Semi graphic bite photos.

[voodoolamb]

Simply annoying and off topic. Though a semi recovery from early.

I didn't say ALL were culled but it is not misinformation that it occurred.

You said;

" By the way pit bulls are typically more difficult to protection train due to the fact that in their creation dogs that bit their handlers or others were culled or never used for breeding."

The implication of "in their creation dogs that bit were culled or never used for breeding" is "ALL". That is simply what I am correcting. Dogmen didn't select against biting. They selected for the best fighters. The best fighters were the ones that focused on the job at hand and didn't redirect to handlers while in the pit. That is very very different then breeders selecting specifically for docility.

Have you titled a dog in French Ring, Mondio Ring, PSA or anything protection relate? Have you worked with dogs in law enforcement?

Yes. I have. IPO. See post #4 of this thread. Working dogs is also part of my livelihood - scent detection in the private sector.

I never said any old bloke should own one. I did however say legislation was ineffective and really a violation of rights.

Which I agree with. I am against BSL. Which I have previously stated.

Your first post on this said you wished you hand't supported the breed, at least that's what I got from it.

Um no. You must have me confused with someone else. My first post on this thread was commiserating because my boyfriend was afraid of getting bit by my 300g ball but has no issues with the idea of getting bit by our shepherds. He's even stated he'd rather work the dogs without a suit then handle my snappy 300g snake. My second post was disagreeing with someone who brought up labs and weight, saying I'd rather deal with an 80 lb constrictor than an 80 lb fila. The rest of my posts were simply an conversation disagreeing with you about pit bull breed history.


I have repeatedly emphasized my love for the breed. I lived with several. Over the last 20 ish years - 4 of my personal dogs were pits or pit mixes. My heart dog was a little brindle boy who's ashes are 2 feet away from me with a picture of his goofy smiling face as we speak. I fostered 19. Of those fosters I put CGCs on 17 of them. To make them more adoptable. Because they were pits. Some of them had baggage. 2 were emaciated by the time they got to me. I cooked for them daily. A few were heartworm positive. I climbed into their crates with them since they needed to be exercise restricted but I didn't want them to be lonely, sat cramped up for a few hours every day reading with a pit on my lap. One was doused in gasoline and set on fire. I changed his bandages daily. Another was kept in such a small crate and was so malnourished while growing, she had had musco-skeletal disorders the dog version of rickets. I carried her in my arms every day until she was strong enough for physical therapy. I have even been a volunteer and helped to organize weight pull contests in inner cities as an alternative to dog fighting. Throwing out my back tossing bags of kibble or cinder blocks around.

The only reason I do not have a pit now is the youngest shepherd (who just received is BH this month and will be going for his IPO I in march) is a jerk with other dogs and I don't have the energy for the rotating crate game or micro managing interactions anymore so I won't be taking on a dog aggressive breed until this guy's senior years or until he's crossed the bridge. Maybe by that time I might switch to mini bull terriers instead of an APBT. Very similar personalities but I'll be an old git by then and might want a smaller dog.

I have never said and never will say "I wish I hadn't supported pit bulls."

I have a wonderful pit rescue that my kids are in love with. I never strayed from responsible ownership.

Pits can be great family dogs - when paired with a dog savvy owner who understands and accepts their genetics. Sadly the vast majority of pit owners do not and that is why the breed that I love ends up topping the statistic charts in terms of fatalities. Too many pit bull advocates try to dismiss the claims of those statistics and that is not helpful to preservation of the breed

[Gio]

You said;

" By the way pit bulls are typically more difficult to protection train due to the fact that in their creation dogs that bit their handlers or others were culled or never used for breeding."

The implication of "in their creation dogs that bit were culled or never used for breeding" is "ALL". That is simply what I am correcting. Dogmen didn't select against biting. They selected for the best fighters. The best fighters were the ones that focused on the job at hand and didn't redirect to handlers while in the pit. That is very very different then breeders selecting specifically for docility.




Yes. I have. IPO. See post #4 of this thread. Working dogs is also part of my livelihood - scent detection in the private sector.


Which I agree with. I am against BSL. Which I have previously stated.



Um no. You must have me confused with someone else. My first post on this thread was commiserating because my boyfriend was afraid of getting bit by my 300g ball but has no issues with the idea of getting bit by our shepherds. He's even stated he'd rather work the dogs without a suit then handle my snappy 300g snake. My second post was disagreeing with someone who brought up labs and weight, saying I'd rather deal with an 80 lb constrictor than an 80 lb fila. The rest of my posts were simply an conversation disagreeing with you about pit bull breed history.


I have repeatedly emphasized my love for the breed. I lived with several. Over the last 20 ish years - 4 of my personal dogs were pits or pit mixes. My heart dog was a little brindle boy who's ashes are 2 feet away from me with a picture of his goofy smiling face as we speak. I fostered 19. Of those fosters I put CGCs on 17 of them. To make them more adoptable. Because they were pits. Some of them had baggage. 2 were emaciated by the time they got to me. I cooked for them daily. A few were heartworm positive. I climbed into their crates with them since they needed to be exercise restricted but I didn't want them to be lonely, sat cramped up for a few hours every day reading with a pit on my lap. One was doused in gasoline and set on fire. I changed his bandages daily. Another was kept in such a small crate and was so malnourished while growing, she had had musco-skeletal disorders the dog version of rickets. I carried her in my arms every day until she was strong enough for physical therapy. I have even been a volunteer and helped to organize weight pull contests in inner cities as an alternative to dog fighting. Throwing out my back tossing bags of kibble or cinder blocks around.

The only reason I do not have a pit now is the youngest shepherd (who just received is BH this month and will be going for his IPO I in march) is a jerk with other dogs and I don't have the energy for the rotating crate game or micro managing interactions anymore so I won't be taking on a dog aggressive breed until this guy's senior years or until he's crossed the bridge. Maybe by that time I might switch to mini bull terriers instead of an APBT. Very similar personalities but I'll be an old git by then and might want a smaller dog.

I have never said and never will say "I wish I hadn't supported pit bulls."



Pits can be great family dogs - when paired with a dog savvy owner who understands and accepts their genetics. Sadly the vast majority of pit owners do not and that is why the breed that I love ends up topping the statistic charts in terms of fatalities. Too many pit bull advocates try to dismiss the claims of those statistics and that is not helpful to preservation of the breed

Mostly agree but they did cull and it was not a secret. They ARE not typically good P/P trial dogs.

Great IPO is a standard test for the breed it was designed for.

The stats are flawed as mentioned by Pit On The Prowl earlier.

I don't have further time for this but I see you have more of a liking for them than I thought.

[Gio]

You said;

" By the way pit bulls are typically more difficult to protection train due to the fact that in their creation dogs that bit their handlers or others were culled or never used for breeding."

The implication of "in their creation dogs that bit were culled or never used for breeding" is "ALL". That is simply what I am correcting. Dogmen didn't select against biting. They selected for the best fighters. The best fighters were the ones that focused on the job at hand and didn't redirect to handlers while in the pit. That is very very different then breeders selecting specifically for docility.




Yes. I have. IPO. See post #4 of this thread. Working dogs is also part of my livelihood - scent detection in the private sector.


Which I agree with. I am against BSL. Which I have previously stated.



Um no. You must have me confused with someone else. My first post on this thread was commiserating because my boyfriend was afraid of getting bit by my 300g ball but has no issues with the idea of getting bit by our shepherds. He's even stated he'd rather work the dogs without a suit then handle my snappy 300g snake. My second post was disagreeing with someone who brought up labs and weight, saying I'd rather deal with an 80 lb constrictor than an 80 lb fila. The rest of my posts were simply an conversation disagreeing with you about pit bull breed history.


I have repeatedly emphasized my love for the breed. I lived with several. Over the last 20 ish years - 4 of my personal dogs were pits or pit mixes. My heart dog was a little brindle boy who's ashes are 2 feet away from me with a picture of his goofy smiling face as we speak. I fostered 19. Of those fosters I put CGCs on 17 of them. To make them more adoptable. Because they were pits. Some of them had baggage. 2 were emaciated by the time they got to me. I cooked for them daily. A few were heartworm positive. I climbed into their crates with them since they needed to be exercise restricted but I didn't want them to be lonely, sat cramped up for a few hours every day reading with a pit on my lap. One was doused in gasoline and set on fire. I changed his bandages daily. Another was kept in such a small crate and was so malnourished while growing, she had had musco-skeletal disorders the dog version of rickets. I carried her in my arms every day until she was strong enough for physical therapy. I have even been a volunteer and helped to organize weight pull contests in inner cities as an alternative to dog fighting. Throwing out my back tossing bags of kibble or cinder blocks around.

The only reason I do not have a pit now is the youngest shepherd (who just received is BH this month and will be going for his IPO I in march) is a jerk with other dogs and I don't have the energy for the rotating crate game or micro managing interactions anymore so I won't be taking on a dog aggressive breed until this guy's senior years or until he's crossed the bridge. Maybe by that time I might switch to mini bull terriers instead of an APBT. Very similar personalities but I'll be an old git by then and might want a smaller dog.

I have never said and never will say "I wish I hadn't supported pit bulls."



Pits can be great family dogs - when paired with a dog savvy owner who understands and accepts their genetics. Sadly the vast majority of pit owners do not and that is why the breed that I love ends up topping the statistic charts in terms of fatalities. Too many pit bull advocates try to dismiss the claims of those statistics and that is not helpful to preservation of the breed

I owe you a bit of an apology. I did have you mixed up with somebody else.

Too much BS in this thread.

I will give you the information WHICH IS CORRECT about the culling and not passing man aggressive tendencies on.

It is from Richard F. Stratton's THE TRUTH ABOUT THE AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER.

I can't get into page specifics at this time but there IS NO DOUBT that the earliest and best game dogs were man friendly and desired.

Handlers separating pit dogs didn't want the dogs to turn on them.

It is well documented and makes complete sense. It also was what led to the general happy, go lucky attitude of the breed early on.

If needed I'll provide a page number as well when I have time. I know my stuff and really should not have to prove anything here in a snake post. However I thought you were a different poster and was confused since the post went off track.

I will also find it in the Colby book, and probably THE WORLD OF FIGHTING DOGS and other media I have.

The simple fact that I have done field work with them and been with others who have as well is also very telling.



TRUE game bred pits were family dogs for the most part and EXTREMELY man friendly.

Wanna be dog men have ruined the breed, destroyed their reputation and created a completely different animal which is now crucified by the media.

[KingWheatley]

Staying on this tangent... Pits have always come across to me as just big loyal lovable dummies with huge hearts and an intense need to please.

I doubt the animal is that much different. Just that people used and abused the "practically undying loyalty" aspect to train the empty headed muscle machines to be aggressive/defensive.

That is just how I view it. Nothing but personal experience with many members of the breed, and none professional.


Herp Derp

[voodoolamb]

I owe you a bit of an apology. I did have you mixed up with somebody else.

Too much BS in this thread.

I will give you the information WHICH IS CORRECT about the culling and not passing man aggressive tendencies on.

It is from Richard F. Stratton's THE TRUTH ABOUT THE AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER.

I can't get into page specifics at this time but there IS NO DOUBT that the earliest and best game dogs were man friendly and desired.

Handlers separating pit dogs didn't want the dogs to turn on them.

It is well documented and makes complete sense. It also was what led to the general happy, go lucky attitude of the breed early on.

If needed I'll provide a page number as well when I have time. I know my stuff and really should not have to prove anything here in a snake post. However I thought you were a different poster and was confused since the post went off track.

I will also find it in the Colby book, and probably THE WORLD OF FIGHTING DOGS and other media I have.

The simple fact that I have done field work with them and been with others who have as well is also very telling.



TRUE game bred pits were family dogs for the most part and EXTREMELY man friendly.

Wanna be dog men have ruined the breed, destroyed their reputation and created a completely different animal which is now crucified by the media.

If you get the time I would be interested - I still have my copy of Colby's book. I don't think I have ever read Stratton's though.

I think this is one of those mythos where the truth lies somewhere in the middle. My opinion is based on match reports, interviews with dog men, old gazette articles and pedigree research. Heck even old classifieds from the early 1900s touting the bull terriers as watch dogs.

I am content to let this be an agree to disagree thing.

Believe it or not we are 100% on the same side. Both pit bull loving people that wants what is best for the breed. We might disagree with what that is exactly and we definitely disagree on breeding practices 50 - 100 years ago but at heart are both fanciers of the dogs and it sounds like we've both had pretty amazing ones in our lives.

I've owned game bred pits - i once had to use a break stick on a boy while playing with a tether pole. He landed on a baby copper head and got bit. Latched onto that tug and would not let go. (How's that for gameness?!) Had to break him off to take him to the emergency vet. Silly goose of a dog. He was an amazing and sweet boy. Actually he saved my life once. Fell asleep with my TV on and it caught fire! He woke me up.

It's the same with snakes (getting back on topic!). Not every snake is right for every snake owner and some complete *insert BP-net inappropriate mean word here* get ones they are in no way, shape or form capable of owning then a tragedy happens... and it ruins it for those of us who are responsible.

Which is probably about 85% of the reason I an a total misanthrope :p

[voodoolamb]

Staying on this tangent... Pits have always come across to me as just big loyal lovable dummies with huge hearts and an intense need to please.

I doubt the animal is that much different. Just that people used and abused the "practically undying loyalty" aspect to train the empty headed muscle machines to be aggressive/defensive.

That is just how I view it. Nothing but personal experience with many members of the breed, and none professional.


Herp Derp

You can't really train a non aggressive dog to be aggressive. There is a HUGE genetic component.

If a dog has the drives to be aggressive you can train it to use its aggression at your discretion.

But there is a reason that labradors aren't used as patrol dogs and why poodles were never used in blood sports.

[KingWheatley]

You can't really train a non aggressive dog to be aggressive. There is a HUGE genetic component.

If a dog has the drives to be aggressive you can train it to use its aggression at your discretion.

But there is a reason that labradors aren't used as patrol dogs and why poodles were never used in blood sports.

Actually... Labs are used as patrol dogs.

My ex's department has two Labs, one German shepherd, and one other dog who I don't remember the breed of.

Also Lexington Metro Police Department just got a new Chocolate Lab as a K-9.

Herp Derp

[voodoolamb]

Actually... Labs are used as patrol dogs.

My ex's department has two Labs, one German shepherd, and one other dog who I don't remember the breed of.

Also Lexington Metro Police Department just got a new Chocolate Lab as a K-9.

Herp Derp

No they are not. Labs are used as single purpose detection dogs in K9 units. NOT for patrol work aka bite work.

Single purpose dogs are cheaper and less of a liability which us why some police departments have them. Labs being hunting dogs have a great sense of smell and good prey/ball drive so they make swell detection K9s.

The patrol dogs are always of a breed that was selected to be civil (meaning it has a willingness to bite a person). Shepherds, malinois, and Dutch shepherds being most common. A handful of other herding and guardian breeds can be found but they are pretty rare.

[KingWheatley]

No they are not. Labs are used as single purpose detection dogs in K9 units. NOT for patrol work aka bite work.

Single purpose dogs are cheaper and less of a liability which us why some police departments have them. Labs being hunting dogs have a great sense of smell and good prey/ball drive so they make swell detection K9s.

The patrol dogs are always of a breed that was selected to be civil (meaning it has a willingness to bite a person). Shepherds, malinois, and Dutch shepherds being most common. A handful of other herding and guardian breeds can be found but they are pretty rare.

"Patrol dogs." These dogs do go on patrol. But both departments do not have what they would call "bite dogs."

Now, dog breeder/selling may have different lingo, however I am VERY familiar with police especially around here.

Terms are as follows:

"Bite dog" a take down dog. Lexington Metro to my knowledge has none. UKPD absolutely has none. They are too much of a liability to the college.

"Patrol dog" a dog who is making rounds with their handler. Usually going to be a lab or "friendly breed." Especially at U.K. They are ALL about appearances, and not looking too intimidating, so the German Shepherd is never out as a patrol dog.

Then the usual sniffer and terms associated with the different sniffing talents.


Herp Derp

[voodoolamb]

"Patrol dogs." These dogs do go on patrol. But both departments do not have what they would call "bite dogs."

Now, dog breeder/selling may have different lingo, however I am VERY familiar with police especially around here.

Terms are as follows:

"Bite dog" a take down dog. Lexington Metro to my knowledge has none. UKPD absolutely has none. They are too much of a liability to the college.

"Patrol dog" a dog who is making rounds with their handler. Usually going to be a lab or "friendly breed." Especially at U.K. They are ALL about appearances, and not looking too intimidating, so the German Shepherd is never out as a patrol dog.

Then the usual sniffer and terms associated with the different sniffing talents.


Herp Derp

You must live in an outlier area. That is not the typical lingo even amongst police departments. Perhaps it is used colloquially at that department to refer to any police dog.

"Patrol Dog" is the name of a certification. Check out the United State's Police K9 Association's (A large national organization which many police departments use to certify their teams) certification requirements:

http://www.uspcak9.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/PATROL-DOG-I-CERTIFICATION-RULES-2016.pdf

As you can see the "Patrol Dog" certification includes a section on criminal apprehension aka bite work. The other North American k9 associations use similar terminology. Detection dogs have their own certifications that don't use that terminology.