Dogs Bite

I've been refraining from writing about this for awhile....but like cancer, you can't just ignore a problem and hope it goes away.

Several months ago, a new website launched called dogbites.org.  I'm not going to provide a link, as I'd rather not give them any undue web traffic.  Most of you are probably aware of the site already.

I want to make a note about the site. The site claims to be a "public information website with support of the following":

• Distinguish which dog breeds are dangerous to have in our neighborhoods.
• Help enact laws to regulate ownership of these breeds.
• Help enact laws that hold dog owners criminally liable if their dog attacks a person and causes serious injury or death.

There are several major problems with their premise.  Nowhere in their mission statement do they say that their goal is to improve public safety.   Their goal is completely dedicated to enacting laws against breeds of dogs.  As such, they spend no time or effort researching laws and policies that would actually improve public safety.  And even if they add "safety" to their list of objectives, their site continues to be based very much on emotion and media articles...not real world information like what types of policies actually work.

I'm always suspicious of any "group" that is completely anonymous (with the exception of their founder being outted) and nearly all comments on the site are anonymous.  And I also find it interesting that a site that says they're dedicated to public information is so diligent about sensoring opposing viewpoints.  Seems they don't want certain facts to get in the way of their opinions.

Most websites/blogs/etc have a bias.  I, of course, have mine...which was developed after doing a ton of reading and learning about all the information regarding breeds of dogs, dog bites and city policies.  It's also probably not much of  a coincidence that my view and opinion happens to be shared by most of the nation's leading experts in the field (all of whom have a stance on this issue born out of facts and not out of bias).  However, I've never made it a point to censor any comments on the blog (with very rare exceptions of spammers and rantic lunatics).  I figure that the way to truly create knowledge and effective policies -- policies that have positive effects for both human and dog populations -- is through open knowledge and conversation.

What's interesting is that most "dog people" would support them in their 3rd goal of holding violating dog owners criminally responsible if their first two goals were founded on a real premise.   Unfortunately, their premise of enforcing breed bans, regardless of whether it makes policy sense or not is tragically flawed.

I would be hesitant to put much credibility in any site that remains purposefully anonymous, has blatant mis-information, and doesn't allow any dessenting dialogue.  I will continue to not withhold rational discussions from my site -- because I feel confident that the facts (both science and policy) will prevail. 

Comments

[MAC`s GANG]

That site truly is frightening.

[quote]What's interesting is that most "dog people" would support them in their 3rd goal of holding violating dog owners criminally responsible[/quote]

This should be the #1 Goal for everyone concerned about public safety.

I am going to post a link.
It`s a link to Calgary Animal Services.

http://content.calgary.ca/CCA/City+Hall/Business+Units/Animal+and+Bylaw+Services/Animal+and++Bylaw+Services.htm

They have the solution and they do it without BSL.

I think you posted a story about 2 dogs in Calgary recently that had bitten or "attacked".
Can`t remember off hand if it was a person or a pet.

Calgary AC went door to door looking for the owners of those dogs.
Now that makes sense.

If a man beats his wife,you go looking for that man,you don`t go looking for all men that resemble him!

[Tony]

I'm a Libertarian so any group like that I'm against. They almost remind me of the white supremacists group America Renaissance that attempts to use so-called "scientific research" to prove that all non whites are prone to low IQ and violent behavior.

But political ideology aside I just hate BS overall. I'm actually surprised you didn't blog about them sooner Brent, I was going to bring it up on here since I blogged about them and Alan Hill's site "stoppitbullattacks.com" both are pretty sick and full of it.

I just hope that maybe more people will do their own research and not just rely on web-site that only say what they want to hear. How much more of America do we have to make idiot proof by destroying people's rights? Today its a certain dog, tomorrow its all dogs and the next is animals altogether.

[katie]

Make sure you don't miss the Families and Dogs Against Fighting Breeds offshoot. The site's not active yet, but the name alone is all kinds of special!

[Michelled]

Almost every breed of dog was breed to hunt and/or kill something. Pit bulls haven't been bred to fight for a LONG time (with a few exceptions of course) and Am Staffs like a hundred years - longer than they were used for fighting.

I'm sick of pit bulls being called a fighting breed -- its a WORKING breed. My SweetP is a professional snuggler and Stella a professional tennis ball fetcher and Grommit a professional "there's a squirrel in the yard" notifier - he also moonlights as a "the mail is here" announcer.

[Brent]

Like I said Tony, I really didn't want to post anything and legitimize the site. However, it is what it is I guess. They've certainly done a fine job of making a nice design and making it seem like a legit group (the site is unfortunately well optimized on Google). However, it's just disturbing the number of made up stats they have on the site and the fact that they completely squelch all negative comments (and the reality that everyone posts and comments anonymously). I do think it's really telling though that "public safety" isn't even one of their objectives. At least they're not pretending...

[Jayne]

It is truly a disgusting site, with zero information of actual fact it's basically full of the regular media myths and junk science.
You can't post to that site, I did and it never made it on the site.
Its pretty obvious they are just fanatics and hate dogs in general.
Hopefully it won't be up long

[SocialMange]

Hey, can I sue those sites if I get bitten by anything other than a "pit bull"? *grin*

They are absolute nonsense. And you're right, they don't believe in free speech. Or facts.

[Sabrina Kennedy]

Truth about dogbites website is that mr "you-know-who" out of denver claims he has nothing to do with it,but that has already been exposed by rdows. Nelson follows the anti BSL groups on yahoo groups to get a heads-up, for example...He also finds victims/cities and pounces on them w/BSL encouragement. With MSN likely approaching Los Angeles, he will soon be pushing that. If everyone knows the dogbite gal (a webmaster allegedly bitten in WA by a lab mix dog) who put up that site was encouraged by Nelson, as a public servant,and alleged professional, this is WAY out of bounds. Even so, BSL is actually meeting w/more resistance; a Rott group just tabled proposed BSL in AL, and even got the gov to sanction a grassroots citizen's committee. TN also rejected a recent proposal.

[Caveat]

The recent proposal in TN was a deliberate spoof, according to Sen Kilby who introduced it.

Listen, if a site has NO contact info, it violates internet rules and you can have it taken down.

Or, you can just let them yammer on because they will have no effect on anything important.

You know, a certain type of person just has to hate something - why not make it helpless animals who can't read - or sue?

Nelson should have been fired a long time ago, he's already been cautioned about pursuing his little hobby during working hours, using company resources. He's a moron. Too bad he doesn't have the guts to run for office because I think that would be the end of him.

What kills me is that he owns a GSD. Duh.

Watch out for MSN, the new BSL. Much more acceptable to a wider audience now that the groundwork has been laid.

[Sabrina Kennedy]

PS the posts are anonymous on dogbites, bec they are making them up to suit their purpose.

[Sabrina Kennedy]

Who do I contact to have it (dogsbite) taken down, is it the provider? If it will work I will do it.

[Karen]

The amount of garbage on this site is only surpassed by the amount of hatred and downright nastiness that seems to routinely make it pass the "moderator" - as long as the insults support the moderator's agenda.

Very disturbing site - Small minds who know nothing about dogs, canine behavior, dog breeds or human behavior - who think that with a google search of the words "dog attack" and a heaping dose of hatred they have "proof" of the dangerousness of entire breeds of dogs.

If it wasn't so mean-spirited, the comments and conclusions would actually be laughable.

[Caveat]

The domain name is registered to a guy named Gary Stevens in Seattle. The IP addy is in Texas which is no big deal.

I was just looking at a forum, they've found 4 of these people in Seattle, one looks likely by zip code.

I note there's a Dr G Stevens in Seattle - don't know if there's a connection but it could be a doctor trying to cash in somehow, or one who has misunderstood that dog bites are circumstantial, not 'breed' related.

It's funny that dogbites.org the blog is linked through dogbitelaw/dogbites.org the ambulance-chasers page. So funny I forgot to laugh.

And unfortunately, they have a Contact link so they can't reported to their ISP, which is Network Solutions.

No, I guess freedom of opinion, even if your opinion is so ignorant that a child could see through it, applies to everybody.

Let them stew and make stuff up - it really is irrelevant.

[Becky]

On Brent's advice, I have not gone to this site yet -- I think Brent and the rest of you have negated the need at this point.

I have no idea if this site has more power than someone like KN? Regardless, from what I am reading here, I perceive this as extremely serious threat to the safety of dogs who look like mine, my dog, and me.
(partly because Families and Dogs Against Fighting Breeds will probably promulgate false info from this site)

In that light, please correct me if I am wrong, but libel and slander are not protected by our right to free speech, are they?

From what I have read here, this site is posting false information, including statistics FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE of fear, hatred and prejudice towards my dog and dogs who look like mine, as well as THEIR OWNERS.

I have no money, but with some advice on how best to approach this, while I maintain that my dog is not, by definition, 'predominantly' pit, I will consider seeking an attorney who might be interested in a pro bono case that might get him/her some publicity, if not money from those we have sued.

This is no longer a 'game' for yokels and yo yo's. Although I already know many lives and families destroyed and devastated by lies and hatred, we're getting too close to ME and MY DOG and I consider this to be extremely dangerous.

Sabrina, kudos for your efforts towards trying to take this site down. The Webmaster or whatever it is called, may believe that this is 'free speech', but from what I've read here, I do not believe it is protected or should be protected.

Please let us know what you learn, OK?

Any attornies out there??

[Becky]

and OOPS, I forgot to say THANK YOU MICHELLE for pointing out the fact that pit bulls (and the like) are WORKING dogs.

Heck, I know they wrestle differently than other dogs, but for me, WallaceThePitBull.com shows us exactly what these dogs were bred to do.

[SocialMange]

Apparently the "contact" on that site requires a donation...so I've written ICANN to see what domain rules are about that.

[SocialMange]

Sorry for the fragmented thought process...

And if Nelson is involved and using City time and resources (whether hardware or wetware), Denver taxpayers should be screaming about someone using their money for his personal activities. He apparently got slapped hard for a similar activity a few years ago; perhaps he needs another (rhetorical) hard-five upside his skull.

[Sabrina Kennedy]

dogbitelaw and KN go hand in hand. They basically subscribe to Peta's theory of eliminating certain dogs; and since attoneys can pay each other a finder's fee for giving another attorney a CASE (CA rule anyway, which dogbitelaw atty is), KN could easily be steering victims to such an attorney.