinion of the dog’s type NB Not all vets are sufficiently familiar with this complicated area of identification, so you may be referred to someone else. (There are also some show judges, and others, who have expertise on this issue but we have suggested your vet as the first person to speak to for the sake of convenience). Alternatively, go to the Police (see 3 below)

3. Contact your local Police and ask them what they would like you to do. If the Police believe that your dog is a pit bull type, there is a significant risk that your dog will be seized and will remain in a Police appointed kennel until the case is concluded. 

4. The Police will have your dog examined by their experts and if they conclude that your dog is a pit bull terrier type, you will probably be prosecuted under Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. At Court, unless you can prove that your dog isn’t a pit bull terrier type dog you will be convicted. Although the Act gives a maximum penalty of 6 months prison, we have never dealt with a case where an ‘ordinary’ dog owner has been sent to prison for this offence. The most likely sentence is that you will be fined (or given a conditional discharge) and ordered to pay costs (which may include kennelling fees). As to your dog, you will need to prove that it would not constitute a danger to public safety, and if you can, the Court may allow it to be registered (otherwise it must be destroyed). You will have to pay for the registration fee, the insurance, the neutering, microchipping and insurance. The dog will not be returned to you until all this is completed. Please remember that once the dog is returned then other conditions must also be complied with (see below).

*Frequently Asked Questions*
*Q. What is a pit bull terrier type dog*
A. Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 relates to dogs of the type known as the pit bull terrier. The High Court has decided that for a dog to be a pit bull type, it must have a substantial number of the physical characteristics of a pit bull terrier. These characteristics are listed in a number of places, and probably the most comprehensive (and that generally relied on by Courts) is the American Dog Breeders Association’s Basis of Conformation for the American Pit Bull Terrier. This is a functional standard which describes the ideal, and so the dog does not have to conform in every detail to be regarded as a pit bull type. DEFRA has produced guidance which summarises some of the main physical aspects of a pit bull terrier (see ‘DEFRA guidance on prohibited dogs’ which can be accessed via the links page on this site)

*Q. But I have a dog with a nice temperament. Surely this can’t be regarded as a pit bull type*
A. The High Court has ruled that the behaviour of a dog is relevant *but not conclusive* when determining whether a dog is a pit bull type.

*Q. Surely there is a DNA test that can be used*
A. Not at present. In any event, the legal test is predominantly on the basis of physical conformation so it isn’t just about the breeding but is about what the dog looks like.

*Q. Doesn’t the law just apply to pure bred pit bulls*
A. No. Cross-breeds and mongrels could be regarded as pit bull types depending on their physical conformation.

*Q. How does the prosecution prove their case*
A. In Court the burden of proof is on the dog owner to prove that the dog isn’t a pit bull type. This reversal of the usual burden of proof has been challenged in the European Court, but has been found to be lawful. It is therefore very difficult to successfully defend a case. The evidence is likely to be given by experts.

*Q. Can a pit bull type dog ever be lawfully owned*
A. Owners were given a short period of time to have their dogs registered onto the Index of Exempted Dogs, but this form of voluntary registration ended in 1991. Since 1997 the law has been slightly relaxed, so that if an owner is prosecuted for possession of an unregistered pit bull type dog the Court may allow the dog to be registered (and all of the other conditions must be complied with) but only if the owner can prove that the dog would not constitute a danger to public safety. If this cannot be proven then the Court must order that the dog be destroyed.

*Q. What are the conditions of owning a pit bull type apart from having the dog registered*
A. The dog has to be neutered, microchipped, tattooed and insured. Also, no person shall:
Breed, or breed from, the dog
Sell or exchange the dog or offer, advertise or expose the dog for sale or exchange
Make or offer to make a gift of the dog or advertise or expose the dog as a gift
Allow the dog to be in a public place without being muzzled and kept on a lead
Abandon the dog or allow it to stray.

*Q. What would happen if any of the conditions are breached after a dog has been registered*
A. It is a criminal offence and in addition to penalties for the Defendant there is a presumption that the dog shall be destroyed.


----------



## Pimperella

girlsnotgray said:


> It wasnt meant to be a religous insult - far from it. Ill happily apoligise if she was ACTUALLY offended. However I dont see how someone who had harassed and stated many total asumptions about myself can claim that they are truley HURT by that comment. I really dont get why you cant just leave it now, iv not mentioned anything about the subject but you go to the effort of joining threads and attacking myself? I didnt realise this was a playground


 
Yes I bloody well was you biggot!

And yes, YOU YOURSELF STATED YOUR HAD PIT BULLS, ATTACK TRAINED ONES IN FACT!

You and only you told us all this. 
So hardly an assumtion when I quoted all the parts you happily claimed you had them and what for!


And if you didn't realise it was a playground, Then got off the bloody Swings!


----------



## LisaLQ

If they're not pitbulls, why did you come on saying they were? If you're not sure, why have you called them pitbulls on every other thread? If you didn't know what they were, what made you say that on a pitbull thread?

I dont care one way or the other what they are, but you need to be a bit more responsible. If you dont want them seizing, posting on a public forum that they ARE pitbulls, they HAVE been imported from Ireland, and that they ARE attack trained, whilst putting pictures in your album of them, is _probably not very responsible_.

:whistling2:


----------



## Pimperella

LisaLQ said:


> If they're not pitbulls, why did you come on saying they were? If you're not sure, why have you called them pitbulls on every other thread? If you didn't know what they were, what made you say that on a pitbull thread?
> 
> I dont care one way or the other what they are, but you need to be a bit more responsible. If you dont want them seizing, posting on a public forum that they ARE pitbulls, they HAVE been imported from Ireland, and that they ARE attack trained, whilst putting pictures in your album of them, is _probably not very responsible_.
> 
> :whistling2:


 
I didn't in anyway think she was responsible the moment she said she had attack Trained Pitbulls and that she didn't need a licence.
Showing that she actually knows very little.


----------



## Exotic Mad

girlsnotgray said:


> Well considering people on this forum thought an american bulldog looked like a APBT then almost any dog thats bull breed is sc:censor:ed! You and pimperella seem the only 2 people intrested in HARRASSING me when iv already stated that the chances of them being actual APBT's is slim and that loads of people own dogs that are possible type. The fact that you both bothered to join this thread just to "have a go" at me is pathetic.


sorry but third that i saw you tell everyone they were trained attack dogs protecting your stables :whistling2:


----------



## diamondlil

Can I just ask if certain people want someone else's dogs to be seized? If that person thought better of their actions in publically saying they own a banned breed, and the offending thread is now deleted, then linking them to those statements seems to be actively trying to cause problems.


----------



## DRACSAT

diamondlil said:


> Can I just ask if certain people want someone else's dogs to be seized? If that person thought better of their actions in publically saying they own a banned breed, and the offending thread is now deleted, then linking them to those statements seems to be actively trying to cause problems.


 
kinda looks that way!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## KathyM

girlsnotgray said:


> It wasnt meant to be a religous insult - far from it. Ill happily apoligise if she was ACTUALLY offended. However I dont see how someone who had harassed and stated many total asumptions about myself can claim that they are truley HURT by that comment. I really dont get why you cant just leave it now, iv not mentioned anything about the subject but you go to the effort of joining threads and attacking myself? I didnt realise this was a playground


Excuse me? I was explaining something as you seemed confused by P's post. A thank you would've been more apt than this melodrama with shouty capitals.


----------



## snakewhisperer

diamondlil said:


> Can I just ask if certain people want someone else's dogs to be seized? If that person thought better of their actions in publically saying they own a banned breed, and the offending thread is now deleted, then linking them to those statements seems to be actively trying to cause problems.


 Spot on! Its getting a bit f:censor: silly. This holier than thou attitude is p:censor: me off now. To continually return to certain things someone said (probably a little carelessly in the way they said them) and disregard anything that doesn't suit the persecution focus, no matter how many times they try to expain is bullying and unnacceptable. I'm all for a good row but don't take the piss:bash:


----------



## Pimperella

KathyM said:


> Excuse me? I was explaining something as you seemed confused by P's post. A thank you would've been more apt than this melodrama with shouty capitals.


 
It is very seldom me and thee see eye to eye. But on this one we do.

She has Illegal dogs that she has attack trained. 
That to me stinks.

Someone having one and then not attacking training or mouthing off bragging about it. They don't risk their dogs.
But someone who has actually gone to the lengths of importing illegal dogs and then attack training them!? Well thats purely Criminal.

If their dogs get siezed they have only themselves to blame. Covering it up will not make it any better.
All it does is make matters far, far worse for those with dogs that happen to look that way. And in having them attacked trained shows that these dogs have even more potential to do harm.


----------



## KathyM

diamondlil said:


> Can I just ask if certain people want someone else's dogs to be seized? If that person thought better of their actions in publically saying they own a banned breed, and the offending thread is now deleted, then linking them to those statements seems to be actively trying to cause problems.


Does the owner want them seizing? After the mods were kind enough to cover up her constant laughing and gloating on another thread about breaking the law, after she laughed and gloated about her kids pulling on her dogs that she herself said would rip a man's arm off, do you think posting their pictures in her public profile then joining in other threads about illegal dogs was safeguarding them? It really f*cks me off to be honest that people will defend this kind of behaviour, and try and say those who are against it are somehow pro BSL. There wouldn't be any BSL if it wasn't for tits like this owning dogs! If she'd had poodles, they'd be banned now. Ridiculous. Would you sit back and wait for her to post about her kids being mauled by the dogs she gloated about being lethal weapons? I advised her to keep quiet on the last thread for her dogs' sakes, and if anything she's got even more prolific in her showing off, gloating about them everywhere like she wants them seizing. Perhaps if she had seen what some of us have, dogs that went through months of kennelling by the police and came out the other side ruined or dead, she'd think twice about riling people up on these boards. So less of the "poor girlsnotgrey, she's only keeping attack trained pitbulls and encouraging her kids to ride them and yank their ears, while prong collaring them til they cower from her in terror". I can't be arsed with defending my viewpoint when chavs like that get the backup on here. 

There are things that are worse than death for a dog, she's proven that.


----------



## Pimperella

KathyM said:


> Does the owner want them seizing? After the mods were kind enough to cover up her constant laughing and gloating on another thread about breaking the law, after she laughed and gloated about her kids pulling on her dogs that she herself said would rip a man's arm off, do you think posting their pictures in her public profile then joining in other threads about illegal dogs was safeguarding them? It really f*cks me off to be honest that people will defend this kind of behaviour, and try and say those who are against it are somehow pro BSL. There wouldn't be any BSL if it wasn't for tits like this owning dogs! If she'd had poodles, they'd be banned now. Ridiculous. Would you sit back and wait for her to post about her kids being mauled by the dogs she gloated about being lethal weapons? I advised her to keep quiet on the last thread for her dogs' sakes, and if anything she's got even more prolific in her showing off, gloating about them everywhere like she wants them seizing. Perhaps if she had seen what some of us have, dogs that went through months of kennelling by the police and came out the other side ruined or dead, she'd think twice about riling people up on these boards. So less of the "poor girlsnotgrey, she's only keeping attack trained pitbulls and encouraging her kids to ride them and yank their ears, while prong collaring them til they cower from her in terror". I can't be arsed with defending my viewpoint when chavs like that get the backup on here.
> 
> There are things that are worse than death for a dog, she's proven that.


 

Hear Hear!!!!! 

I wholeheartedly agree!


----------



## KathyM

Pimperella said:


> It is very seldom me and thee see eye to eye. But on this one we do.
> 
> She has Illegal dogs that she has attack trained.
> That to me stinks.
> 
> Someone having one and then not attacking training or mouthing off bragging about it. They don't risk their dogs.
> But someone who has actually gone to the lengths of importing illegal dogs and then attack training them!? Well thats purely Criminal.
> 
> If their dogs get siezed they have only themselves to blame. Covering it up will not make it any better.
> All it does is make matters far, far worse for those with dogs that happen to look that way. And in having them attacked trained shows that these dogs have even more potential to do harm.


 
Completely agree P, and what makes it even worse is that she encourages her kids to ride them and yank their ears when they are attack trained and terrified of her by her own admission. She's not just going to get her dogs killed, but that hard nut image is more important to her.


----------



## KathyM

snakewhisperer said:


> Spot on! Its getting a bit f:censor: silly. This holier than thou attitude is p:censor: me off now. To continually return to certain things someone said (probably a little carelessly in the way they said them) and disregard anything that doesn't suit the persecution focus, no matter how many times they try to expain is bullying and unnacceptable. I'm all for a good row but don't take the piss:bash:


You know what attitude gets me? The simpering weak hypocrite that's always one step behind the hardest looking chav wanting in on the image, bleating about bullying and yet laughing and clapping when the side he's on uses foul tactics. What's wrong with just sticking up for what you believe in? There's always one, maybe I'll do my final research project on you. :no1:


----------



## diamondlil

KathyM said:


> Does the owner want them seizing? After the mods were kind enough to cover up her constant laughing and gloating on another thread about breaking the law, after she laughed and gloated about her kids pulling on her dogs that she herself said would rip a man's arm off, do you think posting their pictures in her public profile then joining in other threads about illegal dogs was safeguarding them? It really f*cks me off to be honest that people will defend this kind of behaviour, and try and say those who are against it are somehow pro BSL. There wouldn't be any BSL if it wasn't for tits like this owning dogs! If she'd had poodles, they'd be banned now. Ridiculous. Would you sit back and wait for her to post about her kids being mauled by the dogs she gloated about being lethal weapons? I advised her to keep quiet on the last thread for her dogs' sakes, and if anything she's got even more prolific in her showing off, gloating about them everywhere like she wants them seizing. Perhaps if she had seen what some of us have, dogs that went through months of kennelling by the police and came out the other side ruined or dead, she'd think twice about riling people up on these boards. So less of the "poor girlsnotgrey, she's only keeping attack trained pitbulls and encouraging her kids to ride them and yank their ears, while prong collaring them til they cower from her in terror". I can't be arsed with defending my viewpoint when chavs like that get the backup on here.
> 
> There are things that are worse than death for a dog, she's proven that.


I'm not interested in defending that particular owner, I just don't see the point in bringing up the offending past posts. There are 'type' dogs on every street. At least her 'type' dogs are apparently kept under secure conditions.


----------



## KathyM

diamondlil said:


> I'm not interested in defending that particular owner, I just don't see the point in bringing up the offending past posts. There are 'type' dogs on every street. At least her 'type' dogs are apparently kept under secure conditions.


While her children ride them, but sod it eh? Noone needs to stick up for them if their own mam won't, do they? After all, that doesn't get you forum friends does it, common sense?

ETA: Sorry taking it out on the wrong person. I'm out of this thread, that maniac woman will be the death of me otherwise (and her kids and dogs).


----------



## snakewhisperer

KathyM said:


> You know what attitude gets me? The simpering weak hypocrite that's always one step behind the hardest looking chav wanting in on the image, bleating about bullying and yet laughing and clapping when the side he's on uses foul tactics. What's wrong with just sticking up for what you believe in? There's always one, maybe I'll do my final research project on you. :no1:


 I think you have some serious psychological issues you need to deal with! You have a more aggressive nature than any dog I've ever come across:devil:


----------



## KathyM

snakewhisperer said:


> I think you have some serious psychological issues you need to deal with! You have a more aggressive nature than any dog I've ever come across:devil:


You're like the one that humps other dogs to try and ingratiate itself with them lol. I only ever see you when you go "Yeah! Wot she said!" behind someone else. Get some balls and your own opinion, you've just got a problem with strong women who don't take any shite. :lol2: Over and out!


----------



## diamondlil

KathyM said:


> While her children ride them, but sod it eh? Noone needs to stick up for them if their own mam won't, do they? After all, that doesn't get you forum friends does it, common sense?


I don't remember reading about that, as the thread is pulled I'll trust you and say I'd not let any child pull about and ride any dog, my boys always knew to respect our dog when they were little and I wouldn't condone that from other owners. 
But I don't rule the world, my views on how to raise and train a dog aren't everyone else's. Every time I go down my local high street or take my lurcher out for a run I see real chavs (I'm from near Chatham, home of the damn things) with 'type' dogs running about loose. My lurcher was attacked just before Christmas by 4 'type' dogs. Despite a warning from the community police officer and community warden that owner is still walking his dogs offlead in public! Mind you, she's also had 2 german shepherds and a collie try to bite her, luckily she sprinted away yelping. So unless the whole issue of dog control is pursued vigorously the problem will continue. In my view any dog that is aggressive with other dogs or people should be muzzled and/or kept under control, no matter what breed or type it is.


----------



## girlsnotgray

KathyM said:


> While her children ride them, but sod it eh? Noone needs to stick up for them if their own mam won't, do they? After all, that doesn't get you forum friends does it, common sense?
> 
> ETA: Sorry taking it out on the wrong person. I'm out of this thread, that maniac woman will be the death of me otherwise (and her kids and dogs).


 
Please stop talking bull:censor:, you raelly are coming out with some total :censor:, the pair of you. 
Attack trained dogs?? What part of PP training do you know ANYTHING about? How about you both get a life and stop following me around on threats and brining stuff up from before which isnt even relevant to the current post.


----------

