Anonymous wrote:- and it sounds like they are going to pass this.

How many children will now die every year as a result of this senseless political move?

That's surprising.

Democrats and RINOS are always about banning everything and restricing freedom with more government and more laws.

About fking time they "unban" something for a change!

What is their reasoning?

DEI gone wild.

Unfortunate. My kid went over to a neighbor's house and unbeknownst to me, had a relative visiting with their pit bull. Pit bull bit my kid, luckily just a minor mark. But they acted like I was crazy and NBD when I spoke with them about it. I told kid not to go visit that neighbor anymore. They didn't even say sorry!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Next they’ll legalize dog fighting

If you tax it, that could be a huge money maker for the county. You could pay for schools, transit, and lower property taxes!

And people could bet on the fights.

Anonymous wrote:Next they’ll legalize dog fighting

If you tax it, that could be a huge money maker for the county. You could pay for schools, transit, and lower property taxes!

Anonymous wrote:Why does anyone want a mean dog? It's so stupid.

Basically because people are stupid and believe what influencers tell them. If pits were as friendly and harmless as they say, then the very people who want them would lose interest.

This is the pet equivalent of open carry.

Next they’ll legalize dog fighting

I don't even care but having lived in PG county for ten years, I can tell you that whatever "ban" was in place was totally worthless and unenforced. I can't imagine what would change if they remove it.

Anonymous wrote:Is the ban actually working as intended? As far as I can tell it just means they call the shelter dogs anything but pitbull.

100%

I adopted our dog from PG animal shelter (not a pit); and over half the dogs there are "lab mixes" that are CLEARLY pit bulls. I mean maybe they're mixed, but they're pits.

Anonymous wrote:Is the ban actually working as intended? As far as I can tell it just means they call the shelter dogs anything but pitbull.

Instead of a ban they should actually crack down on backyard breeding and start putting down aggressive dogs. One bite rule. Agree the ban just means people lie and say dogs aren't pits. But if they went after backyard breeders and started euthanizing dogs after a single incident, you could actually limit how many new pits are born and also dissuade people from adopting dogs specifically for aggression which is why people adopt pits.

Anonymous wrote:Why does anyone want a mean dog? It's so stupid.

This. And the ridiculous part is that people will adopt pits and then get offended if you give them a wide berth to stay away from them. I'll be walking around with my 3 yr old and when we come across a pit, especially one who is on a long and lax leash or who looks easily activated, we'll cut a wide path so my kid, who is eye level with that dogs teeth, doesn't have to walk right past the dog.

People get so offended by this and will start explaining to me how sweet their dog is and how they'd never hurt anyone... dude, you got a dog who looks like that and has that rep and I don't care how sweet you claim they are. My kid isn't coming anywhere near them.

Is the ban actually working as intended? As far as I can tell it just means they call the shelter dogs anything but pitbull.

Why does anyone want a mean dog? It's so stupid.

- and it sounds like they are going to pass this.

How many children will now die every year as a result of this senseless political move?