I'm gonna go here just because I can. Based on the reasoning in this thread for getting rid of pits, we should also get rid of all black people. I mean "according to the news" this breed of human is far more aggressive and likely to kill humans than any other breed of human.
Ashley Graham wrote: I'm gonna go here just because I can. Based on the reasoning in this thread for getting rid of pits, we should also get rid of all black people. I mean "according to the news" this breed of human is far more aggressive and likely to kill humans than any other breed of human.
Pit bulls were bred to be aggressive... to other dogs. When they go off the rails and attack people, it's usually a result of poor training or sometimes even malicious training.
With that said, I hope that someday the aggression can be bred out of the pit bull breed so that their many good qualities can come to the fore.
Madcrow Photographics wrote: Pit bulls were bred to be aggressive... to other dogs. When they go off the rails and attack people, it's usually a result of poor training or sometimes even malicious training.
With that said, I hope that someday the aggression can be bred out of the pit bull breed so that their many good qualities can come to the fore.
Then the criminal elements in society looking for guard dogs, the dog fighters looking for the best pit dog & the macho assholes who want big mean dogs to show how tough they are will just look for another breed.
Correction: It'll never get bred out because the back-alley breeders are not breeding Pits for their gentle natures.
Ashley Graham wrote: Because hes so aggressive and scary
Well, of course he is . . . looks like he could fall into a nap at any moment . . . My boy Jake sleeps 23.75 hours a day, he only gets up to eat and take a dump, he really doesn't have time in his busy schedule to be mean and aggressive . . . I've owned Staffs, and Pits for over 35 years, I've lived in a very urban area the entire time . . . people who don't own the breed, nor understand the breed, won't ever be a good barometer as to the "worth" of the breed . . . I've never had an "incident" with any of my dogs, they've all been well kept, well trained, and polite . . . as should all pets be . . .
Jim Ball wrote: Then the criminal elements in society looking for guard dogs, the dog fighters looking for the best pit dog & the macho assholes who want big mean dogs to show how tough they are will just look for another breed.
Correction: It'll never get bred out because the back-alley breeders are not breeding Pits for their gentle natures.
Just because creepy back alley breeders are irresponsible doesn't mean that independent, non-sociopathic breeders couldn't do the right thing. It just means that "good pits" and "bad pits" would co-exist in the "wild".
With that said, some care WOULD need to be taken. Bulldogs used to be aggressive killing machines. A couple hundred years of breeding solely for docility and goofy looks has left the breed as one of the most stupid (IQ-wise) and least healthy dog breeds around.
Just because creepy back alley breeders are irresponsible doesn't mean that independent, non-sociopathic breeders couldn't do the right thing. It just means that "good pits" and "bad pits" would co-exist in the "wild".
With that said, some care WOULD need to be taken. Bulldogs used to be aggressive killing machines. A couple hundred years of breeding solely for docility and goofy looks has left the breed as one of the most stupid (IQ-wise) and least healthy dog breeds around.
'Good Pits' and 'Bad Pits' already are scattered out among the population. I wish there were a way to know the breeding history of dogs involved in fatal or serious attacts on humans. There woud probably be some very interesting correlations.
Faulty Focus
Posts: 669
Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada
Mnemosyne Photography wrote:
Most of those were attacks on someone on someone else's property. Which any dog could do.
Not so, any stats I have seen always show the majority of dog attacks are on family members. I just found this in Wiki : "77% of dog bites are from the pet of family or friends, and 50% of attacks occur on the dog owner's property."
Dogs need dicipline, just as children do and unfortuantely lots of dogs are treated like a child and a spoiled child at that. It is often those same owners that are completely naive about dog attacks and think things like "Rover would never hurt my baby because he loves her and will protect her" and then leave a 80 lb dog with alone in a room with an infant or a child. It only takes a split second for a large dog to remove half of a kids face and these attacks do not show up as fatalities.
A few years ago in a BC city a young women had a huge boa-constrictor that freely shared the house with an infant and a toddler. She argued for weeks in the media that this snake was "a member of the family"and "would never harm her children". Thank goodness the authourities moved in and removed the snake before she was proven wrong at the expense of her children.
Faulty Focus
Posts: 669
Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada
Some very interesting stats forom the American Humane Org. :
Dog bite statistics
An estimated 4.7 million dog bites occur in the U.S. each year
Nearly 800,000 dog bites require medical care
Approximately 92% of fatal dog attacks involved male dogs, 94% of which were not neutered
Approximately 25% of fatal dog attacks involved chained dogs
Approximately 71% of bites occur to the extremities (arms, legs, hands, feet)
Approximately two-thirds of bites occurred on or near the victim’s property, and most victims knew the dog
The insurance industry pays more than $1 billion in dog-bite claims each year
At least 25 different breeds of dogs have been involved in the 238 dog-bite-related fatalities in the U.S.
Approximately 24% of human deaths involved unrestrained dogs off of their owners’ property
Approximately 58% of human deaths involved unrestrained dogs on their owners’ property
So maybe the answer isn't of pit bulls are horrible. I think they should all be put down. The real answer is all dogs are dangerous, pits are only regarded as dangerous in the states and we have made them that way. I picked up a Pit on the street the other week and all he does is cuddle. He's been fought. He's covered in scars from dogs biting him because he wouldn't fight back. Had him 3 or 4 weeks now and he hasn't attacked any other dog or mauled any of the kids. The worst he's done and is bark at a little dog for biting his foot. Am I still wary of him? A little. It's not because he's a pit though, it's because he's a large dog and dogs can be unpredictable with any breed. However, I kiss his face, he sleeps next to my bed and I have had him around kids. He's not a bad dog. We have demonized the breed here in the states because other countries like the dogs. And not only that we are the reason they have become demonized because we leave them to rot, fight them for pleasure, and basically shun them as a breed.
A few points :
Everyone should look at your first link. This is what can happen in a second from a medium size dog left with a toodler. It is a tragedy, but a blessing that the child is still alive. I do not want to get into a breed debate but one has to wonder if this would have been a fatality if the dog was a different breed or a bigger dog.
Your third link is an error. The headline reads "Golden Retriever" but the article indicates "pit bull".
Ashley, your rescue dog sounds great but please be very careful with him around kids.
From your third link:
"yet most owners with surprise attacking dogs have loving homes and owners claim: ”they have never had a problem before, very kind and loving animals”.
Everyone should look at your first link. This is what can happen in a second from a medium size dog left with a toodler. It is a tragedy, but a blessing that the child is still alive. I do not want to get into a breed debate but one has to wonder if this would have been a fatality if the dog was a different breed or a bigger dog.
Your third link is an error. The headline reads "Golden Retriever" but the article indicates "pit bull".
Ashley, your rescue dog sounds great but please be very careful with him around kids.
From your third link:
"yet most owners with surprise attacking dogs have loving homes and owners claim: ”they have never had a problem before, very kind and loving animals”.
I'd be careful leaving my kids or anyone's around a fucking teacup dog, a cat and strange people. Sorry but any breed of animal is unpredictable. A Siamese cat nearly suffocated me as a baby. Every living thing has some danger. It's not just pits. And your link is full of propaganda maybe you should do proper research.
Faulty Focus wrote: Some very interesting stats forom the American Humane Org. :
Dog bite statistics
An estimated 4.7 million dog bites occur in the U.S. each year
Nearly 800,000 dog bites require medical care
Approximately 92% of fatal dog attacks involved male dogs, 94% of which were not neutered
Approximately 25% of fatal dog attacks involved chained dogs
Approximately 71% of bites occur to the extremities (arms, legs, hands, feet)
Approximately two-thirds of bites occurred on or near the victim’s property, and most victims knew the dog
The insurance industry pays more than $1 billion in dog-bite claims each year
At least 25 different breeds of dogs have been involved in the 238 dog-bite-related fatalities in the U.S.
Approximately 24% of human deaths involved unrestrained dogs off of their owners’ property
Approximately 58% of human deaths involved unrestrained dogs on their owners’ property
The dog in the OP happened to be a pit (or looked like one), but as most of us agree, breed is less important than size and weight. A black lab or rottweiler is potentially just about as capable of causing serious injury or death, especially to a child or older person. Many other breeds as well.
So, the real question is: Since when does our right to have a large, furry friend trump the right of all of us, and our children, to be free from hideous dog bites and maulings?
Vivus Hussein Denuo wrote: So, the real question is: Since when does our right to have a large, furry friend trump the right of all of us, and our children, to be free from hideous dog bites and maulings?
When does your right to own a car to drive to work trump our rights to breath clean air and not risk being hit by it?
When does your right to own a firearm trump our rights to not possibly be shot by it?
You are talking about a risk that is so infinitesimally small as to be statistically non existent, why do you discuss it as if it is a common occurrence?
In Canada, there are fewer than 2 dog related fatalities per year, compared to some 11,000 traffic accident fatalities.
You really need to get your priorities straight if you think dogs are a problem.
You also aren't considering things like helper dogs, seeing eye dogs and all the other working dog jobs that they do for us.
You also aren't considering the number of times when dogs actually save their owners lives, either by just being there as a deterrent to assault or break in, or by more direct intervention, such as waking their owners up when something is amiss (the house is on fire, etc).
These are things that large dogs are better for than smaller ones, because larger dogs are generally bred to work rather than being bred as a Kewpie doll with fur.
Why is it that you are so concerned with something that is so low risk that you are over nearly 7000 times more likely to die in a car accident rather than what you are concerned about?
Your logic fails me.
Christopher Hartman wrote: While I disagree that we need to wipe out all pit bulls as suggested by the person you challenged, I do not see how you can equate his resolution towards specific bread of dog as to how we should handle a certain type of people.
Dogs are often put down for attacks; even non-fatal attacks. Would you then suggest we start executing people for assault and battery?
I believe your question in response to their post was stupid.
I think he was being ironic to highlight the absurdity of a dog breed "holocaust" as it would be to malign a race of people based on some individual criminals.
I'd like to hear details about the history of the owner and his treatment of the dog before passing judgement on the dog alone.
Despite the representation of pit bulls in the media as psychotic killers, they are known to be extremely gentle and good natured dogs, and in the past were the most popular breed of family dog, known for being especially good with children.
When does your right to own a car to drive to work trump our rights to breath clean air and not risk being hit by it?
When does your right to own a firearm trump our rights to not possibly be shot by it?
You are talking about a risk that is so infinitesimally small as to be statistically non existent, why do you discuss it as if it is a common occurrence?
In Canada, there are fewer than 2 dog related fatalities per year, compared to some 11,000 traffic accident fatalities.
You really need to get your priorities straight if you think dogs are a problem.
You also aren't considering things like helper dogs, seeing eye dogs and all the other working dog jobs that they do for us.
You also aren't considering the number of times when dogs actually save their owners lives, either by just being there as a deterrent to assault or break in, or by more direct intervention, such as waking their owners up when something is amiss (the house is on fire, etc).
These are things that large dogs are better for than smaller ones, because larger dogs are generally bred to work rather than being bred as a Kewpie doll with fur.
Why is it that you are so concerned with something that is so low risk that you are over nearly 7000 times more likely to die in a car accident rather than what you are concerned about?
Your logic fails me.
The topic of this thread is maulings by dogs.
FYI, in these fora, we talk about things that happen even less often than dog-bites.
Would you like to discuss something more common? Say, toe-stubbings? OK. Just open a thread.
I think he was being ironic to highlight the absurdity of a dog breed "holocaust" as it would be to malign a race of people based on some individual criminals.
I'd like to hear details about the history of the owner and his treatment of the dog before passing judgement on the dog alone.
Despite the representation of pit bulls in the media as psychotic killers, they are known to be extremely gentle and good natured dogs, and in the past were the most popular breed of family dog, known for being especially good with children.
Why is Farina dressed up in a suit and bowler hat?
i have not read any comments in this thread, but why is it every time a pit bull bites or attacks it says so right in the title but any other breed it just says dog?
i see what theyre doing here.
so sad, people need to TRAIN their dogs so things like this dont happen.
no matter what the breed.
DAVfoto wrote: yes I know, but everyone keeps blaming it on the owner. Dogs are not as advanced as we are..
Can't tell if you're joking or not.
If you're not, then FYI, dog problems are nearly always the owner's fault, either through their neglect, abuse, or incompetence.
Well cared for, competently trained, properly socialized, and responsibly handled dogs are never a problem.
FYI, in these fora, we talk about things that happen even less often than dog-bites.
Would you like to discuss something more common? Say, toe-stubbings? OK. Just open a thread.
He pointed out your faulty logic very well...that was the point of his post. I know your history about dogs. Nothing will ever change your mind, we get that.
He pointed out your faulty logic very well...that was the point of his post. I know your history about dogs. Nothing will ever change your mind, we get that.
I know your history of indifference to the victims of dog maulings, and your lack of interest in even discussing ways to reduce the number of maulings. And saying "It's the owner's fault" isn't a way to reduce the number of maulings.
Vivus Hussein Denuo wrote: I know your history of indifference to the victims of dog maulings, and your lack of interest in even discussing ways to reduce the number of maulings. And saying "It's the owner's fault" isn't a way to reduce the number of maulings.
Wrong. You don't know a damn thing about my thoughts on the victims. A baby is dead, that is sad. Who loves a baby next to a pit bull or a bull mastiff?? Just recently a BM mix bit a baby and killed it here in Vegas...same thing, leaving a big dog next to a small being...real idiotic.
The fault is that of the adult/owner. A way to reduce is to train people. Just as a way to reduce auto deaths is to train better drivers, people need to be taught how to deal with dogs. Too many people treat dogs like they treat humans and that is VERY wrong.
Wrong. You don't know a damn thing about my thoughts on the victims. A baby is dead, that is sad. Who loves a baby next to a pit bull or a bull mastiff?? Just recently a BM mix bit a baby and killed it here in Vegas...same thing, leaving a big dog next to a small being...real idiotic.
The fault is that of the adult/owner. A way to reduce is to train people. Just as a way to reduce auto deaths is to train better drivers, people need to be taught how to deal with dogs. Too many people treat dogs like they treat humans and that is VERY wrong.
Well, that's a starting point. Of course, training is not always effective. But anyway, there are 46 million households with dogs in the US.
What is the training to cover? Who will do it? How many people per household will get the training? Will it be mandatory for all current dog owners? Will it be mandatory before someone can own or have a dog in his household? How will the trainers know who has a dog? What's your estimate of the cost per household? Who will pay for it? What happens if an owner fails or refuses to get the training? What happens if the dog turns out to be untrainable? Will the training requirement apply to all breeds, all ages, and all sizes? Will the trainers work for private companies? The city? The county? The state? Will the trainers be paid by dog, or be on a salary?
I know your history of indifference to the victims of dog maulings, and your lack of interest in even discussing ways to reduce the number of maulings. And saying "It's the owner's fault" isn't a way to reduce the number of maulings.
Again I must say bullshit. It's absolutely one of the BEST ways to prevent it. The other being parents teaching their children the proper way to act around a dog, ANY dog of ANY breed.
yes I know, but everyone keeps blaming it on the owner. Dogs are not as advanced as we are..
Exactly why it's the owners fault. If you are going to put a baby around a dog, in any environment and with any sort of vigilance, you have to be responsible if your dog (ANY BREED) attacks the child.
If my dog bites me. It's my fault. I can't blame the dog. I am the one that decided to rescue him. Rehabilitating him has been a bitch because he was so poorly trained and I recognize that. But if he bites me, it's my fault because I decided to co-mingle our environments.
| 
| 
| edu