I was getting spun up reading the thread, getting ready to make pretty much the same remarks you did, across the board. You are right on the money on all points. Thanks for saving me the time.
Originally Posted by TinKnocker
And OldVet is also right, pits can do a lot of damage, which I believe is why they got the reputation. So should we fear and ban retired Navy Seals, or MMA fighters from living among us, or place extra restrictions on them because they are capable of killing people easily? Or how about people who train in self-defense and are armed with knives or guns? Just a comparison to think about.
Don't confuse the mentality of people and dogs . . . it's insulting to the dogs.
That is a ridiculous analogy. I have never heard of a gun breaking out of a safe or dresser drawer and shooting someone by itself.
Originally Posted by Cold Shot
It's not ridiculous. Guns make it extremely easy to kill people. Dumb and/or bad people get their hands on guns and bad stuff happens. Dumb and/or bad people buy pit bulls and bad stuff happens. Then the media runs with it. Neither are inherently dangerous.
Originally Posted by Arborigine
Originally Posted by Thunder71
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^There is some^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
credence to this statement.
A good friend of mine bought his first house years ago, and the owner said they were going to take their dog to the shelter when they moved.
The guy said the dog was crazy.
My buddy had no problem with the dog when he visited the house.
He talked to his wife(my cousin) and told her what the homeowners plans were.
My friend told her he wanted to keep the dog as he thought it was a great dog. She said ? huh?, that dog is huge, and could probably eat me. It was a 145lb Akita named Macho.
They kept the dog; a real nice dog. My buddy was playing/wrestling with the dog on the living room floor one day, after a few weeks of having it, and the dog growled at him and made a move on him to bite, my buddy hauled off and smacked the dog in the side of the head, and that dog NEVER did it again.
Great around kids, cautious/guarded around people.
All you have to do is google "pit bull attacks" and you can read hundreds of stories about pits that were the best dog in the world until the day they snaped and tore some babies face off. Pits are responsible for a much larger percentage of brutal or fatal attacks than their numbers represent in the dog world.
"In one study sponsored by the US Governement Centers For Disease Control it was reported that 32% of all dog related killings of human beings in the United States are caused by Pit Bulls attacks, yet Pit Bulls constitute only 2% of all dogs. 70% of those mauling deaths were of children."
"Among the grisly statistics the study cites: Pit bulls were responsible for 65 percent of all fatal dog attacks nationally in 2008. In Texas in 2007, seven fatal attacks occurred, six involving pit bulls. Someone in the United States is killed by a pit bull every 14 days. One body part is severed and lost in pit bull attacks every 5.4 days."
"31 U.S. fatal dog attacks occurred in 2011. Despite being regulated in Military Housing areas and over 650 U.S. cities, pit bulls led these attacks accounting for 71% (22). Pit bulls make up less than 5% of the total U.S. dog population.3
Notably in 2011, adult victims of fatal pit bull attacks more than doubled the number of child victims. Of the 22 total pit bull victims, 68% (15) fell between the ages of 32 to 76, and 32% (7) were ages 5 years and younger.
The year 2011 also marks an increase in pet pit bulls killing their owners. Of the 8 total instances this year in which a family dog inflicted fatal injury to its primary caretaker, the dog's owner, 88% (7) involved pet pit bulls."
Sounds like it was done to initimidate and voice their opinion about the guy who wanted the anti-pit bull ordinance.
But, there are stupid people out there, who do stupid things. I would be watching if any food of any kind shows up in the areas they are in .... so they don't get any poisoned food.
Someone could make a couple of pitbull decoys and put them in their yard, and sit back ..... watching to see if anyone messes with them. LOL.
You can also google a number of other searches and find studies to contradict what you've found. For instance, did you know that the APBT has a passing rate of 90% when given the dog temperament evaluation by the American Temperament test Society. The 121 other breeds that are given the same evaluation only have an average passing rate of 77%. Now how can that be if the APBT is as human aggressive as you and many other people think?
Originally Posted by CBXMan
Also, here is a quick little excerpt from a story that CBS News did back in 2010:
“A study performed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States, analyzed dog bite statistics from the last 20 years and found that the statistics don’t show that any breeds are inherently more dangerous than others. The study showed that the most popular large breed dogs at any one time were consistently on the list of breeds that bit fatally. There were a high number of fatal bites from Doberman pinschers in the 1970s, for example, because Dobermans were very popular at that time and there were more Dobermans around, and because Dobermans’ size makes their bites more dangerous. The number of fatal bites from pit bulls rose in the 1980s for the same reason, and the number of bites from Rottweilers in the 1990s. The study also noted that there are no reliable statistics for nonfatal dog bites, so there is no way to know how often smaller breeds are biting.”
In other words, as the story says, ”Biting has more to do with circumstances, behavior, training (or lack thereof), and ignorance on the part of human beings.”
I'm not saying that the breed doesn't attack. However, the dogs that attack are either poorly bred (having undesirable characteristics not normally wanted in the breed) and/or poorly raised/handled by ignorant humans that have no business owning any breed of dog. These conditions combined with a powerful breed like the APBT is simply setting the dogs up for failure. Not to mention that about 75% of the dogs that the media calls pit bulls are not even remotely pits. If it is a large dog with a somewhat square head then the media immediately calls it a pit bull. It's ridiculous.
I'll be the first to tell anyone that this breed is definitely not for everyone. These dogs demand respect, patience, leadership, and lots of attention. They are a lot of work. If you can't give them all of those things then be prepared to suffer the consequences. However, if you are able to give this breed all of the above you will have the most loyal companion you will ever find. These dogs will do anything to please their masters, even if that means putting themselves in harms way.
To be perfectly honest, I've got a male pit mix that we rescued and he was in about as bad a condition as I've ever seen a dog (dirty, emaciated, cut up and wounded, fleas/ticks, skin infections, etc.), and was a little skiddish around people. We got him healthy and have had him now for 6 years and I trust that dog more than I trust most people. He sleeps at the foot of my daughters bed at night and patrols the house periodically while we are sleeping, and I have absolutely no doubts about his temperament.
Sorry for the long post, I've had this debate 100's of times with people and I will continue to defend this breed until I die. Sometimes people open their minds and do some more research instead of believing the media hype, while others continue to blindly follow what they're told about these dogs.
No dog "just snaps". It is always a product of direct training. There is a difference between an obedient dog and a well trained dog.
I have known several pits. The only one that was aggressive in any manner was trained intentionally to be aggressive towards strangers, but was well taken care of, and was extremely well trained and obedient. The pit that would kill an enemy on command was the same pit that would let its owner's children ride on it's back around the house. The rest of them were same as any dog I've ever met: sweet as hell (can I use hell here?) and full of love.
There are also similar reports that show that golden retrievers (one of the most loved and respected dogs) are just as likely to "snap" and fatally bite humans as any other breed.
These threads never end well.