CafePress chooses BSL City for meet and Greet

This is where to talk about Pit Bulls!

Postby Karen » May 12th, 2006, 5:14 pm

babyreba wrote:I don't know the ins and outs of what happened in California, but isn't there more to the story than that? Weren't they pushing for an out-and-out ban over there, and Bad Rap and others tried to get the language in the bill changed so it was less aggressive?


I don't live in Cali so I don't have all the details, but from what I've seen discussed here and elsewhere, it's more than a simple matter of BR supporting BSL.



They supported the changes period. They wrote the laws they are responsible for what is spreading. They threw the rest of us to the wolves plain and simple.
Karen, Cuddles, Dilly the Understudy, and Rowdy the Ruckus Raiser
User avatar
Karen
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 534
Location: NH

Postby concreterose » May 12th, 2006, 8:20 pm

Karen wrote:That's nothing I got an email from someone I don't even know saying they put my email on pit bull forum. The deleted it. Isn't that nice? They have cafepress poop everywhere they even have links TO MY STUFF yet I'm banned and because the person left my siggy on it poof gone.


Not anymore. Next complaint?
User avatar
concreterose
Loyally Bully
 
Posts: 719

Postby SisMorphine » May 12th, 2006, 8:32 pm

*sigh*

I love The Harp.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby Karen » May 12th, 2006, 10:01 pm

concreterose wrote:
Karen wrote:That's nothing I got an email from someone I don't even know saying they put my email on pit bull forum. The deleted it. Isn't that nice? They have cafepress poop everywhere they even have links TO MY STUFF yet I'm banned and because the person left my siggy on it poof gone.


Not anymore. Next complaint?


Not anymore what?
Karen, Cuddles, Dilly the Understudy, and Rowdy the Ruckus Raiser
User avatar
Karen
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 534
Location: NH

Postby Red » May 13th, 2006, 2:43 am

Umkay, so whats so wrong with BadRap if i may ask


In a time when a bad mauling happened and a state wide ban was considered the group woked with Speier to limit the damage.Of course none of the usual suspects who complain about everything and everybody realized that limiting the damage was the only thing possible at the moment.Things were bad, i though I had to pack my stuff and dogs and leave. They could have screamed bloody murder , yelled and kicked and end up with each pit bull in the SF shelters being killed anyway.And from there all cities and counties to follow. We got away with spay and neuter and breeders limitations.It sucks because it BSL but it could have been way worse.Sometime people have to compromise, when you can't have it all.When something like Denver is a possibility you look for a compromise and pray you get it.People's partecipation was asked, when the law was in the making.Few were active, from breeders to registries, but everyone complains.
User avatar
Red
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 151
Location: South CA

Postby Asta » May 13th, 2006, 4:53 am

Ah, that makes more sense Reba and Red. I just couldnt compute in my head how this group of people were so opposite of all i thought they stood for. Maybe positive thinking works afterall :) ?

Åsa
User avatar
Asta
Welcome Wagger
 
Posts: 3115
Location: Everywhere

Postby Karen » May 13th, 2006, 8:40 am

Red wrote:
Umkay, so whats so wrong with BadRap if i may ask


In a time when a bad mauling happened and a state wide ban was considered the group woked with Speier to limit the damage.Of course none of the usual suspects who complain about everything and everybody realized that limiting the damage was the only thing possible at the moment.Things were bad, i though I had to pack my stuff and dogs and leave. They could have screamed bloody murder , yelled and kicked and end up with each pit bull in the SF shelters being killed anyway.And from there all cities and counties to follow. We got away with spay and neuter and breeders limitations.It sucks because it BSL but it could have been way worse.Sometime people have to compromise, when you can't have it all.When something like Denver is a possibility you look for a compromise and pray you get it.People's partecipation was asked, when the law was in the making.Few were active, from breeders to registries, but everyone complains.


What utter CRAP. There were breeders slogging away and they were shut out by closed door meetings between BadRap and the culprits. They sold us out plain and simple now the dogs are being banned all over the state.
Karen, Cuddles, Dilly the Understudy, and Rowdy the Ruckus Raiser
User avatar
Karen
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 534
Location: NH

Postby babyreba » May 13th, 2006, 11:09 am

I just looked up the Meet and Greet info. It doesn't appear to be a Northeast Meet and Greet--from what is posted in the message board announcements section, it's a Boston meet and greet for Boston-based Cafepress shopkeepers to get together and get to know one another.

They seem to have them for a few different cities . . .
User avatar
babyreba
Supremely Bully
 
Posts: 1132

Postby SisMorphine » May 13th, 2006, 12:25 pm

Yes, Boston has BSL, but it's also the best meeting place for this area, most convenient for all, etc. Especially The Harp because it is right across the street from the train station, a T station, and down the street from another T station.

OBVIOUSLY I understand that the BSL in Boston sucks, but we need to focus on educating the law makers in that city and turning it around and not on hurting the business owners, who have nothing to do with what happened, and more than likely don't even live in the city itself. Sure you can boycott the city but frankly it's most likely not going to make much of a dent in the city's economy. It would be far more efficient to focus efforts on targeting the law makers if people want the BSL in the city to be reversed.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby Karen » May 13th, 2006, 3:09 pm

SisMorphine wrote:Yes, Boston has BSL, but it's also the best meeting place for this area, most convenient for all, etc. Especially The Harp because it is right across the street from the train station, a T station, and down the street from another T station.

OBVIOUSLY I understand that the BSL in Boston sucks, but we need to focus on educating the law makers in that city and turning it around and not on hurting the business owners, who have nothing to do with what happened, and more than likely don't even live in the city itself. Sure you can boycott the city but frankly it's most likely not going to make much of a dent in the city's economy. It would be far more efficient to focus efforts on targeting the law makers if people want the BSL in the city to be reversed.


Oh really? We tried that. This BSL was concocted on the golf course. The sponsor is the golfing pal of Menino. Done deal from day 1.

And NO this was to have been a northeast meet and greet not just Boston. You didn't have the conversation with Maheesh Jain the co founder of CafePress about his not having it inside the city limits I did. It was supposed to have been outside Boston jusidiction. ALL cities/townships on the outskirts are within T travel so this is a poor excuse.
Karen, Cuddles, Dilly the Understudy, and Rowdy the Ruckus Raiser
User avatar
Karen
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 534
Location: NH

Postby babyreba » May 13th, 2006, 3:50 pm

Karen wrote:And NO this was to have been a northeast meet and greet not just Boston. You didn't have the conversation with Maheesh Jain the co founder of CafePress about his not having it inside the city limits I did. It was supposed to have been outside Boston jusidiction. ALL cities/townships on the outskirts are within T travel so this is a poor excuse.


You say "was to have been." Does that mean it's not happening now? Or they changed it to just be for Boston people?
User avatar
babyreba
Supremely Bully
 
Posts: 1132

Postby SisMorphine » May 13th, 2006, 8:00 pm

Karen wrote:
SisMorphine wrote:Yes, Boston has BSL, but it's also the best meeting place for this area, most convenient for all, etc. Especially The Harp because it is right across the street from the train station, a T station, and down the street from another T station.

OBVIOUSLY I understand that the BSL in Boston sucks, but we need to focus on educating the law makers in that city and turning it around and not on hurting the business owners, who have nothing to do with what happened, and more than likely don't even live in the city itself. Sure you can boycott the city but frankly it's most likely not going to make much of a dent in the city's economy. It would be far more efficient to focus efforts on targeting the law makers if people want the BSL in the city to be reversed.


Oh really? We tried that. This BSL was concocted on the golf course. The sponsor is the golfing pal of Menino. Done deal from day 1.

And NO this was to have been a northeast meet and greet not just Boston. You didn't have the conversation with Maheesh Jain the co founder of CafePress about his not having it inside the city limits I did. It was supposed to have been outside Boston jusidiction. ALL cities/townships on the outskirts are within T travel so this is a poor excuse.

No, I didn't have the conversation, you are correct. Not exactly a conversation I would ever imagine I would have a chance to have anyway.

In general I feel that this is being blown out of proportion. Though if I was in your position and had already had a conversation with these people about specifically not having it within the city limits then I'd probably be PO'ed also. But Boston IS easier to access, especially that area. Even though, say Harvard Square in Cambridge is also easy access via the red line, when you're in the Fanuel Hall area of Boston you have the train, the green line, and the orange line, plus buses and easy parking across the street at the Fleet Center (or Banknorth Garden or whatever the heck it is now) which isn't too hard to find in a car . . . which you can't say for most of the areas of Boston, Revere, Cambridge, Somerville, Jamaica Plain, etc etc etc.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby Red » May 14th, 2006, 1:14 am

What utter CRAP. There were breeders slogging away and they were shut out by closed door meetings between BadRap and the culprits. They sold us out plain and simple now the dogs are being banned all over the state.


Banned all over the State?Where do you come up with these ideas?The thought of restrictions for this breed has been here for a while, way before Speiers' bill.The new legislation prohibits BSL except mandatory spay and neuter by breed, by the way. You would know if you actually read the bill.
What breeders were shut out by the way? The ones who will loose money if they can't breed 45 litters per year? Responsible breeders should go trough kennel permits and litter limitations, if the bill is enforced, what's the complain here?To pay yearly fees and limit litters?Those who claim to be responsible breeders won't have a problem with pet pit bulls being spayed and neutered .Anyone who has a problem with mandatory spay and neuter of pit bull needs to open their eyes and get a grip on reality.Is it that bad if more pit bulls are spayed and neutered?Unless you live in the woods you know how the situation is.It should apply to all breeds but the state of California, just like many others, is croweded with pit bulls.Spayed and neutered dogs do not add to the overpopulation, it is a simple concept.
User avatar
Red
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 151
Location: South CA

Postby mnp13 » May 14th, 2006, 4:05 am

Any law that names a breed is BSL. Of course, it's a good thing to have more dogs spayed/neutered, but EVERY breed should be under this restriction. They sold us out by supporting a law that targets Pit Bulls.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby cheekymunkee » May 14th, 2006, 2:45 pm

The new legislation prohibits BSL except mandatory spay and neuter by breed, by the way.



Uh.....well....... that IS BSL. BSL is breed SPECIFIC legislation, it does not have to mean an all out ban of the breed. ANY legislation that SINGLES out a SPECIFIC breed for ANY reason is BSL. Breed Specific Legislation. :| We have an up & coming bill here in Texas that targets the OWNERS of dangerous dogs, NO breed is mention. I am in full support of that bill, it makes the owners responsible for their dogs actions, not pit bulls actions, not rotties actions, DOGS action. They tried to pass BSL here for larger cities last year but it didn't fly. I think this bill will & it should.
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby Red » May 15th, 2006, 11:42 pm

Uh.....well....... that IS BSL. BSL is breed SPECIFIC legislation, it does not have to mean an all out ban of the breed. ANY legislation that SINGLES out a SPECIFIC breed for ANY reason is BSL. Breed Specific Legislation.We have an up & coming bill here in Texas that targets the OWNERS of dangerous dogs, NO breed is mention. I am in full support of that bill, it makes the owners responsible for their dogs actions, not pit bulls actions, not rotties actions, DOGS action. They tried to pass BSL here for larger cities last year but it didn't fly. I think this bill will & it should.


Of course it is BSL but we can agree that some restrictions do not equal others and someone spoke of a ban which is not what we have here.Spay and neuter vs killing all pit bulls within a county...there is a difference.The Texas bill is great, I totally support it and I wish it would pass here too.At the time SB861 was written politicians already decided to target the breed, no matter what who opposed had to say.My point is that you can't blame a rescue group for limiting the damage and causing BSL when everyone wanted to see these dogs gone.Many protested the Denver ban in the making and many proposed an all breed regulation but you know that we rarely get what is fair.I don't know, I guess that after all the dogs killed in different places I can live with mandatory spay and neuter , even if it is BSL.
User avatar
Red
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 151
Location: South CA

Postby Karen » May 16th, 2006, 8:37 am

Of course you can live with it you don't show or breed at all do you? All your dogs are speutered anyway so that makes yours a moot point.
Karen, Cuddles, Dilly the Understudy, and Rowdy the Ruckus Raiser
User avatar
Karen
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 534
Location: NH

Postby turtle » May 16th, 2006, 12:15 pm

Well, I would certainly chose keeping my dog spayed or neutered rather than having my dog taken and killed like in Denver.

Considering that those dogs killed that boy, it could have been far worse. I would not condemn Bad Rap for fighting to get the bill changed to "spay/neuter" and not make it a death sentence for all bully breeds...

If only the laws would be "viscous dog" laws and cover all breeds, naming no brreds just viscous dogs, that would be much more fair and equitable.
-------------------------------------------------------

I may be slow but I get there - a turtle's motto
User avatar
turtle
Loyally Bully
 
Posts: 688

Postby Maryellen » May 16th, 2006, 12:33 pm

i too would prefer a mandatory spay/neuter then to have a total ban enacted like what happened in denver.. denver has killed over 1000 pit bulls so far, if they did a spay/neuter, those dogs would be alive still
Maryellen
I live here
 
Posts: 5971

Postby Karen » May 16th, 2006, 1:04 pm

Maryellen wrote:i too would prefer a mandatory spay/neuter then to have a total ban enacted like what happened in denver.. denver has killed over 1000 pit bulls so far, if they did a spay/neuter, those dogs would be alive still


You know what? The people that had those dogs in Denver are to blame. Yes the owners. Why on earth would you have a pit bull that had been illegal since 1989 in Denver? On the appeal state law thing? I even knew Denver to be home rule just on principle and I don't even live there! Those dogs are the owners fault.
Karen, Cuddles, Dilly the Understudy, and Rowdy the Ruckus Raiser
User avatar
Karen
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 534
Location: NH

PreviousNext

Return to Pit Bull Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron