Pit Bulls

German Shepherds, Australian Shepherds, Akitas, and many other breeds weren't bred to be mans best friend either. They were bred to do a job.

The pit was never bred to be human agressive so your little history lesson is off anyway. The more you post the more I believe that you have a deep seated fear of these dogs, that's just my personal opinion but come on. You claim to be a fan of the breed and then compair them to wild animals every opportunity and do your best to convince us they are crazy killers bearly under control.

And reguarding the statistics, most of the us cannot positively identify a pitbull. There have been a few cases where people have said pits did the damage and it was later found to be a different breed entirely (once was a border collie) so I'm sorry, I don't put much weight in statistics that can quite easily be manipulated in one form or another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Entropy

And reguarding the statistics, most of the us cannot positively identify a pitbull. There have been a few cases where people have said pits did the damage and it was later found to be a different breed entirely (once was a border collie) so I'm sorry, I don't put much weight in statistics that can quite easily be manipulated in one form or another.

---

Did you read the report?

"this table covers only attacks by dogs of clearly identified
breed type or ancestry, as designated by animal control officers or others
with evident expertise, who have been kept as pets."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Entropy

German Shepherds, Australian Shepherds, Akitas, and many other breeds weren't bred to be mans best friend either. They were bred to do a job.

Your examples weren't bred to be vicious like Pits. However, those breeds are still responsible for quite a few more deaths and attacks than most breeds.

The pit was never bred to be human agressive so your little history lesson is off anyway.

I didn't give any history lessons. I thought we all had agreed on the history of pits here several pages ago, however.

The more you post the more I believe that you have a deep seated fear of these dogs,

No, I am around these dogs overy few days at least. About 8 different pits. I'm not afraid of them, but I do respect what they are capable of and what their natural instincts are, whether burried away from awesome training or up front.

that's just my personal opinion but come on. You claim to be a fan of the breed and then compair them to wild animals every opportunity and do your best to convince us they are crazy killers bearly under control.

I never said that they were as dangerous as any of the animals I used in my analogies, but staying in context with what I've said when I used these analogies, the analogies are fair. I wouldn't, and I didn't say that pits were comparable to wild animals in the way you are implying.

And reguarding the statistics, most of the us cannot positively identify a pitbull. There have been a few cases where people have said pits did the damage and it was later found to be a different breed entirely (once was a border collie) so I'm sorry, I don't put much weight in statistics that can quite easily be manipulated in one form or another.

Like I said before, you would need a MASSIVE weight to say that these statistics are so far off that pits are not way more dangerous than most other breeds of dog. I mean, 500x - 1,000x more maulings or deaths by pits than most of the other breeds, come on now. Like I've said, those statistics could be off by more than any margin or error in the history of statistics, and pits would still be way at the top of the list.

---

Lawrence, I tend to gravitate towards the animal planet channel, when I see 'experts' on shows such as Animal Cops totally misidentify a dog I'm sorry, but they lose the place of 'expert' in my mind, I still stand by my last post.

And Jake, in my years teaching dog obedience I spent a lot of time with pits as well since I was one of the few who would accept them in my area.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Entropy

Lawrence, I tend to gravitate towards the animal planet channel, when I see 'experts' on shows such as Animal Cops totally misidentify a dog I'm sorry, but they lose the place of 'expert' in my mind, I still stand by my last post.

---

That's true. It is just one report, but at least it appears that they were trying to make it as accurate as possible. It could be that many people misidentified the species, or that Pits get more news coverage than other dogs, or even that more "bad" people will get Pits in order to train them to be vicious.

Still... I think it does show that these dogs are more prone to aggression than other breeds. I also found it interesting that they didn't care if the person was a child or an adult as opposed to all of the other dog breeds which tend to attack children more often.

Personally I think alot of incidents with other species aren't reported. For instance, Jack Russell terriers, other toy breeds, etc... For exactly the reasons others have mentioned -- no one is going to report a dog bite that doesn't cause an excess of harm. This does not make the breed less aggressive, but it does decrease the likelihood that it will be reported. Before I'm jumped on, I do understand that a pit or a german shepherd is going to do quite a bit more damage in an attack. But I just don't believe all incidents are reported. In my dealings with smaller dogs I have found them to be MUCH more likely to bite, snap, and growl.

And Lawrence, I noticed that it stated they were pets. This might be true, however even people who mistreat their animals classify them as 'pets'. So while it may sound like these were just everyday good ol dogs it's very likely that many came from abusive backgrounds or lived in unstable home environments.

I believe that any death or maiming would probably be reported :) I also believe that there are plenty of minor pit bites that don't get reported. We are talking about how dangerous a dog can be, not which dogs are more likely to nip at your shins.

Yes, it might be reported but as someone stated earlier it could just as likely be ignored since the animal isn't one that would make news sell.

Honestly, people would buy 'PIT BULL KILLS 2'

But the same people would probably walk right by 'GOLDEN RETRIEVER KILLS 2' thinking it was a typo.

They have sensationalized these dogs, why report facts when it doesn't sell?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Entropy

And Lawrence, I noticed that it stated they were pets. This might be true, however even people who mistreat their animals classify them as 'pets'. So while it may sound like these were just everyday good ol dogs it's very likely that many came from abusive backgrounds or lived in unstable home environments.

---

To add to my previous arguments, without taking back anything I've said, a dog that is raised to be a killer is just as harmful to public safety as the same dog that is just naturally aggressive. Since you guys keep saying everyone who wants a viscious dog gets a pit, I can deduce that pits are still the most dangerous dog even if we are completely wrong about pits being more predisposed to being dangerous and aggressive, which we aren't.