[QUOTE=S1969;7499627]
:lol:
Thanks for trolling.[/QUOTE]
Haha you believe in the anti-pitbull propaganda don tyou?
Look it doesnt matter that pitbulls attack people or even attack horses sometimes. the bottom line is that there are pitbulls that dont attak people and make lovely pets!
[QUOTE=chronos;7499643]
the bottom line is that there are pitbulls that dont attak people and make lovely pets![/QUOTE]
Yes there are - many. And there are some that maul and kill people. How is that “propaganda?” Were those attacks staged?
Agreed. In my opinion they aren’t safe dogs. No dogs are 100% bomb proof of course, but pitbulls scare me ever since they attacked my childhood dog, a friendly mind her own business American Eskimo TWICE! She barely survived both attacks, she was all ripped up. It was especially frightening because they had to break through their fence and run down a hill into our yard to do it, so its not like our dog was close. They really sought her out on both occasions when she was just lounging on the back patio.
[QUOTE=MustangSavvy;7499585]
The term Pit Bull refers to many different breeds of dogs. No one really knows what Pit bulls are, including the police and animal control. I see it time and time again working at a humane society. If you think the police and animal control get proper training you are sadly misinformed. They constantly get things wrong we have even had AC bring in a dog that they thought was dead to put in our freezer that wasn’t actually dead. We always double check.
BSL is not the answer. It is ignorance and fear mongering, pure and simple. Look at Denver verses Boulder. Denver has a BSL and they have killed thousands of innocent dogs and dogs that do not even fall under the ban, because they are poorly educated. Denver also hasn’t reduced the number of bites or fatalities. While, Boulder takes the stance of punish the deed not the breed. Boulder hasn’t had any fatal bites or anything for a long time. Education is key. Not bans, bans create more issues then good. As we have seen time and time again.[/QUOTE]
Not that I agree with BSL, but to play fair, the goal of a ban such a Denver’s is to decrease severe attacks (maulings) and fatalities. There was no goal or expectation with regard to overall dog bites. And, according to the Director of Denver Animal Control, they’ve had no Pit Bull related fatalities or severe maulings since the ban went into effect. That’s more than a lot of US cities can say. So…success, right? In a way.
Those who want to compare Denver to Boulder from a Pit loving stance will leave out details like the fact that Boulder is known as one of the least hospitable dog towns in the US. A dog doesn’t even have to actually cause damage for the owner to be cited for having an aggressive animal. The Boulder ACOs take their Aggressive Dog Ordinance very seriously and many Boulder dog owners feel harassed. Dogs aren’t allowed anywhere in the city unless their leash is in their owner’s hands and the Animal Control Dept. is a for-profit entity farmed out to a third party for management.
Boulder keeps their incidents down because a dog that looks at you wrong is immediately tagged as aggressive, the owner is cited and fines are levied. This happens more than once and things escalate. But…who decides what’s threatening behavior? Does your dog deserve that aggressive label and do you deserve the attached fine if he, say, scratches someone in excitement?
I’m just amazed at how the Pit Bull camp just keeps throwing out half truths, red herrings, straw men, diversions, unicorns…anything rather than owning up to the reality that these dogs can be really dangerous.
Someone who is very dear to me, thought her rescue PB was the “sweetest” thing…until he wasn’t. She was injured trying to pull him off one of her cats (that he did kill) that he had lived with for years.
[QUOTE=shayaalliard;7499594]
from the article:
2-year-old, 130-pound dog
That’s not a pit bull. It just isn’t. The problem as I see it are the IDIOT breeders making these monstrosities. That dog looks like a hypp h/h QH in the pictures.
Pits were/are meant to be a 40-45 lb mid sized dog which is EXTREMELY safe with humans (and NOT safe with other animals). And, it isn’t the fighters who are breeding mean and huge into them- it’s the wannabe tough guys who used to ask me if we sold dog steroids and weights.[/QUOTE]
It is. And what they were meant to be way back when is irrelevant now. GSDs weren’t meant to slink around as if their tails are about to fall off with hyper flexed hocks and hyperextended carpi. Labs weren’t meant to look like stubby tailed beach balls with legs. Dog breeds are very subject to human fancy and the fad with Pits is big and muscular.
In order for any breed to be “EXTREMELY safe with humans”, those that aren’t, must be culled. And that hasn’t happened in a long time.
[QUOTE=chronos;7499620]
Look. I own a pit bull and she lovves me so much! Never blame the breed. Who cares about some stupid 4 year old girl? It was her fault for being near a pitbull. Pitbulls arre the most peaceful dog breed ever![/QUOTE]
:D:lol: Awesome. Post.
I have no problem with the thought that Pitts can be dangerous. I just don’t think it makes sense to throw out the majority of them that aren’t. What are we going to do with 6 million Pit Bulls if we just ban them? And after we have killed 5.9 million happy friendly pets,to get at the .1 million vicious dogs, the idiots and criminals will have moved on to the new “tough” breed, and we will start all over?
One of my best friends has two pit bulls. They are trained but not as well as I would like. They scrap and fight with each other at times. They are not fixed. Her daughters jump in the middle of the dogs arguments- and the dogs back down. Would I ever take my little dogs over there? NO WAY. They would be killed. That’s what a Pit should be, even with a less than perfect owner. The PEOPLE are safe- the other animals, not too sure.
[QUOTE=shayaalliard;7499624]
If you are talking about the cat lady I think you are, it was in my town. The dogs were later confirmed by the owners as corso/mastiff mixes- they are pretty common around here among the drug types. NOT a breed I would trust in any but the best hands, and those owners were not. The follow up never got much publicity because “pit bull kills person” sells more papers as it were.
Pit bulls bite A LOT LESS than several other breeds. The top breed for bites has typically been the cocker spaniel. The problem is, if cockers bite 500 people, and no one dies, and pit bulls bite 50 people but 5 die, thats a scarier stat. The problem isn’t that they are normally vicious- they aren’t. The problem is that when one does attack- usually through no fault of it’s own (training,etc is fault of owner)- it has the sheer power and strength to do a lot of damage.
I worked the store in the bad part of town. The fighters were my customers. I met a LOT of Pit Bulls, Corsos, and a couple bears.
When I moved to the "nice side of town store, where the customers were wannabes instead of actual criminals, then I had one Pitt come over the counter at me. I had very little warning, and the owner had no control. Luckily I’m quick, and the guy pulled him back down. He would have killed me if he could.
In that time I got bitten repeatedly by grandma’s sweet little popsicle. Those dogs were MUCH less commonly in the store, and Much more aggressive- but the scars are a whole lot smaller.[/QUOTE]
Can you find me the stat that shows that Pit Bulls bite A LOT LESS than other breeds? I’d like to see that. And what about maulings? Do they sell news stories?
[QUOTE=shayaalliard;7499624]
If you are talking about the cat lady I think you are, it was in my town. The dogs were later confirmed by the owners as corso/mastiff mixes- they are pretty common around here among the drug types. NOT a breed I would trust in any but the best hands, and those owners were not. The follow up never got much publicity because “pit bull kills person” sells more papers as it were.
Pit bulls bite A LOT LESS than several other breeds. The top breed for bites has typically been the cocker spaniel. The problem is, if cockers bite 500 people, and no one dies, and pit bulls bite 50 people but 5 die, thats a scarier stat. The problem isn’t that they are normally vicious- they aren’t. The problem is that when one does attack- usually through no fault of it’s own (training,etc is fault of owner)- it has the sheer power and strength to do a lot of damage.
I worked the store in the bad part of town. The fighters were my customers. I met a LOT of Pit Bulls, Corsos, and a couple bears.
When I moved to the "nice side of town store, where the customers were wannabes instead of actual criminals, then I had one Pitt come over the counter at me. I had very little warning, and the owner had no control. Luckily I’m quick, and the guy pulled him back down. He would have killed me if he could.
In that time I got bitten repeatedly by grandma’s sweet little popsicle. Those dogs were MUCH less commonly in the store, and Much more aggressive- but the scars are a whole lot smaller.[/QUOTE]
Probably not the same case as the dogs involved were much smaller than a Corso/Mastiff mix would have been - well, at least according to the press. I don’t have much confidence in the press so I have no idea if their report on the weight was accurate.
I think people mix up a dog’s character with a dog’s danger. Many people disparage Chi’s, saying they are aggressive little biters. That same person will say, like you do here, that pit bulls don’t bite much and are usually sweeter than the Chi. My response to that is that it’s about danger, not about character. That Chi is not going to kill you if it decides to bite you whereas the pit bull will do a lot of harm if it decides to attack you.
I’m not advocating any bans or anything like that - never have. (Since I used the Chihuahua as my example of a dog of bad character, I have to say this. I have come to like Chihuahua’s very much even though the ones I knew as a kid were pretty nippy - cute but very nippy. That was the owner error. The ones I’ve known as an adult are fantastic little dogs.
It’s about danger, not about who might nip you if you work with dogs. It’s also about being honest about breeds. Did you read the write up I linked above about the description of the American Bully? It really is worth reading - perfect dog for kids…only have one if you can assert your dominance follows in the fine print.
I’m not sure what my own point is…I guess it’s that people just need to be honest about the potential for rogue individuals in their breed - and with some, it’s a very dangers potential, and with others its just an annoying potential.
In the case of the little 4yo girl, they are testing for steroids, too. So, the information on what happened there isn’t available yet.
(I think everyone would love to see new photos of Bert and Ernie, btw.)
[QUOTE=shayaalliard;7499701]
I have no problem with the thought that Pitts can be dangerous. I just don’t think it makes sense to throw out the majority of them that aren’t. What are we going to do with 6 million Pit Bulls if we just ban them? And after we have killed 5.9 million happy friendly pets,to get at the .1 million vicious dogs, the idiots and criminals will have moved on to the new “tough” breed, and we will start all over?
One of my best friends has two pit bulls. They are trained but not as well as I would like. They scrap and fight with each other at times. They are not fixed. Her daughters jump in the middle of the dogs arguments- and the dogs back down. Would I ever take my little dogs over there? NO WAY. They would be killed. That’s what a Pit should be, even with a less than perfect owner. The PEOPLE are safe- the other animals, not too sure.[/QUOTE]
Not one person on this thread has advocated banning them. Who are you arguing with?
CDC studies are collected here:
dogsbite.org
Basically, the stats say that other dogs BITE people much more often than pit bulls. BUT Pit Bulls that do bite are MUCH more likely to KILL. Basically, the inherent danger is not so much that they are naturally aggressive, it’s that when they do go bad they are strong enough and willing enough to kill people. Less than 10% of dog bites are from pit bulls. Over 50% of fatalities are from Pit Bulls. They are strong animals capable of much harm- they need to be properly trained and handled. Sort of like keeping a stallion.
Highlights:
Dogs predominantly of chihuahua, golden retriever, labrador retriever, poodle, Scottish terrier, and Shetland sheepdog breeds were more common among nonbiting than among the biting dogs. None of the cases and only one control dog was a pit bull terrier.
Dogs predominantly of German shepherd, chow chow, collie and akita breeds were substantially more frequent among biting than nonbiting dogs. The total numbers of dogs mainly collie (n=9) and akita (n=5) breeds were small compared to the total numbers of German shepherd (n=47) and chow chows (n=40).
Biting dogs were significantly more likely to reside in homes with one or more children, ages 10 years and younger, and to be chained while in the yard. Of the 83 chained dogs, 44 (53%) had growled or snapped at visitors to the house. This same behavior, however, was reported in unchained dogs 44% of the time.
My brother was attacked when he was young and it could have easily been a fatal attack. The bites surrounded his face and narrowly missed the temporal artery. And what kind of dog was it? A golden retriever.
Any dog can fatally attack a person. Pit bulls happen to have the physical ability to do it easily. Just imagine if Grandma’s chihuahua had the jaws of a pitbull. There would be whole neighborhoods of kids with no ankles.
Truly though, the sweetest dog that I have ever met is a pitbull, but she was raised by someone experienced with dog training. Unfortunately many pitbulls don’t get that opportunity. The worst kind of idiots seems to think they need to breed and keep them. It’s really a shame that such wonderful animals can be ruined by the idiocy of bad “breeders” and owners.
sigh Well of course all dogs shake.
The point was, terriers are known for shaking. And meaning business when they do it.
Every dog I’ve owned shook something, playing tug of war or a stuffed animal, etc. Shaking to break a hold when playing with other dogs or trying to get a branch off of a tree.
Then there’s the fast snapping shake that terriers are known for. And were created for.
Just like all dogs can pull something. None pull like sled dogs though. All dogs have an excellent sense of smell, few can follow scents like scent hounds. All dogs can swim, but not like water breeds.
There hasn’t been much talk about BSL on here that I’ve noticed. I’m definitely NOT for a breed ban at all.
[QUOTE=Coyoteco;7499711]
Probably not the same case as the dogs involved were much smaller than a Corso/Mastiff mix would have been - well, at least according to the press. I don’t have much confidence in the press so I have no idea if their report on the weight was accurate.
I think people mix up a dog’s character with a dog’s danger. Many people disparage Chi’s, saying they are aggressive little biters. That same person will say, like you do here, that pit bulls don’t bite much and are usually sweeter than the Chi. My response to that is that it’s about danger, not about character. That Chi is not going to kill you if it decides to bite you whereas the pit bull will do a lot of harm if it decides to attack you.
I’m not advocating any bans or anything like that - never have. (Since I used the Chihuahua as my example of a dog of bad character, I have to say this. I have come to like Chihuahua’s very much even though the ones I knew as a kid were pretty nippy - cute but very nippy. That was the owner error. The ones I’ve known as an adult are fantastic little dogs.
It’s about danger, not about who might nip you if you work with dogs. It’s also about being honest about breeds. Did you read the write up I linked above about the description of the American Bully? It really is worth reading - perfect dog for kids…only have one if you can assert your dominance follows in the fine print.
I’m not sure what my own point is…I guess it’s that people just need to be honest about the potential for rogue individuals in their breed - and with some, it’s a very dangers potential, and with others its just an annoying potential.
In the case of the little 4yo girl, they are testing for steroids, too. So, the information on what happened there isn’t available yet.
(I think everyone would love to see new photos of Bert and Ernie, btw.)[/QUOTE]
I think we agree on a lot here 
And I will grab some new picture and make a Bert And Ernie update thread
[QUOTE=JackieBlue;7499677]
Not that I agree with BSL, but to play fair, the goal of a ban such a Denver’s is to decrease severe attacks (maulings) and fatalities. There was no goal or expectation with regard to overall dog bites. And, according to the Director of Denver Animal Control, they’ve had no Pit Bull related fatalities or severe maulings since the ban went into effect. That’s more than a lot of US cities can say. So…success, right? In a way.
Those who want to compare Denver to Boulder from a Pit loving stance will leave out details like the fact that Boulder is known as one of the least hospitable dog towns in the US. A dog doesn’t even have to actually cause damage for the owner to be cited for having an aggressive animal. The Boulder ACOs take their Aggressive Dog Ordinance very seriously and many Boulder dog owners feel harassed. Dogs aren’t allowed anywhere in the city unless their leash is in their owner’s hands and the Animal Control Dept. is a for-profit entity farmed out to a third party for management.
Boulder keeps their incidents down because a dog that looks at you wrong is immediately tagged as aggressive, the owner is cited and fines are levied. This happens more than once and things escalate. But…who decides what’s threatening behavior? Does your dog deserve that aggressive label and do you deserve the attached fine if he, say, scratches someone in excitement?
I’m just amazed at how the Pit Bull camp just keeps throwing out half truths, red herrings, straw men, diversions, unicorns…anything rather than owning up to the reality that these dogs can be really dangerous.[/QUOTE]
Haha
I live in Boulder, I at a humane society. I am pretty sure I know a lot more about my area where I live and work, then you do. Boulder takes a long time to do anything about so called aggressive dogs. I have seen dogs come in on bite confinement six or more times, before the city acts. That is a lot. Boulder is one of the most dog friendly cities in the country. We have the green tag program which allows dogs to be off leash on all of the open space. Frankly, having dogs on leash in our extremely busy little city makes a lot of sense.
AC used to be in the shelter, but they have always been under the police. They are in the police station. They are not under some for-profit third party.
We are NOT constantly harassed by AC. I have not ever been harassed by animal control. IMHO we have some of the best animal control in the area and I have regular contact with lots of different areas surrounding Boulder, not just Boulder AC.
But, you know you obviously know more since you don’t live in the area or have regular interactions with AC and animal lovers. I am just some stupid and ignorant pit bull lover. 
Pitts and Rottweilers are both banned in Denver, and have been for years. There have been attacks I’ve read about. One was a little boy severely injured by (if I recall correctly, but it’s been a few years) his uncle or adult cousins fighting pitts the man was hiding in the family home. They were not family pets, but fighters. A woman and her (I think Golden) dog were attacked walking on the street in the suburbs, and they were rescued by some kids playing street hockey, the kids heard the screams, ran over, and started beating the attacker away with their hockey sticks. I don’t know if either case was outside the city limits, but both were in the Denver metro area. And there are other people with Pitts, because I know of several cases with problems neighbors with aggressive animals, but no one calls authorities because they’re afraid of retaliation, and all three are in Denver city.
I read years ago about a study (I think in Dog World?), and over a thousand fatal or severe dog attacks were studied, and virtually all animals were for guarding illicit activities, and none of the animals were really family pets. Lying about why they had the dog was routine also, making it look like a family pet suddenly went berserk, when the reality was they were aggressive guard animals, and not pets at all.
Jackie, here you go
http://mabbr.org/pit-bull-ownership/the-truth-about-pit-bulls/
shay, dogsbite is a very biased site against pit bulls.
I want to know those of you saying how bad pit bulls are, where are you getting your statistics and numbers? Because when I do research looking at credible sites, even the CDC has re-vamped their original dog bite research, the credible sites i.e. not the news! are saying most times breed cannot be determined. http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dogbites/dog-bite-related-fatalities/
Another good credible source http://www.companionanimalpsychology.com/2013/12/can-fatal-dog-attacks-be-prevented.html
and another
http://stubbydog.org/2011/07/when-dogs-bite/
[QUOTE=S1969;7499461]
Sigh. I actually agree with you.
BUT. It seems that pit bulls (and bully types and mixes) ARE bred indiscriminately, and are very often placed in the hands of the worst types of owners.
The reason people are fearful and blame the “type” (and I won’t say “breed” because SO MANY of these dogs are not actually deliberately bred…they are just reproducing) - this “type” is extremely powerful and has been incriminated in many incidents - some fatal.[/QUOTE]
This is the biggest problem, these dogs are attractive to the wrong people who are not conscientious dog owners who instill the manners a dog of this type requires.
Would banning them, perhaps for a short while, reduce that?
What dog would they then migrate towards? And then become the ‘problem breed’?
When I was a kid it was Pinschers and GSDs who were the ‘bad dogs’. It is always going to be one breed or another that gets the bad rep, in part because they are attractive to asshats who need a dog in a studded collar on a large link chain to feel like a big tough guy.
[QUOTE=S1969;7499461]My dogs are simply NOT capable of that kind of physical damage, even if they went totally beserk.
I am a dog lover and really don’t have prejudices against breeds - I show my dog and have NEVER been afraid of walking him by any grouping of dogs waiting ringside (which, if you’ve never done it, can be intimidating).
I AM, however, prejudiced against “bully types” because they so often come with owners who know next to nothing about breeding, socializing and safety - they are a big bundle of “what ifs”. Add to that the fact that everyone knows that some pit bulls/bully types have gone beserk and mauled and killed people and other dogs…they are hard to trust unless you know them extremely well.[/QUOTE]
Yes. It’s not the dogs or breed, per se. But today it is PBs. And it IS a problem. What, if anything we can do about it… that’s the $1M question.
I have 2 dogs: a large black lab who will only kill you with her hellatious halitosis, and the Beagle who, if she thinks you are an interloper, will sneak up and nip [she has not gotten anyone, I watch her like a hawk as I recognized early on that she is a very protective big dog in a lil dog body].
I trust them as far as I know I can trust them… many PB owners [not the ones posting on horse boards, of course] are not as in tune with who their dogs are, what they can do, and how to control them. And that lack of stewardship to the individual dog and the breed harms the individual dogs, and the breed as a whole.
Because regardless of statistics or biased/unbiased sources, PERCEPTION is reality.
Curious where they get their “registered population” numbers from since I would argue that most “pit bulls” aren’t registered.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
