Pit bull for the last time: How media hype is destroying a once-secure breed
A vintage picture of a pit bull and a girl
Photo courtesy of saveabull.com
I bet a lot of people are going to click on this article simply because the word pit bull is in the title. Frankly that fact sickens me and gets directly to the root of why I've decided to write it. I have generally chosen to steer clear of the ongoing pit bull controversy and, with all due respect to those who are passionately engaged in the debate, my reason is that the discussion is riddled with ignorance, insensitivity and flippant assumptions that I find unsavory at best.
But I've reached my breaking point.
Personally I would like to see the conversation take a more productive trajectory, or just end altogether. In an effort to support a constructive debate, I will tell you why I think the topic is being grossly perverted by the media and, in my opinion, becoming more dangerous with each passing day.
Nation's hero?
Photo courtesy of pbrc.net
The word “pit bull” is now used by many as a term, not a breed.
Although there is an exact pit bull pedigree and various breeding campaigns have produced relative breeds from those bloodlines, these days, especially in the news media, the term is used liberally to describe a range of dogs with similar physical characteristics — whether those doing the describing are aware of it or not.
Perhaps part of the reason is that original pit bull bloodlines have been used to produce various extensions of the breed (Staffordshire terrier, bull terrier, American pit bull) and in many instances, for a variety of reasons, the characteristics of these subsequent breeds have been altered by a myriad of other breeds.
The interesting thing about the “real” pit bull is that it is a longstanding breed, and despite the fact that it has been wildly popular for quite some time in many different parts of the world, including the U.S in the early 1900s, the breed has never before been regarded as overtly aggressive toward people.
Not until fairly recently.
Historical statistics confirm that there aren't too many dog breeds that can boast a cleaner record than the pit bull in the department of aggression towards humans.
So, first question: Who is this contemporary pit bull, making atrocious headlines? What is the dog we are talking about?
This is the question that eats at me.
Breeding, and the results thereof
When I was a kid living in Detroit, German shepherds and Dobermans were the big scary meanies, and yes, people did get bitten by them. Both breeds were very popular and easy to come across, as they were often used for home security.
Honestly, in those days, if I came across a dog that looked like what everyone today is calling a pit bull, it didn't trigger the fear that folks nowadays associate with the breed. But a Doberman, whoa! I'm outta here.
In the case of the German shepherd, the popularity and controversy surrounding the breed eventually resulted in a virtual washing-out of healthy bloodlines and re-establishing the strength of the breed is a work still in progress today.
You don't need to understand that much about “line breeding” to get the idea that, in order to create a breed (or intentionally transform one) you must first know what you want. The vast majority of recognized breeds were envisioned first in the mind's eye for a specific purpose.
With patience and a gene pool to work from, humans have demonstrated their clever ability to create a stupefying array of breeds and alter the confirmations of existing ones.
Ironically, the effort to resurrect the American bloodlines of the German shepherd, including, in part, the introduction of lines from other breeds to correct genetic imperfections, a process which is intended to save the breed, is the very same process (in reverse) that is playing out in our collective “mind's eye” and threatening to decimate the bloodlines of the pit bull — an inherently trustworthy breed.
A search through history doesn't seem to suggest that the pit bulls making bad headlines are a demon risen from our past as much as a product of the present and a promise in our future. It doesn't take long for a cultural obsession to alter the genetics of any breed, usually for the worse.
If I only make one thing clear in this article it is this: We are creating the breed we fear through our portrait of the situation in the news, and it's not a pit bull.
We'll wish we had the pit bull back.
A dangerous replacement is up for election!
The psyche of a fighting dog breeder
The practice of fighting dogs has evolved from a sport (if you can call it that) to a business. It isn't about who has the scrappiest little pit bull anymore. Not unlike many of our own professional sports, it's about the biggest, toughest, most aggressive — and money, of course. Cultural infatuation with danger doesn't help matters.
So if you want a pit bull, I'll make you one. A dog that looks like your idea of a pit bull is every bit as formidable and tenacious, will fight if you put it in the ring, and, although having some on hand wouldn't hurt, I won't need one drop of pure pit bull genetics to do it.
Breeding a dog that is difficult to control isn't hard — it just takes a little bit of focused stupidity. If I want to breed a dog that will fight and fits the profile of the current cultural candidate, all I have to do is get on the Internet, start reading news articles, blog posts and comment streams, look at photos, and then create the dog that everybody is freaking out about and arguing over. It's that simple.
There are plenty of breed combinations that would almost certainly render a percentage of pups that look like the dogs everyone is raging about and fight just as well, or better. I could then cull out the best, or worst if you prefer, and sell them for good money, maybe holding a “perfect one” back for my next litter.
Here are some likely breed matches...
Jack Russell terrier/Australian cattle dog
German shepherd/Beagle
Rottweiler/Dalmatian
American bulldog/Rhodesian ridgeback
Boxer/Manchester terrier
Bull Mastiff/Doberman
If it is big, strong and athletic enough for your liking, you'll buy it and do with it what you will, even if it is the product of leaving my sister's and cousin's dogs in the yard for a while. If you think it's a pit bull and you want to call it a Pit bull, go right ahead. Maybe, someday, you'll even breed her to a real pit bull and get one of those dogs that I saw on TV.
So the story goes ...
Have you ever noticed how just about every smooth coat, muscle-bound, blocky-headed dog that bites someone is referred to in the news as a pit or pit mix, instead of a Boxer mix, a Ridgeback, a Mastiff or a Rottweiller mix? If it's a mix, it's mixed with something right?
This media debate isn't about a bad breed — it's about bad breeding and poor judgment on both sides of the fence!
Bite frequency
I often hear the argument, “Maybe pit bulls don't bite as frequently as some small dogs, but when they do, it is more damaging; therefore, they are more dangerous dogs.”
I think this is dangerous thinking.
Of course larger dogs do more damage. Nevertheless, a bite is a bite, one that was fueled by a behavioral imbalance, whether it was inflicted by a big mouth or a small one, a wide one, a long one.
Actually, if a small dog is willing to bite, that is pretty alarming! Dog's aren't dumb. If a 4-pound Chihuahua is confident that it can control a 150-pound person with aggression, just imagine what the 60-pound “pit mix” is thinking!
Every bite should count, if nothing else but for the fact that it is pertinent information. Every time a dog bites a human, there is a chronology that led up to that moment — that is what needs to be looked at.
If, as a society, we are producing, marketing and raising little dogs who bite with alarming frequency, regardless of what the weak link is, there is a likelihood that a similar scenario is occurring somewhere with larger more formidable breeds.
We would be wise to search for the parallels.
How we can change
I realize that, if you dig around, most of what I've said so far has been covered in the plethora of comment streams generated by dog blogs everywhere. So the least I can do is offer some helpful suggestions to be hopeful solutions for a threatening trend.
I'll be the first to raise my hand and take the pledge to maintain an accurate, open-minded discussion with regards to pit bulls and their current status in society.
I would like to see ...
• The general and casual use of the term “pit bull” cease, across the board. If we're going to talk about a dog, tell everyone who the dog is you are talking about. If you are using the word “pit bull” as a term to describe physical attributes shared by a variety of breeds, be clear in your statement/s. If you don't know the difference, find out before you speak.
• The news media make an obligation to accurate reporting when covering breed-pertinent issues and not making breed an issue when it's not relevant. It would make a big statement if ...
• The Humane Society set a precedent by further underscoring the need for breed specificity and by exemplifying it in their intake/adoption programs and related educational materials.
• A broader documentation of bite statistics that includes all breeds, degrees of injury, information about dogs' owners and status of the people who have been bitten.
• The more extensive application of genetic identification technology in cases of catastrophic aggression to (to the best of our ability) determine the breed recipe present in dogs who commit the act.
• Increased effort/resources geared toward advancing the education of animal shelter staff, operators of rescue programs and foster care providers in the area of breed identification and related behavioral tendencies.
• Pit bull advocates embrace the reality that the dog they love so dearly and its historically commendable reputation is transforming rapidly with not just the help of meddlesome breeding, but also news hype.
• Pit bull opponents understand that their angst toward the situation needs to be directed (hopefully in a productive manner) at people, for their overall lack of responsibility/skillfulness with regards to dogs, not a breed or dogs themselves.
I am begging, along with the pit bull, for a change in dialogue...
That's it. Pit bull, for the last time.
John Spieser is a professional dog trainer and owner of Dogheart. He can be reached at john@doghearta2.com.
Comments
Candy
Fri, Apr 29, 2011 : 3:43 p.m.
I certainly don't pretend to be an expert on this issue, but I can share my experience. I volunteer for the county animal shelter in a large metropolitan city in a southern state. To give you an idea of the size, I am one of 300 volunteers in this very professionally run operation. They have a "pit bull" program specifically to educate the public and get these dogs adopted. Obviously, they don't have the funding to do genetic testing – any dog that the average person might look at and think is a pit bull is classified as a pit bull. Dogs given the pit bull classification are temperament tested and if they don't pass they are put down. If they pass they try to get them adopted. This is a county municipality – they are not going to take on any liability risks they don't have to. It seems to me that if there was any actual evidence or scientific data that supported the perception that this breed is "inherently" aggressive, it would be way easier for them to just put down all of these dogs. They have an incinerator right on the premises, they put down thousands of animals every year because they don't get adopted fast enough. There are thousands of these dogs living in homes all across America, with other dogs, with cats, with children that never have any aggression issues. If the breed is inherently aggressive, how is that possible? It just doesn't hold water.
Jasper
Thu, Apr 28, 2011 : 3:21 a.m.
John, Thank you I have learned a lot from your article and the discussion. I know, from my own experience, that even very good responsible dog people can have a lapse of judgement resulting in injuries to other people and dogs.
zero2sixty
Tue, Apr 26, 2011 : 12:50 a.m.
After fostering a pit bull 3 yrs. ago, with the intention of only fostering a dog in need, and this dog to help me with my border collie & her dog-aggression problem. Signage over the foster's kennel read "Staffy-mix". I had no interest in pit bulls, & knew "Staffy" was short for Staffordshire Terrier (AKC breed). After a little research, I realized my foster was a pit bull by known appearance standards. I was surpised. She was sweet & submissive. After 3 months of fostering, I was convinced by shelter staff to adopt the pit bull. Prior to adopting, I was given a book, The Pit Bull Placebo, by Karen Delise (2007). This was an eye-opening read, in defense of the 'pit bull' and other breeds that have been villianized throughout history (Newfoundland, Bloodhound, St. Bernard, German Shepherd, etc.) and I'd recommend it to anyone who is open-minded enough to realize the 'pit bull' issue may more complicated than simply denouncing an entire breed. Of the many complexities that are clearly factors in the villianization of the 'pit bull', the one I find most crucial, and has been mentioned previously in comments, is the fact that the breed description of a 'biting dog' comes from various sources when reported by media. Breed descriptions come from those who may have no direct knowledge (victim, witness, police, etc.) of the dog. Evidence exists that these breed descriptors are often inaccurate. Roughly half the dogs in the U.S. are of mixed breeds (The problem with dog bite studies, NCRC, 2011). For anyone's further reading and self-initiated research of the topic, please visit a variety of sources, but make sure to visit a source that specializes in this type of research. I suggest you include: <a href="http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/" rel='nofollow'>http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/</a> and read The Pit Bull Placebo if you're at all interested in making an educated decision before claiming a purely opinionated point-of-view, driven only by media hype.
Jasper
Thu, Apr 28, 2011 : 3:23 a.m.
I am interested in the Pit Bull Placebo. Thank you for the reference.
Adam
Wed, Apr 27, 2011 : 4:54 p.m.
@Cgr58 I think you've missed the point of this entire article. What the author and some other posters have pointed out is that the term "pit bull" is often misused to describe any dog with similar characteristics both by the media and perhaps law enforcement in their incident reports (which you've so eloquently copied and pasted for us here multiple times). The purpose of the article, I believe, was to reduce the sensationalization of the breed by using better descriptors (ie a pit bull mixed with what?). A pit bull "mix" could describe any number of remarkably unrelated dogs. In my experience a surprisingly large number of people who believe they are pit bull owners are, in fact, not.
Cgr58
Tue, Apr 26, 2011 : 1:28 p.m.
2nd adult in 4 days killed by a pit bull this week alone: <a href="http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S2081281.shtml?cat=500" rel='nofollow'>http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S2081281.shtml?cat=500</a> 2011 USA DOG-RELATED FATALITIES. 11. April 25, 2011 - Age 48 - (4) PIT BULLS (neighbors) Margaret Salcedo, Truth or Consequences, NM 10. April 22, 2011--AGE: 50-PIT BULL (non owner). Virgil A. Cantrell, Ardmore, OK. 9. April 13, 2011--AGE: 7 months-ROTTWEILER (owner's). Annabelle Mitchell, Frankfort, Maine. 8. March 6, 2011--AGE: 47-PIT BULL (owner's). Jennie Erquiaga, San Bernardino, Ca. 7. March 5, 2011--AGE: 3-ROTTWEILERS (2) (grandparent's). Vanessa Husmann, Hopkinton, Iowa 6. February 19, 2011--AGE: 10 day-old-PIT BULL (owner's). Unknown Baby, Kalamazoo, Mich. 5. Febuary 17, 2011--AGE: 66-ROTTWEILERS (2) (neighbor's). Sirlinda Hayes, Dillon County, SC. 4. January 26, 2011--AGE: 51-PIT BULLS (2) (neighbor's). Ronnie Waldo, Randolph, Miss. 3. January 24, 2011--AGE: 9-AKITA (owner's). Kristen Dutton, Modoc Shores, SC. 2. January 12, 2011--AGE: 5-PIT BULLS (2) (neighbor's). McKayla Woodard, Waxhaw, NC. 1. January 4, 2011--AGE: 51-PIT BULL (owner's). Linda Leal Castillo, Colusa, CA.
Snow Bird
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 5:17 p.m.
"I have generally chosen to steer clear of the ongoing pit bull controversy and, with all due respect to those who are passionately engaged in the debate, my reason is that the discussion is riddled with ignorance, insensitivity and flippant assumptions that I find unsavory at best." I agree. So many people here that have no idea what they are talking about. I see a few people on here posting the fatalities. Those people are lobbyists and advocates from dogsbite.org. the fanatical anti-pit bull organization. the fact is, that no official organization tracks breeds by bite, and that info is useless, as pit bull isn't even a breed, but a generalization for a short-haired blocky dog. real stats would identify the dog by specific breed. So all of you stats folks out there, please provide the specific breed that attacked, otherwise your stats are completely meaningless. No info, no believie in stats.
Cgr58
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 12:01 p.m.
2011 USA DOG-RELATED FATALITIES. 10. April 22, 2011--AGE: 50-PIT BULL (non owner). Virgil A. Cantrell, Ardmore, OK. 9. April 13, 2011--AGE: 7 months-ROTTWEILER (owner's). Annabelle Mitchell, Frankfort, Maine. 8. March 6, 2011--AGE: 47-PIT BULL (owner's). Jennie Erquiaga, San Bernardino, Ca. 7. March 5, 2011--AGE: 3-ROTTWEILERS (2) (grandparent's). Vanessa Husmann, Hopkinton, Iowa 6. February 19, 2011--AGE: 10 day-old-PIT BULL (owner's). Unknown Baby, Kalamazoo, Mich. 5. Febuary 17, 2011--AGE: 66-ROTTWEILERS (2) (neighbor's). Sirlinda Hayes, Dillon County, SC. 4. January 26, 2011--AGE: 51-PIT BULLS (2) (neighbor's). Ronnie Waldo, Randolph, Miss. 3. January 24, 2011--AGE: 9-AKITA (owner's). Kristen Dutton, Modoc Shores, SC. 2. January 12, 2011--AGE: 5-PIT BULLS (2) (neighbor's). McKayla Woodard, Waxhaw, NC. 1. January 4, 2011--AGE: 51-PIT BULL (owner's). Linda Leal Castillo, Colusa, CA.
Snow Bird
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 5:23 p.m.
Since pit bull is a generic term, and you are so heavily numbers based, can you please provide the specific breed of pit bulls that attacked, provide a reliable source of info, and which scientific tests were done to determine that the dogs were truely pit bulls. otherwise I have to assume the information is fabricated or from and unreliable, biased source.
Cgr58
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 9:20 a.m.
John. Within hours of your article, yet another person was killed by a pit bull in Ardmore, OK. This time it was a 50 yr old full grown adult male, who witnesses say was very known by and familiar with, the owner and the dog. The pit bull was tethered on the front porch when it killed him. A young boy was the first to witness the attack , and note that he was but by the dog the day before, requiring 20 stitches. Yet another person was bit prior to both. To date, pit bull have been responsible for exactly 60% of all fatal attacks on humans in 2010, which is the same % as in the past 7 years. The next closest was Rottweilers at half that or 30%....the only other breed was one single Akita that killed a person in 2011. When a person gets killed by a pit bull every 3 weeks, it's not media hype, John.
John Spieser
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 3:37 p.m.
Cgr58, The reason you are calling this dog a pit bull is because it said so in the article. I read the article but didn't see a picture. I did read that the dead dog was being set to the lab for testing, I suspect partially for the purpose of genetic information that may shed some light on the TRUE genetic make-up of the dog. If the breed/s that created this dog can be determined, that could possibly help investigators trace the origin of the litter, or at least provide helpful info that may prevent another incident. I have been all over the internet this week reading article about "pit-bull" attacks and looking at photos. What I have found is a very broad description of "pit bull type" dogs. These dogs range in size from 30lbs-over 100lbs, have every different color and coat pattern imaginable, and range dramatically in shape and musculature. What single breed of dog do you know that has such a versatile confirmation ? I will also point out that this dog(?) was tied out on a chain, to the porch IN FRONT of the house, the owners weren't even home !? Seems to me that it would be pretty stupid to do that with any dog, not to mention that it is physically abusive. This dog was obviously not being cared for/about. I am not in the dark about the fact that fatal dog attacks are on the rise in this country and I would be the first to advocate for action to reduce or end this trend. I am not a rah! rah! pitbull advocate. The dogs that people are calling pit bulls these days (both supporters and opponents) could not possibly be coming from the genetic line of any one specific breed and in most cases are poor representations of whatever breed they are claimed to be. I have had clients re-act with dissappointment when I informed them that the dog they've been telling everyone is a pit bull was not. There is huge infatuation in our current culture with "bully-breeds" in general and that is one thing I am trying to point out.
Adam Jaskiewicz
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 12:26 p.m.
How many dogs attack humans, period? What's the breakdown by breed? How does it compare to the popularity of breeds in the country? One statistic taken out of context doesn't mean much. The dog in this story was obviously aggressive. Two people had been bit by the same dog prior to the man in this case. Says more to me about the irresponsible owner than the breed. Also, who says it's a pit bull, and what makes them qualified to say that?
sbbuilder
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 12:44 a.m.
Mr Spieser Are you serious? Are you not aware of the scrutiny that this breed, and a few others, have undergone in countries around the globe? Are you not up to date on the research that has been done in the last number of years? Are you serious? <a href="http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/Locations/USLocations.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/Locations/USLocations.htm</a> Searchable database that shows dozens and dozens of municipalites in the US that have laws in place either restricting or banning pit bulls.) <a href="http://www.rott-n-chatter.com/rottweilers/laws/countries.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.rott-n-chatter.com/rottweilers/laws/countries.html</a> <a href="http://www.pettravel.com/news_agressivedogbreeds.cfm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.pettravel.com/news_agressivedogbreeds.cfm</a> (Just a couple of many sites that list countries that ban or restrict pit bulls, as well as a few other breeds.) In order for legislation to pass in such a disparate group of countries, there must be concensus as to the research and data about pit bulls. I simply don't know how you can get around this, and say that pit bulls are misunderstood. I am open-minded about this. Show me the data that says that these countries are in the wrong. Show me their faulty logic. Convince me that pit bulls are not a danger to society. BTW, we have a Jack Russell. Although not a true pit bull, he is a near cousin.
sbbuilder
Tue, Apr 26, 2011 : 5:07 a.m.
"Funny how everyone gets all worked up when a dog kills a person yet we slaughter millions of them every year." You have me there. I fail, utterly, to see anything 'funny' about a human being killed by a dog. <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110426/us_nm/us_dog_mauling" rel='nofollow'>http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110426/us_nm/us_dog_mauling</a> Look, Mr Spieser, pit bulls, or pit bull mixes, however you want to classify them, have an inordinate share of maulings/killings. Blame the owners/breeders. Blame the breed. At this point, I view this as a distinction without a difference. Governmental bodies have the responsibility to ensure the safety of citizens. This breed is manifestly a danger.
John Spieser
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 5:46 p.m.
sbbuilder cont.. That was, the "ultimate deterrent". I don't trust their breeding practices. - Countries and municipalities that are imposing BSL are including pit bulls (or using the reference "Bull dog types") in their listing along with many other breeds ie, all bulldog type dogs, Huskies, German shepherds, Rottweillers, Presacanario's, Dobermans, Mastiffs, etc,etc. If your Jack russel was a larger breed it would likely be included as well. You can not effectively ban a breed without considering the bloodlines of all dogs that created the breed, or extensions of the breed, or could be used to simulate the breed. It just won't work. That is why BSL that is engineered intelligently doesn't attempt to net a bunch of different dogs under one heading. The emphasis is on BREED SPECIFIC legislation. I am quite sure that nowhere in my article did I voice opposition to BSL, in fact, I didn't even mention it. Banning the general public from owning Pit bulls could be the best thing that has happened to the genetics of the breed for the past 70 years. - One of the url's you linked was quite specific about what a pit bull is and although I don't completely agree with their assesment, I commend their secificity. What they did was list the number of breeds created by the UKC and AKC using Pit bull bloodlines, along with accurate physical descriptions. This is smart. If people could train themselves to speak breed specifcally and education themselves on the breed profile, it would help everyone understand what is going on more clearly. Then, when there are no longer any bloodlines left from the Pit bulls, Staffy's or Bulldogs and irresponsible breeders start up-sizing the Jack russel to replace them, you and I will remember what a "real" Jack Russel terrier was. Hypothetically, what if the catch all term for the "bad,bad", dogs was "Jackies" or Jackie type dogs ? I agree with you in principle. Nuff said.
John Spieser
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 4:22 p.m.
sbbuilder, I have checked out your url's and would have to say that they support my arguement. First of all, I think (respectfully) that you are making some assumptions about my motivation for writing this article. Hopefully, you don't think that I am in the rah! rah! pit bull camp, completely opposed to BSL, and think that all these hyper aggressive dogs simply "need to be loved." NO! People do create dangerous dogs and you can love a screwed up dog all you want and that won't repair a neorological dis-order. Cocker spaniels ( who have maintained a seat high up on the biter list for decades) are clear proof of this fact. On the contrary, if I had my druthers, I would impose much stricter regulations on dog ownership, across the full spectrum of breeds. This would be for the protection of dogs. Funny how everyone gets all worked up when a dog kills a person yet we slaughter millions of them every year. Furthermore, I feel that the hard core "pit bull" supporters are doing as much damage to the breed as their opponents are. That is because they insist on clinging to the term pit bull and refuse to accept that they are lumping a (growing) number of breeds into that category. Here is why I feel that the url's that you shared, support my position... - It is difficult to find any BSL that was imposed pre-1980. I'm not saying that none exist but clearly BSL has become a recognized necessity in the eyes of communities much more so in the past 25 years. I was having dinner with a friend just last night who was a cop in Flint for 35 yrs. I asked him when he started seeing problems with pit bulls/bully breeds on the force. He answered immediately "when we started seeing crack-cocaine". He told me that pit bulls, bull dogs, mastiffs, rotteweillers, dobies and virtually any of the musle breeds were often used to guard drug stashes. I bet you that the gang-bangers were also blending all of these breeds together to create the "ultima
sbbuilder
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 3 a.m.
Mr Spieser Read the URL's. They are very, very clear. End of discussion. Two swings, two misses.
John Spieser
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 1:55 a.m.
I am fully aware of the growing trend of breed bans and I am not necessarily opposed to banning dangerous dogs, vehicles, or activities of any sort that jeopardize the well-being of the public. If a community decides to prohibit something as a result of a collective decision, they have a right to their own consensus. I am simply asking-- when you say banning pit-bulls are you talking about Pit-bulls or are you talking about all breeds that contain any percentage of Pit-bull genetics ? If you could list for me the breeds that fall under your category of pit bulls that would be helpful. I am not trying to be combative, I am sincerely curious. I have my own answer to this question and have learned that there are varying opinions. I'm wondering what a Pit-bull is to you ?
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 5:51 p.m.
This is important info: <a href="http://dogbitelaw.com/the-diane-whipple-case.html" rel='nofollow'>http://dogbitelaw.com/the-diane-whipple-case.html</a> <a href="http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil/in-your-state/dog-bite-fatalities/" rel='nofollow'>http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil/in-your-state/dog-bite-fatalities/</a>
sbbuilder
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 11:53 a.m.
Mr Speiser Just one question, then. Why have many countries, and many municipalities around the world banned the breed entirely? Rhetorically: Are they all bigoted? Are they all misinformed? Are they all caving to reactionary 'media hype'? When numerous countries have banned the breed, it makes you sit up and pay attention. Give it a try.....
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 3:02 p.m.
What breed has been banned ? Staffordshire terrier, staffordshire bull terrier, Bull terrier, Bulldog, Pit bull, or all of them ? There is a ban on "pit-bulls" in Windsor but no shortage of muscle mix dogs.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 7:27 a.m.
@ rich, Wow, you covered a lot of comments for me. I think that you are pretty much spot on with most of your responses. One thing that you might want to consider though, is the historic work ethic of small dogs. Very different than many larger breeds. small dogs were often bred to be more solitary and "cat-like". Exploring the halls of the castle, erradicating rodents, and then curling up with the kid/s at night, "a home dog." Sort of like an inside farm dog. When working with smaller breeds we modify our standards, especially for field work. That doesn't mean that we ignore indications of an unsteady tempermant and allow inappropriate aggression to go un-checked.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 7 a.m.
@moscow on the huron, and anyone else who was offended by my intro. I apologize if I hurt your feelings. I will underscore my statement, "with all due respect to those who are passionately engaged in the debate" to at least illustrate the fact that I was cognitive of my actions. But, in all honesty, my words were sincere. I am frustrated with the dialogue. I do work with dogs everyday, many of which are "muscle-mix" breeds, I have worked with many aggressive dogs, and I do see the clear trends taking place with dogs/breeds these days. I also realize that argueing is not going to resolve anything (thus, my pledge to accurate, open-minded dialogue) so, please don't dis-engage from the discussion for any other reason than, you've said all that you care to say. As long as people are willing to converse respectfully and strive for a deeper understanding of the subject, I am all about it !
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 6:40 a.m.
@Juliewhimsies, I like your point about having a pet is a privlege. There are so many things in our society that require one to "tow the line" as far as rules/regulations: Parenting, Drivers liscense, passport, home-ownership, etc. The reason everyone else allows one-another to enjoy these privleges is because we trust you to be responsible with them. When dogs become the burden of your neighbors it is only about sharing the responsibility, not the privlege.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 6:26 a.m.
@ Sharoncooper, So many good points ! I would add though, that it is not always exhuberant children who get bit. I have witnessed for myself, numerous situations where a child was both curious and fearful of a dog at the same time. If you read my other comments regarding smart breeding protocols; paying attention to tempermant and nerve condition of dogs; you will understand why a dog that is guessing about the intentions of a child that they are interacting with, especially if they are genetically a "nervous nilley" is not a good scenario. Unfortunately the kid has no idea why the dog is anxious around them, even though it is because they are anxious about the dog. It is rare to see a dog who doesn't take interest in a kid who is having fun by themselves and doesn't care one lick about what the dog is doing.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 6:04 a.m.
@robert granville, thank you for the support of my arguement but I would also point out that the ignorance is being promoted by what many would refer to as credible sources. That is why I used "media" in my title. I myself frequently encounter media sources, that profess or support opinions about dogs that are based on questionable evidence, that I would expect to be reliable. So, I wouldn't be too hard on our human "pack members", instead focus on a nourishing dialogue that promotes the truth. Be patient, trust nature, stick to your principles.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 5:32 a.m.
@ Lorrie, You make a very important point. We can all speculate all we want. But unless we have accurate facts that include not only the breed recipe's contained in dogs who commit catastrophic acts of aggression, but the engineers of the dogs themselves (whether intentional or inadvertent) and the status of those victimized, we are all shooting in the dark. That is why I provided some possible solutions in my article (which, incidently no one commented on) to hopefully promote some kind of action/s that would shed some light on the issue; One of which was genetic testing in cases of catastrophic aggression as a part of the forsenic analysis in on-going investigations. Think of this... If I design and build an un-registered assault rifle in my basement, that is a crime. If then, someone is shot and murdered by the weapon I created, that is a second crime. The weapon itself cannot be held accountable for either crime, but can be used as evidence against the actual perpatrator of at least the first crime. Eliminate the first crime, eliminate the second.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 4:55 a.m.
@craig lounsbury, I have been working with aggressive dog cases for 12 years and I don't think that my "thinking is flawed." You say that a small dog is reacting out of fear, fear of what? Is anyone abusing them? A dog of any size is capable of percieving a threat whether it is well founded or not. I often work with dogs who are over-reacting to external conditions and when they bite it is usually a "one and done" scenario. When it is not, and a dog sustains an attack, we categorize the behavior differently regardless of the dogs size/breed profile. I have had small dogs bite repeatedly with confidence and although this is alarming it is often more easily corrected than a dog who bites out of fear or as a reaction to being startled/or an inaccurately percieved threat. When you are trying to discern the tempermant and nerve condition of a dog ,you need to determine where their threshold or "limits of aggression" is, otherwise you don't know where to start in training to promote a higher tolerance. A dog that reacts with aggression because they "feel" threatened, or a dog that "snaps or bites" when startled or aroused from sleep, is a dog that has unsteady nerves. There was a story in the news quite a few years back about a grandmother who startled an otherwise trustworthy St. Bernard in it's sleep, she's dead now. Unfortunately small dogs are the victims of poor breeding practices because it isn't as critical to pay attention to tempermant, drive or steadiness of nerves. Also, small dogs are attractive to puppy mill breeders for a variety of reasons including the fact that they are less threatening to consumers and work well from an inventory standpoint. I will stick with my statement that "a bite is a bite" and "we would be wise to search for the parallels" The parallel being bad breeding practices.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 4:16 a.m.
"A Pit bull is not a casual pet" I agree and would add that a dog is not a casual pet. Regardless of breed a dog is a pack/family oriented species. That is to say that a dog, even in the wild, relies on relative comraderie for survival. Although some dogs require more effort to own than others, and virtually all of the working breeds do better with an experienced handler, a dog is not a "pet" ! A dog will require an understandable environment that they can feel an intimate/responsible connection with. A fish is a potential casual pet.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 4:04 a.m.
@debling, I assume that you have never been seriously ripped up by a dog ? I have been and I promise that I would never respond to anyone who is sincerely attempting to engage an intelligent discussion about dog aggression with "blah, blah, blah. My question to you, and anyone else on this comment stream, who insists on using pit bull as a term and refuse to look at the broader dynamics of the issue is... How many dog breeds would need to be regulated or banned for you to feel completely safe ? Can you provide a complete list ?
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 3:56 a.m.
@ ronalduck, Not bigoted, just scared. Kind of hard for a nine year old kid, racing through neighborhood yards, to be bigoted. In those days we kids knew why the dogs were in the yards, to control us ! We didn't ask "does your dog bite" because we knew the answer. I always admired/respected the Shepherds and Dobies as I still do. These are dogs who were bred to challenge the human psyche (unlike the pit bull). Used for police work, riot control and popular among lay-dog owners for home security.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 3:37 a.m.
@1bit, I stand corrected. What I was referring to was the more distant historical reputation of the pit bull. I will remind everyone here that the established pedigree of the Pit bull dates back to the late 1700's. Pit bull purists will argue that the original pit bull ancestory does not include one drop of terrier genetics. It is true that the AKC introduced (or re-introduced depending on your perspective) terrier bloodlines to produce their version of the Pit bull. I personally believe that the Staffy and Bull terrier breeds are well engineered and their reputation is solid but, for the sake of accuracy, must point out that they are very likely a noteable deviation from original bloodlines. My personal observation is that the Pit bull breed (Bull terrier, staffordshire, American pit bull or otherwise), whether being used as a term or actual name of a breed, didn't show up on the biter list as frequently aggressive until the late 1980's. Interesting how this timeline correlates with a cultural trend towards "physically invinsible". Terminator, Performance enhancing drugs, Ultimate fighting, etc.
1bit
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 5:35 p.m.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. It is an interesting phenomenon. I think my post above was misunderstood in some ways. I consider dog bites to be a public health issue, just as I would gunshot wounds. Some guns wound, some maim and some kill. Should all guns be banned or just specific varieties? Is there a rational for more training for certain types of guns? Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying dogs are guns and the latter cause many more fatalities obviously. And I'm not against guns either, but there are commonsense limits for the latter. What I posted was a smattering of the available statistics and what it really shows is that more research in this area is necessary. Maybe Emergency Departments across the country should be surveyed over a month long period to get a better sense of the morbidity associated with all animal bites. There are other ways to answer the question as well, but I find the science here lacking.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 3:01 a.m.
@BHarding, I agree with you that it would probably not be a bad idea to require a greater level of knowledge for people who want to own dogs. Sigh, getting people to drive a car, be responsible with firearms, raise their kids to be respectful, all that would be great. The dog that attacked your dog was the product of some person/s. Whether it was really a Pit bull or not may be up for debate, the fact is that the experience left you and your dog negatively affected. Any dog regardless of breed, who attacks un-provoked, is displaying a dramatic behavioral imbalance. Dogs, in general, do not attack when they don't feel threatened. A dog who, "conjures up a threat" inaccurately, is a dog that has weak nerves and regardless of whether people are labeling it as fear biting or malicious aggression needs to be handled with great care (which would always be the compassionate option), or destroyed. I would connect this aspect of the discussion to the comments about "small dogs" biting when startled or percieve themselves to be under threat. I am not afraid of a little dogs ability to hurt me, even though I have had little dogs bite me a half dozen times in 2 seconds. My statement is "we would be wise to search for the paralells".
BHarding
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 4:27 a.m.
Hi, The dog owner himself referred to his dog as a Pit Bull, I'm just assuming that he knew what it was. It's possible he contributed to the dog's behavior by not playing a more commanding role, i.e., being the alpha leader that the dog needed. My dog and I recovered just fine, no fear of dogs. It was just a total shock. Probably more shocking to the dog's owner. My basic point, I seem to have a hard time making this point, is that some dogs are predisposed to certain behaviors. If there is a genetic link to this behavior, it is either very difficult or impossible to train out. If the parents have bad teeth, the pups will, too. The same for bad temperaments. It could be bad breeders or backyard breeding: some inbred dogs are highly territorial, others might be overly submissive. It happens to many breeds. It happens to mixed breeds. If a pup is the offspring of two junkyard dogs, that is, two dogs with very little human contact whose only purpose is to be aggressively territorial, and those two dogs were themselves the offspring of junkyard dogs, etc., those traits are going to be passed on.......I don't know how many generations it takes, but I hope you see my point. I realize that if someone wants to rescue a dog from a shelter, they may not have access to information about the dog's history and that can make it hard. I had a crazy dog for 14 years, some kind of mental illness, she saw things no one else could see, she cornered ghosts and growled at them. Sometimes it was funny, but mostly sad. She was often afraid. There was nothing we could do. She wasn't aggressive, so we just tried to make her comfortable. I raised her from a pup just like my other dogs. But, I knew nothing about her parents. Sorry to go on and on. Btw, I have no idea what "we would be wise to search for the parallels" means.....
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 1:54 a.m.
"I'll be the first to raise my hand and take the pledge to maintain an accurate, and open minded discussion with regards to Pit bulls and their current status in society." @ Everyone, This comment stream and the varying perspectives that have been portrayed within, are the very reason that I decided to write this article. Although I could (and I will) parce out the opposing opinions of all who feel invested in the subject, that is really not the point. The fact that we are even having this discussion is an indication that there is an issue that is affecting enough of us to force the conservation and, all bets would have it, worthy of a deeper understanding. First of all, I will admit that sorting out all of the perspectives, comments, counter-comments etc, is a bit overwhelming. So, if your opinion is not addressed directly, please don't take offense. Since I feel that it is pertinent to almost all of the comments submitted I would first like to say some thing about breeding... When you look up a breed profile in a breed book ( which I have done countless times to familiarize myself with a dog that I would be meeting soon) there is a description of the breed. This description includes the physical attributes of the breed and, something that is most pertinent to our discussion, the tempermant, drive and nervous condition of the breed. If a dog is bred to fulfill the quota of physical confirmation and the tempermant/nerve condition of the dog is either ignored or intentionally altered to result in a dog that is a "hair trigger", you have a problem, regardless of size, breed, environment.
John Spieser
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 2:33 a.m.
First @ zipthecat, I am not telling a sob story. I have no disillusions about "muscle mix" breeds becoming more popular and accounting for a greater number of catastrophic aggression incidents. I myself had a near death experience that resulted from a dog bite (a lab-mix). April may have said it all, but the truth is that the dog that injured your loved one may or may not have been what you could accurately call a pit-bull. The reason that this is important is because if you truly care, which I'm sure you do, you want to understand what is specifically fueling this trend. Writing it off as a pit bull problem oversimplifies the issue. I wrote this article because I have likely seen more examples of nasty dog aggression than anyone commenting here and I would like to alleviate the potential for it, for anyone, in the future.
Shanna Davis
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 1:10 a.m.
Wow, many of the comments on this article just make me shake my head in disgust! Lots of uneducated comments. No wonder these dogs are in trouble. For those who think it is the breed that is the problem.......think again. It most certainly is ignorant and irresponsible humans that are to blame. Period.
Dog Guy
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 7:04 p.m.
Please do not insult dog owners. It is rude to say, "Your hound don't hunt." "That's the biggest chihuahua I've ever seen." "If your greyhound hadn't been so fat and slow, you wouldn't have it." "Your pit bull is as gentle as a bunny." Insulting dog owners shows poor breeding.
Craig Lounsbury
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 9:31 p.m.
If you own a dog I guess you have a horse in this race.
Moscow On The Huron
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 6:31 p.m.
Starting out your article with a paragraph that combines attacks on some of your readers and a healthy dose of arrogance just ruins your case before you even get started.
Jack
Tue, Apr 26, 2011 : 3:35 a.m.
Why, does the shoe fit? Are you really THAT sensitive? Come on.
julieswhimsies
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 10:57 p.m.
Oh, come on, guys...
Craig Lounsbury
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 7:02 p.m.
well said
julieswhimsies
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:09 p.m.
Thank you for this well-written article on an often misunderstood breed of dog. Possessing a pet is a privilege and a responsibility. Train and license owners.
Sharon Cooper
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5 p.m.
I love some of these comments. We have one that talks about statistics involving dog attacks combining Rottweilers and pit bulls (what's the matter, no real statistics to give?) and another that talks about a child that was attacked for no reason. etc. First of all, let's start with the fact that MANY DOGS LABELED AS PIT BULLS ARE NOT PIT BULLS, BUT MIXES OF OTHER DOGS, WHICH IS A POINT MADE IN THIS ARTICLE!!! Did this person even read it? Doesn't sound like it to me! Does this person realize that the #1 dog for attacks on humans in the world (and this country) is the LABRADOR RETRIEVER? The DACHSHUND is #2? The German Shepherd #3? Pit bulls, and this article also pointed out that 3 DIFFERENT BREEDS OF DOGS FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY, ALONG WITH MIXES AND THOSE MISTAKEN FOR MIXES, are not even at the top of the list! If you MUST combine another breed of dog to make your point, that should tell you something about your 'facts'. Nice try. I'm sorry for that child. However, it should also be pointed out that children play rough. They kick, bite, punch, hit, jump, smack, etc. We've had cases here where the dog almost, and did, lose their lives because of a child's rough play. The dog often gets blamed when the child provokes what happened. Perhaps this happened in your case. If so, blaming the dog is WRONG. it really is people that cause the problems, not the dogs. As a steady viewer of TCM (I suggest those who hate this breed do so) you will find pit bulls in the family dog more than any other family dog in early films (pre 1934). Maurice Chevalier cuddled one. Fred Astaire, Bogie, Helen Keller, Woodrow Wilson, and Teddy Roosevelt owned them, as do David Spade and Jon Stewart now. These are not evil dogs. They are dogs exploited by evil people and a media that loves sensational stories, often other breeds. Boxers, bulldogs, etc, even an Airedale have been called pits. The media should be ashamed. Dogs are individuals. Look at them that way.
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:58 p.m.
Just for the record, I not only am the guardian of a well mannered and loving Pit Bull, but a sweetheart of an American Bulldog as well. Completely different breed of dog, but 9 times out of 10 my American Bully is mistaken for a Pit Bull and also lumped in to the Pit Bull category and subject to Breed Legislation. There is my testimony to mis-categorization and mis-information.
BHarding
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:39 p.m.
I just want to clarify what I've been saying, especially with your reference to Labs, dachshunds, etc. If ANY dog comes from a line of dogs with an aggressive or unpredictable temperament, you've got a problem. You may have a problem Lab, or Dachshund or Pit Bull, but you've got a problem. That's why it so important to look into a particular dog's background.
Robert Granville
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:40 p.m.
This is such a well written and logical article. It's too bad that it will fall on mostly deaf ears. People believe what they want and what the media tells them. They don't bother with logic when gross generalizations and faulty assumptions are much easier for the human brain to process. Don't bother telling them that the pit bull was not bred for fighting other dogs, they'll tell you that you're wrong... despite knowing very little about the breed from primary sources. Don't bother telling them that the reason for their perceived reputation for aggression is due to the popularity of the breed with unscrupulous blood sport enthusiasts... they'll say its inherent in the dogs. Certainly don't tell them that pitbulls make great family pets even around small children.... they'll call you crazy even if you've got decades of historic evidence to prove it.
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:16 p.m.
The general stigma I believe and a problem that works against Bull Breeds is the fact that people belive these dogs are owned by and favored by criminals. Completely false, yet people still believe to choose the fear instilled by the media hype. Nevermind the fact that all but 2 of Michael Vick's fighting dogs were able to be rehabilitated with the right guidance, Some have been placed into families with children and some are certified therapy dogs. This speaks volumes about the breed: they simply love humans and live to please them. Fallen into the wrong hands, of course as with any dog, you can expect the opposite result.
Lorrie Shaw
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:35 p.m.
All of these statistics are indeed interesting to read - but what piques my interest the most is in these numbers is one thing: Who are the faces and circumstances in the data? Who were the people, in what town do they live, what were the circumstances? How many actual dog bites by any breed or mixed breed go unreported? There are always humans behind any dog bite or attack, whether it's their stupidity, ignorance or to some degree, an intention. Who are the real faces of the humans behind any dog who bites? Another sad fact in our own area: "Pit-bull" type dogs are the number one breed brought in by the HSHV's cruelty department. They are abandoned, starved and the number one type of dog running stray in this area. What does that say to you? Why does all of this occur? I would love to know the answers to all of these question.
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:05 p.m.
100% percent agree. Well said.
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:09 p.m.
@zipthecat: First of all, I don't for one second believe a dog ever bites a "defenseless" child. 99.9 % of the time, bites are the occurence of something happening to that dog to cause it to act in defense. This is why responsible pet guardians NEVER leave a child unattended with ANY dog. Children grab, poke, and are unpredicatble and capable of hurting an animal at any given moment. So, the result is:dog acts in defense and is blamed for the incident and in most cases destroyed. Negligence on the part of the parent. NO CHILD SHOULD EVER BE LEFT UNATTENDED! Let me throw you a proven statistic : According to testing by The National Canine Temperament Testing Association, the Golden Retriever, Poodle, Border Collie, English Setter, and numerous other breeds are considered more likely to become aggressive than the breeds commonly referred to ...as Pit Bulls. While the average score of the 231 breeds tested was a mere 82.4 percent, Pit Bulls scored a 86.5 percent (the higher the score the better). here's a reference: <a href="http://www.moderndogmagazine.com/articles/what-it-about-pit-bulls/17294ce" rel='nofollow'>http://www.moderndogmagazine.com/articles/what-it-about-pit-bulls/17294ce</a>: So, our Pit Bulls score better in temperament testing with humans than Golden Retrievers. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:47 p.m.
I will not continue to defend my dogs. No, the Pit Bull is not for everyone. The compact and powerful body make them 5x the dog of many other breeds, BUT, at the same time, well-socialized, well trained and responsible gurdains produce great dogs. I don't believe in breeding and I support Pit Bull Rescue and work actively in the field, as do many of my friends. As with any dog, each dog must be evaluated individually and not placed into a lump category. To do otherwise with ANY breed would be dangerous.
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:27 p.m.
Yes, I bit, I did look at the article as well as 3 others others posted, so I apologize and no venom was geared your way. It's a bit confusing to keep up with all the hatred being slung at me. My dog was a death row Pit Bull. For the past year he has shown nothing but kindness and good behavior toward my family. I don't know what his past is, and that is no fault of his own. I have given him proper training and guidance to ensure he can be the best pet he can be. He has given my family nothing but love and devotion. And while he loves my children, I would never trust to let my kids alone with him. Not because he is a Pit Bull, but because he is a dog. That is what every responsible pet guradian needs to realize. Lots less bites would occur from ANY breed.
1bit
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:14 p.m.
april: I'm assuming your comment and vitriol are directed my way. Did you actually read the links I posted? They SUPPORT what you are saying. Did you actually read the comments I have made? I did read the Modern Dog Magazine article - that's what I wrote. The first four words. Look again. But Modern Dog Magazine is not a scientific journal. Maybe you have already made up your mind, not me.
BHarding
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:14 p.m.
April, I couldn't find the exact connection in the link you provide, although I was happy to see beautiful photos of dog breeds. I think you should give zipcar the benefit of the doubt, though. Just because you haven't experienced unpredictable behavior doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I was often bitten by my aunt's Afghan Hound when I was a child, hard "warning" bites to discourage me from trying to play with her. The adult response was always: "and what did you do to the dog?" and I eventually learned to keep a respectful distance. I do respect dogs, but that doesn't mean there aren't doggie sociopaths out there. In my case, my dog was sitting comfortably when she was viciously attacked. I don't think of Staffordshires as pit bulls, especially when they've come from a reputable breeder. But, it doesn't take very many generations to add or extract a genetic trait in dog. Plenty of backyard breeders have been producing this aggressive trait in pit bulls for a long time. If you want to see just how fast this evolution is, Google "domestic silver fox". Another example of genetic change, a breeder in the UK, suspecting that tail-docking would become illegal, bred his Boxers to other short-tailed dogs until his dogs were eventually born with short tails and those dogs were accepted back into the UKC. Imagine how fast a genetic mutation can happen in a dog's temperament? As it happens, I've never heard of a pit bull attacking its owner (family) so the perspective from that side is different. I hope you consider that these traits are bred into dogs bred from fighters.
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:03 p.m.
What are the qualifiactions of the source of this information? Do you own any bull breeds? Can you make testament to any of these claims? Hmmm.... That's what I thought. The only bites that make the news are bites from dogs labeled "pt Bulls, which I guarantee, as mention before in other folks comments are dogs generally lumped into the breed for appearance only. Are you an experienced handler or trainer? Can you back up these facts. Yep, That's what I thought. The general public should not be making comments of something they know NOTHING about. If you don't like Pit Bulls, fine. But, you leave mine alone. Mine are well trained, socailized and well cared for. They are never left to run loose. I even comply with state law and carry liabilty insuranvce on my dogs who seldom leave my home and fenced in yard. Any responsible guardian of ANY breed of dog follows this creed. Part of the problem with the bad media Pit Bulls and similar breeds receive is bad media amd folks slinging half-truths around. The article is in Modern Dog Magazine. It is easily found by typing "pit BUll into the search. Bet you don't bother reading it because it's obvious you have already formed your opinion. Very sad and truly a discredit to a normal, well cared for Pit Bull. This is the problem.
1bit
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:34 p.m.
I read your link, but I can't find "National Canine Temperament Testing Association" in a Google search to look at the original data. I found another link that seems to say the same thing: <a href="http://www.pitbullproject.ca/CanineBehavior.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.pitbullproject.ca/CanineBehavior.pdf</a> This is another interesting link I came across, particularly the comments afterward: <a href="http://cltampa.com/tampa/are-pit-bulls-really-all-that-dangerous/Content?oid=2034633" rel='nofollow'>http://cltampa.com/tampa/are-pit-bulls-really-all-that-dangerous/Content?oid=2034633</a>
Craig Lounsbury
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:22 p.m.
"I often hear the argument, "Maybe Pit bulls don't bite as frequently as some small dogs, but when they do, it is more damaging; therefore, they are more dangerous dogs." I think this is dangerous thinking." I think its logical thinking. Given the choice between facing 10 separate four-pound Chihuahua attacks or 1 "Pitt bull" attack I'll take the four-pound Chihuahua every time. "Actually, if a small dog is willing to bite, that is pretty alarming! Dog's aren't dumb. If a four-pound Chihuahua is confident that it can control a 150-pound person with aggression..." Your thinking is flawed...a straw man argument to defend your position. When a small dog bites its NOT about controlling its 150 pound target, its about fear, perceived self defense or defense of its territory. A small dog will most often back off from the "attack" as soon as it feels its "point was made". Large dogs who kill people don't back off they continue the attack till the "mission" is accomplished.
Jack
Tue, Apr 26, 2011 : 2:42 a.m.
Glad to hear about how a small dog thinks. How would you know? So, when an 8-pound fluffy something or other charged from about 20 yeards away at my passive 90 pound labrador and backed him up into the water, that must have been fear. Gee, I never would have guessed.
Urban Sombrero
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 1:07 a.m.
I should also add that my chihuahua was born with a deformed mandible and has no teeth. Not that that makes her nipping excusable, but trust me.....she can barely chew food. No ones fingers, or ankles, are at risk.
Urban Sombrero
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 1:04 a.m.
I think we have to agree to disagree. I HAVE a dog over 5 lbs.....the most docile, well-behaved Beagle you'll ever meet. I'm not dismissing anything. Like I said, she's in training. I'm working on it. You can't expect miracles to be imminent. Training, training, training. What I think you don't understand is my point.....small things startled by huge people/things will react accordingly. I'm trying to fight her nature, with the training. But, like I said, if I were picked up by something humongous, as I slept, you'd better bet I'd be in fight mode. So, I understand it coming from a small animal. I do not condone it! I understand it. And, like I've repeatedly said, I'm working on training it out of her. And, she NEVER nips me. Only my (rather rambunctious and quite spazzy) children. Who should know better than to just grab at a sleeping dog. I honestly think my kids need training as much as my dog. But, that's a different story altogether.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 11:59 p.m.
@Urban Sombrero Wow, you don't get it do you. Your dog bites. You have a problem, but you are dismissing it because its such a tiny little dog. Please, please either educate yourself or NEVER get a dog bigger than 5lbs.
Urban Sombrero
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 10:33 p.m.
@Rich, my hamster and parrot also bite when startled. What's your point? She's in obedience school and we're working on her behavior. She's honestly made quite a change already. But, honestly, if I were asleep and someone just grabbed at me to pick me up, I'd be swinging my fists and biting until I knew I was safe. It's an instinct thing. They're scared.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 9:58 p.m.
@Urban Sombrero Do you realize that you just admitted that your dog "nips" (nips, bites, tomato, tomahto) and you accept it as her being grumpy from waking up? That is exactly my point that I just made. You accept your dog doing this. And Dogs DO NOT routinely bite when they wake up or are startled. Dogs don't bite for no apparent reason, ever. There is always a reason. If it is indeed because you startled it awake that is a fear or maybe territory bite. It also means that you have not trained her out of the behavior and she does not fully accept you as the leader. Put that in context now, if she was an AM Staff or a Lab or a Bullmastiff , you would never accept that behavior- or if you did accept it you would have no business with a big dog in your home.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 9:47 p.m.
Incorrect, it IS about controlling its 150lb, or 40lb or 250lb person. It is the need to control that is caused by fear, self defense or territoriality. Regardless of size. Size does matter but it matters only a little to a dogs psyche, basic dog behavior is basic dog behavior. And I find his thoughts on small dog bites logical, albeit maybe a bit off subject. We tend to treat little dogs very differently than medium and large dogs. We can overpower them easily and therefore we tend to not train them or demand good behavior from them. How many little dogs will do a down/stay at distance or come back when called as they race across a yard to drive off the big dog being walked in front of its house? In my experience a dismal amount. That's an entire other article to talk about rather than pit bull bigotry.
Robert Granville
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:42 p.m.
Did you just make that last part up..... yes... the answer is yes.
Urban Sombrero
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 3:07 p.m.
"When a small dog bites its NOT about controlling its 150 pound target, its about fear, perceived self defense or defense of its territory. A small dog will most often back off from the "attack" as soon as it feels its "point was made"." As the owner of a 3.5 lb Chihuahua, I could not agree more. She can be a little snotty, sure. But it's not for lack of training or poor control on my point. When she nips, it's because she was woken up or startled. And inmmediately backs down once she realizes she's made her point, and is very contrite. I think it's part instinctive response and part Napoleon complex, lol.
Craig Lounsbury
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:28 p.m.
and as others have pointed out statistically large dog attacks are much more likely to be a "pit Bull" or "rottweiler"
BHarding
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:21 p.m.
I'd go farther than Debling. Just as there should be parenting classes in high school (and maybe there are, I don't know) there should be pet ownership classes. I see dog owners dragging their poor dogs down city sidewalks in winter, the dog is in pain because the sidewalk salt is cutting into their paws, and the owner is oblivious. Or tying up young dogs outside, apparently thinking that the dog will "exercise" on its own. Unaware that the dog is a social animal. As for pit bulls, whatever the dog once was, the damage to them has been done. The breed has been genetically altered by idiots into something else. You don't have to teach most retrievers to go after a toy in the river, they'll do that at ten weeks if you let them. It's in their blood. I love dogs. But. A long time ago my own dog, on a leash by my side, was attacked by a pit bull, completely unprovoked, while I was chatting with his owner in the park. The owner was telling me at that moment how misunderstood pit bulls were, and what a "Teddy Bear" his 3-year old dog was. It was so fast it is still blurry in memory, his dog ripped open my dog's throat, I picked up my dog to protect her but the pit bull came at me like some ninja-bowling ball and knocked me to the ground, his owner was yelling and trying to catch his dog. Finally, he threw himself onto his dog, and I got away with mine. Straight to the vet for some expensive surgery. In that case, I don't blame the dog owner, he really believed his dog was a Teddy Bear, and it probably had been, right up until the moment he wasn't anymore. I don't think that loving owner did anything wrong except unknowingly adopt a time-bomb. So, sometimes it's nature, not nurture.
Craig Lounsbury
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:25 p.m.
well said BHarding...I hope your dog recovered.
1bit
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:55 p.m.
"Historical statistics confirm that there aren't too many dog breeds that can boast a cleaner record than the Pit bull in the department of aggression towards humans." Although I appreciate your points and agree that "focused stupidity" by breeders and owners can lead to a lot of problems, I was disappointed that your link did not actually give actual statistics. Here are some links I found: 1. "In 2010, the combination of pit bulls (22) and rottweilers (4) accounted for 79% of all fatal attacks. In the 6-year period from 2005 to 2010, this same combination accounted for 71% (129) of the total recorded deaths (181)." <a href="http://blog.dogsbite.org/2011/01/2010-us-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html" rel='nofollow'>http://blog.dogsbite.org/2011/01/2010-us-dog-bite-fatality-statistics.html</a> 2. "...pit bull terriers are noteworthy for attacking adults almost as frequently as children." <a href="http://dogbitelaw.com/images/pdf/Dog_Attacks_1982-2006_Clifton.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://dogbitelaw.com/images/pdf/Dog_Attacks_1982-2006_Clifton.pdf</a> <a href="http://dogbitelaw.com/dog-bite-statistics/the-dog-bite-epidemic-a-primer.html" rel='nofollow'>http://dogbitelaw.com/dog-bite-statistics/the-dog-bite-epidemic-a-primer.html</a> 3. <a href="http://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pitbull-myths.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pitbull-myths.htm</a> 4. "Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites." <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Dog-Bites/dogbite-factsheet.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Dog-Bites/dogbite-factsheet.html</a> 5. "Although fatal attacks on humansappear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-typedogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite andcause fatalities at higher rates. Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog's breed with certainty,enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues." <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/images/dogbreeds-a.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/images/dogbreeds-a.pdf</a>
sbbuilder
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 12:47 a.m.
The above url is about pit bulls, not Alsatians.
sbbuilder
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 12:46 a.m.
Rich My bad, I meant to type Malamute instead of Alsatian. I was thinking at the time about the Nazis extensive use of this breed at concentration camps, or just anywhere they wanted to control large groups of people. I wonder what decision process they went through to arrive at the Alsatian? Whatever. I know two families that have had Malamutes. Both of them claim that the dogs tend to either tame or wild, and if they tend to wild, there is very little they can do. My first encounter with a Malamute was because the dog decided it wanted out, and literally ate its way through the solid core door from the house to the garage. The jamb and door were torn to shreds. That was a male Malamute, and they had to give the dog up at that point. These people were dedicated dog trainers. BTW, several countries around the world have banned the breed entirely. Why would that be? Are they so misinformed? <a href="http://www.mvtelegraph.com/index.php/news/3189-Pit-Bulls-Banned-in-Areas.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.mvtelegraph.com/index.php/news/3189-Pit-Bulls-Banned-in-Areas.html</a>
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 11:52 p.m.
You pulled out sensationalized info from 2 very biased sources. Than listed 2 CDC sources. If you were trying to offer stats and info from across the boards you would have just left us with CDC info. Or offered those 5 sites and added in info from 2-3 sites with pro-pit biased info. As it is you led with 2 heavily biased websites and I focused on one of the links, #3 that you seem to have posted as a counter point to the author. So I think I got the point you seemed to make in your first post. And yes, I serialized, had to, it's how the software works. Max chars per entry. Your welcome for the info.
1bit
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 9:59 p.m.
Rich: Thanks for the long replies. You completely missed the point. I did read all of those articles and, realizing the bias, included the CDC information as a counterpoint. I wish the author of the article had saved me the bother. For the record none of the websites I listed were "mine". If you had bothered to read the post I made to sbbuilder, you would see the acknowledgment of the counterargument to the fatality statistics. So, all you have done is serialized your opinions. Great. Thanks for the input.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:44 p.m.
@sbbuilder "Talk to any one who has an Alsatian. Those dogs tend towards being tame or wild, and you can only find out when they reach adulthood. Maybe that's because of their half-wolf parentage." Huh? First, an "Alsatian" is just the Euro name for a German Shepherd. Saying they are either tame or wild and you have to wait until they grow up is utterly absurd. A good dog person can evaluate a 10 week old pup and get a good read on its basic temperament, and if you don't start training and socializing as a pup you will indeed have a crapshoot for its adult personality. That goes for ANY breed.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:39 p.m.
So in the end, all you did was got to a couple of anti Pit Bull websites and cut and paste biased facts and this is your argument. You didn't read any of it, you didn't support any of it, you put no thought into it. Google is your friend but is no substitute for thought.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:34 p.m.
Myth #10: Punish the deed not the breed. Dogsbite says this is a myth because a breed ban is a way to punish the deed by not letting it happen. Blah blah. Circular logic at best. Well, punishing the deed works for guns in California. In CA, if you allow your kid to accidently shoot himself with your Ruger, you will be prosecuted and serve prison time. Your guns must be secure, they are a right to own and a responsibility to treat with respect and safety (and before it starts let's keep this to dogs not guns) As a guy with a full gun safe I agree with that. I feel the same way with dogs. If I choose to have a big, strong dog than I need to train him, supervise him and care for him like he was a big strong dog. If I don't do any training and allow him to be unsupervised with a 3 year old and something happens, I need to be prosecuted for negligence. Sounds fair to me.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:33 p.m.
Myth #9: Pit bulls pass the American Temperament Test Dogsbite says the test is invalid because it is not stringent enough and indeed not statistically valid. I'm going to say they argue its not statistically valid because the statistics disagree with Dogsbite.org. Further they argue it lacks two components, testing with the owner not present and testing dog reaction to other dogs. And than they imply that the Canine Good Citizen test is more valid but fail to provide any data from the CGC that it measures Pit Bulls better or worse. Well, they can't. The CGC is an AKC test and the AKC guards its territory with an iron boot. They only allow AKC dogs to take the official test. Pit bulls are not an AKC dog. So the CGC becomes meaningless for this purpose too. So whats the data for Bull Terriers, Am Staffs, Mini Bulls and English Staffs? I don't know, you look it up. Than they argue that we need to test dog on dog reaction and aggression. Wait, this is about dog on human reaction isn't it? Dog on dog isn't valid for this argument.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:32 p.m.
Myth #8: Pit bulls used to be the most popular dog in America Well, I can't speak for that one as I wasn't around in 1944. Does it matter? Maybe. Maybe not. Petey was a pit. Sergeant Stubby was too. That dog on the RCA records looks like a pit. Proves nothing either way. Stupid to argue.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:31 p.m.
Myth #7: Pit bulls do not have a locking jaw Dogsbite.org says this is a myth because of numerous proof of having to pry a dog off somebody. Well, that's still not proof. Locking means there is some way the dog can mechanically fix its jaws so they can't open. Well, they can't. Go find me a vet anywhere who says they can. What they do have is extremely strong jaws. But I know this will make you dog haters cringe, they are far from the strongest dog jaws out there. Its inherent to the head shape and is why blocky dog heads were developed in the first place. So if this is your reason to ban pits you are gonna' have to ban every dog with a brachycephalic skull.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:30 p.m.
Myth #6: Pit bulls are not unpredictableDogsbite.org has just 2 examples to prove this myth is false. One by quoting Randal Lockwood of the HSUS. Well, the HSUS is not only an anti-pit group they also routinely argue in court to have all dogs killed who come from animal hording or puppy mill situations and along with those pathetic hypocrites PETA argued to have all the Mike Vick dogs killed because it was more humane. Well, Best Friends and Bad Rap sure proved them wrong now didn't they. And lets look at what Randal said, the dog in question did a play bow and than lunged at his face. They say that means the dog was lying. I'm sorry, lying is a human concept, dogs don't lie. They don't have the knowledge to lie. Pure anthropomorphizing. Lunging after a play bow is also common among dogs. Boxers are known for it. Commonly you train that out of them as a puppy. In this case the owner hadn't done that. (Oh, I forgot, there are no bad owners, huh.) Than they quote a court case where the dog attacked somebody with no warning. Wait, it was a court case. The famous trainer (who I have never heard of) involved was trying to NOT lose a lawsuit. What else was he gonna do but blame the dog? The dog was being trained for a reason. Either way, 2 examples are proof of nothing spread over 5 million dogs.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:30 p.m.
Myth #5: The media conspiracy against pit bulls Your website dogsbite.org claims this isn't true at all and if anything its underreported. Well, lets go back to our original stats of 7 deaths per year. To hear the media crow about it you would think it was 7 deaths per day. A dog kills somebody in Maine and you hear about it in Florida and Alaska if it was a pit. Yet if Uncle John kills his wife you don't hear about it outside the local community unless they were famous or it was incredible weird or brutal. Yet to listen to the media you would think pit bulls kill more humans than humans do. Yeah, the media does that, don't they. Blows things out of proportion. Just look at the spat of stories on the air traffic controllers falling asleep. They were falling asleep last year and the year before too, you just were not hearing about it.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:28 p.m.
Further that stat is based on extensive research and you have to give the CDC credit for being thorough, However it relies on newspaper reports for some of that data and often does not include a photo of the dog identified as the pit bull type. They do rely on expert identification from animal control officers or shelter workers. However if you ask a shelter worker if so and so dog is an AM Staff or a pit he is going to call it a pit because quite frankly he doesn't care and has better things to do. I can tell a pure am Staff from a Pit at a glance. The head shape is different. That shelter worker probably can too but he doesn't have to so he isn't going to. I know this because I spend a lot of time in shelters working for 2 different rescue groups (neither are pit bull rescues). They are hardworking, underpaid, understaffed folks, and I am not going to force the issue with them. However it remains a fact that skews the data. We pulled a dog a year ago that the owner surrender sheet stated was boxer x rat terrier that the staff kept calling a pitt mix.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:28 p.m.
Myth #4: Fatal attack statistics about pit bulls are false Thios one goes to the CDC numbers that show pitbulls killing at about twice the rate of everyother dog bred. Well, lets look at that. First, you have skewed the study simply by using the term "Pit Bull Type". The other breeds get to stand on there own. A Rottie is a Rottie not a Rottie or a black brindle bullmastiff or a black Neoploitan or a black or black brindle Cane Corso. Just Rotties. .German Shepherds are alone, not combined with the Malinos, Belgian Shepherds or Tervuren (and I guarantee your average person can't tell those 4 apart). But not pit bull "types". No, there we have thrown in actual Pit Bulls, American Staffs, plain ole' Staff Bull Terriers, TWO types of Bull Terriers, American Bulldogs, Olde English Bulldogs, Catahoula Bulldogs, Alpaha Bluebulldogs and every mix possible of these breeds with any other breed that you can think of. And before you discount my choice of breeds, rest assured that despite Myth #2 on your anti pit bull website every one of those dogs would be identified as a "pit bull" by the general public much in the same way that a non truck person could not tell the difference between a F150, Sierra 1500, Ram 1500 or a Silverado 1500 if they didn't have the name written right on them. Those dogs run the gamut of personality and when you mix them with other breeds you end up with the entirety of possible dog personalities all being represented in that statistic.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:27 p.m.
Myth #3: Human-aggressive pit bulls were "culled" With this one your website tries to go to the dog fighting myth about pits. Yes Dog fighting occurs, and is very popular in certain areas of Michigan and the rest of the US. I don't know how many dog fighting dogs exist at any one time, and surly a higher portion will show up in the Detroit City shelter rather than the Ann Arbor shelters, but the vast portion of pit "types" are not or were not fighting dogs or from fighting dog lines. There are not 5 MILLION fighting dogs in the US or it would be on every block in every suburb from Chelsea to East Grand Rapids to Imperial County California and everywhere in between. Therefore stating that human killers are not culled becomes meingless unless you can prove how manyfighting dogs there are in the first place and how many are kept alive because they will kill a human. And once again we go back to the stats above that 7 of 5 million dogs killed folks. So 4,999,993 didn't kill anyone. Stating that dog fighter don't cull human killers is just hyperbole.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:25 p.m.
Myth #2: It's impossible to identify a pit bull want to tell us that it's a myth that people can't ID a dog as a pit. They offer no proof at all here, saying that because of media coverage that we all know what a pit looks like. If that's true than why do people ask me if my pure boxer who looks like a show quality pure boxer, is a pit. It happens monthly. If you are gonna just say something is a myth, well that's not debunking a myth, that's making stuff up out you bottom. Do a study and prove it.
Rich
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 8:23 p.m.
Ahh so you are pulling "facts" from 1 anti pit bull website (dogsbite.org) with an agenda to rid the world of pits, and an ambulance chaser lawyer who has made a career of suing dog owners for bites (dogbitelaw.com). Well, ok. Lets look at that. Dogbites.org wants to debunk myths: Myth #1: It's the owner not the breed (Remember these are the myths from dogsbite.org not mine) They say that the concept of it's the owner, not the dog is untrue and among other thing "prove" it by stating: "44% (36) of these attacks involved a family member and the family pit bull." Come on, of course that's going to be a stat, you can't fall off a mountain if you aren't on top of a mountain. By the by that's 36 deaths over 5 years or 7ish deaths a year. 7. 7 nation wide. 7.. Shall I say it again 7. How many family members fell off ladders, drank drano left in reach of a toddler or got locked in the fridge? How many got killed by human family members? Heck lets go further, 16-17 people die per year from dog bites in the us per the CDC. 17 total; a number so statistically small as to be meaningless. I bet you are more likely to choke on pudding than get killed by a dog. There is an estimated 50-53,000,000 dogs in the US. Of those somewhere between 10-40% are Pit type dogs depending on where you live. If its JUST 10% that's 5,000,000 and if "pit types" kill 8 people in a year than that means 1 dog in 625,000 dogs killed somebody. So you have about a 0.0016% chance of meeting a killer "pitbull" type. Which means that 99 .9984% of pit bull "types" were fine, upstanding K9 citizens. Well, that goes a long way to saying that the breed is fine, and maybe .0016 were horrible killers or maybe .0016 of owners were horrible owners. Being that tiny of a stat, does it even matter?
1bit
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 3:22 p.m.
I'd be interested in your search. There seems to be a lot of data that support what you wrote. There was one counterpoint that I didn't have time to examine which claimed that the above data were faulty because pit bull-type dogs make up such a large proportion of dogs in the U.S. that one would expect statistically higher rates of bites/fatalities from those dogs. I'm still looking for a good study that corrects for the relative prevalance of the breed in the U.S. (or I suppose we could do that if there was a good prevalance study of dog breeds in the U.S. - which I assume would be difficult to estimate). Also, I'm not sure what to make of the CDC information. Seems pretty wishy washy as they want to stay out of the foray.
sbbuilder
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 3:12 p.m.
1bit I was going to present the same data, but you beat me to it. Every dog bite data base you look at, from emergency room stats, to law enforcement stats, pit bulls are way out ahead of every single other breed. Their behaviour is instrinsic to their breeding. They are purposely hard wired to be agressive. You can quiet them down only so much. Talk to any one who has an Alsatian. Those dogs tend towards being tame or wild, and you can only find out when they reach adulthood. Maybe that's because of their half-wolf parentage. Same goes for pit bulls.
zip the cat
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:48 p.m.
Tell your sob storey to my friends daughter with 80 plus stitches in her face from a raised from a puppy family pet killer of a dog. Your so called friendly breed dog turned on a defenseless child for no reason at all.
aawolve
Mon, Apr 25, 2011 : 3:13 p.m.
Your friends are blaming their failures as parents on something or someone else, happens all the time.
Shanna Davis
Sun, Apr 24, 2011 : 12:52 a.m.
Zip the Cat.....I'm truly sorry that your friend's daughter was attacked and injured BUT.....here is the solid cold fact............behind a girl with 80 stitches in her face is an irresponsible adult! You can try to explain your way around it all you want but it won't change the fact that an adult was not being a responsible dog owner!! Dogs DO NOT attack for "no reason at all!" There is ALWAYS a reason, a trigger, provocation, etc. ALWAYS!
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:20 p.m.
I included feedback on this post below. Here is an example of someone who truly adds to the problem with mis-information.
Robert Granville
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:43 p.m.
Could there be a more worthless, less logical post? This is exactly the type of flawed thinking that is destroying the pit bull breed. One does not equal all. Generalizations are for the weak-minded.
Craig Lounsbury
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:47 p.m.
A "Real" Pit Bull "is not the best choice if your goal is a casual pet" . "American pit bulls are tough and intelligent animals, historically bred for a willingness to test their mettle against larger and stronger animals and against each other. It is not uncommon for an adult pit bull to be very quarrelsome toward other dogs." Pit Bulls are "the best fighting dogs in England and America in the past fifty years."
debling
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:42 p.m.
bla, bla, bla, pit bulls are not that bad, ... bla, bla, bla, ... it's in the training ... bla, bla, bla ... it's the dog, not the breed ... bla, bla, bla, ... it's the owners fault, ... bla, bla, bla, ... other dogs bite too, ... bla, bla, bla ... Heard everything before. It's very clear. Read the news. Determine which dog breads are mauling people. Pit bulls are in that category. Get rid of them. They have no place in cities and communities where children live. If you don't like eliminating the bread then make all vicious breeds require special licensing and force the owners to take special training and certification to handle such a breed. Yearly testing should be required including such tests as taking a bone out the dogs mouth to see if it attacks.
Candy
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 11:31 p.m.
I certainly don't pretend to be an expert on this issue, but I can share my experience. I volunteer for the county animal shelter in a large metropolitan city in a southern state. To give you an idea of the size, I am one of 300 volunteers in this very professionally run operation. They have a "pit bull" program specifically to educate the public and get these dogs adopted. Obviously, they don't have the funding to do genetic testing – any dog that the average person might look at and think is a pit bull is classified as a pit bull. Dogs given the pit bull classification are temperament tested and if they don't pass they are put down. If they pass they try to get them adopted. This is a county municipality – they are not going to take on any liability risks they don't have to. It seems to me that if there was any actual evidence or scientific data that supported the perception that this breed is "inherently" aggressive, it would be way easier for them to just put down all of these dogs. They have an incinerator right on the premises, they put down thousands of animals every year because they don't get adopted fast enough. There are thousands of these dogs living in homes all across America, with other dogs, with cats, with children that never have any aggression issues. If the breed is inherently aggressive, how is that possible? It just doesn't hold water.
Robert Granville
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:48 p.m.
Glad to see that you trust the news as your primary source of non-biased, historical information. No wonder your line of thinking is so illogical. You do know the news is profit-based correct? You do know that without people entertained and watching their business would fold? If that had nothing to make you afraid... you wouldn't watch. You cannot and will not ever eliminate the pitbull.... so you can end that thought now. I will never participate in any effort to specially license any pitbull I own or cooperate in any efforts to eradicate the breed. Their are thousands of current pitbull owners that are like minded and will stand up for the breed. We all share something in common.... we know how to raise well-socialized dogs and we don't fight them. You never hear about us because our dogs never make headlines.
april
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:18 p.m.
see the article on facts:<a href="http://www.moderndogmagazine.com/articles/what-it-about-pit-bulls/17294" rel='nofollow'>http://www.moderndogmagazine.com/articles/what-it-about-pit-bulls/17294</a> and how Pit Bulls score higher in expert trainers' temperament testing than even *SHOCKING* Golden Retrievers??????? FYI, I can take food from the mouth of my Pit Bull as he's eating. He simply looks at me and wags his tail. Don't sling hate at a breed you obviously know NOTHING about.
ronaldduck
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 10:50 a.m.
I find it ironic that you admit that when you were younger you were bigoted against Dobermans and German Shepards and today, with all your vast experience training dogs, you have such a problem with people doing the same thing against "pit bulls". Remeber most people do not have the advantage of your experience. I do agree that "pit bulls" are demonized in the media but if you read the papers it seems that half the time someone is severely injured in a dog attack it is with some sort of pit bull type dog. I have never read about a person being killed or severely injured by a pack of Chihuahua's. I have owned a Doberman, German Shepard and a American Staffordshire Terrier mix and all were marvelous, kindhearted dogs that wouldn't hurt a flea. As a matter of fact I have a picture of my Doberman nursing a kitten that lost it's mother. Wake up people, the dog is a reflection of it's owner. If you want to stop dog attacks ban certain people from owning dogs, not certain breeds.
Robert Granville
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 4:50 p.m.
Did you miss the part of this article that demonstrated that the media has an alarming tendency to call any large dog with prominent musculature a pit bull? It's no wonder there are so many headlines about pit bulls when they don't even know what a pit bull is.