Please donate to support our work is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »

17 thoughts on “Historic Recall: 50 Million Blinds Recalled Following Child Deaths

Please review our comment policy.

  1. And that's the thing that just floors me. It's much easier to prevent your child from being strangled in a blind cord than it is to prevent one from being killed by a pit bull. Nobody says a peep when products are recalled for defective design, but they scream bloody murder if you want to regulate a dog for the same reason. People need to get their priorities straight.

  2. Pit Bulls…. dangerous and defective product!…(unless one is a dog fighter or dope dealer needing a cop stopper)

  3. The bottom line is that pit bulls are and have always been SPECIFICALLY BRED TO BE AGGRESSIVE.

    It is the reason why the breeds were created by man, the reason the breeds exist, and the reason the breeds are still being bred.

    There are no breeders of pit bulls to be "pets."

    Pit bulls have always been intentionally bred to BE A LIABILITY to humans and other animals.

    ALL pit bulls (whether AKC Staffordshire Terrier registered or dog fighter registered, or simply backyard breeder pits) are PURPOSE-BRED to be "game," to be dominant, to have a high prey drive, to have enormous strength and resistance to pain, to create much damage with their bite, TO BE AGGRESSIVE.

    These are not "pet" qualities. These are qualities that lead to death and dismemberment of humans, and of other pets and livestock.

    Pit bulls are not breeds that are fit for integration into society.

    But because we have breeders and fighters (many middle class) who make large amounts of money from these dogs, we have a lobby that tries to PRETEND that pit bulls are "safe," just like we had a tobacco lobby for years spend millions trying to convince authorities, the media, and the public that tobbacco was ok.

    The pit bull lobby uses the same tactics to come up with spurious stories, fake statistics, and outright lies to pretend that pit bulls are ok, so they can KEEP MAKING MONEY FROM PIT BULLS (much of it unclaimed and untaxed income).

    They even use tobacco industry lobbyists to do some of that dirty work!

  4. Where is the Centers for Disease Control (Preventable Injuries) section? Oh, that's right, Julie Gilchrist (then with the CDC) has been quoted as being opposed to BSL.

    Does anyone else find it interesting that since the 1979-1998 study, the CDC has not published the number of men, women and children KILLED by dogs? Could there be a bias, Julie Gilchrist? Would you hide these numbers from the public?

  5. There needs to be an investigation into the activities of the CDC.

    This organization is clearly part of the problem, and is contributing toward the deaths and injuries by hiding the problems, for reasons that need to be examined.

    There needs to be an examination about the influences of the dog breeder lobby and their financial motivations on this organization.

    Someone's personal opinion about dogs should have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with PUBLIC SAFETY, and clearly there is a conflict of interest here.

    The CDC is not a "dog" organization. It's about the health and public safety of PEOPLE.

  6. I was reading an article about a bill before the House to lower the volume on commercials as they tend to be much louder than the TV show. It seems people have been complaining about this for decades – sound familar? The last two lines of the article fit the BSL/pit bull issue perfectly:

    "…the legislation would force the industry to comply with its own standards. Volunteerism hasn't worked for 50 years."

    Imagine a world where human agressive pits were actually culled and pit bull owners were knowledgable about their dogs to ensure public safety? Blaming the "irresponsible" owner falls flat when it is the only kind of pit bull owner there is.

  7. "Imagine a world where human agressive pits were actually culled and pit bull owners were knowledgable about their dogs to ensure public safety"

    It is unclear to me why you think this could ever even remotely be a possibility or a solution.

    To be honest, you sound like you are coming from the breeder mentality.

    And "dog aggressive" pit bulls still mean that PEOPLE get hurt or killed. Why would culling human aggressive pit bulls be enough? It would not solve the problem.

    But the bottom line is that pit bulls are not bred to be pets. They are bred to be aggressive and dangerous, that is a key breed trait. That's why they ARE pit bulls.

    There is ZERO reason for anyone to breed pit bulls that don't have the danger factors bred into them. They CAN'T. The danger factors have been bred into these breeds for hundreds of years. You can't just start breeding them out.

    Without these factors, there would be no pit bulls.

    There are NO "responsible" breeders of pit bulls anywhere.

    If pit bulls are bred, there will be problems PERIOD.

    It is NOT POSSIBLE to breed "safe pit bulls."

    And all the "knowledgeability" about pit bulls doesn't stop the maulings. There is no possible way to ensure that pit bulls can be kept away from other people or pets. Leashing, fencing, neutering, training. None of this has proven to be enough to stop the maulings.

  8. I don't think the last comment is fair or realistic. Pit bulls, and all fighting dogs, horrify me and I don't believe they have any place in a civilized society, either. However, the fact is that a sweeping ban is unlikely to happen because of the number of breeds it would have to encompass (you don't think that the pit fighters would move to Presas or Tosas or Filas in a heartbeat if pits were banned?). In my opinion, a solution that is ATTAINABLE is better than one that is perfect, and asking for legislation that recognizes the danger inherent in the fighting breeds and calls for strict regulation of them (and thus allows for criminal prosecution of people like Brian Pennington)is far better than what we have now, which is nothing.

  9. Dear Anonymous,

    There is ZERO evidence dogfighters will switch to a different breed, as pit bulls were selectively bred for hundreds of years to be the ULTIMATE CANINE DOGFIGHTING WARRIOR.

    Pit bulls "annihilate" Presas, Tosas, Filas and all other fighting dog breeds in fight matches — in a "heart beat" as you put it.

    Do you not understand this? In the world of dogfighting, pit bulls rule by a Mnt. Everest scale!

    Second to this, there is no simple solution to the pit bull problem. Some jurisdictions will ban pit bulls, others will impose dangerous dog regulation measures (the State of Ohio for instance) and others will require the mandatory spay and neuter of pit bulls (San Francisco for instance).


  10. I'm not interested in arguing about which breed is a better fighter. I don't think it matters – all of the fighting and guardian breeds (Filas, Ovtcharkas, Boerboels) are dangerous and ludicrous. I believe they should all be banned, I really do. But I do think that a ban on one will and does result in proliferation of the others. Perhaps you're right that the old-time, hard-core dogmen will stick to the pits, but the gangsters and the punks won't. I live in Ontario, where we have a ban on pits and there has been an explosion of American Bulldogs, Presas, and Cane Corsos. If we don't encompass those breeds within the DOLA I predict the problem will be right back at square one within 10 years. We are starting to see Filas here and I am terrified because I believe Filas to be the most dangerous dog in the world. I'd love to see all of these breeds banned, but as soon as any rumbling starts the "next they'll be coming for Rotties and Shepherds" garbage starts up. Ideally, I'd like to see a ban on all fighting breeds and strict regulation of all guard/police breeds. But is it likely? I don't think so.

    I'm happy to hear any other opinions.

  11. "But I do think that a ban on one will and does result in proliferation of the others"

    No it won't.

    As a former dog breeder, I can tell you that you are wrong.

    The fighting breeds have been developed over hundreds of years through selective breeding.

    Other breeds were bred for other purposes, and you can't just suddenly switch.

    However no one has the right to breed aggressive breeds, no matter what breed that is. This is a liability issue, and lack of proper regulation has allowed this problem to flourish.

  12. We have let this thread build itself with various comments, but future comments outside of this blog post's central theme, "Historic Recall: 50 Million Blinds Recalled Following Child Deaths" will no longer be published.

  13. Pits are also displacing other breeds form the sport of Canine Weight Pulling…thus the containment issues.

    Even Dog Lobby Pimp Randall Lockwood identified this 20 years ago in his famous study.

    He analyzed that Pit Bulls were 14 times more likely to break containment and attack compared to other breeds.

    This is what happens when you brutally cull losers for two centuries….The perfect Dog Fighter, but defective and dangerous "Pet".

Comments are closed.