Excellent post Logical!! I so agree with everything you wrote.
[QUOTE=beowulf;8891801]
Do you think that the dog-fighting rings like Vicks, that those blood-lines perpetrate an entire type of dog? From Am-staff to Bull Terrier? There are reputable breeders (as in, NOT dog fighting) that have breed lines that never once were used for fighting. Bull-baiting, yes, 150~ years ago.
OK. So by your logic, all PB types are/were bred for dog-fighting. That the Am-staff breeder/shower down the road from us, her lines must be the same/identical as Michael Vick’s, and so on, so forth.
Unless the dog is DNA’d, it is anybody’s guess. The alleged difficulty comes with trying to ID a “pit bull” because there’s too many variations and too many dogs with similar characteristics – that and that genuinely mixed breed/feral dogs do homogenize to a pariah-type dog with stocky features and blocky heads. Blocky head and low-set physique is found in other non-PB, you know: Cattle dogs, plott hounds, mastiffs, English-type labs, newfoundland mixes, etc.
If it was a “smoke-screen” diversion, you wouldn’t see experts like the CDC refuse to endorse it.[/QUOTE]
Let me put it this way–why did Vick and his ilk select pit bulls to fight over all other types out there? And Vick and assorted ilk didn’t start this practice, they simply took advantage of the breed/type’s traits.
We had an AmStaff breeder comment here and tell us she has had to euthanize aggressive dogs that she herself has bred. I’m sure she is not breeding fighting dogs.
Indiscriminately bred dogs do absolutely indeed homogenize to pariah-type ferals but it is an absolute lie that they develop a blocky head. This is not at all, in any way shape or form true of pariah/feral type canine. Not at all. Not in the slightest bit true.
The CDC also refuses to compile gun violence records. It’s amazing the clout and influence that special interests have. Again–it is not logical nor just that the enthusiasts of one type of dog, trump the interests of everyone else, and all of society as a whole.
A dog breeds reputation does not come out of thin air. Everyone agrees JRTs are tenacious and will kill vermine with no training and you best watch them around your chickens. Everyone agrees GSDs have guarding tendencies and you best not hop a fence into it’s yard. Everyone agrees a greyhound will be a bolter and you best not let them off leash in an open field full of rabbits. Everyone agrees that a basset hound has a voice that will carry across the county and be a bugger to housetrain. But pit bull behavior is somehow a hot topic of debate despite the fact that they were responsible for 30 human fatalities last year and vets are tired of having to put their victims back together.
The pit bull type has some very loud supporters in internet land and the trendy, social media fueled rescue network who are very aggressive and outspoken, who spend a lot of time and energy perpetuating myths about this type of dog that are proving to be very detrimental to society as a whole. They ignore the problems with this breed/type at the expense of other people’s pets, children, lives. I disagree that the loudest and most aggressive voice wins the debate.
[QUOTE=beowulf;8891755]
The stats don’t support that they’re “weaponized dogs/loaded guns/ballistic cannons/whatever-other-hyperbolic” you use to describe them, the studies don’t support it, professionals/experts in the field don’t support it.[/QUOTE]
Please don’t put words in my mouth. I say plenty of things that you can quote me with, no need to make things up and attribute them to my argument. It doesn’t support yours to do so, rather it weakens your stance. You have done this repeatedly throughout the thread. I believe it is a distraction technique, to present an argument that you can easily refute, rather then address my actual debate points.
[QUOTE=Sswor;8891857]
Indiscriminately bred dogs do absolutely indeed homogenize to pariah-type ferals but it is an absolute lie that they develop a blocky head. This is not at all, in any way shape or form true of pariah/feral type canine. Not at all. Not in the slightest bit true.[/QUOTE]
Have you actually ever seen a feral dog population? Here’s what a common feral dog pack in the US looks like:
note the blocky heads - google ‘Detroit feral dog population’.
Too bad your posts have no sort of proof or data. How many of those “30 PBs” were DNa tested? Oh…
YOU are the one perpetuating myths about the breed. The reason people like MV have them? They’re cheap and en vogue, easy to obtain, easy keepers, a dime a dozen, convey/symbolize thug status, have a social stigma, and are easily contained after. It’s extremely cheap to keep and contain them. People won’t go near them which bolsters their security-status. Generally, they’re stoic, so they carry on even with massive injuries, and are fairly easy to train for whatever purpose you want.
If they were the bloodthirsty, ruinous, loaded-cannon dogs you described there would be hundreds of thousands of deaths, not thirty… The fact there are so little deaths related to “PB” types in that time period tells you that these are not the mark of an entire breed, but individuals.
I agree that Am-Staffs have specific traits, just as I would agree that GSDs have specific traits. I do not agree for a hot moment that Am-Staffs are more violent or dangerous than other breeds. Their trait unique to them, I think, is that they are incredibly people oriented and forgiving, but like other terriers, can be stubborn. They attract a demographic that is, best put, unsavory and does their breed/type no favors: 10 years from now the world will have moved on to some other ‘en-vogue’ breed to demonstrate socioeconomic class and “bad-assery” and the vilification of PB-types will shift onto some other breed… Just like it did 10 years ago, and 10 years before that, and 10 years before that.
Sswor, speak for yourself. When I point out sources you’re using are not unbiased or that you are exaggerating, you deflect by telling me I’m using “distraction techniques”. Sorry that factual statements are a “distraction technique” and detract from your argument. You have done this repeatedly throughout the thread, argued some imagined point you thought someone had said, and then ignore all factual evidence put forth that your stance on “PB types” isn’t supported by, you know, actual evidence.
Sorry that evidence is so inconvenient for you. In the three odd-pages of our back and forth you’ve yet to post a single reputable site or study. Oops.
Why do others have to provide DNA proof every time a pitbull attacks someone, but yet you can turn around and claim this:
Are you seriously expecting us to believe that every “pitbull” you have had “experience” with over the years came with a tagged collar that had his or her DNA info on it to prove it was, in fact, a pitbull? Because if not then you’re expecting us to believe that only pit owners (like yourself - not biased at all, nooo) are capable of correctly id’ing a pitbull. Everyone else, police officers, victims (often dog enthusiasts themselves), Humane Society employees, vets etc… all those people id’ing the pittie in an attack as a pittie - are you saying all those people are full of sh*t?
Good GOD, people.
And here we are, 7 pages later, and people are STILL latching on to the “pitties aren’t more aggressive than other breeds”. WE DON’T GIVE A RAT’S A$$ ABOUT THAT!!! We care about the amount of damage they can do when they finally DO attack! It IS a problem no matter which way you slice it!
And yes, I think BSL should be extended to other known “problem” breeds as well, absolutely.
And for the MILLIONTH TIME - BSL does not mean euthanizing every dog of the breed in that county/province/country/city, etc… There is no freaking euth’ing with BSL, jesus christ, people, get your facts straight. It’s a ban on acquiring them (fair), it’s a ban on breeding them (fair) and it’s a bunch of restrictions for those who already own them (absolutely 100% FAIR).
Genocide? REALLY??? To the posters who used that word, you should be ashamed of yourselves. There’s no freaking “genocide” going on with regards to pitbulls. Anywhere. :eek: :mad:
I am FOR BSL. And i’m not even a dog owner. Do I think it should be extended to other breeds that have been proven to have aggressive tendencies and are large enough to be problematic for many owners? HELL YES.
Agreed. And fully support extending the restrictions.
Someone else recommended Sswor move. That’s not a bad line of reasoning. Let’s follow it.
Q. I live in a place where I legitimately fear Pitbull attack.
A. Move
Q. ok, is there somewhere where I can reasonably expect to find no Pitbull? Or at least where Pitbulls need to be kept responsibly, like on a leash and maybe muzzled? Really, having this required for all large dogs would be ok with me. My personal issue is Pitbull, but some other large dogs can be equally frightening.
A. There’s none near me right now. And rich people don’t seem to have them.
Q. Hmm, that seems a bit thin. I’d like to move somewhere there’s a rule, so that I could settle there long term.
And here’s how we get to local BSL again. Or SSL. I really like that better.
NO. I said laypeople have a hard time distinguishing breeds. Just like laypeople would have a hard time telling a Thoroughbred from an Arabian. My experience has been with papered/AKC Am-Staff too. There’s two in my family. Calling me biased is fine and all, but if I am biased for having experience with the breed then so is every single other person out there who is anti-PB. It goes both ways.
Again, for the millionth time, there is a REASON that there is no verified, certified, peer-reviewed proof out there that all the breeds that are considered “pitty types” are more dangerous. There is a reason experts say that BSL does not work, and that you cannot ID a dog’s breed on phenotype alone. Since these are actual experts and not armchair posters like Sswor I am going to go with their knowledge and expertise.
I didn’t say anything about myself correctly labeling pit bulls. I didn’t say people who don’t have PB’s cant identify a dog. That’s all you.
You have to realize saying “pb type” encompasses a huge breed base which no one will agree on. The bull terrier down the road? PB. The boxer? PB. The media never comes back and says “oh wait, sorry, it was a labx”. Why would they? Sensationalism sells.
If it’s a lab crossed with a bully type, and is a stocky, block headed, short coated dog… I’m not sure I understand the need for a major distinction. The Montreal proposal was based largely on phenotype… Which actually isn’t that stupid. It’s the physical characteristics, not necessarily the genetics that make the dog risky. A genetic Pitbull with no teeth weighing under 15 lbs for example. I don’t really care about it’s genes…its probably not any more dangerous than any other dog.
The DNA argument is stupid, I think. Phenotype bans make more sense.
[QUOTE=beowulf;8892080]
Have you actually ever seen a feral dog population? Here’s what a common feral dog pack in the US looks like:
note the blocky heads - google ‘Detroit feral dog population’.
Too bad your posts have no sort of proof or data. How many of those “30 PBs” were DNa tested? Oh…
…
Sswor, speak for yourself. When I point out sources you’re using are not unbiased or that you are exaggerating, you deflect by telling me I’m using “distraction techniques”. Sorry that factual statements are a “distraction technique” and detract from your argument. You have done this repeatedly throughout the thread, argued some imagined point you thought someone had said, and then ignore all factual evidence put forth that your stance on “PB types” isn’t supported by, you know, actual evidence.
Sorry that evidence is so inconvenient for you. In the three odd-pages of our back and forth you’ve yet to post a single reputable site or study. Oops.[/QUOTE]
Where is the reputable evidence, besides your own personal biases and anecdotal experience to support your position? I skimmed back through here and didn’t any non-biased study supporting your position.
Do you get a pass because you worked with a pitbull rescue? Are all of the pits you’ve rescued or fostered DNA’d?
If I missed a link somewhere, sorry, really
BTW, I would fully expect a pack of feral dogs in Detroit to have pit bull characteristics, just as I would expect many feral dogs in Southeast DC (where I’m at) to have pit bull characteristics. That’s not to say that feral breeding tends toward blocky heads, just that a large portion of the non-feral dogs in those areas are pits, so a normal, reasonable person would expect the free range non-feral dogs would breed with the feral ones.
“Laypeople” are not the ones ID’ing the dogs involved in all these fatal maulings, beowulf.
The police officers, HS employees, vets, etc are not tapping passersby on the shoulder and going “hey, you see this dog, what do you think it is? you think it’s a pitbull? Ok, then i guess we’ll write pitbull on the report, then”.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Apparently yes, he/she does, and yes, apparently every single pittie beowulf has worked with/encountered/handled at all these shelters and kennels came with a glossy set of AKC papers when they were handed in/dumped/dropped off. I totally believe that, don’t you??
[QUOTE=red mares;8892145]
Where is the reputable evidence, besides your own personal biases and anecdotal experience to support your position? I skimmed back through here and didn’t any non-biased study supporting your position.
Do you get a pass because you worked with a pitbull rescue? Are all of the pits you’ve rescued or fostered DNA’d?
If I missed a link somewhere, sorry, really
BTW, I would fully expect a pack of feral dogs in Detroit to have pit bull characteristics, just as I would expect many feral dogs in Southeast DC (where I’m at) to have pit bull characteristics. That’s not to say that feral breeding tends toward blocky heads, just that a large portion of the non-feral dogs in those areas are pits, so a normal, reasonable person would expect the free range non-feral dogs would breed with the feral ones.[/QUOTE]
Good god, I don’t think I get a pass or that all dogs were DNA’d?? I really don’t get where this is coming from - I pointed out that until you DNA a dog that was involved in a mauling, you cannot know 100% for certain what type of dog it is.
Wouldn’t you say that’s kind of… logical? No?
The links are all several pages back. They’re also supplied in the three hundred other threads on this subject, by me, other posters.
Here is just one:
http://www.fairdog.dk/elements/documents/research/canine-behavior.pdf
Other posters offered links too.
Re: homogenized dog packs - if Detroit isn’t a good example, why not look at Hottentot strains, a continent away? Blocky heads. What about the feral dog population in Aiken? Tan, blocky heads, short fur, upright ears.
[QUOTE=ASBJumper;8892146]“Laypeople” are not the ones ID’ing the dogs involved in all these fatal maulings, beowulf.
The police officers, HS employees, vets, etc are not tapping passersby on the shoulder and going “hey, you see this dog, what do you think it is? you think it’s a pitbull? Ok, then i guess we’ll write pitbull on the report, then”.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
I don’t think most police officers are experts on dogs, personally. Veterinarians, yes. Dog trainers, maybe. HS workers/volunteers… probably not. Which is why I never once in my post said that HS workers accurately labeled dogs… they don’t. That was actually a major thing I pointed out a few pages ago.
Lay-people are doing reporting - yaknow, the media??? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
BSL doesn’t work. It hasn’t worked. The proof is in the pudding - that is my bigger beef. If you think it works you aren’t paying attention. If you want to mitigate the mauling problem, it has to be another way – because the people who have these violent, aggressive dogs are not exactly the type to be interested in following little rules and bylaws, and BSL isn’t even a speedbump for them. Chances are they’re already participating in something much worse than violating BSL.
[QUOTE=ASBJumper;8892146]
“Laypeople” are not the ones ID’ing the dogs involved in all these fatal maulings, beowulf.
The police officers, HS employees, vets, etc are not tapping passersby on the shoulder and going “hey, you see this dog, what do you think it is? you think it’s a pitbull? Ok, then i guess we’ll write pitbull on the report, then”.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
I don’t think a police officer is an expert, personally. Veterinarians, yes. Dog trainers, maybe. HS workers/volunteers… probably not.
Lay-people are doing reporting - yaknow, the media??? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I don’t own a dog, and I don’t particularly like the looks of the pit bull type, so they would not be my dog of choice if I were to own one. But you cannot reasonably say that they are all killers/wanna be killers/have it in them to be killers. Certainly, any dog can bite, all large dogs can maul, and many breeds could kill an adult, most medium/large breeds (including spaniels, though a previous post said otherwise) can kill a child. But the majority of pit bulls (and I agree that there is a very large population of pit bull types out there) are not going to kill someone. And that’s not even because they are managed well, because the average dog owner is a complete moron (I work in a vet’s office, and I see a lot of moronic dog owners every day. Very few think their dog is capable of hurting someone). There is the type of person out there that gravitates towards an aggressive looking/acting dog, and those dogs are often dangerous, because they are trained/conditioned to be. Some of those dogs are aggressive from the word go. That’s bad genetics that need to be eliminated. No one is arguing that. I think everyone on this thread agrees that a dog that kills someone should be euthanized. But to think that pit bulls are all an accident waiting to happen is a crazy argument.
As for the breed identification for official reports, etc. it is very easy to see how that gets mixed up. For years, the media has been telling us that every dog that attacks someone is a pit bull. So now, when the next door neighbor, when interviewed by the police as an eyewitness in the attack, is asked what type of dog it is, they say it’s a pit bull. Take the dog attack in the UK posted upthread. The man was not close enough to truly identify the dog, admits he doesn’t really know, but says it was probably a pit bull (or staffie, in the UK). Do you think he really knew that, or do you think his bias is influencing his thoughts? If for the last 10 years, you were taught to think that a Boston Terrier was a murdering psychopath of a dog killing people willy nilly, and then you saw a black and white dog with a big head and pointy ears attack a person, would your first guess not be a Boston Terrier?
Maybe we should DNA test all dogs that are involved in attacks, especially fatalities instead of relying on phenotype. That might actually give us some useful information. Conversely, we should not rely simply on phenotype when saying a certain breed is a great dog that would never hurt a fly. DNA test them too. But there are DNA tested/ AKC registered Am Staffs who are therapy dogs, just as I’m sure there are DNA tested/AKC registered Am Staffs who have attacked people. More evidence that it is not the breed, but the individual dog who is aggressive, whether that way by genetics or the owner.
So first you said it was that the pitbull was bred to be aggressive, so it is in it’s DNA.
Now you want to ban dogs based on phenotype alone?
Which is it? Phenotype or Genotype???
Blame the owner.
The next dog you will have to ban in my area is the Cane Corso. They are the next tough guy dog. They are already in the hands of byb, breeding whatever dogs they have and selling puppies on craigslist, no questions asked. Yet another powerful breed ending up in the hands of morons who have no clue.
[QUOTE=Incantation;8892221]
So first you said it was that the pitbull was bred to be aggressive, so it is in it’s DNA.
Now you want to ban dogs based on phenotype alone?
Which is it? Phenotype or Genotype???
Blame the owner.
The next dog you will have to ban in my area is the Cane Corso. They are the next tough guy dog. They are already in the hands of byb, breeding whatever dogs they have and selling puppies on craigslist, no questions asked. Yet another powerful breed ending up in the hands of morons who have no clue.[/QUOTE]
^ :yes:
Thinking about CCs in the hands of byb-idiots makes my stomach drop; they’ll be castigated quickly, having a similar phenotype… Not a dog for an amateur owner.
To me it makes logical sense to DNA a dog involved in a mauling/killing. That way we can compile evidence and if there is a link between dog A and dog B, figure out a way to eliminate those types of dogs from being bred into the population. It is known there are families (of all breeds, species) out there with bad temperament, and culling them (euthanasia) and their offspring really would be one of the easier ways of controlling the population; it would also prevent them from continuing to get in the hands of people willing to exploit the breed.
I have nothing against pits (know some GREAT ones) and don’t think they’re bloodthirsty monsters or anything but I have to say that the latest “save this innocent soul from death row” fad that rescues are pulling to entice inexperienced owners to foster/adopt bully breeds is a bit scary to me.
I have seen some pitties that are naturally super gentle with other dogs, but many many more that have a natural tendency to play in a more physical boxer-y style coupled with a terrier’s intensity and it can lead to over aroused dogs and fights.
This happens with other dogs all the time, particularly with terrier type breeds that haven’t been socialized properly, but when you’re talking 65+ pounds of pure muscle it’s a lot scarier than dealing with someone’s Jack Russell.
There has to be some middle ground between “vicious monsters” and “inherently good” - it’s not that I don’t think they’re inherently good, it’s just that many people seem to take this as “doesn’t require any training, socialization, or prior dog experience.”
I don’t think it’s solely nature OR nurture that defines them but, as with all other dogs and people, a combination of both. They ideally need a solid upbringing but they at least need remedial socialization - just like any rescue dog, but again, the stakes are a lot higher with a huge terrier.
We’re already on to cane corsos in my neck of the woods 
[QUOTE=Perfect10;8891379]
I’m not saying it is. I’m saying it may be the solution to your specific problem. There are no pit bulls terrorizing my neighborhood. I know of one a few streets over, but he has never terrorized anyone and is safely contained in a fence or on a leash when he is outside.[/QUOTE]
There are at least five pitt bull houses in my very small neighborhood. I’m not about to move because the next neighborhood will be the same. Cheap, ill-bread dogs for cheap, not so bright people. A perfect storm.
