answered: AMERICAN STAFFORDSHIRE TERRIER: A BANNED BREED 1 Purpose To stop Breed Specific Legislation en



To stop Breed Specific Legislation enacted against the American Staffordshire Terrier

also known as Am Staff or American Staffy and the group of dogs commonly referred to as pit

bulls. Much of the research will cite sources referring to pit bulls. Because of the difficulty in

differentiating between the breed, AmStaff, and the group, Pit Bulls. The author will cite

research which documents the inability to identify dogs involved in fatalities, the unreliability of

visually identifying the animals and the use of misinformation to create public concern which

resulted in the law-making. I will discuss the history of the Am Staff and how it came to be the

gentle, loving companion it is today. I will compare the amstaff and the pit bull. Finally, I will

offer solutions other than banning the breed.


The ancestors of the Am Staff are traced back to the 6th century B.C. Phoenician traders

brought the Molossian dogs of Asia to England. 500 years later, when the Romans invaded

Britain, they were impressed with the savagery of the dog, and they carried many specimens

back to Italy where they featured them in blood sports where dogs were pitted against lions. In

12th Century England, these dogs were used in bull baiting contests. The object of the contest

was for the dogs to pin the bull. Typically, this took many attempts. This led to the breeding of

dogs with a high pain tolerance and a tenacious spirit. These traits continued to be desired and

bred as the blood sport evolved from bull baiting to dog fighting. By the 1870s the Am Staff had

made its way to America. It continued to be used for dog fighting, but it also evolved into other


roles. Photographic evidence shows the breed being employed widely on the Western Frontier.

They were utilized to bring down varmints and herding livestock (Pflaumer, 1998).

This brings us to the present day Am staff. The Am Staff is described as a brilliant, happy,

outgoing, stable and confident dog. Staffordshire is good-natured, entertaining, extremely loyal

and an affectionate family pet. It is good with children and adults and wants nothing more than

to please its master because of its true and devoted nature. Over the past 50 years, careful

breeding has produced this friendly, trustworthy, dog that is especially good with children.


The belief that the Am Staff has an aggressive nature towards humans is totally not true. Since

the 1800s and the evolution of dog fighting, the owners of the dogs and a referee have been

present in the ring. The owners needed to be able to separate the dogs without fear of being

bitten or attacked. Any dog that turned on its master was never bred and in most instances, they

were killed immediately. Dog fighting is a brutal sport, but it was breeding for this sport that

assured the Am Staff is not prone to attacking people.

An Am Staff is a Pit Bull, but a Pit Bull is not necessarily an Am Staff. Confused? You are not

alone; this confusion has allowed statistics to be exaggerated and presented as fact to support the

banning of the breed.

The Pit Bull is never a breed, but it continues to be referred to as a breed and sometimes wrongly

used to refer to the Am Staff. The misuse and misnamed bring into question the many statistics

presented regarding Pit Bull attacks, Pit Bull bites and fatalities. By combining several breeds

and including any dogs resembling a Pit Bull, the statistics are greatly exaggerated. These

statistics are presented to community officials and the public as fact and are contributing directly


to the decision to ban the Am Staff. This regulation would make no difference than categorizing

every retriever and any dog resembling a retriever as one class; then stating how frequently it

attacks. Doing so could make the retriever appear to be the most dangerous dog in the country.

There are sources that contradict my hypothesis that the Am Staff is not a violent dog. For

instance, according to Warnes (2013), “A 2000 study published in the Journal of the American

Veterinary Medical Association on breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United

States between 1979 and 1998 showed that from 1981 to 1992, pit bull-type dogs including

Rottweilers were responsible for about half of all human fatalities due to dog bites.” This source,

written in 2013, refers to a study published in 2000. This provides an example of the incorrect

information used to promote the myths. The authors of the study have gone on record to state

that their data does not show any one breed is more aggressive than the other. A more recent

study concluded that “of 256 fatalities in the United States during the 2000s, the association was

only able to determine that valid breed identification had happened in nearly 17 percent of

recorded incidents” (Patronek et al., 2013). This research is based on fatalities; crimes where

police officers, medical examiners, and animal control are involved and DNA testing may be

performed. In these incredibly detailed incidents, less than 1 time in 5 could the breed be

identified. The ability to visually determine the breed of dog was also tested. The research from

that cast more doubt on the validity of predicting behavior based on pedigree.

Another study addresses the difficulty for people, who work with dogs every day, to visually

identify a pit bull, a group made up of many specific breeds. This is the same identification used

to support breed specific legislation. If investigated by the law enforcement and identified by

shelter employees cannot correctly determine the breed, what is the likelihood that a routine dog

bite or a dog showing aggression will be exactly identified?


I do accept that some dogs are dangerous. But this argument needs to be put into perspective. In

the United States from the year 2000 through the end of 2009, there were 256 fatalities related to

dogs. In the same period, there were 4,500 people that died falling out of bed (Jenkins).

It is not my intention to make light of an attack or fatality; they are traumatic and terrible events.

My goal is for my reader to look at the data and determine for themselves if the legislation is

deserving of consideration. It is the position of the author that any individual dog may be

aggressive, but this is the result due to the behavior of the owner, not the breed. A recent study

points out several avoidable factors that were present in the fatalities.


The study pointing out common factors in dog fatalities is key to the solution. In every

one of the common characteristics, there is an irresponsible owner. The environment created by

the owner led to the fatalities. Dogs are social; they are pack animals, and the isolation and

abuse lead to an unbalanced animal. Cesar Millan, TV Host and Dog Behaviorist states, “Dogs

have three primary needs, exercise, discipline, and affection, in that order” (Patterson, n.d.).

My solution is to apportion the responsibility on the owner. Anyone planning to own a

dog is required to register the animal. They are required to show a certificate of graduation from

a dog obedience school within one year of ownership. They are required to prove beyond doubt

that they have Liability Insurance of at least $300,000. All dogs will be microchipped for

identification purposes. All dogs will be spayed or neutered unless the owner is registered as a

breeder, with the proper licensing and insurance. All dogs will be on a leash in public. The only

time it is acceptable for a dog to be off leash is at a dog park, in a private or a fenced area.


If a dog is running loose and picked up, the owner will be given a warning. A second incident

and the owner will be fined. The fine will continue to double, each time the dog is caught

running loose. If a dog bites a human being, the owner may face criminal prosecution for

negligence, abuse, or other appropriate charges. A second bite and the dog will be put down, no

exceptions. In this instance, if the owner has additional dogs, an inspection of their living

conditions will be overseen. If issues are identified, the dogs may be removed and put in a

shelter for protection until the necessary changes are made. The owner will be responsible for

the cost of boarding the dogs and the bill will be paid in full before the dogs are released. The

fees from registration and fines from dogs running loose will be used to fund additional animal

control personnel.

Implementing these changes will provide some positive results. First and foremost, the owner

will be legally and financially responsible for the behavior of their dog. Dog registration and

microchipping will make identification of the dog and the negligent owner easy to identify.

Spaying and neutering of all animals will significantly reduce the numbers of stray dogs,

allowing those resources to be utilized for training and law enforcement.

Requiring breeders to be registered, licensed and insured will help identify puppy mill situations.

It will considerably reduce overbreeding done strictly for profit and will result in better blood

lines across all breeds. This will lead to animals with better temperaments and improved safety

for the public.

Finally, this will cancel the need to have any breed specific legislation. The laws will focus on

the owner and the dog, not on the breed.



The American Staffordshire Terrier is misunderstood and exploited. The grouping of multiple

breeds and crossbreeds as the pit bull has led to exaggerated statistics. There have been

numerous dogs that were labeled vicious, the Doberman Pinscher, German Shepherd, Rottweiler,

and most recently the Am Staff. When the facts are inspected, the Am Staff is one of the greatest

breeds ever to exist. While it’s physical attributes and loyalty have been perverted in the past,

the breed holds no hostility. The American staffordshire terrierier are just as loving and loyal as


Problem: Since the Coronavirus Pandemic occurred in March; many employers have allowed
employees to work from home using their own personal devices. An employee using a personal
device will cause issues within the organization.

Solution: The organization needs to implement a VPN and provide employees with company based
laptops or desktop computers.

Risk: inability to secure the host, lack of authority, lower malware defense and no protective
Background and Overview
The pandemic has sent waves across all industries and work from home is the new normal today. As
the company has come out of the 2008 stringer, time calls for building a strong plan of approach to
come out of this pandemic as well. Employees have been working from home for 3 months marked
by the onset of COVID-19 on their personal systems and working on personal systems leads to
issues within the organization. There has been a significant number of reporting of such issues
recently. Thereby the organization plans to tackle this problem by making an investment in providing
remote systems and a secured network to its employees.
Business objectives
The project looks to generate an infrastructure that complies with the organization’s bylaws. The
investment made is expected to get a return of significant value and a purified work environment. It
is going to consist of setting up systems working on cloud-based virtual machines that will be
provided to the employees and setting up a virtual private network for work purposes.
Project Scope
27 laptops with AWS virtual machines running on them and an AWS site to site VPN will be
incorporated. The systems will be sent to the employees via FedEx.

1) The risk of infection to the outgoing employees for the setting up of the infrastructure.
2) The AWS billing duration lapse.
3) Effective and efficient communication throughout the process.
4) Inability to secure the host
5) Lack of authority
6) lower malware defense
7) No protective solutions
Communication Plan:1)Motive: Solutions architecting.
Medium: Microsoft Teams (Twice a day for 3 days)
Audience: Cloud experts, Tech Support and managers
2)Motive: Operational Coordination
Medium: Office platform (Once a day,Throughout the project)
Audience: Operational Management and Managers
3)Motive: Support for employees
Medium: DirectFrequency: As per requirement
Audience: Employee and tech support.

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more