And it happened again, yesterday. A 3 year old dead. 
http://www.wapt.com/news/2yearold-killed-in-pit-bull-attack/25257766
This one is just stupid, but at least the owner is being charged:
As a child my sister was bitten in the face by the neighbors dog. A dog that was a family pet and lived with children. But, my sister was not “his” children. The dog was a dashound. He caugh her lip and my sister required all of two stitches. If, all other things equal, this dog had been a pit/pit mix would my sister have had a face left to stitch up? That is really what’s going on with this disscussion… the power of ANY dog that bites. Dogs of size with powerful jaws are going to inflict much, much more damage. Especially to children. And if the dog owners cannot/do not protect children/other adults from their dogs that goverment will step in with bans.
[QUOTE=JackieBlue;7506798]
And it happened again, yesterday. A 3 year old dead.
http://www.wapt.com/news/2yearold-killed-in-pit-bull-attack/25257766
This one is just stupid, but at least the owner is being charged:
http://wavy.com/2014/03/31/vicious-dog-reported-in-hampton/[/QUOTE]
Another death yesterday. 85 year old woman.
http://www.terrelltribune.com/news/local/article_b5354db2-b9a3-11e3-baaa-0019bb2963f4.html
I might add, for all us horsie people with dogs on here. I took an adult friend with me to the Rolex. I could not convince her to quit bending over and “gushing” at every dog she met. I kept trying to tell her “You are going to loose your face one of these days!”. Nothing is a more agressive move toward a preditor type animal than getting in it’s face!
[QUOTE=chancellor2;7506704]
s1969- so you don’t have to weed through posts THIS is why I don’t support a ban or regulations of breeding.
IT WILL PUNISH THE GOOD BREEDERS AND NOT THE BAD ONES. Do you really seriously believe that the thugs who are breeding them for dog fighting are going to say “Oh, I need to go out and get a license to breed these dogs”?
The people who are breeding the bad dogs are probably ALREADY committing a crime. They CAN be prosecuted NOW…but no one has the time, money or energy to go after them.[/QUOTE]
Who are the “good breeders” of pit bulls? The shelters are FULL of them. :rolleyes:
Many states are already considering legislation to limit breeding without a license in order to eliminate puppy mill breeding. I know a lot of “good” breeders are against this in theory, because they feel it will affect them financially (having to pay for a license) and also having to potentially face inspections. But, the good breeders should have no trouble with inspections, and the fee schedule could be structured in a way to support good breeders – why not discounts for AKC breeders of merit? (Or UKC, or other Kennel Clubs, if they exist) – or for breeders that conduct health checks on their breeding dogs?
Will the dog fighters buy a license? Of course not - but they wouldn’t be able to advertise their puppies online without being at risk for a fine or prosecution if they don’t have a license. And, if a breeder is found without a license, there is no requirement for the municipality to prove that the dogs were being bred for fighting or that they were vicious.
The current “bad breeders” have to be proven that they are BAD. How exactly is that defined? That they bred a dog for fighting? How do you prove that? What if they don’t actually fight dogs themselves, but just sell puppies for that purpose? Or are they bad breeders because they sell drugs and keep a bad dog for protection? Now you have to prove that they sell drugs.
I don’t see these as “easily enforced” existing laws.
I do support S/N and licensing breeders. I’m just against the singling out of specific breeds. According to at least one person on this thread most large breed dogs should be under BSL. I too have been around bad Pits, really bad Pits. I’ve owned quite a few dogs that are “at risk” breeds. I get it, they are strong dogs who have the ability to do damage if they showed aggression. I. Get. It. I’ve been on the other end of the leash when I was walking two Rotties and crossed the street because someone was afraid of my, very socialized, dogs. But was still yelled at and called an a$$hole for having “those killer” dogs out in public. I was being responsible, my dogs were leashed, social, and completely under control. I crossed the street so as not to cause confrontation. Now I have a Pit mix, I’ll do the same with her to keep her safe. But I do not want her discriminated against by Breed Specific Legislation. She has done nothing wrong other than being bred by some idiot BYB. If she would show aggression I will deal with it appropriately, and not allow her to become a statistic.
All I would like see is stronger, enforced dog laws. Again I’m for S/N, stricter leash laws, tethering laws, breeding licensing, with all breeds included. But the laws would have to enforced equally. I’ve had my previous Rotts harassed by small dogs and been accused of having the dog aggressive dogs, when my dogs didn’t even growl back. They tried to stay behind me. But if they would have growled or snapped they would have been the dogs labeled dangerous, that is not equal, and what BSL causes. Just take out specific breeds, make the dog owners accountable, whatever breed they have.
[QUOTE=chancellor2;7505201]
So pit bull TYPES are 66%
And your beloved Rottie is 39%.
Let’s just divide that 66% by THREE (when in fact there are FOUR breeds but one the AKC doesn’t recognize)
66%/3 is hmmmm. 33% which puts your beloved Rottweiler ahead by 6 whole percent.[/QUOTE]
I am going to stay neutral on the discussion at hand (because I am trying to follow my own advice from the climate change thread and not offer opinions about things where I lack knowledge). However, I DO know a fair bit about data analysis and the application of statistical methods – and what you just did here is a huge statistical fallacy.
The only meaningful statistics would be those indexed to the number of dogs of a particular type or breed so that you could look at risk/bite severity/fatalities/what have you on a per dog (or per 1,000 dogs or per 10,000 dogs) basis. Dividing 66% by 3 and comparing to 39% is meaningless number-juggling.
Fargaloo, I know that my statistics are incorrect. My point is that those statistics are incorrect ANYWAY. So, basing ANYTHING on them is pointless.
Nice coverup. You were trying to start some shit with me. It’s okay. I don’t mind. 
[QUOTE=scierra;7506847]
Now I have a Pit mix, I’ll do the same with her to keep her safe. But I do not want her discriminated against by Breed Specific Legislation. She has done nothing wrong other than being bred by some idiot BYB. If she would show aggression I will deal with it appropriately, and not allow her to become a statistic. [/QUOTE]
BSL might do nothing to your dog - if she is spayed, and you have her under control. She would only “become a statistic” if she actually did act aggressively.
Sorry, but there is a difference between an aggressive pit bull mix and an aggressive rat terrier or malti-poo. One can kill you, the other can’t. It matters. That is partly why they are labeled “dangerous” dog. The other part is the history of severe injuries and fatalities in comparison to other breeds.
All owners can be held accountable if their dogs bite, but it simply is very different when the dog in question has the physical capacity to kill a person. So…yes, I think there should be a different type of “breeding license” for “dangerous dogs”. How to define which ones are “dangerous?” There are lots of ways it could be done and the “pitty type” proponents will say they are unfair no matter what. But…if you don’t want to be subject to BSL…don’t get a dog that is on the list; get a malti-poo.
Actually you DID quote me. Post #109.
You lied about me advocating using “killing machines” as babysitters, which I certainly never did. I don’t think any dog should be used as a baby sitter.
I realize facts can be hard to keep track of for some people.
[QUOTE=Sswor;7502969]
It was a collective you. I’m not sure why you thought I was talking to you. I didn’t quote you, did I?
What did I lie about.
You think my posts are ridiculous, I think defending the position of keeping a fighting dog as a family pet is ridiculous. To each his own.[/QUOTE]
First of all, when any child or person is attacked and killed or injured by a dog it is a tragedy.
Interesting article on BSLs, $1800 would spay/neuter a bunch of dogs!
http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2008/02/niko-returns-ho.html
and another reason against BSLs!
http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2007/10/woman-wins-lega.html
Do you want your dogs removed and killed just because the AC think they are “pit bulls”? That scares me, that and cops shooting supposedly “pit bulls” like Lucky that I have posted about (Lucky is all hound dog!). My big dog will approach some people grinning at them, it is because he is submissive not snarling but some who do not know dog behavior would mistake him for snarling though he makes no sound. At 95 lbs, just his size is enough to intimidate some!
[QUOTE=S1969;7506882]
BSL might do nothing to your dog - if she is spayed, and you have her under control. She would only “become a statistic” if she actually did act aggressively.
Sorry, but there is a difference between an aggressive pit bull mix and an aggressive rat terrier or malti-poo. One can kill you, the other can’t. It matters. That is partly why they are labeled “dangerous” dog. The other part is the history of severe injuries and fatalities in comparison to other breeds.
All owners can be held accountable if their dogs bite, but it simply is very different when the dog in question has the physical capacity to kill a person. So…yes, I think there should be a different type of “breeding license” for “dangerous dogs”. How to define which ones are “dangerous?” There are lots of ways it could be done and the “pitty type” proponents will say they are unfair no matter what. But…if you don’t want to be subject to BSL…don’t get a dog that is on the list; get a malti-poo.[/QUOTE]
But with Breed specific, my dogs are labeled, and I’m affected. I chose the breeds that I like, all breeds are not for everyone. When you say it isn’t the same as a Rat Terrier biting I get that. But small dogs have killed children. Few and far between I know, but it can happen. Years ago it was reported that a Doxie killed an infant. I do not have the article so can’t quote it. I’ve seen statistics that show that some small dogs are more prone to bite, granted their bites are not as damaging as a large breed, but they should be legislated too. Again I get that a large dog who is aggressive does horrible damage, but all dogs can cause damage to kids.
I just do not want to see any breed of dog discriminated against for its breed or type. Enforce the dog laws already on the books, and make some of them stronger.
You do understand the difference the difference between “cause damage” and kill, don’t you? And the difference between Rat Terrier damage and Pit Bull damage? It’s like saying that both a butter knife and a cleaver can do damage. Sure. I let my 12 year old use one and not the other. Calculated risk is not in favor of the fighting breeds.
[QUOTE=S1969;7505065]
Really? I bet you would care if it was you.
Guess what? My breed has never killed anyone. Call people pit bull haters, but there are a lot of facts out there also.[/QUOTE]
You must have me confused with someone else. I did not, nor do I, call anyone “pit bull haters.”
Actually, I have had several dog bites over the years. Only one came from a pit bull that I was working with, and yes, I did have him euthanized. Yes, he did have signs he was going to bite, but his problem was neurological in nature combined with seizure activity as a result of a tumor.
However, the only dog I’ve had to go to the hospital for with crushed bones in my hand and permanent scarring? An Australian Shepherd. An Australian Shepherd from a breeder who did all of the “responsible breeder” things including, but not limited to, showing her dogs in conformation and working events. That dog would climb over fences and break through doors to bite people.
I don’t judge the entire breed on that one dog just like I won’t throw other breeds of dogs under the bus when it comes to “oh yeah - well what about this article?”
Do I think overbreeding is a problem in pit bulls? Absolutely.
Do I think the overbreeding issue ties in directly with dogs that are a few screws loose? Yes as the persons breeding for the sake of making a buck don’t care about temperament or any type of behavioral issues.
Do I think everyone needs a pit bull? Nope. Just like I don’t think everyone needs a lot of other breeds.
But I won’t engage in any venomous judgments and opinions of others especially as it pertains to dog breeds.
Edited: Regarding the “XL Pit Bulls,” this is of what I spoke:
http://www.ukcdogs.com/Web.nsf/Breeds/CompanionDog/AmericanBully
[QUOTE=S1969;7506882]
Sorry, but there is a difference between an aggressive pit bull mix and an aggressive rat terrier or malti-poo. One can kill you, the other can’t. It matters.[/QUOTE]
Clearly, it does. A rat terrier, malti-poo, or dachshund are all small breeds. The is a huge difference between being bitten by a small dog with a small mouth and being bitten by a medium size dog with a large mouth or by a large dog. Size and strength matter when it comes to dog bites. As a kid I knew someone bitten by his friend’s
Lab who had his had torn up pretty badly. If the friend’s family had malti-poo instead of an 85 lb lab, I bet her wouldn’t have needed nearly as many surgeries. Big dogs do a lot more damage than small dogs, and dogs with large heads do more than those with small heads.
[QUOTE=WorkingDrive;7507014]
You must have me confused with someone else. I did not, nor do I, call anyone “pit bull haters.”
Actually, I have had several dog bites over the years. Only one came from a pit bull that I was working with, and yes, I did have him euthanized. Yes, he did have signs he was going to bite, but his problem was neurological in nature combined with seizure activity as a result of a tumor.
However, the only dog I’ve had to go to the hospital for with crushed bones in my hand and permanent scarring? An Australian Shepherd. An Australian Shepherd from a breeder who did all of the “responsible breeder” things including, but not limited to, showing her dogs in conformation and working events. That dog would climb over fences and break through doors to bite people.
I don’t judge the entire breed on that one dog just like I won’t throw other breeds of dogs under the bus when it comes to “oh yeah - well what about this article?”
No one is throwing Pits under the bus or advocating for stricter legislation based on one dog or one article. Or even 10 dogs. Or 10 articles. Hundreds of deaths and I don’t know how many thousands of maulings and the incidences of these being on the rise are what have led to the current level of public concern.
Do I think overbreeding is a problem in pit bulls? Absolutely.
Do I think the overbreeding issue ties in directly with dogs that are a few screws loose? Yes as the persons breeding for the sake of making a buck don’t care about temperament or any type of behavioral issues.
Do I think everyone needs a pit bull? Nope. Just like I don’t think everyone needs a lot of other breeds.
But I won’t engage in any venomous judgments and opinions of others especially as it pertains to dog breeds.
Edited: Regarding the “XL Pit Bulls,” this is of what I spoke:
http://www.ukcdogs.com/Web.nsf/Breeds/CompanionDog/AmericanBully[/QUOTE]
Many sources say that we euthanize more than a million Pit Bulls in shelters every year. More that 72,000 in Los Angeles alone! How anyone can argue against strict S/N regulations is beyond me. More than a million dead dogs each year. If you really love these dogs, focus on that and push to spay and neuter as many as possible. What a sad statistic.
[QUOTE=JackieBlue;7506879]
Nice coverup. You were trying to start some shit with me. It’s okay. I don’t mind. ;)[/QUOTE]
This has NOTHING to do with a coverup but with the say statistics can be skewed.
BTW:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95747
According to this :
Home> U.S.
Rottweilers Called Deadliest Dogs
But of course, THIS site is reasonable. They definitely SAY that the statistics may not be good.
