Pit bulls kill a small child in SA (West, Howe: countertops, live in)

[verybadgnome]

Originally Posted by mpd33

Because some people teach them to fight so they learn aggression from humans. They're also bred (by humans) to be aggressive (the most aggressive ones are bred with each other) so aggressive traits persist.

This site may be helpful to those who are not familiar with the breed and want to learn something (hey, I can be optimistic): Pit Bull Myths

Go down to the 'Pit Bulls attack more people than any other breed.” and enjoy the learning experience

I did read the section on 'Pit Bulls attack more people than any other breed and haven't changed my mind b/c they could not quote any other sources that disprove what the CDC has published.

Also someone else stated that the reason there are so many Pit Bull attacks is b/c they are so popular. I would say that with the information in post #98 that cannot be the main reason as 39% of all fatalities are dealt by this breed. Are you trying to say that 39% of the dogs in this country are Pit Bulls even though they are not the most popular breed here (Labradors are)?

Actually just checking the AKC website and Bull Terriers are No. 55 on the list. There are 5 other terriers that are more popular, Scottish, Yorkshire, Cairn, West Highland, and Boston:

http://www.akc.org/reg/dogreg_stats.cfm

[majormadmax]

rd2007

I would suspect someone tripped over the animal in the dark and banged their head on a sharp corner. Our two terriers have almost taken me out that way!

But as for Chows, my sister had to put hers down after it turned on her. Her vet recommended it...

When we were in Germany, I really wanted a German Shepherd as they have the full-sized ones there and not the anorexic ones we have here with the bad hips. But most people use them for protection, and I could not find one that wasn't aggressive. They are beautiful dogs, but with a newborne on the way we couldn't risk it...

Cheers! M2

[mpd33]

Originally Posted by verybadgnome

I did read the section on 'Pit Bulls attack more people than any other breed and haven't changed my mind b/c they could not quote any other sources that disprove what the CDC has published.

Also someone else stated that the reason there are so many Pit Bull attacks is b/c they are so popular. I would say that with the information in post #98 that cannot be the main reason as 39% of all fatalities are dealt by this breed. Are you trying to say that 39% of the dogs in this country are Pit Bulls even though they are not the most popular breed here (Labradors are)?

Actually just checking the AKC website and Bull Terriers are No. 55 on the list. There are 5 other terriers that are more popular, Scottish, Yorkshire, Cairn, West Highland, and Boston:

AKC Dog Registration Statistics

The CDC are a bunch of whack jobs. I could go into that but I honestly don't want to upset myself on such a beautiful Friday morning. Suffice it to say that if you believe anything THEY say without proof from non-govt organizations, then that's your prerogative, but I choose to do more research.

If you read the site I posted then you also read (and common sense should also reinforce) the fact that pit bulls are routinely mis-identified, especially in bite situations. The majority of the public are not qualified to identify dog breeds. Add to that the victim's stress of being bitten, which could be considered a similar situation as when victims of human-human crime are the worst witnesses.

Pit bulls in the 2000's are the rottweilers of the 80's. It's a fad and the next decade will have another dog enemy.

But if it's your choice to condemn the whole breed then that's your choice (and opinion). Just try to keep the hate speech to a minimum.

[stan4]

Originally Posted by mpd33

You can't blame the breed.

You know, I agree. But at the same time, I really don't see my dog (a collie) ever doing the same thing. She's 8 and has never bitten anyone in her life - even when they deserved it. And her whole attitude/demeanor changes yet again when she is with children. It's like she's dancing on eggshells. And they can do no wrong.

So yeah, I still blame the owners for not raising their dogs right and for the lack of supervision, but you have to know that even gentled, some breeds are just more likely to be provoked into a sustained attack.

[V3rtigo]

Originally Posted by verybadgnome

I did read the section on 'Pit Bulls attack more people than any other breed and haven't changed my mind b/c they could not quote any other sources that disprove what the CDC has published.

Also someone else stated that the reason there are so many Pit Bull attacks is b/c they are so popular. I would say that with the information in post #98 that cannot be the main reason as 39% of all fatalities are dealt by this breed. Are you trying to say that 39% of the dogs in this country are Pit Bulls even though they are not the most popular breed here (Labradors are)?

Actually just checking the AKC website and Bull Terriers are No. 55 on the list. There are 5 other terriers that are more popular, Scottish, Yorkshire, Cairn, West Highland, and Boston:

AKC Dog Registration Statistics

now do a breed count factoring in income levels. i would say that pit bulls and mixes ARE at least 39% of the dog population in the poorer areas. with low income comes lack of training and lack of neutering. youd be amazed if you saw which of my dogs everyone is scared of. its not the pit mix.

[verybadgnome]

Originally Posted by mpd33

The CDC are a bunch of whack jobs. I could go into that but I honestly don't want to upset myself on such a beautiful Friday morning. Suffice it to say that if you believe anything THEY say without proof from non-govt organizations, then that's your prerogative, but I choose to do more research.

If you read the site I posted then you also read (and common sense should also reinforce) the fact that pit bulls are routinely mis-identified, especially in bite situations. The majority of the public are not qualified to identify dog breeds. Add to that the victim's stress of being bitten, which could be considered a similar situation as when victims of human-human crime are the worst witnesses.

Pit bulls in the 2000's are the rottweilers of the 80's. It's a fad and the next decade will have another dog enemy.

But if it's your choice to condemn the whole breed then that's your choice (and opinion). Just try to keep the hate speech to a minimum.

I don't think there was 'hate speech' in any of my posts but I was merely trying to stick to the statistics on this and other breeds.

Some pits may be wrongly ID'd but that fact could just as easily work against other breeds too. Also in the case of the SA woman and the two year old authorities were on the scene so hopefully in situations like that there will be 100% correct ID.

I think most people can distinguish between a Pit Bull vs. a Scottish Terrier or Yorkie. Many of the dogs that are supposedly confused with Pit Bulls seem to be on the rare side: ( Perro de Presa Canario, Cane Corso, Dogo Argentino, Alano Espanol, Japanese Tosa, Dogue de Bordeaux, Cordoba Fighting Dog, Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldog, American Bulldog, Boxer, Valley Bulldog, Olde English Bulldogge, Renascence Bulldogge, and Banter Bulldogge. ) I really doubt there most of the breeds are around in U.S. cities in any great numbers, but if you have some registration numbers that show otherwise please feel free to share.

Also it just isn't stressed out victims who have something against the dog but Allstate insurance does too:

"Allstate (depending on the state) may not insure homes with Pit Bulls or even Boxers, Akitas, Chow Chows, Dobermans, Rottweilers, or wolf hybrids."

[verybadgnome]

Originally Posted by V3rtigo

now do a breed count factoring in income levels. i would say that pit bulls and mixes ARE at least 39% of the dog population in the poorer areas. with low income comes lack of training and lack of neutering. youd be amazed if you saw which of my dogs everyone is scared of. its not the pit mix.

I'm not sure that data exists for this as I don't think it was on the Census long form. I guess if they were the most popular dog in these areas that could account for SOME of the discrepancy, but 39% is a huge, huge number when you consider that there are over 150 different breeds listed in AKC registrations:

http://www.akc.org/reg/dogreg_stats.cfm

This recent attack in Austin is in a neighborhood where the 1950's era homes start in the $220-250k range, hardly the bad side of Austin:

http://www.txcn.com/sharedcontent/dws/txcn/austin/stories/040109kvuepitbull-bkm.93ae5add.html (broken link)

[rd2007]

which is why you have a mutt when it comes to insurance.. I don't have papers on any of mine, so they're all a bunch of mutts that came from other people/rescues.
and it is only logical that a popular breed that is large and strong will obviously account for a majority of attacks. Technically my chihuahua attacks at least one person every day when they pick him up, but those obviously are not getting reported because he's so small and it's pretty much a satanic growl while bearing the tiny little dull teeth.. it's actually pretty funny and sometimes we do it just to laugh, however it is definitely an attack and if he could do anything more I'm sure he would. I would obviously never play that game with my chow because her teeth are not tiny nor are they dull and her jaws snap the bones she chews on like they were a candy bar.. the CDC report is like the apple fanboys that point out all the attacks on Microsoft systems. Of course they are attacked more often, because they're dominant and you get more bang for your buck from attacking them.
that's the way I see it at least

[mpd33]

Originally Posted by verybadgnome

I don't think there was 'hate speech' in any of my posts but I was merely trying to stick to the statistics on this and other breeds.

Some pits may be wrongly ID'd but that fact could just as easily work against other breeds too. Also in the case of the SA woman and the two year old authorities were on the scene so hopefully in situations like that there will be 100% correct ID.

I think most people can distinguish between a Pit Bull vs. a Scottish Terrier or Yorkie. Many of the dogs that are supposedly confused with Pit Bulls seem to be on the rare side: ( Perro de Presa Canario, Cane Corso, Dogo Argentino, Alano Espanol, Japanese Tosa, Dogue de Bordeaux, Cordoba Fighting Dog, Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldog, American Bulldog, Boxer, Valley Bulldog, Olde English Bulldogge, Renascence Bulldogge, and Banter Bulldogge. ) I really doubt there most of the breeds are around in U.S. cities in any great numbers, but if you have some registration numbers that show otherwise please feel free to share.

Also it just isn't stressed out victims who have something against the dog but Allstate insurance does too:

"Allstate (depending on the state) may not insure homes with Pit Bulls or even Boxers, Akitas, Chow Chows, Dobermans, Rottweilers, or wolf hybrids."

I wasn't accusing you of hate speech, I said to keep it to a minimum if you choose to think that banning a breed would be helpful.

You list 13 breeds that are known to be mistaken for pits yet this somehow makes your point that there aren't a lot of mis-identifications? And at least 3 of those breeds are pretty common (boxers, 2 types of bulldogs).

If you're looking for research (and not just links within articles I post about), then google "breed specific legislation". That will keep you busy and hopefully enlighten you.

If you don't *truly* care about this issue, please stop pursuing it. If you're arguing for the sake of argument, I'm going to stop responding. I care about stopping ignorance when it pertains to animals (and the banning of such animals), so if you don't really care about it, please stop.

The bottom line in this argument is about responsibility. The more ways we remove responsibility from the picture (such as banning (read: blaming) the breed) the less we should expect responsibility to play a role in animal ownership.

And, really, using Allstate as an example?

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by majormadmax

rd2007

I would suspect someone tripped over the animal in the dark and banged their head on a sharp corner. Our two terriers have almost taken me out that way!

But as for Chows, my sister had to put hers down after it turned on her. Her vet recommended it...

When we were in Germany, I really wanted a German Shepherd as they have the full-sized ones there and not the anorexic ones we have here with the bad hips. But most people use them for protection, and I could not find one that wasn't aggressive. They are beautiful dogs, but with a newborne on the way we couldn't risk it...

Cheers! M2

I know any breed can be mean, some more than others. We are lovers of Springer Spanials but occassionally you will see one that can be snappy, rare but can happen..SAme with DAnes, normally about a mellow as they come. We had one that would turn on other dogs for what appeared to be no reason. She was mistreated as a pup and never got over it.

That being said, I am only really uncomfortable around one breed: Chows, I think they are beautiful but I just don't trust them.

Nita