Thanks for the comment. I read the post you linked to. I agree that this part of the law is going to get interesting. I handled an invasion of privacy case (my first trial) regarding the release of medical information. In that case the at fault person released the information to just one other person. Just think if they would have posted it on the internet!

Thanks again for the comment.

I agree. Pitbulls that don’t have a history of causing damage or biting aren’t subject to double damages. That law applies to all breeds not just Staffordshire Terriers. Wisconsin law does not single out any particular breed as inherently dangerous.

I have stated that my experience is that I receive more calls from victims of pit bull bites than any other breed. This could be because of nature or nurture. I’m not an expert enough to give an opinion on the cause.

I know there are many nice pit bulls out there. I won’t dispute that. But, you also have to understand that there are a lot of dangerous pit bulls out there too (again, either because of their owners or something in the breeds make up).

Some municipalities have decided to ban pit bulls. That’s democracy and representative government. They could also decide to ban yorkies or labs.

Thanks for the comment!