Pit Bull Forum

Bull Terrier

Forum dedicated to the history, health and training of the Bull Terrier

Forum to discuss bull terriers and topics about health, training, rescue and history. Forum provides pictures of bull terriers and discussion among experienced bull terrier owners and lovers.
Home| Forums| Rescue| Reviews| Blogs| Chat| Links| Pictures | Policies | Store | Pit Bull Chat's RSS Feeds
Join our community!
Tags| FAQ| Calendar| Active Threads | Search
Go Back   Pit Bull Chat Forum > Other Bully Breeds > Bull Terrier
Read about our new Controversial and Heated Debates forum. Send a private message to Shon to find out how to get an email@pitbull-chat.com email address! Interested in cats? Check out our new Feline Forum.
Hey there!

It looks like you're enjoying Pit Bull Chat Forum but haven't created an account yet. Why not take a minute to join our community for free now? As a member you get free access to all of our forums and posts plus the ability to post your own messages, communicate directly with other members and much more. Join now!

Already a member? Login at the top of this page to stop seeing this message.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 02-22-2008, 01:20 PM
Purple's Avatar
Purple Purple is offline
Administrator
 
My Mood: Busy
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,630
Images: 202
Send a message via AIM to Purple
Default Bull Terrier Still Deemed Dangerous By Gladstone, MO

Bull terriers still deemed dangerous by Gladstone
By Jeffrey M. Salem



Kirk Forslund of Gladstone walks Quincy, his bull terrier, the afternoon of Feb. 14. Forslund and his wife fought the Gladstone City Council after its decision to include the bull terrier breed on its list of dangerous dogs. The Forslunds recently lost that battle.

Gladstone couple’s year-long attempt to alter the city’s Animal Control Ordinance finally failed.
Kirk Forslund had repeatedly asked the City Council to omit the bull terrier breed from the ordinance’s definition of a pit bull, which is considered pre-emptively dangerous and requires certain restrictions to be allowed in the city. The City Council, after directing city staff to investigate Forslund’s claims that bull terriers should be separate from other pit bull breeds in the ordinance, chose to do nothing at the present time. The inaction by the City Council essentially muzzles the discussion.
Councilwoman Carol Rudi, who initially voted unsuccessfully against the breed-specific legislation on Feb. 26, 2007, said it was too early to reconsider the ordinance, as it had not even been on the books for a year.
“I still don’t support this breed-specific legislation, but I will support the council’s decision to go ahead and maintain that,” she said at the Feb. 11 meeting.
Forslund has owned Quincy, a bull terrier, since 2006, and the dog is therefore exempt from the restrictions added to the animal control ordinance passed last year. Although the new language does not forbid Forslund from purchasing another bull terrier, he would have to follow several stipulations. Those include keeping the dog on a shortened leash with a muzzle when off the owner’s property and secured in a pen when outside of the house.
Any breed can be deemed dangerous, but dogs defined as pit bulls are pre-emptively deemed dangerous. Those defined breeds by the ordinance include the Staffordshire bull terrier, the American pit bull terrier and the American Staffordshire bull terrier along with any similar mixes.
Gladstone’s ordinance was molded from similar legislation in Liberty and Grandview, city staff said. That is where Forslund said he had a problem.
“I think that it just so happens they copied Liberty’s ordinance, which had bull terriers unfairly listed,” Forslund said.
Though Forslund offered a handful of letters from area veterinarians in support of his stance, the city research found enough conflicting reports regarding the breed’s aggressiveness to suggest the ordinance go unchanged.
“The literature probably weighs in at about 50-50,” City Counselor Dave Ramsay said. “It appears that bull terriers probably pose less a threat than the more aggressive of the pit bull breeds. But at the same time, the literature warns that they do have those same characteristics and the same genetic ancestry that put them in a category of fighting dogs and dogs that are bred for aggressiveness.”
Forslund said he and his wife, Kim, respected the council’s decision not to change its ordinance.
“Even though we don’t agree with the council, I do think they want to do the right thing about vicious dogs,” he said. “But we do think they’re misguided to look at specific breeds.”

http://www.kccommunitynews.com/artic...5102723422.txt
__________________
Got Cats? Slink on over to our Feline Forum!

Game-Dog.com ~ Preserving The APBT

Interested in the Molosser breeds? Check out our Mastiff Forum!

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Pit Bull Chat Forum > Other Bully Breeds > Bull Terrier > Bull Terrier Still Deemed Dangerous By Gladstone, MO

Thread Tools


Similar Threads to: Bull Terrier Still Deemed Dangerous By Gladstone, MO
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Staffordshire Bull Terrier tat2stuff Pit Bull Roots & Heritage 2 10-21-2008 12:13 AM
Featured Bull Terrier~Jeno~Adopted! Purple Bull Terrier Rescue 8 04-14-2008 08:20 PM
Bulldog, or bull and terrier ? screamin'eagle Breeder Discussion 21 03-13-2008 10:02 PM
How To Confuse A Bull Terrier... Purple Bull Terrier Pictures 15 02-06-2008 10:43 AM

Follow us on:


Page Strength: 4.0
Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All posts and photos become the property of Pitbull-Chat.com and may not be reprinted without written permission from the original author or Pitbull-Chat.com.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95