Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: texasmom on January 09, 2009, 12:29:08 AM
-
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dog-pit-perry-2275294-bull-wife
This man ran to the neighbors house, borrowed a kitchen knife & killed the attacking dog. I don't think I would have thought to do that. I would have continued to wrestle with the thing, jam my fist down it's throat until it suffocated or asked an onlooker to bring me back a knife instead of leaving. I don't think I would have left & came back with a knife.
So, would you stay or would you go, or do you carry a knife on family walks? :)
-
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dog-pit-perry-2275294-bull-wife
This man ran to the neighbors house, borrowed a kitchen knife & killed the attacking dog. I don't think I would have thought to do that. I would have continued to wrestle with the thing, jam my fist down it's throat until it suffocated or asked an onlooker to bring me back a knife instead of leaving. I don't think I would have left & came back with a knife.
So, would you stay or would you go, or do you carry a knife on family walks? :)
I generally carry a knife, these two were gifts from the GF for christmas:
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc74/Serene_One/Photo2-00033.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc74/Serene_One/Photo2-00043.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc74/Serene_One/Photo2-00022.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc74/Serene_One/Photo2-00032.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc74/Serene_One/Photo2-0004B.jpg)
The first is just a display piece. The second I carry with me. However, as long as I was the only one being attacked and not Ash, I would probably never use it.
-
I'd just pull my carry and shoot a garbage dog like that. Then sue the begeesus out of the idiot that brought him to the neighborhood.
-
Those dogs are just a menace. I've known a few good ones in my days. But as a whole, they're not worth the risks.
-
This is England.....the only weapon I'm allowed to carry are the steel toe caps on my size 12s.
However, they are very effective and that dog would have had a serious headache.
-
My little town has banned pittbulls in the city limits after one attacked a mail carrier. I've hated those things with a passion ever since my sisters killed my Red Bone coon hound puppy. Alot of young adults want these pittbulls because they think they're "cool". I personally would like to see a huntin' season on them. :salute
-
I always carry a knife with me. When my wife goes for a walk alone, she likes to carry a 6" standard screwdriver. Im sure that would be effective.
Seems every day there are dog attacks on the news. Can you immagine loosing a loved one to a damn dog.
Very scarry.
-
This is England.....the only weapon I'm allowed to carry are the steel toe caps on my size 12s.
However, they are very effective and that dog would have had a serious headache.
It's just a matter of time before you're relieved of those as well - for your own good...
-
it's more the dog owner than the dog itself
some people should not be allowed to own a goldfish let alone a 4 legged lethal weapon
see the silly Dog Whisperer show for examples of stupid people with uncontrollable pets
-
I grew up in a household full of the so called rabid type Pig dogs, and have raised a couple of straight out Bull Terriers since adulthood, with no issues coming even close to these incidents(except for the feral pigs that is).
It is a shame that sheople are so easily fooled by the media into thinking just because it is a certain breed of dog it must be a natural born wanton killer.
Completely not true, as said, the Dog Whisperer basically just preaches a bit of common sense, of which is not so common. The dog is just a product of its owner.
The owner should be held accountable for anything that the dog does, just as if you had any other type of weapon and didn't handle or store it in a safe manner.
Either way I would have just kicked that mutt into next week, and found the owner for the next serving(no knife necessary).
-
It has more to do with the type of person who is drawn to an animal that has such a reputation than the breed itself.
-
I grew up in a household full of the so called rabid type Pig dogs, and have raised a couple of straight out Bull Terriers since adulthood, with no issues coming even close to these incidents(except for the feral pigs that is).
It is a shame that sheople are so easily fooled by the media into thinking just because it is a certain breed of dog it must be a natural born wanton killer.
Completely not true, as said, the Dog Whisperer basically just preaches a bit of common sense, of which is not so common. The dog is just a product of its owner.
The owner should be held accountable for anything that the dog does, just as if you had any other type of weapon and didn't handle or store it in a safe manner.
Either way I would have just kicked that mutt into next week, and found the owner for the next serving(no knife necessary).
I don't know. Alot of pitbulls are bred just for fighting and they're the ones that have this instinct in their blood. My sister has been a life long pitbull owner and she has always said the same as you, but in the same breath told me not to trust them and be careful around them.
I've always been a german shepherd owner having 2 females and 1 male. Always treated them the same as far as training and treatment goes. But the females i've had would eat you alive if you didn't live under the same roof as them. The male I have now I've never seen him so much as bark at a stranger. But he is extremely protective of my family and have a good feeling he'd come unglued if he thought harm was coming to any of us.
-
I have had two roomates with pit bulls over the years. Both were great dogs. One of my all time fav. dogs I owned was 1/2 timber wolf.
It is how you raise/train them not the breed.
-
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dog-pit-perry-2275294-bull-wife
This man ran to the neighbors house, borrowed a kitchen knife & killed the attacking dog. I don't think I would have thought to do that. I would have continued to wrestle with the thing, jam my fist down it's throat until it suffocated or asked an onlooker to bring me back a knife instead of leaving. I don't think I would have left & came back with a knife.
So, would you stay or would you go, or do you carry a knife on family walks? :)
A kid in town, iirc he was 11, was recently attacked by a pitbull. Jokes on the dog, the kid trains at a local brazilian jiu jitsu gym. He choked it to death.
-
http://xmb.stuffucanuse.com/xmb/viewthread.php?tid=5857 (http://xmb.stuffucanuse.com/xmb/viewthread.php?tid=5857)
Here's the kid that choked out the pit, it happened in Cali but I think I heard it miss reported as houston also.
-
Wow, great kid. If it were me I'd over-react and use the knife. I'm not confident enough in my flexibility to constantly kick the thing away preventing it from digging into me.
-
http://xmb.stuffucanuse.com/xmb/viewthread.php?tid=5857 (http://xmb.stuffucanuse.com/xmb/viewthread.php?tid=5857)
Here's the kid that choked out the pit, it happened in Cali but I think I heard it miss reported as houston also.
Right on. I was just waking up when it came on the morning news. I find it interesting because it's not really an air choke. On a human, it pinches the arteries in the neck shut, blacking you out in under 10 seconds. Not sure exactly how a dog's circulatory system is laid out.
-
Right on. I was just waking up when it came on the morning news. I find it interesting because it's not really an air choke. On a human, it pinches the arteries in the neck shut, blacking you out in under 10 seconds. Not sure exactly how a dog's circulatory system is laid out.
yea I heard he choked the dog out, but I was also working while listening so might have missed something.
Denholm, over react with a knife? I would have used a chain saw if I had one.
-
Knife is the worst I've got, unless I pick up my PC and drop it from the roof.
-
Knife is the worst I've got, unless I pick up my PC and drop it from the roof.
How, then, would you be able to play AH???
-
Offline. With very quick drawings.
GET ME SOME MORE CRAYONS!
-
Coming from someone whose mother breeds dogs, lived with them their whole life and has trained them (in Schutzhund) for half his life, I will tell you that it is, without question, the owner and not the breed of dog.
Yes, some dogs are bred for certain purposes, but how they are trained (or in most cases, NOT trained) dictates how the dog will behave. Also, not all dogs are good for a the purpose they were bred for. I, personally have had 3 good Schutzhund (personal protection) dogs (German Shepherds, of course :D ) that made the grade, out of about 6 or 7 that I have tried to train. Some dogs just do not have the drive, or temperament for the job. They are either too aggressive and you cannot control them instantly with a command, they have no drive and do not train well, and some are just crap at tracking and get distracted when trying to follow a scent.
You can tell right away by the neighbor walking his/her dog who is in charge. It could be a doberman or a pug, it doesn't matter one bit. Some people should not own dogs, period. This is especially the case with dogs that are large enough or strong enough to pose a danger to another human. People get them as "pets" and let them do whatever the hell they want. And in most cases, they NEVER listen to the owner.
On the other hand, I have seen some of the dogs I've owned do some amazing things such as: track a person for miles (even across running water), engage and disengage an agressor (the guy with the "sleeve") on command, and even walk across a 2x4 across saw horses like a dang cat.
I have never had a need for a leash on any shepherd that I've owned, EVER, after they have been trained. I tell the dog "Foose" (all commands are in German, of course ;) ) and it will walk one step behind and to the right of me, wherever I go, regardless of distractions. I could also go to the store, tell the dog to sit outside, be in the store for an hour, and come back and the dog wouldn't have moved an inch.
But to sum it up, obedience is mostly about the training and the owner/handler, not the breed of dog.
Don't believe me? Can your dog do this?
(http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff107/tymekeepyr/confidence.jpg)
-
^^^^^
l l l l l
:rofl :rofl
Some of those shepherds were drooling though
I have to agree it's the owner not the dog but some dogs unfortunately are very hard to train.
Cheers,
gusman44
-
Of course they are drooling :)
It's the training that supercedes the instinct :aok
-
Gotta call you on this one, bud.
There's NO doubt that training and owner interaction make huge difference in outcomes. BUT -- and its a big BUT (no offense intended to those with ample cushions) -- genetic influences also play a major role. I mean, just about anyone would agree that certain breeds have certain characteristics. Poodles are generally high strung. Huskies benefit from lots of exercise, and will get antsy if they're left inside all the time. Golden Retrievers are mellow and love their packs to death. Even dog groups have characteristics, so that if you take a sheep dog on a hike with a group it will keep checking to see that the group is all together.
All those characteristics are genetically derived. They are not trained, they are inbred. Thats why even you say:
Some dogs just do not have the drive, or temperament for the job. They are either too aggressive and you cannot control them instantly with a command, they have no drive and do not train well, and some are just crap at tracking and get distracted when trying to follow a scent.
Now, if groups of dogs share genetic material (ie they're a BREED), it only stands to reason that they can share behavioral characteristics. And yeah, some dog breeds are more prone to aggressiveness, territoriality, and comfort with strangers. Why WOULDN'T there be those differences? No doubt that within a genetic line there will be considerable variation, and even with similar genes there will be huge behavioral differences based on the environment dogs are brought up in. A bad owner can ruin a good dog, and a good owner can get control of a difficult one.
But I think you'd have to admit that there ARE differences in average temprament, so some breeds are simply going to be more aggressive -- on average. And wouldnt you agree that experience has shown that pit bulls are more likely to react aggressively than, say, Pekingese? And that they are equipped with more dangerous tools to be aggressive with?
-
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dog-pit-perry-2275294-bull-wife
This man ran to the neighbors house, borrowed a kitchen knife & killed the attacking dog. I don't think I would have thought to do that. I would have continued to wrestle with the thing, jam my fist down it's throat until it suffocated or asked an onlooker to bring me back a knife instead of leaving. I don't think I would have left & came back with a knife.
So, would you stay or would you go, or do you carry a knife on family walks? :)
the only time i am without a knife in my pocket is when i'm flying by airlines.
-
It's just a matter of time before you're relieved of those as well - for your own good...
absolutley. they don't need to carry anything over there. the camera system there will protect everyone.
-
Gotta call you on this one, bud.
There's NO doubt that training and owner interaction make huge difference in outcomes. BUT -- and its a big BUT (no offense intended to those with ample cushions) -- genetic influences also play a major role. I mean, just about anyone would agree that certain breeds have certain characteristics. Poodles are generally high strung. Huskies benefit from lots of exercise, and will get antsy if they're left inside all the time. Golden Retrievers are mellow and love their packs to death. Even dog groups have characteristics, so that if you take a sheep dog on a hike with a group it will keep checking to see that the group is all together.
All those characteristics are genetically derived. They are not trained, they are inbred. Thats why even you say:
Now, if groups of dogs share genetic material (ie they're a BREED), it only stands to reason that they can share behavioral characteristics. And yeah, some dog breeds are more prone to aggressiveness, territoriality, and comfort with strangers. Why WOULDN'T there be those differences? No doubt that within a genetic line there will be considerable variation, and even with similar genes there will be huge behavioral differences based on the environment dogs are brought up in. A bad owner can ruin a good dog, and a good owner can get control of a difficult one.
But I think you'd have to admit that there ARE differences in average temprament, so some breeds are simply going to be more aggressive -- on average. And wouldnt you agree that experience has shown that pit bulls are more likely to react aggressively than, say, Pekingese? And that they are equipped with more dangerous tools to be aggressive with?
There are genetic differences, but as a dog owner it is your responsibilty to recognize this and train your dog accordingly. Sorry it is the owners fault and not the breed of dog in the aspect that some dogs require less aggressive training and others don't. On the same note though you can have any breed of dog be aggressive by nature and require a more rigorous training as well. I have had several family members have pits and I myself have had a rot and sheppards and none of the ones that I have seen have been anywhere near being considered a vicious dog.
Dogs that are bred for fighting also have those aggressive tendancies reinforced to get them to level they need for fighting. The methods used by the owners of these dogs is terrible and if there is a hunting season needed it is on those that breed and train dogs for fighting.
As far as not trusting pits, this is probably a good idea but not because they are a bad breed but because you might not know if the owner is a responsible owner and took the time to train the dog properly or not. Again it's not the breed you need to fear as much as it is the owner.
My family has always been dog people and I now have the smallests dogs in the family with a australian sheppard and an old chow. The chow by the way is probably the least people friendly of all them and are known for their aggressiveness also, but I have never had a time where I could not control her with the sound of my voice.
-
Gotta call you on this one, bud.
There's NO doubt that training and owner interaction make huge difference in outcomes. BUT -- and its a big BUT (no offense intended to those with ample cushions) -- genetic influences also play a major role. I mean, just about anyone would agree that certain breeds have certain characteristics. Poodles are generally high strung. Huskies benefit from lots of exercise, and will get antsy if they're left inside all the time. Golden Retrievers are mellow and love their packs to death. Even dog groups have characteristics, so that if you take a sheep dog on a hike with a group it will keep checking to see that the group is all together.
All those characteristics are genetically derived. They are not trained, they are inbred. Thats why even you say:
Now, if groups of dogs share genetic material (ie they're a BREED), it only stands to reason that they can share behavioral characteristics. And yeah, some dog breeds are more prone to aggressiveness, territoriality, and comfort with strangers. Why WOULDN'T there be those differences? No doubt that within a genetic line there will be considerable variation, and even with similar genes there will be huge behavioral differences based on the environment dogs are brought up in. A bad owner can ruin a good dog, and a good owner can get control of a difficult one.
But I think you'd have to admit that there ARE differences in average temprament, so some breeds are simply going to be more aggressive -- on average. And wouldnt you agree that experience has shown that pit bulls are more likely to react aggressively than, say, Pekingese? And that they are equipped with more dangerous tools to be aggressive with?
Not much to call me out on.
I'm not denying that certain breeds have certain traits. Northern dogs like to run, certain breeds are better with children than others, etc, but in most cases, these instincts can be tempered through training. Not in all cases, of course.
I'm not trying to =say that certain breeds of dogs do not exhibit certain characteristics, but rather it's mostly (I'll repeat mostly) poor ownership or handling.
It's a shame certain breeds get a bum rap. Especially when the "breed" doesn't even exist.
There is no recognized SINGLE or PURE breed of dog, known as a pit bull. The AKC certainly recognizes a Bull Terrier as the following:
"The Bull Terrier must be strongly built, muscular, symmetrical and active, with a keen determined and intelligent expression, full of fire but of sweet disposition and amenable to discipline"
There are actually about a half dozen breeds of terrier that are referred to as a "Pit" bull, and most of them are not mean or aggressive by nature. There are so many breeds called this because, at one point, almost every county in England had it's own breed of terrier. Once they imported them and started cross breeding them with other dogs for fighting is where the term "Pit Bull" came from.
So... the trait of being aggresive is really not the "breed" of dog, but the "breedING"
Remember Petey, from Our Gang (The Little Rascals)?
Genuine American Bull Terrier :aok
-
the American Pitt Bull Terrier, is the greatest dog man has ever created, as a breed they were breed to fight DOGS not people, any "man fighters" were put down, or in the least not breed, they were never to be used as "Home protectors" for they love people to much, and if you have ever met a "true" APBT, you would know what I am talking about.
you dont need to train a APBT to fight, you have to de-train them, it is in there breeding.
now saying that, what are called "Pittbulls" today are not "true" APBT, they have been breed with so many other types of dogs, to get a bigger and more impressive "scarier" looking dog, a "true" APBT, will not be over 65 pounds,(many fall into the 45-50 pound range) it is a small to medium build dog, with a zest for life second to none, and an unwavering love for his master and pack.
I have had dogs a good portion of my life and I was fortunate enough to have an amazing "APBT" in my life, I have also had "shepherds", my "shepherd" growled at my kids, a "lab" I had also growled at my kids, but "Mia" my APBT, would allow my kids to do anything to her, they would use her as a step to climb into bed, pulled her ears, her lips, poke her eyes, whatever, it did not matter what they did, she took it happily.
I would bet my bottom dollar that 99% of these "pittbull" attacks are done by dogs that have been breed so much out side of the true "APBT" lines, that they are NOT APBTs. they may "look" like them but they are not.
I have seen so many so called "pitbulls" that are 80 to 90 pounds even heaver than that, ask the owner what kind of dog? they say "pittbull" ya they may look similar, but if you do a little research they would know the truth of the matter, they most likely own whats called an "American Staffordshire terrier"
a dog that was breed from the "American Pitbull terrier",
http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/americanstaffordshire.htm
there is so much untruth out there around this breed, it saddens me to see the Hostility to one of Mans greatest "best friends"
Not much to call me out on.
I'm not denying that certain breeds have certain traits. Northern dogs like to run, certain breeds are better with children than others, etc, but in most cases, these instincts can be tempered through training. Not in all cases, of course.
I'm not trying to =say that certain breeds of dogs do not exhibit certain characteristics, but rather it's mostly (I'll repeat mostly) poor ownership or handling.
It's a shame certain breeds get a bum rap. Especially when the "breed" doesn't even exist.
There is no recognized SINGLE or PURE breed of dog, known as a pit bull. The AKC certainly recognizes a Bull Terrier as the following: Yes there is, the UKC was founded exclusively for the APBT
"The Bull Terrier must be strongly built, muscular, symmetrical and active, with a keen determined and intelligent expression, full of fire but of sweet disposition and amenable to discipline"
a none fighting version horribly disfigured
There are actually about a half dozen breeds of terrier that are referred to as a "Pit" bull, and most of them are not mean or aggressive by nature. There are so many breeds called this because, at one point, almost every county in England had it's own breed of terrier. Once they imported them and started cross breeding them with other dogs for fighting is where the term "Pit Bull" came from.
they where breed for fighting long before they came to America
So... the trait of being aggresive is really not the "breed" of dog, but the "breedING"
Remember Petey, from Our Gang (The Little Rascals)?
he was a true APBT.
Genuine American Bull Terrier :aok
-
This is England.....the only weapon I'm allowed to carry are the steel toe caps on my size 12s.
However, they are very effective and that dog would have had a serious headache.
lol swoop :aok
Keep in mind folks.... a pit bulls biting capacity is amazing 2000 psi. All it takes is once. I saw one in a shipyard bite a 4 x 4 wiggle it and snap it in half.
-
Coming from someone whose mother breeds dogs, lived with them their whole life and has trained them (in Schutzhund) for half his life, I will tell you that it is, without question, the owner and not the breed of dog.
Yes, some dogs are bred for certain purposes, but how they are trained (or in most cases, NOT trained) dictates how the dog will behave. Also, not all dogs are good for a the purpose they were bred for. I, personally have had 3 good Schutzhund (personal protection) dogs (German Shepherds, of course :D ) that made the grade, out of about 6 or 7 that I have tried to train. Some dogs just do not have the drive, or temperament for the job. They are either too aggressive and you cannot control them instantly with a command, they have no drive and do not train well, and some are just crap at tracking and get distracted when trying to follow a scent.
You can tell right away by the neighbor walking his/her dog who is in charge. It could be a doberman or a pug, it doesn't matter one bit. Some people should not own dogs, period. This is especially the case with dogs that are large enough or strong enough to pose a danger to another human. People get them as "pets" and let them do whatever the hell they want. And in most cases, they NEVER listen to the owner.
On the other hand, I have seen some of the dogs I've owned do some amazing things such as: track a person for miles (even across running water), engage and disengage an agressor (the guy with the "sleeve") on command, and even walk across a 2x4 across saw horses like a dang cat.
I have never had a need for a leash on any shepherd that I've owned, EVER, after they have been trained. I tell the dog "Foose" (all commands are in German, of course ;) ) and it will walk one step behind and to the right of me, wherever I go, regardless of distractions. I could also go to the store, tell the dog to sit outside, be in the store for an hour, and come back and the dog wouldn't have moved an inch.
g.
Don't believe me? Can your dog do this?
(http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff107/tymekeepyr/confidence.jpg)
Yup, MY dogs can. :cool:
But to sum it up, obedience is mostly about the training and the owner/handler, not the breed of dog
:aok
-
I generalize, and I apologize.
There is no breed known SIMPLY as a "Pit Bull" like a Samoyed, for instance
American Staffordshire Terrier
American Bull Terrier
American Pit Bull Terrier
Pit Bull is a generalized term that the media uses to demonize any type of mutt that resembles any of the above breeds.
They are a cross breed from Terrier and Bulldog stock.
They were not bred for fighting inasmuch as they were bred for their ability to aggressively handle cattle, etc on the farm as well as, to be a gentle home companion at the same time. Only twisted folks, who should not be allowed to own dogs, train them for fighting. Yes, an amount of aggressiveness is a characteristic of the breed, but the level of aggressiveness needed for dog-fighting is almost always from human intervention.
There is nothing "horribly" disfigured about a purebred American Bull Terrier. It is what it is.
-
I generalize, and I apologize.
There is no breed known SIMPLY as a "Pit Bull" like a Samoyed, for instance
American Staffordshire Terrier
American Bull Terrier
American Pit Bull Terrier
Pit Bull is a generalized term that the media uses to demonize any type of mutt that resembles any of the above breeds.
They are a cross breed from Terrier and Bulldog stock.
They were not bred for fighting inasmuch as they were bred for their ability to aggressively handle cattle, etc on the farm as well as, to be a gentle home companion at the same time. Only twisted folks, who should not be allowed to own dogs, train them for fighting. Yes, an amount of aggressiveness is a characteristic of the breed, but the level of aggressiveness needed for dog-fighting is almost always from human intervention.
There is nothing "horribly" disfigured about a purebred American Bull Terrier. It is what it is.
we humans created the "Bulldog" over 4 hundred years ago, yes they were created to fight, it was called "bull baiting" or "bear baiting" (and some were forced to fight lions) they were made to fight plain and simple, these dogs were large breeds with no one look, when they outlawed bull and bear baiting, in England, they turned the dogs on each other, but they were to slow not enough action, so this is when they introduced the terrier into the lines, the terriers are notorious killers, much smaller and faster dogs,
this is were the name "bull-terrier" comes from, these are the Dogs that came to America, and became the "American pit-bull terrier" the cattle dogs you refer to are most often "American bulldogs"
which ironically some people say are the original "bulldogs" from England, that were never crossed with terriers.
so to think that these dogs were not breed to fight, is out right wrong, and to think you have to train them to fight is also wrong,
You have to train them to NOT fight.
-
From the UKC site
http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/AmericanPitBullTerrierRevisedNovember12008 (http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/AmericanPitBullTerrierRevisedNovember12008)
I am confused by the first line here.......
"Sometime during the nineteenth century, dog fanciers in England, Ireland and Scotland began to experiment with crosses between Bulldogs and Terriers,"
:huh
And you are correct. I meant not bred to fight other dogs
-
While I absolutely agree that the "fault" is with the owner -- the dog is just following through on instinct, which the owner should harness with training -- the fact remains that some dogs are more likely to attack than others.
Here's what I mean: There are millions of dog owners in America, ranging from the excellent to the absolute...ummm...knucklehead ed. Taken as a group, IN GENERAL, they will average out so that owners of any given breed have more or less similar skill in dog handling. (I know that's a generalization, and that in reality some breeds attract different kinds of people, and maybe even different skill levels in ownership.)
I'm a bottom line kind of guy. And bottom line is that "Pit Bulls" (and while that is not a breed, it DOES have meaning -- it means the kinds of dogs people call pit bulls!) account for more human deaths than any other group. They ARE more dangerous to have around, regardless of whether you blame it on crappy owners or on the dogs' genes.
Pit Bulls and Rottweilers are implicated in over half of the 283 human DEATHS from dog bites in the past 20 years. Pit bulls and pit bull crosses account for 20% of serious bites, Rotties and Chows account for 10% each, and German Shepherds another 7%. These are statistically significant differences from the "average" dog's chance of being involved in serious bites.
So you can't say it's "ALL" the owner, not the breed.
But notice what I'm NOT saying. I'm not saying that Pits ought to be outlawed, or that they should be treated differently from Rottweilers or Chows. I'm not saying that this breed or that ought to be banned. Dogs are more likely to bite when they haven't been trained, when they've been mistreated, or when they haven't had appropriate socialization -- and those things are true regardless of breed.
I just think it's misguided to claim that the breed has no part to play in likelihood of aggression. Although the anti-Pit Bull fanatics have an agenda that pushes them to warp the truth, we dog lovers can let our agenda try to cover up the unpleasant fact that some dogs are more dangerous to have in the neighborhood than others.
-
While I absolutely agree that the "fault" is with the owner -- the dog is just following through on instinct, which the owner should harness with training -- the fact remains that some dogs are more likely to attack than others.
Here's what I mean: There are millions of dog owners in America, ranging from the excellent to the absolute...ummm...knucklehead ed. Taken as a group, IN GENERAL, they will average out so that owners of any given breed have more or less similar skill in dog handling. (I know that's a generalization, and that in reality some breeds attract different kinds of people, and maybe even different skill levels in ownership.)
I'm a bottom line kind of guy. And bottom line is that "Pit Bulls" (and while that is not a breed, it DOES have meaning -- it means the kinds of dogs people call pit bulls!) account for more human deaths than any other group. They ARE more dangerous to have around, regardless of whether you blame it on crappy owners or on the dogs' genes.
Pit Bulls and Rottweilers are implicated in over half of the 283 human DEATHS from dog bites in the past 20 years. Pit bulls and pit bull crosses account for 20% of serious bites, Rotties and Chows account for 10% each, and German Shepherds another 7%. These are statistically significant differences from the "average" dog's chance of being involved in serious bites.
So you can't say it's "ALL" the owner, not the breed.
But notice what I'm NOT saying. I'm not saying that Pits ought to be outlawed, or that they should be treated differently from Rottweilers or Chows. I'm not saying that this breed or that ought to be banned. Dogs are more likely to bite when they haven't been trained, when they've been mistreated, or when they haven't had appropriate socialization -- and those things are true regardless of breed.
I just think it's misguided to claim that the breed has no part to play in likelihood of aggression. Although the anti-Pit Bull fanatics have an agenda that pushes them to warp the truth, we dog lovers can let our agenda try to cover up the unpleasant fact that some dogs are more dangerous to have in the neighborhood than others.
you are right in the fact that some dogs are more prone to aggressive behavior than others and some breeds are more likely to be as well. However as a dog owner it is your responsibility to recognize this and train your dog accordingly.
I think a big part of the reason that the numbers point in this direction are like you said certain breeds tend to attract certain types of owners, in which case it is still the owners responsibility.
I do remember reading a study once though I am unable to find it now, that most dog bites are by dogs that are tied up or kenneled and given little to no attention. This has a tendency to create severe territorial issues as well as other problems and I think the level of aggressiveness and energy levels that these dogs have are a big part of the reason they are treated this way, which could lead to higher percentage of bites you show in your numbers. This still makes it an owner issue.
I tell you the dogs I associate with dog bites more than any other dog and it probably does not make the numbers because of lack of reporting,is the Chihuahua or any other ankle biter. They just are not usually serious enough or not reported because of their size maybe because most people would be embarrassed for reporting such a bite.
edit: There was a specific question asked in the OP that many have not even addressed here, myself included.
I don't carry a knife or any other normal weapon on family walks and I can not say for sure if I would have thought to go to a neighbor for a knife. I really think I would have stayed and beat the living crap out of the dog with anything I find lying around. I also think that man was in the right for stabbing that dog until it left and fell over dead, I would have with out reserve. That said though I would definitely blame no one but the owners of the dog for having such an aggressive dog and taking the proper steps to train the dog appropriately.
-
From the UKC site
http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/AmericanPitBullTerrierRevisedNovember12008 (http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/AmericanPitBullTerrierRevisedNovember12008)
I am confused by the first line here.......
"Sometime during the nineteenth century, dog fanciers in England, Ireland and Scotland began to experiment with crosses between Bulldogs and Terriers,"
:huh
And you are correct. I meant not bred to fight other dogs
it must be the "dog fanciers" part, you gotta remember times were so different than, people had no respect for Human life, let alone a dogs life,
on a side note "pittmen' those who fought and breed "pittbulls" in the early 20s and earlier, were the first to keep track of there dogs pedigree,
and in those days the dogs did not have to fight to the death. that's more of a modern "human" trait.
-
you are right in the fact that some dogs are more prone to aggressive behavior than others and some breeds are more likely to be as well. However as a dog owner it is your responsibility to recognize this and train your dog accordingly.
I think a big part of the reason that the numbers point in this direction are like you said certain breeds tend to attract certain types of owners, in which case it is still the owners responsibility.
I do remember reading a study once though I am unable to find it now, that most dog bites are by dogs that are tied up or kenneled and given little to no attention. This has a tendency to create severe territorial issues as well as other problems and I think the level of aggressiveness and energy levels that these dogs have are a big part of the reason they are treated this way, which could lead to higher percentage of bites you show in your numbers. This still makes it an owner issue.
I tell you the dogs I associate with dog bites more than any other dog and it probably does not make the numbers because of lack of reporting,is the Chihuahua or any other ankle biter. They just are not usually serious enough or not reported because of their size maybe because most people would be embarrassed for reporting such a bite.
Owning a dog can be as dangerous as owning a gun. It also carries as much responsibility..
I've told my friends, many times. If someone pulls a gun out to rob me, while I have dog with me, he had better hit the dog first because if I go down, there won't be anyone else left to make the dog stop.
-
Owning a dog can be as dangerous as owning a gun. It also carries as much responsibility..
I've told my friends, many times. If someone pulls a gun out to rob me, while I have dog with me, he had better hit the dog first because if I go down, there won't be anyone else left to make the dog stop.
Agreed. :aok
-
Unfortunately many Pits are owned either by drug dealers or circuit fighters. The ones Ive had to deal with were usually both. Ive seen them in such horrible condition after they've been abandoned by ghetto dog fighters. Just imagine the worst condition a dog could be in and still be alive.
Ive had friends who have owned some really nice ones. I myself would never have one with small kids around but then again any dog is an animal and you have to be careful. Its really unfortunate so many screwballs have caused these animals to be demonized like they are. A good Pit with the right kind of owner makes for a fine companion.
-
Articles like this are why I carry a pistol. Not only for protection from stupid people, but animals as well.
We need laws to hold owners (and custodians) of such beasts accountable. The "my friend had it" just does not work. You can't tell me the owners "friend" did not know a PIT BULL was dangerous. Letting one of those run loose is no different than firing a gun at random in different directions.
-
We have a few moronic pit bull owners around here, also. One of those owners wouldn't care if their dog got out or not. In fact, that same owner had to pick up his dog from animal services around 8 times before he finally got fed up and moved some place else. Rather strange these ignorant individuals are.
-
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dog-pit-perry-2275294-bull-wife
This man ran to the neighbors house, borrowed a kitchen knife & killed the attacking dog. I don't think I would have thought to do that. I would have continued to wrestle with the thing, jam my fist down it's throat until it suffocated or asked an onlooker to bring me back a knife instead of leaving. I don't think I would have left & came back with a knife.
So, would you stay or would you go, or do you carry a knife on family walks? :)
<- 6'4", 280 lbs
It's not as sharp as a knife but almost as effective against a dog, it's called my size 14 foot and fists of fury.
My little town has banned pittbulls in the city limits after one attacked a mail carrier. I've hated those things with a passion ever since my sisters killed my Red Bone coon hound puppy. Alot of young adults want these pittbulls because they think they're "cool". I personally would like to see a huntin' season on them. :salute
It's unfortunate that pitbulls have such a bad wrap because they have such horrible owners. I've met some really sweet ones though, and each one comes from a loving family/owner that looks after their dog (giving it a treat when it does good and giving it a strong hand when it does bad). I'll believe that some breeds of dogs are more prone to being this or that, but if you've ever been around dogs for most of your life like me, you know good dogs have good owners, bad dogs have bad owners. I'm only 25, but most of my peers I honestly don't think could clean their own toilet bowl if their life depended on it, noneless take after another living thing such as a dog.
-
I'm glad the man rescued his family, but leaving for even a moment could have led to disaster. The manner in which he killed the beast is weird as well, but that's not going to be the point of my post.
Pitbulls should be exterminated. Many will disapprove of this statement, the bleeding hearted liberals, and the animal rights activists. Those types of people will only change their tone of voice when a loved one or friend, or worse yet, their own child is mauled to death or so hideously disfigured they'll never be able to enjoy life. Only then will they see the light of their misguided and blind ignorance.
It's not uncommon for animals to be completely exterminated in the United States, like the wolverine, or wolf, granted, they still exist, but were pushed to near extinction levels because of either human/livestock/fur issues. Imagine a wolverine mauling and killing a child in any state, what would happen? Imagine if it had a few more times. Imagine if it had a few times a year, for a decade. They would be hunted, killed, and their coats used to line jackets. Just because a pitbull is a "domesticated" pet doesn't mean it shouldn't be destroyed. Pitbulls are listed with rottweilers as the two species of canine that are responsible for the highest rate of homicides. http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html (http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html) That's one source for my claims, and opinions.
http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2009/01/2008-us-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html (http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2009/01/2008-us-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html)
http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2007/12/grim-2007-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html (http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2007/12/grim-2007-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html)
http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2008/08/2006-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html (http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2008/08/2006-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html)
http://www.dog-bite-law-center.com/pit_bull_attacks.html (http://www.dog-bite-law-center.com/pit_bull_attacks.html)
http://www.pitbulllovers.com/pitbull-attacks-deadly.html (http://www.pitbulllovers.com/pitbull-attacks-deadly.html)
Read through those sites, Pitbulls take the prestigious title of most people killed for three straight years. They are the USC of canines.
People will come crying to their defense, that it's not their fault, its about their upbringing, and what not. The fact they never see is that they are an animal. No animal can ever be completely domesticated, its virtually impossible. Its like those When Animals Attack shows, I always wonder what those people are thinking when they say "I've been training this lion for years, I wonder why it attacked me". BECAUSE ITS A LION! Look at how many people died when that elephant went on a rampage at a circus, people were absolutely confused that an elephant would go on a rampage. It's those same people that will blindly defend the pitbull.
It has gotten to the point that people should be required, by LAW, to register their pitbull with the state. For all intents and purposes, pitbulls are lethal weapons. A male pitfull could easily kill or maul an (un)suspecting person. No matter how tough you think you are, when a dog with powerful jaws and sharp teeth latch onto you, it'll take the wind out of your sails. Strict guidelines should be enacted, and through ALL 50 states. Fines should be levied, and should be harsh, think pirating a DVD fine.
I've been attacked by three dogs in my lifetime. One was a rottweiler, the dog was a full grown male, it was coming after my 6 month old king German shepherd. I had to defend my dog, he was still a puppy. I got bite twice, once on the arm, and once on leg. Unfortunately for the dog, my friend was within earshout and came out with a baseball bat. The second time was by a bullmastiff, I was about 8 years old and was playing with some of the neighborhood children, it was their dog. I was playing touch football, and ran past the dog, who was normally chill as ice with me, but he decided to bite me this time around. He bite me on my chest, puncturing about an inch into my chest. The dog got shot by the owner latter on in the day, after the dog had bitten him as well when he started to discipline it after it had bitten me. The last, to no surprise, was a pitbull. I was in Jacksonville, North Carolina, at a friends house who lived next door to a guy who owned a pitbull. For whatever reason, the dog disliked me from the get go, it wouldn't stop growling and staring at me from underneath the dinning room table. I figured the dog would do something stupid, so I called the evening short and went to leave. As I was bending down to grab my boots, the dog lunged at me, but was surprised when I caught it in mid-air and slammed it into the wall. I did end up getting bite after a struggle until my friend pulled it away. I ended up breaking three knuckles and denting in my steel toed boots on the dog and it wouldn't stop. Pitbulls are like a Timex, they'll take a lickin and keep on tickin.
I'm just wondering how many pitbull attacks go unrecorded, or if in another country, won't make international news if it's a fatality. I'm sure the stats would increase exponentially.
-
My sister has a Pitbull/lab mix. It is a very nice dog, and is happy to let any member of our family play or pet him.
However it was shown he was amazingly defensive as well. This time last year my sister and her boyfriend were out at a party and someone broke into the house...bad decision. They got home to an amazing amount of blood, just everywhere. The floors were red, the walls had bloody hand prints.
Apparently Jasper (dog) had bit the hell outta the guy, while the guy stabbed Jasper in the shoulder. They found Jasper crying under the bed and bleeding profusely from his shoulder when they got home. He went to the vet and healed fine, but is a little more edgy now and very afraid the of window where the burglar crashed through to get out of the house from. They guessed that because there was a huge bloody trail leading to the window and then out of it, with a mess of paw and foot prints along the way.
Jasper may have been hurt, and apparently psychologically damaged (he is regaining normalcy slowly though) but the guy certainly didn't get off easy and will have hopefully learned not to break into peoples' homes.
-
.
-
My little town has banned pittbulls in the city limits after one attacked a mail carrier. I've hated those things with a passion ever since my sisters killed my Red Bone coon hound puppy. Alot of young adults want these pittbulls because they think they're "cool". I personally would like to see a huntin' season on them. :salute
+1, vicious dogs, I hate those things. A friend used to have it, till it attacked him, he just shot it, got a Labrador, and forgot about the pitbull, still tells me he'll never get another one in his life. Damn things are worthless, can't use em for huntin, can't trust 'em enough to guard something, they'll accidentailly attack you, can't use em to guard livestock. Tells you what generations of inbreeding will do to ya.
-
some of you are just down right ignorant.
did you try to read any of the posts or read up on any thing about those dogs? no of course not you already know that they are vicious animals and should all be killed.
ya lets kill all of them, because some owners allow there dogs to rule them and not the other way around,
its ignorance like this, that had men put a bounty on the Bald Eagle, and basically killed every wolf in this country, and grizzly...
whats the point... you cant fix stupid.
-
Any dog kept as a pet absolutely MUST know who the Alpha Male/Female in the pack is. And it can not be the dog, ever. It's when (in the dogs view) the dog is the Alpha male/female that trouble begins. To many owners are to lazy to make sure their pet understands it's place in the pack, and make no mistake, in the dog's view, his owner and family are his pack. A dog that properly understands his place in the pack will be eager to please and thus, easily trained. A trained dog is a polite dog and is a joy to have as a member of the family. A dog that does not understand his proper place in the pack will have little to no desire to please and will be difficult if not impossible to train. This dog will be a nuisance and will be likely to growl, bite or in extreme cases even kill when it becomes annoyed.
I've had dogs most of my adult life. I can (and have) trained them to sit when their food bowl is put down and they don't move until the release command is given. I could even leave the house and the dogs wouldn't move to eat. How is that possible? Simple really, the dog understands that no matter how long he is made to wait, that he WILL eventually get his food. His reward for waiting obediently is his meal. That goes against all the dogs instincts, it is hungry and food is in front of it and yet he waits obediently until the pack leader allows him to eat. Years ago I knew a woman that had trained her dog to sit still with a piece of raw meat laying on it's muzzle. Poor dog would be salivating heavily and darn near cross eyed while staring at that piece of meat and yet he would not move a muscle to try to eat it until she told him it was ok.
Any dog can be aggressive and some breeds are more prone to it than others. Training your dog is an act of love towards that animal. With training he/she knows exactly what is expected of him/her, what behaviors are acceptable and which ones are not. A trained dog will react immediately to it's masters voice commands (and hand signals as well). A trained dog, regardless of breed, poses no threat to it's owners or any other human being.
There are no bad dogs in this world, but there are many bad owners. Much like our human children are a reflection of their parents, our dogs are a reflection of their owners.
-
Any dog kept as a pet absolutely MUST know who the Alpha Male/Female in the pack is. And it can not be the dog, ever. It's when (in the dogs view) the dog is the Alpha male/female that trouble begins. To many owners are to lazy to make sure their pet understands it's place in the pack, and make no mistake, in the dog's view, his owner and family are his pack. A dog that properly understands his place in the pack will be eager to please and thus, easily trained. A trained dog is a polite dog and is a joy to have as a member of the family. A dog that does not understand his proper place in the pack will have little to no desire to please and will be difficult if not impossible to train. This dog will be a nuisance and will be likely to growl, bite or in extreme cases even kill when it becomes annoyed.
I've had dogs most of my adult life. I can (and have) trained them to sit when their food bowl is put down and they don't move until the release command is given. I could even leave the house and the dogs wouldn't move to eat. How is that possible? Simple really, the dog understands that no matter how long he is made to wait, that he WILL eventually get his food. His reward for waiting obediently is his meal. That goes against all the dogs instincts, it is hungry and food is in front of it and yet he waits obediently until the pack leader allows him to eat. Years ago I knew a woman that had trained her dog to sit still with a piece of raw meat laying on it's muzzle. Poor dog would be salivating heavily and darn near cross eyed while staring at that piece of meat and yet he would not move a muscle to try to eat it until she told him it was ok.
Any dog can be aggressive and some breeds are more prone to it than others. Training your dog is an act of love towards that animal. With training he/she knows exactly what is expected of him/her, what behaviors are acceptable and which ones are not. A trained dog will react immediately to it's masters voice commands (and hand signals as well). A trained dog, regardless of breed, poses no threat to it's owners or any other human being.
There are no bad dogs in this world, but there are many bad owners. Much like our human children are a reflection of their parents, our dogs are a reflection of their owners.
frigging spot on :aok
my female APBT, at 10 weeks old would drop anything in her mouth that I told her too"leave it", would go pee on command, could close my fridge door or cupboard doors, she was very easy to train, by far the smartest dog I have ever met.
but damn she was a vicious "pittbull" I guess I shoulda just killed her when she was born.
-
frigging spot on :aok
my female APBT, at 10 weeks old would drop anything in her mouth that I told her too"leave it", would go pee on command, could close my fridge door or cupboard doors, she was very easy to train, by far the smartest dog I have ever met.
but damn she was a vicious "pittbull" I guess I shoulda just killed her when she was born.
The reputation those dogs carry is why they should be outlawed. Some old lady was killed by 2 pitbulls a while back not even 10 miles from my house. The "exceptions" don't outweigh the risks sadly.
-
The reputation those dogs carry is why they should be outlawed. Some old lady was killed by 2 pitbulls a while back not even 10 miles from my house. The "exceptions" don't outweigh the risks sadly.
I hate to say it AGAIN, but I highly Doubt it was a "pittbull" just because the papers call them "Pittbulls" don't make them so. and just because the "owner" says they are "pitts" don't make them so ether.
NO one species of Dog should be outlawed, by your reasoning the "risks",
well then we need to outlaw, Cars, alcohol, cigarettes, Planes, Guns, boats,knives, bikes, Food also.......
-
Someone in this thread characterized his/her nature as that of a "bottom line type of person"...I can certainly relate to that, so here's mine:
In addition to requiring Dog owners to license their Dogs, perhaps the Dog owners should be licensed, via a requirement to attend "doggy school..then an exam. This may not eliminate the "dog attack" problem, but I'm pretty sure it'll decrease the frequency...imho.
-
I have been in this argument many times, "it's the dog, no, it's the owner".
What a bunch of BS.
The dogs classified as "Pit Bulls" have a terrible record of attacking, and sometimes killing other dogs, children, and full grown adults.
I don't accept it is always "the owner". The dogs have an inbred tendency to attack, and the strength and stubbornness to do incredible damage when they do attack.
If they were outlawed it wouldn't break my heart, and it would save a lot of lives.
To accept it's always the owner is to say the majority of owners are vicious stupid people. Certainly not all owners of Pit Bulls are stupid or vicious.
I do actually believe there is a tendency in stupid vicious people to own pit bulls, if they owned Golden Retrievers instead, I don't think the Goldens would be attacking at the rate Pit Bulls do.
-
ISimple really, the dog understands that no matter how long he is made to wait, that he WILL eventually get his food. His reward for waiting obediently is his meal. That goes against all the dogs instincts, it is hungry and food is in front of it and yet he waits obediently until the pack leader allows him to eat.
You're close, but a bit wrong. Waiting for their food actually goes WITH the instincts the dog has already. Alpha eats first and controls access to the food, it's natural. Makng them wait just enhances an already engrained instinct.
Good training can help control a dog and make it a valuable member of the family. Training cannot, however, change what a dog is. I use this example whenever this topic comes up, but it still remains valid. I share my home with two rough collies and a border collie, herding dogs. Two are trained for agility, one is a rehab from an abusive owner. I'm alpha and just raising my voice will make the dog it's directed at drop its ears, even though I've never raised a hand to any of them. I reinforce my alpha status daily in subtle ways. I had my border collie off leash in the front yard when she spotted a squirrel. She was off like a dart and in the middle of a dead run. All I had to do was holler out "wait" and she stopped dead in her tracks and waited for the next command. The biggest thing for me is that I can lay my full dinner plate on the couch and walk out of the room and they won't even give it a second look. ;)
So I'm alpha, and I'm in control of pack. But my dogs are herders. They're bred to round things up into tight little circles. And they do it well! We had a get together once and had lots of people in the back yard along with their kids. The kids started getting a little rowdy and that's when I noticed what my dogs were doing. They were very discreetly walking in circles around the kids and getting them closer and closer in a group. It was hysterical to watch. Within a few minutes the kids were back with their parents and had no idea what had just happened. They've done it several times now but I don't let them finish. As soon as I catch what they're doing I have them go do something else. It's what they're bred to do, and while I can control it, I cannot eliminate it's presence.
A dog's status in it's pack is forever fluent. My top dog has changed three times in the last year alone. And sometimes the top dog gets a little big for his/her britches and decides to see if they can take my spot. It's usually very subtle. Sitting in my position on the couch to see if I will move somewhere else, forcing their way through a door before me, not giving way when I walk through, etc. But sometimes it takes on a more aggressive tone. A soft growl when I make them move or a bark when I tell them to do something. Each time I rebuff it and reassert my place in the pack.
Alright, so on to pit bulls. First, their absolutely IS a pit bull breed. Are there several variations? yes Are they a standardized breed? no But they still exist. The people that buy them know what they are and what they're bred for. It's like defining pornography. The people that look for it know what it is.
The pit bulls that we're talking about are bred for fighting, hands down. Always have been, always will. They're bred with an instinct to kill. No matter what the training the instinct is still there. You may think it's under control, and it may be. But all it takes is being wrong ONE time and lives change. And what happens when this type of dog tries to elevate it's position in the pack? If it get a little touchy ONE time, lives change.
People say they need these dogs because they're great with families and excellent for protection. That can be said about virtually any large dog. Dogs in general are protective of their pack members. There is not a doubt in my mind that if there is in intruder in my house my cute and fluffy herding dogs will be relentless in their pursuit. And yet when their instincts pop up all that happens is parents get their kids back. So why the need for owning this type of animal? I believe it boils down to machismo. I've yet to talk to an owner of a pit bull that doesn't gloat about how big and strong their dog is. Let me stress that, I've NEVER talked to a pit bull owner that hasn't gloated about their dogs power. And I've met lots of owners in my lifetime. Owning a dog that is bred to kill is the same as leaving a loaded weapon on the coffee table. You can train your children on how that weapon will kill them every day. They may very well go through their entire life without having it go off and kill someone. But if they're wrong ONE time, lives change. That in and of itself should be enough to make people look for another breed.
-
here are some interesting facts about pit bulls
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu8Sk9GhJ1HgBkoBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzZ2RlNnUzBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA1IyMDVfMTIx/SIG=11vumk02f/EXP=1231701540/**http%3a//www.realpitbull.com/perspective.html (http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu8Sk9GhJ1HgBkoBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzZ2RlNnUzBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA1IyMDVfMTIx/SIG=11vumk02f/EXP=1231701540/**http%3a//www.realpitbull.com/perspective.html)
2.) Although there are no accurate or even near accurate census records for dogs in the U.S., in some populations pit bulls are estimated to comprise some 30-40% of the dog population, making it a very popular breed. Considering that there were an estimated 53,000,000 dogs in the U.S., and assuming that pit bulls make up 10% of that population, there would be approximately 5.3 million pit bulls in our society. In 2000, 13 pit bulls were involved in 8 fatal attacks. That is roughly ONE dog out of 204,000 - or .000385 percent of the pit bull population.
wow these are un-trustworthy animals that need to be exterminated.
9.) Every year, more than 2,000 children in the U.S. are killed by their parents or guardians either through abuse or neglect. A child is more than 800 times more likely to be killed by their adult caretaker than by a pit bull.
ok now we need a rule that says parents can't raise their own children too
5.) Approximately 50 children in the US are killed every year by their cribs - 25 times the number of children and adults killed by pit bulls.
outlaw those nasty cribs whie we are at it too
not really trying to be a smart arse here but there are things out there will be more likely to hurt or kill you than a pit bull. some of them others have already mentioned like guns, cars, planes, or even the food in your refrigerator
ANY dog can attack and be considered vicious when not trained or raised properly and I know several families you have pit bulls because they like the demeanor and the energy these dogs have not to mention the dedication these dogs have for their owners. I have talked to very few people you have these dogs because of their ability to harm somebody however if you have the opposite experience then perhaps you have been hanging with the crowd of people who should not have any dog.
-
While you're throwing around stats, how about adding in the people that were bitten and/or maimed and not just killed.
-
They're bred with an instinct to kill. No matter what the training the instinct is still there.
Every dog has an instinct to kill, they are domesticated predators.
You're close, but a bit wrong. Waiting for their food actually goes WITH the instincts the dog has already. Alpha eats first and controls access to the food, it's natural. Makng them wait just enhances an already engrained instinct.
His instinct isn't to wait, it's to obey the pack leader. He is hungry and desires food, but obeys his pack leader. This is evident during the early training sessions when the pup attempts to go for his food instead of waiting. The waiting must be taught, things that must be taught are not instinctive.
-
While you're throwing around stats, how about adding in the people that were bitten and/or maimed and not just killed.
by this comment I guess you don't drive cars, or have children, or bathe either right.
-
by this comment I guess you don't drive cars, or have children, or bathe either right.
Of course I do all of the above. But I drive a safe car to mitigate my risks, I take excellent care of my child and when I take a bath I make sure that there aren't any electrical appliances about to fall in the water. I like to be as in control of my risks as possible.
-
Every dog has an instinct to kill, they are domesticated predators.
The instinct to hunt and kill passed down through their ancestors is still present, but definitely not dominant. Plus the hunt kill is completely different than the defense kill that is so prominent in the pit bull situations.
-
The instinct to hunt and kill passed down through their ancestors is still present, but definitely not dominant. Plus the hunt kill is completely different than the defense kill that is so prominent in the pit bull situations.
The *defense kill* is not prominent among pit bulls as evidenced by the stats provided by another poster.
The instinct to hunt and kill can be brought out in any dog by simply no longer providing food.
-
Of course I do all of the above. But I drive a safe car to mitigate my risks, I take excellent care of my child and when I take a bath I make sure that there aren't any electrical appliances about to fall in the water. I like to be as in control of my risks as possible.
while you may may be the safest driver in the world accidents still happen. You can not control the other drivers and you being out on the road illistrates to me that you are trusting that everyone else operates their vehicle in a responsible manner since they have the ability to kill.
In the tub you can still slip and fall knocking yourself unconscious and drown in the tub.
You are more likely to be injured by another driver in a vehicle than you are bit by any dog let alone singling out any one breed.
Those of you who use the pit bull leads all other breeds in the attacking human stats must realize that once you take them out of the picture there will another one that will take it's place then right. After you eliminate that one another will take it's place. Will we continue to wish for the number offender to be killed off until all dogs are illegal. A little far fetched I know, but using the pit bull is the number one human attacker is a bogus reason because there will always be a number 1.
-
I have to trust the other drivers to do their thing unless I want to use some other form of transportation. As of right now, there are no other options than motor vehicles and bicycles to commute to work. So I make the choices that I can to mitigate that risk. There are alternative dog breeds available, so why the need to have the most dangerous?
Yes I may slip and fall in the tub, but I have no other alternative to getting clean, so I just take care of myself and accept the risk.
dkff - After doing a touch of searching, statistics show that pits are responsible for three times the number of dog bites as the second place Rottweiler. Three times over is more than just one dog having to be at the top of the list.
-
Bottom line: Dogs commonly referred to as "pit bulls" kill more humans than any other breed. Even though they are far from the most common breed around.
Yeah, the ones who attack are probably the least trained, worst handled, maybe even abused dogs in the breed. But there are poorly trained dogs in every breed, and other breeds simply kill people less often -- or not at all.
Would be great if there was a way to limit ownership to the competent, but don't see how we could license owners (any more than we could license parents!)
Sensible solution I've read about elsewhere would hold owners OF ANY BREED DOG liable to both civil and criminal penalties when attacks occur. Certainly makes more sense than destroying dogs who happen to carry a certain label, but unfortunately as things are now the dogs are the ones who pay the (ultimate) penalty when their owners fail them.
-
cougar you can sponge bath not that anybody here needs a visual
but the pit bull attacks are the exception as a matter of fact most of the breeders only breed dogs that have a tendancy to be more gentle, not all are bred to be aggressive that is falacy. The ones that don't usually are bred for dog fights and are illegal.
None the less using the number attacker is a bad reason. using the 3 times more likely than other breeds is an ok reason to not own one yourself but the fact that there are many more that never even some close to biting anyone is a good reason to believe that it is not the breed as much as it is the owners.
There are other breeds out there but it is a persons choice as to what breed they like the most and I don't think it is right to expect someone to give that up because .000385% of that breed ever attacks anybody.
-
I own 2 Rottweilers, and when one was a pup she was attacked by a pitbull. From experience, they're pretty easy to take care of if ya get em by the throat and squeeze till ya feel your fingers on the other side. It's not lethal, but they don't enjoy it a bit.
Rotts and pitts which are so-called "vicious breeds" both require A LOT of training and a dominant owner. These types of animals are far too powerful to take lightly. Given the right owner and training though they can be great companions and protectors.
-
Even though they are far from the most common breed around.
In many places the various breeds known as pit bulls ARE the most common breeds around.
-
Bottom line: Dogs commonly referred to as "pit bulls" kill more humans than any other breed. Even though they are far from the most common breed around.
Yeah, the ones who attack are probably the least trained, worst handled, maybe even abused dogs in the breed. But there are poorly trained dogs in every breed, and other breeds simply kill people less often -- or not at all.
Would be great if there was a way to limit ownership to the competent, but don't see how we could license owners (any more than we could license parents!)
Sensible solution I've read about elsewhere would hold owners OF ANY BREED DOG liable to both civil and criminal penalties when attacks occur. Certainly makes more sense than destroying dogs who happen to carry a certain label, but unfortunately as things are now the dogs are the ones who pay the (ultimate) penalty when their owners fail them.
+1!
I really don't care what type of animal is involved, the owner/custodian has a responsibility to control it and should be held accountable for it's actions. It's not just a moral responsibilty, it's common sense.
The owner/custodian should be charged/sued for whatever action that animal takes. If it attacks someone, the o/c is guilty of assault and should be prosecuted as such along with being responsible for any medical bills, lost wages and payment for any long-term disability caused. If an attack ends in death, the o/c is guilty of murder.
Doesn't matter if its a dog, cat, snake or whatever. Pits do seem to end up as the culprit most of the time when you hear of a dog attack in the news. People can argue all they want...there may be some docile ones out there, but you often hear the owner and neighbors comment on a pit involved in an attack as being nice and playing with the kids just fine and then one day SNAP...it's got a toddler in it's mouth. How many collies, labs, sheps, dobies, etc. do you hear snapping and attacking people? Some interesting findings can be viewed here http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf (http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf).
Pit bulls are responsible for as many attacks as all other breeds combined. This is unacceptable and needs regulation.
-
The numbers show that a pit is three times more likely to injur someone than the Rottie which is second. The pit is also THIRTY times more likely to bite than the third place dog, German Shepherd. And the pit only represents 8% of the dog population. Those kind of numbers can't be ignored.
Back to the bath/driving analogy for a quick sec. Yes these two can be dangerous, but I'm not going to own a car with pointy spikes on the steering wheel and my bathtub doesn't have rollers in the bottom for me to step on. I wouldn't buy objects with inherent safety defects, and I wouldn't buy a dog with an inherent safety defect. There are sooooo many other breeds available that there just isn't any reason that I can see.
-
cooger the driving/bathing analogy was simply to show you that no matter how careful you are you can not control all the aspects and remain 100% safe and you still be more likely to be injured in one of those types of incidents than to be attacked by any dog let alone a pit bull.
as far as the numbers go the numbers also show that it is very unlikely that anybody will be attacked by a pit bull since the statics show that only approximately .000385% of the dogs will ever attack anybody. I would be willing to bet that the percentage of drivers involved in a vehicle accident is higher than that.
I realize that you will never own one and that you will never trust one. That is ok I just don't feel that this breed of dog should be made illegal all together just because a few dumb arses can't control of train their dog and it is only a relatively few dogs.
In answer to the statement made by another about the pit bulls that are little angles one day and attack the next, I would have to say that I don't remember hearing many stories to that effect and most of the ones that I have heard or read about have been exactly the opposite and that is for all breeds. Most of them have been dogs that are tied or behind a fence all the time and act aggressive through the fence and many times what a kid calls playing with a dog involves throwing things at them or teasing them with food or other things that most adults would not do.
Look I know that everybody here has an opinion and nobody here is going to change theirs but it is the right for everyone here to choose the dog that they like or no dog at all if they wish. The ownership of these dogs are regulated in many places and many insurance companies won't insure owners of these dogs and those that have rotts (not so sure I agreeor disagree with this but it is what it is). There are municipalities around here that do not allow these 2 breeds to be kept as pets though it is not enforced very much, only when something happens or someone complains.
I just wanted to get acrossed that the likelyhood of ever being attacked by one of these great dogs is very low adn therfore should not be exterminated or made illegal.
-
In many places the various breeds known as pit bulls ARE the most common breeds around.
Places like trailer parks and Michael Vicks back yard?
-
Dave,
I agree that I'm not going to convince you of anything and vice versa. The point I am making (and I'll leave it at this) is that the attacks do happen and that it's thirty times more likely to be bitten by a pit than a german shepherd. And this is only going off of the reported statistics.
I will also refute your claim that they do not go from angel to devil in a heartbeat. I've seen it happen with my own very eyes. The really scary thing is that he went back to angel just as quick.
I don't advocate outlawing the breed. We have enough laws to police without that. I believe that as more people are educated about what these dogs are capable of that it will take care of itself. Whenever a thread like this comes up I feel the need to weigh in so both sides are heard and out there for people on the fence to read.
-
Dave,
I agree that I'm not going to convince you of anything and vice versa. The point I am making (and I'll leave it at this) is that the attacks do happen and that it's thirty times more likely to be bitten by a pit than a german shepherd. And this is only going off of the reported statistics.
I will also refute your claim that they do not go from angel to devil in a heartbeat. I've seen it happen with my own very eyes. The really scary thing is that he went back to angel just as quick.
I don't advocate outlawing the breed. We have enough laws to police without that. I believe that as more people are educated about what these dogs are capable of that it will take care of itself. Whenever a thread like this comes up I feel the need to weigh in so both sides are heard and out there for people on the fence to read.
Well put and I did not say or want to imply that they never go from angel to demonand back I simply said that most of the stories that I have heard and or read about were not this way. I rarely ever use the terms never and always because you can generally find an example of anything if you look hard enough.
I appreciate your opinion in not taking the extreme like so many others here have and agree that eduacting the masses is the right approach to the issue of pit bulls. I also believe that this will resolve the issue as well whether it be to the effect that no one wants one anymore or the ones that get them will be more responsible in the way the train and care for the dogs.
Again well said
-
In answer to the statement made by another about the pit bulls that are little angles one day and attack the next, I would have to say that I don't remember hearing many stories to that effect and most of the ones that I have heard or read about have been exactly the opposite and that is for all breeds. Most of them have been dogs that are tied or behind a fence all the time and act aggressive through the fence and many times what a kid calls playing with a dog involves throwing things at them or teasing them with food or other things that most adults would not do.
I found this in about 10 seconds of searching (under "pit bull attack" in Google). http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/baltimore_city/bal-md.ci.pitbull23oct23,0,7163330.story (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/baltimore_city/bal-md.ci.pitbull23oct23,0,7163330.story)
A similar thing happened around here not long ago. It happens more than you want to think that it does and as much as you don't like it or agree with it, it is a fact.
Again, I'm not saying exterminate the things, I'm saying that they are proven to be a danger to society more than any other common pet and their owners/custodians should be held accountable to the highest degree for their pets' actions. If you know something is dangerous, you have a moral (and legal) obligation to control it. Allowing a pit access to another person in any way is no different than pointing a gun at them. Will it go off?
If you want one, fine. Restrain it and you and those old enough to make life-and-death decisions about themselves should be the only ones exposed to it. If it snaps, then you get mauled...not some child or passerby.
-
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dog-pit-perry-2275294-bull-wife
This man ran to the neighbors house, borrowed a kitchen knife & killed the attacking dog. I don't think I would have thought to do that. I would have continued to wrestle with the thing, jam my fist down it's throat until it suffocated or asked an onlooker to bring me back a knife instead of leaving. I don't think I would have left & came back with a knife.
So, would you stay or would you go, or do you carry a knife on family walks? :)
=D mom not everyone walk around w/ a knife!
-
I found this in about 10 seconds of searching (under "pit bull attack" in Google). http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/baltimore_city/bal-md.ci.pitbull23oct23,0,7163330.story (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/baltimore_city/bal-md.ci.pitbull23oct23,0,7163330.story)
A similar thing happened around here not long ago. It happens more than you want to think that it does and as much as you don't like it or agree with it, it is a fact.
Again, I'm not saying exterminate the things, I'm saying that they are proven to be a danger to society more than any other common pet and their owners/custodians should be held accountable to the highest degree for their pets' actions. If you know something is dangerous, you have a moral (and legal) obligation to control it. Allowing a pit access to another person in any way is no different than pointing a gun at them. Will it go off?
If you want one, fine. Restrain it and you and those old enough to make life-and-death decisions about themselves should be the only ones exposed to it. If it snaps, then you get mauled...not some child or passerby.
read that article and though it does support the calm one second and not the next the only thing I can say is any dog in a new enviroment should be watched carefully for signs of stress. These signs my not come in the form of growling, biting, or showing of teeth. Sometimes the signs are easily missed ones, like the animal seperating itself from the other family members. I know these types of incidents happen again there is an exception to every rule.
I agree with you any animal attack on a human needs to be addressed both criminally and civil. These attacks no matter the breed are the responsability of the owners and it is their responsability to know the needs of their breed of dog and the needs of the individual dog that they own and take care of that. I also know that there are several breeds that have a bad rap and every time an attack happens by one of them the press and everybody else makes it sound as they are evil dogs also (examples are the rotts, sheppards, and chows).
It really is exceptionally rare for a dog to suddenly attack with no warning, the problem is many people don't know how to read the signs. I can't tell you the number of times I had to tell someone to back away from my chow. Now I can control easily but when she is backing away from someone and hiding behind me then it is time to back off, but unfortunately many people don't know that a dog that is curious won't back away but move forward cautiously. Many people will back a dog into a corner to pet them, not a good idea.
Again I'll repeat there is an exception to every rule but any attack by any dog is the exception and not the rule and it is no different for pits. As far as them being a danger to society, simply not anymore true than people driving cars around town.
-
I was at a family reunion at my ex-wifes cousin house. All the kids that were there were playing in the back yard so I took mine out there to play.
I saw a dog chained up in the back. (a pitt bull).
I approached the dog to 'check it out' as my kids will be back. The dog seemed freindly enough. I extended my hand for the dog to smell it and it did so all the while wagging it's tail and exhibiting 'friendly' dog behavior.
It then suddenly bit me. Out of the blue, no warning, no grown, no body language change. I jerked my hand back but not in time and it caught that little triangle of skin between the thumb and index finger in it's mouth. I immediatly punched the dog in it's jaw and it's mouth snapped open.
Super nice, friendly, tail wagging dog suddenly was barking and growling bloody murder straining at it's chain to reach me.
Because of the sudden commotion the cousin came out and ask what had happened.
"Your dog bit me" I told her.
"That's not our dog" was her reply.
I took a step back and then kicked the dog like I was kicking off a football.
Stupid dog. Turned out it was a neighbors dog from down the street who had jumped the fence earlier that day and they were not home.
The point being you really can't tell with some dogs. They may be showing 'friendly' body language right up untill they attack.
-
Moral of the story?
Leave a dog on a chain alone :aok
-
Moral of the story?
Leave a dog on a chain alone :aok
couldn't be helped.
if my kids are playing in a yard with a dog I don't know I am gonna check the dog out.
and in this case, I was glad I did.
-
I've owned dogs all my life and I've never had a problem,but I've always owned Labs.
But to claim it's all about the training and not the breed is just flat out wrong.When over half of all dog bite related fatalities are by just two breeds(Pits and Rotts),folks,that is cold hard data that just doesn't support the defense of these two breeds.I'm glad your particular pit or rott hasn't attacked you or your children,but I will never own or allow either breed in my home.
A snippet from a link below-#
Rottweilers and Pit Bulls were involved in 60 percent of the 27 dog bite fatalities that occurred in 1997 and 1998. Rottweilers were involved in 10 deaths, and Pit Bulls were involved in 6.#
From 1979 through 1998, at least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in 238 human dog bite related deaths. Pit Bulls and Rottweilers were involved in more than 50 percent of these deaths.
Links
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html#Thedogsmostlikelytobite (http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html#Thedogsmostlikelytobite)
http://www.dogbiteclaim.com/dogs-that-bite.shtml (http://www.dogbiteclaim.com/dogs-that-bite.shtml)
http://www.dogbitelegalcenter.com/resources/dogbite-statistics.html (http://www.dogbitelegalcenter.com/resources/dogbite-statistics.html)
-
Classmate of my sons was killed by his grandma's dog last year. Some kind of pitbull variation. Nice family, nice little grandma, all that jazz, not 'training' the dog to be an attack dog, etc. Kids were chasing one another through the house when the dog attacked him.
-
some of you are just down right ignorant.
did you try to read any of the posts or read up on any thing about those dogs? no of course not you already know that they are vicious animals and should all be killed.
ya lets kill all of them, because some owners allow there dogs to rule them and not the other way around,
its ignorance like this, that had men put a bounty on the Bald Eagle, and basically killed every wolf in this country, and grizzly...
whats the point... you cant fix stupid.
Bald eagles weren't hunted and killed because they were killings humans, but because of their talons being sold for $.50-$2 a pair. Add in the fact that the people of Alaska thought that the mighty birds were competing with fisherman. Most of the population that was hunted for money was killed by pesticides like DDT.
Wolves were nearly wiped out due to human deaths, the spread of rabies, and livestock being killed off.
The grizzly bear is simple, it's called western expansion. I can't even imagine how many people died in the mid 1800's by grizzly bears. The bears were hunted and killed for their meat, fur, and out of fear.
While I said that they should be exterminated, there's not much of a defense against it. People routinely blame the human involved, which sometimes is the case, but the dog is a natural fighting machine, with bad temperament. People that have a mild mannered pitbull have a lame duck. The only reason their breed exists is for protection and fighting, they not not meant to be a home companion like a golden retriever.
I did in fact read the links THAT I POSTED MYSELF.
What's the point, you can't fix naiveness.
-
Classmate of my sons was killed by his grandma's dog last year. Some kind of pitbull variation. Nice family, nice little grandma, all that jazz, not 'training' the dog to be an attack dog, etc. Kids were chasing one another through the house when the dog attacked him.
It must have been the owners fault, THERES NO WAY the dog would do that unless it was untrained or unprovoked.
/sarcasm
-
It must have been the owners fault, THERES NO WAY the dog would do that unless it was untrained or unprovoked.
/sarcasm
Your sarcasm is noted here but I don't think there was a single person here that said that pit bulls have to be trained to attack or that all pit bull attacks are prevoked.
Most any dog can and does attack running children when they are not subject to that on a regular basis. I have seen many breeds act in this way and usually I or someone else that has the strength will quickly step in to stop it before it goes too far. Now I am not saying that grandma should have been able to do more at that time but this is still a lack of training and foresight. No offense intended here texasmom but a dog exposed to anything that they are not accustomed to creates stress and any dog stressed is an unpreditictable dog.
I know that nice little granny did not train the dog to fight or attack children however in my experience nice little grannies also do not take control of their dogs either. It has already been stated and agreed upon by pretty much everybody here that certain breeds (several more than just pits and rotts) require more aggressive training and a little grandma typically is not the type of person that will provide this.
-
Your sarcasm is noted here but I don't think there was a single person here that said that pit bulls have to be trained to attack or that all pit bull attacks are prevoked.
Most any dog can and does attack running children when they are not subject to that on a regular basis. I have seen many breeds act in this way and usually I or someone else that has the strength will quickly step in to stop it before it goes too far. Now I am not saying that grandma should have been able to do more at that time but this is still a lack of training and foresight. No offense intended here texasmom but a dog exposed to anything that they are not accustomed to creates stress and any dog stressed is an unpreditictable dog.
I know that nice little granny did not train the dog to fight or attack children however in my experience nice little grannies also do not take control of their dogs either. It has already been stated and agreed upon by pretty much everybody here that certain breeds (several more than just pits and rotts) require more aggressive training and a little grandma typically is not the type of person that will provide this.
I guess you didn't really catch my sarcasm then.
Exactly the response I was fishing for. It seems to just come natural for these animals. They don't need to be trained, or provoked to attack with deadly force, it just happens. Granted it can, and will happen with all breeds of dogs, but the matter at hand is that it's much more likely for a pitbull to do it then most other
I have a king German shepherd, his name is Bosco. He just turned six years old, and has never been around children before. My fiancee had a friend of hers over who has a little boy. The boy is maybe three and was rough housing with Bosco. The boy was pulling his tail, on his ears, and pinching him, Bosco never once growled or even attempted to bite/attack the little boy. Now, I wouldn't be willing to say that's how he would react 100% of the time, but it definitely surprised the hell out of me. I've found by large, that German shepherds have the best temperament out of any dog that I have ever encountered, or seen. I believe it has a lot to do with their intelligence, and personality. All Bosco wants to do is be close to me, and make me happy, which he has done for over six years now.
A question I pose is why did a elderly woman even own a pitbull in the first place? She has no business, unless she was a breeder to even own one. If she needs protection, get a German shepherd, they are widely recognized as the best guard dogs, and family companions. So in this case, blame would fall upon the human, but the fact of the matter is still present, pitbulls are lethal animals who use their God given abilities to kill whatever crosses their paths (within reason).
-
*SNIP*
Again I'll repeat there is an exception to every rule but any attack by any dog is the exception and not the rule and it is no different for pits. As far as them being a danger to society, simply not anymore true than people driving cars around town.
People being responsible for their dogs' actions and their cars' actions are two completely different things. Cars don't attack people. Statistics and real life experience proves that pits are a danger to society and must be controled. Laws banning and restricting them in certain parts of the country prove this. I've never walked by a car and had it try to attack me for no reason.
-
Here is my gentle giant Hallie and little Lou the pain in the azz. The Saint Bernard although slobbery, hairy and smelly has a very even and predictable temperament. Once when an angry neighbor raised his voice to me, she came right through our storm door. When I commanded her to stop, she sat right down next to me. The neighbor quickly changed his attitude. The Saint Bernard has a completely undeserved bad reputation. DAMN YOU STEPHEN KING!!!
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/skilless/dogs.jpg)
-
People being responsible for their dogs' actions and their cars' actions are two completely different things. Cars don't attack people. Statistics and real life experience proves that pits are a danger to society and must be controled. Laws banning and restricting them in certain parts of the country prove this. I've never walked by a car and had it try to attack me for no reason.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5a/ChristinePoster.jpg)
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5a/ChristinePoster.jpg)
DOUBLE DAMN YOU STEPHEN KING!!!
-
I like Labradors personally. Our old dog Sam was stupider than a rock trying to take an Algebra test, but he was so sweet. And he was such a big dog, that when he saw you, he'd either knock you down, or hit you in the gonads, with his wagging tail. After being in my life for more than 12 years, he died in May.
We had then gotten a new puppy, we named him Fred (we say it though, as Fread, kinda like Bread... lol), and Fred is the smartest dog I have ever met. We haven't trained him, but he'll get stuff almost on the spot. I can bring a treat, tell him to sit, then make a circular motion with the dog treat, and he'll run around in circles till I tell him to stop, and stay and what not. And I never trained him for anything else except to sit. BUT, he's very hyper, since he's half Lab, and half Border Collie.
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5a/ChristinePoster.jpg)
LOL!!! I stay away from '58 Plymouth Furys! I've seen what those things are capable of :uhoh
-
kelly it is indeed a fact that there are more attacks by pits and rotts than any other breed however for me and many others is the fact that regardless of how evil people want to make these fine animals out to be the dogs that attack anybody are the exception and not the rule and this is by a large margin. I see where you and others are coming from and you have a right to base your opinions on the numbers that you think is appropriate however I think the more important numbers are based on something different.
I can tell you though that not everybody chooses these dogs to be protectors. My father in-law got one for my step daughter who lives there and I can tell you the last thing he bought the dog for was protection and this dog has taken a great deal of rough housing from young kids as well, but she has been trained by someone who stands up to the dog and forces it to obey and not let her walk all over him. He really choose the dog because it was available when he went looking and it was small enough for him to consider it suitable for indoor life by his standards.
Most of those that I know that have pit bulls don't get them for their ability to protect as much as they think they are beautiful animals with a great deal of energy and almost all of them have a wonderful demeanor and are very dedicated dogs. My guess is that granny got the dog because of the reasons I mentioned or for the same reason that my father-in-law got his.
BTW my daughter was nearly attacked by a german shepard just a few weeks ago while we were away on vacation but it was because the dog was stressed over the new visitors in the house and I assure you my daughter did absolutely nothing to provoke this especially given the fact that the dog had to run about 50-75 feet to get to her. She was simply playing by herself not even paying the dog any attention and luckly wew were able to see what the dog was doing and stop him before getting a hold of her. Now with that I can tell you that we hold no prejudice against that breed and we do blame the owner which by the way is a family member for not taking the time and do what they knew was necessary to correct the stress before this happened.
Roundeye you comment on the the fact that pitbulls are a danger to society but people driving cars do kill or injure more people than all the breeds of dog combined. I really only added this simple fact in there to show there are things that are much more likely to hurt you than these animals are.
There are many places where laws are written to restrict these and other breeds however that really proves nothing since many times laws are written based prejudices and public opinion more so than taking all the facts into account.
Oh well I have made my case and probably more so than I should have and now I am out of this one.
Just remember that any dog can attack without provacation and you really should approach with caution asking the owner ifit is ok and any dog in a corner or tied up should either not be approached unless you are prepared to be bit and even this won't protect you 100% of the time
-
Most any dog can and does attack running children when they are not subject to that on a regular basis. I have seen many breeds act in this way and usually I or someone else that has the strength will quickly step in to stop it before it goes too far.
It's true that almost any dog will bite given the correct set of circumstances, but stats show that the pit is incredibly more risky. After doing some more research, it's shown that there are around 4.7 million dog bites reported per year. 1 out of every 6 is serious enough to require attention, about 800,000. Being bitten by a dog is the fifth highest reason for visiting the emergency room. I think your comparison to bath tub slips is moot at this point. Now if you take all of those bites, pits and rotties are responsible for 75%. yet pits only represent 1-3% of the dog population. (i really would like to see the numbers w/out the rotties, only thing i've seen shows pits at 50-60% but I'm not confident enough in those numbers)
-
Roundeye you comment on the the fact that pitbulls are a danger to society but people driving cars do kill or injure more people than all the breeds of dog combined. I really only added this simple fact in there to show there are things that are much more likely to hurt you than these animals are.
Agreed, however I take precautions so as to not drive my car at people. I maintain control of it. My car does not have a mind of its own, it does EXACTLY what I make it do. It cannot take off on its own and attack someone.
Dangerous pets must be controled. Thats all I'm saying. Keep them caged up so they cannot access people to attack. If you want the darn thing, then fine....you and only you should be the person it has access to, so if it snaps then YOU get mauled, not some child.
A creature with a mind of its own and of violent nature needs to be isolated from society. A simple search of pet attacks will show that pits lead this category. It is fact.
-
The problem is a lack of accountability. When an animal attacks the law should see it as if the owner were the perpetrator. That would mean that the grandmother in mom's post would have been charged with murder but perhaps if she had been aware of a heightened sense of responsibility she would have made a wiser choice in pets.
-
The problem is a lack of accountability. When an animal attacks the law should see it as if the owner were the perpetrator. That would mean that the grandmother in mom's post would have been charged with murder but perhaps if she had been aware of a heightened sense of responsibility she would have made a wiser choice in pets.
:aok
-
The problem is a lack of accountability. When an animal attacks the law should see it as if the owner were the perpetrator. That would mean that the grandmother in mom's post would have been charged with murder but perhaps if she had been aware of a heightened sense of responsibility she would have made a wiser choice in pets.
I agree. One question though, would your tone change if your monster of a dog killed someone?
It boils down to a lack of common sense, a "it won't happen to me" mentality, and overall poor researching.
-
I agree. One question though, would your tone change if your monster of a dog killed someone?
It boils down to a lack of common sense, a "it won't happen to me" mentality, and overall poor researching.
I trust her as a member of the family. She would not hurt anyone who didn't pose a threat to a member of her pack. The worth of her protection would far outweigh any possibility trouble caused by her. For instance, I have no problem leaving my eleven year old daughter home alone with Hallie here. I would not feel so good about it without the dog.
-
You didn't answer my question. Hypothetically, your dog does what you think it'd never do, and kills someone for no apparent reason. Would you still stand behind your original statement?
How much does she weigh?
-
You didn't answer my question. Hypothetically, your dog does what you think it'd never do, and kills someone for no apparent reason. Would you still stand behind your original statement?
How much does she weigh?
My trust of her and her worth to me make the risk acceptable. If she were to injure or kill someone due to no fault of their own (climb through my window at three in the morning though and you're on your own), I should be held responsible.
She's small for her breed. She weighs around 135.
-
But to claim it's all about the training and not the breed is just flat out wrong.When over half of all dog bite related fatalities are by just two breeds(Pits and Rotts),folks,that is cold hard data that just doesn't support the defense of these two breeds.I'm glad your particular pit or rott hasn't attacked you or your children,but I will never own or allow either breed in my home.
Rottweilers and Pitt Bulls both have very powerful jaws and bodies. That is why they account for so many of the fatal attacks.
Out of an estimated 4.7 million dog bites each year in the US only a hand full are fatal.
-
I guess you didn't really catch my sarcasm then.
Exactly the response I was fishing for. It seems to just come natural for these animals. They don't need to be trained, or provoked to attack with deadly force, it just happens. Granted it can, and will happen with all breeds of dogs, but the matter at hand is that it's much more likely for a pitbull to do it then most other
I have a king German shepherd, his name is Bosco. He just turned six years old, and has never been around children before. My fiancee had a friend of hers over who has a little boy. The boy is maybe three and was rough housing with Bosco. The boy was pulling his tail, on his ears, and pinching him, Bosco never once growled or even attempted to bite/attack the little boy. Now, I wouldn't be willing to say that's how he would react 100% of the time, but it definitely surprised the hell out of me. I've found by large, that German shepherds have the best temperament out of any dog that I have ever encountered, or seen. I believe it has a lot to do with their intelligence, and personality. All Bosco wants to do is be close to me, and make me happy, which he has done for over six years now.
A question I pose is why did a elderly woman even own a pitbull in the first place? She has no business, unless she was a breeder to even own one. If she needs protection, get a German shepherd, they are widely recognized as the best guard dogs, and family companions. So in this case, blame would fall upon the human, but the fact of the matter is still present, pitbulls are lethal animals who use their God given abilities to kill whatever crosses their paths (within reason).
Mixed breeds and not pure bred dogs are the type of dog most often involved in inflicting bites to people. The pure-bred dogs most often involved are German shepherds and Chow chows.
http://www.dogexpert.com/Dog%20Bite%20Statistics/DogBiteStatistics.html
Maybe YOURS doesn't bite and is happy to just sit back and cuddle with you, but many German Shepards don't do that.
The second part of you post that I bolded is either just ignorance or intentional gross exaggeration on your part. If there was any[/b] truth to that statement at all there would be hundreds of thousands of deaths yearly to pitt bulls given their popularity as a breed. That simply isn't the case.
-
Elfie, there doesn't have to be hundreds of deaths. Ask the parent of a child that was severely bitten but survived if it wasn't a traumatic moment. Here's the truth: Dog bites happen, and 75% of the dog bites that are reported belong to Pits and Rotties.
I really would like to know the breakdown because I hate having to keep mentioning Rotties in this conversation. They're cart pulling dogs and not in the same boat as Pits imo.
-
You didn't answer my question. Hypothetically, your dog does what you think it'd never do, and kills someone for no apparent reason. Would you still stand behind your original statement?
How much does she weigh?
Any dog that bites, needs to be put down. I had a $3500 Drathaar I owned put down for biting my (then) 3 yr old daughter. He tried to kill her and the Humane Society wanted to let him live.
-
Elfie, there doesn't have to be hundreds of deaths. Ask the parent of a child that was severely bitten but survived if it wasn't a traumatic moment. Here's the truth: Dog bites happen, and 75% of the dog bites that are reported belong to Pits and Rotties.
I really would like to know the breakdown because I hate having to keep mentioning Rotties in this conversation. They're cart pulling dogs and not in the same boat as Pits imo.
Back up that statistic please.
Rotts were guard dogs in Germany along side German Shepards, Dobermans and Drathaars (Drathaars only during the second) during both world wars. Early Rott's were beasts of burden, that much is true. Today they are frequently used as guard and police dogs. The reason for that is simple, because of their size, power and weight, an aggressive rottweiler can cause a higher level of damage than a smaller, weaker dog. Which also happens to be the same reason why Pitt Bulls cause so much damage when they attack.
Rotts also apparently have ancestry going all the way back to the old Roman war dogs as well.
I am the parent of a child that was severely bitten but survived.
-
Back up that statistic please.
Rotts were guard dogs in Germany along side German Shepards, Dobermans and Drathaars (Drathaars only during the second) during both world wars. Early Rott's were beasts of burden, that much is true. Today they are frequently used as guard and police dogs. The reason for that is simple, because of their size, power and weight, an aggressive rottweiler can cause a higher level of damage than a smaller, weaker dog. Which also happens to be the same reason why Pitt Bulls cause so much damage when they attack.
Rotts also apparently have ancestry going all the way back to the old Roman war dogs as well.
I am the parent of a child that was severely bitten but survived.
major size difference between Rots and pitts.
with all these Statistics flying around, I wish there was a way we could have the weight of each dog put into the stats, I would bet just about anything, that in 99% IF NOT 100%, of the attacks, were done by dogs over 70LBS,
if the dog is over 60 LBS ITS NOT A PITTBULL don't you people get it. A TRUE "AMERICAN PITTBULL TERRIER" will not attack people unless protecting his pack, or it was badly abused, they DO NOT MAKE GOOD GUARD DOGS, they love people to much, that is a fact even though you want to clump all these types of dogs into one breed it simply is not the case, these dogs, are not human fighters, but when the modern man got a hold of them and started to breed all types of other breeds into the line they moved away from the traits that "dogmen" breed for IE, love of fighting, love of people, and have lost those quality's that make a true "American pitbull terrier" the greatest dog ever!!!
I have seen these dogs first hand lived with a individual who breed both APBT and American Staffordshire terriers, the "guard" dogs were all around 90 LBS,"AM-staffs" the "fighting" dogs "APBT" were all around 50 LBS, the females were only 40. if you wanted a "guard" to protect the family, house, Garage, you got the Am-staff, if you wanted a dog "fighter" you got the "APBT" the "APBT" make horrible Guard dogs, why? you ask... THEY FRIGGEN LOVE PEOPLE,
I know you don't care "lets just exterminate them all"
same way you can have my gun, you can kill my dog, over my dead body"
-
new study released this week in the journal of Applied Animal Behavior Science involving researchers from the University of Pennsylvania as well as 6,000 dog owners lists the top 3 most aggressive dogs as
1 -The Dachshund.out of the 33 dogs surveyed? The Dachshund. Yes - the wiener dog. The study found that “one in five dachshunds have bitten or tried to bite strangers, and a similar number have attacked other dogs; one in 12 have snapped at their owners.”
2 - Chihuahua (nasty little animals. really doesnt surprise me)
3 - Jack Russells
"One of the teams researchers, Dr. James Serpell, believes that smaller breeds may be more genetically predisposed to aggressive behavior than their larger counterparts. Serpell says, “Reported levels of aggression in some cases are concerning, with rates of bites or bite attempts rising as high as 20 per cent toward strangers and 30 per cent toward unfamiliar dogs.”
Pit Bulls and Rottweilers scored average or below average in the aggression study. Breeds that scored on the low end are Basset Hounds, Golden Retrievers, Labradors, Siberian Huskies and Greyhounds."
http://www.dogguide.net/blog/2008/07/the-3-most-aggressive-dog-breeds-revealed-pit-bulls-rottweilers-youll-be-surprised/
Unfortunately I while there are a ton of links that mention the study. I cant find the study itself
In any event. Pits are no more aggressive or likely to attack then any other dog.
The problem is, the damage they do when they do attack.
Its usually not the dog but the owner who is the problem.
I have a couple of friends who have pits. One who has two. I wont go near his home unarmed and I told him that if his dogs arent put away when I am there I WILL kill them. He's a good guy. Just a poor dog owner
The other has several of them. The biggest threat these dogs have is fleas, or gettign whacked inthe back of the leg with their wagging tail (that watermelon HURTS) And the owner makes sure of that.
She breeds them. so she's had a bunch of them. And the moment one shows the least bit of aggression it gets put down. No second chances.
Because she "knows what they can do" and she's not willing to take that chance And she's not willing to mate her animals without knowing intimately the temperament of the animals she it mating her dogs with.
All that being said. I approach all dogs I dont know with caution
-
new study released this week in the journal of Applied Animal Behavior Science involving researchers from the University of Pennsylvania as well as 6,000 dog owners lists the top 3 most aggressive dogs as
1 -The Dachshund.out of the 33 dogs surveyed? The Dachshund. Yes - the wiener dog. The study found that “one in five dachshunds have bitten or tried to bite strangers, and a similar number have attacked other dogs; one in 12 have snapped at their owners.”
2 - Chihuahua (nasty little animals. really doesnt surprise me)
3 - Jack Russells
"One of the teams researchers, Dr. James Serpell, believes that smaller breeds may be more genetically predisposed to aggressive behavior than their larger counterparts. Serpell says, “Reported levels of aggression in some cases are concerning, with rates of bites or bite attempts rising as high as 20 per cent toward strangers and 30 per cent toward unfamiliar dogs.”
Pit Bulls and Rottweilers scored average or below average in the aggression study. Breeds that scored on the low end are Basset Hounds, Golden Retrievers, Labradors, Siberian Huskies and Greyhounds."
http://www.dogguide.net/blog/2008/07/the-3-most-aggressive-dog-breeds-revealed-pit-bulls-rottweilers-youll-be-surprised/
Unfortunately I while there are a ton of links that mention the study. I cant find the study itself
In any event. Pits are no more aggressive or likely to attack then any other dog.
The problem is, the damage they do when they do attack.
Its usually not the dog but the owner who is the problem.
I have a couple of friends who have pits. One who has two. I wont go near his home unarmed and I told him that if his dogs arent put away when I am there I WILL kill them. He's a good guy. Just a poor dog owner
The other has several of them. The biggest threat these dogs have is fleas, or gettign whacked inthe back of the leg with their wagging tail (that watermelon HURTS) And the owner makes sure of that.
She breeds them. so she's had a bunch of them. And the moment one shows the least bit of aggression it gets put down. No second chances.
Because she "knows what they can do" and she's not willing to take that chance And she's not willing to mate her animals without knowing intimately the temperament of the animals she it mating her dogs with.
All that being said. I approach all dogs I dont know with caution
Pretty good advice :aok
-
I suppose it's possible to have to visit the ER after a weiner dog attack...
A friend that had a lab/dachshund mix named Howard. That was the goofyest looking dog I have ever seen. He had lab head tail and body, but weiner dog legs. He literally looked like someone had sawed his legs off. I get a chuckle even now just thinking about it.
-
major size difference between Rots and pitts.
with all these Statistics flying around, I wish there was a way we could have the weight of each dog put into the stats, I would bet just about anything, that in 99% IF NOT 100%, of the attacks, were done by dogs over 70LBS,
if the dog is over 60 LBS ITS NOT A PITTBULL don't you people get it. A TRUE "AMERICAN PITTBULL TERRIER" will not attack people unless protecting his pack, or it was badly abused, they DO NOT MAKE GOOD GUARD DOGS, they love people to much, that is a fact even though you want to clump all these types of dogs into one breed it simply is not the case, these dogs, are not human fighters, but when the modern man got a hold of them and started to breed all types of other breeds into the line they moved away from the traits that "dogmen" breed for IE, love of fighting, love of people, and have lost those quality's that make a true "American pitbull terrier" the greatest dog ever!!!
I have seen these dogs first hand lived with a individual who breed both APBT and American Staffordshire terriers, the "guard" dogs were all around 90 LBS,"AM-staffs" the "fighting" dogs "APBT" were all around 50 LBS, the females were only 40. if you wanted a "guard" to protect the family, house, Garage, you got the Am-staff, if you wanted a dog "fighter" you got the "APBT" the "APBT" make horrible Guard dogs, why? you ask... THEY FRIGGEN LOVE PEOPLE,
I know you don't care "lets just exterminate them all"
same way you can have my gun, you can kill my dog, over my dead body"
(http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/Shooter912/PitbullZeppelin2YearsOld.jpg)
(http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/Shooter912/PitBull.jpg)
Two fine examples of pit bulls. Both animals are heavily muscled (one more so than the other), powerful animals. Yes, they are smaller than Rottweilers but they are not a small dog. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that either animal pictured here could do grievous bodily harm if they became violent.
Out of the millions and millions of dogs kept as pets in this country only a small percentage of them actually bite humans.
-
(http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/Shooter912/PitbullZeppelin2YearsOld.jpg)
(http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/Shooter912/PitBull.jpg)
Two fine examples of pit bulls. Both animals are heavily muscled (one more so than the other), powerful animals. Yes, they are smaller than Rottweilers but they are not a small dog. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that either animal pictured here could do grievous bodily harm if they became violent.
Out of the millions and millions of dogs kept as pets in this country only a small percentage of them actually bite humans.
First instinct as a lifetime dog owner, and trainer of many others............?
Dog #1 MAY be approachable
Dog #2 ............?
The chain serves a purpose, stay further than chain reaches :aok
Just a quick decision :D
-
First instinct as a lifetime dog owner, and trainer of many others............?
Dog #1 MAY be approachable
Dog #2 ............?
The chain serves a purpose, stay further than chain reaches :aok
Just a quick decision :D
I won't approach any dog on a chain. They are 2.8 times more likely to bite than an unchained dog. :)
-
Would you consider that a "Common sense" evaluation, garnered from experience, or just plain instinct? :D
Usually things are chained for a reason.
1) To keep them from being removed as in a bicycle, etc
or
2) To keep them from going anywhere else further than the reach of the chain :)
-
:aok :aok :salute
I'd just pull my carry and shoot a garbage dog like that. Then sue the begeesus out of the idiot that brought him to the neighborhood.
-
We own a pitbull mix thats a rescue dog (we are a "foster family" for local agency). We got him as a pup and he's a great dog, I grew up around dogs and have some experience with them. Like any other alpha type dog he (Moe) had to be trained correctly but he's an amazing and loving dog...and very protective. He's really my daughters dog...
(http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/Haley.jpg)
Once she was playing around and a friend of hers went to hit her (goofing around) and Moe leapt over our dry bar and grabbed the kids arm (without breaking the skin) mid strike and just sat there holding him till Haley told him to release. He (moe) knows he's not allowed to break skin ever (Be it dog, horse, person, rodent etc). While you can have a bad dog (or horse) 96% of the time its the trainer not the "trainee" thats the problem...
-
Any dog that bites, needs to be put down. I had a $3500 Drathaar I owned put down for biting my (then) 3 yr old daughter. He tried to kill her and the Humane Society wanted to let him live.
Even when the dog is defending its owner from a legitimate threat?
How bad did she get bitten?
-
Would you consider that a "Common sense" evaluation, garnered from experience, or just plain instinct? :D
Usually things are chained for a reason.
1) To keep them from being removed as in a bicycle, etc
or
2) To keep them from going anywhere else further than the reach of the chain :)
A chained dog likely doesn't get the human contact that it should. Dogs don't just desire socialization, they require it, they are pack animals not individualists. Dogs are generally chained to keep them from running free.
-
Even when the dog is defending its owner from a legitimate threat?
How bad did she get bitten?
Dogs defending their owners from legitimate threats are likely to be rare exceptions when it comes to the overall numbers of dog bites in the US.
He had ahold of her head and was violently shaking her. Shaking is just one way that dogs attempt to kill.
-
(http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/Shooter912/PitbullZeppelin2YearsOld.jpg)
(http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg18/Shooter912/PitBull.jpg)
Two fine wrong examples of pit bulls. Both animals are heavily muscled (one more so than the other), powerful animals. Yes, they are smaller than Rottweilers but they are not a small dog. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that either animal pictured here could do grievous bodily harm if they became violent.
Out of the millions and millions of dogs kept as pets in this country only a small percentage of them actually bite humans.
sorry but that bottom pic IS NOT A PITTBULL, it is a gross misrepresentation, the top one is far More APBT, again looks has nothing to do with it, it is weight that matters, APBT, that were too big and muscular, for one they are NEW, A true Fighting pitt IS not A body builder but more like a cross country runner, he should have long lungs, not wide, longer lungs allow more air which in turn allows longer fights, again you can't tell what it is by looks, in the world of "APBT" it is weight that counts.
lol check this out
mind you I did a quick search after I saw the two pics you posted, I knew right away the bottom pic was not a APBT, even though the "owners" im sure they will tell you they are "Pittbulls"
NOT
this is quoted from website.
" ...which is the APBT can you guess?
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/SpotTheAPBT.jpg)
"did you make your guess?
its the second from the right on the bottom
did you get it right?
if so,good for you! if not, you need to do a little more research about the breed."
here is the link
http://www.doggonegoodtraining.net/APBT.html
another good read on APBT
http://greylinepitbulls.kinnemankennels.com/2007/06/pit-bull-info-from-wikipedia.html
this is a "PITTBULL" A true "American Pit bull terrier" or "APBT"
I highly doubt this dog would ever attack a human, BUT unless trained to NOT fight keep all other dogs away!
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/pitt.jpg)
and another
http://www.realpitbull.com/id.html
find the pittbull
Yes I guessed it right, can you? be Honest!!!!!!
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
-
if the dog is over 60 LBS ITS NOT A PITTBULL don't you people get it. A TRUE "AMERICAN PITTBULL TERRIER" will not attack people unless protecting his pack, or it was badly abused, they DO NOT MAKE GOOD GUARD DOGS, they love people to much, that is a fact even though you want to clump all these types of dogs into one breed it simply is not the case, these dogs, are not human fighters, but when the modern man got a hold of them and started to breed all types of other breeds into the line they moved away from the traits that "dogmen" breed for IE, love of fighting, love of people, and have lost those quality's that make a true "American pitbull terrier" the greatest dog ever!!!
I have seen these dogs first hand lived with a individual who breed both APBT and American Staffordshire terriers, the "guard" dogs were all around 90 LBS,"AM-staffs" the "fighting" dogs "APBT" were all around 50 LBS, the females were only 40. if you wanted a "guard" to protect the family, house, Garage, you got the Am-staff, if you wanted a dog "fighter" you got the "APBT" the "APBT" make horrible Guard dogs, why? you ask... THEY FRIGGEN LOVE PEOPLE,
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf (http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf)
-
Ink the American Pit Bull Terrier isn't the only breed called *Pit Bulls*. The American Staffordshire Terrier and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier and the American Pit Bull Terrier are all collectively called Pit Bulls, right or wrong, that's the way it is. All 3 breeds have at one point been bred for fighting but in all fairness there are also breeders that breed these same dogs for shows where any aggressive behavior towards humans or other dogs can lead to disqualification.
-
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf (http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf)
Your point?
-
Your point?
Did you even read it?
-
Did you even read it?
Yep, I read it the first time it was linked in this thread. What was your point in linking it a second time?
-
The thing is that screwed up folks make screwed up dogs, and their choice is something easy, with a reputation, and a talent for mauling the victim. Hence those pit bulls.
-
Yep, I read it the first time it was linked in this thread. What was your point in linking it a second time?
A post was made claiming that American Pit Bull Terriers do not attack people unless protecting a pack or were badly abused. The study and data in the link shows that Pit Bull Terriers are responsible for more attacks on humans than all other breeds combined (including pit bull mixes).
So, are we to believe that PBTs are that much more abused? Or is there a difference between "Pit Bull Terriers" and "American Pit Bull Terriers" (the later of which is not even on the list)?
-
A post was made claiming that American Pit Bull Terriers do not attack people unless protecting a pack or were badly abused. The study and data in the link shows that Pit Bull Terriers are responsible for more attacks on humans than all other breeds combined (including pit bull mixes).
So, are we to believe that PBTs are that much more abused? Or is there a difference between "Pit Bull Terriers" and "American Pit Bull Terriers" (the later of which is not even on the list)?
my point is what is called" Pittbulls" on that list are not American Pit bull terriers, they are most Likely American Staffordshire terriers. or a number of offshoot breedings.
-
This is a site for
American Temperament Test Society, Inc.
it has figures through study of many dogs, check it out. You'll be surprised.
http://www.atts.org/index.html
-
But if they have such a good temperament why is 2% of the dog population responsible for nearly 75% of the reported bites?
-
my point is what is called" Pittbulls" on that list are not American Pit bull terriers, they are most Likely American Staffordshire terriers. or a number of offshoot breedings.
So what you call "American Pitbull Terrier" and what is called "Pitbull Terrier" on the list two completely different things? "American Pitbull Terrier" is not even listed.
So, either the "American Pitbull Terrier" is less agressive than a Poodle, or this man http://www.bestfriends.org/nomorehomelesspets/weeklyforum/biomclifton.cfm (http://www.bestfriends.org/nomorehomelesspets/weeklyforum/biomclifton.cfm) (the man who compiled the data) does not know how to classify his dogs.
It's all clear now.
-
A post was made claiming that American Pit Bull Terriers do not attack people unless protecting a pack or were badly abused. The study and data in the link shows that Pit Bull Terriers are responsible for more attacks on humans than all other breeds combined (including pit bull mixes).
That is incorrect. The pit bulls are responsible for more fatal attacks, they are not responsible for more bites in general than all other breeds combined.
*edit* One thing about his study that makes it suspect is he claims as much as 2/3 of all the dog attacks were unprovoked and no warning given by the dog. I submit that people just don't know what to look for in the dog's body language.
-
But if they have such a good temperament why is 2% of the dog population responsible for nearly 75% of the reported bites?
They aren't responsible for 75% of reported bites, they are responsible for more fatal attacks, there is a difference. And no one knows exactly how many of each breed of dog is out there so saying pit bulls are only 2% of the dog population may or may not be accurate.
-
That is incorrect. The pit bulls are responsible for more fatal attacks, they are not responsible for more bites in general than all other breeds combined.
Really? The Clifton study shows a total of 2209 "attacks causing bodily harm" by all breeds included in the study. Of those, the Pit Bull Terrier is responsible for 1110 of them.
Some quick math will show that all other breeds account for 1099 attacks. 1110 is greater than 1099. Am I missing something?
-
*edit* One thing about his study that makes it suspect is he claims as much as 2/3 of all the dog attacks were unprovoked and no warning given by the dog. I submit that people just don't know what to look for in the dog's body language.
Again, I refer you to the man who completed and published the study.http://www.bestfriends.org/nomorehomelesspets/weeklyforum/biomclifton.cfm (http://www.bestfriends.org/nomorehomelesspets/weeklyforum/biomclifton.cfm) I think it would be a reasonable statement to say that the man knows a thing or two about canine behavior.
If you are refering to the victims' statements to him, I submit that he would not have included that statement in his findings if he did not himself concur.
-
Really? The Clifton study shows a total of 2209 "attacks causing bodily harm" by all breeds included in the study. Of those, the Pit Bull Terrier is responsible for 1110 of them.
Some quick math will show that all other breeds account for 1099 attacks. 1110 is greater than 1099. Am I missing something?
Did you even read the entire study yourself?
The opening statement:
Reports are logged as received, and the current log is printed out as
requested. Compiled by the editor of ANIMAL PEOPLE from press accounts
since 1982, this table covers only attacks by dogs of clearly identified
breed type or ancestry, as designated by animal control officers or others
with evident expertise, who have been kept as pets. Due to the exclusion
of dogs whose breed type may be uncertain, this is by no means a complete
list of fatal and otherwise serious dog attacks. Attacks by police dogs,
guard dogs, and dogs trained specifically to fight are also excluded.
"Attacks doing bodily harm" includes all fatalities, maimings, and other
injuries requiring extensive hospital treatment. "Maimings" includes
permanent disfigurement or loss of a limb. Where there is an asterisk (*),
please see footnotes. If there are more "attacks" than "victims," it means
that there were multiple dogs involved in some attacks. If the numbers of
"victims" does not equal the numbers of "deaths" and "maimings," it means
that some of the victims -- in attacks in which some people were killed or
maimed -- were not killed or maimed.
Breed
This study does not include ALL bites, it only includes fatalities and serious harm.
-
Again, I refer you to the man who completed and published the study.http://www.bestfriends.org/nomorehomelesspets/weeklyforum/biomclifton.cfm (http://www.bestfriends.org/nomorehomelesspets/weeklyforum/biomclifton.cfm) I think it would be a reasonable statement to say that the man knows a thing or two about canine behavior.
If you are refering to the victims' statements to him, I submit that he would not have included that statement in his findings if he did not himself concur.
He's an editor.....big deal.
-
Did you even read the entire study yourself?
The opening statement:
This study does not include ALL bites, it only includes fatalities and serious harm.
Yes, I did. Thoroughly.
Attacks causing fatalities and serious harm are the only ones that pose a danger to society.
-
Yes, I did. Thoroughly.
Attacks causing fatalities and serious harm are the only ones that pose a danger to society.
Really? Dog bites in general cost this country billions in medical bills every year. Four to 5 million dog bites each year from all breeds.
-
Just in our town's newspaper about a guy killing a dog who attacked him.
The article does make the tag-line sound like he's being wrongly accused of a safety violation for protecting himself, when he's actually being charged with firing a 'warning shot' up into the air before he shot to kill the attacking dog (which could have injured or killed someone in the neighborhood). I agree with that; and besides... if you're going to use a handgun, you better be aiming to kill on the first shot.
http://www.kdhnews.com/news/story.aspx?s=30566
But I'm glad for him that he had a gun on him to kill the thing, even if he does spend a little jail time for carrying it without a license ~ at least he's alive.
-
Just in our town's newspaper about a guy killing a dog who attacked him.
The article does make the tag-line sound like he's being wrongly accused of a safety violation for protecting himself, when he's actually being charged with firing a 'warning shot' up into the air before he shot to kill the attacking dog (which could have injured or killed someone in the neighborhood). I agree with that; and besides... if you're going to use a handgun, you better be aiming to kill on the first shot.
http://www.kdhnews.com/news/story.aspx?s=30566
But I'm glad for him that he had a gun on him to kill the thing, even if he does spend a little jail time for carrying it without a license ~ at least he's alive.
The guy deserves a medal for ridding the neighborhood of another dangerous beast.
As for the charges, another example of "it's better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6".
-
The guy deserves a medal for ridding the neighborhood of another dangerous beast.
As for the charges, another example of "it's better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6".
By far one of my favorite phrases of all-time.
The pitbull broke down a fence. That's just ridiculous.
-
The pitbull broke down a fence. That's just ridiculous.
Sure is. Owner should have understood his obligation to society and built a better fence. :aok
-
Sure is. Owner should have understood his obligation to society and built a better fence. :aok
I'm sure he'll reinforce his fence with titanium from now on.