Yeah, pit bulls don’t come in 130lb models. And since “pit bull” isn’t actually a breed… The dog in the picture looks like a Mastiff/boxer cross or something. But hey, it’s solid and has a big head, so we’ll call it a pit bull!
[QUOTE=MistyBlue;7500351]
There’s nothing inherently wrong/bad with pit bulls except:
*thug type owners
*ignorant, cheap owners (just want one litter, speutering costs too much)
*ignorant, internet reading, unable to accept reality owners (but MY dog saves kittens so ALL dogs must be like the ones I’ve met and here’s a pitbullsarewonderful website to educate you to my thinking!)
All are just as responsible of the others for the plethora of poor handling that causes a high risk breed to become media-blitz targets.
An enormous help to all pits everywhere would be for all the responsible owners of them to take their heads out of the sand and stand up for their dogs as opposed to making unfounded excuses for them. If they don’t want the general public trying to force local goverments from banning these dogs, they have to start being seriously realistic about them. Their current “it’s the media” and “it wasn’t a pit, it was a ______” and “they’re nanny dogs!” methods haven’t improved anything one bit. And it’s sad, because they love their dogs (as well they should) and they’re shooting themselves in the foot as they drag their breed down instead of helping them.[/QUOTE]
I think you nailed it. More so than any other breed/breed type, pitbulls attract asshole owners. If Dobermans of the pink eared snuffle were as popular and numerous as pitbulls and had the same owner population, we’d be hearing about the outrageous number of bite incidents with Dobermans and pink eared snuffles.
I’ve met wonderful ones, including a few owned by my technicians over the years. I’ve met what I’ll call average ones, could use more manners and training–but so could most of the dogs I encounter. And then I’ve met the downright scary. I watched one maul a technician in front of my eyes and then it went for my throat. Dog has bitten multiple people–all of whom were too nice to file a report and the owner never mentioned it. Went from sweet and tail wagging to intent to cause grave bodily injury in the blink of an eye. And while I’ve met more scary pitbulls than any other breed, that likely reflects they’re general popularity rating. I’ve also met scary Newfoundlands and Chihuahuas, too. And I’m at the point where I’m about ready to scream if another client tries to excuse their pet’s inappropriate behaviour by claiming they’re a rescue and must have been abused.
I don’t support breed specific legislation, I just don’t see it ever working as desired. It would just punish the good owners. And while I think the best thing that could happen to the breed is a reduction in numbers, I can’t see any type of breeding ban having any effective impract.
[QUOTE=Appsolute;7500357]
They have proven to be an unsafe animal. Be it because of bad breeding, bad owners, lack of culling etc - but these dogs have proven time and time again to be dangerous.
I will point out though, I proposed sterilization, not a mass gassing of the dogs. Love your pit bull? Fine, you get to keep them, but not breed them and make even more pits to “fall into bad hands” or whatever else makes these dogs kill at rate so much higher than other breeds. [/QUOTE]
Untrue. Absolutely, positively, completely untrue.
In order to actually support those statements, you would need to:
- ACCURATELY identify the breed(s) of dog in every fatal attack. If the breed is not absolutely identified, that data point is eliminated.
- ACCURATELY identify the population of each breed of dog involved in a fatal attack.
- Calculate percentages and determine if there are statistically significant differences.
And you know what? That is not possible, if for no other reason than the vast majority of people CAN’T identify dog breeds. I’ve had people absolutely insist that my purebred, AKC-registered Labrador retriever is part Rottweiler.
You are falling prey to the availability heuristic. You hear about more pit bull attacks (nevermind if the dog was actually a pit bull) than any another type of dog, therefore you think that they actually attack more. Kind of like how people think airplanes are more dangerous than cars, because plane crashes are more publicized than car crashes. And you hear about pit bull attacks because that’s what the media talks about, because that’s what sells. The media isn’t interested in truth or impartiality, they’re interested in money.
Keep an eye out for news reports of dog attacks. I can guarantee you that at least 99% of the time, if the dog was a pit bull (or people thought it was), the headline will include the dog’s breed. If the headline does not mention a breed, you can be pretty certain that it was some breed other than a pit bull.
[QUOTE=VCT;7500319]
And theres the post about how awesome Labs are and how they (or a mix) could never be involved in a mauling cuz you know, they are Labs. Talk to anyone who works in a vet office or with a large number of animals about how awesome Labs are. Do I think they are bad dogs inherently? No… I think they are very common pets and owned by people who shouldn’t own a dog. Same as pits.
During the last year, in my neighborhood, cows were getting mauled by a pack of three dogs. Some of the attacks were fatal. Full grown cows. A lab, a LabX and a GSD mix.[/QUOTE]
PLEASE READ MY POST AGAIN!!! You have obviously not read it at all - or at least comprehended what I wrote.
Yes, in general, labs are fabulous - in my opinion.
Did I say that every lab was??? NO! They need training to be good dogs just like any other breed. Their breed standard - again in general - really requires them to be gregarious friendly and forgiving (paraphrasing it). And that has been my experience with them.
As I implied in my post, you will get good fogs in a bad bunch and bad fogs in a good bunch.
IME, PBTs are not trust-worthy and are more prone to maul and do not take correction well. Labs are more prone to be trustworthy dogs who accept correction well.
That is my opinion. It is not yours and that is fine. But claiming that my opinion is something that I didn’t say is wrong . And to be frank, IME , and in NZ, if someone says a dog is a Labx and I can not see the traditional lab head I ask crossed with what. We have a problem here with fogs being identified as labxboxers that are do clearly not.
[QUOTE=amastrike;7500831]
Untrue. Absolutely, positively, completely untrue.
In order to actually support those statements, you would need to:
- ACCURATELY identify the breed(s) of dog in every fatal attack. If the breed is not absolutely identified, that data point is eliminated
Data point is eliminated? DBRFs don’t just go away because someone doesn’t like how data is collected. DBRF should be recorded and studied regardless of breed ID. There are other criteria to learn from as well.
- ACCURATELY identify the population of each breed of dog involved in a fatal attack.
Eee gads. Here we have another one of the Pro-Pit red herrings. In determining simply which breed of dog kills the most, NOT which percentage of which breed, population of breeds is irrelevant. Whatever breed pops up the most in DBRF is the winner. How many of them there are overall would be useful in determining the percentage of that breed that is responsible for the DBRF or how “dangerous” that breed might be overall, but has nothing to do with what type of dog is most often responsible for death by biting/mauling.
- Calculate percentages and determine if there are statistically significant differences
Just another red herring and part of the same argument as #2. Throwing in technical words like percentages and statistically significant to confuse the issue some more is common on many Pro-Pit websites. Again, when determining the type of dog that leads by simple numbers of individuals in DBRF, percentages and statistical significance don’t even come into play.
And you know what? That is not possible, if for no other reason than the vast majority of people CAN’T identify dog breeds. I’ve had people absolutely insist that my purebred, AKC-registered Labrador retriever is part Rottweiler
And here we go back to “the unicorn defense”. It can’t be PitBulls. They don’t even exist!
You are falling prey to the availability heuristic. You hear about more pit bull attacks (nevermind if the dog was actually a pit bull) than any another type of dog, therefore you think that they actually attack more. Kind of like how people think airplanes are more dangerous than cars, because plane crashes are more publicized than car crashes. And you hear about pit bull attacks because that’s what the media talks about, because that’s what sells. The media isn’t interested in truth or impartiality, they’re interested in money.
?Most intelligent humans are well aware that automobiles are more dangerous than airplanes. Pit Bull attacks make it into the news because, as multiple threads going on right now can attest, Pit Bulls maul people. “Dog bites child’s hand” vs. “Dog rips child’s face off, disfiguring him for life” is the selling factor. Over time, THAT is what has made “Pit Bull” the buzz word it is with the media. Repeated headlines with disfigurings, dismemberment and loss of life. And time and time again, the dog associated with such headlines is a Pit Bull or part bred. Yes, “Pit Bull” is a hot word with the media, and sadly, it has earned its place.
Keep an eye out for news reports of dog attacks. I can guarantee you that at least 99% of the time, if the dog was a pit bull (or people thought it was), the headline will include the dog’s breed. If the headline does not mention a breed, you can be pretty certain that it was some breed other than a pit bull.[/QUOTE]
I haven’t seen that to be true, but if it is, it’s because these dogs have earned their place in the news, not because someone arbitrarily decided to pick on them.
[QUOTE=amastrike;7500810]
Yeah, pit bulls don’t come in 130lb models. And since “pit bull” isn’t actually a breed… The dog in the picture looks like a Mastiff/boxer cross or something. But hey, it’s solid and has a big head, so we’ll call it a pit bull![/QUOTE]
Yes, Pit Bulls, do, as crazy as it is. I do think they exaggerated that dog’s weight, based on the photo. Also, based on the photo, it is NOT a Mastiff/Boxer cross.
ETA: “Pit Bull” can be short for American Pit Bull Terrier or it can refer to the collective family of Pit-type dogs. Using the “Pit Bull” isn’t a breed argument is just another “unicorn sighting” tactic.
Say hello to so
When my parents Wire Haired Dachshunds dig in my Mom’s garden, it’s not quite so cute, but it’s certainly not surprising either. Why is it so hard for the Pit Bull nuts to believe or admit that their beloved dogs might be prone to unpredictable fits of aggression??
All the fighting pitts.i have see are light and agile. Med size to small so They are super quick
Breed of dog: This is what I thought but wanted to wait until I could confirm it to make a definite statement. The dog is listed as an American Bully according to this article http://www.wdsu.com/news/local-news/new-orleans/breed-of-dog-blamed-in-childs-death-under-investigation/25214348#mid=18686270
Now according to the article I cited above, and American Bully is a breed created in the 1990’s by crossing an American Pit Bull Terrier and an American Staffordshire Terrier with a few outcrosses to bulldog breeds. BUT the primary cross is TWO pit bull breeds - the American Pit Bull and the American Staffordshire Terrier.
I cannot see how one can argue that this American Bully is not a pit bull.
Information on the American Bully:
http://www.ucadogs.com/Breed_Info_American_Bully.htm This clearly shows the connection to the American Pit Bull Terrier.
http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/a/americanbully.htm
and this is the description of the temperament in the above link:
The American Bully is a happy, outgoing, stable and confident dog. Gentle and loving toward people. Good-natured, amusing, extremely loyal and an affectionate family pet. Almost always obedient, this dog wants nothing more than to please its master. It is an extremely courageous and intelligent guard dog that is very full of life. This breed possesses the loyalty and stability of the American Pit Bull Terrier while retaining the sociable, amiable, and outgoing temperament of the American Staffordshire Terrier. This unique breed is noted for displaying extreme tolerance with children and an overwhelming eagerness to please its family. Confident, yet not aggressive, this breed possesses a very pleasant temperament. Physically, the American Bully has an impressive, athletic build, which is both muscular and defined, and displays strength and agility. The breed is versatile and capable of accomplishing a wide variety of tasks. All around, the American Bully is a well-rounded, reliable, trustworthy and ideal family companion. The breed is very outgoing with an eagerness to please. They are known for their courage. A persistent fighter if provoked. Highly protective of his owners and the owner’s property, it will fight an enemy to the death if the enemy traps the dog in a corner and threatens its loved ones. This breed has a very high tolerance for pain. Socialize very thoroughly when young to curb any dog aggressive tendencies. It has given outstanding results as a guardian of property, but is at the same time esteemed as a companion dog. This breed is not for the passive owner who does not understand that all dogs have an instinct to have a pack order. Read Top Dog. The American Bully needs an owner who is firm, but calm, confident and consistent. They need to know what is expected of them; rules to follow and limits to what they are and are not allowed to do. The objective in training and successfully keeping this dog is to achieve pack leader status. It is a natural instinct for a dog to have an order in their pack. When we humans live with dogs, we become their pack. The entire pack cooperates under a single leader; lines are clearly defined. You and all other humans MUST be higher up in the order than the dog. That is the only way your relationship can be a success.
Also seems this was an intact male used for breeding and there was a 6 month old female going into her first heat in the same apartment.
:no:
He was a winning show dog with the “abkc” which is all bully breeds. His registered name is TG’s Hidden Treasure from BTM Kennels.
Sadly BTM stands for Breaking The Mold. Which supposedly stood for both breaking the mold due to size/muscling and breaking the mold of pit bulls being seen as vicious.
sigh They also thought their dogs were child-proof nanny dogs. Registered show dogs. Supposedly proven breeding stock. Designed specifically for temperament and extreme size.
I also read that both the sire and dam of the attacking dog were UKC registered APBT, FWIW.
[QUOTE=MistyBlue;7501324]
Also seems this was an intact male used for breeding and there was a 6 month old female going into her first heat in the same apartment.
:no:
He was a winning show dog with the “abkc” which is all bully breeds. His registered name is TG’s Hidden Treasure from BTM Kennels.
Sadly BTM stands for Breaking The Mold. Which supposedly stood for both breaking the mold due to size/muscling and breaking the mold of pit bulls being seen as vicious.
sigh They also thought their dogs were child-proof nanny dogs. Registered show dogs. Supposedly proven breeding stock. Designed specifically for temperament and extreme size.[/QUOTE]
I know! And this is my problem with the pit bull dilemma. It’s not whether or not they can be vicious. If an owner wants to keep it restrained (humanely) and be responsible for it an take the risk, that is fine.
What is not fine is people misrepresenting the breed or misleading inexperienced people.
From the description cited above:
“The American Bully is a happy, outgoing, stable and confident dog. Gentle and loving toward people. Good-natured, amusing, extremely loyal and an affectionate family pet. Almost always obedient, this dog wants nothing more than to please its master. It is an extremely courageous and intelligent guard dog that is very full of life. This breed possesses the loyalty and stability of the American Pit Bull Terrier while retaining the sociable, amiable, and outgoing temperament of the American Staffordshire Terrier. This unique breed is noted for displaying extreme tolerance with children and an overwhelming eagerness to please its family. Confident, yet not aggressive, this breed possesses a very pleasant temperament.”
This misleads people and they repeat that pit bulls are great family dogs and tolerant with children. However, if you read further, the same author says something completely different. But, it is phrased in such a way as to not inform people looking for that “perfect family dog who is tolerant with children”.
It says “all dogs have an instinct to have a pack order” leading the reader to believe that the pit bull is no different from any other breed and then proceeds to say “You and all other humans MUST be higher up in the order than the dog.”
So, where do the children fit in with this “must be higher up in the order than the dog”?
This description is clearly intended to misrepresent the dog breed to unsuspecting families looking for a good pet.
This is what bothers me. Pit bulls may be great dogs, but it is wrong to misrepresent them to unknowledgeable people looking for a safe dog.
[QUOTE=JackieBlue;7501334]
I also read that both the sire and dam of the attacking dog were UKC registered APBT, FWIW.[/QUOTE]
Apparently dogs can be double registered as American Pit Bull terriers and American Bullies.
This dog is a confirmed pit bull and that is irrefutable at this point unless we find that the press is absolutely reporting inaccurate facts.
threedogpack, no problem! I probably didn’t explain very well either.
several thoughts have occurred to me during this thread.
At some point, someone mentioned getting a CGC on a dog. I’ve long advocated for this. I think it should be done on a neighborhood block basis with testing done by a group of 2 or 3 who live in that neighborhood. If you actually know who has which dogs, and they know you personally, it makes the testing more sensitive, I think. Done by a stranger you will likely not meet again…there is less pressure. I think it should be done 2x a year as well. How to handle and what to do with those dogs that fail…dunno. If I were a tester for my neighborhood, the dogs that failed would either have to be confined behind secure, high fences or euthed. That said, I have a neighbor with a Sheltie that would not pass, she’s quite fearful and would never tolerate strangers touching her.
CGC testing would encourage those with shy dogs to acclimate them, it would encourage training dogs (which almost never happens around here), and it would create opportunities for neighbors to get together for training and socialization.
it will never happen. Ever. But I think it’s a great idea.
I think society, in general, has lost the ability to see behavior in animals. Most people do not have livestock, most people do not understand [b][u]and[/b][/u] they have no desire to learn about behavior. There is nothing quite like having a cow charge you or a horse wave his feet around your ears to make you aware of behavior. Very likely in each case of mauling, there were precursors but the owners were ignorant of the signs and so were taken by surprise. Also likely was that there was little to no obedience training done on any of these dogs. Which does not discount genetics as well, but having some limits on behavior (with obedience training) might have modified how these incidents turned out. I have a really low to zero tolerance for dogs who bite, and think there are far too many nice dogs to put up with that kind of aggression. I would never tolerate biting in my home. If a dog bites a family member, I am pretty black and white about the consequences, I think they need to be euthed.
An old Pit Bull breed history/description from a 1908 NY Times article:
"The old lovers of the bulldog found to their dismay that sometimes a terrier, with only quickness and a pair of punishing jaws to recommend him, would kill a bulldog while the latter was merely hanging on. The bulldog would be brave to the death of course, and would withstand pain that the terrier would never endure, but that was poor consolation when the terrier had killed the dog.
The dog fighters were, however, as persevering a set of men as were the bull baiters, and they set to work to remodel their favorites for their new occupation. They began to cross their bulldogs with the white English terrier, a breed now practically extinct, but the same in every respect, save color, as the modern Manchester or black-and-tan. The progeny was named the bull terrier, the greatest fighting machine, pound for pound, on four legs. The bull terrier had the courage of the bulldog and the jaws and quickness of the white terrier. Moreover, he has the terrier’s way of fighting. He does not simply take a hold and stay there. He takes a hold and begins to eat his way through and tear and worry. If his first hold doesn’t suit, he takes another. If he gets his adversary by the throat, he will tear out the throat in a minute or so and end the battle."
look guys you can’t blame pitbulls. so what if its just a random 4 year old? it’s not like pitbull attacks happen often. Stop blaming the breed.
![[IMG]http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y172/MistyBlue5105/543236_4223615633830_1141088328_n_zpsfa8b43e6.jpg)](http://s5.photobucket.com/user/MistyBlue5105/media/543236_4223615633830_1141088328_n_zpsfa8b43e6.jpg.html){kind=link}