Another fatal Pit Bull attack....

[Arrows_Endure]

I think I’m still trying to figure out how 32 deaths is an epidemic. It’s really not! Think about it guys!

How many children deaths are caused by car accidents? By falling down the stairs? How about BY THIER OWN PARENTS? I can promise that every one of those is WAY more than the 32 deaths caused by a pit bull. However, I don’t see everyone saying that we should eliminate everyone who ever drove distracted, or all houses should be single story. Or we should eliminate all parents that MIGHT abuse a child (figure out how to accurately predict that, I might agree, but only because there are SO many children killed by their own parents).

Dogs bite. That’s the nature of a dog. EVERY DOG has the potential to bite. EVERY dog has a trigger that will cause it to bite. Dogs used to bite years ago, but that was before we lived in a world where it was always someone elses fault if you got hurt. If you want to prevent dog bites (and dog related deaths) from happening, you will need to say that we aren’t allowed to have dogs at all. That seems pretty dramatic for 32 deaths.

[S1969]

[QUOTE=Arrows Endure;7501875]
I think I’m still trying to figure out how 32 deaths is an epidemic. It’s really not! Think about it guys!

How many children deaths are caused by car accidents? By falling down the stairs? How about BY THIER OWN PARENTS? I can promise that every one of those is WAY more than the 32 deaths caused by a pit bull. However, I don’t see everyone saying that we should eliminate everyone who ever drove distracted, or all houses should be single story. Or we should eliminate all parents that MIGHT abuse a child (figure out how to accurately predict that, I might agree, but only because there are SO many children killed by their own parents).

Dogs bite. That’s the nature of a dog. EVERY DOG has the potential to bite. EVERY dog has a trigger that will cause it to bite. Dogs used to bite years ago, but that was before we lived in a world where it was always someone elses fault if you got hurt. If you want to prevent dog bites (and dog related deaths) from happening, you will need to say that we aren’t allowed to have dogs at all. That seems pretty dramatic for 32 deaths.[/QUOTE]

This argument will never work. Sorry. It does not help the bully breeds by claiming that “only 32 people - some of them innocent children - were brutally mauled to death by a pet.” It only makes people dislike the breed and its proponents even more.

The public should not (and will not) become more tolerant of the only occasional brutal and horrific mauling (some fatal) by a dog…most of which tend to be of the same type.

The breeders need to be the solution.

[Arrows_Endure]

No one ever said that you don’t continue to work on improving the breed by breeding dogs with solid temperments. That’s part of the solution to ANY breed related problem. You don’t just ban the problem and assume it’s fixed. That never works. (Prohibition anyone?)

You have to keep perspective, and remember that 32 dogs out of 82 MILLION dogs caused a problem. Not 32 pit bulls, but 32 dogs total. We go back to math, that’s .00000004% of the dogs in the world caused a death. It was tragic to those 32 people and their families, and I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, however, it’s still a stupidly low number.

Breeders do need to work on breeding out the dog aggressive tendencies that some pits have (not all by any means). However, I would say that about any breed. No dog should be dog aggressive, yet I’ve seen (and I work in a shelter!!!) dog aggressive JRT’s, shepherds, a couple of labs (including one that climbed our 6 foot fences, pried the top of the kennel off, got out, got into another kennel, and killed a hound mix. We came in that morning to that mess), hounds, Chihuahuas, and many random mixes. Dogs are social animals, a dog aggressive dog is inherently flawed, and they should be kept isolated and never, ever bred.

Honestly, we need to be having this conversation on how to keep people from killing people, not how to keep dogs from doing it. We are much more dangerous to our peers than any dog will ever be.

[JackieBlue]

Not only that, but there were far more maulings resulting in permanent disfigurement and dismemberment. Peoples lives and the lives of those who love them are changed forever after one of these brutal attacks. They can’t just be swept under the rug or lumped in with “dog bite” for the sake of public safety.

We’ve put a lot of time and money into improving the safety of stairs and cars for our children. The least we can do is try to do something similar with our pets. Maybe 32 deaths in one year is no big deal to you (it’s on the rise, BTW), but I personally cannot imagine the horror of coming out of the bathroom to find my toddler nearly decapitated and blood dripping from my walls and furniture. That mother describes slipping and sliding in her dead son’s blood while trying to call 911. Her husband came home and was so distraught and inconsolable that the police had no choice but to taser the poor man. (According to them - I think it was a crappy thing to do someone who’d just witnessed that scene.) One family living with this horror is one too many. One child dead at the jaws of the beloved family pet is one too many.

Here are the real stats, FWIW:

[h=2]2013 statistics[/h]

• 32 U.S. dog bite-related fatalities occurred in 2013. Despite being regulated inMilitary Housing areas and over 700 U.S. cities, pit bulls contributed to 78% (25) of these deaths. Pit bulls make up about 6% of the total U.S. dog population.[B]2[/B]
• Together, pit bulls (25) and rottweilers (1), the second most lethal dog breed, accounted for 81% of the total recorded deaths in 2013. This same combination accounted for 74% of all fatal attacks during the 9-year period of 2005 to 2013.
• The breakdown between these two breeds is substantial over this 9-year period. From 2005 to 2013, pit bulls killed 176 Americans, about one citizen every 18.6 days, versus rottweilers, which killed 33, about one citizen every 99.5 days.
• In the year of 2013, the combination of pit bulls (25), rottweilers (1) and bullmastiffs (2) accounted for 88% of all dog bite-related fatalities. Notably, the two bullmastiff-mixes[B]3[/B] were littermates that inflicted death within a 6-month period.
• Annual data from 2013 shows that 56% (18) of the fatality victims were children 7-years and younger, and 44% (14) were adults, 25-years and older. Of the total children killed by dogs in 2013, 61% (11) were ages 4-years and younger.
• Annual data shows that when combining all age groups, male and female fatality victims were equivalent, 16 and 16. Amongst children 7-years and younger, however, males were excessively victims, 72% (13), versus females 28% (5).
• In 2013, over one-third, 38% (12), of all dog bite fatality victims were either visiting or living temporarily with the dog's owner when the fatal attack occurred, up from 32% in 2012. Children 7-years and younger accounted for 83% (10) of these deaths.
• Of this subset of 12 fatalities, 92% (11) were inflicted by pit bulls and 58% (7) involved a babysitter, including a relative or friend under the directive to watch a child 7-years or younger. All 7 of these child deaths were inflicted by pit bulls.
• 47% (15) of all fatalities in 2013 involved more than one dog; 16% (5) involved breeding on the dog owner's property either actively or in the recent past, and 9% (3) involved tethered dogs. All 3 chaining deaths were attributed to pit bulls.
• Dog ownership information for 2013 shows that family dogs comprised 47% (15) of all fatal attack occurrences; 78% (25) of the attacks resulting in human death occurred on the dog owner's property and 22% (7) resulted in criminal charges.
• California led lethal dog attacks in 2013 with 5 deaths. 100% were attributed to pit bulls and 60% resulted in criminal charges. Texas followed with 4 deaths and 0% criminal charges. Arkansas and South Carolina followed, each with 3 deaths.

[JackieBlue]

[QUOTE=Arrows Endure;7501903]
No one ever said that you don’t continue to work on improving the breed by breeding dogs with solid temperments. That’s part of the solution to ANY breed related problem. You don’t just ban the problem and assume it’s fixed. That never works. (Prohibition anyone?)

You have to keep perspective, and remember that 32 dogs out of 82 MILLION dogs caused a problem. Not 32 pit bulls, but 32 dogs total. We go back to math, that’s .00000004% of the dogs in the world caused a death. It was tragic to those 32 people and their families, and I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, however, it’s still a stupidly low number.

No, as you can read in my post above, 47% of fatalities involved more than one dog. And you can’t say 32 + however many others were involved in fatalities “caused a problem”, because again, there were MANY, many more severe attacks/maulings and bites. There is an average of 4.5 MILLION American dog bite victims each year (Sacks JJ, Kresnow M. Dog bites: still a problem? Injury Prevention 2008 Oct;14(5):296-301.). And there are a HUGE number of bites that are never reported for various reasons that were not included in calculations when determining this average. So, we just went from 32 dogs to well over 4.5 million that “caused a problem”. I’d say we have a problem worth dealing with in one way or another. Now, with our country’s “I’ll do it my way” mentality, I’m just afraid we won’t get very far with owner education efforts.

Breeders do need to work on breeding out the dog aggressive tendencies that some pits have (not all by any means). However, I would say that about any breed. No dog should be dog aggressive, yet I’ve seen (and I work in a shelter!!!) dog aggressive JRT’s, shepherds, a couple of labs (including one that climbed our 6 foot fences, pried the top of the kennel off, got out, got into another kennel, and killed a hound mix. We came in that morning to that mess), hounds, Chihuahuas, and many random mixes. Dogs are social animals, a dog aggressive dog is inherently flawed, and they should be kept isolated and never, ever bred.

?Keep in mind that BECAUSE you work in a shelter, you’re going to see the worst of the worst. You aren’t getting the properly raised, well socialized, physically and mentally fit, nutritionally sound individuals. You’re getting unwanted animals being surrendered by people who surrender animals or strays, for the most part. Not an accurate sampling of America’s canine population as a whole and certainly not a great sampling of pure bred dogs with true characteristics of their breed.

Honestly, we need to be having this conversation on how to keep people from killing people, not how to keep dogs from doing it. We are much more dangerous to our peers than any dog will ever be.[/QUOTE]

Pointing out that there are “more important arguments to be made” is another common pro Pit tactic. Just because there are other important topics doesn’t detract from the value of the topic at hand.

I’m editing this to add that if you “breed the dog aggressive tendencies out of the Pit Bull” as you suggest, if it’s even possible, than it’s not really a Pit Bull anymore. That’s all they were bred FOR. If you turn around and change up the selection criteria altogether, then you end up with a different breed. And we already have so many breeds created for their pet qualities. Imagine breeding out the olfactory senses of Bloodhounds or the retrieving instincts of Goldens. Doing away with dog aggression in Pit Bulls isn’t a realistic goal, not in the short term anyway.

[JackieBlue]

I never knew this:

Getting bitten by a dog is the fifth most frequent cause of visits to emergency rooms caused by activities common among children. (See Weiss HB, Friedman DI, Coben JH. Incidence of dog bite injuries treated in emergency departments, JAMA 1998;279:53; also see US Consumer Product Safety Commission, Injuries associated with selected sports and recreational equipment treated in hospital emergency departments, calendar year 1994. Consumer Product Safety Review, Summer 1996;1:5.)

[chancellor2]

JackieBlue, continuing to quote “dogsbite.org” and telling me those are REAL statistics just makes you look like a lemming.
That ENTIRE SITE is dedicated to trying to ban pit bulls. So, OF COURSE, the statistics are going to be skewed.

Are YOU going to read and believe a site called LoveABull.org or something like it? No, I am sure you are not.

Try finding a site that is neither pro nor anti pit bull and THEN MAYBE I will look at the statistics you quote. Until then, don’t bother. You just look like a lemming.

[JackieBlue]

I’ve quoted and cited all different sources (Journal of the American Medical Association, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, the Center for Disease Control, The American Veterinary Medical Association, Injury Prevention Magazine, American Kennel Club, and others) highly varied, all over the web. What I haven’t done is shared any personal opinion, aside from when I said I don’t think Pit Bulls should be banned, I haven’t gotten emotional, I haven’t shared personal stories o and I haven’t attacked anyone’s character.
You tell me who you believe to be a reliable source of information. I’m sure it’s whatever source I’m not quoting.
Just because I quoted a statistic I found on Dogsbite.org (that was attributed to the original source, BTW) doesn’t make me anti-Pit Bull, as you seem to think it does. I’m simply seeing reality, which is that dogs bred for fighting have a higher chance of killing or maiming humans than dogs bred for other purposes. It’s a bummer. And even knowing that, I don’t hate Pits, so don’t assume that I do.

[jetsmom]

The dog involved has been known to produce human aggressive dogs…yet they still breed him and don’t mention it.
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=505mhl&s=8#.UzcQypqPKM8

[Hollycatt]

Part if the problem is, that no-one knows the scale of the problem. Amazing that very few countries in the world have a database of dog bite fatalities, never mind dog bite incidences. In average in the UK there are 2 fatalities per year. The UK is small and compact so cases can be easily traced and the details found as there will be press coverage and a coroners inquest. How does this compare to the USA taking into account differences in population. Generally no UK cases are attributeable to Pitt bulls as they are banned, though there are illegal ones.

[vacation1]

[QUOTE=chancellor2;7501682]
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?[/QUOTE]

Dogs are not humans. Dog breeds are not human races. What is it about this that’s so confusing for pit bull owners, who regularly try to leverage race is a way that’s grossly racist?

You can’t ban a human. Humans have certain rights. Owning a particular breed of dog isn’t one of them. Dogs have been bred to emphasize various physical and behavorial features - hence the Saluki and the Bulldog existing in one species. Humans haven’t. All our differences are random, the result of independent “matings” based on personal preference and parental meddling.

[Hollycatt]

One study if US paedatricians showed that when parents were given information and advice regarding children and dogs, bite incidents statistically decreased. I don’t have the citation off the too of my head - sorry.

[Nicker]

IME, a good majority of Pitts are owned by people who should not be dog owners to begin with. And I’m not just talking about the “gangsta” who thinks his dog makes him look tough. There’s a new trend of “advocates” for the breed who love the looks they get while walking their misunderstood dogs at the park. They, like the “gangsta”, own the dog because they love the way it makes them look. They strive to look cool enough, tough enough, etc to handle this so misunderstood type of dog. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve handled alot of pitts. Love the majority of them. I handle unfamiliar dogs on a daily basis and tend to get the stink eye from more lab or shepherd mix types then I do pitts. But the majority of people I’ve met that own them, own them for the wrong reasons, which is sad. In the right homes they are wonderful dogs.
As for spaying and neutering, I rarely meet a dog that deserves to stay intact. It’s the first thing I recommend when talking to people about behavioral issues they are experiencing.

[VCT]

I never advocated using any dog as a babysitter. This is just another of your completely ridiculous posts. And you’re a liar.

[QUOTE=Sswor;7500341]
I find all of your posts particularly ignorant considering you advocate employing a killing machine as a babysitter.[/QUOTE]

[VCT]

I think stricter licensing laws would work. No warnings or inconsequential fines (maybe large ones?)… missing license, your dogs get taken away and you can’t have another for a year. Three strikes you are out on dog ownership.

Dogs can be evaluated for suitability and if they pass, neutered/spayed, adopted out or sent to a prison training program, etc.

You could also require the dog and owner to pass some sort of test similar to CGC…. maybe not quite so involved as the CGC but similar… in order to get a license beyond a “temporary” one.

I’m all for making people be more responsible about their dogs. I just don’t think BSL works. Research countries it’s been implemented in and it’s just not all that successful.

[QUOTE=S1969;7501689]
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.[/QUOTE]

[VCT]

I agree with you. I was in a rush before, heading outside for work. The point, that I didn’t sufficiently make, was that the cattle attacks that happened in my neighborhood weren’t officially reported. It wasn’t on the news… etc. I can bet you if it had been pit/mixes it would have been all over the news and internet.

My view is that all dogs can be bad or good and BSL doesn’t work. Thats all.

[QUOTE=MistyBlue;7500351]

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]

[Foxtrot_s]

I can’t go into all these posts, but regarding identifying the breeds, x-breeds, types of dogs, etc., it is appalling how little some people know about them. I’ve been around the shelters enough to know that when you lose a dog and phone to find out if it is in the shelter, not to trust what you are told. You have to physically go down there and see all the dogs and not go by the description somebody wrote in the book. And if they are the shelters that do not allow you to go in and see (as some are) you have to insist. People just don’t know what breed of dog they are admitting to the shelters.

[Sswor]

[QUOTE=VCT;7502826]
I never advocated using any dog as a babysitter. This is just another of your completely ridiculous posts. And you’re a liar.[/QUOTE]

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.

[Sswor]

Someone earlier mentioned BSL would work if only because it would reduce the number of pit bulls and fighting dogs in residential areas. I agree with that. All these other suggestions require $$ to implement and with most states and municipalities struggling for cash right now, especially the blue class and working poor communities where pit bulls are more likely to be kept as “pets”, I don’t think those are realistic suggestions. Just ban them, don’t chase around the people who own them to make them be complaint, it’s never going to happen and you know they are going to have to get multiple warnings before the dogs get seized, and those warnings mean more $$ shelled out, over and over again. Ban then, seize them, euthanize them, the end.

Because as it is right now, if you were unlucky enough to have one or two of them that run loose periodically around YOUR neighborhood, and you have dogs of your own that you love dearly and don’t want to see get assaulted and mutilated in front of your eyes should you dare to, you know, walk them on a leash once a day–you might think a little differently about BSL.

[Stushica]

Nine pages later and my eyes hurt… I’m not sure I really even have anything to add other than the death of a child is terribly tragic.

Additionally, owning a “pit type” dog and having had many “pit bulls” I am avidly against BSL. I’m certainly not a “gangsta” or a bad dog owner or some crazy insensitive wack-a-doo. I just really love the dogs overall temperaments, they mesh well with me and my life, I like the size of them, and I like their big fat happy looking mouths.

I think everything that isn’t a 100% conformationally, in temperament, etc. should be spayed or neutered. I also 100% agree with euthing even questionable dogs. The way I see it there are loads of temperamentally sound dogs that need homes… why chance it with one that is iffy? My dog will be 8 in a few months and if he even TRYED to nip someone I have a zero tolerance policy, I think I pray every night I’ll never have to euth my own dog but it’s something I’ll hold myself too.

I also think that pediatric offices should supply more information relating to dogs and kids. However, I feel like you would get the “oh no rover would never hurt my child” thing a lot but maybe someone would think about it and it could save a live.

I believe in lots of training, exercise, CGC, therapy dogs, socialization, I also do not allow even play growling, or any part of his mouth on any part of me, etc. To think that someone else has passed judgement on me and my dog(s) because of their gene pool just always rubs me the wrong way. For those that complain that the pro-pittys never own up to our dogs flaws, my dog is, to a fault, over exuberant it’s why after 7 years he’s still not a therapy dog as I would have hoped but he didn’t bite the kid who was whacking him in the head with a stick so I guess I’ll just have to see about my next dog becoming a therapy dog lol

Oh and in reference to the stick hitting. I feel like because this is COTH I should clarify that I was in my yard supervising my dog and the next door neighbor playing fetch when the little boy asked him to sit which he did then instead of throwing the stick he decided to hit romeo in the head a few times for absolutely no reason except he was “just playing” Obviously I talked with the little boy and he never did it again.

I think I need to sleep I just don’t feel like arguing on either side today.