Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The breed isn't the issue, the owners are. The breed is, for whatever reason, a badge of thug type street cred. I'd rather ban thugs, which would do more good for humanity.
The breed is not to blame. The human who trains the dog is to blame.
I really get tired of hearing this, yes it is not the breeds fault, but this breed from it's beginning was bred to be aggressive and tenacious when it attacks, they have a bite strong enough to break bones and is second only to the Rottweiler. Pit Bull Breed History -- Pitbull
The link I provided is a good read and I suggest it to all, to have a good understanding of this breed.
I am not against the breed, but I believe special licenses should be issued to own one , along with special training, since these are an extremely powerful and aggressive dog.
They don't turn often, but when they do, there attack is tenacious and often deadly, and difficult to stop because of their strength. Pits are special and should be treated as such and not everyone should be allowed to own one.
Last edited by Ghostrider275452; 07-13-2012 at 11:30 AM..
this comes up often enough that i ought to just make a blog post and then link people to it when a new thread arises. until i get around to that, i'll just quote the same stats that i have posted before, the ones that have yet to be answered by the anti-pit bull crowd.
#1
Quote:
Originally Posted by stycotl
further, people ascribe magical powers to pit bulls, where they are stronger than all other dogs, have locking jaws, bipolar personalities, and a craving for human flesh. but none of these claims has ever been proven, and most of them are so ridiculous that they don't ever get enough attention by scientists to try and prove them.
#2
Quote:
the truth though is that pit bulls have only been generally feared for these made-up attributes for about 25 years or so, which is odd, considering that the breed has been around in its current form now since the 19th century or so.
so if they are the same dog, where was the hysteria before the 1980's? it was directed at dobermans, shepherds, malamutes, and so on, all the way down to bloodhounds in the late 1800's. back then, everyone thought that pit bulls were angels, but thought that bloodhounds were demons bred straight from the depths of hell.
#3
Quote:
even if that doesn't make you rethink an anti-pit bull stance, go with the numbers, as exaggerated as they are. “dog bite statistics are not really statistics, and they do not give an accurate picture of dogs that will bite,” says the american veterinary association, as these "statistics" rely on media accounts, which are very often (upwards of 70% in some estimates) identified incorrectly, even by the experts, and sometimes on purpose by people trying to make the story more dramatic, or to bolster public opinion for breed ban legislations.
#4: the kicker
Quote:
conservative statistics (usually the ones put out by the experts) say that pit bulls are responsible for around 3-4 fatal attacks every year, but even if we use the media's exaggerated and incorrect statistics, pit bulls are responsible for fewer than 7 fatal attacks and just over 60 serious attacks in the US every year.
take those 3-7 fatal pit bull attacks (depending on whether you believe the experts or the media), and compare that to the estimated total pit bull population of the US., which was predicted in 2009 to be somewhere around 10.6 million pit bulls, out of a total 54-78 million dogs in the country total. the media's liberal numbers even say that only one pit bull in 1.5 million will fatally bite someone, and one in 168,000 will seriously hurt someone. conservative estimates used by the professionals are obviously a lot less. that means that even by the liberal statistics of the media, 0.0006603774 percent of the pit bull population is involved in serious or fatal attacks every year in the US (although it is actually lower than that even because some of tallied attacks are made by the same dogs).
to recap, there are off the top of my head four major issues that the BSL, anti-pit bull crowd consistently ignores. there are other issues that they ignore as well, but for the sake of simplicity, we'll focus on these fairly blatant ones.
pit bulls are not physiologically or psychologically deviant from other dog breeds (no magical locking jaws, immunities to pain, etc).
the pit bull breeds have been around for hundreds of years, but society's paranoia toward pit bulls stretches back only a few decades.
pit bull statistics are not accurate––at all.
even using the media's hyperbolic statistics, pit bulls are responsible for very few attacks, and even fewer serious attacks. most pit bulls (by leaps and bounds) go their entire lives without having a problem.
the challenge
since the "ban the pit bulls" crowd never responds to these points, and just continues to deflect, i'll focus on #4, the really important one.
BSL supporters make claims like, "it's only a matter of time," "they all say that they never saw it coming," etc, etc, and use that kind of baseless nonsense to indicate as many people in this thread already have, that all pit bulls are violent, and that all or most pit bulls will eventually hurt someone.
but the numbers don't support that theory, even when using the exaggerated and downright dishonest numbers that the BSL supporters come up with.
the numbers actually show that pit bull attacks are on par with those of other dog breeds, and that means that they are few and far between. the numbers show that most pit bulls will go from pup to backyard grave without ever having hurt a human being. and when i say "most", i mean hundreds of thousands to millions of them every year.
so, can any of you come up with even a single good reason (use logic, not deflections, straw men arguments, etc) why pit bulls should be banned when by the very numbers that you use to support your case, only one in 1.5 million pit bulls will fatally bite someone, and one in 168,000 will seriously hurt someone this year?
for comparison's sake, out of the more than 10,000 children killed in the usa between 1976 and 2005, 60% of them were killed by their parents. considering that in 2010 there were estimated to be 23 million two-parent households and 6.2 million single-parent households (meaning roughly twice as many parents as pit bulls in the usa), and that an average of 214.28 children were murdered by their parents every year in the states during that time (without knowing how many of them killed multiple children), one out of every 136,270 parents will kill their child, as opposed to one pit bull out of every 1.5 million of them killing a human (not even narrowed down to children). so between 1976 to 2005, a parent is more than 11 times more likely to kill a child than a pit bull is.
and that is not counting the fact that all of the other 10,000 children killed in the states during that time period except for just under 500 of them were killed by another relative or an acquaintance. yourself and your family members and friends are dozens of times more likely to kill your own children than is the pit bull next door. pretty disturbing, in my opinion.
incidentally, i have done an absurd amount of research on pit bull violence and dog violence in general, and have pages and pages worth of sources, if anyone wants me to PM them the list.
Their owners of course would say otherwise. I'm going to bet you wouldn't even think of messing with an owner walking a pit bull.
Because of the underclass ghetto scum in my area, who want to be tough guys and own aggressive pit's, I carry a gun while I walk my small dog, and believe me, I will not hesitate to shoot.
I really get tired of hearing this, yes it is not the breeds fault, but this breed from it's beginning was bred to be aggressive and tenacious when it attacks, they have a bit strong enough to break bones and is second only to the Rottweiler. Pit Bull Breed History -- Pitbull
The link I provided is a good read and I suggest it to all, to have a good understanding of this breed.
I am not against the breed, but I believe special licenses should be issued to own one , along with special training, since these are an extremely powerful and aggressive dog.
They don't turn often, but when they do, there attack is tenacious and often deadly, and difficult to stop because of their strength. Pits are special and should be treated as such and not everyone should be allowed to own one.
Full grown macaws can break bones with their beaks. Should they be banned? I had my arm broken by a macaw.
As far as special licensing, do you honestly think those owners who are not responsible enough to properly train the dog has it licensed?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ban the owners
