American pitbull terrier.opinions please Discussions

I know this site is ran from a country where bsl is in effect,that being the case what are peoples opinions on the breed and bsl,has it worked or hasnt it?
As a owner of the american pitbull terrier this intrests me.

I have never seen a pitbull in real life. Here they are portrayed as viscious animals who need to be put down as soon as possible. I don't see it that way. I feel they have been bred as fighting dogs and their training (or lack of) has resulted in some being viscious. Blame the deed, not the breed I say. Ignorant ownership and the media have made these dogs out to be evil and the general public goes along with it, such a shame.

Sadly the law here does not just go by breed it also goes by type. If you have an SBT and the law deems them to be a pitbull type the dog will be destroyed

thats so weird,Ive got two,my neighbor has three and next to him theres another one,I'm not sure but theres at least 10 pit bulls on my block,very common type dog,as for pure bred American pit bull terriers thats another story completely and those are very rare.
My male is registered with the ukc as a apbt,but has some French mastiff and American bulldog and amstaff in his pedigree via hung papers,this is only something i know from loads of research.
Thanks for sharing your opinion,it is interesting for sure,Ive never talked to someone who's never seen a apbt in there life.

It also seems a little sketchy considering almost all sbt look like pitbull types,they are infact a pitbull type,whatever?

dont some american states also have anti pit BSL?

It must be weird! Here common dogs are border collies, GSDs and Staffs. I have never seen an apbt but I would love to

As far as I know SBTs are in no way linked to apbts. If your dog was under inspection it wouldn't matter if you had the dogs entire heritage at hand. If the police deem it to be a pitbull type you can say bye bye to your dog.

I know there is a case going on in Ireland with a staff called Bruno. It's really sad :-(

That's how I understood it also.


No the law does not work well here, there are still pits and pit types ,

But I think the difference between the legal pedigree pit in the US, and here, is that those here have been brought in or bred illegally and sadly they are going through the hands of the less desirable element of owner/breeder... they are not bred as family well ajusted pets/

Many years ago my friend had one...her idiot of a husband bought it as a status symbol but, unfortunately for him, he turned out to be one of the soppiest dogs I have ever met. His name was Arnie and he was about 6 months old when they brought out the legislation about them having to be neutered and muzzled in a public place.

It broke my friends heart at the time as she was terrified that he would have to be put down, they followed all the procedures laid down and he lived to be about 12 years old. My friend had 3 children during his lifetime and he was as good with those kiddies as any family dog could have been, he was a darling.

I know these dogs have got a bad reputation but having known Arnie I also know that they can be wonderful pets if given the chance.

This is what has always confused me. I'm a member of a different forum and the view there has always been if you have a pitbull or a pitbull type you've got no hope if you're caught with it.

Then when doing independant research I've come across what you've said, if you have a pitbull you have to muzzle it in public and have a licence.

Arnie sounded like he was a wonderful dog. Really goes to show that you shouldn't judge the breed.

I've never seen a pitbull either and TBH I probably wouldn't be able to identify one if I saw it.

I therefore don't really have an opinion on them from experience. The media make them out to be monsters.

I was watching SallyJessyRafael on ITV2 yesterday blush and they were talking about "When Dogs Attack", I realise this programme was probably a few years old but it was quite interesting.
One of the ladies in the audience who owns pitbulls said that once they taste blood, that's it. That kind of shocked me as this was an experienced pit owner (I assumed).

I've heard that too, not sure if there's any truth in it though

There are a few near me (I've seen two) and they were nice dogs, owned by responsible people luckily.

The DDA hasn't worked obviously because there are still many pitbulls and pitbull types in the UK.

This should hopefully explain a bit better,can't post the link as it's blocked.
Section One of the DDA made it illegal to own any of the following “types”

The Pit Bull Terrier
The Japanese Tosa
The Fila Braziliero
The Dogo Argentino
When the Act became law there where no known Fila’s or Dogo’s in the country. There was one Tosa and there where a thousands of pit bull terrier types. Owners of those dogs previously legally owned where given until March 1992 to register their dogs with the Index of Exempted Dogs in order to avoid prosecution. Registering the dogs meant the owners had to comply with the following restrictions:

The dogs had to be:

Neutered
Micro chipped
Tattooed with exemption number on the inside of the back leg
Kept on lead at all times in a public place
Muzzled at all times in a public place
Not to be owned or walked by a person under 16 years of age
To be covered by third party liability insurance cover.

Once the Index closed in March 1992 any dogs deemed to be “type” by a court were automatically ordered to be destroyed. There wasn’t any other option open to the courts until 1997(see below for more details) and before that date many dogs of good temperament where destroyed under the DDA.

The idea behind the Act was that with all the dogs being neutered those “types” of dogs would die out. 17 years on, the Act has clearly failed to achieve this goal.

Weaknesses in the DDA

The problems with the law began even before it was drawn up. The law does not ban four breeds of dog; it bans four “types”. Pit Bull Terrier’s and the three other breeds where not recognised by the government. This meant there wasn’t a breed standard defining what any of the breeds actually looked like. With this in mind the government decided that the word “type” should be used however they failed to properly define what was meant by “type”.

Home Office 1992 – “Under the Act any dog which has the characteristics of the type known as a pit bull terrier is regarded as being of that type, irrespective of parentage.”
Home Office 1992 – “In this country the pit bull terrier is generally regarded as being a cross between a bull breed of dog and larger dogs like the mastiff. It may also, however, be obtained by breeding or cross-breeding pit bull terriers themselves.”

Home Office 1992 – “Whether section 1 of the Act applies to any particular cross will depend on whether the resulting dog is of the type known as the pit bull terrier – that is to say, whether it has the physical and behavioural characteristics of the pit bull terrier.”

With so much confusion about, when cases began to go through the courts it was up to the judge to determine whether any dog was “of type” and to define the meaning of the word.

In 1993 the Queen’s Bench Divisional Court (appeal court) decided that

“a dog of the type known as a Pit Bull Terrier is an animal approximately amounting to, near to, having a substantial number of characteristics of the Pit Bull Terrier”

The court also ruled that the relevant breed standard for assessing whether a dog is or is not of the type should be that of the ADBA(American dog breeders association). Since part of that breed standard concerned the dog’s behaviour, the court ruled that evidence of a dog’s behavioural characteristics was relevant, but not conclusive.

This ruling created “Case Law” meaning that all future cases followed this definition. However by defining the word type in such a way the law then began to spill out to cover other legal breeds and cross breeds. Any dog, regardless of the breed or cross breed could have a substantial number of characteristics of a Pit Bull Terrier. A dog does not need to have all the characteristics, just a substantial amount and the law is regardless of the parentage of the dog. This resulted in KC regged staffords being destroyed and litters of puppies being split as to whether they where pit bull type or not. Behaviour of the dog being deemed relevant but not conclusive when deciding whether a dog is “type” or not, meant that dogs with good temperaments could still be deemed type and therefore dangerous by law.

By stating irrelevant of parentage it means it is irrelevant if you can prove a dogs parents are legal breeds. If a dog looks like a pit bull type, it becomes one unless you can prove it looks more like another breed.

The burden of proof was also reversed. Unlike in every other law where a person is innocent until proved guilty, the DDA means once an allegation has been made, it is up to the defendant to prove their dog is not of “type”. The prosecution do not have to prove a dog is a pit bull type. An owner has to prove it isn’t. This is incredibly difficult to do given the definition of “pit bull type” The reversal of the burden of proof was challenged in the High court and the European commission however it was upheld as law.

In 1997 the DDA was amended to remove mandatory destruction of dogs brought before a court. While this amendment saved many lives it also showed just how flawed the law is. The amendment stated that if a dog was deemed to be pit bull type but the owner could show he was a responsible owner and the dog posed no danger to the public, the judge could order the dog to be registered with the Index of exempted dogs and not be destroyed, however there is still the presumption of destruction. So on one hand the law says a breed of dog is a dangerous breed but then accepts that this isn’t the case for the whole breed and each dog should be judged on its merits.

Since the amendment many dogs have been entered onto the index. To date there has never been a situation where a registered dog has gone on to attack anyone.

While the amendment was a literally life saving change, the Index remained closed. This means that the only way you can legally register a dog is to be taken to court either by civil or criminal law. You cannot apply to the Index yourself.

I watched that too - interesting and sad too.
I've never seen a APBT either, and don't think I would even recognise one.

Brilliant, thank you very much for that

YOu beat me to it Sal!

The only two I've met have both been brought up as pets on farms, both THE soppiest dogs, one goes everywhere with his owner, game fairs, agricultural shows, horse shows etc and he's so soppy that he just ignored mums two JRT's - one tried 'humping' his leg and the other was trying to pick a fight and generally being a yappy little terrier to him - however I still realise that due to jaw and the bite they are capable of alot more than your usual breed.

Also feel that it is the types of people that own them that are to blame and not the breed!

i live in cardiff (capital city of Wales) & there are tons here. so no BSL has not worked & they have unsuitable owners

yes some cities in the USA have enacted bsl,never entire states however.
In Denver Colorado it is illegal to own one and if you do they are put down,a lot of this is due to campaigns by p.e.t.a and other lobbyists with no practical experience with the dogs,just feeding off media paranoia.
Ive owned and cared for many and just like any bull and terrier dog they are friendly to man and potentially dangerous to animals.There a very easy dog to spot with a trained eye,but also difficult for the novice due to many breeds looking a lot like them[presa canario,bigger but a lot alike in the looks department,not temperament however,dogo argentino,american bulldog].
One thing about the breed,it is highly trainable,and smart as hell,so if the owner is a bad person and wants the dog to be human aggressive,it can be trained to be as such,but the same goes for many other breeds,what separates this breed from others is that it dosent quit once it starts,many in till death,a trait called gameness,so once a poorly trained dog starts a attack it must be separated using specially made parting sticks or sometimes killed[as seen on t.v.].Nowadays the dog breed is bred more for aesthetic than performance so a larger number of these dogs labeled apbt lack this gameness and also a separate breed has stemmed from the apbt called the american bully,which is advertised as a easier keep,a larger dog and usually blue in color,it is a cross bred dog and is also registered as a apbt by registries,there are pure bred apbts out there,but they are not the dogs being seen by the masses as such.
here is two examples of american pitbull terriers,both my dogs banjo and mongo.



Not a dog for the first time owner,but a very fun breed,athletic as any with a never say die,wont quit attitude[literally]

Aw bless they look like lovely dogs...

There are quite a few round here as well. i think the Army bring quite a few over with them as family pets from postings in Ireland, so there are always a lot about the garrison. Many I am certain are pure Pitbulls or a close as makes no odds. Certainly not staffys anyway.

I have met lots of nice ones and a few very nasty ones... I think the fear is that hen things go wrong with a Pitbull they can go very very wrong and very quickly.

But it's still down to bad owners more than bad dogs. Unfortunately Bad owners are attracted to the 'hard' breeds and banning them has only made them more desirable to the idiots looking for a status symbol.. As some of the lads with nasty dogs round here aren't afraid to carry knives or even guns.. a ban on a dog breed is hardly a deterrent!