[cpg35223]

Originally Posted by rnc76

I'm going to come off as a pit apologist, but I don't think that I am. I am a big dog lover and I've been around dozens of pit bulls. I've yet to meet one that fits the stereotype portrayed. Pretty much across the board, they've been extremely sweet, gentle animals. The common thread with the pits that I've been around is that they were owned by responsible owners. I've never met a vet or a dog trainer that thinks pits are inherently mean.

There are a lot of factors at play IMO.

-95% of people out there couldn't identify a pit bull if it was standing in front of them. Anytime someone gets attacked, if the dog is muscular and has short hair, people call it a pit bull.
-I've seen that website reference countless times. It is a website to a lawyer who specializes in dog bites. Dubious info at best.
-There are a LOT more pitbulls out there than are registered. I wouldn't doubt if pits are as common as labs if somehow you could do an accurate count of the dogs out there. No one wants to call their dog a pit in case breed bans come to town, so they call them boxer mix, lab mix, terrier mix...
-Pit bull attacks make for sensational news. A kid gets bit by a cocker spaniel or a lab, it doesn't make the news unless it is a really bad injury or death. A pit bites a kid on the hand, it is on the front page "child mauled by pit bull".
-Probably the most important is that this breed of dogs has been tortured and abused by HUMANS. Many of them are beat, hung, shocked... from an early age to be mean. They chain them in their back yard and ignore them. The vast majority of dogs in low income neighborhoods are pits. They look tough, they've become a status symbol for thug culture. Rottweilers used to be that dog 30 years ago and their reputation wasn't any better. I'd bite somebody too if I was treated the way many pits are treated.

There are a lot of websites dedicated to debunking pit bull myths. They are worth browsing through if interested. Pits may have a higher incident of biting, but I wouldn't doubt if the numbers are greatly exaggerated.

Well, I think the CDC's research is pretty thorough and certainly seems pretty objective to me. What's more, I have actually read and heard some of those arguments from debunkers and--guess what?--they are just as agenda driven as anything else you read out there.

I mean, are you really going to expect a organization that promotes pit bulls and supports breeders of pit bulls to stand up one day and say, "Why, you know what? Those animals are indeed a public menace." Nope. They'll argue things from their own particular slant.

And, quite frankly, I'm uninterested in why the dog chooses to maul my ten-year-old son. If it's a danger because the owner is a cruel bastard, then animal is a danger nonetheless. Any dog can be raised to be aggressive. However, aggressiveness and physical power are a dangerous combination, a recipe for grief.

[Reactionary]

cpg35223 = "I'm uninterested in why the dog chooses to maul my ten-year-old son. If it's a danger because the owner is a cruel bastard, then animal is a danger nonetheless."

Absolutely - the only quibble I have with Gardendale's ordinance is naming the breed (breedists!), else I'm all for the licensing and restrictions and punishments. I like that that any sworn officer can enforce the ordinance and that 'menacing' behavior is enough to trigger it. It seems like another tool to deal with thug culture.

BTW Huntsville has a dangerous dog ordinance, but it doesn't name breeds and it's not as tough otherwise. Also, Rep. Randy Hinshaw (D-21) has proposed a bill in the State legislature to allow the unincorporated parts of Madison County to enact a dangerous dog ordinance.

[rnc76]

Originally Posted by cpg35223

Well, I think the CDC's research is pretty thorough and certainly seems pretty objective to me. What's more, I have actually read and heard some of those arguments from debunkers and--guess what?--they are just as agenda driven as anything else you read out there.

I mean, are you really going to expect a organization that promotes pit bulls and supports breeders of pit bulls to stand up one day and say, "Why, you know what? Those animals are indeed a public menace." Nope. They'll argue things from their own particular slant.

And, quite frankly, I'm uninterested in why the dog chooses to maul my ten-year-old son. If it's a danger because the owner is a cruel bastard, then animal is a danger nonetheless. Any dog can be raised to be aggressive. However, aggressiveness and physical power are a dangerous combination, a recipe for grief.

Referencing the CDC data. If it is accurate, that means 238 people, 76 of which were killed by pit bulls in a 28 YEAR PERIOD. Think of how many tens, maybe even hundreds of millions of dogs have lived in this country during that time period. Now, compare to all the other dangers in life that we accept without thinking twice. The risk of getting killed by any dog, more less a pit bull is significantly less than getting killed by a lightning strike. It is a danger that is overblown.

Many of the groups you are referring to are not breeders of pit bulls. Many are rescue organizations. Do they have an agenda? Yes, but it isn't profit driven. I really believe many of those people are heartfelt supporters of a breed they feel has been maligned and abused. I've met many of them. I will admit that some of their logic is flawed and self serving.

As you say, any dog can be raised to be aggressive. The problem is that pit bulls are not unique in their strength. There are dozens of breeds that are more powerful and capable of doing much more damage if trained to do so. By your logic, essentially every dog over 30 pounds should be subject to a breed ban, because they all have the potential to do serious bodily harm.
The problem with breed bans is that if by some measure all pit bulls were eliminated, these scum would find another breed to torture.

[Threestep2]

Slow down folks! My problem is a young lady who does not know what time of the day it is, parents who bought her a house in a family neighborhood with lots of kids (!) and the parents know the dog has been agressive, has bitten and hush it. She leaves housedoor and garage open, AC running and goes to the beach. Some nights she locks her dog and mom's and who knows whose dog out. When will she leave the fence gate open?

[rnc76]

Originally Posted by Threestep

Slow down folks! My problem is a young lady who does not know what time of the day it is, parents who bought her a house in a family neighborhood with lots of kids (!) and the parents know the dog has been agressive, has bitten and hush it. She leaves housedoor and garage open, AC running and goes to the beach. Some nights she locks her dog and mom's and who knows whose dog out. When will she leave the fence gate open?

Is the dog a pit?

Regardless of the breed, if the dog is not properly contained or cared for, call animal services. If it gets removed, there is a good chance it will be put down. But that is a lot better alternative than it biting someone if it already has a history of aggression. The problem is, there is nothing stopping those idiots from going and getting another dog to neglect.

[Threestep2]

Originally Posted by rnc76

Is the dog a pit?

Regardless of the breed, if the dog is not properly contained or cared for, call animal services. If it gets removed, there is a good chance it will be put down. But that is a lot better alternative than it biting someone if it already has a history of aggression. The problem is, there is nothing stopping those idiots from going and getting another dog to neglect.

It is a pit mix per owner/parents but animal control is not interested in dealing with it.

[bluebeard]

I'm with everyone else. vicious dogs=bad. irresponsible owners=bad. pitbull=neutral. Pitbulls are indeed an intense breed, bred to fight. They are obviously have much more potential than a chihuahua to kill someone (altho if a chihuahua could, it would). however, unless you think cities should also have the ability to ban all firearms and anything else potentially dangerous from the city limits, it makes no sense to ban pitbulls.