Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Attacks by French Poodles don't result in death or serious injury.
|
explain to us your definition of "death or serious injury" then, since your understanding of the english language seems to be a little lacking. according to you, when a poodle or other breed of dog kills someone, it isn't serious? only when a pit bull kills is it serious?
http://www.homeworking.ws/megalightn...lledinoire.jpg
this isn't serious? this was the work of a lab?
Labrador Puppy Kills Baby Boy (http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/633/labrador-kills-child/ - broken link)
hey look, another lab attack, this one fatal. was that not serious? i get it, i get it; it wasn't a pit bull, so it doesn't fit your definition of
alarming.
http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/a...80_572701a.jpg
this one was a greyhound, so it was obviously of no concern to you.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080131/images/met-dog2-220.jpg (broken link)
boxers here, so this was obviously not serious...
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MwG0NgoVBq...aldogbite1.jpg
bull mastiff here, which i ought to point out to those that are going to assume otherwise, is *not* a pit bull.
do i need to keep going, or is this sufficient to prove to you that other dog bites are serious too (hint, especially the fatal ones). now, add that to the current stats that say that other dog breeds actually bite quite a bit more often than pit bulls, and cause more deaths than pit bulls, despite what you and the media are saying (this is science, not judge judy), and those serious and seriously fatal attacks by other breeds keep becoming more and more serious, don't they?
in case you have forgotten the research that i am speaking of:
ifaab.tripod.com/2009/abstracts2009htm
different kinds of aggression; pits are not as human aggressive, but are easily triggered to animal and object aggression
Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in ...[J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2000] - PubMed Result
other breeds seem to attack and attack fatally, more often. this study might actually interest you for other reasons, because these guys seem to think that the reason for pit attacks is more closely tied to breed than circumstances. i think that this goes mostly back to the ifaab.tripod.com abstract that mentions different kinds of aggression, but you will certainly spin it your own way.
i have more. if any of you want to take a look at my research, i've compiled a few lists. none of them include judge judy, by the way, so you don't have to worry about momonkey's tactics sneaking in there.
Quote:
"I laid there for a little bit. I was bleeding, and the blood was just gushing out, so I knew I didn't have much time," Hill said. "I just kept getting weaker and weaker, and I knew I wasn't going to last much longer."
A motorcycle officer came by and assisted Hill.
"As soon as they opened the door to help me, I passed out," Hill said.
Hill said he doesn't understand why the Independence City Council is hesitating to ban pit bulls from city limits.
Dog Bite Victim Pleads For Pit Bull Ban - Kansas City News Story - KMBC Kansas City
|
yes, he is now a supporter of the pit bull bans. bet he didn't even give it a thought before that. this is called an emotional reaction. it doesn't have anything to to do with him caring about the little girl that might be targeted next. it has to do with his new aversion to a dog based off of a traumatic experience.
emotional reactions are also rarely backed up by any actual research, and generally only take into account anecdotal experience, colored by an unhealthy dosage of opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by las vegas drunk
There is no reason arguing with you. Have you ever owned a pitbull? I would be willing to be money you haven't. Therefore, your "opinion" is worthless. On the other hand, I have owned two, and know how they really are. You are listening to the biased media. My best friend used to think like you, until he saw how my dogs were. He has four kids, and two of them are only 5. I talked him into getting a pit bull puppy. The dog is now 2, and he told me she has been the best dog he ever had. Her name is chocolate, and she even sleeps with his kids, and is very protective of the family.
|
i'm certainly not defending momonkey's mindless posts, but just because someone hasn't owned a pit bull, their opinion doesn't automatically become useless. this kind of argument is known as a logical fallacy, and doesn't hold water.
Quote:
Originally Posted by las vegas drunk
Actually, people like Mo Monkey are downright dangerous, because they have led to the ruthless destruction of many peoples loving pets. I have zero respect for people like her.....
Denver pit bull ban leads to 'dogs in hiding' - Other Pet News- msnbc.com
Pit Bull Ban in Housing Projects Results in Mass Euthanization - Gothamist
|
i do feel sorry for the innocent dogs that are being euthanized, but i am even more concerned about the human victims of future dog bites that will not have the protection that they need specifically because of the irresponsible mentality that momonkey and others like him display.
they are dangerous. yes, they kill thousands of dogs that have *never* hurt anyone, and that is atrocious. but the horrible thing about it is the fact that their whole crusade is to "help the victims."
but when they arbitrarily scapegoat an entire dog breed based off of whatever social whims are being brewed up in the media, without doing any research on the subject, without having the balls to actually work at a real solution, and then they sit back feeling good about themselves, that they helped someone today...
...then, when the dog bites continue to happen, when children continue to die at the hands of aggressive dogs, then all of the thousands of promises that they made, all of the millions of dollars that they have wasted, all of the thousands of dogs that they have killed, have all been for nothing. they are trying to treat a symptom of a problem, rather than tackle the problem itself, because it is too hard and too complex an issue to try to correct at the human level, where the problem resides. it is better just to massacre millions of dogs that haven't ever done anything wrong....
Quote:
Originally Posted by azriverfan.
There is truth to both sides. The pit bull is instinctually aggressive.
|
again, *all* dogs are instinctively aggressive. if you don't understand this concept, don't get a dog; you would be putting other people at risk.
Quote:
|
Anyone who purchases one takes a risk.
|
any dog is a risk; dogs are
canis lupus, more commonly known as the gray wolf. if the gears aren't starting to turn in your head right about now, then you might as well join momonkey's club.
Quote:
|
You simply can't afford it the same freedom that you can with other breeds regardless of how well you socialize and train it.
|
now there is some truth to this statement, except for the fact that you are just applying it to one breed, compared to all others. pit bulls are definitely a high maintenance breed, but they are far from alone in that group.
and even the dogs that are not generally considered high maintenance are still potentially dangerous, especially when living in a home where they are treated as humans, or dismissed and undisciplined because they are "harmless" dogs.
those conditions breed tragedy.
Quote:
|
However, many pit bull owers are irresponsible for a variety of reasons. Many people purchase them for their potential for violence and don't inhibit their violent tendencies by socializing it and being gentile with them. Others buy them and are too busy to provide them with the requisite training and socializing.
|
quite true. this phenomenon switches breeds every few decades. karen delise found upon researching dog attacks for the last two hundred years, that dog breed popularity was directly linked to the consequent number of violent incidents; the more popular the breed, the more attacks associated with the breed. this is common sense, but it is still pivotal to note.
especially since she also found that the popularity of the breed with bad owners increased directly when the breed was thought to be vicious and bloodthirsty. during the late 1800s when bloodhounds were generally considered to be violent maneaters, it was bloodhounds that were desirable to many individuals as guard dogs or even just status symbols to show how tough they were.
same with pits today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by azriverfan.
But the statistics don't support that. I've heard arguments like that before regarding poodles and other dogs but the fact remains that pit bulls are statistically the most responsible for dog maulings in this country.
|
and where do those stats come from? science? research? nope.
they come from tallied newspaper articles, and less frequently, police reports. they don't come from animal control officers that can verify the dog breed. they come from cops, reporters, and eyewitness victims that cannot generally pick a pit bull out of a lineup with even 50% accuracy.
even the experts (vets, dog trainers, etc) admit that it is sometimes next to impossible to tell dog breed. if the professionals can't always get it, how are reporters, cops, and plumbers supposed to be a reliable source of census data?
on top of general mistakes, the media is routinely exposed for having mentioned pit bulls in an attack when it was really some other breed. pit bull stories get more views and create more emotional reactions, which sells more newspapers and gets more ratings on tv. therefore, the media will continue to blame pits for attacks that they didn't commit until some other breed takes their place as the current scapegoat.
Quote:
|
To be honest, I wouldn't be afraid of having a pit bull and I have small children. I'm afraid of what the pit bull would do to others in an effort to protect our house. I don't think pit bulls are evil. I just think they have a combination of an aggressive instinct combined with a powerful bite and compact body. I know the pit bull will be sweet 95% of the time but I would hate to see what my pit bull would do by seeing a neighbor's child walk in my yard on their way home and mistake them for an intruder.
|
most of the time, a pit will either play with the kid, or ignore it. if you don't believe me, take a second to think about it. pits are one of the most popular breeds in america right now; there are estimated to be upwards of 40 million of them in the states. if every pit bull was a threat like momonkey and others claim, there would be more than 4-6 deaths attributed to them per year (and this is even using the fallible stats compiled by the media!), and a few dozen less serious attacks.
most pit bulls go from pup to a backyard grave being remembered as sweet, loyal family dogs. just like every other breed. most pit bulls *never* have an issue.
momonkey and his cronies cannot account for this fact; they cannot account for the fact that less than 20 of the dogs are involved in what could be considered a mauling in a year, out of 40 million plus.
what can they account for? only the fact that they still manage to see news stories about pit bull attacks almost every week. they never bother to think about what that means on a national and international level, out of millions of dogs, many of them falsely accused, some of them falsely accused on purpose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by las vegas drunk
This is actually true, but you left off one important fact. Here is whole statement....
The pit bull is instinctually aggressive towards other animals, but not people.
|
and i'll fix the statement to where i like it:
all dogs are instinctually aggressive. some dogs, like pit bulls, are more aggressive toward animals and objects. other dogs, such as border collies, poodles, cattle dogs, and chihuahuas, are more aggressive toward people.
if you don't believe this statement, feel free to do some research on it; i've been posting links to studies here on city-data for months now. if you are either supporting or opposing breed ban legislation without having researched the topic, then you are carelessly toying with laws that will affect the lives and deaths of thousands of people, and tens of thousands of dogs. this is not a decision to be made lightly. there is plenty of factual information out there, but as usual, you have to go to the experts to find it.
i won't go to judge judy, fox news, or others that are not experts when i want to learn about health insurance of immigration issues. but too many people decide that this is good enough for them when we are talking about the poor souls that are mauled by dogs, and the innocent dogs that are killed simply because they look like the breed that was responsible for the last attack.
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.
On the other hand, I have owned two, and know how they really are. You are listening to the biased media. My best friend used to think like you, until he saw how my dogs were. He has four kids, and two of them are only 5. I talked him into getting a pit bull puppy. The dog is now 2, and he told me she has been the best dog he ever had. Her name is chocolate, and she even sleeps with his kids, and is very protective of the family.
