Another pitbull kills, this time a little girl

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kilopular

This whole argument reminds me I can't get an apartment because of my golden retriever chow chow mix because he's part chow. Because they're considered dangerous. Yet he is perfect around people and I've worked with him around other dogs.

And when I go to the dog park, who's dog is starting the fight and being threatening? Not mine. Who's owner is shrugging the behavior off, not controlling their precious angel, and ignoring their dog? Not me.

Its the owner. Not the animal.

Sent from my XT897 using Tapatalk

---

The golden is probably making a lot of the difference. Chows are usually one-person dogs. They, and a lot of the asian breeds, are also typically more independent than the european breeds. This combination of basic traits can result in problems with strangers, especially if the dog is not well socialised. I used to groom a chow at the vet hospital where I once worked. She 'trusted' me and I *still* had to muzzle her to work with her. But if anyone not-me came by she would lunge and snarl, and once that muzzle was off and she was in a kennel? No one but the owners could get near her.

Pit bulls can make great pets, but saying they aren't more dangerous than other breeds is like saying a Reticulated python isn't more dangerous than a ball python.

The argument about bite frequency is also completely irrelevant. Pit bulls are genetically different than other breeds. They have the ability to inflict significant damage. Is a nippy ball python that always bites more dangerous than a tame 15ft retic??

Let's get real. In the grand scheme of "dangerous dogs" (and we all know any dog can be dangerous) pit bulls overwhelmingly top the charts on factual data. In the 9-year period from 2005 to 2013, pit bulls killed 176 Americans and accounted for 62% of the total recorded deaths (283). Yet they made up 4% of the dog US population. Because of bad owners? German Shepards have the same population, and are actually referred to as a dangerous breed as well being responsible for 3.5% of dog attack fatalities from 2005-2013. You are 18 times more likely to be killed by a pit bull than a German Shepard. Is it because German Shepard owners are more responsible than pit bull owners? Does the breed make an owner feel less inclined to be responsible? Does it matter?

Untrained dogs and abuse happens to all breeds, and even more so to most populous breeds. The difference is the ability of the breed to cause damage, thus highly increasing the chance for victim fatality. Would you rather be bit, than killed?? The majority of pit bulls responsible for deaths aren't abused fighting dogs either. They are pets.

I completely understand there are perfect pit bulls out there. Wouldn't harm a fly. I also know of a pit bull that were perfect for years and was quoted as "lick you to death" pit, than ended up killing a grown woman. This was completely unexpected and I have to ask myself how?

I like to see things without rose colored glasses on. I always felt it was healthy to be honest with myself even if it wasn't what I wanted to hear. I was an athlete growing up and my parents would be the first ones to say "Brant, you sucked today." I love all dogs. I own a Bulldog named Toby and my family owns a German Shepard named Rocky, Golden Retriever named Mason and a Pit mix named Lucy. The Pit mix is probably the nicest one. However, I can still read facts at the end of the day and understand that Lucy has the highest potential to cause serious and fatal injuries on someone else based on her genetics from her breed.

Just as large constrictor owners should know their animals are more dangerous, so should dog owners with pit bulls. Doesn't mean you can't own them, it just takes a higher responsibility than your average dog owner, much as owning a 20ft snake would. I'm sure people aren't going to see things exactly the same way as me, and that's cool. I think it's important with all things to take a step back and critically think unbiasedly.

Quote:

---

Pit bulls are genetically different than other breeds.

---

Not sure how you come to that conclusion when they are descended directly from a mix of older still existent breeds. I doubt the "new" genetic interactions resulted in an animal that is all that different from what existed before.
We aren't even talking about a combination as unlikely or significantly different from anything that went before as that involved in creating bateaters.

Cant back up apples and oranges.................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by majorleaguereptiles

In the 9-year period from 2005 to 2013, pit bulls killed 176 Americans and accounted for 62% of the total recorded deaths (283).

---

This is not accurate, it includes mixes and unidentifiables. Here in SA if it has short hair and a muscular build guess what classification it is? This includes the one SAPD shot that was roaming a neighborhood. I cant find the photo anymore but it was clearly a boxer laying there with 6 shots in him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by majorleaguereptiles

Yet they made up 4% of the dog US population.

---

Again, this only includes registered breeds. All the backyard breeders are not included.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raven01

Not sure how you come to that conclusion when they are descended directly from a mix of older still existent breeds. I doubt the "new" genetic interactions resulted in an animal that is all that different from what existed before.
We aren't even talking about a combination as unlikely or significantly different from anything that went before as that involved in creating bateaters.

---

Its because you need a key for their "locking jaws" :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

So far the stats I see are skewed as usual. Just like the 130 pound pit bull in the story that isn't really a pit bull but is added to the list. You should look at the stats from the USHS on snake bites. It's pathetic as well because the USHS is a joke that lobbies for $ but does little for the animals. Pythons being called boa constrictors, boa constrictors being called venomous LOL!

Once again, I ask; If the prison system is proportionately populated with more black males in the US should we deem black males dangerous?

What an absolute crock.

Lets take a look at the GSD or other breeds argument,,,. How many gang bangers are out screwing up any other breed of dog? Once the pit fell in favor of the drug and violence crowd there was a huge increase in the frequency of strays and a abused pit bulls. Homie/gang banger brother didn't care if he left his "status symbol" pit bull home, without ever being played with or socialized. He didn't care if his little sister and mom were the only ones home when he went out to get high and party. Then the dog, now bigger, unsocialized and frustrated acts out. It's a typical scenario.

Individuals are dangerous, not breeds or groups of people.

The idea of some "shotgun" approach to make permits, and interviews and whatever else the norm for all pit bull owners is complete BS!

Sure, there are people that should not own dogs. IMO a very large percentage of people shouldn't, but we here in the US are also free and we have the right to pursue happiness, and we should have the government working for us and not regulating every little thing we do.

Once again, I'm shocked that somebody from a reptile forum would bring this type of thing up.

Just remember in the eyes of the brilliant law makers, CONSTRICTOR covers every snake that constricts to kill it's prey. Then go read some of the proposed legislation regarding snakes as pets. Your harmless, BP is now a DANGEROUS animal. Yep,,, that's how it happens.

As stated earlier,,, Blame the Deed, Not the Breed.


OH Lord its a dog fight!!!

http://i772.photobucket.com/albums/y...a/IMG_2899.jpg

Comparing a ball python to a reticulated python is comparing two different species. There are absolutely differences between species, differences in care, housing, handling, behavior, etc. But when you compare a pit bull type dog to any other dog, you ate comparing the same species, the same species that needs to be housed, cared for and trained the same way, with differences only due to size and athletic potential. But that difference in size and athletic potential ate again regardless of breed. Does a pit bull type dog have the potential to cause more harm than a pomeranian? Sure does, not because of its breed but because of its size. Likewise a 200 pound mastiff has the potential to cause more harm than a 50 pound pit bull type dog.

Statistics about dog bites and fatalities are so flawed its not even funny. The first biggest problem is most dogs are incorrectly identified. Short fur and blocky build are automatically labeled pit bull, whether the dog in question is an Am Staff, mastiff, Labrador, or boxer. Next statistics are extremely easy to manipulate to prove your point. In scientific literature it is best to see the whole data set ands not just the statistics, so the reader knows where the stats came from. The problem with dog stats is you aren't given the full data set, ever, because its simply not available. In other words, stats about dog bites are pretty near completely useless.

Just to add to all the excellent points already made here is a picture of my "vicious killer" that was the bait dog I talked about in page one that will apparently kill my other dogs and son with her locking jaw because I let them interact... she weights a whooping 56 pounds better watch out!
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/03/28/aha7umad.jpghttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/03/28/atubu7ys.jpg

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jclaiborne

Just to add to all the excellent points already made here is a picture of my "vicious killer" that was the bait dog I talked about in page one that will apparently kill my other dogs and son with her locking jaw because I let them interact... she weights a whooping 56 pounds better watch out!
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/03/28/aha7umad.jpghttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/03/28/atubu7ys.jpg

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

---

Nice looking dog there brother!!

Our new female rescue is black like that with the white patches and toe trim! I need to get pictures of her up too.

Our pit barely cracks 50 pounds and gets on with our male presa just great. I can't think of a better rescue than what we got when we rescued her. There are some excellent books written by the Colby family on this breed of dog and so many positive stories that rarely get the press time that the bad incidents get.


Oh,,,oh looky here,,,, a drug dealer with a pit bull but then,,,,,,,,,,,,,http://www.cerebralcanine.com/?p=40

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by majorleaguereptiles

Pit bulls can make great pets, but saying they aren't more dangerous than other breeds is like saying a Reticulated python isn't more dangerous than a ball python.

The argument about bite frequency is also completely irrelevant. Pit bulls are genetically different than other breeds. They have the ability to inflict significant damage. Is a nippy ball python that always bites more dangerous than a tame 15ft retic??

---

I do completely agree with you that if you own these animals you have to treat them with the respect they are owed. The fatalities from "harmless" animals come from people ignoring or forgetting the fact that their animals can kill them. I for one will never forget or not adhere to proper protocols that keep me safe when dealing with large constictors and large breeds of dogs. I also, wouldn't allow a small breed to have access to a infants room.