PDA

View Full Version : Marauding pit bulls attack six - 10 year old boy, Critical



Pages : [1] 2

Casshew
04-28-2004, 08:18 AM
Child In Stable Condition; Scalp Found In Dog's Stomach
HODGENVILLE, Ky. -- A 4-year-old Kentucky girl is lucky to be alive after a gruesome attack by the family's pit bull.

The attack happened Monday night at the child's home in Hodgenville, in Larue County, Louisville television station WLKY As Emily Page Stinnett remains in stable condition at Louisville's Kosair Children's Hospital, Larue County Sheriff Bobby Shoffer struggles to remember an attack as gruesome as Monday's.

"It's the worst I've seen in my 17 years of law enforcement," he said.

Shoffer added that when he and his colleagues responded to the Stinnet's home, they saw a blood-spattered doghouse in the backyard, Miller reported. And the pit bull hadn't seemed to calm down since the attack. The deputies then took action.

"When we got at the scene, the child was in the backyard just a few feet from the dog," Shoffer said. "EMS was called, and they responded. The dog apparently was still aggressive and it wouldn't let EMS near the child, so the dog had to be put down."

Stinnett and another girl were swinging on the swingset with the pit bull chained and staked just 7 feet away, WLKY-TV reported.

Shoffer said something provoked the dog, and it snapped, pulling its stake as it lunged at the girl and biting her face just above the eyebrow.

"I guess you would say she was more or less scalped," Shoffer said. "She had some puncture wounds to her stomach."

According to Shoffer, the dog then dragged the little girl around the yard as she screamed for help. Her stepmother ran to Emily's aid, but the dog would not let her near the little girl. According to investigators, the stepmother took off in her car to get a neighbor to help rescue little the girl.

"These dogs are unpredictable," Shoffer said. "The least little thing ... the dog could be happy one minute, and the next minute they go absolutely crazy. Anybody that has young children (needs) to make sure the dog is chained or properly fenced in."

http://www.thelouisvillechannel.com/news/3243296/detail.html

Ike
04-28-2004, 02:36 PM
How terrible, I feel for the poor little girl. The insurance company I work for will not insure a person's home if they own a pitt bull because of the liability risk.

MysteryMomma
04-28-2004, 02:52 PM
Scary stuff. Why do people need to own dogs like these? I know it is a free county but jeez. One irresponsible owner and a child is dead or scarred for life.

Wrangler
04-28-2004, 05:31 PM
You can blame the breeders too. They inbred these dogs to make them meaner. A pitbull that isn't inbred, or is mixed with another breed can be a great dog that never turns on it's owner or the children. It's the purebreds that have these type of problems IMO.

LP Moderator
04-28-2004, 05:39 PM
I'm sure that little girl's step mother was probably in shock, but my God, she left to get help? Was there nothing she could hit that dog with anywhere near by? A butcher knife? A shovel? NOTHING???

KatzHome
04-28-2004, 09:06 PM
I just don't understand people who have to have killer animals... Even a peaceful loving dog will fight to save it's family ~ so it's not about protection ~ I think that killer pets fulfill some sort of sick need ~ maybe insecurity or something....

becca
04-28-2004, 10:23 PM
How terrible, I feel for the poor little girl. The insurance company I work for will not insure a person's home if they own a pitt bull because of the liability risk.

I have trouble with insurance because I have a Rottie and a Chow mix....

pitbulls are another thing. They should be kept away from children. They are way too unpredictable.

MysteryMomma
04-28-2004, 11:13 PM
How terrible, I feel for the poor little girl. The insurance company I work for will not insure a person's home if they own a pitt bull because of the liability risk.

Some airlines wont crate ship certain types of dogs. Not just the well known biters. Chows were on the list of dogs they will not transport.

I grew up with a chow and she didn't bite us but man no one was allowed on our property, per the dog. We had to chain her up when company came over.

becca
04-29-2004, 01:14 AM
Some airlines wont crate ship certain types of dogs. Not just the well known biters. Chows were on the list of dogs they will not transport.

I grew up with a chow and she didn't bite us but man no one was allowed on our property, per the dog. We had to chain her up when company came over.

My chow mix is just the opposite of most, he'd welcome anyone in and then show them where the silver is. Of course my Rottie would help them carry it out. Its all in their breeding and how they are brought up. Mine think they are kids.... then again they are to me.

Hugh
04-29-2004, 03:08 AM
After several of these attacks the UK goverment outlawed the owning of these dogs under the Dangerous Dogs Act. Any dogs found are destroyed and the owners fined or imprisoned. I think they are magnificent physical specimens but they are bred to fight and therefore although I can admire them they should not really be around in this day and age.

Babcat
04-29-2004, 10:39 AM
After several of these attacks the UK goverment outlawed the owning of these dogs under the Dangerous Dogs Act. Any dogs found are destroyed and the owners fined or imprisoned. I think they are magnificent physical specimens but they are bred to fight and therefore although I can admire them they should not really be around in this day and age.

I applaud the UK with gusto for this decision. I wish the US government would have the guts to do the same.

Pit bulls aren't even a "real" dog breed. They were created, essentially over the last thirty years by mixing English Bull Dogs (a breed that consequently is also a mix of two breeds, the original large Bull-Dog and the Chinese Pug) and terriers. It doesn't really seem to matter which terrier gets thrown in the gene cauldron along with the Bull Dogs. They still get called Pit Bulls. :rolleyes: There actually is a breed that has been legitimized and is called The American Pit Bull. But nearly none of these "backyard breeder atrocities" that we see all the time, everywhere, are legitimate bloodline descendants of any of the official breed. Instead they are closer to a volatile mix of aggressive, non-desirable flaws... because mean, stupid dogs fight better and to the death. They actually carry the term "pit" in their breed name because originally they fought rats in a pit. Now they fight each other in a repulsive display that nets big bucks for criminal types. :sick:

Why anyone would be moronic enough to own one of these stupid, potential killing machines as a "family pet" boggles the mind. It ought to be child abuse to have one and also have a child. :mad:

This part of the story made me physically ill... as well as confused... :confused:


Once the girl was transported to Kosair, doctors there told the sheriff that child's hair and scalp had to be found and delivered or she would die. Shoffer said he had to cut the dog's stomach open to find the scalp, which was then rushed to the hospital, WLKY reported.

Family members told WLKY that the doctors reattached the majority of the scalp, but added that the girl still might face more surgeries.

I guess time spent in the digestive juices of a dog's stomach doesn't deform a scalp with hair... or even contaminate it with bacteria just itching to cause major infection!! :eek: Just a good size dose of Dial anti-bacterial soap and "Houston, we have go"... huh? :confused:

Ike
04-29-2004, 12:32 PM
I have trouble with insurance because I have a Rottie and a Chow mix....

pitbulls are another thing. They should be kept away from children. They are way too unpredictable.


Rottweilers and Chows are also included on our list of "uninsurable dogs" along with any type of wolf hybrid.

I've been around alot of these types of dogs with no problem. However, overall they are known for being aggressive and alot of insurance companies will not insure you if you have them.

becca
04-29-2004, 01:12 PM
Rottweilers and Chows are also included on our list of "uninsurable dogs" along with any type of wolf hybrid.

I've been around alot of these types of dogs with no problem. However, overall they are known for being aggressive and alot of insurance companies will not insure you if you have them.

Thanks to the AKC and the work they do, I knew what companies to avoid.
They have a chart on their website http://www.akc.org/love/dip/legislat/insurance_chart0702.cfm
that helps.
Some companies want the vet to verify a mixed breed isn't more of one breed than another. I can't even imagine asking my vet to do that for Bear. He's a chow/shepard mix , it won't do a bit of good to pay for that test.He's a very gentle dog with everything and everyone except the bunny.

Ike
04-29-2004, 04:58 PM
Thanks to the AKC and the work they do, I knew what companies to avoid.
They have a chart on their website http://www.akc.org/love/dip/legislat/insurance_chart0702.cfm
that helps.
Some companies want the vet to verify a mixed breed isn't more of one breed than another. I can't even imagine asking my vet to do that for Bear. He's a chow/shepard mix , it won't do a bit of good to pay for that test.He's a very gentle dog with everything and everyone except the bunny.

How interesting, thank you for sharing that! The company I work for, American Family Insurance, isn't on the list. We are only in thirteen states so that may have something to do with it.

Elf
04-30-2004, 11:36 PM
I have trouble with insurance because I have a Rottie and a Chow mix....

pitbulls are another thing. They should be kept away from children. They are way too unpredictable.
Nope. Wrangler is right. A well-bred Pitbull is one of the most docile (to humans anyway), playful, loyal dogs a person could own. They are very active and requite LOTS of exercise and playtime and even climb trees.

I had a wonderful pitbull who died of a heart attack a few months ago. My brother used to be a breeder and still owns his stud and one of his daughters. My children have done to them what children always do (pull ears, jump on them...) and they take it like it's a big game.

It is true that unscrupulous breeders inbreed and the results can be disastrous. It gives the whole breed a bad name. But if you are lucky enough to know one that is well bred, then you know that most pitbulls are just happy-go-lucky little clowns. (Just keep them away from other animals! They DO NOT have to be trained or given weird things to make them want to fight other dogs. They were bred like that and it's hundreds of years of instinct that make them do it).

Casshew
11-07-2005, 09:26 AM
I and glad I live where this breed is BANNED! :hand:


A 10-year-old boy was in critical condition Sunday after three pit bulls escaped from a home and went on a rampage, attacking six people before police shot and killed dogs, authorities said.

Neighbors said the attacks started late Saturday afternoon when children going door-to-door for a fund-raiser arrived at the home of Scott Sword, 41, who owned the dogs.

"We had music playing, and I heard this bizarre sound," said Debby Rivera, who lives three houses away. "I looked out the window, and I saw a young boy. The dogs were just jumping on him."

"The screams were horrible," she said. The dogs were "relentless, like they were possessed."

The pit bulls attacked the two children, and when the dogs' owner tried to stop them, the dogs turned on him and bit off his thumb, Nygren said. The boy's father also tried to protect his son and was attacked. The dogs went after another neighbor as well.

"The scene sprawled over a couple blocks; it was a very chaotic scene," said Lt. Michael Douglas of the Cary Fire Protection District.

Residents threw rocks at the dogs and honked car horns to try to distract them from attacking before police arrived and shot the animals.

Jim Malone said he and a neighbor tried to beat the dogs back with baseball bats. "He'd hit them, they'd run, and they'd come back," Malone said. "This went on for 15 minutes."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/06/pit.bulls.ap/index.html

BarnGoddess
11-07-2005, 12:56 PM
The attack mentioned in the last half of the story has been big news here in Colorado. Just horrible and disgusting.

http://www.9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=534e4197-0abe-421a-01f4-115f2522d7ac&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bf

These dogs were moved out of Denver where there is a recent pit bull ban and moved to Aurora, a nearby suburb of Denver. These things make you sick to hear about them.

Hbgchick
11-07-2005, 01:03 PM
The dogs themselves are not the problem. It is the irresponsible owners and the people who train them to attack and fight that are the problem.

BarnGoddess
11-07-2005, 03:23 PM
The dogs themselves are not the problem. It is the irresponsible owners and the people who train them to attack and fight that are the problem.
Hearing that said over and over, I still don't think Pit Bulls need to be kept as pets in the city. Supposedly these dogs were not trained to be attack or fighting dogs, but just "pets". Over and over, we hear of so much destruction and heartache these dogs cause.

Notice these attacks seem to happen when there are more than one pit bull in the household. Sometimes it could be one pit bull, but dogs of other breeds in the house. To trust them around children is just asking for it.

I know all dogs can bite, but pit bulls have the reputation for vicious and continuing attacks that lead to death. Why not get a dog with a milder bred personality, especially with children in the home.

Years ago we had a beautiful female collie for our two young boys. She played with them, guarded them, pulled them out of the street and pushed them home when I called them in for meals. She went everywhere with us. Once a young kid put his face up against the car window and said something like "hiya dog" and since the boys were in the back seat with her, she let this kid know that he needed to back off. Never tried to bite, but she held her ground between the boys and bared her teeth until he left. Yet she never did it when all the neighborhood kids were out playing with her. Even little squabbles, she'd try to "settle" in her gentle way. Collies, labs, retrievers can be wonderful family pets. Why on earth would someone buy a pit bull for a family dog, when these other large breeds can make better pets?

Hbgchick
11-07-2005, 03:50 PM
Hearing that said over and over, I still don't think Pit Bulls need to be kept as pets in the city. Supposedly these dogs were not trained to be attack or fighting dogs, but just "pets". Over and over, we hear of so much destruction and heartache these dogs cause.

Notice these attacks seem to happen when there are more than one pit bull in the household. Sometimes it could be one pit bull, but dogs of other breeds in the house. To trust them around children is just asking for it.

I know all dogs can bite, but pit bulls have the reputation for vicious and continuing attacks that lead to death. Why not get a dog with a milder bred personality, especially with children in the home.

Years ago we had a beautiful female collie for our two young boys. She played with them, guarded them, pulled them out of the street and pushed them home when I called them in for meals. She went everywhere with us. Once a young kid put his face up against the car window and said something like "hiya dog" and since the boys were in the back seat with her, she let this kid know that he needed to back off. Never tried to bite, but she held her ground between the boys and bared her teeth until he left. Yet she never did it when all the neighborhood kids were out playing with her. Even little squabbles, she'd try to "settle" in her gentle way. Collies, labs, retrievers can be wonderful family pets. Why on earth would someone buy a pit bull for a family dog, when these other large breeds can make better pets?
Depending on where you're talking about, I don't think ANY dog over 15lbs should be kept in a city without room to run and play. Taking a walk on a leash along a cement sidewalk twice a day just doesn't cut it.

I don't disagree with you totally, but I really think that pit bulls have gotten a bad rep. As you say, "have the reputation for vicious and continuing attacks that lead to death". I think a lot of (not all) people who own pit bulls LIKE that they are "bred to attack", and actually have done the breeding themselves. I also think that if you do not raise a dog from a puppy, you can't really guarantee what they'll do given a certain situation. I definitely do agree with you in that I would absolutely not choose a pit bull as a pet unless I had raised it from a puppy, and even then I would keep him restrained in the fenced in forest we have behind our house for our dogs to run.

I think a lot of these "attacks" are a combination of at least three and maybe four things - first of all, very often the dogs are found to have been TRAINED to attack or fight, in which case they're only doing what they do (they have been adopted and the family does not know it's true history). Secondly, I have seen many of these "vicious dog" stories which end up more like "people teased dog and got bitten" stories. Third, I know that often if a dog thinks it's master is danger for any reason - as in your collie's situation - they will protect them. Who is to say what the collie would have done if she had not been restrained in the back seat by her diligent owner? And fourth, a dog, or dogs, should not be kept 24 hours a day restrained. That would get to anyone, don't you think? If you've got two large pit bulls in a small city apartment, can't blame them for getting a little uptight. But again, I think the PEOPLE are more to blame than the dog.

I think if there were a real and true study done, it would find that very, very few "attack dog" stories are of just a normal, everyday pet suddenly "going wrong" and attacking a totally innocent human being.

eve
11-07-2005, 04:23 PM
The dogs themselves are not the problem. It is the irresponsible owners and the people who train them to attack and fight that are the problem.


The owners exploit this breed's predisposition for violence. They have a rep for turning on humans. They seem to be wired that way. I would never trust one.

This child lived at this home, right? He was climbing over his own fence -- why didn't the dog recognize him/ his scent? My dad was a veterinarian. He believed that once a dog, any dog, any breed, crossed the line and bit a human being, it should be put down, no questions asked. Even a good trained watchdog should only go so far as necessary to warn someone off, before attacking. IMO.

My youngest has been attacked twice by dogs, in the face. Luckily scars were minimal and he healed really well. I will never forget how cavalier the dog owners were about this, in both cases. He was only 3 the first time and 4 1/2 the next, and no, he didn't provoke the dogs. He was just the wrong height and a friendly little boy. The Dalmation that bit him was leashed at the time and the owners didn't even apologize. Ou physician said many bites in kids are caused by Dalmations, which surprised me. My son had just seen the movie.

This same son of mine (now 13) has a friend with a pit bull. Given his history with dog bites, I do not even want him at the kid's house, even though my son swears it is a nice dog. I would never trust a pit bull. Never.

For the life I me, I do not know why people don't get it through their heads that pit bulls should not be pets.

Eve

Casshew
11-07-2005, 04:38 PM
. Our physician said many bites in kids are caused by Dalmations, which surprised me.
Chihuahua's bite more that pitbulls or Dalmations- but biting and ripping someones throat out is not the same thing.

This breed bites to kill.

Nore
11-07-2005, 04:39 PM
I and glad I live where this breed is BANNED! :hand:


A 10-year-old boy was in critical condition Sunday after three pit bulls escaped from a home and went on a rampage, attacking six people before police shot and killed dogs, authorities said.

Neighbors said the attacks started late Saturday afternoon when children going door-to-door for a fund-raiser arrived at the home of Scott Sword, 41, who owned the dogs.

"We had music playing, and I heard this bizarre sound," said Debby Rivera, who lives three houses away. "I looked out the window, and I saw a young boy. The dogs were just jumping on him."

"The screams were horrible," she said. The dogs were "relentless, like they were possessed."

The pit bulls attacked the two children, and when the dogs' owner tried to stop them, the dogs turned on him and bit off his thumb, Nygren said. The boy's father also tried to protect his son and was attacked. The dogs went after another neighbor as well.

"The scene sprawled over a couple blocks; it was a very chaotic scene," said Lt. Michael Douglas of the Cary Fire Protection District.

Residents threw rocks at the dogs and honked car horns to try to distract them from attacking before police arrived and shot the animals.

Jim Malone said he and a neighbor tried to beat the dogs back with baseball bats. "He'd hit them, they'd run, and they'd come back," Malone said. "This went on for 15 minutes."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/06/pit.bulls.ap/index.html
-----------------

Casshew,they are banned where I live also.There was a case where` a person in our city was dog sitting a Pit,Rottwieler (sp) and one other dog.They escaped from the yard and mauled an elderly man who died after surgery.The people caring for the dogs were charged.I cannot understand why people want this breed.Oh they are sweet if raised right~Yeah right! tell that to someone who has been mauled..

BarnGoddess
11-07-2005, 04:46 PM
I always get puppies. I do not adopt full grown dogs. Our collie was purchased as a pup. Bonnie was perfect the day we brought her home. We had to go out that night and introduced her to the baby sitter. When we came home, she told us that Bonnie had gone to lay under the crib when she put our 18 month old to sleep. She never left until we got home. If it were just me in the car with her, she wouldn't have reacted that way, just when the boys were there. Once, I left her to go to a neighbor to play cards. The men were gathering at my house to watch football and were just coming up the walk when I walked out. Next think I know, they came over and said that Bonnie wouldn't let them in the house. She was at the door barking at them. Never tried to attack, but just wouldn't let them in. She knew the neighbors, but still, said they couldn't come in unless I said it was ok. Once I did that, she made a pest of herself wanting them all to pet her and feed her nibbles. Definietly not the same reaction as that what happened to that little boy.

By the way, earlier stories on the little Colorado boy, show that the dogs had been there only about a week. They left those dogs in the backyard with no adult home. The little boy was often locked out of the house when he came home from school. I would imagine his normal behavior was to go to the backyard of his own home.

Absolutely irresponsible owners. No doubt in my mind about that. There were also puppies in the house according to the news.

Nore
11-07-2005, 04:52 PM
Chihuahua's bite more that pitbulls or Dalmations- but biting and ripping someones throat out is not the same thing.

This breed bites to kill.
-------------------------

Casshew you hit the nail on the head.They bite to kill.They have also been known to turn on their Master after having a good upbringing..as in being raised from 5 weeks.Their jaws lock and it's over.I dont care what anyone says I would not have one near my greatgrandson!!

BarnGoddess
11-07-2005, 05:00 PM
Chihuahua's bite more that pitbulls or Dalmations- but biting and ripping someones throat out is not the same thing.

This breed bites to kill.
I absolutely agree 100%. And as Nore said, those jaws lock and you just don't get them open.

eve
11-07-2005, 05:00 PM
-------------------------

Casshew you hit the nail on the head.They bite to kill.They have also been known to turn on their Master after having a good upbringing..as in being raised from 5 weeks.Their jaws lock and it's over.I dont care what anyone says I would not have one near my greatgrandson!!

This is the problem, they have no "loyalty" -- pit bulls are known to turn on their own masters -- they are wired for fighting no matter how they're raised and will revert to this kind of behavior with no visible provocation. They are unpredictable and have a propensity for violence and when they go for it, they go for the throat, literally.

Eve

Nore
11-07-2005, 05:00 PM
was buried today in Cleveland Ohio.His father is under arrest.The (so called) father scalded the boy with hot water,threw him in the basement with I beliieve it was 6 Pit Bulls.The boy died at Metro hospital.I hope this "father" (I want to swear) gets life in prison or better yet hope it can go death penalty. Oh I have to! Dirty Ba*#%^d

Hbgchick
11-07-2005, 05:05 PM
was buried today in Cleveland Ohio.His father is under arrest.The (so called) father scalded the boy with hot water,threw him in the basement with I beliieve it was 6 Pit Bulls.The boy died at Metro hospital.I hope this "father" (I want to swear) gets life in prison or better yet hope it can go death penalty. Oh I have to! Dirty Ba*#%^d
Good Lord.

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 06:00 PM
Hearing that said over and over, I still don't think Pit Bulls need to be kept as pets in the city. Supposedly these dogs were not trained to be attack or fighting dogs, but just "pets". Over and over, we hear of so much destruction and heartache these dogs cause.

Notice these attacks seem to happen when there are more than one pit bull in the household. Sometimes it could be one pit bull, but dogs of other breeds in the house. To trust them around children is just asking for it.

I know all dogs can bite, but pit bulls have the reputation for vicious and continuing attacks that lead to death. Why not get a dog with a milder bred personality, especially with children in the home.

Years ago we had a beautiful female collie for our two young boys. She played with them, guarded them, pulled them out of the street and pushed them home when I called them in for meals. She went everywhere with us. Once a young kid put his face up against the car window and said something like "hiya dog" and since the boys were in the back seat with her, she let this kid know that he needed to back off. Never tried to bite, but she held her ground between the boys and bared her teeth until he left. Yet she never did it when all the neighborhood kids were out playing with her. Even little squabbles, she'd try to "settle" in her gentle way. Collies, labs, retrievers can be wonderful family pets. Why on earth would someone buy a pit bull for a family dog, when these other large breeds can make better pets?I have 4 Great Danes, and they are all extremely gentle with children. They just don't have an aggressive bone in them. I don't understand why people even have pit bulls. Even though my children are older teenagers, I STILL wouldn't trust having one in my home. They might seem alright but it seems they "snap" and become dangerous. No way would I want one in my neighborhood. My next door neighbor had one 5 years ago. It jumped the fence and attacked the 2 Danes I had at the time. They fought her off and I managed to open the gate to get her out. Luckily my dogs had no serious wounds. That dog later hung itself when my neighbor kept her on a chain, and it tried to go over the fence to another neighbor's yard. Occasionally someone forgets to close my gate and my dogs will get out, but it's nothing for a 6 year old see them and to bring them home. All the kids around me know my dogs. As much as I love animals, I was not sorry the pit bull died. I worried that the dog would jump the fence and attack a child one day. Don't think I've ever heard of a case of a Great Dane attacking. With all of mine all you have to say is "Boo" to them and they run and hide, such big wussies!!

I adopted one of my Danes as a 3 year old. He's the sweetest of all, even after being severely abused by his previous owner. So a lot has to do with temperament of the breed.

reb
11-07-2005, 06:11 PM
i am so sick to death of this "ohh, the poor little puppies, they are so misunderstood"... BS i could puke. and i'm an animal (esp dog) lover!!!

the problem may be the people, BUT ULTIMATELY THE PROBLEM IS STILL THE DOGS. it is the dogs that are attacking people (& other dogs/animals) and tearing them to shreds in the end, am i right? so, therefore, that is the problem.

it's true that we now unfortunately have a country full of anti-social, drug-dealing, drug-using, ghettofied, white trash/back trash/trailer trash/ whatever-trash thugs & thug wanna be's who train them to be vicious, breed them indiscriminately, fight them and don't socialize them... so the problem IS with these idiotic people. BUT THE PROBLEM IS- ALSO- STILL THE DOGS.

yes, of course there are some nice sweet pit bulls out there. but the fact is, PIT BULLS ARE STILL A PROBLEM!

the fact that pit bull-defenders are in total denial of is that CERTAIN DOGS WERE BRED TO DO CERTAIN THINGS. PIT BULLS WERE BRED TO FIGHT AND KILL. THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE BIG STRONG JAWS & ARE ALL MUSCLE. SO YES, THEY HAVE A GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO FIGHT TO KILL. THAT'S THE QUALITY THAT WAS BRED TO BE HARD-WIRED INTO THEIR BRAINS AND BODIES. (i can just hear a crowd whining now, "shut up, it is NOT!")

and, that is why so many of them SNAP without warning and attack other dogs & people, and cannot be stopped until their "prey" is dead.

there are countless stories such as the following one i am about to tell you:

a dog rescue person i know of HAD RAISED A PIT BULL FROM BIRTH to be sweet, loving, docile, etc. etc. etc... and it just adored her other dog, an old one she had for 14 years.. they were best buddies. one day without warning, she came home and found her old dog on the floor, near dead, bleeding everywhere, after being mauled by the pit bull. the PB stood there like, "oops, what did i do??" she had to put her older dog to sleep.

and of course, this is what happens to peoples' children.

i have also been in my vets several times when someone was dropping off or picking up their dog for surgery, after being mauled by one of these things. NOT a pretty sight.

my question is, with all the wonderful dogs out there, WHY on earth do you need a freaking pit bull, of all things?? why go looking for trouble?

the fact is, most people have them to look tough and scary, and because it's controversial and rebellious. AND because they ARE capable of doing serious damage.

the rest of the people are in denial just because they feel sorry for the dogs, and perhaps have one of their own who happens to be very sweet & harmless.

human beings could very easily breed out the viciousness and physical ability to do major harm out of these dogs, and keep their good qualities, if we made a concentrated effort- it IS possible, in theory. but the fact is, there's soo many idiots out there who keep breeding their fighting dogs to be more & more vicious... and there's just too d*mn many of these dogs out there now... so i don't think that's going to happen.

reb
11-07-2005, 06:18 PM
by the way, i hope they ban them where i live (and any other vicious fighting-type dogs a thug would want).. sorry, but i would be all for it, even though i have 3 rescued dogs. the local dog pounds are just overflowing with PB's, no wonder they have to put so many down every day? what, are they supposed to find homes for them all??? yeah, right.

of course, it would take a few kids getting shredded to death before that would ever happen.

it should also be a crime to breed them, in my not-so-humble opinion!

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 06:25 PM
, PIT BULLS WERE BRED TO FIGHT AND KILL. THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE BIG STRONG JAWS & ARE ALL MUSCLE. SO YES, THEY HAVE A GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO FIGHT TO KILL. THAT'S THE QUALITY THAT WAS BRED TO BE HARD-WIRED INTO THEIR BRAINS AND BODIES. (i can just \, loving, docile, etc. etc. etc... and it just adored her other dog, an old

human beings could very easily breed out the viciousness and physical ability to do major harm out of these dogs, and keep their good qualities, if we made a concentrated effort- it IS possible, in theory. but the fact is, there's soo many idiots out there who keep breeding their fighting dogs to be more & more vicious... and there's just too d*mn many of these dogs out there now... so i don't think that's going to happen.
I agree 100%. It was done to Great Danes. Ages ago Danes were used as guard/attack/watch dogs. The aggressive behavior was BRED out of them so that the majority of them are gentle, docile family pets. As I stated in my previous post, I have never heard about a Great Dane attacking or mauling anyone. Imagine what a dog that size could do to a person if it had aggressive behavior! The lightest weight Dane I have is about 140#, my big baby Kong is just under 160#.

reb
11-07-2005, 06:31 PM
i think a lot of large breed dogs were bred to just LOOK imposing, but not necessarily to do a lot of harm, am i right?

it kills me when people say "more poodles bite than any other dog"... well, DUH, maybe so but how many have you heard about ripping someone's face off?? LOL! please! or grouping together in a pack and attacking a child? can you imagine? kind of funny to think about... the poor kid might even have to get a few band-aids out! LOL!

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 06:39 PM
by the way, i hope they ban them where i live (and any other vicious fighting-type dogs a thug would want).. sorry, but i would be all for it, even though i have 3 rescued dogs. the local dog pounds are just overflowing with PB's, no wonder they have to put so many down every day? what, are they supposed to find homes for them all??? yeah, right.

of course, it would take a few kids getting shredded to death before that would ever happen.

it should also be a crime to breed them, in my not-so-humble opinion!
In many places if it's a PB it's automatically put down. They're not adoptable.

TheShadow
11-07-2005, 06:47 PM
In the city where I live, the SPCA will spay or neuter anyone's pit bulls and pit bull mixes for no charge. It is an attempt to reduce the backyard breeding of this breed. Accidental breeding and backyard breeders are the source for most of the dangerous pit bulls around here. Less PB puppies, less PB's. Hopefully this free program will spread to other cities throughout the country.

reb
11-07-2005, 06:49 PM
and believe me, it IS sad for the dog, i do feel sorry for them and the sorry predicament that human stupidity has put them in. in the pound i have seen the sad faces of the "condemned", they know they are on "the list".. and it breaks your heart. however, there are many other dogs in there that are much more desirable, dependable, and safe to have as a pet. at least, the pits are not going to be neglected, abused, or have to suffer any more.

reb
11-07-2005, 06:50 PM
sadie-
WOW,, too bad cities don't have free spaying/neutering for ALL cats & dogs!!

btw, any plans to have a program like this for humans.........??

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 06:52 PM
In the city where I live, the SPCA will spay or neuter anyone's pit bulls and pit bull mixes for no charge. It is an attempt to reduce the backyard breeding of this breed. Accidental breeding and backyard breeders are the source for most of the dangerous pit bulls around here. Less PB puppies, less PB's. Hopefully this free program will spread to other cities throughout the country.
Free or not, the people breeding those dogs to fight aren't interested in that. They're in it for the money! I doubt it would decrease the number of dogs being bred for fighting purposes.

Jeana (DP)
11-07-2005, 06:56 PM
-------------------------

Casshew you hit the nail on the head.They bite to kill.They have also been known to turn on their Master after having a good upbringing..as in being raised from 5 weeks.Their jaws lock and it's over.I dont care what anyone says I would not have one near my greatgrandson!!


Absolutely. The dog can be hand raised from birth and there is absolutely no way to know that he won't turn and bite one day. They're a completely unnecessary breed.

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 06:56 PM
sadie-
WOW,, too bad cities don't have free spaying/neutering for ALL cats & dogs!!

btw, any plans to have a program like this for humans.........??
Geeze Reb, since I joined this forum I WISH!!! The stories I've read here I wish we did have a program to spay/neuter or automatically put down some "humans".

BarnGoddess
11-07-2005, 07:38 PM
I agree 100%. It was done to Great Danes. Ages ago Danes were used as guard/attack/watch dogs. The aggressive behavior was BRED out of them so that the majority of them are gentle, docile family pets. As I stated in my previous post, I have never heard about a Great Dane attacking or mauling anyone. Imagine what a dog that size could do to a person if it had aggressive behavior! The lightest weight Dane I have is about 140#, my big baby Kong is just under 160#.
This and your above post about saying "Boo" to a Great Dane. I have a friend who calls her Dane, her "cowardly couch potato". I've heard about their timid and lazy natures.

Every dog should have a job, even if it's only as the family clown, cuddler or lap companion. Most breeds are bred for jobs. I have three different dogs presently. Our 1/2 border collie 1/2 blue heeler is a fantastic cattle dog, by instinct. We never taught him a thing, he just does it. Our Welsh Corgi is learning to heel, but still a pup. Lastly, our Shi' Tzu is the best footwarmer in the business.

The best Collie I owned, Bonnie, would have been lost without children around. She thrived with them, not just ours, but all those in the neighborhood. Many times kids would come over to see if Bonnie could come out and play. They usually brought her back sooner than they wanted to because she herded them and wouldn't let them run all over the place. They were her own personal little herd of sheep. To her they needed to be kept together and in her sight at all times. Absolutely the greatest dog to have around children. Another Collie we had loved to play football with the kids. They'd get him to line up with him and he'd tackle for them. I have that on video. Of course he'd tackle the wrong side sometimes. LOL

concernedperson
11-07-2005, 07:47 PM
First,I have to say I love dogs. Second, my friend was cornered in her garage by a Great Dane. This dog was inches above her head and held her at bay for the longest period of time. Pit bulls are little evil things that are inbred and will rip your throat out without the necessary cuddling. Not all creatures or humans are without fault but some behaviors need to be looked at and we need to protect all that are vulnerable.

Details
11-07-2005, 07:51 PM
Thank goodness it was a great Dane rather than a pit bull - they probably wouldn't just hold her at bay, they'd go for the throat.

I don't see any reason for pit bulls as pets, any more than any other deadly animal. Maybe put the same restrictions as you would on a person owning a tiger, etc. Well caged, not let out without a leash and someone strong enough to maintain control of the animal, if at all, and generally not allowed period as a pet most places.

My sister was once held at bay for a fair amount of time by a housecat. My uncle John had the most evil, angry cat in the world - it loved him, hated everyone else. Every vet visit was the same thing - the vet would say, "Don't bring him back.". My sister was caught in the bathroom when the cat wanted to go in to get some food - but wouldn't let her walk past him to get out of his way.

aussiegran
11-07-2005, 07:59 PM
I lost my 8 lb miniture fox terrier who was like our baby to one of these pi bulls ,it jumped a 6 ft fence to get him .our hearts were broken I still cry 8 years later, .the owner wouldnt do any thing just laughed about it ,I nearly broke my hand trying to get at the owner through his door the chicken s/it :furious: so my husband fixed the problem one night .no more p/bull .this breed is now banned in australia thank goodness

concernedperson
11-07-2005, 08:10 PM
I lost my 8 lb miniture fox terrier who was like our baby to one of these pi bulls ,it jumped a 6 ft fence to get him .our hearts were broken I still cry 8 years later, .the owner wouldnt do any thing just laughed about it ,I nearly broke my hand trying to get at the owner through his door the chicken s/it :furious: so my husband fixed the problem one night .no more p/bull .this breed is now banned in australia thank goodness

See, this is my problem. The dogs are inbred to do destruction. It really isn't about the owners anymore it is a breed that favors destruction. Just like sociopaths. We have got to realize that no matter how much we love there is always another path that doesn't favor our views.

Casshew
11-07-2005, 08:27 PM
I lost my 8 lb miniture fox terrier who was like our baby to one of these pit bulls aussiegran http://www.casshew.com/15.gif I am so sorry for your terrible, terrible loss.

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 08:54 PM
I lost my 8 lb miniture fox terrier who was like our baby to one of these pi bulls ,it jumped a 6 ft fence to get him .our hearts were broken I still cry 8 years later, .the owner wouldnt do any thing just laughed about it ,I nearly broke my hand trying to get at the owner through his door the chicken s/it :furious: so my husband fixed the problem one night .no more p/bull .this breed is now banned in australia thank goodness
Oh Aussie, sorry for the loss! That poor little thing didn't have a chance against the PB. :furious: At least mine were big enough and there were two of them to fend off the attack. And good for your husband, that dog was dangerous.

reb
11-07-2005, 09:20 PM
oh no,, how awful,, i am so sorry. and they just LAUGHED?? what a subhuman monster.

and that was mightly brave of your husband to "take care of" the problem... how did he do it without them finding out?

btw, i am surprised to see so many level-headed people on here, i thought by now we would all be attacked for the things we are saying (funny how the owners often act so much like their dogs! LOL)

Casshew
11-07-2005, 09:25 PM
btw, i am surprised to see so many level-headed people on here, i thought by now we would all be attacked for the things we are saying (funny how the owners often act so much like their dogs! LOL)
There are some pit bull owners on the board, and in past discussions they basically say their baby wouldn't hurt a fly - and they could be very right about that but I wouldn't want to be around when 'baby' snaps one day

concernedperson
11-07-2005, 09:30 PM
There are some pit bull owners on the board, and in past discussions they basically say their baby wouldn't hurt a fly - and they could be very right about that but I wouldn't want to be around when 'baby' snaps one day

Me either.

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 09:37 PM
:laugh: :laugh:
I have a friend who calls her Dane, her "cowardly couch potato". I've heard about their timid and lazy natures.

That would be Kong also!!! He hates thunder and that's the only time he jumps in my bed between me and hubby and buries his head under a pillow. I wouldn't say Danes are lazy, just more laid back.:D

reb
11-07-2005, 09:44 PM
that is too funny........ poor thing!

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 10:06 PM
First,I have to say I love dogs. Second, my friend was cornered in her garage by a Great Dane. This dog was inches above her head and held her at bay for the longest period of time. Pit bulls are little evil things that are inbred and will rip your throat out without the necessary cuddling. Not all creatures or humans are without fault but some behaviors need to be looked at and we need to protect all that are vulnerable.
If a Great Dane had the temperament of of PB, your friend wouldn't be alive. That dog probably wasn't trained not to jump on people. I don't know who's dog it was, and you didn't say the dog was being aggressive (growling) when holding her there, but when I got Sadie at 10 mos old, she would do that. Danes have no idea of their size. Trust me, I have 2 that think they can fit in my lap, LOL. She would pin me against the wall because she wanted a treat. I broke her from doing that real quick. A lot of people who are not familiar with the breed fear them, just because of their immense size and they do look intimidating! I usually take one of them with me if I have to make a quick run to Walmart in the evenings. I had just gotten out of my car when the guy in the car next me was getting out of his. Well Kong stuck his big head out the window and that guy screamed & jumped on the roof of his car. Gosh, I couldn't stop laughing and told him Kong was harmless. He eventually pet Kong and said he really needed to get a dog like that for his wife when he deploys to Iraq. He said the sight of a dog that big scared the chit out of him!

aussiegran
11-07-2005, 10:08 PM
There are some pit bull owners on the board, and in past discussions they basically say their baby wouldn't hurt a fly - and they could be very right about that but I wouldn't want to be around when 'baby' snaps one dayThanks for the sympathy ,I am reliving it today with this discussion and I miss him still ,I have 2 more Toby and Penny a brother and sister we saved from a bad home,
Its funny when my daughter and I were walking past the dogs house before it attacked my dog the pit bull was outside with its owner and we walked to the other side of the street because it had the scariest look on its face ,the owner Laughed and said quote (he wouldnt hurt a fly) .

Casshew
11-07-2005, 10:17 PM
we walked to the other side of the street because it had the scariest look on its face ,the owner Laughed and said quote (he wouldnt hurt a fly) .
Maybe a fly is the only safe thing around a pit bull :angel:

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 10:19 PM
Thanks for the sympathy ,I am reliving it today with this discussion and I miss him still ,I have 2 more Toby and Penny a brother and sister we saved from a bad home,
Its funny when my daughter and I were walking past the dogs house before it attacked my dog the pit bull was outside with its owner and we walked to the other side of the street because it had the scariest look on its face ,the owner Laughed and said quote (he wouldnt hurt a fly) .
That guy doesn't deserve to own any dog! Wouldn't it be great if his own dog turned on him? "Wouldnt hurt a fly" oh really????

Sassygerl
11-07-2005, 10:50 PM
There are some pit bull owners on the board, and in past discussions they basically say their baby wouldn't hurt a fly - and they could be very right about that but I wouldn't want to be around when 'baby' snaps one day

Nearly every story you hear about a pit mauling you hear the owners say what a wonderful family pet they were for 8+ years without ever even one incident of aggression. I don't trust them and won't let my kids play at peoples houses who have them. I've been around many, and they have always been very friendly, but I will never trust them!!!!

detectivewannabe
11-07-2005, 10:57 PM
Last night in my mom's neighborhood, a pit bull that was in the bed of a truck (the driver was going to visit someone) jumped out and attacked a poodle on a leash in it's own yard. Tore it to pieces. I'm not sure if it's going to make it. After it attacked the dog, it went straight for some kids down the road. The owner finally caught it and drove off before anyone else could get hurt. That's all I know. Also, my mom's neighbor has one inside and one time this summer, my mom was in her yard with her dog and this pit bull could see my mom's dog through the window and it tried to attack mom's dog. No joke, it cracked the window trying to get to her dog!!!!!!!!!!!! Insane creatures!!!

Cypros
11-07-2005, 11:01 PM
My cat, Buster, was mauled and killed by a pitbull. Buster and my other cat, Cairo, were sunning themselves on the front porch and some guy came down the street with his pitbull off the leash. It charged the cats and got Buster. Apparently the guy just watched it happen and then called his dog back and went on down the street. I was not home and think I would have killed the guy myself if I got my hands on him. I never did find the creep or his killer dog.

I miss my sweet Buster. :(

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 11:06 PM
Last night in my mom's neighborhood, a pit bull that was in the bed of a truck (the driver was going to visit someone) jumped out and attacked a poodle on a leash in it's own yard. Tore it to pieces. I'm not sure if it's going to make it. After it attacked the dog, it went straight for some kids down the road. The owner finally caught it and drove off before anyone else could get hurt. That's all I know. Also, my mom's neighbor has one inside and one time this summer, my mom was in her yard with her dog and this pit bull could see my mom's dog through the window and it tried to attack mom's dog. No joke, it cracked the window trying to get to her dog!!!!!!!!!!!! Insane creatures!!!
So typical! I honestly wouldn't miss that breed if they became extinct.
To breed that aggressiveness out them would probably take a couple hundred years. It's not worth waiting for.

lilpony
11-07-2005, 11:07 PM
My hairdresser had 2 pitbulls. She got them when they were about 8 weeks old. Had them for many many years. She used to say they were so great and playful. Never would hurt a fly. Such sweets dogs, she would say. Well I asked her one day how the dogs were, because she mentioned she got a new dog(not a pitbull). Thats when she said all of the sudden they started showing aggression, to the children and herself. She got rid of them immediately. I wanted to say, I thought they were great dogs, but I bit my tongue. As she was cutting my hair..:p Those dogs scare me to death. In my opinion, I don't even think they are cute. I am afraid to go for outdoor walks, because I have seen some roaming around. And it scared me.

LinasK
11-07-2005, 11:08 PM
The owners exploit this breed's predisposition for violence. They have a rep for turning on humans. They seem to be wired that way. I would never trust one.

This child lived at this home, right? He was climbing over his own fence -- why didn't the dog recognize him/ his scent? My dad was a veterinarian. He believed that once a dog, any dog, any breed, crossed the line and bit a human being, it should be put down, no questions asked. Even a good trained watchdog should only go so far as necessary to warn someone off, before attacking. IMO.

This same son of mine (now 13) has a friend with a pit bull. Given his history with dog bites, I do not even want him at the kid's house, even though my son swears it is a nice dog. I would never trust a pit bull. Never.

For the life I me, I do not know why people don't get it through their heads that pit bulls should not be pets.

Eve
I completely agree with you Eve!

detectivewannabe
11-07-2005, 11:08 PM
My cat, Buster, was mauled and killed by a pitbull. Buster and my other cat, Cairo, were sunning themselves on the front porch and some guy came down the street with his pitbull off the leash. It charged the cats and got Buster. Apparently the guy just watched it happen and then called his dog back and went on down the street. I was not home and think I would have killed the guy myself if I got my hands on him. I never did find the creep or his killer dog.

I miss my sweet Buster. :(
I do not understand these people who own these animals. In alot of instances, they seem to not even care! I own a dog who truely wouldn't hurt a fly but there have been times she has barked at the meter lady and I could have died of embarrassment. I hollered and scolded our dog and she really didn't do anything that bad. I can't fathom letting her attack someone or something and just walking away.

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 11:10 PM
My cat, Buster, was mauled and killed by a pitbull. Buster and my other cat, Cairo, were sunning themselves on the front porch and some guy came down the street with his pitbull off the leash. It charged the cats and got Buster. Apparently the guy just watched it happen and then called his dog back and went on down the street. I was not home and think I would have killed the guy myself if I got my hands on him. I never did find the creep or his killer dog.

I miss my sweet Buster. :(
Sorry about Buster. I can't get over the mentality of the owners of these dogs. It's NOT ok to have a "pet" that kills other people's pets and children.

Casshew
11-07-2005, 11:11 PM
I miss my sweet Buster. :( So much pain for everyone with these terrible experiences, I am so sorry Cypros, I have three cats and would be devestated to lose one.

I hate pitbulls I don't care how sweet they are :bang:

Cypros
11-07-2005, 11:15 PM
Thanks, Casshew.

Sassygerl
11-07-2005, 11:34 PM
Aw, I'm sorry about Buster...how sad :( A classmate of my youngest, he's in 1st grade, the dad bought his daughter a pit bull a few months ago. The mother told me the dog growls at her (they keep it outside...she said the dog LOVES their daughter) but she carries a fly swatter when she goes out back. Like a fly swatter would even help!!!!! Just another mental note I made that my son will not go over there!

SadieMae
11-07-2005, 11:38 PM
Aw, I'm sorry about Buster...how sad :( A classmate of my youngest, he's in 1st grade, the dad bought his daughter a pit bull a few months ago. The mother told me the dog growls at her (they keep it outside...she said the dog LOVES their daughter) but she carries a fly swatter when she goes out back. Like a fly swatter would even help!!!!! Just another mental note I made that my son will not go over there!
And rightly so!!!

reb
11-08-2005, 12:32 AM
HA!! that lady's gonne need more than a fly swatter when that dog turns demonic and lunges for her neck. hope it's worth it... risking your safety and the safety of your kids too. some people are so stupid, it's more important to be a rebel and flip the bird to civilized society than it is to keep their child safe.

poor buster,, i'm so sorry. i used to live in the big city and almost witnessed some drug dealer's ho walking their PB down the street, and it lunged & attacked my neighbor's cat who was about 15 yrs old, just lounging on the front step. what a way to go, after all those years. and of course the jerk just kept going down the street without a care in the world, while they were raging at her.

it seems to me that the people who own these monsters actually LIKE to watch their PB maul another animal.... i think they get off on it. after all, it's just practice for getting in the ring... even if they don't fight the dogs, the owners probably fantasize about it, or they just figure the dog has to kill for sport once in a while, to get it out of their system. what sick freaks!!! in a perfect world, the breed would be banned completely, and anyone caught with one would get a fine & jail sentence.

SadieMae
11-08-2005, 12:51 AM
HA!! that lady's gonne need more than a fly swatter when that dog turns demonic and lunges for her neck. hope it's worth it... risking your safety and the safety of your kids too. some people are so stupid, it's more important to be a rebel and flip the bird to civilized society than it is to keep their child safe.

poor buster,, i'm so sorry. i used to live in the big city and almost witnessed some drug dealer's ho walking their PB down the street, and it lunged & attacked my neighbor's cat who was about 15 yrs old, just lounging on the front step. what a way to go, after all those years. and of course the jerk just kept going down the street without a care in the world, while they were raging at her.

it seems to me that the people who own these monsters actually LIKE to watch their PB maul another animal.... i think they get off on it. after all, it's just practice for getting in the ring... even if they don't fight the dogs, the owners probably fantasize about it, or they just figure the dog has to kill for sport once in a while, to get it out of their system. what sick freaks!!! in a perfect world, the breed would be banned completely, and anyone caught with one would get a fine & jail sentence.
In a perfect world yes the breed would be banned. But banning them would just create an underground market for the dogs. There's just too many to eradicate breed entirely. They would end up being an illegal commodity like drugs. Already they are a status symbol to drug dealers. I don't get it. Poor cat didn't deserve that kind of death!

I had another Great Dane 20 years ago, Ghenghis who went after a little kitten. He just took off running down the street, I saw him grab it in his mouth and then he came trotting back to me with this kitten in his mouth. Had the whole head in his mouth, I was horrified!!! Well he dropped the little kitty at my feet, and looked so proud that he brought me a present. Little kitty was quite irritated, but not a mark on her. Genghis was a sweetie too, and I kept the cat!

PrayersForMaura
11-08-2005, 01:42 AM
I don't know if anyone suggested this, but we should keep track in a thread or a forum of all the stories about pit bull attacks. I've seen so many stories about them everywhere.

Details
11-08-2005, 01:49 AM
If they were banned, there would be an underground market... but it would still cut way down on the number of pit bulls out there - not everyone is willing to break the law to have a pit bull. And if you saw one in your neighborhood, you could just report it immediately instead of waiting for it to attack a person or pet.

Nothing is ever a perfect situation, but banning them is a huge improvement. The people and pets killed probably wouldn't have been if the owners had had to keep their pit bulls hidden and locked away in order not to be caught owning an illegal dog.

For some people, pit bulls are good dogs - and maybe even they'll stay that way the rest of their life. But there are plenty of other good dogs out there who are not bred to the bone killers, time bombs who may go psycho at any time.

SadieMae
11-08-2005, 01:59 AM
If they were banned, there would be an underground market... but it would still cut way down on the number of pit bulls out there - not everyone is willing to break the law to have a pit bull. And if you saw one in your neighborhood, you could just report it immediately instead of waiting for it to attack a person or pet.

Nothing is ever a perfect situation, but banning them is a huge improvement. The people and pets killed probably wouldn't have been if the owners had had to keep their pit bulls hidden and locked away in order not to be caught owning an illegal dog.

For some people, pit bulls are good dogs - and maybe even they'll stay that way the rest of their life. But there are plenty of other good dogs out there who are not bred to the bone killers, time bombs who may go psycho at any time.That's what's so scary about the breed. You couldn't have said it better, pitbulls are timebombs. I'm all for banning the dogs. Believe me if there were a ban here, I'd have no hesistation in reporting anyone having one. In Detroit I heard there is a sort of ban....no one under 18 can be an owner of one. A person walking one under 18 will have the dog confiscated. Does that make sense to you? Bottom line on that, IMO that's not a ban on the dog. Kids just say it's my momma's dog.:waitasec:

Sassygerl
11-08-2005, 02:08 AM
They're just like guns....they'll always be around IMO.

Details
11-08-2005, 02:12 AM
They're just like guns....they'll always be around IMO.Yes - but that doesn't mean we can't improve the situation.

Pet peeve - just because there's no perfect solution to completely fix something doesn't mean that partial solutions that will improve the situation significantly are worthless, nor that the situation is hopeless.

SadieMae
11-08-2005, 02:16 AM
So since it's pretty much the consensus here, PB do not need to be in our neighborhoods, does anyone know how, who to see to get them banned? I don't know where to start...city council, county commissioners, get it on a ballot, petitions? Anyone know?

LinasK
11-08-2005, 02:19 AM
San Francisco is getting ready to authorize an ordinance requiring Pit Bull owners to get them spayed or neutered. I'd prefer an out-and-out ban, but it's a step!:clap: :clap: :clap:

LinasK
11-08-2005, 02:21 AM
So since it's pretty much the consensus here, PB do not need to be in our neighborhoods, does anyone know how, who to see to get them banned? I don't know where to start...city council, county commissioners, get it on a ballot, petitions? Anyone know?
In San Francisco, it's the board of supervisors. Try your city council or county commisioners.

SadieMae
11-08-2005, 02:28 AM
San Francisco is getting ready to authorize an ordinance requiring Pit Bull owners to get them spayed or neutered. I'd prefer an out-and-out ban, but it's a step!:clap: :clap: :clap:
Yes for the law abiding owners it's a good move. But with city ordinances, there's usually never enough people out checking they're being followed. There's a city ordinance here that all dogs must be licensed annually. Mine never had a city license in 14 years. Nobody ever came by to check either. The only way they know is if a dog gets picked up by the dog catcher and taken to the pound. You have to buy a license to bail them out.

LinasK
11-08-2005, 02:31 AM
Yes for the law abiding owners it's a good move. But with city ordinances, there's usually never enough people out checking they're being followed. There's a city ordinance here that all dogs must be licensed annually. Mine never had a city license in 14 years. Nobody ever came by to check either. The only way they know is if a dog gets picked up by the dog catcher and taken to the pound. You have to buy a license to bail them out.
Since a 12-year-old boy Nicolas Fabish was just recently killed in S.F. by his own pit bulls, I think they'll (no pun intended) put some teeth into enforcing this statute. S.F. has also had one other horrific dog mauling death by Presa Canario dogs bred for fighting.

Details
11-08-2005, 02:32 AM
Neutering all of them is a good start. That'll solve the problem over time - to whatever degree you can get compliance.

SadieMae
11-08-2005, 02:46 AM
Since a 12-year-old boy Nicolas Fabish was just recently killed in S.F. by his own pit bulls, I think they'll (no pun intended) put some teeth into enforcing this statute. S.F. has also had one other horrific dog mauling death by Presa Canario dogs bred for fighting.
I remember that case. Aren't those also pretty huge dogs from Portugal/Spain? Very dangerous breed also, but not common in the US I don't think. The owners are out of jail now? Nicholas was left home by his "mother" in the basement because she didn't want the dogs to attack him. Now that was one stuuuupid beeyotch. She KNEW the dogs were a threat to her child and left him alone with them.:banghead:

golfmom
11-08-2005, 08:49 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-051107pitbull,1,4744982.story?page=2&coll=chi-news-hed

"I was always one of those people who said it wasn't the dog, it was the owner," Ellen Lamarre said. "But in this case I think it was the dog. They just turned."

SewingDeb
11-08-2005, 10:01 AM
I don't know if anyone suggested this, but we should keep track in a thread or a forum of all the stories about pit bull attacks. I've seen so many stories about them everywhere.

It's easy to get thousands of these stories. Just google pit bull + attack. It's horrific to see how many hits you get.

I'll stick with my little beagle. She loves everybody and she's great with kids.

Jeana (DP)
11-08-2005, 10:04 AM
They're just like guns....they'll always be around IMO.


I disagree with that statement. They're a lot harder to hide than guns. However, speaking of guns, since there ARE so many of them around, I wonder why no one went and got one and shot these dogs when they attacked. That would have been my first reaction.

Dogs are pack animals who have been bred to attack and kill their own kind. They see children just as they see other dogs and have no "STOP" sign in their heads telling them NOT to go after them as they were trained to do. Simple as that. The breed needs to go.

Hbgchick
11-08-2005, 10:48 AM
In the city where I live, the SPCA will spay or neuter anyone's pit bulls and pit bull mixes for no charge. It is an attempt to reduce the backyard breeding of this breed. Accidental breeding and backyard breeders are the source for most of the dangerous pit bulls around here. Less PB puppies, less PB's. Hopefully this free program will spread to other cities throughout the country.
Hear hear!

tuppence
11-08-2005, 11:04 AM
My hairdresser had 2 pitbulls. She got them when they were about 8 weeks old. Had them for many many years. She used to say they were so great and playful. Never would hurt a fly. Such sweets dogs, she would say. Well I asked her one day how the dogs were, because she mentioned she got a new dog(not a pitbull). Thats when she said all of the sudden they started showing aggression, to the children and herself. She got rid of them immediately. I wanted to say, I thought they were great dogs, but I bit my tongue. As she was cutting my hair..:p Those dogs scare me to death. In my opinion, I don't even think they are cute. I am afraid to go for outdoor walks, because I have seen some roaming around. And it scared me.

at least she was willing to do something about it! I think most people would be too stubborn after they spent years defending the breed...

Sassygerl
11-08-2005, 11:36 AM
I disagree with that statement. They're a lot harder to hide than guns. However, speaking of guns, since there ARE so many of them around, I wonder why no one went and got one and shot these dogs when they attacked. That would have been my first reaction.

Dogs are pack animals who have been bred to attack and kill their own kind. They see children just as they see other dogs and have no "STOP" sign in their heads telling them NOT to go after them as they were trained to do. Simple as that. The breed needs to go.

Oh I agree with you that they're a lot harder to hide, but rest assured it can be done, and the dogs will continue to be bred....banned or not. Just like anything else illegal. I am one who would be happy if there were none in my neighborhood...trust me! Then there are Rotties too....

Nore
11-09-2005, 10:03 AM
Me either.
-----------------------

That makes three of us!

Hbgchick
11-09-2005, 10:15 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-051107pitbull,1,4744982.story?page=2&coll=chi-news-hed

"I was always one of those people who said it wasn't the dog, it was the owner," Ellen Lamarre said. "But in this case I think it was the dog. They just turned."
Well of course. It's HER FAMILY that is the owner this time, so of COURSE it couldn't be THEIR fault...it's just those OTHER owners fault...:banghead:

golfmom
11-09-2005, 10:41 AM
Well of course. It's HER FAMILY that is the owner this time, so of COURSE it couldn't be THEIR fault...it's just those OTHER owners fault...:banghead:

I believe you're mistaken, she is the relative of the little girl. It certainly didn't benefit her or her family members to say that. It just so happens that I agree with her. I always felt that it was the owners and not the dogs. I now firmly believe that these dogs (like people) in spite of having loving homes can turn.

Details
11-09-2005, 02:26 PM
I think she had to learn it the hard way. When it's not you, it's easy to blame the owners - until you know the owners and the dog involved and realize that it really does happen - a well raised dog, good owners, and they'll still snap!

Pure denial - until it's you. A common thing - just like the people who are anti-abortion (until it's their 16 year old daughter who gets pregnant), or people who are sympathetic to criminals being caused by society's ills (until they get mugged), etc.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 02:34 PM
Let me start by offering my condolences to any of you who have lost a family member (human or animal) to any dog. It is truly an unfortunate occurrence that should never happen. I ask that you do your best to keep an open mind as you read this.



Please take this quick pit bull identification quiz: http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html (http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html)

I didn’t get it right until probably the 15th guess.



From this it is easy to understand how identifying a dog involved in an attack, especially a pit bull, can be inaccurate. Almost all media stories involving “vicious pit bulls” rely on the accounts of eyewitnesses. In many of these stories, further investigations reveal that the dog (or dogs) involved is not in fact a pit bull. Unfortunately, newspapers with headlines like “Unknown-Breed Dog Mauls Woman” don’t attract readers like ones about pit bulls. You will never see follow-up stories with the same front-page publicity that correct the breed type or even stories after the investigation. They are always first reports in the day or days right after the incident.



Also, many people in this thread describe pit bulls as ready to “snap” or “turn without notice”. Since nobody seems to have owned one, and only one person said that they have a friend who owned two, I can only infer that these descriptions are based on the media reports where owners of the dog describe the history of the dog. If we think about this for a minute: The owner’s dog has just hurt or killed someone. Police officers and reporters are asking about the dog. How likely is it that the owner is going to say, “Oh yeah, Rex has always been vicious. In fact, it was just a matter of time until this was going to happen. What, with all that illegal fighting that I’ve been training him for, I am surprised that this was his first kill.”? Of course they are going to say that the dog was always nice, if the owner has any chance of avoiding criminal charges or lawsuits, they must say that. How many people actually take responsibility for their negligence these days? The story that started this whole thread states that the incident is being investigated as a criminal matter. What are the chances that anyone will read the results of the investigations?



Many posts also make comments like “They see children just as they see other dogs and have no "STOP" sign in their heads” and “They bite to kill”. Let’s put this in perspective. There are millions of pit bulls in the United States and annually there is an average of 17 DOG related deaths per year. That is ALL dogs. Since 1965 that list includes 36 breeds (with the beagle and Great Dane making the list). So either pit bulls are not “programmed” to attack or they do not “bite to kill”, or both are false. As a matter of fact, the American Temperament Test Society (http://www.atts.org/statistics.html (http://www.atts.org/statistics.html)) ranks the pit bull (American Pit Bull Terrier and American Staffordshire terrier) higher than almost all other dogs. To further explore, even if you say that pit bulls caused half of the annual deaths or 8.5 (which is not the case), your odds of winning the Powerball lottery jackpot are much greater with an average of 14.33 annual winners over the last three years (and this average will go up since 2005 is not over, but there will likely be more winners). Furthermore, the Powerball lottery is only played in 27 states.



Let’s also look at some additional things that should be banned because they are “dangerous” (2002 National Safety Council, http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm (http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm) ):

-Dogs (all dogs not just pit bulls), 18 deaths: but let’s ban pit bulls.

-Animal rider or occupant of animal-drawn vehicle, 118 deaths: clearly horses must go.

-Cars (just cars, not SUVs, Trucks, Motorcycles, etc.), 16,337 deaths: let’s ban them.

-Fall involving bed, chair, other furniture, 785 deaths: furniture is clearly vicious, ban it.

-Drowning in the bath tub, 352 deaths: my neighborhood would surely be better off without them.

-Ignition or melting of nightwear, 13 deaths: evil little pajamas, ban them.

-Intentional Self Harm; 31,655 deaths: Whoa, huge number. What should we do here? Should we ban anything one can overdose on, suffocate themselves with, guns, knives, etc? Maybe we need to ban people, or maybe just ones with emotional or mental health issues. Maybe certain races or sexes are more likely to harm themselves. According to the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus04trend.pdf#046 (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus04trend.pdf#046)) white males have the highest percentages; lets ban both whites and males, because clearly the only logical conclusion is that they are ready to snap without warning.

Other sources:

-In the year 2000, 1561 teenagers were arrested for murder: maybe we should ban teens; maybe we could neuter people, then the problem would solve itself.

-You are more likely to be murdered by someone you know. Lets band together (temporarily) to pass some legislation that bans contact with anyone we know. We must then disband quickly so that we don’t break our new law or give into our ingrained instincts to snap on one another. This fact also makes us wonder about the stories describing dog attacks where the people “knew the dog”.

-Lets not even talk about alcohol, tobacco, and our national inability to balance diet and exercise.



I apologize for the sarcasm, but the point is that nobody thinks that any of these things should be banned or that they are inherently dangerous. Also, I know that one reaction will be, “yeah, but pit bulls hurt way more people than they kill”. The same can be said of everything in the list above. Everyone can see how absurd the proposed bans above are, except for pit bulls.; Quite a few people see that as reasonable.



Take a look at the experiences that people in this post have discussed. Is it responsible to have a dog (of any breed) that can jump its own fence and is given an opportunity to do so? Is it responsible to let a dog approach a cat (or any animal) it doesn’t know? Is it responsible to let a Great Dane corner someone in a garage (more on this later)? Is it responsible to own a dog that is too strong physically that you can’t handle it? Is it responsible to allow dogs the opportunity to wander the streets and “maraud children”? Is it responsible to laugh when your dog inflicts damage on another animal (makes me question whether the owner raised the dog properly and had good intentions)? It seems to me that all of the postings about pit bull horror stories have a common theme in addition to the dog breed: an irresponsible owner.



To the comment “i am surprised to see so many level-headed people on here, i thought by now we would all be attacked for the things we are saying (funny how the owners often act so much like their dogs! LOL)”. I honestly did laugh out loud; this follows a poster whose husband killed a neighbor’s dog (albeit an irresponsible owner and a vicious dog with a mind-numbing vertical jump) in an eye-for-an-eye exchange. Sounds like the definition of level-headedness to me. In that situation the tally is vicious dog, 1 dog killed; levelheaded adult, 1 dog killed. Also, so far, the only attacking seems to be non-pit bull owners attacking pit bull owners. Funny how the non-owners often act so much like the stereotype of the dogs that they hate.



This comment, in another post, blows my mind, “…second, my friend was cornered in her garage by a Great Dane. This dog was inches above her head and held her at bay for the longest period of time. Pit bulls are little evil things…” This sounds like a Johnnie Cochran closing argument, “If it doesn’t fit…it’s an evil little pit”. This is followed by, “Thank goodness it was a Great Dane rather than a pit bull- they probably wouldn't just hold her at bay, they'd go for the throat.” Guess what? IT WASN’T A PIT BULL!!! This is exactly how pit bull myths are perpetuated. The story is about a Great Dane that was aggressive to someone. Then, with no basis pit bulls enter the story. Then some says “good thing it wasn’t a pit bull”. The next person will say, “Did you hear about the Great Dane an pit bull that mauled someone?” The next, “I heard a lady was almost killed by a pit bull, but her Great Dane saved her”. Another poster explains that her son has been bitten twice by Dalmatians, but doesn’t trust pit bulls.



I took one of the poster’s advice and googled pit bull + attacks. They were right, it is a horrific 616,000 hits. Then I googled beagle + attacks, 704,000 hits. Try it with any breed. A Pomeranian killed someone.



Also, the only dog to ever bite me (broke skin on three occasions, once in the face) was my childhood dog, Asta (like the Thin Man movies). He was a wirehaired fox terrier. Was it the dog breed that was the problem? No. Was it responsible for my parents to keep the dog after the first incident? No. Finally, everyone seems to know a brother’s girlfriend’s second-removed step-cousin or some acquaintance that has been bitten by a pit bull. Ask everyone you know if a dog has personally bitten him or her. Then ask them what breed. A dog has bitten every person that I have ever asked this question. Not one by a pit bull.



This forum is called "Websleuths". The Merriam-Webster definition of sleuth is "to act as a detective : search for information". From what I can tell, there hasn't been much information searching to substantiate the logic behind hating and banning an entire breed. Most reactions seem to be emotional ones based on the quick examination of the top-level events, which are often provided by a sales-driven media (e.g. Marauding pit bulls attack six = all pit bulls are bad). Before rushing to conclusions, investigate, analyze and learn about individual situations. Then examine whether individual situations are representative of the big picture. In other words, be part of the "crime sleuthing community" for which this forum is intended.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 02:44 PM
Give me a break!!!! We ALL think teenagers should be banned. Geez. :croc:

Details
11-10-2005, 03:17 PM
The problem with pit bulls isn't how often they attack - everyone knows little dogs are psycho. It's what happens when they attack. Their inbred tendencies and their strength make an attack by a pit bull serious, where an attack by a terrier is just a nuisance.

And these attacks - they are pit bulls. In the case above where it was a family dog that just turned and snapped - they know it was a pit bull.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 03:21 PM
The problem with pit bulls isn't how often they attack - everyone knows little dogs are psycho. It's what happens when they attack. Their inbred tendencies and their strength make an attack by a pit bull serious, where an attack by a terrier is just a nuisance.

And these attacks - they are pit bulls. In the case above where it was a family dog that just turned and snapped - they know it was a pit bull.


Of course pitt bulls are the most vicious dogs on the planet or they wouldn't be the breed used for the fighting. If any other dog could provide these idiots with better "entertainment," why aren't they using them? People can stick their heads in the sand if they want when it comes to these dogs, but they're dangerous or they wouldn't be making so many people so much money.

SewingDeb
11-10-2005, 03:28 PM
http://www.fataldogattacks.com/statistics.html
From THE STATISTICS - FATAL DOG ATTACKS IN THE U.S. FROM 1965 - 2001 *


Breeds Involved
Pit Bull and Pit-bull-type dogs (21%),
Mixed breed dogs (16%),
Rottweilers (13%),
German Shepherd Dogs (9%),
Wolf Dogs (5%),
Siberian Huskies (5%),
Malamutes (4%),
Great Danes (3%),
St. Bernards (3%),
Chow Chows (3%),
Doberman Pinschers (3%),
other breeds & non-specified breeds (15%).

Boatswain'sMate
11-10-2005, 03:30 PM
Of course pitt bulls are the most vicious dogs on the planet or they wouldn't be the breed used for the fighting. If any other dog could provide these idiots with better "entertainment," why aren't they using them? People can stick their heads in the sand if they want when it comes to these dogs, but they're dangerous or they wouldn't be making so many people so much money.
Pit bulls are used for fighting because they are muscular and will not stop if they are hurt. You do realize people stand in the pit while the dogs fight and handle the dogs during the fight? Do you think they would do that if the dogs were likely to turn on them and rip them apart? Please read curlytone's post; it is well researched and fair.

People who make pit bulls fight should be sent to jail. People who train any large, muscular dog to be agressive should be sent to jail, too.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 03:32 PM
http://www.fataldogattacks.com/statistics.html
From THE STATISTICS - FATAL DOG ATTACKS IN THE U.S. FROM 1965 - 2001 *


Breeds Involved
Pit Bull and Pit-bull-type dogs (21%),
Mixed breed dogs (16%),
Rottweilers (13%),
German Shepherd Dogs (9%),
Wolf Dogs (5%),
Siberian Huskies (5%),
Malamutes (4%),
Great Danes (3%),
St. Bernards (3%),
Chow Chows (3%),
Doberman Pinschers (3%),
other breeds & non-specified breeds (15%).



Thank you.

'Nuf said.

SewingDeb
11-10-2005, 03:34 PM
You're welcome.

Details
11-10-2005, 03:49 PM
Pit bulls are used for fighting because they are muscular and will not stop if they are hurt. You do realize people stand in the pit while the dogs fight and handle the dogs during the fight? Do you think they would do that if the dogs were likely to turn on them and rip them apart? Please read curlytone's post; it is well researched and fair.That's part of what makes pit bulls so dangerous - when they focus on an enemy, they keep going until they kill it. If it's another pit bull, then we're safe. When it's a child or a person, they can't be stopped.

The stats are there - pit bulls kill.

Details
11-10-2005, 03:53 PM
http://www.fataldogattacks.com/statistics.html
From THE STATISTICS - FATAL DOG ATTACKS IN THE U.S. FROM 1965 - 2001 *


Breeds Involved
Pit Bull and Pit-bull-type dogs (21%),
Mixed breed dogs (16%),
Rottweilers (13%),
German Shepherd Dogs (9%),
Wolf Dogs (5%),
Siberian Huskies (5%),
Malamutes (4%),
Great Danes (3%),
St. Bernards (3%),
Chow Chows (3%),
Doberman Pinschers (3%),
other breeds & non-specified breeds (15%).I wonder how this relates to the percentage of each of these dog breeds in the dog population. Mixed breed is a huge category, to only have 16 percent of the attacks is really a good thing, but not as good as the Labs, who are also a huge population, but aren't even listed here. If Pitbulls are 21% of all dogs in America, then they're not killing out of proportion, but if they're 1%, they are a huge risk.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 04:03 PM
But let's not blame the people "making all the money"??? It must be the dog. Do you think that they just buy a pit bull, treat it well, and it becomes a fighter? They train it to fight. Are they strong dogs? Yes. Should we condemn things based on their strength? Are you more likely do die by getting hit by a Semi than a car? Does that make the semi bad? To answer your question "why do they use pit bulls?" It's because they are strong and there are backyard breeders all over so they are cheap. Why would they spend thousands on another breed when there is easy and cheap access to pit bulls and you fully expect that the dog will die? If every pit bull were gone tomorrow, do you think that the dog-fighting people will pack up their winnings and say "well it was a good run for us" or do you think that another breed will enter the picture?

Let's also explore the dog-fighting concept. The trainers must interact with the dogs. What do you think happens to dogs that are aggressive with people? They are eliminated (or historically they were, in recent times SOME irresponsible owners value human aggression. I think we SHOULD pass a ban on owners like that and eliminate ANY dog of ANY breed that is aggressive with people). Pit bulls have been breed to be aggressive with other animals, especially dogs. By far and away the overwhelming majority of them love people.



My head is fully out of the sand, but again most of the responses are based on a news story here and there. To me, that is not a very trustworthy source of information. I suppose that you don't know that in the early 1900s pit bulls were one of the most common family dogs. Helen Keller owned one, president Roosevelt owned one, Petey on the Little Rascals was one, and they represented our country on WWI and WWII posters. It seems to me that much of the public responds only to sensationalized media stories. I see no evidence of any other post with any research at all. Dateline doesn't count. I think you should reevaluate who has their head in the sand.



BTW, aggression does not necessarily have anything to do with inbreeding. The reason that inbreeding is bad (other than the obvious part about copulating with relatives) is that it is more likely for rare, recessive genes to be paired and therefore expressed. If a family has a really rare genetic disorder that is recessive, the chances of meeting and reproducing with someone else that has the same gene is very remote. However, if they reproduce within the family, the chance that the two recessive genes are paired (and therefore the gene that is expressed) is very likely. So the only way that this leads to aggression is if there is a recessive gene for viciousness. To my knowledge no one has researched that.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 04:05 PM
From the link:

The study covers 431 documented human fatalities from a dog attack.

Victim Profile
79% of all fatal attacks were on children under the age of 12
12% of the victims were the elderly, aged 65 - 94
9% of the victims were 13 - 64 years old

FROM CNN.Com

CNN) -- Dogs are the preferred pet for millions of Americans, valued for their loyalty, companionship and protection. But sometimes, that faithful friend can turn into a foe. Health officials say dogs bite or attack more than 4.5 million people each year, killing an average of 20 people.

Young children are often the most vulnerable to these attacks.

"Children are small people, they are closer to dog size. So the dog often views them as playmates, you know, rather than someone as leader," said Patricia McDonnell of Comprehensive Pet Therapy.

In dog society there is a distinct rank order, and dogs sometime see a young child as someone they can push around or perhaps discipline by biting or nipping, according to McDonnell.

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/02/25/dog.bite/

Details
11-10-2005, 04:07 PM
Semi drivers do have to undergo extra training - there's a different license. And dog fighting rings aren't so much the problem as the people who get a pit bull because it's known as a mean dog, or have one as a family pet, well treated, well raised, but it turns - and they do turn. All dogs can, but when pit bulls turn, they kill.

Dog fighting rings aren't the problem, it is in the genes of the pit bull, bred there over centuries - it doesn't go away just because a nice family adopts the dog, nor does it get strengthened immediately because they are in a dog fighting ring.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 04:10 PM
Curlytone, let's say you're right about everything you posted. You most likely are. The fact of the matter is that these dogs, for the most part, are being breed and raised in basements and backyards- not so that they can be brought into loving homes to become part of the family. They're raised to fight. So, instead of making sure some of these dogs are never born in the first place, and save them all of the torture of being ripped to part in someone's backyard for "fun" and "profit," what would you suggest?

You suggest that if this breed were ended, these criminals would just pick up on another breed to fight? What breed, besides a pitt, is going to fight to the death?

Jules
11-10-2005, 04:19 PM
You suggest that if this breed were ended, these criminals would just pick up on another breed to fight? What breed, besides a pitt, is going to fight to the death?

Jeana, unfortunately, there are many that would. Chow and Rottweiler come to mind immediately and I have no doubt there could be others - if they are trained that way. Perhaps dobermans, german shepherds.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 04:20 PM
I wonder how this relates to the percentage of each of these dog breeds in the dog population. Mixed breed is a huge category, to only have 16 percent of the attacks is really a good thing, but not as good as the Labs, who are also a huge population, but aren't even listed here. If Pitbulls are 21% of all dogs in America, then they're not killing out of proportion, but if they're 1%, they are a huge risk.
Fair enough, but what does that tell you:

1) it could be the breed
2) it could be the type of people who are more likely to own the breed and the training that they give it
3) it could be that pit bull is an umbrella term that categorizes more than one ACK, ADBA, etc. recognized breed and any cross breed pitbull look-alike (my guess is that the majority of pit bulls have no papers).

I have read reports that estimate that in Chicago, every night, there are 3,000 dog fights. Even if each instance only has two dogs, that is 6,000 dogs trained to fight and be aggressive. I would guess that most are pit bulls. Would I trust these fighting dogs? Problably not, but I think that it is the criminals training them that are the problem, not the breed.

Also think about someone who sets out with the goal of getting an intimidating dog. Will they pick a lab, collie, retriever? No, they will get a pit bull or a rottweiler. The wanted and intimidating dog so they will likely train it to be aggressive so that it "walks the walk" so to speak. It is not suprising to me that statistics show a disproportionate number of deaths from pit bulls and rottweilers, but consider the facts that lead up to them. If labs struck fear into most of the public that saw them, than they would be the dogs that get trained by irresponsible people to be mean. Again, it is the people not the breed.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 04:24 PM
Jeana, unfortunately, there are many that would. Chow and Rottweiler come to mind immediately and I have no doubt there could be others - if they are trained that way. Perhaps dobermans, german shepherds.


Jules, I think some of them would and some of them wouldn't. Its definately not a guaranteed thing as it is with a pitt. I took my GSD to classes in protection for months and months and months and I'm telling you, there's no guaranty that the dog would fight someone to the death. I'm thinking that he wouldn't.

Jules
11-10-2005, 04:28 PM
Jules, I think some of them would and some of them wouldn't. Its definately not a guaranteed thing as it is with a pitt. I took my GSD to classes in protection for months and months and months and I'm telling you, there's no guaranty that the dog would fight someone to the death. I'm thinking that he wouldn't.

Yep, that's why I said "if trained that way." I'm not saying all of them - but if they are born into the "fighting" atmosphere that pitts are - I don't know that they'd be able to walk away from a fight.

aussiegran
11-10-2005, 04:31 PM
http://www.fataldogattacks.com/statistics.html
From THE STATISTICS - FATAL DOG ATTACKS IN THE U.S. FROM 1965 - 2001 *


Breeds Involved
Pit Bull and Pit-bull-type dogs (21%),
Mixed breed dogs (16%),
Rottweilers (13%),
German Shepherd Dogs (9%),
Wolf Dogs (5%),
Siberian Huskies (5%),
Malamutes (4%),
Great Danes (3%),
St. Bernards (3%),
Chow Chows (3%),
Doberman Pinschers (3%),
other breeds & non-specified breeds (15%).
Thanks SewingDeb.


curlytone
(this follows a poster whose husband killed a neighbor’s dog (albeit an irresponsible owner and a vicious dog with a mind-numbing vertical jump) in an eye-for-an-eye exchange. Sounds like the definition of level-headedness to me. In that situation the tally is vicious dog, 1 dog killed; levelheaded adult, 1 dog killed. Also, so far, the only attacking seems to be non-pit bull owners attacking pit bull owners. Funny how the non-owners often act so much like the stereotype of the dogs that they hate

When my husband got rid of the dog it wasnt an eye for eye type thing it was because we had small grandkids and other neighbours had small dogs at risk.at least you agree that he was level headed here.I still cannot understand why anyone would want this breed of dog as a pet knowing they are recognised as a risk breed when there are so many gentle breeds out there .My vet told me he has treated
Quote (a huge number of animals attacked by THIS breed compared to others )and thinks they should be banned. I as a non owner of a pitbull will always shake my head at anyone with a family who owns one and I dont consider myself in any way like a pitbull.:furious: .

curlytone
11-10-2005, 04:31 PM
Curlytone, let's say you're right about everything you posted. You most likely are. The fact of the matter is that these dogs, for the most part, are being breed and raised in basements and backyards- not so that they can be brought into loving homes to become part of the family. They're raised to fight. So, instead of making sure some of these dogs are never born in the first place, and save them all of the torture of being ripped to part in someone's backyard for "fun" and "profit," what would you suggest?

You suggest that if this breed were ended, these criminals would just pick up on another breed to fight? What breed, besides a pitt, is going to fight to the death?
I would suggest that we devote more resources to breakup dogfights and arrest criminals who are involved with them. I think dog owners should be held more accountable for the behavior of their dogs.

I don't really want to offer suggstions for dog fighters but I would suspect that any large dog would fit the bill: Rottweilers, Dobermans, German Shepherd Dogs, Akitas, Chows, Dogo Argentino, Cane Presario, Cane Corso, etc. Again, it takes people to train them to be mean. I have seen nice family labs get into a fight, and without human intervention from responsible owners, they sure looked like could kill eachother.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 04:34 PM
Yep, that's why I said "if trained that way." I'm not saying all of them - but if they are born into the "fighting" atmosphere that pitts are - I don't know that they'd be able to walk away from a fight.

Its not just that they have to walk away from a fight Jules. Put a pitt bull in front of another dog and it WILL more times than not, attack that dog. Put another breed dog in front of another dog and its not the case.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 04:35 PM
I would suggest that we devote more resources to breakup dogfights and arrest criminals who are involved with them. I think dog owners should be held more accountable for the behavior of their dogs.

I don't really want to offer suggstions for dog fighters but I would suspect that any large dog would fit the bill: Rottweilers, Dobermans, German Shepherd Dogs, Akitas, Chows, Dogo Argentino, Cane Presario, Cane Corso, etc. Again, it takes people to train them to be mean. I have seen nice family labs get into a fight, and without human intervention from responsible owners, they sure looked like could kill eachother.


What about all of the attacks mentioned in the link above? None of those 21% pitt bulls from that article were "trained" fighting dogs. They were pets. Your argument makes no sense to me Curly. I think you don't want to see what is so obvious. I've lived with trained police K-9s and there's no way any of them would attack another dog or person unprovoked the way pitts do.

Jules
11-10-2005, 04:40 PM
Its not just that they have to walk away from a fight Jules. Put a pitt bull in front of another dog and it WILL more times than not, attack that dog. Put another breed dog in front of another dog and its not the case.

I agree with that.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 04:46 PM
Thanks SewingDeb.


curlytone
(this follows a poster whose husband killed a neighbor’s dog (albeit an irresponsible owner and a vicious dog with a mind-numbing vertical jump) in an eye-for-an-eye exchange. Sounds like the definition of level-headedness to me. In that situation the tally is vicious dog, 1 dog killed; levelheaded adult, 1 dog killed. Also, so far, the only attacking seems to be non-pit bull owners attacking pit bull owners. Funny how the non-owners often act so much like the stereotype of the dogs that they hate

When my husband got rid of the dog it wasnt an eye for eye type thing it was because we had small grandkids and other neighbours had small dogs at risk.at least you agree that he was level headed here.I still cannot understand why anyone would want this breed of dog as a pet knowing they are recognised as a risk breed when there are so many gentle breeds out there .My vet told me he has treated
Quote (a huge number of animals attacked by THIS breed compared to others )and thinks they should be banned. I as a non owner of a pitbull will always shake my head at anyone with a family who owns one and I dont consider myself in any way like a pitbull.:furious: .

My vet loves pit bulls and acknowledges that they are more prone to animal aggressivness. I also feel that pit bull ownership requires more responsibility than other breeds. I know that my pit bull could have a propensity for animal aggression. She hasn't shown that, but I understand her breeds history, and it could be there. I also know that if my dog gets into a fight, regardless of which dog starts the fight, my dog will be blamed. That means that I can't be as cavilier with my dog as the owner of say a pug could, but I don't see why there should be a law banning my dog. And people can choose not to get one as you have, but if use "why would you want this, when there is this" as the measuring stick, I think most of the "wants" that people have could come into question. Also, lets look at the risk. Flamming pajamas (see my first post) kill more people annually than pit bulls.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 04:47 PM
My vet loves pit bulls and acknowledges that they are more prone to animal aggressivness. I also feel that pit bull ownership requires more responsibility than other breeds. I know that my pit bull could have a propensity for animal aggression. She hasn't shown that, but I understand her breeds history, and it could be there. I also know that if my dog gets into a fight, regardless of which dog starts the fight, my dog will be blamed. That means that I can't be as cavilier with my dog as the owner of say a pug could, but I don't see why there should be a law banning my dog. And people can choose not to get one as you have, but if use "why would you want this, when there is this" as the measuring stick, I think most of the "wants" that people have could come into question. Also, lets look at the risk. Flamming pajamas (see my first post) kill more people annually than pit bulls.


Curly, did you take your dog in for basic obedience training or need to do anything else to satisfy a home ownwer's insurance company?

Casshew
11-10-2005, 04:48 PM
Anyone who has or who has known a pitbull who was loving & sweet is just going to poo-pooh the arguments and statistics.

I hope for their sake they (or one of their children) does not become a statistic one day.

Details
11-10-2005, 04:56 PM
I've known a loving and sweet pitbull - nice, wonderful dog - my big sister's family dog. Doesn't change the facts, doesn't change the genes, doesn't change the possibilities. They are more prone to be agressive. It's in the genes. When they snap, they go for the kill and people die. Even a good, loving, sweet, family pet pitbull can and does snap.

I also know a pedophile who seems to not be attacking and killing children. That doesn't change my point of view about the danger of pedophiles.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:01 PM
What about all of the attacks mentioned in the link above? None of those 21% pitt bulls from that article were "trained" fighting dogs. They were pets. Your argument makes no sense to me Curly. I think you don't want to see what is so obvious. I've lived with trained police K-9s and there's no way any of them would attack another dog or person unprovoked the way pitts do.
Actually no, these are all of the statistics on dog related human deaths from 1965-2001. They don't categorize them by circumstance. Also, 21% translates to 90 or 91 (90.51) deaths from "PIT BULLS AND PIT BULL TYPE DOGS" over 36 years. That is not a wave of pit bulls sweeping the nation killing everyone in sight. That is an average of 2.5 people per year. There are 295,734,134 people in the US. That risk is miniscule. PLUS it says "PIT BULLS AND PIT BULL TYPE DOGS", they don't define pit bull type. None of the other breeds have an AND in there. Look at the pit bull ID link in my first post. There are 25 breeds in there that look similar (some identical) to pit bulls.

Details
11-10-2005, 05:03 PM
That stat excludes those who survived the pitbull attack - it's not just the deaths, it's the people horribly maimed by pitbulls. It's an unnecessary risk. Spay and neuter every pitbull, and in a generation, they won't be a problem anymore.

forthekids
11-10-2005, 05:04 PM
"What about all of the attacks mentioned in the link above? None of those 21% pitt bulls from that article were "trained" fighting dogs. They were pets. Your argument makes no sense to me Curly. I think you don't want to see what is so obvious. I've lived with trained police K-9s and there's no way any of them would attack another dog or person unprovoked the way pitts do."

Jeana:
If you read what curly had written in his first posting he stated,
"The owner’s dog has just hurt or killed someone. Police officers and reporters are asking about the dog. How likely is it that the owner is going to say, “Oh yeah, Rex has always been vicious. In fact, it was just a matter of time until this was going to happen. What, with all that illegal fighting that I’ve been training him for, I am surprised that this was his first kill.”? Of course they are going to say that the dog was always nice, if the owner has any chance of avoiding criminal charges."
I agree that the likihood of someone stating that their 'pet' is a fighting dog is highly unlikely.
Also I don't understand your argument or what is so obvious. You say you've lived with highly trained police dogs. Doesn't that say it all? They've been highly trained. Do you know that there are highly trained pit bulls that are part of Search and Rescue groups for 9-1-1? I'm sure the same statement would be true about them or any other highly trained dog. I guess I just don't understand your connection here.

Also everyone needs to keep in mind that 21% of and ave. of 20 deaths by all dog breeds isn't a huge number. I am really sorry that some of you have had really bad experiences with these these dogs, but for me personally, I've had a very scary situation as a child from a much smaller that did some damage to my face. I don't remeber the breed, but it was only about 10lbs. with very long hair.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:06 PM
I went to obedience class because I feel it is part of being a responsible owner, but my insurance did not require it. I would not be opposed if the did; I think they should for all breeds.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 05:09 PM
I went to obedience class because I feel it is part of being a responsible owner, but my insurance did not require it. I would not be opposed if the did; I think they should for all breeds.


Unless you called your insurance company and told them you were getting a pitt bull, you can't be sure they require it. If your dog attacks someone and they sue you, you'll find out soon enough if you're covered or not. My homeowners' policy from USAA wouldn't cover a pitt bull PERIOD and would only cover my GSD with certification of training.

forthekids
11-10-2005, 05:11 PM
Actually no, these are all of the statistics on dog related human deaths from 1965-2001. They don't categorize them by circumstance. Also, 21% translates to 90 or 91 (90.51) deaths from "PIT BULLS AND PIT BULL TYPE DOGS" over 36 years. That is not a wave of pit bulls sweeping the nation killing everyone in sight. That is an average of 2.5 people per year. There are 295,734,134 people in the US. That risk is miniscule. PLUS it says "PIT BULLS AND PIT BULL TYPE DOGS", they don't define pit bull type. None of the other breeds have an AND in there. Look at the pit bull ID link in my first post. There are 25 breeds in there that look similar (some identical) to pit bulls.
In addition to the above post:
“Pit Bull type” dogs are the highest in fatal attacks but that in itself encompasses like 15 separate breeds, it is almost like saying the "hound dog" so that is blood hound, basset hound...etc. The stats are not accurate with Pit Bulls because they lump so many distinctly different breeds into one category. This ties into that whole find the Pit Bull test that we have all seen.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 05:11 PM
Actually no, these are all of the statistics on dog related human deaths from 1965-2001. They don't categorize them by circumstance. Also, 21% translates to 90 or 91 (90.51) deaths from "PIT BULLS AND PIT BULL TYPE DOGS" over 36 years. That is not a wave of pit bulls sweeping the nation killing everyone in sight. That is an average of 2.5 people per year. There are 295,734,134 people in the US. That risk is miniscule. PLUS it says "PIT BULLS AND PIT BULL TYPE DOGS", they don't define pit bull type. None of the other breeds have an AND in there. Look at the pit bull ID link in my first post. There are 25 breeds in there that look similar (some identical) to pit bulls.


I wonder what the statistics would be if they covered all of the attacks by pitt bulls through 2005? It seems that as the number of reported attacks just in the last years that I've been here on Websleuths is alarming.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:12 PM
That stat is deaths resulting from dogs. The stat says that 21% of the 431 deaths in the 36 year period from 1965-2001 are from "pit bull and pit bull type dogs". That is an average of 2.5 pit bull realated deaths per year. What other dog breed in the list includes what basically amounts to "anything that looks like breed X"? Only pit bulls. The stat excludes anyone who walked away. IF, as people are saying, pit bulls can't help but attack and can't help but kill when they attack, how do they only kill 2.5 people per year? Are there only 3 in the U.S.?

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:16 PM
I've known a loving and sweet pitbull - nice, wonderful dog - my big sister's family dog. Doesn't change the facts, doesn't change the genes, doesn't change the possibilities. They are more prone to be agressive. It's in the genes. When they snap, they go for the kill and people die. Even a good, loving, sweet, family pet pitbull can and does snap.

I also know a pedophile who seems to not be attacking and killing children. That doesn't change my point of view about the danger of pedophiles.
You are saying every dog in a breed is a killer. That is not the same as every pedophile is dangerous. The corollary would be that every person is a pedophile or that every killer pit bull is a killer.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:22 PM
Unless you called your insurance company and told them you were getting a pitt bull, you can't be sure they require it. If your dog attacks someone and they sue you, you'll find out soon enough if you're covered or not. My homeowners' policy from USAA wouldn't cover a pitt bull PERIOD and would only cover my GSD with certification of training.
Again, I am a responsible owner. I did call them to check, I did tell them. My insurance DOES NOT breed discriminate, so I am covered. Also, I would like to point out that insurance companies that do breed discriminate usually include the following breeds: Akita, American Staffordshire terrier (aka pit bull), Bernese mountain or cattle dog, Canario (aka Pressa Canario), chow chow, Doberman pinscher, German shepherd, Great Dane, huskies (American, Eskimo, Greenland, and often but not always Siberian), Karelian (aka Laika), malamute (aka Alaskan malamute), Rhodesian ridgeback, Rottweiler, Saint Bernard.

Details
11-10-2005, 05:24 PM
You are saying every dog in a breed is a killer. That is not the same as every pedophile is dangerous. The corollary would be that every person is a pedophile or that every killer pit bull is a killer.Not every pedophile is dangerous. They have a fault in their brain that makes them attracted to children. Some of them fight against that for their entire lives (and you never hear about them), or nearly their entire lives before they fail. There is a fault in the pitbull breed (which is deliberate) to make them extremely agressive, and very focused once they attack. Not every one will attack, some will not. Doesn't make them not dangerous, any more than the pedophiles are not dangerous just because some of them never attack a child.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:28 PM
I wonder what the statistics would be if they covered all of the attacks by pitt bulls through 2005? It seems that as the number of reported attacks just in the last years that I've been here on Websleuths is alarming.
One of my main points all along. It is a myth perpetuated by the media. A story about killer pit bulls will sell like hot cakes. Think about when the whole anthrax thing happened in 2001-2002. Watching the news, you would think all of us were facing immanent death. I think 1 person died.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 05:28 PM
Pit bulls led all breeds for fatal attacks between 1979 and 1998, with at least one pit bull involved in 66 mauling deaths, the study said. Rottweilers were blamed for 37 -- most of those in the 1990s -- followed by German shepherds with 17 and huskies with 15


http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/09/15/deadly.dogs.ap/


Look down the list of these animal attack stories and see how man pit bull attacks are mentioned.

http://www.igorilla.com/gorilla/animal/


A Bronx tot was mauled yesterday when her pet pit bull snapped and tore into her cheeks, police and witnesses said.
Makailah Barnett, 3, nearly had the side of her face ripped off after a pooch named Pepper attacked her and her sister as they played in the house with the family's two other dogs.
"The dog just lost her mind," said the girl's uncle Corey Bellamy, who ran across the street when he heard screams. "The dog wigged out."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/162138p-142189c.html


Anecdotally, pit bulls are often said to be not only the most
dangerous breed, but also the breed most often shot by police, dragged by
vehicles, and otherwise violently injured--with Rottweilers right behind.

http://www.animalpeoplenews.org/haydenLaw1100.html


threatening and fatal pit bull attacks increased 789%


http://www.nokillsolutions.com/PDF/ANIMALPEOPLE.PDF


AND FROM PIT BULL REPORTER MAGAZINE:
The annual number of reported fatal attacks has not varied widely in the past 20 years, the study said. But overall attacks are on the rise — likely because families are busier, leaving them less time to train their dogs and watch their children.
"A dog has to have its behavior monitored and consequences put in place," Sacks said. "People don’t seem to have a lot of time in their lives for that."
Pit bulls led all breeds for fatal attacks between 1979 and 1998, with at least one pit bull involved in 66 mauling deaths, the study said. Rottweilers were blamed for 37 — most of those in the 1990s
http://www.pbreporter.com/rottweilers_now_.htm

In December, 2004, the Billingsley family of Shoreline Park, MS, lost their infant child, Kamryn, when the family’s 6 month old pit bull dragged the child out of her mother’s bed and into the living room, biting Kamryn several times. The child would die of head trauma before paramedics arrived.


http://www.jayfosterlaw.com/practice_areas/dog-bite-attacks.cfm


I concede there’s an epidemic of pit bull attacks; in Boston, and all over America. Incredibly, only hours before the Boston City Council approved the measure, a local police officer’s pit bull dog leveled an apparently unprovoked attack on a Shiba Inu dog. In another incident on Monday of the same week, a pit bull in Dorchester, MA mauled a 6-year old boy.

http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/pet/breedspecific.htm

forthekids
11-10-2005, 05:29 PM
Unless you called your insurance company and told them you were getting a pitt bull, you can't be sure they require it. If your dog attacks someone and they sue you, you'll find out soon enough if you're covered or not. My homeowners' policy from USAA wouldn't cover a pitt bull PERIOD and would only cover my GSD with certification of training.
Jeana:
When I first looked into homebuying I did some research on this. According to the insurance that is promoted by my employer it WILL NOT cover homeowners insurance for anyone who owns the following dog breeds:German Shepard Dogs, Akita, Chow Chow, Doberman Pinchers, Rotweilers, Husky, Wolf hybred, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffershire Terrier, Cane Corsos and a few others. That is a HUGE list. After looking more there are some companies that have these restrictions and others that don't.

I think as a responsible pet owner it is a MUST to look into this no matter what kind of animal you have. Ya know!

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 05:29 PM
Curly, I guess I've posted all I can about this issue. I just hope no one you know is the next reported victim. Good luck and God bless.

Jules
11-10-2005, 05:30 PM
I worked for an insurance defense firm several years ago that handled a really nasty dog bite case. It was a girl, age 7. She had over 2500 stitches on her face and head. It was the most horrifying thing I have ever seen. She had been mauled by a pit bull.

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:39 PM
Not every pedophile is dangerous. They have a fault in their brain that makes them attracted to children. Some of them fight against that for their entire lives (and you never hear about them), or nearly their entire lives before they fail. There is a fault in the pitbull breed (which is deliberate) to make them extremely agressive, and very focused once they attack. Not every one will attack, some will not. Doesn't make them not dangerous, any more than the pedophiles are not dangerous just because some of them never attack a child.
I am not going to even approach the "Not every pedophile is dangerous". But, dogs are not intellectual powerhouses that fight their urges with extreme efficiency. Put a hamburger on your kitchen table in front of a dog and leave the house. Do you think it will be there when you return? Also, if they only want to fight and kill as you suggest, why don't they (2.5 deaths per year)? A dog doesn't have the moral objections that we do and they don't understand that it is illeagal. All dogs had to kill before we domesticated them and started loading them with Purrina.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 05:43 PM
One of my main points all along. It is a myth perpetuated by the media. A story about killer pit bulls will sell like hot cakes. Think about when the whole anthrax thing happened in 2001-2002. Watching the news, you would think all of us were facing immanent death. I think 1 person died.


Once again you try to make a situation less serious than it is. One two second search and:

Telegraph | News | Two postal workers die in Washington anthrax scare
TWO postal workers in Washington DC died of suspected anthrax poisoning ...
If the two deaths are confirmed as anthrax, it would bring the number of ...
http://www.news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/10/23/wthrax23.xml - Cached


Burnham Institute - News - 10-23-2001
October 23, 2001 - CRYSTAL STRUCTURE OF ANTHRAX TOXIN LETHAL FACTOR INFORMS ...
“The same pathways that have been developed by anthrax to cause death can be ...
http://www.burnham.org/NewsAndInformation/News/10-23-2001.asp - Cached


Karl Pfleger's Discussion of Leading Causes of Death
It's mid-Nov., 2001. That means that more people have died since 9/11/01 ...
plus died of anthrax poisoning, plus died in the recent New York airline crash. ...
http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~kpfleger/auto/causes_of_death.html - Cached


CNN.com - Ashcroft: Terrorists 'poisoning our communities ...
... of the September 11 attacks -- are now poisoning our communities with anthrax."
... 13 total anthrax infections • 3 deaths from inhalation infections ...

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:44 PM
I worked for an insurance defense firm several years ago that handled a really nasty dog bite case. It was a girl, age 7. She had over 2500 stitches on her face and head. It was the most horrifying thing I have ever seen. She had been mauled by a pit bull.
Also, I am not saying that pit bulls can't attack, they can. I truely is tragic when anybody gets mauled, but mauling isn't breed specific and it is often the result of negligence on the part of the owner. Was that the only dog bite that worked on? A car can create a very horrific scene and is much more dangerous than any dog, but we hold people responsible for being negligent with them.

Details
11-10-2005, 05:45 PM
I am not going to even approach the "Not every pedophile is dangerous". But, dogs are not intellectual powerhouses that fight their urges with extreme efficiency. Put a hamburger on your kitchen table in front of a dog and leave the house. Do you think it will be there when you return? Also, if they only want to fight and kill as you suggest, why don't they (2.5 deaths per year)? A dog doesn't have the moral objections that we do and they don't understand that it is illeagal. All dogs had to kill before we domesticated them and started loading them with Purrina.Dogs don't have self control like humans do - their humans control them which is why they don't kill all the time. And when they do try, they don't always succeed - they just maim horribly (as per Jules post). Keeping the analogy - lots of pedophiles don't kill - doesn't make their actions any less horrible.

The dog is not as bad as the pedophile - it's just animal instinct that we humans have deliberately strengthened for centuries that makes them be so focused on their target and go for the kill. But it's the first example that came to mind - a case where just because someone who is inclined to attack, and restrained by society (or their owner and the pack mentality) doesn't attack doesn't mean they shouldn't be considered a danger, up until the day they die. And when they die with no attacks to their name, that doesn't mean that all other pedophiles, all other pitbulls are safe. It just means this one didn't have the right set of circumstances. But the statistics show what can and often does happen.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 05:46 PM
Jeana:
When I first looked into homebuying I did some research on this. According to the insurance that is promoted by my employer it WILL NOT cover homeowners insurance for anyone who owns the following dog breeds:German Shepard Dogs, Akita, Chow Chow, Doberman Pinchers, Rotweilers, Husky, Wolf hybred, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffershire Terrier, Cane Corsos and a few others. That is a HUGE list. After looking more there are some companies that have these restrictions and others that don't.

I think as a responsible pet owner it is a MUST to look into this no matter what kind of animal you have. Ya know!


Or you can just wait for the lawsuit and the person can own your home! :)

forthekids
11-10-2005, 05:54 PM
Or you can just wait for the lawsuit and the person can own your home! :)
You got that right! :D I think every person with a dog should be required to take their animal to obediance training...I've definitely seen some pretty crappy owners out there. Heck lets not stop there, being a child protection investigator I think soon to be parents should be required to take parenting classes before having a kid! But that is a while other issue.:clap:

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:57 PM
Once again you try to make a situation less serious than it is. One two second search and:

Telegraph | News | Two postal workers die in Washington anthrax scare
TWO postal workers in Washington DC died of suspected anthrax poisoning ...
If the two deaths are confirmed as anthrax, it would bring the number of ...
http://www.news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/10/23/wthrax23.xml - Cached


Burnham Institute - News - 10-23-2001
October 23, 2001 - CRYSTAL STRUCTURE OF ANTHRAX TOXIN LETHAL FACTOR INFORMS ...
“The same pathways that have been developed by anthrax to cause death can be ...
http://www.burnham.org/NewsAndInformation/News/10-23-2001.asp - Cached


Karl Pfleger's Discussion of Leading Causes of Death
It's mid-Nov., 2001. That means that more people have died since 9/11/01 ...
plus died of anthrax poisoning, plus died in the recent New York airline crash. ...
http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~kpfleger/auto/causes_of_death.html - Cached


CNN.com - Ashcroft: Terrorists 'poisoning our communities ...
... of the September 11 attacks -- are now poisoning our communities with anthrax."
... 13 total anthrax infections • 3 deaths from inhalation infections ...

Not intentional. Went with memory on this one. Let me offer a correction from CNN:
"Five people died of the inhaled form of anthrax and 13 others suffered anthrax infections."

I am talking about the anthrax that was sent in letters shortly after 9/11. So 5 instead of "I THINK 1". Doesn't change the point at all. When this was going on you couldn't see anything else in the media and they were telling us to go buy duct tape to prevent an attack.

Once again? Where did I do it before?

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 05:58 PM
Not intentional. Went with memory on this one. Let me offer a correction from CNN:
"Five people died of the inhaled form of anthrax and 13 others suffered anthrax infections."

I am talking about the anthrax that was sent in letters shortly after 9/11. So 5 instead of "I THINK 1". Doesn't change the point at all. When this was going on you couldn't see anything else in the media and they were telling us to go buy duct tape to prevent an attack.

Once again? Where did I do it before?


LOL Not for nothing, but every other post of your's on this thread!! LOL :truce:

curlytone
11-10-2005, 05:59 PM
Or you can just wait for the lawsuit and the person can own your home! :)
That is the point of insurance, when something happens, you pay your premium and they pay the rest. My house stays with me, but thanks.

Jeana (DP)
11-10-2005, 06:00 PM
That is the point of insurance, when something happens, you pay your premium and they pay the rest. My house stays with me, but thanks.


Talking about the policies that won't cover the dogs - not your policy!! ;)

curlytone
11-10-2005, 07:00 PM
These are really good general sites that examine the data on all fatal dog attacks from 1965-2005:
http://ncrf2004.tripod.com/id8.html (http://ncrf2004.tripod.com/id8.html)


http://www.fataldogattacks.com/ (http://www.fataldogattacks.com/)

Just to show that not all Great Danes are cuddly teddy bears:

http://www.rense.com/general19/boy.htm (http://www.rense.com/general19/boy.htm)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/ozwash/may02/41371.asp?format=print (http://www.jsonline.com/news/ozwash/may02/41371.asp?format=print)

http://www.unchainyourdog.org/news/Roebuck.htm (http://www.unchainyourdog.org/news/Roebuck.htm)

curlytone
11-10-2005, 07:01 PM
Talking about the policies that won't cover the dogs - not your policy!! ;)I see, my mistake. :)

forthekids
11-10-2005, 07:09 PM
Ok, so now that I am a new member I am finding myself addicted to this Crime Sleuthing Community....:D...I feel like I'm in Debate class again...:)

I think that it is really important to be sure as fellow crime sleuthers we do not take everything in the media as fact. As I'm sure all of you know there is so much that can be sensationalized and it is not hard to report inaccuracies. My point here is to make sure all of us, as media junkies, that these stories aren't academic studies or fully researched reports. Just be aware of this before hasty judgments are made....about anything! Check out the following!

Listed below is a small sampling of inaccurate and misleading media accounts that have caused irreparable damage to the image of Pit Bulls:

Killer Pit Bulls Rip Granny to Shreds New York Post (NYPost.com)
Dec. 11, 2002:liar:
Pet Pit Bulls Kill Woman, 80, in Her Home The New York Times
(nytimes.com) Dec. 11, 2002
[The victim's daughter and granddaughter (owner of the dogs) could not believe the dogs, a female Pit Bull and a male Lab/Pit mix attacked and killed the elderly woman. The family hired a forensic pathologist to review the case. It was determined that although the victim had sustained some dog bites, all the bites were non-lethal and post-mortem. The grandmother was not "ripped to shreds" by the dogs but died from cardiac arrhythmia. Both dogs were eventually returned to their owners.]

Pit Bull Attack Victim Leaves Hospital WTVO (Channel 17) April 25, 2003:liar:
Man Struggles to Recover from Pit Bull Attack WTVO (Channel 17)
April 29, 2003:liar:
[The man in this case was never bitten by a Pit bull. Indeed, there is no mention of the dog making contact with the man at all. Instead, the man was running from the dog and he ran into the road and "slammed" into a passing van. He sustained serious injuries from the collision with the vehicle.]

Pit Bull Horror New York Daily News February 7, 2004
Pit Bull Mauls 3-Year-Old's Face New York Newsday February 6,
2004:liar:
[A Bronx family owned a Boxer dog and a German Shepherd puppy that usually were kept in the basement as guard dogs. Two days before the girl was bitten, the family took in a Pit Bull. The 3-year-old was alone playing with the three dogs when a dogfight started. At this point the girl was bitten in the face by the Boxer (also reported to be an American bulldog). It was later acknowledged that the Pit bull (also reported to be a Pit bull mix and a "pet bulldog") was not involved in the attack on the girl]

Cortland Pit Bull Mauling Death WBNG.com (Channel 12) Dec. 9, 2002:liar:
[It was later determined that although the Pit bull participated in the death of 24-year-old Eric Tallman, the dog did not inflict the fatal wounds. The victim died from blunt force injury. It was later revealed that the victim was beaten to death by an acquaintance over a drug debt.]

Barstow Trial Opens in Boy's Death: Pit bulls fatally mauled Cash
Carson, 10. The Press-Enterprise May 5, 2001 Murder Charges Filed in Pit Bull Mauling The Associated Press June 17, 2000:liar:
[This tragic case of a 10-year-old boy killed by dogs was carried
extensively in the media. The dogs were repeatedly headlined
as "Pit Bulls". Neither of these dogs were "Pit Bulls". One appeared to be a Pit Bull Mix and the other dog (the male that inflicted the fatal wounds) was clearly a mixed breed dog. Animal Control and photographs of the dog more accurately identify him as a possible Chow/Pit Bull mixed breed.]

Vancouver Girl Badly Injured in Pit Bull Attack CTV News Dec. 23,
2002:liar:
[This was a very severe attack and as such garnered much media
attention. As a result of more in-depth coverage the breed was later correctly identified as a Mastiff/Rottweiler mixed breed]

Family's Pit Bull Kills Boy, 20, months The Gainesville Sun May
8, 2000:liar:
20-month-old Killed by Bull Terrier Naples Daily News May 9, 2000
[This child was not killed by a Pit Bull, nor a Bull Terrier, nor
a "family" dog. How the dog came to be labelled a "Pit bull" is
unexplained. The owner described the dog to be a Labrador/Mastiff/Rottweiler cattle dog. The dog was used to herd
cattle and was kept chained on the property. Animal control and the Alachua Sheriff's office confirm the dog was a mixed breed.
Photographs of the dog reveal no discernable breed.]

Another serious problem with the image of Pit Bulls is the over-
reporting of Pit Bull attacks vs. other breed attacks.
Unquestionably, a disporportionate amount of media attention is
given to Pit Bull attacks. One example of this is a recent fatal
attack in Detroit by a Pit Bull. This story ran in over 30 separate national newspapers and was also picked up by FOX news, CNN and two British newspapers. Two weeks earlier a man was killed by his German Shepherd Dog and this story ran only in the local community newspaper. Proposed breed specific legislation as the result of an individual severe or fatal dog attack in a community appears to be a phenomena that arises almost exclusively from a Pit Bull or Rottweiler attack. Severe or fatal attacks by other breeds of dogs almost never initiate this kind of response.

Whether you care about the above information or not, please just take into consideratioin before making a judgement.

BarnGoddess
11-10-2005, 08:04 PM
Still don't and won't ever trust a Pit Bull. I really don't believe that any responsible person should keep a Pit Bull with young children in the house. It shows lack of responsibility on the part of the owners that they trust a breed known for it's overly agressive behavior, not to suddenly attack with no prior warning. These dogs do not belong in neighborhoods where children should be able to play without fear of the neighbor's dog suddenly jumping the fence and attacking.

Responsible owners do not violate the law and take in Pit Bulls that have been banned in other jurisdictions. I agree that these dogs need to be totally banned in all residential settings.

Statistics quoted on this thread do not seem to be accurate. I sense there are many, many more attacks by Pit Bulls than appear in these lists. I don't know where these statistics are gathered, but it seems to me that all aren't listed. I suppose it depends on which side of the issue is gathering them.

Casshew
11-10-2005, 08:15 PM
Great post Barn Goddess :clap: I want to elect you as president after that

concernedperson
11-10-2005, 08:23 PM
Great post Barn Goddess :clap: I want to elect you as president after that

US or Canada? I agree though. My ex inlaws were enamored of a Dobe that they had had for years. Then out of the blue this dog, Rocky, took a chunk out of my ex FIL's arm, he needed skin grafting. I always knew this dog was dangerous but they would never acknowledge it.

Casshew
11-10-2005, 08:29 PM
We don't have presidents up here :)

Any dog can be dangerous, even small dogs can give you a good bite - but usually it's just that - a bite, not a rip your face off. Sorry about your FIL ~ that must have really hurt physically and emotionally because he liked & trusted the dog.

concernedperson
11-10-2005, 09:16 PM
We don't have presidents up here :)

Any dog can be dangerous, even small dogs can give you a good bite - but usually it's just that - a bite, not a rip your face off. Sorry about your FIL ~ that must have really hurt physically and emotionally because he liked & trusted the dog.

He died shortly after. Not from a dog bite but from an aneurism. He was pretty cool as far as FIL's go. His family was from Griffin, Ga. I loved his family and not his wife, she wasn't a part of that family. I married her son but still carry that family's name even though it isn't my own. I just like being a part of decent people.

SadieMae
11-10-2005, 10:00 PM
These are really good general sites that examine the data on all fatal dog attacks from 1965-2005:
http://ncrf2004.tripod.com/id8.html (http://ncrf2004.tripod.com/id8.html)


http://www.fataldogattacks.com/ (http://www.fataldogattacks.com/)

Just to show that not all Great Danes are cuddly teddy bears:

http://www.rense.com/general19/boy.htm (http://www.rense.com/general19/boy.htm)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/ozwash/may02/41371.asp?format=print (http://www.jsonline.com/news/ozwash/may02/41371.asp?format=print)

http://www.unchainyourdog.org/news/Roebuck.htm (http://www.unchainyourdog.org/news/Roebuck.htm)
I defense of Great Danes, in the first story, the father scared them off "with his voice". I doubt a Pit Bull would retreat just because you yelled at it.

In the second story, the Dane was rescued "from a filthy" home. That poor thing was probably abused and reacted to what it saw as a threat or fear.

In the third story, "9 Danes were chained to tree". That tells me a lot about the owners right there. They were probably always chained up, and not given love, affection and attention. They were probably abused, neglected animals. A dog that size needs exercise not staying chained. Anyone responsible owner knows Danes are mainly inside family dogs. They often suffer separation anxiety from their owners.

Sorry but in all three of those stories, it's not about the breed temperament, but the owners treatment of the dogs. None of those stories convince me the Great Dane is a dangerous dog. Not one story shows the animal was a well treated, much loved pet, that just TURNED like so many Pit Bull stories.

Justice7
11-10-2005, 10:54 PM
OK, I'm new at this, so bear with me. It took me some time to get through all the postings, but what struck me in most of these posts was how much of what's reported in the media is blindly believed. Thanks to unscrupulous, opportunistic people (the humans who have bred & trained pit bulls & other dogs to be aggressive; & the media, who are more prone to sensationalism than they are to researching the topics they write about, talk about, or otherwise portray), pit bulls & other bull-breed dogs have become the current biggest scapegoat for the lack of control this country has over its own epidemic of violence in the last 5-10 years. People are fearful of being the victims of violence, for good reason. And the media & dogfighting participants are profiting hugely from it.

Each side of the pit bull issue bickering with the other will get us nowhere. We are falling prey to the media: if they continue to hype the "horrible pit bull," the controversy simply rages on, nothing gets done about it, & newspaper publishers & t.v. networks profit. I can assure you, after researching this breed for some 8 years now, including interviewing trainers & vets, that for every "horror story" about pit bulls, there are at least 10 stories (not all reported in the media - that wouldn't sell papers) documenting bull-breed dogs' heroism & histories absent of attacks on humans or other dogs. These are the dogs, after all, whose ancestors, Staffordshire Terriers, were bred to be nannies to children. Yes, you read right. Not to mention the famous & much-loved pit bulls in U.S. history noted in earlier posts today... they were the country's mascot. The media doesn't want to know - or want you to know - because then their focus would have to be on the people who have so changed public perception of these animals, rather than the animals themselves... enter the Ku Klux Klan, who were the original dog fighters in the U.S., &, later, the criminal element in inner-city areas, who quickly learned how much money could be made fighting bull-breed dogs.

Let me tell you my experience with that same criminal element. I'm a probation officer with a 20+ year career of dealing with drug offenders & other violent offenders - in county, state, & federal systems. The "dogfighting rings" referred to earlier in today's posts as "not the problem" are not only the element perpetuating the violence you've been bickering about all day, they are also well-documented by law enforcement for bringing specific kinds of dogfighting-related criminal activities to your very own neighborhoods, including drug sales, illegal gun sales, high-stakes gambling, & prostitution. They rake in hundreds of millions of dollars in the U.S., alone. That's a LOT OF MOTIVATION to keep producing fighting dogs. Pit bulls or otherwise. Any of you who think that they will not simply find other aggressive breeds to fight when all the pit bulls are dead, are simply fooling yourselves.

Oh, & did I mention that children commonly attend these clandestine, organized "sporting events" with their families? Anyone with kids knows how easily they become conditioned to things they see or experience frequently. The violence of dogfighting is no different; they become the ones who carry on this violent tradition & its related crimes. FBI documentation clearly demonstrates that every single serial killer in this country's history began with violence to animals. That link between violence to animals & violence to humans has been clearly established. (Believe me, I see it play out every day, as I supervise newer generations of violent offenders from the same families.)

Stopping dogfighting & backyard breeding of "aggressive breeds," & enforcing existing leash & licensing laws, is the only way to reduce the number of fatal dog attacks in our communities. Breed bans will simply assure that only the aggressive, genetically unstable pit bulls continue to be bred (covertly) because - don't forget - these dogs mean big money to the opportunistic, antisocial low-lifes who breed & fight them. The dogs that attack humans & people's animals are NOT "pets," as presumed in an earlier post from today. The study referred to notes that in many cases the dogs "were ordered or encouraged to attack." Does that sound like a "pet" to you?? No, that is a dog expressly trained to be aggressive to others.

We who are concerned enough to discuss this topic need to take responsibility for alerting law enforcement when we notice activities in our neighborhoods that are connected to dog fighting & backyard breeding. When you see traffic in-&-out of a particular house or apt. building all hours of the day & night, especially night (people who stay only a few minutes), or see a pit bull-type dog - chained or running loose - with obvious signs of being fought (serious injuries or recently-healed deep scars, usually around the face, neck, & legs), or you hear a dog(s) barking or crying out from a basement, warehouse, or abandoned building that no one seems to be caring for, or you see people & pit bull-type dog traffic in/out of a partiular location that seems out-of-place, or you observe multiple bull-breed dogs heavily chained at one location, or you see classified ads for dogs for sale that state the dogs are "game bred" (bred to be especially aggressive) alert your local law enforcement. Do not try to do any investigation of the situation yourself. Murders in various part of the country have been directly linked to organized dogfighting networks; these are dangerous people. Dogfighting, to whatever degree of organization, is occurring in most of the country - in rural & inner-city areas, alike.

And yes, I live with a pit bull. He is my heart, as are my other dogs. I am more worried about the danger to him in our current social climate than I am about his ever presenting a danger to anyone else. It will be a sad day, indeed, if there are no more of these dogs; he is the most affectionate canine I've ever been around, & there have been many. He's an affable, clumsy, absolutely clownish cream puff, whose biggest threat to anyone is that he might step on your foot. :angel: We have been through obedience classes, & we are insured. And make no mistake, when he plays with a little too much gusto or steals someone else's spot on the couch, my female Heins57 - easily 25 lbs. smaller than he - promptly reminds him who rules the roost. And he runs to me for protection. Not much of a killer, never has been...

Sassygerl
11-10-2005, 11:42 PM
Justice 7~

I have sympathy for anyone who has a pit bull and loves their dog. However, I do fear the breed, as well as several others, and while I wouldn't have one myself, I can appreciate your love for your animal. When you have a pet that is loyal and loving, it's hard to hear that your pet could possibly be taken away, put to sleep, or otherwise. I can understand and appreciate the fight against a ban when you yourself have a pit lounging on your couch who you are able to lean down and give a smooch to and you dearly adore.

I don't want to get in the mess of things here....this thread has become quite a battle, but I personally hope those that own the dogs around us are good pet owners and keep them confined. The thought of my children riding their bikes being run down and mauled by one of these dogs is horrific. I don't trust the dogs and never will. Working for a vet I was around many, and never once did we have any incidents with them. We had more incidents with the smaller, common breeds. I do agree though that when a pit turns, it can be deadly, unlike bites with many other breeds.

I would say the most fiesty, biting dogs were Chows, Shitzu's, Cockers and Lhasa's, but their bites were just that...bites. When a pit bites it's an attack....

I will never let my children be around them and I will never have one....I guess my point of this post is to say that those who have them and love their dogs, I understand your frustration and pain concerning this matter........

Sassy

curlytone
11-11-2005, 12:02 AM
Still don't and won't ever trust a Pit Bull. I really don't believe that any responsible person should keep a Pit Bull with young children in the house. It shows lack of responsibility on the part of the owners that they trust a breed known for it's overly agressive behavior, not to suddenly attack with no prior warning. These dogs do not belong in neighborhoods where children should be able to play without fear of the neighbor's dog suddenly jumping the fence and attacking.

Responsible owners do not violate the law and take in Pit Bulls that have been banned in other jurisdictions. I agree that these dogs need to be totally banned in all residential settings.

Statistics quoted on this thread do not seem to be accurate. I sense there are many, many more attacks by Pit Bulls than appear in these lists. I don't know where these statistics are gathered, but it seems to me that all aren't listed. I suppose it depends on which side of the issue is gathering them.
Then I implore you, provide some opposing statistics or any statistics (and I am sorry, but your senses and what you think seems accurate just doesn't cut it). Many of the statistics provided on this post are from government agencies, the CDC for example, with no agenda or reason to dupe you. Can you at least acknowledge that it might be possible that the media has possibly blown the issue (or even a different issue) out of proportion?

Your right, responsible owners do not violate the law. I really hope that I don't need to explain to you that if something is banned in another jurisdiction, but not the one in which you live, then it is not violating the law to have the something-in-question where you live. If one jurisdiction applies everywhere, what is the point of jurisdictions? However, if that is the kind of logic that I have to use to get you to at least CONSIDER other ideas, here goes: Pit bulls are completely legal in most jurisdictions, so they should be legal everywhere.

Casshew
11-11-2005, 12:22 AM
the media, who are more prone to sensationalism than they are to researching the topics they write about, If a child or an adult is ripped apart by a pitbull and a newspaper reports it - it is not sensationalism - it is just what happened.

Thank God there is a ban where I live, people have to register their pitbull or pitbull cross, it must be sterilized and when it dies eventually, 5,6 8 - 10 years - thats it... no more pitbulls, you can't buy them, you can't sell them and if one is seen without the special pitbull tag on it's collar it is taken away - and I believe destroyed, but I am not sure on that.

A 12 year old girl had her throat torn open by a pitbull and bled to death in a park not too far from me. What a waste of a life and what a way to die - can you imagine the horror?

Also, in my neighbourhood a Mom and 2 little girls 3 and 5 were attacked on the sidewalk by a pitbull.

The 5 year old was it's target - the Mom was trying to pull the dog, kick the dog - cars stopped and a man came out to try and help the dog turned on him and tore his arms up.. the police came and had to shoot the pitbull point blank 4 times to kill it.

The little girl has had several surgeries to repair her face.

There is no place in civilized society for a killer animal. It is like walking a shark on a leash.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 12:55 AM
I defense of Great Danes, in the first story, the father scared them off "with his voice". I doubt a Pit Bull would retreat just because you yelled at it.

In the second story, the Dane was rescued "from a filthy" home. That poor thing was probably abused and reacted to what it saw as a threat or fear.

In the third story, "9 Danes were chained to tree". That tells me a lot about the owners right there. They were probably always chained up, and not given love, affection and attention. They were probably abused, neglected animals. A dog that size needs exercise not staying chained. Anyone responsible owner knows Danes are mainly inside family dogs. They often suffer separation anxiety from their owners.

Sorry but in all three of those stories, it's not about the breed temperament, but the owners treatment of the dogs. None of those stories convince me the Great Dane is a dangerous dog. Not one story shows the animal was a well treated, much loved pet, that just TURNED like so many Pit Bull stories.
First off, you missed the point. It wasn't to start trashing Great Danes, so you don't have defend any breed for me. Remember, I am one of the few here that doesn't think that breed is the issue. So thank you very much for taking the leap to consider that it might not be the breed in the three Great Dane stories above. My point was that other breeds, one that has been described on this forum as one that would never hurt anyone, can and do hurt people.

:banghead:So why is it that when it is a Great Dane that actually hurts someone, it is okay to review the events surrounding it and not blame the dog, but to blame the circumstance or mistreatment or owner, but when the dog is a pit bull, the only conclusion that you can come to is that it was the breed?

I don't care what scared the dog off, it mauled a kid. How would that defense hold up in court? "Your honor, my client did assault the man in question, but when the police yelled, he ran. Plus I bet if it were different kind of guy, he would have killed him".

Once again, a breed OTHER than a pit bull attacks someone, the other breed is defended and it is speculated as to what a pit bull would do. What do you even base this speculation on, clearly statistics do nothing for you. The American Temperament Test Society, ranks the temperament of pit bulls higher than the vast majority of breeds: http://www.atts.org (pit bulls are called American Pit Bull terriers and American Staffordshire Terriers). I am sure that this research is meaningless to you, data doesn't matter, after all the news papers tell us otherwise.

Is it anecdotal evidence you need? I know more Pit Bull owners than any other breed owners. None of these pit bulls have ever attacked anyone or hinted at it. My friend was walking his two pit bulls when an unleashed Rhodesian Ridgeback ran towards them. The ridgeback bit his dog in the face and my friend in the hand, his dog bit the other dog to protect him. He yelled "let go" and his pit bull let go. The pit bull required stitches, the ridgeback did not.

Someone else talked about a Dobe that attacked someone. By that, I assume Doberman. Again, the conversation drifts towards pit bulls. Do you ever think that maybe the media, which people refuse to believe might NOT be the best source of information, work like the conversations on this site? Any time a dog attack is mentioned, it seems the words "pit bull" must be mentioned.

Casshew
11-11-2005, 12:58 AM
but when the dog is a pit bull, the only conclusion that you can come to is that it was the breed?

Because it is the breed, thats why :slap:

curlytone
11-11-2005, 01:37 AM
If a child or an adult is ripped apart by a pitbull and a newspaper reports it - it is not sensationalism - it is just what happened.

Thank God there is a ban where I live, people have to register their pitbull or pitbull cross, it must be sterilized and when it dies eventually, 5,6 8 - 10 years - thats it... no more pitbulls, you can't buy them, you can't sell them and if one is seen without the special pitbull tag on it's collar it is taken away - and I believe destroyed, but I am not sure on that.

A 12 year old girl had her throat torn open by a pitbull and bled to death in a park not too far from me. What a waste of a life and what a way to die - can you imagine the horror?

Also, in my neighbourhood a Mom and 2 little girls 3 and 5 were attacked on the sidewalk by a pitbull.

The 5 year old was it's target - the Mom was trying to pull the dog, kick the dog - cars stopped and a man came out to try and help the dog turned on him and tore his arms up.. the police came and had to shoot the pitbull point blank 4 times to kill it.

The little girl has had several surgeries to repair her face.

There is no place in civilized society for a killer animal. It is like walking a shark on a leash.
It really is horrible, but the only thing that is being reacted to is the final outcome. What are the facts of the situation? Do you think that with two dog attacks like this in the same neighborhood that maybe something clandestine could be going on?

Please explain to me why it makes sense to ban an entire group of something for the actions of one or even a few. We don't hold our own species to that standard and we are far more dangerous than any dog. How many people are killed by other people every day. Do you think that this is not gruesome and horrible? Is that not a waste of life? How many people die in car accidents every day? They drive past our homes and loved ones all the time. The chance that any one person in the U.S. will die in a transportaion accident is 1 in 77 over the course of thier life, the chance that any one person will die from a dog (any dog) over the course of thier life is 1 in 206,944. The chance that any one person in the U.S. will die by being bitten or struck by other mammals (not dogs) is 1 in 49,666 over the course of thier life. (http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm). Yet all that people want is a ban on a subset of dogs. How many people smoke themselves to death? We could ban so many things and save thousands and thousands more people than if we ban pit bulls. When all the pit bulls are dead and gone in your area, but people still get killed by dogs, what then? Of all the dangers in the world, why is it so important to put pit bulls in the cross hairs?

Go read the post by forthekids. It gives many accounts of how dog attacks can be sensationalized in the news, simply with incorrect facts or failure to investigate. It also talks about a situation where a pit bull did kill someone and the story ran "in over 30 separate national newspapers and was also picked up by FOX news, CNN and two British newspapers. Two weeks earlier a man was killed by his German Shepherd Dog and this story ran only in the local community newspaper"

curlytone
11-11-2005, 01:50 AM
Because it is the breed, thats why :slap:That is all you can say. Show me how it is the breed. Come up with a fact or a statistic that demonstrates that remotely. Show the ability to actually think and research. Millions and millions of pit bulls in the US and Canada with single digit deaths anually. How is that in the breed? Other breeds kill people, but it is not in the breed. :waitasec: If that is your evidence for condemning a breed, than for you all humans are killers. It is in our breed because our breed kills thousands of its own anually. Can you show me a semblance of a logical argument based on any facts? If so, please do. Why not take comfort in the fact that they are banned where you live. Still don't feel safe enough. Unless you can kill them all, they might migrate to where you live? After all, I read somewhere the breed is know to migrate, it must be true.

If you were trying to be funny, I am sorry for the rant.

Details
11-11-2005, 01:50 AM
The great dane who attacked was scared of with a loud voice. The pit bull who attacked couldn't be pulled off, and had to be shot 4 times to get it to stop. They are massively different.

No need to kill all existing pit bulls if they are in good houses where they are well controlled - just neuter them so when they die, there are no more.



Nope, pitbulls aren't the only threat and hazard in the world - but that doesn't mean they aren't a problem that should be solved. It's possible to work on solving more than one problem at once, thank goodness, or all cancer research would have to be stopped until we got terrorism under control, etc.

SadieMae
11-11-2005, 11:07 AM
First off, you missed the point. It wasn't to start trashing Great Danes, so you don't have defend any breed for me. Remember, I am one of the few here that doesn't think that breed is the issue. So thank you very much for taking the leap to consider that it might not be the breed in the three Great Dane stories above. My point was that other breeds, one that has been described on this forum as one that would never hurt anyone, can and do hurt people.

:banghead:So why is it that when it is a Great Dane that actually hurts someone, it is okay to review the events surrounding it and not blame the dog, but to blame the circumstance or mistreatment or owner, but when the dog is a pit bull, the only conclusion that you can come to is that it was the breed?

I don't care what scared the dog off, it mauled a kid. How would that defense hold up in court? "Your honor, my client did assault the man in question, but when the police yelled, he ran. Plus I bet if it were different kind of guy, he would have killed him".

Once again, a breed OTHER than a pit bull attacks someone, the other breed is defended and it is speculated as to what a pit bull would do. What do you even base this speculation on, clearly statistics do nothing for you. The American Temperament Test Society, ranks the temperament of pit bulls higher than the vast majority of breeds: http://www.atts.org (http://www.atts.org/) (pit bulls are called American Pit Bull terriers and American Staffordshire Terriers). I am sure that this research is meaningless to you, data doesn't matter, after all the news papers tell us otherwise.

Is it anecdotal evidence you need? I know more Pit Bull owners than any other breed owners. None of these pit bulls have ever attacked anyone or hinted at it. My friend was walking his two pit bulls when an unleashed Rhodesian Ridgeback ran towards them. The ridgeback bit his dog in the face and my friend in the hand, his dog bit the other dog to protect him. He yelled "let go" and his pit bull let go. The pit bull required stitches, the ridgeback did not.

Someone else talked about a Dobe that attacked someone. By that, I assume Doberman. Again, the conversation drifts towards pit bulls. Do you ever think that maybe the media, which people refuse to believe might NOT be the best source of information, work like the conversations on this site? Any time a dog attack is mentioned, it seems the words "pit bull" must be mentioned.These were listed a failures in the ATT test...
"Failure on any part of the test is recognized when a dog shows:

Unprovoked aggression
Panic without recovery
Strong avoidance "
The test results of the dogs tested only list how many "failed" in each breed, but not in which of the above categories. I would like to know how many of each breed failed the "Unprovoked aggression" portion of the test. My personal opinion from being an owner of the breed for almost 25 years, is the Great Danes probably "failed" mostly in "strong avoidance". Is there anywhere they show the breakdown on which breeds failed in "Unprovoked aggression"? That would give more information than lumping all three in a group. I wonder where the Pit Bulls would rank among other breeds given that test alone. JMO

When a Pit Bull attacks, I conclude it IS the breed. Why would a well taken care of, well treated, loved family pet, turn into a killer? I do consider the surroundings of the dog. And in many cases it is the family PET that attacks with no provocation.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 11:22 AM
"The great dane who attacked was scared of with a loud voice. The pit bull who attacked couldn't be pulled off, and had to be shot 4 times to get it to stop. They are massively different."But it still tore up a kid, so why is that okay? It doesn't matter that a loud voice scared the dog. I provided a story where a pit bull was easily stopped with a voice when bitting another dog (when protecting his owner from a different breed), but that doens't seem to matter. You have made up your mind so you pick and choose what to read, what to listen to, what to believe. And if you cannot understand why 1 news story or even 100 news stories about pit bulls over the course of the last 36 years are not representive, even a little bit, to the entire population of pit bulls, then you have no chance of truly solving any problem with dog attacks. The best you will ever do to is to rid the world of all the large dogs, beacause many of them do kill also. 36 breeds have killed since 1965, but again that stat is lost on you, because you are comfortable explaining away all incidents involving other breeds.


"just neuter them so when they die, there are no more."The reason that neutering is used is not to wait for them to all die, it is to control backyard breeding and beacause the NATIONAL CANINE RESEARCH FOUNDATION found that 94% of the fatal dog attacks were the result of dogs with their reproductive systems intact (unaltered).




"Nope, pitbulls aren't the only threat and hazard in the world - but that doesn't mean they aren't a problem that should be solved. It's possible to work on solving more than one problem at once, thank goodness, or all cancer research would have to be stopped until we got terrorism under control, etc. It is possible to solve more than one problem at a time, but you can't seem to wrap your mind around this one to realize that the problem is not the breed. Rather than bother to address the root cause, irresponsible and often crimal owners, you just use a handful of headlines to go after the 99.999% of dogs that have never, and will never harm anyone.

It doesn't bother me when people disagree with me if the can support their argument. What bothers me is that people don't bother to research, to learn, to make valid points, to do anything other than look at the very surface of an issue. If you look above you say "thank goodness, or all cancer research..." It is nice to see that you understand that problems require research, otherwise we might just recommend killing everyone with cancer, because then, temporarily, there would be no cancer.

Jeana (DP)
11-11-2005, 11:26 AM
GOOD MORNING YA'LL

SSDD I SEE!!! lol

Sassygerl
11-11-2005, 11:32 AM
GOOD MORNING YA'LL

SSDD I SEE!!! lol

Yeppers....just reading along LOL

beakiebean
11-11-2005, 12:14 PM
In the city where I live, the SPCA will spay or neuter anyone's pit bulls and pit bull mixes for no charge. It is an attempt to reduce the backyard breeding of this breed. Accidental breeding and backyard breeders are the source for most of the dangerous pit bulls around here. Less PB puppies, less PB's. Hopefully this free program will spread to other cities throughout the country.

Spaying and neutering is a good idea for any breed of dog. Dogs that have been spayed and neutered tend to be less aggressive overall in addition to not producing gobs of puppies.

Becca

Details
11-11-2005, 03:40 PM
It doesn't bother me when people disagree with me if the can support their argument. What bothers me is that people don't bother to research, to learn, to make valid points, to do anything other than look at the very surface of an issue. If you look above you say "thank goodness, or all cancer research..." It is nice to see that you understand that problems require research, otherwise we might just recommend killing everyone with cancer, because then, temporarily, there would be no cancer.The support for the argument is the media articles, not to mention personal experiences, not to mention pit bull owners themselves admitting it is a more agressive dog. You want to see the support for the argument, look at Jenna's post a little ways down. Pit bulls are a problem. As some responsible pit bull owners have learned the hard way.

And, I'm sorry, but I see the sites you are pulling up about the same as the smoking sites that say that smoking doesn't cause cancer, etc. Anyone can write a website, and link to selected news articles to make nearly anything seem true.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 06:24 PM
The support for the argument is the media articles, not to mention personal experiences, not to mention pit bull owners themselves admitting it is a more agressive dog. You want to see the support for the argument, look at Jenna's post a little ways down. Pit bulls are a problem. As some responsible pit bull owners have learned the hard way.

And, I'm sorry, but I see the sites you are pulling up about the same as the smoking sites that say that smoking doesn't cause cancer, etc. Anyone can write a website, and link to selected news articles to make nearly anything seem true.
I provided statistics from:
American Temperament Test Society
National Safety Council
Centers for Disease Control
NATIONAL CANINE RESEARCH FOUNDATION

Those seem pretty trustworthy to me. If millions of people smoked cigarettes, but they killed less than 3 people per year, then they really wouldn't be dangerous, would they?

I provided personal experiences. Why are they less valid than yours? I volunteer with a pit bull rescue orginization that has placed hundreds of pit bulls over the last 7 years. They have had ZERO human bite incdents. One of the volunteer's pit bull is a therapy dog that is used in dog bite classes in elementary schools.

The media is about as reliable as a weather man. The media picks and chooses what they want you to hear. There are 4.5 million dog bites reported every year. How many news stories do you read? If you read 100 stories about dog attacks in the media in a year, I would be willing to bet that 95 of them would be about pit bulls. I really don't think that this can be the basis for any conclusion. I doubt that you read that many stories per year, but if you do that would cover 2 one thousandths of a percent (0.002%) of the dog bites for the year. If they wrote a story on all 4.5 million reported bites, then they might provide some credibility, but I still doubt they could get the facts right.

A bunch of people, inluding yourself, have said essentially two things "most pit bulls want to attack" and "pit bulls are so strong and go for the kill". Since they only kill 3 people per year, you have to abandon at least one of your claims. If they all wanted to attack and all went for the kill, and because there are millions of them, the would surely kill more than 3 people.

You have also said that most pit bulls want to attack, but that they don't because of some self control influenced by humans. If you think about how a dog is trained, this doesn't hold water. A dog does what it wants to do until it learns otherwise or it does what you want it to after repeatedly rewarding it for desired behavior. For example, you buy a puppy, it doesn't know that it can't pee whenever it gets the urge. It only learns that after a long period of time with you showing it where to go and where not to. When it comes to attacking something, it doesn't know that you don't want it to. The only way that it would know that is if it attacked things all the time and you repeatedly told it not to. If your dog is constantly attacking things and you teach it this self restraint for that behavior, why would it be suprising when it has "an accident" and attacks?

If you can't understand me, or the data and sites that I have provided thus far, how about the Humane Society of the United States:

http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/dangerous_dogs.html

or how about a statement from the American Kennel Club (AKC):
"
“Dangerous Dog” Control Legislation
The American Kennel Club supports reasonable, enforceable, non-discriminatory laws to govern the ownership of dogs. The AKC believes that dog owners should be responsible for their dogs. We support laws that: establish a fair process by which specific dogs are identified as "dangerous" based on stated, measurable actions; impose appropriate penalties on irresponsible owners; and establish a well-defined method for dealing with dogs proven to be dangerous. We believe that, if necessary, dogs proven to be "dangerous" may need to be humanely destroyed. The American Kennel Club strongly opposes any legislation that determines a dog to be "dangerous" based on specific breeds or phenotypic classes of dogs."

http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/position_statements.cfm#dangerousdog

aussiegran
11-11-2005, 06:28 PM
The support for the argument is the media articles, not to mention personal experiences, not to mention pit bull owners themselves admitting it is a more agressive dog. You want to see the support for the argument, look at Jenna's post a little ways down. Pit bulls are a problem. As some responsible pit bull owners have learned the hard way.

And, I'm sorry, but I see the sites you are pulling up about the same as the smoking sites that say that smoking doesn't cause cancer, etc. Anyone can write a website, and link to selected news articles to make nearly anything seem true.
Details I couldnt have put it better myself :clap: and I have seen first hand what these dogs are capable of .

Details
11-11-2005, 06:36 PM
A bunch of people, inluding yourself, have said essentially two things "most pit bulls want to attack" and "pit bulls are so strong and go for the kill". Since they only kill 3 people per year, you have to abandon at least one of your claims. If they all wanted to attack and all went for the kill, and because there are millions of them, the would surely kill more than 3 people.You are seeing what you want to see - in the media, in my posts, in the real world. As I said with the pedophiles - it doesn't matter how many pit bulls you have seen that haven't attacked anyone (that you know of) - what matters are the statistics - the hard numbers that say that as a group, they do attack more than any other dog breed (and I think the numbers are even higher when you consider all serious attacks rather than all deaths; and then weight it for the dog population).

And this is an illogical argument I quoted above - just because a pit bull goes for the kill doesn't mean that it accomplishes that. They do go for the kill. You don't see reports on them like on other dogs - that they run up and bite someone once, then run away. They run up and bit someone, and keep on biting. They go for the kill. But humans are fair sized, parents are around, they don't always manage to do it. Doesn't change their intentions.

They attack more easily than other dogs (as I pointed out, even pitbull supporters admit they are a more agressive dog breed), and when they attack, they do more harm than other dog breeds.

Tell me - why should we keep them around? It's just one breed of dog, there is nothing, other than kill, that other dog breeds don't do as well or better than them.

SadieMae
11-11-2005, 06:49 PM
I provided statistics from:
American Temperament Test Society
National Safety Council
Centers for Disease Control
NATIONAL CANINE RESEARCH FOUNDATION

Those seem pretty trustworthy to me. If millions of people smoked cigarettes, but they killed less than 3 people per year, then they really wouldn't be dangerous, would they?

I provided personal experiences. Why are they less valid than yours? I volunteer with a pit bull rescue orginization that has placed hundreds of pit bulls over the last 7 years. They have had ZERO human bite incdents. One of the volunteer's pit bull is a therapy dog that is used in dog bite classes in elementary schools.

The media is about as reliable as a weather man. The media picks and chooses what they want you to hear. There are 4.5 million dog bites reported every year. How many news stories do you read? If you read 100 stories about dog attacks in the media in a year, I would be willing to bet that 95 of them would be about pit bulls. I really don't think that this can be the basis for any conclusion. I doubt that you read that many stories per year, but if you do that would cover 2 one thousandths of a percent (0.002%) of the dog bites for the year. If they wrote a story on all 4.5 million reported bites, then they might provide some credibility, but I still doubt they could get the facts right.

A bunch of people, inluding yourself, have said essentially two things "most pit bulls want to attack" and "pit bulls are so strong and go for the kill". Since they only kill 3 people per year, you have to abandon at least one of your claims. If they all wanted to attack and all went for the kill, and because there are millions of them, the would surely kill more than 3 people.

You have also said that most pit bulls want to attack, but that they don't because of some self control influenced by humans. If you think about how a dog is trained, this doesn't hold water. A dog does what it wants to do until it learns otherwise or it does what you want it to after repeatedly rewarding it for desired behavior. For example, you buy a puppy, it doesn't know that it can't pee whenever it gets the urge. It only learns that after a long period of time with you showing it where to go and where not to. When it comes to attacking something, it doesn't know that you don't want it to. The only way that it would know that is if it attacked things all the time and you repeatedly told it not to. If your dog is constantly attacking things and you teach it this self restraint for that behavior, why would it be suprising when it has "an accident" and attacks?

If you can't understand me, or the data and sites that I have provided thus far, how about the Humane Society of the United States:

http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/dangerous_dogs.html

or how about a statement from the American Kennel Club (AKC):
"
“Dangerous Dog” Control Legislation
The American Kennel Club supports reasonable, enforceable, non-discriminatory laws to govern the ownership of dogs. The AKC believes that dog owners should be responsible for their dogs. We support laws that: establish a fair process by which specific dogs are identified as "dangerous" based on stated, measurable actions; impose appropriate penalties on irresponsible owners; and establish a well-defined method for dealing with dogs proven to be dangerous. We believe that, if necessary, dogs proven to be "dangerous" may need to be humanely destroyed. The American Kennel Club strongly opposes any legislation that determines a dog to be "dangerous" based on specific breeds or phenotypic classes of dogs."

http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/position_statements.cfm#dangerousdogA dog with aggressive behavior is a problem to begin with and I would try to train it, but I wouldn't ever trust it and I wouldn't keep the dog if I felt it would have an "accident" and attack. I would consider the dog, no matter what breed, not a safe pet for my family. I have yet to read your other links, I already made my comments of the American Temperament Test Society, and found those results misleading based on what fails a dog. I don't need to read statistics on Pit Bulls to know I don't want them in my neighborhood. In the last 4 years there has been a 16 y/o girl killed by 4 PB, a 5 year old maimed almost to death by a PB walking home from school, an 11 y/o girl seriously mauled by a PB while visiting a friends home, and a 35 y/o woman attacked and mauled in her driveway by 2 PB belonging to her neighbor. Nope, these didn't make national news, and only the death made the local papers here. The other 3 I heard about from friends here and that's all I need to know to not want those dogs near my home.

Casshew
11-11-2005, 06:58 PM
bump :mad:

curlytone
11-11-2005, 07:30 PM
A dog with aggressive behavior is a problem to begin with and I would try to train it, but I wouldn't ever trust it and I wouldn't keep the dog if I felt it would have an "accident" and attack. I would consider the dog, no matter what breed, not a safe pet for my family. I have yet to read your other links, I already made my comments of the American Temperament Test Society, and found those results misleading based on what fails a dog.
Please tell me that you are kidding. My god, I was proving a point, I also think that a dog that attacks should be put down. It is a hypothetical statement. The point was to show that Details agument about Pit Bulls not attacking all the time because they are trying to appease people is baseless. The dog doesn't know what you want it to do unless it has done the action and you told it not to, on repeated occasions.

Try reading it again NOT JUST THE PARTS YOU MADE RED:

Here are the two options:
1) A pit bull IS NOT born with a desire to attack people - MY POSITION
2) A pit bull IS born with a desire to attack people, but since very few actually do, it must be restraining itself for the sake of appeasing its owner and it is only a matter of time before it snaps. -DETAILS' POSITION

IF you believe number 2, explain to me how the dog knows not that you do not want it to attack unless you follow the hypothetical training scenario I gave? Dogs do not know what we want of them until we teach them. Since they are not clairvoyant, they can't read our minds. So, to get a dog to the point that it knows that it is not supposed to attack, but it really wants to as DETAILS suggests, it would have had to of attacked already and you scolded it. IF you have done all this, there is no way that it would be suprising if the dog "snapped", and in fact it would not be snapping beacuse you have seen the behavior before.

If you decide that learning about the issue is for you, but you are crunched for time, read the Human Societies stance:
http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/dangerous_dogs.html

I hope that we can at least agree that maybe they are in good position make a conclusion on the issue.

Also
"A study performed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States, analyzed dog bite statistics from the last 20 years and found that the statistics don't show that any breeds are inherently more dangerous than others. The study showed that the most popular large breed dogs at any one time were consistently on the list of breeds that bit fatally. There were a high number of fatal bites from Doberman pinschers in the 1970s, for example, because Dobermans were very popular at that time and there were more Dobermans around, and because Dobermans'size makes their bites more dangerous. The number of fatal bites from pit bulls rose in the 1980s for the same reason, and the number of bites from rottweilers in the 1990s. The study also noted that there are no reliable statistics for nonfatal dog bites, so there is no way to know how often smaller breeds are biting."

But why beleive the experts in the field???????

Linda7NJ
11-11-2005, 07:39 PM
I don't own a pit bull, but I have friends that do. Their dogs are sweet and lovable and well .............well to tell the truth.......... huge sissys! One is terrified of my cat. ( The cat knows this and really enjoys chasing the wuss)

While I like the breed and find them to be intelligent and loyal and great family dogs ........in someone else's house, I wouldn't have one because I have a 7 yr old. I would just hate to be wrong and fit out the hard way! I like to err on the side of caution.
I do have two dobermans though and they had a terrible reputation for years.

Details
11-11-2005, 07:46 PM
Dogs are not human. Their ethics, morals, motivations and actions are not human. You need to recognize this to get out of this silly black and white idea that either dogs all want to kill humans or they don't.

According to pretty well every dog trainer - dogs, if reasonably trained at all, see your family as the pack they belong to, and you as the top dog in the pack. Being pack animals, they're subservient to the top dog, while trying to move up in status - sometimes by trying not to do what the top dog wants them to, or by attacking another dog to shift themselves above that dog.

Children especially, the dogs tend to see as another dog. All it takes is for them to come into the wrong area, make the wrong sort of gestures, movements, sounds, to make the dog think they are being dissed. If it's an agressive, jealous dog bred to fight and kill other dogs - then it'll attack, and try to kill the child or other person.

They don't have the human perspective that a child is not a threat, and the child and people don't have the canine body language to submit fast enough (even if the dog is open to that concept). Dogs don't just go kill everyone because they want the approval of the pack leader. But they may decide in their little canine minds that maybe they can take the pack leader, or maybe the jealousy gets high enough they attack what they see as a competitor even if the pack leader doesn't want them to.

SadieMae
11-11-2005, 07:59 PM
Curly, then why in a lot cases, the PB owner's say the dog was never aggressive or attacked anyone before they killed? The owners say dogs had not shown any aggressiveness, then the next thing you know it kills. I could read about PB on and on, but sorry, I'm not nor will I ever be a fan of the breed. I have been bitten by dogs, but needed nothing but a little neosporin and bandaids. I still like Chihuahas, Poodles and German Shepherds even after I've been bitten by them.

I agree what you said about Doberman's. I had one in the early 70's that at 3 years old, after not ever showing aggressive behavior lunged and bit my husband when he told him to get off the couch. He was put down that night with a .38. That is another breed I would not have again as a family pet.

concernedperson
11-11-2005, 08:03 PM
Curly, then why in a lot cases, the PB owner's say the dog was never aggressive or attacked anyone before they killed? The owners say dogs had not shown any aggressiveness, then the next thing you know it kills. I could read about PB on and on, but sorry, I'm not nor will I ever be a fan of the breed. I have been bitten by dogs, but needed nothing but a little neosporin and bandaids. I still like Chihuahas, Poodles and German Shepherds even I've been bitten by them.

I agree what you said about Doberman's. I had one in the early 70's that at 3 years old, after not ever showing aggressive behavior lunged and bit my husband when he told him to get off the couch. He was put down that night with a .38. That is another breed I would not have again as a family pet.

I know I have posted this before but not on this thread. My FIL was attacked by a Dobe that was his baby for years. He required skin grafting as his arm was almost totally obliterated. It still took them weeks to put down this dog. I personally hated the dog as I always saw how evil he was.

Casshew
11-11-2005, 08:04 PM
I don't own a pit bull, but I have friends that do. Their dogs are sweet and lovable and well .............well to tell the truth.......... huge sissys! One is terrified of my cat. ( The cat knows this and really enjoys chasing the wuss)


and this is the big problem, there are no telltale signs - to warn you that their temperment is changing.... the next thing you know they have killed a cat, or a child or attacked someone out of the blue.

I hope these people are careful

Details
11-11-2005, 08:09 PM
and this is the big problem, there are no telltale signs - to warn you that their temperment is changing.... the next thing you know they have killed a cat, or a child or attacked someone out of the blue.

I hope these people are carefulIt's true, to a degree, for all dogs. The differences are how likely they are to snap, how badly they injure someone once they do snap, and how hard is it to get them off of someone once they do snap - a harsh word, or does it require 4 bullets into the dog before they quit.

Labs hardly ever snap. Little dogs snap all the time, but don't injure people too seriously and are easy to get away from. But a big dog with an agression problem that doesn't like to let go is the worst combo.

Growing up we had a stupid little cockapoo dog who all at once charged the door and bit the mailman. Boy, talk about someone with no sense of humor about those kinds of things (not that I'd expect him to have one, but we were pretty young, and he was quite serious). Fortunately Toby didn't break the skin. But that's because he was a small dog. He also immediately backed off and ran away when we yelled when he bit the mailman. No hanging on, no problem. He snapped, but since he's a small dog, it didn't cause any injury, disfigurement, trauma, nor death. If we had had a pet pitbull - the outcome would have been far, far different.

SadieMae
11-11-2005, 08:09 PM
I know I have posted this before but not on this thread. My FIL was attacked by a Dobe that was his baby for years. He required skin grafting as his arm was almost totally obliterated. It still took them weeks to put down this dog. I personally hated the dog as I always saw how evil he was.
I read that post CP, sorry what happened to your FIL. My dobe was like a child to me, as I had no children then. My husband at the time did get 12 stitches on his arm. So I guess he was pretty lucky.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 08:10 PM
- what matters are the statistics - the hard numbers that say that as a group, they do attack more than any other dog breedYour right, and I have been using statistics all along. News stories are not statistics. Word of mouth stories are not statistics. The "hard numbers" say that PIT BULL and PIT BULL TYPE dogs (which encompases more than one breed of dog) KILL (not attack as you say) more than any other singular breed over the last 36 years. During the 1990s it was actually Rottweilers. That said, they kill, on average 2.5 people per year. That is one more person a year than Rottweilers or German Sheapards. 13 people die every year from flamming pajamas, flamming pajamas FCOL.

These statistics are also raw numbers, they have no interpertion. They do not take into account how many dogs of each breed exist in the population, cirumstance or any other interpertaion. Someone else pointed out that if pit bulls make up 21% of the dog population then the statistics do not show a disproportionate number of deaths. This is closer, but it is not accurate either. Pit bulls do not have to make up 21% of all dogs, just 21% of the dogs on the list of killer dogs. I would argue that pit bull and pit bull type dogs are the most common dogs on that list. In many neighborhoods they make of 20-40% of TOTAL dog population. The human society, the ACK, and the American Veterinary Medical Association all used the same statistics that you are using. I think they have more basis to interpret the data than you or myself.

Pit Bull and Pit-bull-type dogs (21%),
Mixed breed dogs (16%),
Rottweilers (13%),
German Shepherd Dogs (9%),
Wolf Dogs (5%),
Siberian Huskies (5%),
Malamutes (4%),
Great Danes (3%),
St. Bernards (3%),
Chow Chows (3%),
Doberman Pinschers (3%),
other breeds & non-specified breeds (15%).

What happens if we apply your practice of using statistics to prove a point without attempting to interpret them?

48% of inmates are African American, yet they are not 48% of the population. Do you think that we can make any conclusions with that statistic without taking the proper steps to analyze WHY the statistic is the way it is?

Details
11-11-2005, 08:17 PM
I was the one to point out that in order to know what the stat meant, we needed to know how many pit bulls there were in the American dog population during that time.

But I see plenty of dogs, and there's no way that 1 in 5 is a pitbull. I see lots of labs, shepherds, pure mutts (tons of mutts), the occasional retriever - I see very few pit bulls. So my suspicion is that the 21% kills by pitbulls is extremely higher than the percentage of pit bulls in america, and that says that they kill out of proportion to their numbers - that they are a problem.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 10:06 PM
Curly, then why in a lot cases, the PB owner's say the dog was never aggressive or attacked anyone before they killed? The owners say dogs had not shown any aggressiveness, then the next thing you know it kills. .\

From my original post:
"Also, many people in this thread describe pit bulls as ready to “snap” or “turn without notice”. Since nobody seems to have owned one, and only one person said that they have a friend who owned two, I can only infer that these descriptions are based on the media reports where owners of the dog describe the history of the dog. If we think about this for a minute: The owner’s dog has just hurt or killed someone. Police officers and reporters are asking about the dog. How likely is it that the owner is going to say, “Oh yeah, Rex has always been vicious. In fact, it was just a matter of time until this was going to happen. What, with all that illegal fighting that I’ve been training him for, I am surprised that this was his first kill.”? Of course they are going to say that the dog was always nice, if the owner has any chance of avoiding criminal charges or lawsuits, they must say that. How many people actually take responsibility for their negligence these days? The story that started this whole thread states that the incident is being investigated as a criminal matter. What are the chances that anyone will read the results of the investigations?"

Also, some signs or precursors to aggressiveness are not known by a lot of people. do a quick search.
Here are some:
*Respond to eye contact with a prolonged, direct stare.
*Growl spontaneously.
*Mount legs.
*Guard its food.
*Guard its sleeping area.
*"Demand" to be petted and let outside.
*Resist being placed in submissive postures or situations.
*Become more aggressive with physical punishment.
*Block the movements of family members in the home.
*Become glassy-eyed during aggressive incidents.

Also, many people do not want to admit that they missed warning signs that could have prevented a tragedy. The same thing happens when peoples family members end up murdering someone. Many people say, "he was so nice". In most cases there probably were warning signs.

I am not saying that there aren't fluke cases, but it certainly isn't the normal scenario. Ask youself what news story would evoke more emotion and readership: "Loving family pet kills 5 year old" or "Gaurd dog defends home, killing intruder".

I fully respect your decision to not trust the breed and not to want one. The problem I have is when people try to impose what they want on me.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 10:42 PM
I was the one to point out that in order to know what the stat meant, we needed to know how many pit bulls there were in the American dog population during that time.

But I see plenty of dogs, and there's no way that 1 in 5 is a pitbull. I see lots of labs, shepherds, pure mutts (tons of mutts), the occasional retriever - I see very few pit bulls. So my suspicion is that the 21% kills by pitbulls is extremely higher than the percentage of pit bulls in america, and that says that they kill out of proportion to their numbers - that they are a problem.I am sincerely glad that you acknowledge that. Again, if pit bulls make up 21% of the dogs on the list of killer dogs, not just the general dog population (labs and retrievers are not in that list), then it is out of proportion. If it is out of proportion, which it could be, then ask yourself WHY. That is the point of mentioning the inmate statistic. It is out of proportion. However, sociologists ask WHY it is out of proportion. We don't base social agendas solely on a quick glance at the numbers. We look for the root causes and try to address those. So back to dogs. IF it is out of proportion, then WHY? Many people only look at the breed. There are many other options, and the one that I believe, is that a disproportionate number of people with bad intentions seek out the breed and then develop bad characteristics in individual pit bulls. It doesn't take many people doing this to skew the numbers.

Look at the breeds that have topped the lists. In the 1970s it was dobermans, in the 1980s it was pit bulls, in the 1990s it was Rottweilers. Now it is back to pit bulls. What do all of these dogs have in common, besides size and strength? They are all considered by many people to be guard and protect dogs. 40% of people who buy dogs list "for a guard dog" as one of their reasons for getting the dog. I would imagine that many of these people train their dogs to be "guard dogs". So now, if the dog is put in the position to do what it was purchased and trained for and it kills the intruder, the death of the intruder is logged as a "1" in the statistics above, and the breed responsible is only logged as having killed someone.

If your neighborhood is representative of every other neighborhood in the country, then the tallies that you provide would be accurate to broaden to the rest of the US. However, I am very confident that any 1 neighborhood can't be generalized to fit even a fraction of the neighborhoods in the country. I have been in many neighborhoods where the only dogs you see are pit bulls. I just called my friend (the one who's pit bull protected him from an attacking rohdesian ridgeback) who grew up in a neighborhood right outside of a large city. I asked him how many dogs in his neighborhood where pit bulls. His response, "AT LEAST 95% of them". I have seen estimates that put the number of pit bulls at 5 million nationwide.

My main argument is that eliminating a breed is not the answer to a real problem. If you get rid of pit bulls, most of the owners who lost their dogs will get a new dog. Will they switch to a rat terrier? Probably not. Will they get another medium-large dog? Likely. Will the owners who were irresponsible with their pit bull be irresponsible with whatever breed they decide to get. I would put my money on YES.

SadieMae
11-11-2005, 10:57 PM
I don't care who wants to own a pit bull, that's their decision. But if a neighbor of mine gets one, I'll be first to tell them to check to make sure they have plenty of insurance, and if their dog ever got loose and attacked anyone in my family or my dogs, I won't wait for the police to shoot it. I've already had that experience of my dogs being attacked by a pit bull.

Curly, you are probably a responsible owner and you have researched and know the breed. I don't know anything about the breed other than what I read or have heard about them, all negative. I personally don't know anyone who owns one at the moment. I'd say, and correct me if I'm wrong, the majority of owners know nothing about the breed or how to properly train it. All they know is they have a pit and they probably got it from some backyard breeder or puppymill. I think the only way to save the breed is selective breeding of the least aggressive dogs only. It will take time for sure. In researching the history of the Great Dane, they at one time had a pretty bad rap for being vicious attack dogs. The aggressive behavior was bred out of them, and as cruel as it sounds, puppies showing aggressiveness were destroyed. It was posted that pits were nannies to babies a long time ago. I believe that, but poor breeding has created a dog people don't trust and fear.

LinasK
11-11-2005, 11:04 PM
I am sincerely glad that you acknowledge that. Again, if pit bulls make up 21% of the dogs on the list of killer dogs, not just the general dog population (labs and retrievers are not in that list), then it is out of proportion. If it is out of proportion, which it could be, then ask yourself WHY. That is the point of mentioning the inmate statistic. It is out of proportion. However, sociologists ask WHY it is out of proportion. We don't base social agendas solely on a quick glance at the numbers. We look for the root causes and try to address those. So back to dogs. IF it is out of proportion, then WHY? Many people only look at the breed. There are many other options, and the one that I believe, is that a disproportionate number of people with bad intentions seek out the breed and then develop bad characteristics in individual pit bulls. It doesn't take many people doing this to skew the numbers.

Look at the breeds that have topped the lists. In the 1970s it was dobermans, in the 1980s it was pit bulls, in the 1990s it was Rottweilers. Now it is back to pit bulls. What do all of these dogs have in common, besides size and strength? They are all considered by many people to be guard and protect dogs. 40% of people who buy dogs list "for a guard dog" as one of their reasons for getting the dog. I would imagine that many of these people train their dogs to be "guard dogs". So now, if the dog is put in the position to do what it was purchased and trained for and it kills the intruder, the death of the intruder is logged as a "1" in the statistics above, and the breed responsible is only logged as having killed someone.

If your neighborhood is representative of every other neighborhood in the country, then the tallies that you provide would be accurate to broaden to the rest of the US. However, I am very confident that any 1 neighborhood can't be generalized to fit even a fraction of the neighborhoods in the country. I have been in many neighborhoods where the only dogs you see are pit bulls. I just called my friend (the one who's pit bull protected him from an attacking rohdesian ridgeback) who grew up in a neighborhood right outside of a large city. I asked him how many dogs in his neighborhood where pit bulls. His response, "AT LEAST 95% of them". I have seen estimates that put the number of pit bulls at 5 million nationwide.

My main argument is that eliminating a breed is not the answer to a real problem. If you get rid of pit bulls, most of the owners who lost their dogs will get a new dog. Will they switch to a rat terrier? Probably not. Will they get another medium-large dog? Likely. Will the owners who were irresponsible with their pit bull be irresponsible with whatever breed they decide to get. I would put my money on YES.
I agree with 95% of your post. Labs and goldens are not part of the stats, because their bites/attacks are not fatal. Most retrievers are bred to be very tolerant of children. Yes, they can fight to the death, I had to pull apart two large male Labs who were going for each others throats. The difference-neither dog harmed me when I pulled them apart.

I believe banning pit bulls/eliminating them- the most vicious dog- is the answer to a real problem. You claim all these wonderful things about your pit bull, we'll see what you have to say when (not if) it harms somebody, possibly even yourself. I have good friends who were professional dog trainers, temperment trainers and neither of them would ever own a pit bull, let alone have one anywhere near their children! These dogs are psychologically inbred to snap with no provocation even at their owners. You can take that risk, I never will. My daughter is not allowed over the the next-door neighbors or the other neighbors down the block who both have 1/2 pit bulls.

Casshew
11-11-2005, 11:04 PM
This is the reality of pitbulls in society

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/04/30/wisby_narrowweb__200x291.jpg

Five-year-old Jordan Wisby was walking home from school in Illawong in Sydney's south when a neighbour's American pitbull savagely attacked him.

Jordan suffered multiple lacerations to his head, throat, left arm and back during the horrifying attack which was witnessed by his eight-year-old brother Mitchell.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 11:19 PM
no way that 1 in 5 is a pitbull
Just so that we are all on the same page with these numbers:
Pit Bull and Pit-bull-type dogs (21%),
Mixed breed dogs (16%)
Rottweilers (13%)
German Shepherd Dogs (9%)
Wolf Dogs (5%),
Siberian Huskies (5%)
Malamutes (4%)
Great Danes (3%)
St. Bernards (3%)
Chow Chows (3%)
Doberman Pinschers (3%)
other breeds & non-specified breeds (15%).

That is 21% of the 431 dog realted deaths from 1965-2001 were caused by pit bull or pit bull type dogs, or 91 deaths in 36 years. For Rottweilers, it is 13% of 431, or 56 and so on. If you add all the percentages it totals 100%. These numbers have nothing to do with the general dog population. If you want to compare proportions amongst killer breeds, you can only look at the ones that have offended. What I mean is, obviously 21% of the dogs in the U.S are not pit bulls, but 13% are not rottweilers, and 9% are not German Shepards, and so on down the line. If they were, the list above would cover every dog in the U.S., but we all know that there are hundreds of different breeds. (NOTE that if you find the CDC reports that these number came from, they say 36 breeds have killed, so the "other breeds" section above covers about 25 breeds not listed by name).

kgeaux
11-11-2005, 11:23 PM
\

From my original post:
"Also, many people in this thread describe pit bulls as ready to “snap” or “turn without notice”. Since nobody seems to have owned one, and only one person said that they have a friend who owned two, I can only infer that these descriptions are based on the media reports where owners of the dog describe the history of the dog. If we think about this for a minute: The owner’s dog has just hurt or killed someone. Police officers and reporters are asking about the dog. How likely is it that the owner is going to say, “Oh yeah, Rex has always been vicious. In fact, it was just a matter of time until this was going to happen. What, with all that illegal fighting that I’ve been training him for, I am surprised that this was his first kill.”? Of course they are going to say that the dog was always nice, if the owner has any chance of avoiding criminal charges or lawsuits, they must say that. How many people actually take responsibility for their negligence these days? The story that started this whole thread states that the incident is being investigated as a criminal matter. What are the chances that anyone will read the results of the investigations?"

Also, some signs or precursors to aggressiveness are not known by a lot of people. do a quick search.
Here are some:
*Respond to eye contact with a prolonged, direct stare.
*Growl spontaneously.
*Mount legs.
*Guard its food.
*Guard its sleeping area.
*"Demand" to be petted and let outside.
*Resist being placed in submissive postures or situations.
*Become more aggressive with physical punishment.
*Block the movements of family members in the home.
*Become glassy-eyed during aggressive incidents.

Also, many people do not want to admit that they missed warning signs that could have prevented a tragedy. The same thing happens when peoples family members end up murdering someone. Many people say, "he was so nice". In most cases there probably were warning signs.

I am not saying that there aren't fluke cases, but it certainly isn't the normal scenario. Ask youself what news story would evoke more emotion and readership: "Loving family pet kills 5 year old" or "Gaurd dog defends home, killing intruder".

I fully respect your decision to not trust the breed and not to want one. The problem I have is when people try to impose what they want on me.

I own a pit. My son brought this little puppy home that he rescued--he bought him for $400 from a guy that was planning to use him as bait in a fight....He's beautiful, loyal and friendly. He passed our veternarians rigourous testing to be declared non-aggressive. I don't remember all of the testing, but I do know that Ninja was required to show his belly to the vet, to the vet with assistants, and to the vet when another dog was in the room. He had to sit and stay seated even when the vet made a "move" toward me. He had to sit quietly and not become agitated when the vet made prolonged eye contact with him. Ninja passed with flying colors. I love him and trust him with ADULTS, when I am present. The vet did recommend that we not have more than one pit at a time since they do form packs and become more aggressive if they are egging each other on.....I've seen that in person, and it is a scary sight to behold.

He has been well socialized, he has been mixed repeatedly with other animals and required to behave. He is, as my husband says, a real quality animal. I love his big square head and his deep chest, I love that bulldog strut when we take him out walking. I love the way he wags his whole body and not just his tail when he is happy.

I trust this dog with my life. But not with everyone's life...................... my dog is NEVER allowed outside unleashed, he is never alone with children, and if children visit my home, my sweet puppy wears a muzzle. Pits have strong jaws and if the worst were to happen, the potential for tragedy is there.....so hence, the muzzle. We do not let him alone with other animals for the same reason.

I love my dog, he fell into my home by accident, but I am so glad he is here. I know that I would never in a million years have gone out and gotten this dog on purpose, and when Ninja "passes on" I don't know if I would get another, but this one dog is wonderful.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 11:27 PM
I agree with 95% of your post. Labs and goldens are not part of the stats, because their bites/attacks are not fatal. Most retrievers are bred to be very tolerant of children. Yes, they can fight to the death, I had to pull apart two large male Labs who were going for each others throats. The difference-neither dog harmed me when I pulled them apart.

I believe banning pit bulls/eliminating them- the most vicious dog- is the answer to a real problem. You claim all these wonderful things about your pit bull, we'll see what you have to say when (not if) it harms somebody, possibly even yourself. I have good friends who were professional dog trainers, temperment trainers and neither of them would ever own a pit bull, let alone have one anywhere near their children! These dogs are psychologically inbred to snap with no provocation even at their owners. You can take that risk, I never will. My daughter is not allowed over the the next-door neighbors or the other neighbors down the block who both have 1/2 pit bulls.
They kill 2.5 people per year, there are and estimated 50 million dogs in the US and 250 million people, I think that my odds are fine. The percent of pit bulls that bite someone is absolutely miniscule. Pit bulls have been around for a long long time, why is it that they have come under fire in the last 20 years? What changed? The fact that you think that a pit bull bitting is a gauranteed thing shows your supreme lack of understanding of the issue.

curlytone
11-11-2005, 11:36 PM
This is the reality of pitbulls in society

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/04/30/wisby_narrowweb__200x291.jpg

Five-year-old Jordan Wisby was walking home from school in Illawong in Sydney's south when a neighbour's American pitbull savagely attacked him.

Jordan suffered multiple lacerations to his head, throat, left arm and back during the horrifying attack which was witnessed by his eight-year-old brother Mitchell.
I've already explained why trusting 1, 10, 100 media stories and basing your opinion on that is not even remotely reliable. I agree that there are hundreds of bad stories about pit bulls. But they don't tell you about any other stories. 17 people are killed by dogs every year, 2.5 by pit bulls. That leaves an average of 14.5 deaths by other dogs EVERY year. Find me those news stories and I might take your media-only approach seriously.

Casshew
11-12-2005, 12:04 AM
I've already explained why trusting 1, 10, 100 media stories and basing your opinion on that is not even remotely reliable. News coverage is much more reliable than anything you say. :hand:

kgeaux ~ you are obviously an aware and responsible pet owner :blowkiss:

SadieMae
11-12-2005, 12:08 AM
Please tell me that you are kidding. My god, I was proving a point, I also think that a dog that attacks should be put down. It is a hypothetical statement. The point was to show that Details agument about Pit Bulls not attacking all the time because they are trying to appease people is baseless. The dog doesn't know what you want it to do unless it has done the action and you told it not to, on repeated occasions.

Try reading it again NOT JUST THE PARTS YOU MADE RED:

Here are the two options:
1) A pit bull IS NOT born with a desire to attack people - MY POSITION
2) A pit bull IS born with a desire to attack people, but since very few actually do, it must be restraining itself for the sake of appeasing its owner and it is only a matter of time before it snaps. -DETAILS' POSITION

IF you believe number 2, explain to me how the dog knows not that you do not want it to attack unless you follow the hypothetical training scenario I gave? Dogs do not know what we want of them until we teach them. Since they are not clairvoyant, they can't read our minds. So, to get a dog to the point that it knows that it is not supposed to attack, but it really wants to as DETAILS suggests, it would have had to of attacked already and you scolded it. IF you have done all this, there is no way that it would be suprising if the dog "snapped", and in fact it would not be snapping beacuse you have seen the behavior before.

If you decide that learning about the issue is for you, but you are crunched for time, read the Human Societies stance:
http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/dangerous_dogs.html

I hope that we can at least agree that maybe they are in good position make a conclusion on the issue.

Also
"A study performed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States, analyzed dog bite statistics from the last 20 years and found that the statistics don't show that any breeds are inherently more dangerous than others. The study showed that the most popular large breed dogs at any one time were consistently on the list of breeds that bit fatally. There were a high number of fatal bites from Doberman pinschers in the 1970s, for example, because Dobermans were very popular at that time and there were more Dobermans around, and because Dobermans'size makes their bites more dangerous. The number of fatal bites from pit bulls rose in the 1980s for the same reason, and the number of bites from rottweilers in the 1990s. The study also noted that there are no reliable statistics for nonfatal dog bites, so there is no way to know how often smaller breeds are biting."

But why beleive the experts in the field???????I agree with Details. I've owned 8 Great Danes in 25 years. 3 were puppies from championship bloodlines and 5 were rescue Danes varying in ages 10mos-3years old when I adopted them. Not one of them ever displayed any aggressive/attack behavior. Never growled at any one, never bared their teeth to a person or other animal. They really don't have a clue how to attack. It made no difference whether it was a $1200 Dane or $150 adopted one that I had no breeding information for. Three of my adopted ones had been severly abused :furious: and still they showed absolutely no aggression to people or the other Danes in my home. My conclusion is there are certain traits and characteristics inherent in every breed. Regardless of training, you can't train those out of a dog, maybe restrain the trait but it's always going to be in the dog.

:laugh: My neighbors were hysterical from laughter when I put "Beware of Dogs" sign on my fence. It was city ordinance if you owned a dog bigger than 40 lbs.

I really don't care what "experts" say. For every expert that has one view there's always another expert with an opposing view. JMO

LinasK
11-12-2005, 12:52 AM
Pit bulls have been around for a long long time, why is it that they have come under fire in the last 20 years? What changed? The fact that you think that a pit bull bitting is a gauranteed thing shows your supreme lack of understanding of the issue.
No, I understand the issue completely!

if pit bulls make up 21% of the dogs on the list of killer dogs, not just the general dog population (labs and retrievers are not in that list), then it is out of proportion.is that a disproportionate number of people with bad intentions seek out the breed and then develop bad characteristics in individual pit bulls. It doesn't take many people doing this to skew the numbers.

Look at the breeds that have topped the lists. In the 1970s it was dobermans, in the 1980s it was pit bulls, in the 1990s it was Rottweilers. Now it is back to pit bulls. What do all of these dogs have in common, besides size and strength? They are all considered by many people to be guard and protect dogs. 40% of people who buy dogs list "for a guard dog" as one of their reasons for getting the dog. I would imagine that many of these people train their dogs to be "guard dogs". So now, if the dog is put in the position to do what it was purchased and trained for and it kills the intruder, the death of the intruder is logged as a "1" in the statistics above, and the breed responsible is only logged as having killed someone.

If your neighborhood is representative of every other neighborhood in the country, then the tallies that you provide would be accurate to broaden to the rest of the US. However, I am very confident that any 1 neighborhood can't be generalized to fit even a fraction of the neighborhoods in the country. I have been in many neighborhoods where the only dogs you see are pit bulls. I just called my friend (the one who's pit bull protected him from an attacking rohdesian ridgeback) who grew up in a neighborhood right outside of a large city. I asked him how many dogs in his neighborhood where pit bulls. His response, "AT LEAST 95% of them". I have seen estimates that put the number of pit bulls at 5 million nationwide.


Case proven! Pit Bulls are an unacceptable risk to society IMO! And no, I don't think drug dealers will decide to go get Presa Canarios to have around, but they sure won't be getting Golden Retrievers!!!

Casshew
11-12-2005, 01:05 AM
but LinasK.. they're just so sweet and cuddily
http://images.tvnz.co.nz/tvnz_images/news/accidents_emergencies/dog_attack_232.jpg

http://www.leerburg.com/Photos/soda1.jpg



http://www.sptimes.com/News/050401/photos/tb-kayla-345.jpg

SadieMae
11-12-2005, 01:19 AM
Good Lord Cass!!!! :furious:

This should NEVER happen.

IdahoMom
11-12-2005, 01:20 AM
Ahem- an update on the kids...

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-pitbull10.html

SNIP
A McHenry County girl mauled by pit bulls continued her recovery Wednesday, while the 10-year-old boy attacked by the dogs remained in critical condition, hospital officials said.

Jourdan Lamarre, 10, was upgraded from fair to good condition, officials at Advocate Lutheran General Hospital said.

She was one of two children attacked last weekend by three pit bulls near northwest suburban Cary.

Her friend, 10-year-old Nick Foley, is still in critical condition, hospital officials said. Despite her continuing recovery, it's not clear when Jourdan may be released from the hospital, a spokeswoman there said.

SadieMae
11-12-2005, 01:29 AM
Ahem- an update on the kids...

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-pitbull10.html

SNIP
A McHenry County girl mauled by pit bulls continued her recovery Wednesday, while the 10-year-old boy attacked by the dogs remained in critical condition, hospital officials said.

Jourdan Lamarre, 10, was upgraded from fair to good condition, officials at Advocate Lutheran General Hospital said.

She was one of two children attacked last weekend by three pit bulls near northwest suburban Cary.

Her friend, 10-year-old Nick Foley, is still in critical condition, hospital officials said. Despite her continuing recovery, it's not clear when Jourdan may be released from the hospital, a spokeswoman there said.
A Ticket!!!! His dogs practically kills 2 kids, and had to be shot and they can't decide if he should only get a ticket!!!??? Give me a break!

"Authorities have said there's no evidence of prior problems involving the dogs. No decision has been made yet on possibly ticketing Sword for letting the dogs outside unleashed, McHenry County State's Attorney Louis Bianchi said."

LinasK
11-12-2005, 01:41 AM
A Ticket!!!! His dogs practically kills 2 kids, and had to be shot and they can't decide if he should only get a ticket!!!??? Give me a break!

"Authorities have said there's no evidence of prior problems involving the dogs. No decision has been made yet on possibly ticketing Sword for letting the dogs outside unleashed, McHenry County State's Attorney Louis Bianchi said."
It doesn't matter if he had a prior dog problem , this guy deserves to be charged with attempted manslaughter or assault with a deadly weapon at minimum!!!:behindbar :behindbar :behindbar

Sassygerl
11-12-2005, 02:32 AM
News coverage is much more reliable than anything you say. :hand:

kgeaux ~ you are obviously an aware and responsible pet owner :blowkiss:

Cass, I hate to say it, but with your comment here with a blowkiss blows everything you've said!!!! JMO :D, but oh so true!!!!!!

Sorry Cass, but I'm calling you OUT....

ETA: you've spoken so strongly against the dogs, but when a poster who you know posts they have a pit, you say you're glad they are responsible, and aren't saying the dog should be destroyed...please explain!!!!!! You obviously are not against the dogs as your posts state........

reb
11-12-2005, 05:16 AM
it always strikes me as so strange (and predictable) the way PB defenders blame the "evil lying media" for defaming the good name of the sweet, innocent pit bull. hey folks, it's not some underground "conspiracy theory"... i think enough people have seen or known about mauling cases THAT HAVE BEEN CLOSE ENOUGH TO HOME and happened to SOMEONE THEY KNOW... to know the truth. so,, quit trying to deny the truth!

(but to the responsible people who love their PB's but take precautions, thanks for at least not being in denial about it & making an effort to make sure those around you are safe!)

reb
11-12-2005, 05:30 AM
so... i guess all the pro-PB folks are going to say the media "lied"-- and it wasn't REALLY a pit bull..... LOL.

golfmom
11-12-2005, 08:28 AM
http://www.wlky.com/news/3243296/detail.html

Once the girl was transported to Kosair, doctors there told the sheriff that child's hair and scalp had to be found and delivered or she would die. Shoffer said he had to cut the dog's stomach open to find the scalp, which was then rushed to the hospital, WLKY reported.

Family members told WLKY that the doctors reattached the majority of the scalp, but added that the girl still might face more surgeries.

forthekids
11-12-2005, 08:45 AM
News coverage is much more reliable than anything you say. :hand:


Wow Casshew, this is a low blow. I'm not sure how personal attacks support your argument?
You've got to give some credit to culytone in that he has pretty much taken on this whole forum by himself. Whether you support one side or the other you at least have to admit that he makes a good argument and that I hope that there are more pit bull owners out there like him....responsible and informed.

forthekids
11-12-2005, 08:51 AM
A Ticket!!!! His dogs practically kills 2 kids, and had to be shot and they can't decide if he should only get a ticket!!!??? Give me a break!

"Authorities have said there's no evidence of prior problems involving the dogs. No decision has been made yet on possibly ticketing Sword for letting the dogs outside unleashed, McHenry County State's Attorney Louis Bianchi said."
Wow, just a ticket...that is crazy! I really aggree that people need to be much more responsible for their actions than this?!?!? Wow!

forthekids
11-12-2005, 08:56 AM
Wow, this discussion has really gone on and on.....
Overall, from my experience as a Child Protection Investigator for a very large city, I think there are much bigger things to worry about as far as protecting our children go....lets talk about those things instead: chemical dependency, mental health, poverty!
If anyone has any solutions to combat the things above....let me know!:truce:

forthekids
11-12-2005, 09:10 AM
After several of these attacks the UK goverment outlawed the owning of these dogs under the Dangerous Dogs Act. Any dogs found are destroyed and the owners fined or imprisoned. I think they are magnificent physical specimens but they are bred to fight and therefore although I can admire them they should not really be around in this day and age.
I't amazing how many horrible people are owning these dogs (and these are the owners that make the news---keep in mind that we won't be hearing about the good ones!)
Just look at animal precint on Animal Planet, most specifically the Detroit and NY ones. These dogs definitley represent the largest population of abuse and neglect. I really wish we had more of a law nationally that would set harsher penalties for irresponsible owners. (Of ANY dog breed! I've had my fair share of mishaps with other breeds.)

I personally know and would bet that there are many good owners of pit bull type dogs out there though. I wish we could hear more about them. And don't get me wrong, this news report is HORRIFIC! I just honestly wonder since we hear about these horrible stories all of the time, that there has got to be some good ones too, right?

kgeaux
11-12-2005, 09:17 AM
Cass, I hate to say it, but with your comment here with a blowkiss blows everything you've said!!!! JMO :D, but oh so true!!!!!!

Sorry Cass, but I'm calling you OUT....

ETA: you've spoken so strongly against the dogs, but when a poster who you know posts they have a pit, you say you're glad they are responsible, and aren't saying the dog should be destroyed...please explain!!!!!! You obviously are not against the dogs as your posts state........


I think Cass's position is clear. She would like there to be no pits, but if someone has one, she's happy that they are responsible. She's just being sweet to me.

Sassy,I do think there is a reason why the American Veternairy Association and other large groups that work with dogs on a daily basis refuse to condemn pit bulls. My own city/parish council recently tried to ban pit bulls from the parish, but when they did research on the matter they were astounded to find: 1) pits were not responsible for the larger number of maulings or deaths, ever, in any given year. Other large breeds bounced that "honor" back and forth. 2)the number of attacks per capita--the number of pits who attack compared to the number of pits in the USA is extremely small. Extremely. Almost all other large breeds attack more often than pits do. and 3) the research done by veteranary groups did not back up the perception the public has that pits are dangerous just because of their breed.

The city parish council had to recind its plan, because they would have had to ban ALL dangerous breeds, and that was basically a list containing all large breeds. I think the only big dog not on the list was the greyhound!

Now, I'm not crazy. (believe it or not!) I know that pits do attack and that they are such strong and persistant dogs that they are not easily stopped and the attacks often end in disfigurement or death. I also know that for every pit that attacks, there are over a million more who are living peaceful, submissive, obedient lives. A lot of research was forced on me when my son rescued the little pup he brought home. I started off terrified, cuz I knew that little bundle would grow to be strong and BIG. But the research I did was calming and encouraging. And my doggie has proven the research true.

BTW, pits were not "inbred" to produce dogs that attack PEOPLE. Pits are naturally aggressive toward animals, not toward people. If a dog is consistently aggressive to people, you can bet your booty that he has not been trained. Or that other measures were taken to force him to become aggressive--we know people who do pit bull rescues and you would not believe the abuse that is done to these animals to try to make them aggressive. This ignorant backasswards part of the country is still having problems with idiots fighting their dogs, so I've seen alot of hurt dogs that have been fed iron filings, blood, that are given massive doses of steroids--I've seen enough evidence of animal abuse to last a lifetime.

A good rule to keep in mind when buying any large dog is to know your breeder. In breeding is DANGEROUS in any breed, even yorkies!

kgeaux
11-12-2005, 09:27 AM
I't amazing how many horrible people are owning these dogs (and these are the owners that make the news---keep in mind that we won't be hearing about the good ones!)
Just look at animal precint on Animal Planet, most specifically the Detroit and NY ones. These dogs definitley represent the largest population of abuse and neglect. I really wish we had more of a law nationally that would set harsher penalties for irresponsible owners. (Of ANY dog breed! I've had my fair share of mishaps with other breeds.)

I personally know and would bet that there are many good owners of pit bull type dogs out there though. I wish we could hear more about them. And don't get me wrong, this news report is HORRIFIC! I just honestly wonder since we hear about these horrible stories all of the time, that there has got to be some good ones too, right?

editing to add: you know why so many horrible people gravitate toward owning pitbulls? because it makes them feel tough and "gansta" Idiots.

There are many good stories. I've read of pits jumping into rushing rivers to pull their little charges out of the water. They can be wonderful dogs.

My great grandparents lived out on a very large farm. We recently discovered an old photo of all the extended family posing out on the front porch and front grounds of the house. Alongside the family is a pitbull. (I never knew!) My grandma remembered that the dog used to come to the door of the kitchen every day right before lunch, and her mom would fix Pop's lunch in a pail, give it to the dog and the dog would run out into the fields and deliver the lunch to Pop. After lunch, he'd bring the pail back to the house so it could be washed! What a smart dog!

curlytone
11-12-2005, 10:05 AM
I don't care who wants to own a pit bull, that's their decision. But if a neighbor of mine gets one, I'll be first to tell them to check to make sure they have plenty of insurance, and if their dog ever got loose and attacked anyone in my family or my dogs, I won't wait for the police to shoot it. I've already had that experience of my dogs being attacked by a pit bull. .I think that is perfectly reasonable. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have been bitten by a wiredhair fox terrier. I don't have anything against the breed, or other dogs of the breed, just the one that bit me. However, I would never get one, and that negative association will always be there for me so you won't see me rushing to pet one.



Curly, you are probably a responsible owner and you have researched and know the breed. I don't know anything about the breed other than what I read or have heard about them, all negative. I personally don't know anyone who owns one at the moment. I'd say, and correct me if I'm wrong, the majority of owners know nothing about the breed or how to properly train it. All they know is they have a pit and they probably got it from some backyard breeder or puppymill. I think the only way to save the breed is selective breeding of the least aggressive dogs only. It will take time for sure. In researching the history of the Great Dane, they at one time had a pretty bad rap for being vicious attack dogs. The aggressive behavior was bred out of them, and as cruel as it sounds, puppies showing aggressiveness were destroyed. It was posted that pits were nannies to babies a long time ago. I believe that, but poor breeding has created a dog people don't trust and fear.I am not in a position to know if it is a majority, but that would not suprise me. That is what I have been driving at, the problem is a disproportionate number of bad owners versus other breeds. It would only take a 100-200, maybe less, really bad owners nationwide to generate 99% of all the bad stories that you hear; I am sure there are way more bad owners than that. I appreciate that you are considering alternatives to an all out ban.

curlytone
11-12-2005, 10:08 AM
A Ticket!!!! His dogs practically kills 2 kids, and had to be shot and they can't decide if he should only get a ticket!!!??? Give me a break!

"Authorities have said there's no evidence of prior problems involving the dogs. No decision has been made yet on possibly ticketing Sword for letting the dogs outside unleashed, McHenry County State's Attorney Louis Bianchi said."
Personally, I think that he should go to jail.

curlytone
11-12-2005, 10:27 AM
No, I understand the issue completely!
Case proven! Pit Bulls are an unacceptable risk to society IMO! And no, I don't think drug dealers will decide to go get Presa Canarios to have around, but they sure won't be getting Golden Retrievers!!!
Good, so we agree that they wouldn't get Golden Retrievers. What kind of dogs do you think that they would get?

Maybe not a drug dealer, but why wouldn't someone who runs a dog fighting ring get Presa Canarios? People here have acknowledged that there are all kinds of backyard pit bull breeding operations now. So now jump to a time when pit bulls are very hard to come by (after a ban). Dogs are very prolific. They reach reproductive age in less than 1 year, they have litters, not just single puppies. They can have more than one litter per year. Dog fighters don't seem to have a problem with inbreeding. The numbers will increase exponentially in a matter of a few years. So, if one person applies some of their dog fight winnings to buy a male and a female Presa Canario (or whatever breed they choose), the whole cycle starts over. The end result will be thousands of aggressive Presa Canarios, some will kill people. The media will report all about every incident and so on and on and on. The problem is that the cause of the whole problem is still there, making thousands of dollars by exploiting the dogs and destroying the reputation of whatever breed is accessible and willing to fight other dogs. We can't forget that criminals are good at what they do and if there is money to be made, it will be.

curlytone
11-12-2005, 10:39 AM
By posting pictures, you are doing exactly what the media does: evoking a rection based not on logic and facts, but emotions from individual incidents. I am not in denial. Pit bull attacks can be horrible. The pictures are horrible. I fully acknowledge that pit bulls can attack people; that pit bulls kill people.

As I have stated, The average number of dog related deaths every year is 17. Pit bulls have been, on average, responsible for 2.5 of those. Where are the stories, the articles and the pictures about the other 14.5 killings each year? You are seeing only what the media wants you to see. People have accused me of only seeing what I want to see, which is not true. Even if it were, it is better than seeing what the media has decided you should see: the cases when a pit bull is responsible.

Linda7NJ
11-12-2005, 10:41 AM
Outlawing pit bulls isn't the answer. Street thugs will simply move onto a different breed and there are plenty of big dogs with lots of fighting potential.

Tougher sentences for dog fighting and animal abuse is needed.

Jeana (DP)
11-12-2005, 10:43 AM
Outlawing pit bulls isn't the answer. Street thugs will simply move onto a different breed and there are plenty of big dogs with lots of fighting potential.

Tougher sentences for dog fighting and animal abuse is needed.


Yes, they definately would. However, only pits will go after a target to the death (of the pit) if necessary. They don't back down no matter what. No other breed does this, which is why the pit is so popular for that purpose.

IdahoMom
11-12-2005, 11:34 AM
Wow Casshew, this is a low blow. I'm not sure how personal attacks support your argument?
You've got to give some credit to culytone in that he has pretty much taken on this whole forum by himself. Whether you support one side or the other you at least have to admit that he makes a good argument and that I hope that there are more pit bull owners out there like him....responsible and informed.Low blow? :confused: Personal attack?!:confused: Cass can consider news coverage more reliable than a pitbull owner's- I think that is HER judgement to make.

It is curlytone's prerogative to take on the whole world if he/she wants...that doesn't make him/her 100% right! (Note the use of 100%!)

Casshew
11-12-2005, 11:39 AM
Wow Casshew, this is a low blow. I'm not sure how personal attacks support your argument?
You've got to give some credit to culytone in that he has pretty much taken on this whole forum by himself. Whether you support one side or the other you at least have to admit that he makes a good argument and that I hope that there are more pit bull owners out there like him....responsible and informed. forthekids... curly is a name on an internet message board - the news media is the news media, responsible for what they print. I am posting article after article - mainstream news.

Hence, the articles are more reliable than what cury is posting IMO

-------------------

Sassy, I want the breed banned world wide, but Kgeaux is the best case scenario - did you read her post? she trusts her dog with her life but NOT anyone elses - she controls who can be near and never lets situations of danger arise because she recognizes her breed could snap.
A commited person like that deserves a blowkiss. :blowkiss:

and heres one for you too :blowkiss:

Casshew
11-12-2005, 11:43 AM
By posting pictures, you are doing exactly what the media does: evoking a rection based not on logic and facts, but emotions from individual incidents. You are way more emotional on this topic than I am.

Your statistics are skewed, you are only seeing what you want to see to champion your cause.

There is no place in society IMO for an animal that regularily kills children, adults, pets & the ones that are not killed need multiple surgeries and months, perhaps years to recover for their ordeal.

I don't understand the mentality of those who want to fight to keep this vicious animal in our communities.

Amraann
11-12-2005, 11:54 AM
Obviously this topic is a hotly debated one and not the first time we have discussed it here at WS.

I would ask that you all refrain from personal attacks.

Casshew
11-12-2005, 12:02 PM
Another recent story - this pitbull/mix was proported to have killed over 200 cats (with other dogs already caught) in 10 months - can you imagine??

Killer dog's reign of terror ended

A dog that killed more than 200 of the King Country town's cats over 10 months was yesterday shot dead by animal control officer Rod McLeod. Mr McLeod shot the dog with a .22 rifle about 2pm, he said.

"He was asleep in the sun and he didn't wake up," he said.

The dog, described as mainly pitbull with a bit of staffordshire bull terrier, was in the area he had predicted it was living.


The pure white dog, which was "very muscley" and in good condition, seemed to have no fixed living place and moved around a bit.

He was probably about two or 2½ years old.

"He'd probably been one of those fighting dogs and I think he was probably fed cats to get him going. When he got loose he just thought that was a bit of fun."

What the dog lived on remained a mystery.

He did not eat the cats and he never touched rubbish bags.

"It just makes you wonder," Mr McLeod said.

Te Kuiti resident Gay Glasgow, who lost her beloved pedigree Persian cat Manchew to a dog attack in March, was among those delighted Mr McLeod had finally succeeded in killing the beast dubbed "the ghost dog".

"Where I found him (her cat) there were two other cats within a foot," Mrs Glasgow said.

"I don't know whose cats they were but they were in the same place – just dead."


http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3465036a11,00.html

golfmom
11-12-2005, 01:14 PM
Yes, they definately would. However, only pits will go after a target to the death (of the pit) if necessary. They don't back down no matter what. No other breed does this, which is why the pit is so popular for that purpose.

The other thing that disturbs me about this breed is how unpredictable they are. Even those raised in loving homes just snap and turn vicious.

golfmom
11-12-2005, 02:03 PM
Ya'll can debate until the cows come home, but I firmly believe that there are some breeds that are as safe to have as a loaded gun is around children.

I've always been a dog lover. I used to believe that it was the owner, not the dog -- not anymore, these dogs are just too dangerous and unpredictible.

Casshew
11-12-2005, 02:42 PM
I've always been a dog lover. I used to believe that it was the owner, not the dog -- not anymore, these dogs are just too dangerous and unpredictible.
It's true. The only way diehard Pitbull fans will be convinced is when their beloved pet turns on them or kills someone who was in the wrong place at the wrong time and then it is too late.

curlytone
11-12-2005, 03:57 PM
The following orginizations are against breed specific legislation:

Humane Society of the United States:
http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/dangerous_dogs.html

American Kennel Club:
http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/position_statements.cfm#dangerousdog

American Veterinary Medical Association:
http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/nov00/s111500c.asp

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/biteprevention.htm

Here is an article from Michigan State University - Detroit College of Law that looks at both sides of the issue:
http://www.animallaw.info/articles/aruslweiss2001.htm

If you don't want to believe me, fine. If you want to attack me, fine. If you want to refuse to explain why my points are invalid (with anything other than individual or groups of stories), fine. PLEASE explain why the above sources are wrong; "because CNN said so" doesn't count.

sandraladeda
11-12-2005, 04:36 PM
I believe there would be far more pit bull attacks if it were not for the fact that so many people fear the breed, and go out of their way to avoid them. If I see a pit bull, I gather my kids and/or dog, we turn and move in the opposite direction. My kids know what a pit bull looks like, and know to avoid them. If one moved into my neighborhood, we would avoid that home like the plague, and would be very vigilant in case that dog ever roamed free.

I get sick of hearing the cliche about "blaming the owner, not the breed". The reality is that there are people who are not completely responsible dog owners, no matter what the breed. However, irresponsible pit bull ownership is more likely to result in tragedy than irresponsible golden retriever ownership. I have a golden, and occasionally, he manages to escape from our yard. My greatest worry in this case is that he might get picked up by bylaw enforcement or get hit by a car. The last thing I worry about is him attacking or harming a person or another dog.

I just don't see what good qualities there are in a pit bull that make it worth the worry, or that cannot be found in another, safer breed.

IMHO

curlytone
11-12-2005, 05:43 PM
...If I see a pit bull, I gather my kids and/or dog, we turn and move in the opposite direction. My kids know what a pit bull looks like, and know to avoid them. If one moved into my neighborhood, we would avoid that home like the plague, and would be very vigilant in case that dog ever roamed free.
I hope that you are teaching them to avoid all large dogs, not just pit bulls, that they don't know. 85.3% of the dog realated deaths every year are the result of breeds other than pit bulls. It would also be wise to teach them how to properly interact with any dog. More tips for safety:
http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet_care/dog_care/stay_dog_bite_free/avoiding_dog_bites.html

Boatswain'sMate
11-12-2005, 07:36 PM
I hope that you are teaching them to avoid all large dogs, not just pit bulls, that they don't know. 85.3% of the dog realated deaths every year are the result of breeds other than pit bulls. It would also be wise to teach them how to properly interact with any dog. More tips for safety:
http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet_care/dog_care/stay_dog_bite_free/avoiding_dog_bites.html

curlytone, good job of hanging in there. I'd join you, but I've been there before and found that people will not be convinced by statistics and facts. Believe me, it's thousands and thousands of times more likely that they will be killed or injured by their neighbor than by his pit bull. It's just too emotional and scary, and there is so much misinformation out there, especially with the media calling every short-haired dog a pit bull.

Anyway, what's the point? As long as my sweet, sweet, docile, people-loving Vito can't read, people bashing pit bulls won't hurt his feelings.
And that's all I care about.

**All dogs should be confined or under their owner's control at all times.**

**I'm a veteran of a Golden Retriever bite. Control your animals!**

Txmom
11-12-2005, 08:48 PM
Last year we had an incident with the 2 pit bulls that lived behind our house, we live out in the country. The vet told me that at about 2 years of age their personality and aggressiveness would come out. He also said that since the dogs had come onto our property and attacked our dog, but they didnt kill her, they would be back to finish the job. He told me that they only thing that I could do was to have a gun ready and kill the pits first and ask questions later.

SadieMae
11-12-2005, 09:07 PM
Nope. Wrangler is right. A well-bred Pitbull is one of the most docile (to humans anyway), playful, loyal dogs a person could own. They are very active and requite LOTS of exercise and playtime and even climb trees.

I had a wonderful pitbull who died of a heart attack a few months ago. My brother used to be a breeder and still owns his stud and one of his daughters. My children have done to them what children always do (pull ears, jump on them...) and they take it like it's a big game.

It is true that unscrupulous breeders inbreed and the results can be disastrous. It gives the whole breed a bad name. But if you are lucky enough to know one that is well bred, then you know that most pitbulls are just happy-go-lucky little clowns. (Just keep them away from other animals! They DO NOT have to be trained or given weird things to make them want to fight other dogs. They were bred like that and it's hundreds of years of instinct that make them do it).
I totally agree with the breeding issue giving the dogs a bad name and have posted that on another thread about pit bulls. Many pit bulls in the news for attacks are most like NOT from a reputable breeder. They were backyard/inbred bred dogs. All dogs have traits and characteristics inherent to their breed that cannot be "trained" out of the dog and a responsible owner will know those when selecting a breed for a pet. :laugh: For instance, I could never train my 160 lb Great Dane to be an attack/watch dog...it just AIN'T in him!!!

Sassygerl
11-12-2005, 09:10 PM
Remember sweet Petey the Pit bull???...he was in The Little Rascals and was so cute with the circle around one eye. What has happened? Is it the media...the inbreeding or were there not such attacks years ago?

I remember back in the late 70's it was the Dobie.

It seems a far stretch to ban them simply because there are so many pit mixes! Also, I do know people who own the breed and they are great dogs. While many make great family pets, there are those that turn (minimal to how many there are) I personally don't want my children around them, and won't have one, but realistically I know they're around, and always will be more than likely. I can tell you that many Pits when they get their Rabies are listed as "mixed breed" on their certificates. It's true.

I have no doubt there are many, many harmless Pits......but when they do attack it's vicious. And from many stories I've read it's always "he was such a wonderful family pet for 8 years" until he attacked! It's scary. I think though that the media tends to run the most sensational attacks. And as evidenced by the number of messages in this thread, it's obviously a hot button in our soceity.

As far as another thread regarding a Pit killing cats....every large breed has the instinct to chase and kill prey. It's their natural pride. I can assure you I was horrified when my Golden killed a cat right in front of my eyes and I had to take in all her babies who were weeks old. This dog (who has passed on) never had an aggressive bone in him until he saw that cat! I now have another Golden and he would certainly kill a cat given the opportunity...as well as my lab/heeler mix. Thankfully, my tabby cat stands her ground!!!!

forthekids
11-12-2005, 09:23 PM
editing to add: you know why so many horrible people gravitate toward owning pitbulls? because it makes them feel tough and "gansta" Idiots.

There are many good stories. I've read of pits jumping into rushing rivers to pull their little charges out of the water. They can be wonderful dogs.

My great grandparents lived out on a very large farm. We recently discovered an old photo of all the extended family posing out on the front porch and front grounds of the house. Alongside the family is a pitbull. (I never knew!) My grandma remembered that the dog used to come to the door of the kitchen every day right before lunch, and her mom would fix Pop's lunch in a pail, give it to the dog and the dog would run out into the fields and deliver the lunch to Pop. After lunch, he'd bring the pail back to the house so it could be washed! What a smart dog!
Kgeaux:
Oh what a neat story from your past! :D Thanks so much for sharing! Always nice to hear good things too....(my biggest prob. with the media is that newsworthy often equals something bad. So often we never see the great things about life and society). Thanks again!

forthekids
11-12-2005, 09:38 PM
I totally agree with the breeding issue giving the dogs a bad name and have posted that on another thread about pit bulls. Many pit bulls in the news for attacks are most like NOT from a reputable breeder. They were backyard/inbred bred dogs. All dogs have traits and characteristics inherent to their breed that cannot be "trained" out of the dog and a responsible owner will know those when selecting a breed for a pet. :laugh: For instance, I could never train my 160 lb Great Dane to be an attack/watch dog...it just AIN'T in him!!!
Yeah, I hear ya on that SadieMae! It is so sad to see how many dog shelter's there are out there...you know these homeless and often euthanized pooches come from backyard breeders too! I have a friend who was planning to foster a litter of pit bull pups with an organization that rescues pit bulls and rotweillers (sp?), but the woman who was going to turn them over to this organization is changing her mind (and seems have some illegal substance abuse issues) because she wants to sell them instead. This is how it all begins. I'm just horrified to know who will likely get these pups...:(

I really give this org. credit too, not only are they simply taking these abused/neglected dogs in, but they fully assess their aggressiveness by trained professionals, have a VERY tough process to adopt these dogs, and have their own trainers that know how to work with these breeds. (Pit bulls are naturally dog aggressive and they make sure potential owners know this and take necessary precaustions). They also make the adopters go to training and become more educated on how to care for these dogs along with paying for them to get spayed and neutered.

Thanks for the post.

Juan Martinez
11-12-2005, 09:43 PM
well. i am glad to see where everybody tends to get the wrong information about the american pit bull terrier.

for one, the APBT was NOT made up in the past 30 some odd years, they were recognized by the UKC in 1898 and were even around before then.

second, the APBT was NEVER bred to be human aggressive, and in fact are very much so predictable. inexperienced dog owners dont bother educating themselfs before they decide on owning or breeding such dogs, so you will end up with dogs of any breed that are in fact unpredictable.

i have been around and owned the APBT for the past 18 years, i have also been working with and showing the APBT for the past 4 years, not ONCE in my whole time dealing with this breed of dog has ANY APBT attacked my child or family member or ANY human friend or foe...

its sad to see ANY story seeing children being attacked and or humans in general. "I" personally have been attacked by a LAB..he basicly punctured my right hand in 4 different areas, i wasnt doing anything but playing baseball at the local park...the dog didnt like the idea of me taking the baseball and went for me...do "I" blame the whole breed ...NO i simply blame the owner for allowing such dog to roam the parks off the leash KNOWING the dog is in fact human aggressive.

also i suggest to most of you, before you go off labeling a whole breed, is maybe educate yourselfs more on the breed, what was their inteded purposes and WHY they SHOULDNT be dog aggressive and how it was in fact impossile for them to be human aggressive with the kind of work they had these dogs doing.

i find it sad how there are MANY dog attacks accross the country, but the media tends to ONLY publish the attacks that will obviously make headlines, such as APBT's. i have been around all different types of breeds, im sorry folks, but this breed is something NOT to be banning, i have seen and ran into many OTHER breeds of dogs that are truely unstable. this is one breed that is being misguided by the general public and most of all the uneducated. just by seeing some of these comments, i KNOW most of you have no clue about this breed...and it honestly sadens me how you wont bother to educate yourself either.

just remember, after the APBT is gone...these thugs and wanna be dogmen will just simply get a different breed of dog...

i can teach a giant poodle to attack people...and if i let him or her loose out in the park and the said dogs rips the face off of some child...it would never even touch the local newspaper...none the less be brought up on national TV.

i also forgot to add, inbreeding and linebreeding are TWO different methods in breeding...they are NOT the same...in fact linebreeding is a great tool to use for ANY breeding program, as well as outcrossing. inbreeding can be a great tool as well, HOWEVER an unexperienced breeder should NOT be using ANY practices what so ever...

the UNEDUCATED and the misinformed are the problems...not breeding practices...just because you bred fifi and fofo in your backyard does NOT make you an expert in breeding. it takes years and dedication on educating yourself about genetics and the breed itself.

forthekids
11-12-2005, 09:51 PM
[QUOTE=Casshew]forthekids... curly is a name on an internet message board - the news media is the news media, responsible for what they print. I am posting article after article - mainstream news.

Hence, the articles are more reliable than what cury is posting IMO

-------------------

Casshew:
You are right, curly is just a name on an internet board, but he/she seems to be supporting his/her argument with statics that seem much more reliable than the media. (fyi-I'm an academic jounal and research junkie) Whether I'm for or against this issue doesn't matter, from reading his/her posts curly seems to be substanciating the argument through research. I do think that the AKC, National Humane Society and some other sources are much more responsible for what they write than the media.
So, even though curly is formulating an argument in something he/she believes in, it is much more supported than simply stating that information is from firsthand experience or within the news (not saying that this is invalid, just long term research is much more valid).

I guess overall, regardless of your view, curly does make a good argument mainly due to research supporting his/her statements. Ya have to appreciate the work that has gone into that!:o

Casshew
11-12-2005, 09:52 PM
"I" personally have been attacked by a LAB..he basicly punctured my right hand in 4 different areas, i wasnt doing anything but playing baseball at the local park...the dog didnt like the idea of me taking the baseball and went for me...

Did this Lab try to rip your throat out? kill you? were you able to defend yourself against it? did he back off after biting? Did the police have to come and rescue you? Did someone have to shoot it 4 times in the head to stop the attack?

Juan Martinez
11-12-2005, 09:56 PM
Did this Lab try to rip your throat out? kill you? were you able to defend yourself against it? did he back off after biting? Did the police have to come and rescue you? Did someone have to shoot it 4 times in the head to stop the attack? i weigh 220 pounds...i had a hard time getting away from this dog at the time.

MY "pit bulls" have NEVER done this thing to me nor my child or any other human being within the past 18 years...

let me ask you something...can you honestly tell the difference between a pure bred APBT and a american bulldog? werent you one of the people who all of a sudden became an expert dealing with APBT's by saying they only been around for 30 years??? do you have a clue?

and i have YET to see a story of an APBT ripping the throats of some grown man....

Casshew
11-12-2005, 10:01 PM
werent you one of the people who all of a sudden became an expert dealing with APBT's by saying they only been around for 30 years??? do you have a clue?
No, I never said anything like that. I have no idea how long the breed has been around.

I had two bad attacks in my neighbourhood, one killing a 13 year old girl who had her throat torn out. Another was a very serious injury to a 5 year old girl who was out walking with her mom and 3 year old sister.

I follow cases of pit bull attacks or pit bull mix, attacks.

I am well aware that biting is a natural behavior in all dogs and smaller dogs can bite even more. Having said that, deaths or greivious injuries do not usually occur with most breeds as they do with Pits & pit mixes.

Thankfully I live where this breed is banned and it is my hope that many communites will take on this legislation.

Casshew
11-12-2005, 10:07 PM
Ya have to appreciate the work that has gone into that!:o
LOL they are as tenatious as a pit bull! :D

Juan Martinez
11-12-2005, 10:12 PM
No, I never said anything like that. I have no idea how long the breed has been around.

I had two bad attacks in my neighbourhood, one killing a 13 year old girl who had her throat torn out. Another was a very serious injury to a 5 year old girl who was out walking with her mom and 3 year old sister.

I follow cases of pit bull attacks or pit bull mix, attacks.

I am well aware that biting is a natural behavior in all dogs and smaller dogs can bite even more. Having said that, deaths or greivious injuries do not usually occur with most breeds as they do with Pits & pit mixes.

Thankfully I live where this breed is banned and it is my hope that many communites will take on this legislation. have you ever heard of the canary dog? or for which the name that is commonly used the presa canario? or how bout the cane corso?

all these dogs HAVE killed people in the past and with the most recent attack held in san fransisco.

again, your theory is flawed just by the simple fact, this breed was NEVER bred for human aggression. have you ever bothered to look at the breeds description that is listed in registries? such as the UKC and the AKC?

that human aggression that is being displayed by these so called pit bulls simply QUESTIONS THE FACT if they are even pure bred!!!

there was a fad that was developed by morons years ago...they tried to come up with color fads and one of them were in fact called "merles"...this color gene could NEVER pop up within the APBT, but yet these guys were breeding the APBT to the catahoula hog dog...which HAS been bred to be human aggro. you can see evidence of such breeders by looking at their websites, they usually have in big bold lettering "blues for sale" or "merle pit bulls for sale"

by that alone, that is proof its NOT the APBT, but ignorant breeders and owners who are to blame....they are breeding mutts..not APBT's..and its NOT the APBT gene that is causing the human aggression...look into those breed descritions..and take the time to educate yourself before you cast your hate all in one direction.

again, i have taken the time to educate myself about this breed for years, and i have been around it for allot longer...so you would think what i am saying should be taken into consideration...

ALSO i encourage you to look on the ATTS website, which they have on RECORD, how this breeds temperament actually compares to others...here is their website: atts.org

Casshew
11-12-2005, 10:23 PM
again, i have taken the time to educate myself about this breed for years, and i have been around it for allot longer...so you would think what i am saying should be taken into consideration... and thats probably why you're not dead

and I am terrified of this breed and thats probably why I'm not dead - because I am informed and careful.

A 13 year old girl - with her whole life ahead of her - was torn apart in a park - are you so desensitzed that you cannot feel the horror of that situation - instead of turning to books and statistics and surveys to try defend these monsters?

Sorry, you are barking up the wrong tree - IMO, there is no place for an animal like this in communites with children.

You can go back to your books and articles and studies - all the information is not helpful to anyone facing reconstructive surgery or a grieving parents who's child was savaged under a swing set.

Juan Martinez
11-12-2005, 10:26 PM
and thats probably why you're not dead

and I am terrified of this breed and thats probably why I'm not dead - because I am informed and careful.

A 13 year old girl - with her whole life ahead of her - was torn apart in a park - are you so desensitzed that you cannot feel the horror of that situation - instead of turning to books and statistics and surveys to try defend these monsters?

Sorry, you are barking up the wrong tree - IMO, there is no place for an animal like this in communites with children.

You can go back to your books and articles and studies - all the information is not helpful to anyone facing reconstructive surgery or a grieving parents who's child was savaged under a swing set. you arent READING what i am saying...you continue to say its the "pit bull's fault" but what i am trying to tell you is thats its NOT...i will bet my whole paycheck that was NOT a purebred APBT...again...its not within their natural instinct to be human aggressive...what dont you get about it?

and i am alive because i deal with PURE BRED AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIERS...not these mutts perclaiming to be "pit bulls"

poor breeding practices and ignorant owners are to blame...not the dogs...

most of those people cant even tell if the dog has a bad temperament let alone being bred.

and you are not informed...you are strongly misinformed...

and these so called monsters have better temperaments than the saint bernard..and are in fact better than MOST breeds...

and just like any other large breed of dog, most people dont even qulify in my book to be rightfull owners of said breed or any large breed of dog for that matter.

yet you have NO CLUE how long this breed has been in existance...but yet, you KNOW they are monsters...very interesting...and you call that being informed?

SnootyVixen
11-12-2005, 10:27 PM
Notice these attacks seem to happen when there are more than one pit bull in the household. Sometimes it could be one pit bull, but dogs of other breeds in the house. ?

I Think you have got it correct here BarnGoddess. I know of friends two little tiny dogs. Each time they run to bark at someone or dog they go into a freak frenzy condition and then turn on each other and fight themselves!! And harm themselfs badly, one time an eyeball out on the face.
And they are the tiny Yorkshire Terriers. Most time they love each other.

Casshew
11-12-2005, 10:36 PM
Thats very true, many attacks are multiple dogs. They work each other up into a frenzy. Very dangerous.

Sassygerl
11-12-2005, 10:39 PM
Thats very true, many attacks are multiple dogs. They work each other up into a frenzy. Very dangerous.

Yeah, the "pack" mentality is scary!!!! When you have owners who are not the "alpha male" in the dog's eyes, there will be trouble....regardless of the breed. We have 3 males dogs, and we definitely are the "alpha male" in their eyes. If not, they will take over and bad things happen!

SadieMae
11-12-2005, 10:40 PM
...

the UNEDUCATED and the misinformed are the problems...not breeding practices...just because you bred fifi and fofo in your backyard does NOT make you an expert in breeding. it takes years and dedication on educating yourself about genetics and the breed itself.
That's what I'm talking about! :) But sadly I don't think that's being done and therin lies the problem. People are buying those fifi and fofo dogs and they are about as uneducated about the breed as the people they buy the dogs from.

Casshew
11-12-2005, 10:46 PM
Even my cats get like that (I have 3) when our dog barks at something - all the cats come out going psycho - it is probably just instinctive behavior.

(Disclaimer: My cats have never killed anyone)

Juan Martinez
11-12-2005, 10:50 PM
That's what I'm talking about! :) But sadly I don't think that's being done and therin lies the problem. People are buying those fifi and fofo dogs and they are about as uneducated about the breed as the people they buy the dogs from. if the government wants to make a difference, what they need to do INSTEAD of destroying a WHOLE breed of dog..is make more restrictions on the breeders...have them cover qualifications prior to any breeding, such as TT/CGC test the sire and dam prior to any breeding, also have health test requirements, such as OFA/PENNHIP, and have limited breedings per year.

MOST ethical and reputable breeders do these things already...so it shouldnt effect the "good" people, but in fact shows who the bad people are...

and this should be for every breed of dog...NOT just the APBT/AMSTAFF.

i know of breeders that keep track of every single dog that they have produced from their kennel, not ONE has ever showed any signs of aggression towards humans, and if so...they would cull the dog and would spay and or neuture every dog in that dogs litter and wont ever breed that sire and or dam ever again....and these people have been breeding these dogs for well over 20 years...responsibly

again, just by attacking the breed WONT solve the problem...they will simply get a bigger and badder breed of dog...and believe me they are out there!!!

just like how they moved from the GSD, to the DOBE and ROTT and now finally they have moved onto the APBT/AMSTAFF...when will anybody see what is actually going on..and who is actually to blame!!!