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.
Denver and some surrounding counties have had a ban on this breed just for this very reason. If you blame the owners they will get all bent out of shape. If you blame the breed the owners will still get bent out of shape.
Yes any dog breed could go on the attack. Any breed of dog could get a bad owner. IMO the problem is what a pit bull is... a very powerfully muscular dog with a very stubborn terrier temperament. And when a pit bull decides to go into attack mode, they are extremely difficult to defend against AND to change their mind about attacking.
They were bred for the sport of bull baiting. So their drive is to attack, bite hard and hang on to an angry bull, no matter what the bull does.
Owning a pit bull is akin to owning an assault rifle Liberals defend their ownership of rescued pit bull mutts of unknown breeding and upbringing, NRA conservatives defend their ownership of assault rifles. A sleeping pit bull is no threat, just as an AR-15 is not a threat secured in a gun safe.
\Owning a pit bull is akin to owning an assault rifle Liberals defend their ownership of rescued pit bull mutts of unknown breeding and upbringing, NRA conservatives defend their ownership of assault rifles. A sleeping pit bull is no threat, just as an AR-15 is not a threat secured in a gun safe.
The BIG difference is Pit Bulls wake up on their own, and do what their little brains tell them to do. An AR-15 is harmless even out of a safe, until A PERSON picks it up with INTENT to do harm, then carries through on that intent.
The BIG difference is Pit Bulls wake up on their own, and do what their little brains tell them to do. An AR-15 is harmless even out of a safe, until A PERSON picks it up with INTENT to do harm, then carries through on that intent.
Very poor analogy.
Not a perfect analogy, but there are pit bull owners who use them to intimidate and attack others. And there are thousands of responsible AR-15 owners that will never use them for murder.
And then, what's the difference between a usually well-behaving pit bull who suddenly snaps and attacks a person and a seemingly sane human being who suddenly snaps and goes on a murderous spree? In both cases, the warning signs were absent or missed. In both cases, the majority of pit bulls and AR-15's don't cause any damages. In both cases, they both have their very loyal defenders.
Just another case of a "bad owner" or do we REALLY need to do something about this particular breed?
Why it's mainly the pit bulls who almost always are very unlucky to get these so called "bad owners"?
why not, for example, Pugs get the bad owners?
Wow, thanks for sharing, that dog was vicious! And kudos to those 2 ladies for stepping in to help the boy! The granny even tried to take down the dog with her bare hands before others stepped in to help.
Based on the article below, I would say it's a case of a bad owner, not the dog's fault as much.... Dogs can be domesticated and trained to do various functions whether it's fight, guard, help or just be a loyal friend. This dog was trained for the purpose of keeping people away from a certain place and he should have been behind a fence or on a leash.
"Some dogs get a bad rap. Pit bulls, rottweilers, dobermans are all considered aggressive dogs, while labs and corgis are supposed to be fun and docile. But while breeding might have something to do with temperament, a recent study suggests that a far better predictor of how aggressive a dog will be is what their owner is like.
Dogs who came from rescue centers were more likely to be aggressive than those bought from a breeder.
Owners who trained their dogs using punishment and negative reinforcement wound up with twice as likely to be aggressive towards strangers, and three times as likely to lunge at family members...."
Just another case of a "bad owner" or do we REALLY need to do something about this particular breed?
Why it's mainly the pit bulls who almost always are very unlucky to get these so called "bad owners"?
why not, for example, Pugs get the bad owners?
read the article, the dog was owned by a bootlegger that used it to keep people and police away from his property. pitbulls used to be known as the nanny dog. they watched over the children and protected them.
drug dealers, and other nere-do-wells use these dogs, or rather misuse them, to protect their stash houses and keep people away. they also abuse the dogs to get them as mean as possible.
pittbulls are not by nature mean dogs, just like dobermans, rotweillers, and german shepards are not the mean dogs they were portrayed as in the past.
education is the key here. we need to educate the public about dogs in general, and large powerful breeds specifically. far too many dog owners make many mistakes with their dogs.
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.
