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.
It's funny because at that time pitbulls were the "trend". There were hip hop artists like DMX who built their whole gimmick around them. They were popular around the hood not much unlike seeing the trend of young women strolling around the Ville or the East Side with various "hybrid toy breeds" aka mutts... like teacup yorkies...
Unfortunately, the pitbull has been chosen as the jewel of dogfighters....but that article does nothing to reinforce a disposition of the dog. In fact, the main focus is irresponsible breeding and ownership.
That whole article is about idiots training and encouraging their dogs to be aggressive.
Pit Bulls are used for dog fighting because they're extremely loyal and will basically do anything for their owners. They were once known as 'the nanny dog' because families had them to babysit their children. They're strong, capable and very intelligent and MAN used this to turn them into fighters.
Don't blame the dogs. Blame the idiot owners who take perfectly good dogs and encourage them to be violent. 47 out of the 51 dogs seized from Michael Vick's dog fighting operation were rehomed. Fourty seven former pit bulls used specifically for fighting were adopted out to new homes.
These dogs aren't any more aggressive than any other dog, but their loyalty is taken advantage of.
Incorrect, the entire article was not just about that. There are paragraphs on the genetic and chemical makeup of the breed.
So dog bites go up, and they give the man the dog warden of the year award because he is targeting 'pit bulls'. Does that sound like the resume of an award winner for a group advocating for public safety to you? Me neither.
The only dog bite study that is peer reviewed and accepted as factual by vets & the scientific community was performed by the CDC, over a 20 year period. That study ended in 90's, if that gives anyone an idea of how outdated bite research actually is. Several sites, including dogsbite.org misquote the CDC's research and use it out of context to support BSL. The CDC even issued a statement regarding this, stating that using the study for policy-making decisions is in direct contradiction to their own findings:
"A CDC study on fatal dog bites lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years (Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998 ). It does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic. Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites. There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill.
Many practical alternatives to breed-specific policies exist and hold promise for preventing dog bites. For prevention ideas and model policies for control of dangerous dogs, please see the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Task Force on Canine Aggression and Human-Canine Interactions: A community approach to dog bite prevention ." Any site that quotes someone elses research in a manner directly opposite of what the researchers say it should be used for should have an automatic "tune out & ignore" warning on it.
Here's another interesting read regarding the psychology of breed hate & breed bans: http://stubbydog.org/2011/03/the-psy...of-breed-bans/ Scroll down to the "How we Form Our Opinions" section to get to the heart of the article.
I think there's more than enough data out there to steer people in the right direction in regards to finally taking steps to lowering the occurence of dog bites. And lets face it, actual dog bite #'s vs. # of dogs in this country shows we have an extremely low occurence of dog bites, but they are rising and we need to nip it in the bud. Also, since we're an educated country ANY dog fatality should not happen because we have the power to use our brains and we're capable of stopping them from happening. We just have to convince people to get past their inherit beliefs that force them to close off any possible solution that contradicts what they've believed for many years and help them open their minds & get off their butts so they can help be productive and work towards a real solution instead of a false sense of security. Luckily (& oddly since it doesn't seem to cross-apply to things like politics, world affairs, etc.) the current crop of teenagers are showing they are much better educated about dog behavior and BSL then our current crop of adults, so they will grow up with a different attitude & hopefully pass on a more educated outlook to their children, and through this education, dog bites will naturally go down.
Incorrect, the entire article was not just about that. There are paragraphs on the genetic and chemical makeup of the breed.
Quote:
Pit bulls can inflict such terrible damage because their massive skulls and powerful jaws give them almost super-canine biting power.
That's it....
But you have to TRAIN it to actually attack to do that.
This quote was even funnier....
Quote:
But he's wrong, and dead wrong if we're talking about pit bulls. All men may be created equal, but not all dogs. Says Katherine Houpt, director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at Cornell and author of Domestic Animal Behavior: "Different breeds have genetic predispositions to certain kinds of behavior, though that can be influenced by how they are raised. The pit bull is an innately aggressive breed, often owned by someone who wants an aggressive dog, so they're going to encourage it."
First he perpetuates a myth....
#1 - that all men are created equal
and then follows it up with a comment that does nothing to fortify it..expecting the person to take the statistics and his word for face value.
There is no denying the PHYSIQUE of a pitbull is very conducive to killing other dogs. But to me, that is a good thing.
But the worst of that whole article is this...
Quote:
First, the pit bull is quicker to anger than most dogs, probably due to the breed's unusually high level of the neurotransmitter L-tyrosine.
"quicker to anger than most dogs...PROBABLY DUE TO....."
probably....meaning...they don't know they are just flinging poo
Quote:
Second, pit bulls are frighteningly tenacious; their attacks frequently last for 15 minutes or longer, and nothing—hoses, violent blows or kicks—can easily stop them.
Same with a Rott... or a German Shepherd....or a Argentine Dogo
Quote:
That's because of the third behavioral anomaly: the breed's remarkable insensitivity to pain. Most dogs beaten in a fight will submit the next time they see the victor. Not a defeated pit bull, who will tear into his onetime vanquisher. This, too, has to do with brain chemistry. The body releases endorphins as a natural painkiller. Pit bulls seem extra-sensitive to endorphins and may generate higher levels of the chemical than other dogs. Endorphins are also addictive: "The dogs may be junkies, seeking pain so they can get the endorphin buzz they crave," The Economist suggests.
This was so pathetic....
"Pitbulls SEEM extra-sensitive to endorphins and MAY generate higher levels of the chemical than other dogs.
lmao @ "these dogs may be junkies"
Yea...if you beat the **** out of them and turn them into nutjobs... of course...
Read between the lines... this dude is grasping at straws..They should have came with some hardline stuff or went home.
According to statistics complied at DogsBite.org, pit bulls were responsible for roughly 60 percent of fatal dog bites between January 2006 and December 2008. We're talking fatalities, here, folks. Keep in mind that this dangerous breed of dog makes up only around 5 percent of the pet dog population.
Furthermore, the combination of pit bulls, rottweilers, their close mixes, and wolf hybrids are responsible for 68 percent of fatalities and 77 percent of attacks that cause bodily harm.
I can't prove it, but I'm willing to bet that the owners of pit bulls are also more dangerous than your average citizen. You can tell by their tattoos.
I say we outlaw pit bulls and put the others on notice.
You're quite the ban-happy fellow, aren't you? Your solution to everything is BAN, BAN, BAN.
I don't know how you would ban a dog breed unless you plan to kill them all and continue to kill any dog who resembles one.
However, they are dangerous and it not just a matter of "the owner", it's this, as stated in the 10 Dangerous Breeds article:
Quote:
They will lock their jaws onto the prey until it's dead.
Whether a dog attacks because of the "bad owner" or because it was scared, startled, went crazy, or temporary insanity..things all animals and people can do.. it's not going to end well. Ever. While some dogs can be snapped out of it a pit rarely stops once it starts.
I don't know how you would ban a dog breed unless you plan to kill them all and continue to kill any dog who resembles one.
However, they are dangerous and it not just a matter of "the owner", it's this, as stated in the 10 Dangerous Breeds article:
Whether a dog attacks becasue of the "bad owner" or because it was scared, startled, went crazy, or temporary insanity..things all animals and people can do.. it's not going to end well. Ever.
Only an insane dog that is trained to do that will do it....
A pit bull from a loving home that is startled is not going to "lock on" to somebody until they are dead!!! And realize that the chance of a pitbull killing somebody in this scenario is PROBABLY trivially higher than another breed of similar size and stature. Stop drinking the kool aid.
Nobody will argue that a pitbull is less or equally dangerous as a chihuahua... There is an inherent risk with any dog big enough to grip with it's jaws.
The breed is not to blame. The human who trains the dog is to blame.
This.
The problem is, the people who end up getting pitbulls are typically using them for 'home protection', or in a few cases, participating in illegal dogfighting rings. Either way, the dogs are often sought out by people who typically don't know that what they're creating is a lethal weapon. A Rottweiler, a Doberman, a Chow...all of those can be aggressive breeds as well.
Pit bull terrier fatalaties 207 % of dog population .033 Rottweiler fatalities 78 % of dog population .003
What these stats show is a Rottweiler is actually about 4 times more likely to kill someone than a pit bull.
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.
