Another fatal Pit Bull attack....

[shayaalliard]

[QUOTE=JackieBlue;7501132]
I stumbled across this blog post and found it apropos to this discussion. And really sad.

http://17barks.blogspot.com/2014/03/my-red-nose-pit-bull.html?m=1

ETA, another one, along the same lines, just so sad. A well socialized, family dog, living inside, this one even nicknamed “kissy face”.

http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/24746005/mother-fights-for-vicious-dog-ban-in-georgia

I’m just heartbroken reading these.[/QUOTE]

The first link is a really good example of an owner that was not sharp enough to have one. She mentions “Dog and kid were playing by chasing each other like they always did”. Encouraging a small squealing child to play chase me with a large predator is a REALLY REALLY bad idea regardless of breed. Still very sorry the kid was hurt. Still was right to euth dog- but someone who is savvy enough to have one would NEVER have let that happen.

[threedogpack]

[QUOTE=shayaalliard;7501474]
The first link is a really good example of an owner that was not sharp enough to have one. She mentions “Dog and kid were playing by chasing each other like they always did”. Encouraging a small squealing child to play chase me with a large predator is a REALLY REALLY bad idea regardless of breed. Still very sorry the kid was hurt. Still was right to euth dog- but someone who is savvy enough to have one would NEVER have let that happen.[/QUOTE]

and this is what prompted my post above about people not understanding or seeing behavior. Think about barrier frustration, how kids will run on the other side of a fence from a dog and how wound up the dogs get. SMH.

[khall]

I think the big problem with “pit bulls” is like most dogs, yes even the little ankle biters, need training. Being in rescue, I see very few people who train their dogs to have even the basic manners (at the venues where we have adoption events, many people bring their pets i.e. Pet Smart, TSC etc). People do not exercise their dogs enough (hello, these dogs are terriers and can be high energy dogs!) they do not teach them basic commands, they just have the dog as a “pet”, but do not do anything with them to make them acceptable members of society. So the dogs and children end up paying the price.

IMO the person owning any big powerful breed needs to show that they can train and handle the breed in a safe manner (as in ATL attack, leaving 2 yr old alone with big dog? stupid). With my foster, we did much leash walking, playing with toys, teaching her out (drop toy), leave it (she had an obsession with squeaky toys that with training subsided) sit before you eat, down, stay, off. Lots of interaction with other dogs, adoption events are great for that. She had daily interaction with a cat at my place and other dogs that were loose. People also need to train their kids about appropriate interactions with dogs. Of course that means that the parents should know appropriate interactions with dogs, which is not so likely!

[Arrows_Endure]

Ok, lets add some perspective.
In 2013, there were 32 dog related fatalities in the US. There are an estimated 83.3 million owned dogs in the us. That makes the percentage of deaths compared to the number of dogs owned about .00000004%

In 2013, there were roughly 20 horse related deaths in the US. There is an estimated 9.2 million horses in the US. That makes the percentage of deaths compared to the number of horses oned about .000002%

There are far more deaths related to horses than there are deaths related to dogs. Therefore, we should clearly ban horses.

Now, having said all that, pits are exactly the same as ANY OTHER DOG. There are good ones, bad ones, misunderstood ones, and abused ones. There are those that bite, and those that would never dream of biting. Because Pits are strong, when they bite a lot of damage is done. Besides, banning pits won’t make a difference. The thugs either won’t go along with the ban, or they will pick another breed that makes them look “tough”. Then we’ll be here on COTH debating how cane corso’s should be banned, or argentine mastiffs, or Rottweiler’s, or Dobermans, or boxers.

[JackieBlue]

Does it somehow make the horribleness of these attacks easier to live with to immediately start pointing out what we think someone did wrong? In the first link, the dog and the kid grew up together and ran around frequently. Maybe not such a great idea, but dogs and kids have been known to run and play without incident. THIS dog and kid had been known to run and play without incident. The child was attacked in the face, not nipped in the heels, bitten in the back or any of the usual “chase” bites. We will never know what really happened, because, sadly, the adult stepped away and didn’t witness the attack.

Khall, in another thread some posters were aghast when one poster said she doesn’t even leave her child alone with her dog to go to the bathroom. That’s all this mother did. She’d had her beloved “Kissy Face” girl for EIGHT years. She knew her well. She’d lived with her son for 2 years with no signs of any issues whatsoever and the woman had to go to the bathroom, so she did. Moms do it all the time. To say that it’s her fault that her dog nearly decapitated her son isn’t exactly fair. It’s just not quite normal canine behavior to rip the baby’s head off when Mom visits the loo.

It’s a shame that all the Pit Bull propaganda is so prevalent and so convincing. You hear something enough times and it becomes fact in your mind. Pit Bull owners so easily buy into the stories and are lulled into a false sense of security, causing them to fail to even see their dogs as the large predators that they are. That said, if I have to worry about my dog ripping my child’s throat out while I’m in the bathroom or shredding her face while I’m closing a gate, there’s just something wrong.

[JackieBlue]

[QUOTE=Arrows Endure;7501571]
Ok, lets add some perspective.
In 2013, there were 32 dog related fatalities in the US. There are an estimated 83.3 million owned dogs in the us. That makes the percentage of deaths compared to the number of dogs owned about .00000004%

In 2013, there were roughly 20 horse related deaths in the US. There is an estimated 9.2 million horses in the US. That makes the percentage of deaths compared to the number of horses oned about .000002%

There are far more deaths related to horses than there are deaths related to dogs. Therefore, we should clearly ban horses.

Now, having said all that, pits are exactly the same as ANY OTHER DOG. There are good ones, bad ones, misunderstood ones, and abused ones. There are those that bite, and those that would never dream of biting. Because Pits are strong, when they bite a lot of damage is done. Besides, banning pits won’t make a difference. The thugs either won’t go along with the ban, or they will pick another breed that makes them look “tough”. Then we’ll be here on COTH debating how cane corso’s should be banned, or argentine mastiffs, or Rottweiler’s, or Dobermans, or boxers.[/QUOTE]

That’s not a good comparison. The majority of horse related deaths involve horse owners or others actively “involved in horses” in one way or another. Usually, aside from the occasional loose horse hit on a road, you need to be on an equine property to even encounter a horse. Signs regarding risk are posted, farms carry liability insurance, etc.
Dogs are literally everywhere and so are their victims. Completely innocent people going about the business of their daily lives can be maimed or killed through no fault of their own, in their own neighborhood or in their own home. Often, if the victim is not the owner, the dog’s owner, even though liable for the attack, is financially unable to cover any costs of medical treatment, final expenses, etc. and it’s exceedingly rare for someone to carry liability insurance on a dog.
Some people would say that if you choose to work with horses you’ve accepted a certain amount of risk. Fair enough. What risk to you accept by walking out your front door? When horses start getting loose and running people down and purposefully savaging and killing them, I think we’d do something about that in a hurry.

Pits don’t just do a lot of damage because they’re strong. They also have a devastating attack style, for which they were carefully bred and selected, generation after generation. I don’t agree with banning the breed, but there are other forms of aggressive dog legislation that could protect the many from the few.

[MistyBlue]

Comments on BBs and under the news stories just prove the point.

It’s always the fault of everyone and everything other than the dog. Always. :no:

The day that nobody can go answer a phone, close a door, pee, refill a sippy-cup, etc due to endangering their children and being considered stupid/irresponsible is the day that loses all reason.

And of course then add the “the child probably caused it!” Yes, the child probably moved faster than a walk, definitely deserves to be mauled for that. Who the heck ever heard of children and dogs playing together? And if they do, it had better be while standing still.
Or the child made a high pitched noise!

Color me crazy but what happened to the Nanny Dog theory? People used to use these as Nanny Dogs because it was safe to leave your small kids with them. And yet back then without TV and iPads and video games, something tells me the children ran and squealed then too.

I’ve raised children. And dogs. Hard to find a dog with a higher prey drive than a Malamute. My children survived despite running and squealing. Because the dogs lived with the child, knew damned well it wasn’t prey. I could go pee without worrying about my child being decapitated.

Children play with dogs. As long as they’re not playing rough with the dog or teasing the dog, making noise and moving fast is TOTALLY within the accepted play actions of a child around dogs. Hell, how do you think puppies play?

[JackieBlue]

http://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pit-bull-myths.php

Myth #6 is particularly interesting. Sheds a little light on the “There was no warning” thing and makes sense.

[amastrike]

[QUOTE=JackieBlue;7501198]

If we take a dog, specifically, purposefully bred to be an indiscriminate and brutal fighter, designed to inflict maximum damage, to be single minded and determined…and violence is its only job, that’s all we created it to do…why would we ever think this animal would make a perfect pet? [/QUOTE]

Because they were specifically, purposefully bred to be brutal toward other dogs, not humans, therefore not indiscriminate. I would never ever ever trust a pit bull unsupervised with another dog. Never. Would I trust one unsupervised with a child? As much as I’d trust any dog. They make a perfect pet because they were bred to not be aggressive toward humans.

I had a GSD adopted from the shelter. With me and my parents, I’d trust him to the ends of the earth. With a stranger coming into the house, no way, he would have attacked in a second. Yes, different breeds/types of dog do have certain behaviors bred into them, but those behaviors can be much more specific than you seem to realize.

JackieBlue, part of me wants to refute your arguments to my arguments, but I’m pretty sure you just won’t get it. Please tell me you don’t make fact and/or research based decisions that affect anyone but you, because the thought of people who don’t understand the importance of accurate, complete information in decision making and opinion forming influencing public policy is truly frightening.

[JackieBlue]

[QUOTE=amastrike;7501604]
Because they were specifically, purposefully bred to be brutal toward other dogs, not humans, therefore not indiscriminate. I would never ever ever trust a pit bull unsupervised with another dog. Never. Would I trust one unsupervised with a child? As much as I’d trust any dog. They make a perfect pet because they were bred to not be aggressive toward humans.

From the site I just posted a link to. It’s a little late for me to read the cited sources for myself, but there’s always tomorrow:

“[h=2]Myth #3: Human-aggressive pit bulls were “culled”[/h]Historically, it is believed that dogfighters removed human-aggressive pit bulls from the gene pool. “Man biters,” as dogmen referred them, were “culled” to prevent dog handlers from suffering vicious bites. However, dogmen themselves and pedigrees show a different story. As far back as 1909, George Armitage shares a story in, “Thirty Years with Fighting Dogs.” He describes Caire’s Rowdy as not a mere man-biter, but as a “man-eater,” the most dangerous biter of all.6
In more modern years, a substantial number of champion (CH), grand champion (GR CH) and register of merit (ROM) fighting dogs carry the title of a man-biter or a man-eater. These pit bulls were championship-breeding stock, whose famed owners never for a moment considered culling the dogs. Some of the most well known dogs include: Adams’ GR CH Zebo, Indian Bolio ROM,Garner’s CH Chinaman ROM, Gambler’s GR CH Virgil and West’s CH Spade (man-eater).7
In 1974, after a series of high profile news articles written by Wayne King and published by the New York Times, the image of the ferocious fighting pit bull moved from the shadowy world of dogmen into the mainstream. This period, between 1975 and 1979, is known as the “leakage period” when the breeding of pit bulls drastically increased through gang members and drug dealers, who wanted the “toughest dog” on the block, as well as by pet pit bull breeders.8
While some dogmen of the past may have culled human-aggressive dogs to keep their stock free of man-biters, once the leakage period began, there is no evidence that similar selective pressures were maintained.9 As early as 1980, pit bull attacks begin headlining newspapers, “Another Pit Bull Attack Reported; Boy, 8 Slashed (1980),” as well as reports of pit bull owners trying to bolster the breed’s “deteriorating” public image, “Pit Bull Attacks As Owners Fight Image (1980).””

I had a GSD adopted from the shelter. With me and my parents, I’d trust him to the ends of the earth. With a stranger coming into the house, no way, he would have attacked in a second. Yes, different breeds/types of dog do have certain behaviors bred into them, but those behaviors can be much more specific than you seem to realize.

How do you know what I realize?

JackieBlue, part of me wants to refute your arguments to my arguments, but I’m pretty sure you just won’t get it. Please tell me you don’t make fact and/or research based decisions that affect anyone but you, because the thought of people who don’t understand the importance of accurate, complete information in decision making and opinion forming influencing public policy is truly frightening.[/QUOTE]

Um, can you try to be a little more personally offensive and condescending in your next post, please? It would dial up the entertainment value.

And, not to give you nightmares or anything, but I make ALLL kinds of important decisions for LOTS of people other than myself. Are you quaking in your boots yet?

[Sswor]

[QUOTE=Arrows Endure;7501571]
Now, having said all that, pits are exactly the same as ANY OTHER DOG. There are good ones, bad ones, misunderstood ones, and abused ones. There are those that bite, and those that would never dream of biting. Because Pits are strong, when they bite a lot of damage is done. Besides, banning pits won’t make a difference. The thugs either won’t go along with the ban, or they will pick another breed that makes them look “tough”. Then we’ll be here on COTH debating how cane corso’s should be banned, or argentine mastiffs, or Rottweiler’s, or Dobermans, or boxers.[/QUOTE]

No they’re not the same as any other dog. They’re fighting dogs, that is their purpose. They have no other purpose. Pit bulls do a lot of damage when they bite because they were bred to do a lot of damage when they bite–specifically bred to do a lot of damage to large livestock and to kill other dogs.

Pit bulls have been killing people since it was founded as a breed.

You’re right, banning pit bulls isn’t enough. I’d be in favor of banning all fighting breeds, including the rare and exotic in BSL legislation wording. No one needs a fighting dog unless they want it to kill something.

Dobermans, Rottweilers, and Boxers were never bred as fighting dogs.

[GraceLikeRain]

I thought of this thread this week when I was at the feed store and overheard a woman talking about taking her husband to the ER. Being a chatty Cathy we started talking. Her husband stopped on a back country road to help a stranger change a flat tire after dark. As they were finishing up a APBT appeared from down the road with aggressive body language. Both men ignored the dog and tried to calmly finish up quickly. Husband reached for something as they were putting away tools and the dog launched, ripped him up pretty badly, and then bolted. My understanding is that stitches will take care of it but definitely freaked me out. I am that person who always stops for roaming dogs on back roads. Stories like that can definitely make you reconsider.

[Hollycatt]

I live in the UK where we have breed specific legislation (BSL), with four breeds being banned, the Pitt bill bull being one of them. I was a lawyer changing career to become a veterinarian and as part of my thesis work towards my veterinary degree, I wrote on dangerous dogs. My conclusion was that BSL does not work and that greater education concentrating on the reduction of dog bites (without undue concentration on fatalities) is the best way forward. In Europe many countries are repealing their BSL laws, (including the Netherlands and Hungary) and replacing it with legislation that is centred around the education and training of dog owners and dogs together. In Europe year on year the number of dog bite incidents is increasingly despite BSL. Only time will tell if new legislative regimes based on training will work better.

It can be argued a mixed regieme of BSL and training/education would work best. But who can best decide the breeds to ban? In the Ukraine at times over 80 breeds were banned including popular breeds such a Labradors, certain terriers, boxers and certain spaniels in addition to breeds more commonly thought of as having the potential to be aggressive such as Rottweilers and GSD’ s - in a democracy who gets to judge? Everybody has their preferences.and prejudices.

I wrote a chapter on UK fatalities over a 10 year period and in all but 1 case there was a very strong element of human error. In my opinion all the incidents were entirely preventable - back yard breeders, dogs trained to be aggressive, history of biting, unsocialised dogs left alone with infants etc. Pretty much all breeds physically capable of it have been involved in fatalties, including labradors, poodles, jack russel and west highland white terriers. In fatalities involving very small dog s the victims were infants.

You can’t legislate for stupidity. Ultimately people can be offered better techniques to train their dogs, but not all will listen. In some societies such as the Netherlands, people will accept that to own a dog you must attend training and be evaluated and licensed, but in other countries (including both the UK and USA I suspect) this would never be accepted and without compulsory training the uneducated, often irresponsible owners who need the help will not attend. What might work If there was compulsory attendance and evaluation following a bite incident, no matter how minor. Or will people stop getting medical treatment to void detection? Will bites from small dogs remain ignored/more acceptable, despite the fact small dogs can badly maim and even kill a child?

[vacation1]

[QUOTE=amastrike;7501604]
Because they were specifically, purposefully bred to be brutal toward other dogs, not humans, therefore not indiscriminate. I would never ever ever trust a pit bull unsupervised with another dog. Never. Would I trust one unsupervised with a child? As much as I’d trust any dog. They make a perfect pet because they were bred to not be aggressive toward humans.[/QUOTE]

That’s an insane position. It’s like saying pedophiles make great husbands as long as you don’t have kids together. Pit bulls make terrible pets because of the dog-aggression. Even if you, like most pit bull owners, don’t give a shit about non-pit dogs, that violence frequently crosses species boundaries. For one thing, most people have a tendency to “reach in” when their pet dog is being mauled to death in front of them. So you get redirected bites that turn into human maulings. Many pit bull attacks on humans, even deaths, started because the pit was attracted to the victim by their dog - pit attacks dog, then either redirects when the human intervenes or simply begins to attack the human in addition to the dog.

I don’t think most people have a clue what it’s like to maintain a dog with an aggression issue. It means zero mistakes. Your teenager can’t slam out the front door after an argument and bang that door so hard it bounces open. You can’t leave the door ajar while you run back to get the other bag of groceries from the car. You can’t adjust the leash in the middle of the sidewalk. You can’t drop the lead and step on it while you zip your coat. It’s a huge commitment every single day for the 10+ years of the dog’s life.

[vacation1]

[QUOTE=threedogpack;7499567]
vacation1, first of all, what you read is what the news chooses to report. What they choose to report is totally up to them. HOW they choose to describe the dogs involved is also up to them. So perhaps there are some attacks by GSD or 100# all americans or primitive breeds or northern breeds, I don’t know. The news media is in the business of selling news and right now, the pitbull seems to be selling news.[/QUOTE]

If there were an epidemic of GSD maulings, the news would report it. As it is, the news media is apparently quite happy to broadcast both the attacks and the totally parallel universe PR releases of the pit bull owners, like the recent and awkwardly timed “Americans Now Understand Pit Bulls Are Swell” stories that fell a bit flat since they coincided with the Mickey mauling. That reality - that the media literally has no dog in the fight and just follows the chunks of flesh - plus the fact that the “pits aren’t a breed/that isn’t a pit” arguments, which frequently results in cops and AC at attacks calling a pit bull an American Bulldog or a mastiff mix, means that plenty of pit bull attacks aren’t being identified as such.

[Hollycatt]

Just want to add that I believe to really tackle the problem of dogs causing fatalities, it has to start with preventing bite incidents. Education is a must. That nasty little git of a yorkie that bites can really be a menace. It can bite the veterinarian, the postman, maim young children and those children in the family who see the dog being trained by adults, may pick up on those bad training skills. When they grow up they may not get a yorkie, they may get an entirely different breed that can cause real damage if not correctly trained by virtue of its greater size and strength.

The majority of fatalities occur in the home to a person known to the dog. You could see an actual fatality as being a bit like a Darwin award and just say well leave them to it. However many fatalities (and severe maiming) involve children which is utterly tragic given how preventable many of these incidents are, often with clear prior warning signs that all is not well such as bite incidents, growling and threatening behaviour etc. Until people are educated to see these warning signs, or in other cases people are stopped using dogs for questionable reasons e.g. backyard breeding, status symbols, wheapon dogs, dog fighting etc then I do not think the fatality count will drop. I would support compulsory training for any dog involved in a bite incident or who has been complained about e.g. for a noise problem. It would hopefully lead to happier, better trained dogs. I am not sure if this goes far enough. It will be interesting in 10 -15 years to look at countries with no BSL but instead compulsory training for all dog owners as in the Netherlands versus a country with BSL still, but more power to authorities to make owners of badly behaved dogs attend training as in Scotland.

[chancellor2]

Vacation1 et al, let me ask you something. Let’s say that MANY attacks on women are caused by black men in let’s say the North End of Boston.

Is it okay to say that black men in the North End of Boston are now banned because of this?

Or better yet, let’s say that most attacks on women in the North End of Boston are done by men with black hair. Shall we ban all men with black hair? What about those with dark brown hair?

[S1969]

What do the “pit proponents” suggest? I agree that BSL isn’t necessarily working, but I think the “they really are nice dogs” angle isn’t better.

In my opinion, the best solution would be to reduce the number of pit bulls; especially those that are poorly bred and given as pets to people that aren’t capable of managing this type of dog.

How to achieve this? How do we get these bad breeders/backyard breeders to stop producing more dogs with sketchy temperaments?

This is why people support BSL - what other “tools” can achieve this goal? Web campaigns that talk about the “poor misunderstood pit bull” don’t help achieve the most needed goal, but almost encourages the opposite.

[khall]

S, I am all for spaying and neutering as many pet animals as possible. If nothing else but to reduce the unwanted pet population. It can be hard to get people to step up and do so though. here in middle GA there is a grant to spay any pit type female for free, not many of the average owners will put themselves out to get their female spayed. The people in rescue have to go pick up the dogs, take them to the vet and then return the dogs. Talk about not caring about their animals, ugh.

Rescues are doing good work though, going into low income housing areas, vetting the animals there, re-homing those that are asked to be rehomed. We are in the trenches day in and day out trying to reduce the unwanted pet population, trying to save these animals who were not wanted or cared for.

Just wanted to say one thing about my foster APBT, she was NOT dog or cat aggressive from the very first I had her. but she had a low tolerance for other dogs correcting her. That and her puppy like wanting to play was a problem with some dogs, she learned more and more as she interacted with the other dogs on leash. She learned how to read body language and not be such a bull in the china shop and she desperately wanted to please me.

[sunridge1]

Myth #6 is a bit scary. A liar dog? One of the most wonderful things about dogs is they do not lie. I do not ever want a dog that lies, ick! I get enough of that from people.