My wife and I have volunteered at our local humane society for a few years. On a day to day basis, I'd fear being bitten (not attacked) by one of the little breeds (chihuahua, toy poodles, etc ) than a pit bull. In fact of the pits that have been through there in those few years, I haven't had the least bit of fear of any of them, very sweet dogs and I actually enjoy working with them. That said, in those few years, there have been two fairly significant attacks on volunteers and both were by pit bulls whom we all had come to love and trust very much. TO this day, no one can figure out what provoked the attack. Unfortunately, when a pit decides to bite, its going to be much worse than a chihuahua. THose have been the only two "attacks" in the past few years. No other breed or dogs have done this. Unfortunately for the pit bulls, 9 times out of ten, when a person comes to look at them for adoption, its the typical "white trash" that unfortunately gravitates to pits. For no other reason than a status symbol, to look tough, and who knows maybe even a fight. THankfully the centers director is extremely picky on who he will adopt a pit out to and they get good homes. THey really are great dogs, but there is just something in them that has the potential to snap at any given time that I have never seen in the other dogs at the center.
The types of pitt bull terriers out there have a couple things in common, which unfortunately people see as "dangerous." First of all, they are high energy dogs. Second of all, they possess a high level of confidence and they have a tendency to be more alpha-oriented. What that means is, they have to understand that they are not the dominant animal. People ignore this, and because of that the dogs are allowed to establish dominance and CAN be more aggressive as a result. Aggression doesn't always mean dangerous though. Look at police dogs. I have a relative who trains and works with K-9 dogs. They are trained to have a high level of aggression, yet they will come off an attack in an instant if given the command. There are a good number of videos on it. The dogs themselves are not the problem, regardless of the breed. The issue is people not taking the time to learn a breed's tendencies and traits and accounting for that.
It is the breed, or there would not have to be special training and handling skills required to handle that particular breed to avoid unprovoked attacks. That is the valid point he was making. The simple fact that supporters identify special requirements to safely keep pitbulls points directly to the breed and their alpha aggressive nature. After looking at all the data, there is no sensible way to argue that it has nothing to do with the breed. Quite the contrary.
Dan, youre an arrogant A$$. I never would have thought you would be such a.....well lets just end it there. Youre obvlious to the nature of a true APBT. You fall prey to the media.
Police dogs (German shepherds and occasionally Belgian Malinois) have special training. Dobermans, Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Huskies, Cane Corso, Mastiffs, Great Danes, and Pitt Bulls do not require "special training". They DO require general obedience training, because they are large dogs that have alpha tendencies. Each and every one of these breeds have guard dog traits, which can make for excellent pets. Instead of picking a particular breed to demonize, we should encourage people to A) do research, B) have the common sense to take their dog through actual obedience training, and C) if a person can't be convinced follow directive B, give them a cat. I do not own Pitt bulls outside of the ones we are currently fostering. I do not plan to own Pitt Bulls due to their higher energy levels. To write them off as a breed however, is ignorant. As for some comment I saw about locking jaws, I hope that was in jest. Physiologically speaking that isn't possible.
The training bgusty is describing is not specially needed for only pits or other dogs of that type. Training should be a big emphasis to any dog. There are several breeds that require certain training of certain owners to be able to handle them. Sure not all but if you want a dog that that's gonna lay around and do nothing there are certain breeds you probably shouldn't own. I mean seriously didn't we just have this while back with somebody that owned a great pyranese, or how ever it's spelled ha. Any dog will turn in the right situation or lack of control from its owner. I've been around alot of dogs in my life and had more problems with the ones some of you guys think would never do anything. My sister is a dog groomer and I can guarantee she'd say the same thing. Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk
What about the repeated cases of pit bulls turning DESPITE their proper training? We aren't talking about training a dog to not steal food off the counter, or to fetch a duck... We are talking about training a dog so he won't go for the throat when encountering other dogs/people. Apples to oranges.
Pretty good read for those missing the point. The White House's stance: President Obama said “[w]e don’t support breed-specific legislation—research shows that bans on certain types of dogs are largely ineffective and often a waste of public resources. And the simple fact is that dogs of any breed can become dangerous when they’re intentionally or unintentionally raised to be aggressive.” All dogs, including pit bulls, are individuals. Treating them as such, providing them with the care, training and supervision they require, and judging them by their actions and not by their DNA or their physical appearance is the best way to ensure that dogs and people can continue to share safe and happy lives together. CDC is interesting to, they explain why you should not believe the stats that are used: Statistics on fatalities and injuries caused by dogs cannot be responsibly used to document the “dangerousness” of a particular breed, relative to other breeds, for several reasons. First, a dog’s tendency to bite depends on at least 5 interacting factors: heredity, early experience, later socialization and training, health (medical and behavioral), and victim behavior.7 Second, there is no reliable way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed in the canine population at any given time (eg, 10 attacks by Doberman Pinschers relative to a total population of 10 dogs implies a different risk than 10 attacks by Labrador Retrievers relative to a population of 1,000 dogs). Third, statistics may be skewed, because often they do not consider multiple incidents caused by a single animal. Fourth, breed is often identified by individuals who are not familiar with breed characteristics and who commonly identify dogs of mixed ancestry as if they were purebreds. Fifth, the popularity of breeds changes over time, making comparison of breed-specific bite rates unreliable. I know you don't trust the research or the government.
This reminds me of the character played by Jeff Goldblum (Ian) in the original Jurassic Park when he told Hammond that (using Hammond's comparison of Jurassic Park to Pirates of the Caribbean the ride), "Yeah John but when Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down the pirates don't eat the passengers". The biggest problem with trying to defend breeds like pit bulls is that their physical form makes them far more dangerous than the other breeds. Their very structure is bred/developed for bite force and stamina. Couple that with a breed encourage psyche to match skeletal function and you have an animal that not only is willing to fight but capable of overcoming an adult human at it's discretion. Take that and then consider that a very large portion of people that are interested in the breed, are interested in it exactly for those reasons, be it for personal protection, property protection (meth heads) or similar thugs and then they are an extremel volatile mix. How many of society's thugs and criminal element would love to own a T-rex or a Utahraptor for exactly the same reasons they keep bull dogs and pit bulls.
LOL of course you can't take the numbers as gospel... but when you look at all the numbers out there, 60+% of the bites being made my a breed that comprises anywhere from 1-5% of the dogs out there is too large a discrepancy to ignore. Heck let's say the numbers are way off and its actually 45% of the bites are caused by a breed that is actually 15% of the dogs out there.... That is still far too large to ignore. I'm not calling for the extermination of Pitbulls or calling anyone who owns one white trash. I am saying that you are ignoring cold hard facts if you continue to deny the aggressive inherent nature of pit bull breeds.
I am just saying our government agencies are reporting on why not to believe bite stats. If you would like to "believe" go ahead. :D LOL
I don't "believe" in the accuracy of the exact numbers of how many people are dying daily in the middle east right now in this Palestine fiasco.... doesn't mean a **** load of people are not still dying over there. Studies vary in exact results for sure, but this variance can't be reason to ignore a glaring truth they all point towards.
The CDC claims not only the numbers are wrong but so is the type of dog identified. It goes a little beyond just the numbers. Believe me I understand your points, but I believe as many, the dogs are not the problem, but the people are. My problem is I love dogs too much. Sorry for rambling. :D
We'll there you have it folks. Obama has spoken and pit bulls really don't kill people. Time to alert the victims families.
I cleared a business due to an alarm trip tonight. In a dimly lit business I opened a door and voila, I was eye to eye with a massive German Shephard. I about crapped my pants as I backed out at full speed! Thank goodness that dog didnt charge me or I would have been torn to shreds and he would have been shot. Turns out he was a great dog!
