And unless I've read your earlier post wrong, the pitbull wasn't banned when it was put into your dogs lines either. But that wasn't entirely the point I was making,, the point was about need, and who decides which breeds are and aren't needed, because most aren't needed, but they are wanted, which is why I made the comparison. So they should remain banned for the soul reason that they aren't needed, that is of course assuming that there weren't any in the country now, which of course is wishfull thinking, because they are, and they never left.

As for the other point that they aren't needed, because they're being crossed with god knows what, you could say the law you support has played a part in that. But again, poodles are being crossed with god knows what, does that make them more or less needed, and don't say, there legal so it doesn't matter, because need and legality aren't the same issue.

I'd hate to think what could happen if a lot of large breeds woke up, and decided they weren't having a good day..I expect the results would be just as unpleasant.

Pitbulls aren't some geneticly altered super dog, created with the jaw strength of a nile crocodile, the physical strength of a grizzly, and the temper of a bull thats just seen a red rag, despite what some, would like to believe.

They're dogs, normal everyday dogs, and not the only ones bred for agression. So what is the problem exactly.

Is it because they are/were used for fighting?, is that it? because that is the impression I get from some on this thread.

That because it was bred to fight other dogs, it some how makes it more of a threat to humans than any other dog, that was bred to hunt down and kill other animals, or guard land and or livestock, from intruders, animal or human.

There're breeds much larger than a pitbull.
There're breeds that have more powerfull jaw strength than a pitbull. Think someone posted about that earlier in the thread.
There're breeds that combine the above two.
There're breeds in which human agression was not a discouraged trate, at least towards strangers.
There're breeds that could have all 3 of those trates.
There're other breeds bred to display the drive to attack and kill other animals.

I don't see entire threads dedicated to how dangerous those dog/breeds could potentially be, in the wrong hands, or if they woke up and decided to have a bad day. I don't see people calling for them to be banned alongside the pitbull, tosa, fila and dogo, well, maybe except for sbts and rotties, lets ban them too then. After all, as long as it looks like something is being done, it doesn't matter that it actually fails spectacularly. People who don't know better will believe it, and those who should, support it for reasons known only to themselves.

I liken the dda, to the tocan disabled/minority group person that sometimes gets added into book and tv series. You know the one, put there to score brownny points, but that recieves no character development, and a non existant story line. The dda is not disimilar, created to score browny points with the gp, but when it comes down to it, serves no real purpose that is of any benafit to anyone. You know both the program producer/author, and the government are thinking the same thing, we've made it look like we're acting on their concerns, because it gets them off our backs, at least for the time it takes them to work it out, and by that time, I'll have found someone to blame it on.

I find it fascinating, that whenever pitbulls are brought up, there seems to be a complete breakdown in the normal way in which people seem to judge a dog.

Normally, at least on here, dogs tend to be judged on their individual behaviours, and the behaviour of the human responsible for them. But for some reason, whenever there is the slightest hint of a pitbull, it becomes all about the breed, not about the dog, its individual behaviour, its breeding, its upbringing, and how it has been handled, it just becomes all about stereotyping, based on personal perseption and opinion of the breed.

When it comes to other breeds, its almost always, you can't judge the breed because of the bad behaviour of a few, when it comes to pitbulls however, the speed in which that thinking flies out the window, could leave scientists wondering that it may actually be possible to exceed the speed of light.

I know they are Pits, seen the paperwork for them, know the kennel they have been imported from in the USA. £1000 will buy you a pure blood PB puppy from that breeding. They also breed to order [when I went to view a litter they had PB x Rotties] for numpties who like fighting their dogs, those people can be found relatively easy too just like we happened to stumble across them.

There are tens of thousands of dogs in pet homes, working homes, rescues etc up and down the country that are crosses, of those tens of thousands thousands will be big breed crosses. Does this make them all dangerous? Some will be crosses with breeds you obviously admire eg there will no doubt somewhere be a doberman x bull breed or even a badly bred mix x with a corso, imo these dogs can be individually fantastic trust worthy dogs or can be aggressive and unpredictable but it is not the breed or crosses that is the problem it is the individual dog.

The law has tried to intervene at the very end of the process eg lets ban a breed because it is dangerous rather than lets look at the breeding and ownership practices. with longer and stiffer sentences for those who flout the laws but like so many other things they make a law as a knee jerk reaction to a problem.

Don't make it right though does it, technically I had an illegal dog.

Again an issue for responsible breeding and buying NOT PBT's being dangerous, I think you are confusing the two.
You are admitting you had one and got dubbed, again if they are everywhere as you claim, what is the point of the ban, it is a bit like a dog chasing it's tail............pointless

Superb post once again and put so much better than i could even have tried thank you

So...that then makes a complete mockery of the law you support. The law fails spectacularly by allowing the breed that it banned to be imported, bred from and then sold on to unscrupulous owners whilst at the same time seizing loyal family pets that are no more pitbull than I am Australian (sorry Emma!) keeping those family pets who have done nothing other than be a certain size or look in pretty desperate conditions and often destroying them. Well gee three cheers for that spectacularly successful and non discriminative law and resulting ban.

ok, it would have been nice. How does that reflect on Pitbulls as a type of dog though? How does that make them dangerous? How does that mean they should be banned?

indeed

how if it was before the illegalisation

Why was your dog technically illegal if the pitbull lines were introduced before the ban? As as long as when you discovered this was the case, after the ban was introduced, you alerted the authorities and followed the responsible dog owners laws as set out by the act then your dog would not have been illegal.