Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Conversely, my shelter dog who for 10 years I believed to be a 'pit bull' (not actually a breed) is actually a 75/25 boxer-bulldog mix. All dogs are individuals. I've met Goldens who would rather bite a stranger's hand off than be pet by them, it just depends on the dog's early exposures and current management in combination with their genetic temperament.

This is such a disingenuous argument, everyone knows what a person means by "pit bull", just like everyone knows what you mean by "chihuahua", or "Old English Sheep Dog" or "Collie". However, if you want to pick this term apart, you can refer to "Pit Bull Type" dogs, which typically refers to four very closely related dog breeds: the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and the American Bully. The APBT and the Staffi are so closely related, they can be dual registered as AmStaff with AKC and APBT with UKC. Your anecdotal evidence of knowing a couple Golden Retrievers that would bite someone's hand does not change the fact that "Pit Bull Type" dogs commit most of the severe dog maulings and fatal attacks in this country. It is highly dependent on the dog's genetic temperament, and love does not change this. Pit Bull Type dogs are genetically prone to aggression. All dogs are not simply individuals, they are members of a breed that has certain physical and behavior characteristics. That is why you cannot teach a blood hound to guard sheep, or a Boston Terrier to herd cows.

This whole argument is based on the premise that all dogs are intentionally bred, which for most mutts is just so obviously not true. And even if it were - if there were a massive underground operation breeding pit bull mixes to fill suburban shelters - do you know how many dogs a dog fighter has to produce to end up with a handful that can/will fight?! Hundreds! And that is a human being specifically trying to create the most 'dangerous' pit bulls. I'm not going to argue with you that bully-type dogs are very strong; that many have high prey drives; and that their prevalence in shelters means that many of them are problematically under-socialized. But those are correlative, not causative, and could apply to any large-breed dog. Many rescues across the country are seeing a resurgence in problematic German Shepherds as those have become the 'protection' dogs of choice; personally, I don't trust GSDs around children. But I also believe that should problems occur, it is the fault of the owner/handler.

NP. Kind, responsible people aren't out there breeding these dogs. Pits are intentionally bred to fight, and if a pit isn't game enough for fighting for sport, some chump will adopt it from the shelter and let it snuggle with the kiddos, because they don't believe in genetics. For every Golden who would rather bite a stranger's hand than pet them, there are 10 pit bulls that would rather just kill that Golden at the dog park, then rip the face off your toddler. Statistically, they are far, far more likely to kill and maim than any other breed, and not every pit owner is a bad person or bad pet owner; it's just the breed's nature.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/09/13/americas-most-dangerous-dog-breeds-infographic/?sh=1fb597f962f8

https://i0.wp.com/www.animals24-7.org/wp-content/uploads/PicsArt_07-06-06.58.31.jpg?w=742&ssl=1" border="0" class="embeddedImage" />

Using this info, we can do some rough math.

Let’s say there are 35,700 Rottweilers in the us. In a 13 year span, there were 45 fatal Rottweiler attacks. So in one year, there were 45/13= 3.46 attacks. Out of 35,700 Rottweilers, that would be 3.46/35700 = 0.0097 % = one in 10,313 chance of a Rottweiler killing someone.

Let’s say there are 152,678 pit/pit mixes in the us. In a 13 year span, there were 284 fatal attacks. So in one year, there are 284/13 = 21.85 attacks. Out of 152,678 pit/mixes, that would be a 21.85/152,678 = 0.014% = one in 6989 chance of a pit/pit mix killing someone.

Let’s say there are 119,680 labs and Goldens in the us. And of these let’s assume 65% are labs, so 71,808. In a 13 year span, there are 9 fatal attacks. So in one year, there are 9/13 = 0.69 attacks. Out of 71,808 labs, that would be a 0.69/71,808 = 0.00096% = one in 103,723 chance of killing someone.

Rottweiler - 1:10,313 chance
Pit/pit mix -1:6,989 chance
Lab - 1:103,723 chance

Obviously this a rough calculation, but we make do with the numbers we have. Pits are ~15x more likely to fatally attack than a lab in the us.

Does this mean they should banned? Rottweilers are 10 times more likely to kill someone vs a lab, but there aren’t as many people out there advocating a ban on them. How many deaths are too many? If it were one, then all dogs would be banned. In any case, it’s always helpful to have a per capita number to compare, not just absolutes.

Most pit mixes are 100% pit but the owners are in denial. I literally ask people if they pits or pit mixes before I send my children over. You can call me crazy, I don't care.

Would you be OK with a pit bull mix that does growl

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People will come out of the wood work here to defend pit bulls but the reality is they were bred for certain traits and they all have the potential to be unsafe. I too know someone who was mauled by one, no warning and they did nothing to provoke it. I wouldn't let one of those murder machines into my home if you paid me and I don't let me kid get near them either.

what traits? Other than being muscular dogs I don’t think they have other traits that other dogs don’t have.

Pointers were bred to point, border collies were bred to herd, and retrievers were bred to retrieve. You can try all you want, but you aren't going to teach an English Setter to herd sheep better than a border collie. Pitbulls were bred to fight and enjoy it. They are bred for "gameness", to bite, not let go, and enjoy it. They were bred to not give the traditional signs of escalating aggression, (a snarl, a growl, an airsnap), and to jump right to the bite, hold, and shake. There is often no clear warning when a pitbull is about to attack, when compared to normal dog behavior. That's why, during a pitbull attack, people can beat a pitbull with a baseball ball ( https://nypost.com/2019/10/02/bronx-man-says-he-hit-pit-bull-with-baseball-bat-20-times-to-stop-attack-on-4-year-old/ ), hit it over the head with the leg from a wheelchair ( https://www.local10.com/news/local/2020/09/02/dog-owner-recounts-attack-that-killed-his-mom-and-sent-him-to-hospital/ ) or the cops can show up in the middle of a mauling and taze a pitbull ( https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/outreach/back-to-school/arkansas-man-mauled-to-death-by-pack-of-pit-bulls-authorities-say/527-5a6ffda1-626e-4be9-9c60-e6be6ab056db ), and the dog will continue to fight and try to kill. Goldens love to retrieve, and a biting pitbull is in its element. Pictures of pitbulls in flower crowns or tutus do not negate that these are dangerous animals. Any animal can bite, but no one compares a mosquito bite to a shark bite. Other dogs can bite, but a vast majority of maiming and fatal dog attacks are from pitbulls and their mixes.

First of all, when pit bulls were bred this was true but, don't you thinkk that since 1800 these genes were basically bred out of it? Also, if they don't give any warning it is purely because they were punished for doing so. My pit mix certainly gives plenty of warning!

No, I don't think that because I know there has been no concerted effort to cull and breed out gameness. They continue to be the dog of choice for dogfighting, which happens a lot unfortunately. You can look at tons of breeders showing off their puppies dangling from ropes to demonstrate their gameness. Ironically, the breeders tend to be the most realistic about these dogs and they are happy to show off how aggressive and game they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/dog-kills-illinois-toddler-after-she-crawled-too-close-to-food-bowl?fbclid=IwAR3oLzd5-YzzCt-RNtpX7kJwK0292oP2tktN7Y2Ex3ijtECexxJaTF_Kbds

And here we go again. A pit mix that had never shown signs of aggression before, killed a one-year-old who got too close to his food bowl as The sweet baby girl was just toddling in the kitchen.

I posted on another thread about a friend of mine who was taking care of her father’s sweet pitbull who never showed signs of aggression, while her father was in the hospital. Dog was so sweet she was even considering adopting the dog when her father passed. One day when she was feeding it, the dog without any warning snapped and bit her in the face. Pitbull’s are sweet until they are not. I have a little miniature poodle, if he ever suddenly snaps (which is unimaginable because he’s a sweetie) I know that the damage he would inflict on me would be nowhere near as much damage as my friend got to her face. She had to get plastic surgery and she still has scars.

That is so sad. This is what happens when society puts dogs above people.

It wasn't society that put dogs ahead of people. Most people don't understand the warnings dogs give. If anything humans believe they are better and above all. Hence the state of the climate and the extinction of many animals

See but here’s where you’re wrong. Pit bulls don’t give warnings before attack. They don’t use attack like other dogs do, attack is fun for them. They have been known to go down into the play bow that dogs do before launching themselves onto victims. Violence is what they were bred for; it’s the work that brings them joy.

Anonymous wrote:People will come out of the wood work here to defend pit bulls but the reality is they were bred for certain traits and they all have the potential to be unsafe. I too know someone who was mauled by one, no warning and they did nothing to provoke it. I wouldn't let one of those murder machines into my home if you paid me and I don't let me kid get near them either.

It’s this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/dog-kills-illinois-toddler-after-she-crawled-too-close-to-food-bowl?fbclid=IwAR3oLzd5-YzzCt-RNtpX7kJwK0292oP2tktN7Y2Ex3ijtECexxJaTF_Kbds

And here we go again. A pit mix that had never shown signs of aggression before, killed a one-year-old who got too close to his food bowl as The sweet baby girl was just toddling in the kitchen.

I posted on another thread about a friend of mine who was taking care of her father’s sweet pitbull who never showed signs of aggression, while her father was in the hospital. Dog was so sweet she was even considering adopting the dog when her father passed. One day when she was feeding it, the dog without any warning snapped and bit her in the face. Pitbull’s are sweet until they are not. I have a little miniature poodle, if he ever suddenly snaps (which is unimaginable because he’s a sweetie) I know that the damage he would inflict on me would be nowhere near as much damage as my friend got to her face. She had to get plastic surgery and she still has scars.

That is so sad. This is what happens when society puts dogs above people.

It wasn't society that put dogs ahead of people. Most people don't understand the warnings dogs give. If anything humans believe they are better and above all. Hence the state of the climate and the extinction of many animals

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People will come out of the wood work here to defend pit bulls but the reality is they were bred for certain traits and they all have the potential to be unsafe. I too know someone who was mauled by one, no warning and they did nothing to provoke it. I wouldn't let one of those murder machines into my home if you paid me and I don't let me kid get near them either.

what traits? Other than being muscular dogs I don’t think they have other traits that other dogs don’t have.

Pointers were bred to point, border collies were bred to herd, and retrievers were bred to retrieve. You can try all you want, but you aren't going to teach an English Setter to herd sheep better than a border collie. Pitbulls were bred to fight and enjoy it. They are bred for "gameness", to bite, not let go, and enjoy it. They were bred to not give the traditional signs of escalating aggression, (a snarl, a growl, an airsnap), and to jump right to the bite, hold, and shake. There is often no clear warning when a pitbull is about to attack, when compared to normal dog behavior. That's why, during a pitbull attack, people can beat a pitbull with a baseball ball ( https://nypost.com/2019/10/02/bronx-man-says-he-hit-pit-bull-with-baseball-bat-20-times-to-stop-attack-on-4-year-old/ ), hit it over the head with the leg from a wheelchair ( https://www.local10.com/news/local/2020/09/02/dog-owner-recounts-attack-that-killed-his-mom-and-sent-him-to-hospital/ ) or the cops can show up in the middle of a mauling and taze a pitbull ( https://www.5newsonline.com/article/news/local/outreach/back-to-school/arkansas-man-mauled-to-death-by-pack-of-pit-bulls-authorities-say/527-5a6ffda1-626e-4be9-9c60-e6be6ab056db ), and the dog will continue to fight and try to kill. Goldens love to retrieve, and a biting pitbull is in its element. Pictures of pitbulls in flower crowns or tutus do not negate that these are dangerous animals. Any animal can bite, but no one compares a mosquito bite to a shark bite. Other dogs can bite, but a vast majority of maiming and fatal dog attacks are from pitbulls and their mixes.

First of all, when pit bulls were bred this was true but, don't you thinkk that since 1800 these genes were basically bred out of it? Also, if they don't give any warning it is purely because they were punished for doing so. My pit mix certainly gives plenty of warning!

https://news.yahoo.com/indiana-sheriffs-deputy-dies-protecting-123504536.html

Nope. Killed by Pitbull mix.

Anonymous wrote:https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/dog-kills-illinois-toddler-after-she-crawled-too-close-to-food-bowl?fbclid=IwAR3oLzd5-YzzCt-RNtpX7kJwK0292oP2tktN7Y2Ex3ijtECexxJaTF_Kbds

And here we go again. A pit mix that had never shown signs of aggression before, killed a one-year-old who got too close to his food bowl as The sweet baby girl was just toddling in the kitchen.

I posted on another thread about a friend of mine who was taking care of her father’s sweet pitbull who never showed signs of aggression, while her father was in the hospital. Dog was so sweet she was even considering adopting the dog when her father passed. One day when she was feeding it, the dog without any warning snapped and bit her in the face. Pitbull’s are sweet until they are not. I have a little miniature poodle, if he ever suddenly snaps (which is unimaginable because he’s a sweetie) I know that the damage he would inflict on me would be nowhere near as much damage as my friend got to her face. She had to get plastic surgery and she still has scars.

That is so sad. This is what happens when society puts dogs above people.

https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/dog-kills-illinois-toddler-after-she-crawled-too-close-to-food-bowl?fbclid=IwAR3oLzd5-YzzCt-RNtpX7kJwK0292oP2tktN7Y2Ex3ijtECexxJaTF_Kbds

And here we go again. A pit mix that had never shown signs of aggression before, killed a one-year-old who got too close to his food bowl as The sweet baby girl was just toddling in the kitchen.

I posted on another thread about a friend of mine who was taking care of her father’s sweet pitbull who never showed signs of aggression, while her father was in the hospital. Dog was so sweet she was even considering adopting the dog when her father passed. One day when she was feeding it, the dog without any warning snapped and bit her in the face. Pitbull’s are sweet until they are not. I have a little miniature poodle, if he ever suddenly snaps (which is unimaginable because he’s a sweetie) I know that the damage he would inflict on me would be nowhere near as much damage as my friend got to her face. She had to get plastic surgery and she still has scars.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think owners should be criminally prosecuted when their dogs attack others. It would work better than a breed ban to encourage people to put more thought into getting a pet, what kind of pet they can truly handle, and encourage more responsible pet ownership.

I think owners should be substantially fined if they abandon dogs or if their dogs produce puppies that they cannot place with homes. Provide free fix/spay to anyone that wants it. It’s ridiculous that people are allowed to just put all these unwanted animals out there into the world. Take a genetic sample when you get a license and charge the owner. I donate thousands a year to dog rescue but would much rather donate to a sane system for making sure every dog is wanted.
We got out very sweet golden retriever from a breeder. My & year old can pry open his jaws to look at his teeth if she wants. He’s cool with it. I lost my key once and had to break in through a window while he was sound asleep in the middle of the night. He was cool with that too. Not an aggressive bone in his fluffy body.

God this is so pathetic. Do you also donate money into helping members of your own species?

Yes. We donate thousands of dollars to each of these charities for humans: food bank, legal aid for kids in the child welfare system, a charity that helps people in developing countries build wells, schools, get immunized etc., a women’s shelter, a program for developmental disabled adults, a civil rights organization...dogs are only one of the things we care about.
But back to the point, I would pay to maintain a pit mix in a shelter because I fell bad for the animal that stupid humans have created, but I would not bring one into my house with my kids.

Anonymous wrote:Can we stick to genetic and behavioral science please and leave judgments for another thread?

I’d think there is a good possibility that the genetic code to kill at any cost in a pure Pitt is diluted in many mixed breeds, but there is little way to predict this. But I’m not a scientist by any means.

I think it’s just really hard to say. I mean look at humans—you can have one kid that looks and acts exactly like dad, another that looks and acts exactly like mom, a third that looks like dad but acts like mom, and a fourth that looks and acts like neither. Dog genetics are less complicated but similar. It’s just a roll of the dice and you don’t really know.
As with people...the calmest most chill people or dogs I know are the ones where both parents are calm and chill.

Can we stick to genetic and behavioral science please and leave judgments for another thread?

I’d think there is a good possibility that the genetic code to kill at any cost in a pure Pitt is diluted in many mixed breeds, but there is little way to predict this. But I’m not a scientist by any means.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People will come out of the wood work here to defend pit bulls but the reality is they were bred for certain traits and they all have the potential to be unsafe. I too know someone who was mauled by one, no warning and they did nothing to provoke it. I wouldn't let one of those murder machines into my home if you paid me and I don't let me kid get near them either.

what traits? Other than being muscular dogs I don’t think they have other traits that other dogs don’t have.

Aren't you funny.