Why do people still think that these ferocious dog breeds are safe and should be tolerated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I think pit bulls and bull terriers are often confused. They are different dogs. The more posts, the more amazed I am at how truly ignorant so many are here - blissfully so, unfortunately.

I tend to see that people are either dog people or not. Those I know who do not like digs really don't like people, either.

Actually I love dogs. I have an airedale terrier. They can be aggressive. I have to be careful with him. he wears a muzzle in public. He is never off leash in public. But pit bulls and the others on the list? Put them down and ban 'em I say. The mixed breeds will eventually die out. I don't like people that put dog's rights ahead of people's. I think that is just wacko. You're wacko if you can't see the public safer imperative of this. Priorities people. You want to ban SUVs too? Oh brother, get a grip.

I just checked out the site recommended by a pp that shows breed results for temperament tests. Are you aware that Airedale terriers are actually less likely to pass the test than American pit bulls or Staffordshire pitbulls?

http://atts.org/breed-statistics/statistics-page1/

77.5% of the Airedales passed.
86.4% of the American pit bulls passed.
84.2% of the American Staffordshire pit bulls passed.

Now, I don't know if those differences are actually statistically significant so I can't tell you that this means that Airedales are more likely to be difficult dogs (the test is not just about aggression) but clearly there is no evidence that they have better temperaments than pit bulls. So if I were you, I'd be careful about making broad generalizations about breeds because based on this your dog should be banned before my pitbull mix!

At any rate, pp, you and I both believe in controlling our dogs and preventing accidents so we're on the same page there. I think the most important thing is owner responsibility.

[Anonymous]

I know about the jaw myth. Spare me. I also know that they have extremely thick skulls and very strong shoulders (because they were bred initially for bear baiting) which makes them VERY difficult to fight off. A retriever has a relatively softer and smaller head...which makes them relatively easy to fight off with some well-aimed punches and kicks. Again, I ask, how would you defend a child that was attacked by your dog?

My pit bull plays with goldens and is routinely overpowered by them. Have you ever witnessed a pit bull and a golden play?

Can I just say it is a weird mentality to think about fighting off a dog? I don't think about kicking dogs in the head. Instead, I train my dogs and treat them kindly, and they do the same. They go to obedience classes and are trained at home. When I need to verbally correct my dog for getting into the trash, etc. they respond extremely well - typically sulking and walking away. If my dogs get to bouncy or licky around kids, I say "Leave it." and they walk away. So, I guess that is how I would defend a child. Wow - training works!! The fact that you assume my dog would attack a child is the bigotry I first spoke off. But, I am all for you not having a pit bull if you feel you cannot handle one. Seriously.

[Anonymous]

fwiw, "pit bull" is not a breed. I do not own a pit bull. I do have an American Staffordshire Terrier that we rescued from a person who was going to have to have him euthanized due to breed specific legislation.

[Anonymous]

At any rate, pp, you and I both believe in controlling our dogs and preventing accidents so we're on the same page there. I think the most important thing is owner responsibility.

So, true for any breed. Not just pit bulls. I just don't understand why people are hell bent on making pit bulls the villains.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Oh lordy.


"Of the 88 fatal dog attacks recorded by DogsBite.org, pit bull type dogs were responsible for 59% (52). This is equivalent to a pit bull killing a U.S. citizen every 21 days during this 3-year period"


How bout them facts?

What exactly is a "pit bull type dog"? I guess an american bull terrier, bull dog, boxer, Argentine mastiff all qualify as "pit bull type"? Nice definition of a "breed." I can't even take this site seriously since they don't even know what a pit bull is. Any scientist who conducts research with fidelity and integrity gets their subject well defined. Number one rule.

Because "pit bull" is not a breed dummy, it actually IS a type, which the studies define. Anyway, here are some more studies...with citations.

http://dogbitelaw.com/dog-bite-statistics/the-breeds-most-likely-to-kill.html

"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities." (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)

http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-study-dog-attacks-and-maimings-merritt-clifton.php
"The combination of pit bulls, rottweilers, their close mixes and wolf hybrids:
77% of attacks that induce bodily harm
73% of attacks to children
81% of attack to adults
68% of attacks that result in fatalities
76% that result in maiming
Discussion notes:
Even if the pit bull category was "split three ways," attacks by pit bulls and their closest relatives would still outnumber attacks by any other breed.
Pit bulls are noteworthy for attacking adults almost as frequently as children, a characteristic not shared by any other breed.
If a pit bull or rottweiler has a bad moment, instead of being bitten, often someone is maimed or killed; that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk."

There's an excellent chart that I can't paste correctly, but you can see it broken down into different categories.


Breed Bodily harm Child Victims Adult Victims Deaths Maimings % of dog population
Pit bull terrier 1970 826 687 207 1093 .033
Rottweiler 481 272 126 78 268 .003
Husky 66 41 4 22 18 .020
Wolf hybrid 84 69 5 19 48 .001
Bullmastiff (Presa canario) 76 30 28 11 44 .002
German shepherd 89 56 25 12 54 .014
German shepherd-mix 54 33 14 9 32
Pit bull-mix 130 56 31 8 74
Akita 65 42 19 8 47 .004
Chow 54 36 15 7 36 .007
Doberman 15 8 7 7 7 .007

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I know about the jaw myth. Spare me. I also know that they have extremely thick skulls and very strong shoulders (because they were bred initially for bear baiting) which makes them VERY difficult to fight off. A retriever has a relatively softer and smaller head...which makes them relatively easy to fight off with some well-aimed punches and kicks. Again, I ask, how would you defend a child that was attacked by your dog?

My pit bull plays with goldens and is routinely overpowered by them. Have you ever witnessed a pit bull and a golden play?

Can I just say it is a weird mentality to think about fighting off a dog? I don't think about kicking dogs in the head. Instead, I train my dogs and treat them kindly, and they do the same. They go to obedience classes and are trained at home. When I need to verbally correct my dog for getting into the trash, etc. they respond extremely well - typically sulking and walking away. If my dogs get to bouncy or licky around kids, I say "Leave it." and they walk away. So, I guess that is how I would defend a child. Wow - training works!! The fact that you assume my dog would attack a child is the bigotry I first spoke off. But, I am all for you not having a pit bull if you feel you cannot handle one. Seriously.

Hopefully your hubris doesn't get someone hurt. EVERY DOG is capable of attacking someone. The fact that you assume your dog WON'T is ignorant and foolhardy.

[Anonymous]

Because "pit bull" is not a breed dummy, it actually IS a type, which the studies define. Anyway, here are some more studies...with citations.

http://dogbitelaw.com/dog-bite-statistics/the-breeds-most-likely-to-kill.html

"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities." (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)

http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-study-...d-maimings-merritt-clifton.php
"The combination of pit bulls, rottweilers, their close mixes and wolf hybrids:
77% of attacks that induce bodily harm
73% of attacks to children
81% of attack to adults
68% of attacks that result in fatalities
76% that result in maiming
Discussion notes:
Even if the pit bull category was "split three ways," attacks by pit bulls and their closest relatives would still outnumber attacks by any other breed.
Pit bulls are noteworthy for attacking adults almost as frequently as children, a characteristic not shared by any other breed.
If a pit bull or rottweiler has a bad moment, instead of being bitten, often someone is maimed or killed; that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk."

There's an excellent chart that I can't paste correctly, but you can see it broken down into different categories.


Breed Bodily harm Child Victims Adult Victims Deaths Maimings % of dog population
Pit bull terrier 1970 826 687 207 1093 .033
Rottweiler 481 272 126 78 268 .003
Husky 66 41 4 22 18 .020
Wolf hybrid 84 69 5 19 48 .001
Bullmastiff (Presa canario) 76 30 28 11 44 .002
German shepherd 89 56 25 12 54 .014
German shepherd-mix 54 33 14 9 32
Pit bull-mix 130 56 31 8 74
Akita 65 42 19 8 47 .004
Chow 54 36 15 7 36 .007
Doberman 15 8 7 7 7 .007

I was called a "dummy"! We must be in kindergarten! Yes, did you not see I have an American Pit Bull Terrier and a Staffordshire Terrier? Surprise, I know a thing or two about "pit bulls"!

You realize you are referring an attorney site. More sensationalism and a link to litigation forms, nice. They say pit bull-type and later say pit bull terrier, which is it? It sure is convenient to use vague terminology when doing fuzzy math. I could rip this whole article to shreds, but I am not going to waste my time. Your mind is set. I can't change it and am tired of wasting my time. I can only hope one day you actually interact with a "pit bull-type" dog and realize just how crazy your prejudice is. I have experience with pit bulls, and you do not. I think that is why we have different opinions.

[Anonymous]

so those people who died were attacked by.....

toy poodles?

[Anonymous]

Hopefully your hubris doesn't get someone hurt. EVERY DOG is capable of attacking someone. The fact that you assume your dog WON'T is ignorant and foolhardy.

My point is every dog is capable of harm, that is why it is upsetting that pit bulls are being targeted. To reduce the likelihood of problems, you train your dog, be a responsible owner and treat the animals with kindness. What I am seeing, are a bunch of people being terribly unkind and spitting venom about pit bulls. Again, I have experience with pit bulls, and most (if not all) of the people spitting venom have not. I think that is why our opinions differ. Much prejudice is out of fear and a lack of experience.

[Anonymous]

For the anti-pit bull among you, please take a few minutes to read this blog post from the Washington Animal Rescue League:

http://blog.warl.org/blog-posts/the-pit-bull-dilemma/

When we adopted our first dog in 2002, we adopted from WARL. We returned there in 2008 after he died, and pit mixes were pretty much all they had. So for those of us who wish to adopt a homeless dog rather than perpetuate the overpopulation of dogs by going to a breeder, pit mixes are almost the only option in the DC area.

So when you see someone with a pit, or a pit mix, your first thoughts should be "they cared enough to rescue a homeless dog; what a lucky dog to have a caring person" NOT "they think they are so cool or OMG that is an attack dog". And if the dog isn't well trained, blame the person, not the dog. Think about what you are doing to goad the dog. Is your dog on leash and under control? Did your ankle biter dog lock eye contact and threaten my dog? Is your child holding a yummy treat right in front of my dog's nose? Did you approach me in a way that my (very loyal) dog found threatening?

Yes, big dogs can inflict more damage than a small dog. But small dogs are more likely to be ill trained and a menace.

My dog has never bitten my child. She HAS been bitten several times by a classmate. No one is suggesting that we euthanize preschoolers who bite.

As for the "kill instinct"... our pit mix managed to catch a young bird that wasn't ready to fly. She walked around with the bird in her mouth not sure what to do with it. We told her to drop it, and the bird hopped away. Not exactly a kill instinct, IMHO.

[Anonymous]

Every dog is capable of harm, some more harm than others.


You are in deep deep denial my friend.

[Anonymous]

As for the "kill instinct"... our pit mix managed to catch a young bird that wasn't ready to fly. She walked around with the bird in her mouth not sure what to do with it. We told her to drop it, and the bird hopped away. Not exactly a kill instinct, IMHO.

Mine both tried to catch a cricket. They put it in their mouths, walked around for a while, and then dropped it. The cricket did meet and untimely death...at the jaws of my frog!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the anti-pit bull among you, please take a few minutes to read this blog post from the Washington Animal Rescue League:

http://blog.warl.org/blog-posts/the-pit-bull-dilemma/

When we adopted our first dog in 2002, we adopted from WARL. We returned there in 2008 after he died, and pit mixes were pretty much all they had. So for those of us who wish to adopt a homeless dog rather than perpetuate the overpopulation of dogs by going to a breeder, pit mixes are almost the only option in the DC area.

So when you see someone with a pit, or a pit mix, your first thoughts should be "they cared enough to rescue a homeless dog; what a lucky dog to have a caring person" NOT "they think they are so cool or OMG that is an attack dog". And if the dog isn't well trained, blame the person, not the dog. Think about what you are doing to goad the dog. Is your dog on leash and under control? Did your ankle biter dog lock eye contact and threaten my dog? Is your child holding a yummy treat right in front of my dog's nose? Did you approach me in a way that my (very loyal) dog found threatening?

Yes, big dogs can inflict more damage than a small dog. But small dogs are more likely to be ill trained and a menace.

My dog has never bitten my child. She HAS been bitten several times by a classmate. No one is suggesting that we euthanize preschoolers who bite.

As for the "kill instinct"... our pit mix managed to catch a young bird that wasn't ready to fly. She walked around with the bird in her mouth not sure what to do with it. We told her to drop it, and the bird hopped away. Not exactly a kill instinct, IMHO.

This is what is so infuriating to me about some dog owners. I have owned many dogs, and I just ASSUME that most people DON'T know how to act with dogs and act accordingly. Why would you let a kid approach with a treat? If your VERY loyal dog is easily threatened, why are you walking in a crowded place? It's this attitude that I think is responsible for a lot of preventable dog accidents. JMO.

The thing is, I support the adoption of undesirable breeds. I don't support this idea that they're only undesirable because of myths. I don't think people that underestimate their dogs should own them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

a shining example of the ways the people have personified their pets. We're not bigots because we think owning a dog that could easily kill a child is not worth the risk, no matter how sweet the dog is in temperament. I might be a bigot if I hated all people that owned pits though....maybe.

So, specifically, what characteristics make a dog less risky? I guess everyone should get toothless dogs that weigh no more than 5 lbs. if you don't want to runt he risk of a child being killed.

Again, by definition, a bigot a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

You are obstinately intolerant of a specific breed of dog, pit bull. That is bigotry. 1+1 = 2

You're joking right? You don't see how a pit bull is more likely to kill a kid in an attack than say, a retriever? Really? That's actually frightening, considering you own one. How would you defend a child if your dog suddenly lost it and, out of character, attacked them? Would you be able to stop it? I'm not sure I'd be able to, and that's why I don't own one. It's pretty simple really. Not bigotry, just common sense.

A golden once was determined to kill my Yorkie, and completely unprovoked I might add. Snuck up on her, and tried to shake the life out of her. Luckily, we were right there to intervene. This topic isn't so black and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the anti-pit bull among you, please take a few minutes to read this blog post from the Washington Animal Rescue League:

http://blog.warl.org/blog-posts/the-pit-bull-dilemma/

When we adopted our first dog in 2002, we adopted from WARL. We returned there in 2008 after he died, and pit mixes were pretty much all they had. So for those of us who wish to adopt a homeless dog rather than perpetuate the overpopulation of dogs by going to a breeder, pit mixes are almost the only option in the DC area.

.

Is this the same WARL that I adopted my supposedly SPAYED cat from that turned out NOT TO BE SPAYED AT ALL AND THEREFORE HAD KITTENS? Yeah, thought so. Screw those guys, man.