We DID PITT BULLS BEFORE!

[KoKo]

Trainers/Owners of Pit Bulls Cause their Pit Bulls to be Anti-Social KillersTrainers/Owners of Pit Bulls Cause their Pit Bulls to be Anti-Social KillersYou can Try to Breed a KILLER...but Kindness and Love will win out over all the EVIL that can be done..

Not to say just like in the Human Population there aren't Sociopaths/Psychopaths that crop up and no one knows why or why these people went wrong...but, with Animals ...Abuse and Lack of Kindness is why they can go wrong and it's the Owner/Trainer that causes this vicious behavior and NOT the Breed of Dog...even if it's a Pit Bull.

Just saying....In reaction to the "Pit Bull Hate" expressed on DU which seems to say that many want the Breed to DIE OUT....not to BLAME the ones who do this to their dogs that cause the viciousness.

[PeaceNikki]

1. Salon did a good piece on pits this week.

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/05/in_defense_of_the_pitbull_partner/

Dog Racism

Some people are understandably offended when the demonization of pit bulls is compared with bigotry against ethnic minorities, but there’s one aspect of the analogy that is just too apt to ignore.

Pit bulls are disproportionately involved in serious attacks on humans, just as African-Americans are found guilty of a disproportionate number of crimes in the United States. That’s simply what the raw data say.

Most people consider the claim that blacks are inherently more criminal than whites, based on that raw data, to be pretty darn racist as it ignores the social, economic and legal context of crime and instead ascribes it to some imagined genetic or cultural flaw among African-Americans.

And yet, when you strip away the overt falsehoods about pit bulls – those locking jaws and shark-like bites – the raw statistics, stripped of social context, is the entirety of the case against these animals (made even worse by the unreliable nature of data based on media-reported breeds in attacks).

So when Matt Drudge hypes stories of “packs” of black youths rampaging in America’s streets, he’s rightly called out for race-baiting. But when sex advice columnist Dan Savage, who writes numerous posts about pit bulls behaving badly with titles like, “Pit Bulls Should be Boiled Alive like Lobsters and Fed to Their Idiot Owners,” and compares these domesticated canines with wild tigers, he’s doing the exact same thing as Drudge. (Worse, Savage doesn’t appear to make any effort to confirm that the dogs implicated in the stories he promotes are actually pit bulls.)

[Wait Wut]

3. What a great article!

Thank you for sharing. I'm going to post the link on my FB. Lots of real pittie lovers on there!

I've had four, miss them all terribly. Sweet babies all. Not one single agressive act from any of them. Two were terrified of cats.

[PeaceNikki]

5. I've had 2 and both were terrified of my cats.

One was an Am Staff/American Pit Bull mix and he would literally sit and shake waiting for the cat to finish nibbling on HIS food.

They are beautiful creatures and, like all dogs, be treated with love and compassion and they will give it back tenfold.

[Wait Wut]

11. Yep!

My old cat, Py, LOVED dogs so he always wanted to curl up with my oldest pittie. She would lay there and just shake like crazy until my cat fell asleep and then try to slink out from under him.

My last pittie would be forced out of his food dish by my three cats. If he tried to sneak back in for a nibble, my evil calico would bop him in the head so he'd sit in the corner and whimper.

My only complaint, they snore...a lot. And, they just had to share my pillow, so they would snore in my ear.

[PeaceNikki]

16. You inspired me to dig up some old photos of Sam, the bestest doggie ever

As a pup snuggling with the cat who bullied him:


And all grown up:

[Wait Wut]

18. He was gorgeous!

What a noble face.

And, I can see how/why kitty bullied him. Look at the size of that cat! It looks like my old kitty, Harley!

[PeaceNikki]

20. Thanks. I miss him something awful. He was my first dog ever. And, to be honest, I was nervous based

on the media hype and bullshit. So I educated myself. I worked with my vet and with rescue groups and I learned the truth about the breed. I learned how to train him (though he was a breeze). He was a good boy. A snuggler. And I loved him until the day he died in my arms looking into my sweet young son's face.

'scuse me... I've got something in my eye now...

[Wait Wut]

27. I wish more people would do the research.

Every dog needs different types of training. Pitties need socialization, just like Shepherds, Rotties, etc.

I've had dogs my whole life. German shepherds, mutts, a wolf hybrid...the pitties were the most affectionate. Tough to get anything done when you have a 60lb pit bull in your lap.

I know how you feel. My last one was my last. I can't even bear to look at pics of him.

[RebelOne]

48. I had a 93-pound pit bull. How would you want one that size on your lap? n/t

[Wait Wut]

115. Holy cow!

Are you sure it wasn't an ugly horse?

[randome]

117. Or a beautiful warthog?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Marrah_G]

53. ^this

[KoKo]

4. Thanks...will check it out from Salon...

This snip might be some of what I was trying to express. I'm a cat owner...but, had dogs growing up. I just see so much Pit Bull Hate posted on DU that it got OTT for me.
So...I spoke out.

This snip from Salon you posted is interesting:

So when Matt Drudge hypes stories of “packs” of black youths rampaging in America’s streets, he’s rightly called out for race-baiting. But when sex advice columnist Dan Savage, who writes numerous posts about pit bulls behaving badly with titles like, “Pit Bulls Should be Boiled Alive like Lobsters and Fed to Their Idiot Owners,” and compares these domesticated canines with wild tigers, he’s doing the exact same thing as Drudge. (Worse, Savage doesn’t appear to make any effort to confirm that the dogs implicated in the stories he promotes are actually pit bulls.)

[PeaceNikki]

8. And I thank you for that.

The PB defenders here are not the ones who train dogs to be aggressive. We are the ones who provide loving, safe homes. I don't understand the need for so many DUers to attack so viciously.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

70. I'll tell you why

These creatures (I can't call them dogs) think they are being good when they attack. Watch them wag their tails! They don't let go or stop because it's not in their genes to do that. Thank goodness we have the right to shoot them when they are attacking our cattle etc. But I must say that in our neck of the woods, people have more sense to own a pit bull. I don't think one of the monsters will show up on our place. I would shoot it if it attacked any of us and I'm a vegetarian animal lover.

Please watch these videos below. It seems the owners love them and are taking them walkies and all that....................but they still want to kill. No other breed attacks like this.

This is in England. They were later banned.

I have seen videos of pit bulls attacking children.....too awful to post. At least with wild animals you can scare them away most of the time because they have a fear of humans. These monsters fear no human and are actually doing the job they were created for when they attack, maim and kill.

All pit bull owners have blood on their hands for owning and promoting this breed. Keep your monsters under lock and key. Please stop trying to promote them on DU.

[PeaceNikki]

77. prop.o.gan.da.

[baldguy]

120. Hysterical misinformation like this CREATES the "dangerous dog" mystique

That fosters the vicious behavior which abuse & neglect brings about. People like you who who want to indiscriminately ban Pit Bulls are JUST AS BAD as the people who abuse them.

[XemaSab]

122. You keep typing that and it doesn't make any more sense with each repetition

Here's how a breed phase-out could work:

Slap a thousand dollar fine on each person who has an un-neutered male pit bull.

Within 20 years, the breed would die out.

But in your own head, wanting to have all male pit bulls neutered makes me Michael Vick.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense right there.

[baldguy]

15. "Pit Bulls often attract the worst kind of dog owners."

Because of the sensationalized, over-hyped, hysterical stories about vicious Pit Bulls. The very impulse to ban them creates the undesirable mystique that drives the abuse.

[PeaceNikki]

17. And DU totally confuses those shitty owners with those of us here who rescue them and give them

loving, healthy homes.

It's disgusting.

[jazzimov]

61. +10000

[jazzimov]

60. Thank you.

The outrage against specific breeds is- simply - racism.

[XemaSab]

62. I have three dogs.

One is a Newfoundland/Springer Spaniel mix. He's huge and mellow and a total sweetheart.

The Newfoundland dog is legendary for its calm and docile nature and its strength. They are highly loyal and make ideal working dogs. It is for this reason that this breed is known as "the gentle giant". International kennel clubs generally describe the breed as having a sweet temper. It typically has a deep bark, but is easy to train if started young. It is wonderfully good with children, but because of their size at a very young age, small children could get accidentally leaned on and knocked down. The breed was memorialized in "Nana," the beloved dog guardian in Peter Pan. The Newfoundland in general is good with other animals, but their size can create problems if not trained.

One is a boxer/cattle dog mix. She's smart and eager to please, but a little high-strung and occasionally stubborn.

Boxers are a bright, energetic and playful breed and tend to be very good with children. They are active, strong dogs and require adequate exercise to prevent boredom-associated behaviors such as chewing, digging, or licking. Boxers have earned a slight reputation of being "headstrong," which can be related to inappropriate obedience training. Owing to their intelligence and working breed characteristics, training based on corrections often has limited usefulness. Boxers, like other animals, typically respond better to positive reinforcement techniques such as clicker training, an approach based on operant conditioning and behaviorism, which offers the dog an opportunity to think independently and to problem-solve. Boxers are generally patient with smaller dogs and puppies, but difficulties with larger adult dogs, especially those of the same sex, may occur.

Like many working dogs, the Australian Cattle Dog has high energy levels, an active mind, and a level of independence. When on home ground, the Australian Cattle Dog is a happy, affectionate, and playful pet. However, it is reserved with people it does not know and naturally cautious in new situations. Its attitude to strangers makes it an excellent guard dog when trained for this task, and it can be socialised to become accustomed to a variety of people from an early age as a family pet. It is good with older, considerate children, but will herd people by nipping at their heels, particularly younger children who run and squeal. By the time puppies are weaned, they should have learned that the company of people is pleasurable, and that responding to cues from a person is rewarding. The bond that this breed can create with its owner is strong and will leave the dog feeling protective towards the owner, typically resulting in the dog's never being too far from the owner's side. The Australian Cattle Dog can be the friendliest of companions although it is quick to respond to the emotions of its owners, and may defend them without waiting for a command. It responds well to familiar dogs, but when multiple dogs are present, establishing a pecking order can trigger aggression. It is not a breed that lives in a pack with other dogs.

Finally, I have an English shepherd. She's playful and energetic, and she loves two things: me and hunting small animals in the back yard.

The English Shepherd temperament is the defining characteristic of the breed, with high intelligence and often a unique type of kindness for those in his home, both animals and people. The English Shepherd is often an independent worker. English Shepherds are adaptable and learn routines quickly. Some can be watchful of strangers and are more one-person dogs. However, once he accepts people or children or stock as his own, there are few better caretakers than an English Shepherd. The English Shepherd frequently exhibits an independent, bossy or "enforcer of the rules" streak in his temperament. If the dog's desire to enforce order is not channeled and directed to a suitable end by a strong, confident leader, he may exhibit many undesirable behaviors. Nevertheless, English shepherds can thrive as companion dogs in environments that provide sufficient mental and physical stimulation. More than just a specialty herding breed, the English Shepherd is also a guardian of property and livestock, and a hunter of game and vermin on their territory. English Shepherds are also known for their ability to track and 'tree' raccoons and squirrels.

The boxer/cattle dog and the English shepherd hate each other with the burning fire of a thousand angry suns.

All three dogs are totally representative of the personalities of their breeds.

Dogs were bred to have particular personalities, and I could try to get the Newfoundland interested in hunting and killing lizards, but he'd lose interest immediately.

This is not "racism," it's just a fact.

[PeaceNikki]

64. And I have had 2 pit bull rescues. Both with kids and cats.

Mine were also good ambassadors for the breed.

Pit Bulls are not the stereotypical devil dog put forth in media myths. They are companion animals who have enhanced the lives of many through their devoted people-loving natures, positively channeled physical prowess, bravery, and intelligence. Pit Bulls have served key roles in search-and-rescue efforts, excel in agility training, and work nationwide as therapy and service dogs. Famous Pit Bulls include Petey in "Our Gang/Little Rascals" film series and an American poster mascot during WWI.

The most important thing to know about pit bulls? They're just regular dogs. While pit bulls are known to be fun-loving, energetic, and social, they all have unique personalities and should be judged as individuals.

Because their lineage can vary so widely, it is impossible to make broad statements about the "pit bull temperament." A dog is just a dog, regardless of whether it's been labeled as a "pit bull," and all dogs are individuals. The National Canine Research Council offers more information on why it is impossible it is to predict a dog's behavior and genetics solely based on appearance.

Though few shelter pit bulls can be directly traced to the classic American Pit Bull Terrier, a standard temperament has been identified for this breed that defies common stereotypes. The United Kennel Club describes the American Pit Bull Terrier as follows:

"The essential characteristics of the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) are strength, confidence, and zest for life. This breed is eager to please and brimming over with enthusiasm. APBTs make excellent family companions and have always been noted for their love of children."

The United Kennel Club goes on to state, "The APBT is not the best choice for a guard dog since they are extremely friendly, even with strangers. Aggressive behavior toward humans is uncharacteristic of the breed."

A pit bull's behavior, like that of any dog, is a reflection of the humans who manage it. When loved, cared for, and set up for success, they make ideal family companions.

Pictures of Sam are upthread. This is the dearly departed Cocoa. She had a very tough first 9 months before we rescued her. She was severely abused and neglected. She was shy but very sweet. And didn't know how to bark which was a curse and a blessing. Both were cuddlers who were loved and loved back tenfold the entire time they were in our care.

[backwoodsbob]

86. a newfie person!

Junior,my newfie is my new love of my life.
an amazing breed.Gentle giant is an apt description

[LittleBlue]

111. Dog racism???

Salon outdoes itself again

[RobertEarl]

2. Pit bulls are too masculine?

I have known lots of dogs. Pit Bulls are the craziest. They also are, pound for pound, the strongest. They are the most dangerous dogs.

Put a Pit in with a crazy and mean human and you WILL have trouble. Not so with most other breeds, imo.

[DrDan]

6. yep - tend to agree in general, but there are still those cases where

they are in with a loving family and still inflict tremendous trauma

[PeaceNikki]

9. Indeed.

http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2013/05/06/coshocton-dog-euthanized-after-woman-killed-in-attack.html

COSHOCTON, Ohio - The Coshocton County Dog Warden says he will probably never know why Rachael Honabarger's 3-year-old German Shepherd attacked her last Tuesday afternoon.

“The investigation is complete,” said Russell Dreher. “It's a very unfortunate accident."

Dreher says for some unknown reason, the family's 104-pound German Shepherd attacked the 35-year-old mother of two in the yard of her home on Country Road 23.

"It was a scene of controlled chaos at the first. There was a neighbor on the scene that advised us what had happened,” Dreher said.

Shit, that's terrible. Her OWN dog.

[KoKo]

10. Do you know who Trained or Owned the Pit Bulls you've come in contact with, though?

That might explain the behavior. Or, can you "breed Sociopathic and Vicious Behavior into an animal breed?" You think so? I don't. It does crop up genetically probably in all species ...but, then you'd have to prove there was DNA intervention with the Pit Bull Breeding. I haven't seen any of that evidence...although it may exist somewhere.

I think trashing a Breed of any creature because some "Go Wrong" is not taking into consideration the "other factors."

[RobertEarl]

19. Take Great Danes

Do you know why they are such nice dogs?

Because the mean ones had to be killed before they ate everyone.

Pit Bulls name comes from breeding pit bulls to be in a pit fighting. IDB.

Family had a pit bull one. Sweetest dog. Loving. But crazy as heck. When it went on a tear there was no communication with the dog. It just went crazy. Other dogs I have lived with did not go crazy like that unless in the depths of a real battle. The pit would go crazy over just about anything. I've see other pits the same way.

Not bashing pits, but I would never keep one around.

[Doremus]

38. You're as ill-informed about Great Danes as you are about pits. nt

[flvegan]

51. What an interesting, albeit incorrect post about great danes AND pit bulls.

[DesertFlower]

22. i think you're wrong.

presa canarios are bigger and stronger.

[galileoreloaded]

7. if your Chihuahua could eat you it would. facts

over rhetoric and emotion

[KoKo]

29. Very Funny...it would take a lot of work...but I guess "Baby Death from Chihuahua"

will be a Post on DU....Coming SOME DAY SOON!

[galileoreloaded]

33. lol. its true though. they are animals. pure instinct.

they love you because you feed them, thats it.

[KoKo]

36. Nah...unless they are "out on their own" they Love you because they Bond with You

through love and behavior enforcement on both sides.

That's a pretty base view...you have and would work with "Feral Animals." We commune with our animals for cohab. Those who have been "shut out from warmth and comfort" will definitely appreciate food...but that goes with putting behavior in a very narrow confine.

Social Behavior between us and our Cohabs has many different expressions, beyond "who feeds you" unless you are in prison, captive or grew up with only "feeding" as your interactive with other beings whether animal or human.

[galileoreloaded]

37. i respectfully disagree, but good interchange! nt

[SwissTony]

71. Then why does my dog love my 2-year old grandson

who has never fed him in his life?

You don't know dogs, do you?

[galileoreloaded]

73. dogs, like people work on behavioral conditioning

but its not "love". its a transactional, conditional relationship. its like the concept of "unconditional love" that people try and push out there. that has not, and never has been a part of the human equation. in fact, romantic love, and other childlike concepts such as "soul mates" and "the one" has only been a part of the human lexicon since about 1300 AD.

i know dogs, and people, quite well.

[SwissTony]

131. Yeah. Right.

Around 1300 AD the entire human race changed and we could suddenly experience unconditional love???? Before the, no man actually romantically loved a woman or vice versa???

Maybe we didn't express it in such terms, but I doubt that the concept was unknown.

You have a rather worrying view of love. Both human and canine.

[RebelOne]

47. True. I have a Chihuahua and she is a mean little critter.

Whenever a stranger comes to the door, I have to lock her in another room because she think she is a pit bull and will attack.

[Politicalboi]

154. Chihuahua's run in packs

And take down prey in the wild. But give me an attack over a Chihuahua or a Pt Bull any day, the Chihuahua wins. At least my ankle will still be there when I'm in pain.

[Throd]

12. Why not let the breed die out?

I had 3 pit bulls. 2 were very sweet. The 3rd was sweet 99% of the time. The other 1% of the time was terrifying.

I had to get rid of them all when I moved for insurance reasons.

[baldguy]

21. From the Salon article linked by PeaceNikki:

“Pit bull” is not a breed. It’s a term for a variety of breeds, including the American pit bull terrier, the American Staffordshire terrier, the Staffordshire bull terrier and mixes of those dogs. “Pit bull-type dog” is basically meaningless – they’re dogs with various phenotypical traits that subjectively fit the label.

You're blaming the wrong end of the leash. Here's an idea: Why not make it a crime to abuse a dog?

[Throd]

25. It already is a crime to abuse dogs.

The argument about characteristics reminds me of gun zealots who say stuff like "that isn't an assault weapon because the stock is 2" longer than blah blah blah".

[baldguy]

34. And the punishment is often equivalent to a slap on the wrist.

Michael Vick was convicted of torturing & abusing over 70 dogs, and murdering at least 8. He spent 21 only months in jail, and was even allowed to adopt another dog when he got out!

Animal abuse isn't taken seriously by legal authorities.

[Throd]

42. No disagreement on those points.

[SwissTony]

72. I suspect that's why "pits" are blamed for a disproportionate number of attacks.

It's not a breed, it's a label.

[DirkGently]

13. "Pit Bull" has become an imaginary breed based on looks & behavior

I noticed in a (horrible) story today about a woman mauled to death that the multiple dogs were described as "pit bulls" and "two mixed breed dogs." How did the reporter verify that the supposed pit bulls were purebreds? Did he / she look at AKC papers? That's before you factor in the convention of referring to three different breeds. It's easy to talk about all the pit bull attacks, when the identification is based on the fact the dog involved looked somewhat like a pit, Staffy, or AmStaffy, or some mix thereof, AND bit someone. Essentially, people are now just referring to any vicious dog that is clearly not some other distinct breed as a "pit bull."

Irrational nonsense.

[KoKo]

31. "Pit Bull's" get Eyeballs to News Sites....it's how it works...

If it was "mixed breed" it will only come out later if one really follows the story to the end with redactions and retractions. It's how our Media works these days.

As I said in my OP ...there will always be a Timothy McVeigh or other Soco/PsychoPath out there....but, to tar every Pit Bull as a Vicious Killer is not looking "beyond the news" which most of us know is just there to sensationalize everything.

Just like the Media about Cats killing Birds causing MASSIVE DEATH. Not taking into consideration that many species we used to have in our environment also killed birds as part of Evolutionary control. BUT...Blame The CATS...and get EYEBALLS TO VIEW your Web Site or get Money for your organization.. But, it's mostly about getting Outrage against whatever group you want to target. It gets old...

[XemaSab]

54. You have a link that says that cats don't kill millions of birds?

[rrneck]

14. Some dogs are more territorial than others

and some attach strongly road certain people. Butter the influence of the owners and how the dogs are socialized are the most important factors.

Keeping a large powerful dog around is much like having a loaded gun.

[Archae]

23. Of all the dogs I've been bit by...

The worst breed is those &%$#@!!! Yorkshire Terriers.

I've known only TWO in my lifetime that didn't try to eat my ankles.

My current next door neighbor has a shepherd mix, Dodger is bigger than a usual German Shepherd, and he is so friendly, in fact he just adores my cats too!

[KoKo]

39. I'm old enough to remember being terrified by German Shepherds...because of WWII

influence. Look how that turned out when they are the most used dogs for tracking for good purposes and in service of the Blind. They along with Greyhounds are big nursing home visitors to cheer up those confined.

They got a bad rap because of NAZI HATE with every movie showing Nazi's tracking down innocents with the vicious German Shepherds the most vicious of dogs. It was in all the movies I grew up with that had WAR.. As a kid when I saw one I wanted to run away.

So...that's why I look on this with an eye of skepticism...especially when many DU'ers are posting the mess up in Pure Pit Bull with the Mixed Breeds that our Sensationalist Media always talks about killing innocents. "Pit Bulls" are the New Terrorists...no matter what their mix of breed is or how the were raised or what influenced their behavior from birth or breeding, handling, home life.

[cigsandcoffee]

24. Couldn't one say the same about semi-automatic assault rifles? n/t

[PeaceNikki]

26. I'm just going to keep this in my clipboard...

Oh bullshit. Dogs are living creatures.

The defenders here you seek to offend care and love for them out of compassion for living beings. The eagerness shown here to try to equate that to the gun debate and an inanimate object designed with the single intent to kill is childish, petty and wholly inaccurate.

[cigsandcoffee]

28. Indeed - imagine how dangerous guns could be if they had a mind of their own. n/t

[Throd]

30. All modern dogs were bred by humans for specific purposes.

Thats why pit bulls look like steroid abusers and Lhasa Apsos look like dust mops.

[KoKo]

32. lol's...got your point. n/t

[PeaceNikki]

35. Pits were never bred to hurt people.

Even fighting dogs need to be handled by people. APBT's were bred to bait livestock and then later to fight. Each other. Not people. Gameness is not the same as aggression.

Here's a good piece that goes into great detail on the topic:
http://stason.org/TULARC/animals/dogs/american-pit-bull-terriers-breed/12-What-exactly-is-gameness.html#.UY2DG7WcfpE#ixzz2Sw5l5Dmz

Generally speaking, a game dog is an emotionally stable, easy-going dog, especially good with kids. Gameness should not be confused with aggressiveness. There are plenty of aggressive dogs that are not game, and there are game pit bulls who are not aggressive toward other types of dogs. Aggressiveness will propell a dog into a fight but will only sustain him for the first few minutes. Gameness, on the other hand, will not necessarily make a dog fight-happy; but if the dog has no
other choice but to fight, a game dog will fight until it wins or dies trying, and will keep going as long as necessary. Gameness is an inner quality of pit bulls. There is no way you can tell by looking at a pit bull whether it is deeply game or not. The only test--and for many years the main criterion for selecting a dog for breeding purposes--is actually fighting the dog to see how it stands up to other dogs that have likewise already proven their gameness in the pit. Dogs that are emotionally unstable, or that fear-bite human beings are generally not game. If you want a nice pit, you're generally better off getting one that has been game-bred. These dogs represent the truest exemplars of all the best qualities in the breed.

They were bred for a type that was extremely easy-going and docile around people and would NEVER think of biting a friendly hand, even amid the fury of a fight. A well-bred pit bull is so reliable in this respect that even if he is badly hurt in an automobile accident and is in extreme pain, he won't snap at his owner who tries to pick him up--unlike most dogs in that situation.

Well-bred pit bulls are like labs in that they will never try to dominate their owners through threats, such as growling or baring teeth or snapping. Sure, they will try to dominate you--by outsmarting you, by doing something sneaky to get their way when they know you're not looking. But it is a very rare pit bull that will
growl when you pick up his food dish or reach into his mouth to take a bone away. The analogy to labs is fitting because both of these breeds were selectively bred for tasks that demanded an extreme level of generosity toward people.

[KoKo]

43. +1

[XemaSab]

50. This is why pit bulls kill people

I've been bit by dogs four times in my life:

Once by a chihuahua, once by a border collie, once by a toy poodle, and once by a cattle dog mix.

Each time, the dog took a chomp and then immediately went "Oh shit, what did I do?"

When pit bulls bite people, they don't stop biting until whatever they're attacking is dead.

This is why they are vicious killers and other dogs... notsomuch.

According to what you just posted.

[baldguy]

66. Dogs kill humans when a *human* neglects and/or mistreats the dog.

The breed doesn't matter.

The very impulse to ban Pit Bulls that comes from sensationalized, over-hyped, hysterical & inaccurate stories about them creates the undesirable mystique that drives their abuse.

People who want to indiscriminately ban Pit Bulls are just as bad as the people who abuse them.

[deacon2]

40. My two Pit Bulls are sweet as can be

I had labradors for years - they are very sweet tempered and I loved them all.
When our last dog passed, we decided to take in a shelter Pit. Very different
personality and temperament overall, but just a sweetheart. Now we have another
and the story is the same. The Pit Bull attacks that are sensationalized in the news come
from poor animals that are tortured by their owners until they become mean. We can't carry
home owner insurance for pets anymore because of the misinformation and prejudice against this breed.
An absolute crock...

[smokey nj]

41. The attacks we see in the news may or may not even involve pit bulls.

Very often, witnesses identify the breed and get it wrong more often than not. It's difficult to guess a dog's breed or breed mix just by looking at it. My cousin has a mutt that looks like a German shepherd mix. She had the dog's DNA tested and it turns out her dog is mostly a mix of Chow and French bulldog. If you saw this dog, those are the last two breeds that would come to mind.

[Quantess]

44. Obvious, but... this needs to be said!

A kind, attentive, loving person can raise a great dog regardless of the breed.

A careless shitheel who neglects their puppy will end up with a poorly trained adult P.I.T.A. dog.

An abusive person can create a vicious dog.

[KoKo]

45. Agree...but, there's always an errant Socio/Pschopatic one..but, that's in us Humans, also.

For the main part...I stand by my OP and others who have owned ones who weren't handled or trained to be vicious because of bad behavior reinforcement or maltreatment.

I've even know my beloved cats to have a vicious one or two...from either Feral, Maltreatment or they were just born with a "different personality." But, it's not the norm and many can be brought around with love and kindness. A few can't. But...as I said...it's like with us humans also. Some just can't or aren't able to respond to kindness and reinforcement of sociable behavior. Rogues are always amongst us. But, when we start tarring people and animals of whatever breed or affiliation or ethnicity or cross-breading as bad/evil and worthy of extermination...because ofbad/evil behavior of the few...we go down a slippery slope.

[Quantess]

46. No, you just said it yourself...

"...from either Feral, Maltreatment or..."
A lousy upbringing
"many can be brought around with love and kindness. A few can't."
You got that right!

There has already been a lot of established research that confirms birth to age 3 is the most crucial part of a child's development and formative behavior. Childhood.

Which part of a dog's development do you suppose is most crucial to his/her formative behavior?

[baldguy]

49. I've seen dogs be abused & mistreated for *years*

And still be able - with a lot of work, to be sure - to come back & be well-adjusted, happy & friendly companions.

[Quantess]

65. Just like with humans!

There is so much I could say, so much that is going on in my mind about this topic. About catching development when it is young, I mean. But OTOH, it's never too late for intelligent beings such as humans and primates and dogs, and other intelligent animals such as dolphins, etc. to change their behavior, to change their brain.

The brain is malleable and formative. I'm a middle aged woman and I am still learning new things. No actually, I am learning more now than than I was 2 or 3 years ago, and if someone tested my brain cells, I'm sure that would be confirmed.

Anyway, I wish we could have caught them earlier. I wish we could physically lift the sad, shivering, lonely, neglected puppy from the past, and give the dog a different future. Give them love and attention, and a positive upbringing, and they will amaze and delight and impress you.

Same goes for human children.

[Marrah_G]

52. I think it's a mistake to demonize them and a mistake to not acknowledge that they can be dangerous.

When that happens you end up with zero solution and only people yelling " am not, are too" at each other over and over.

[randome]

55. Who really gives a shit if they die out or not?

I mean, is any part of the Earth's ecosystem tied to their continued existence? I don't believe in taking anyone's dog away but sure, what the hell, if they died out, who would really care ten, twenty years later?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[uppityperson]

57. What you write combined with your sig line make me laugh out loud. The irony. nt

[randome]

58. How am I being ironic?

I don't see the value in advocating for a breed that is both artificial and domestic. We created the class of animal called domestic dogs. So we can decide what breeds we want to continue to live with and which ones we don't want to live with.

It seems like a simple step to take or untake to me.

The truth is if pit bulls ceased to exist, no one would miss them for very long.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[uppityperson]

59. "Who gives a shit if a dog dies out. Stop looking for heroes. BE one."

[randome]

63. Glad I could make you chuckle.

From some miscellaneous user forum so the veracity can't be verified.

The Akita was used as a fighting dog in Japan, not as a bear or duck hunter. That is one reason the breed as a whole does not tolerate steady eye contact.
The present day Bandogs have very shallow roots as their pedigrees only go back four or five decades. The original stock died out and was “reconstructed” from other dog breeds. They have less connection to the old time Bandogs than the Irish wolfhound has to their namesake.

Akitas don't tolerate eye contact? I'd say let that breed die out. They don't belong living with humans. Bandogs have already died out? What the hell were those? I suppose I could find out.

I see another reference to a breed called Pyrenean Sheepdog having died out.

So far as I know, no one protested these types of dogs dying out. Although, like I said, this is simply random info pulled from a quick Google search.

On edit: actually, Wikipedia has a page devoted to already extinct dog breeds.
link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Extinct_dog_breeds

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Nine]

56. Baloney. Did Rachel Ray try to create a vicious dog?

There are numerous stories of attacks from pit bulls that were raised in loving family homes, not by drug dealers and the like.

http://blog.dogsbite.org/2010/02/pit-bull-advocate-rachael-ray-under.html

Dogs do what they were bred to do. Herding dogs herd. Hunting dogs point and retrieve. And fighting dogs fight.

[baldguy]

67. And DogsBite.org makes money from creating anti-Pit Bull hype.

People who want to indiscriminately ban Pit Bulls are just as bad as the people who abuse them.

[Nine]

74. DogsBite.org makes money? Please explain what you mean by this.

I hope you're not talking about their asking for victim funds as here: http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-victim-funds.php

Incidentally, why don't you click on some of the victim pictures and see what pit bulls did to them... if you're brave enough.

[baldguy]

79. DogsBite.org is a scam. It's run by one person named Colleen Lynn, and she makes her money

By sensationalizing the extremely rare instances of dog bite deaths, and by conning people like you who are ignorant enough to be taken in by her lies into giving her money. There is no "victim's fund" - all the donations go into Colleen Lynn's pocket. There is no "national volunteer organization". All of the donations for the website go into Colleen Lynn's pocket.

At best, DogsBite should be described as a political lobbying organization that advocates for genocide against Pit Bulls (a breed which Lynn herself can't seem to define, since she includes all molosser types - not just APBTs & ASTs) and the promotion of BSL legislation (which are opposed by every mainstream national organization that is involved in canine/human interactions).

Those victims you're so concerned about are merely fodder which Colleen Lynn uses to con people out of their money.

Do your own research.

[Nine]

81. What "victim's fund" are you talking about?

Dogsbite.org does not steal money from victims because it does not collect money for victims in the first place, nor does it purport to. As you can easily see on the link I posted, the victims listed each have their own fundraising entities, not connected to dogsbite.org.

If you click the site's Donate button, you are told exactly what that money goes toward:

Donations support:

Donations to DogsBite.org go toward our continued documentation of U.S. dog bite fatalities, including reports, such as U.S. Dog Bite Fatalities January 2006 to December 2008 and U.S. Pit Bull Attacks in 85-Day Period, as well as the documentation of breed-specific laws by state and the constitutionality of these laws. Contributions also go toward special projects, such as our 2011 amicus brief filing in a landmark Maryland appeals case that helped moved the Court of Appeals to transform state law, ensuring that Maryland victims of serious pit bull maulings have a remedy.

The DogsBite.org website launched in 2007, became a registered non-profit in 2009 and became a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization in April 2011. DogsBite.org is required to file an IRS Form 990-N (postcard). Learn more about this public charity organization at GuideStar.

Learn about our mission, our passion and why we do what we do.

[PeaceNikki]

82. They have been exposed as frauds by dozens of ACTUAL experts.

http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2010/03/the-truth-behind-dogsbiteorg.html

[Nine]

84. All that link says is that some groups have opposing views.

It says nothing about "fraud" or "scams," so why are making baseless accusations?

[PeaceNikki]

88. You didn't read it. Try again.

[baldguy]

83. The money goes in Colleen Lynn's pocket.

There is no "victims fund".

[Nine]

85. Again, what the heck are you talking about? (nt)

[baldguy]

92. What can you not understand? DogsBite is a scam.

The link you posted allows people to donate to a "victims fund" that doesn't exist.

[Nine]

93. That's not true.

The page I linked to does not collect funds. It tells the stories of individual victims and often links to those victims' personal fundraising entities. If people want to donate to individual victims, they can. None of that money passes through Dogsbite.org. You are not being truthful.

[baldguy]

96. DogsBite.org is not truthful. It promotes genocide & sensationalizes vary rare events

at the expense of the few victims and millions of dog owners. Colleen Lynn relies on the gullibility & stupidity of a few people, who - while they may be well intentioned - are really ignorant and uninformed about dogs.

[Nine]

98. So are you finally backing off your accusation that they steal money from victims?

It seems you are just changing the subject now without admitting that your accusation was unfounded.

And "genocide"? Really? Nice to know you don't approve of "sensationalizing."

[baldguy]

103. There is no "they" at DogsBite. SHE dosn't steal money directly from victims - I never said she did.

Colleen Lynn takes money from sympathetic dupes who are deceived by her lies. And those lies CREATE situations which she exploits: She says she just wants to reduce dog bite & promotes BSLs for that purpose. But BSLs don't reduce dog bites, and when a dog bite happens Collen Lynn is often the first to sensationalize the incident. Then people like you see the over-hyped, inaccurate story & are compelled to give - "to help the victims". It's all bullshit.

And you might have a different word for advocating the extermination of a race, but "genocide" works just fine for the rest of us.

[randome]

106. Really? Genocide? Anyone trying to eliminate the 'race' of dogs?

Whew. The hyperbole is breathtaking. First, it's 'racism', now it's 'genocide'.

Pit bulls are not a 'race', they are a domestic breed. There are already 40 extinct breeds of dogs. No one cares about them and no one will care should pit bulls go extinct, either.

Banning a breed is not the same as willfully exterminating them. Pit bulls are a domestic breed that are not even part of the ecosystem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Extinct_dog_breeds

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[whatchamacallit]

68. Like with most everything else, Americans are too fucking stupid and emotional to do the right thing

**In 1991, Singapore prohibited the entry of pit bulls into the country.
**In 1993, the Netherlands banned pit bulls.
**In 1997, Poland enacted legislation enforcing pit bull owners to display "clear warning signs" and keep the animal behind reinforced fencing.
**In 2000, France banned pit bulls. The goal was to let the breed "die out."
**In 2001, Germany banned pit bulls.
**In 2001, Puerto Rico banned pit bulls.
**In 2003, New Zealand banned the importation of pit bulls.
**In 2004, Italy banned pit bulls.
**In 2009, Australia prohibited the imports of pit bulls.
**In 2009, Ecuador banned pit bulls as pets.
**In 2010, Denmark banned pit bulls and pit bull breeding.
**In 2014, Venezuela will ban pit bulls.

[randome]

75. Great info! Thanks!

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[PeaceNikki]

76. The blog you lifted that from (unattributed, I'll add) is out of date and not telling whole picture.

* Singapore also bans Akitas. And hedgehogs. And 7 other critters including ferrets!
* The Netherlands no longer bans them, look it up. It was lifted in 2008. After fifteen years, it has been found that the ban has been ineffective.
* Poland bans 11 breeds including American bulldogs and Rotties
* France includes German Shepherds and Rotties in their ban as well
* Germany bans EIGHTEEN breeds
* Puerto Rico *is* the US... and they don't ban, but have regulations that should apply to all large dogs
* New Zealand has heavy restrictions on all dogs, and bans importing on several
* Italy - INEFFECTIVE BAN LIFTED - regulations enacted for all breeds (which is what many of us "fucking stupid emotional Americans" want, BTW)
* Australia - see NZ
* Ecuador also bans Rotties
* Denmark has breed ban on 13 breeds - and it's not working. Dog attacks are significantly HIGHER since enacted.

Ok.... your turn to show me any data that BSL works.

http://www.examiner.com/article/breed-specific-legislation-failing-globally

[randome]

87. The PR governor vetoed a bill to overturn the ban in 2010.

From what I can see, they are still illegal in PR. I can't find any 'official' site with that info, just some random questions and answers on forums.

And if 2 countries repealed their bans, that doesn't take away from the fact that many others still have bans in place. Including other dogs deemed to be dangerous is irrelevant to the discussion about PBs.

[PeaceNikki]

89. Show me data that BSL works.

[randome]

94. Well, I suppose it's axiomatic that banning breeds considered dangerous...

...would result in fewer problems with those breeds.

Show me why you have an interest in keeping the pit bull breed active. Keep in mind that no one is suggesting your personal dog(s) be taken from you.

Why would you care?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[PeaceNikki]

97. I have an aversion to legislation based on bullshit propaganda. A breed-neutral approach is the way

to go.

http://www.aspca.org/about-us/policy-positions/breed-specific-legislation-1.aspx

Even laws that ostensibly are only regulatory may impose a de facto ban on a breed, creating a climate where it is nearly impossible for residents to live with such breed, and virtually ensuring destruction of otherwise adoptable dogs by shelters and humane societies. In Ohio, due to a state law that classifies all pit bulls as “vicious” and imposes various requirements on their guardians, pit bull guardians have great difficulty locating housing and obtaining homeowners’ or renters’ liability insurance, and most Ohio shelters have a pit bull non-adoption policy. The consequences have been disastrous: while in 1996, 101 Ohio animal control agencies reported handling 2,141 dogs deemed to be pit bulls, in 2004, 68 agencies reported handling 8,834 such dogs, of whom only 1,425 (16 percent) were reclaimed by their original guardians or adopted by new ones, and 7,409 (84 percent) were killed (Lord et al., 2006). In addition, dogs outside a targeted breed may become “collateral damage” of breed-specific laws. The Prince George’s County pit bull ban places significant pressure on the county shelter, which has limited space and yet must hold pit bulls during the pendency of lengthy legal proceedings. As a result, the shelter has had to euthanize hundreds of otherwise adoptable dogs of many different breeds due to lack of space, and has suffered decreased adoption rates because there are so few dogs available (Taylor, 2004).
Perhaps the most harmful unintended consequence of breed-specific laws is their tendency to compromise rather than enhance public safety. As certain breeds are regulated, individuals who exploit aggression in dogs are likely to turn to other, unregulated breeds (Sacks et al., 2000). Following enactment of a 1990 pit bull ban in Winnipeg, Canada, Rottweiler bites increased dramatically (Winnipeg reported bite statistics, 1984-2003). By contrast, following Winnipeg’s enactment of a breed-neutral dangerous dog law in 2000, pit bull bites remained low and both Rottweiler and total dog bites decreased significantly (Winnipeg reported bite statistics, 1984-2003). In Council Bluffs, Iowa, Boxer and Labrador Retriever bites increased sharply and total dog bites spiked following enactment of a pit bull ban in 2005 (Barrett, 2007).

It must also be considered that if limited animal control resources are used to regulate or ban a certain breed of dog, the focus is shifted away from routine, effective enforcement of laws that have the best chance of making communities safer: dog license laws, leash laws, animal fighting laws, anti-tethering laws, laws facilitating animal sterilization and laws that require guardians of all dog breeds to control their pets. In 2003, a task force formed to study the effectiveness of the Prince George’s County pit bull ban concluded the ban to be extremely costly while providing little attendant financial or public safety benefit to the county and noted that, as a direct result of the ban, "Animal Management Division human resources [are] stretched thin...thus reducing their ability to respond to other violations of the [Animal Control] Code." The task force recommended that Prince George’s County repeal the ban (Prince George’s County Task Force, 2003). However, while out-of-county pit bull adoptions were initiated, for political reasons the ban was not repealed. The Ohio pit bull law, enacted in 1989, has been accompanied by a doubling of dog fighting complaints by Ohio animal control agencies—from 14.6 percent of animal control agencies making complaints in 1996 to 29 percent of animal control agencies making such complaints in 2004 (Lord et al., 2006). Yet studies examining the impact of Britain’s Dangerous Dog Act of 1991 and the Spanish Dangerous Animals Act of 1999 (notwithstanding their names, both laws are breed-specific) indicate that the targeted breeds were not significantly associated with bite incidence prior to enactment of either law and that bite incidence failed to decrease post-enactment (Klaassen et al., 1996; Rosado, 2007).

Thus, the ASPCA is not aware of credible evidence that breed-specific laws make communities safer either for people or other companion animals. There is, however, evidence that such laws unfairly target responsible pet guardians and their well-socialized dogs, are inhumane, and impede community safety and humane sheltering efforts (Sacks et al., 2000; Wapner, 2000; Taylor, 2004).
ASPCA Position

Although multiple communities have been studied where breed-specific legislation has been enacted, no convincing data indicates this strategy has succeeded anywhere to date (Klaassen et al., 1996; Ott et al., 2007; Rosado, 2007). Conversely, studies can be referenced that evidence clear, positive effects of carefully crafted, breed-neutral laws (Bradley, 2006). It is, therefore, the ASPCA’s position to oppose any state or local law to regulate or ban dogs based on breed. The ASPCA recognizes that dangerous dogs pose a community problem requiring serious attention. However, in light of the absence of scientific data indicating the efficacy of breed-specific laws, and the unfair and inhumane targeting of responsible pet guardians and their dogs that inevitably results when these laws are enacted, the ASPCA instead favors effective enforcement of a combination of breed-neutral laws that hold reckless dog guardians accountable for their dogs’ aggressive behavior. Ideally, a breed-neutral approach should include the following:

Enhanced enforcement of dog license laws, with adequate fees to augment animal control budgets and surcharges on ownership of unaltered dogs to help fund low-cost pet sterilization programs in the communities in which the fees are collected. To ensure a high licensing rate, Calgary, Canada—its animal control program funded entirely by license fees and fines—imposes a $250 penalty for failure to license a dog over three months of age (Calgary Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw, 2006).

Laws that mandate the sterilization of shelter animals, ideally before adoption, and make low-cost sterilization services widely available. (See ASPCA Position Statement on Mandatory Spay/Neuter Laws, 2008[link])

Enhanced enforcement of leash/dog-at-large laws, with adequate penalties to ensure that the laws are taken seriously and to augment animal control funding.
Dangerous dog laws that are breed-neutral and focus on the behavior of the individual guardian and dog (taking care to ensure that common puppy behaviors such as jumping up, rough play and nipping are not deemed evidence of dangerousness). Graduated penalties should include mandated sterilization and microchipping (or other permanent identification) of dogs deemed dangerous, and options for mandating muzzling, confinement, adult supervision, training and owner education. In aggravated circumstances—such as where the dog seriously injures or kills a person, or a qualified behaviorist who has personally evaluated the dog determines that the dog poses a substantial risk of such behavior—euthanasia may be justified. In Multnomah County, Oregon, a breed-neutral ordinance imposing graduated penalties on dogs and guardians according to the seriousness of the dog’s behavior has reduced repeat injurious bites from 25 percent to seven percent (Bradley, 2006).

Laws that hold dog guardians financially accountable for a failure to adhere to animal control laws, as well as civilly and criminally liable for unjustified injuries or damage caused by their dogs. Calgary, Canada, has reduced reported incidents of aggression by 56 percent and its bite incidents by 21 percent by requiring guardians of dogs who have displayed aggression to dogs or to humans to pay fines ranging from $250 to $1500 (Calgary Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw, 2006).
Laws that prohibit chaining or tethering (taking care also to prohibit unreasonable confinement once a dog is removed from a chain), coupled with enhanced enforcement of animal cruelty and animal fighting laws. Lawrence, Kansas, significantly reduced dog fighting and cruelty complaints by enacting an ordinance prohibiting tethering a dog for more than one hour (Belt, 2006).

Further, the ASPCA supports a community-based approach to resolving the reckless guardian/dangerous dog question whereby all stakeholders—animal control, animal shelters, medical and veterinary professionals, civic groups, teachers, public officials—collectively identify an appropriate dog bite prevention strategy. Central to this model is an “advisory council or task force representing a wide spectrum of community concerns and perspectives” whose members review available dog bite data, current laws, and “sources of ineffectiveness” and recommend realistic and enforceable policy, coupled with outreach to the media and educational efforts directed at those in regular contact with “dog owners and potential victims” (e.g., medical and veterinary professionals, animal control/shelters, teachers) (AVMA, 2001).
I

[randome]

101. No, I think you have much more invested in this than bureaucratic deportment.

And how will this "...community-based approach to resolving the reckless guardian/dangerous dog question..." be imposed?

The answer is, it won't because the 'approach' is nothing more than 'hoping for the best'.

I still don't understand why you care. You think it's 'unfair'? To whom? To pit bulls? Do you think they understand enough about our laws to care?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[PeaceNikki]

102. I told you why I care. I posted the ASPCA analysis on BSL. IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK.

And if that's not 'good enough' for you well... I don't give a flying fuck.

[randome]

104. Speed limit laws largely don't work, either.

But they don't usually inspire your level of anger, either. I'm really not trying to 'put one over on you', just pointing out that your interest in 'fairness' may be misplaced for a domestic breed of dog that no one would miss should it die out anymore than we miss the 40 breeds that have already gone extinct. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Extinct_dog_breeds

There is a poster below who paints wanting to ban pit bulls to 'racism'. The hyperbole is a little much.

IMO.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[PeaceNikki]

105. You missed a WHOLE lot of the ASPCA analysis.

"Perhaps the most harmful unintended consequence of breed-specific laws is their tendency to compromise rather than enhance public safety."

"It must also be considered that if limited animal control resources are used to regulate or ban a certain breed of dog, the focus is shifted away from routine, effective enforcement of laws that have the best chance of making communities safer: dog license laws, leash laws, animal fighting laws, anti-tethering laws, laws facilitating animal sterilization and laws that require guardians of all dog breeds to control their pets."

"Animal Management Division human resources [are] stretched thin...thus reducing their ability to respond to other violations of the [Animal Control] Code."

"There is, however, evidence that such laws unfairly target responsible pet guardians and their well-socialized dogs, are inhumane, and impede community safety and humane sheltering efforts"


Speaking of hyperbole, my "anger" is due to the repeated bullshit that some DUers insist on spreading on this topic. Look upthread. I've rescued 2 and lived for YEARS with pit bulls. And worked with them for even more. The first my ex husband brought home and I was nervous. Like you, I bought into the BULLSHIT until I educated myself.

There are a number of topics that I get passionate about. This is one. Others include, but are not limited to: women's reproductive rights, WI politics, LGBT rights, victim blaming, domestic violence and third-party advocacy.

[randome]

107. I get your point of view. Really.

But I disagree with the ASPCA analysis. Banning a breed is one -exactly one- law. Having all these other laws in place

-dog license laws, leash laws, animal fighting laws, anti-tethering laws, laws facilitating animal sterilization and laws that require guardians of all dog breeds to control their pets."

makes it obvious to me that more resources are required for monitoring.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[baldguy]

116. So, you disagree with the ASPCA

and Michigan State University, the ABA, the National Canine Research Council, [link:http://www.americanhumane.org/animals/stop-animal-abuse/fact-sheets/breed-specific-legislation.html|
the American Humane Association], The American Kennel Club, the CDC, the AVMA, the Humane Society of the United States, the American Dog Owners Association, the American Working Dog Federation, the Association of Pet Dog Trainers, the Best Friends Animal Society, the International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants, the International Association of Canine Professionals, the National Animal Control Association, the National Animal Interest Alliance, the National Association of Dog Obedience Instructors, the No Kill Advocacy Center, and dozens of peer-reviewed reports - In short, precisely ALL of the people who know the relevant law, medicine & canine behavior – they ALL disagree with you also.

[randome]

119. What I disagreed with was the ludicrous notion that it takes fewer resources...

...to enforce a dozen laws than it does to enforce one that bans a particular breed.

You can trot out all the studies you want that claim it isn't 'right' to ban pit bulls but the fact remains that at least 40 breeds are now extinct and no one cares.

Adding a 41st breed to that list would have exactly ZERO impact on the world other than those, like yourself, who get all worked up about 'unfairness', a concept that doesn't even apply here since pit bulls don't give a damn whether their breed continues or not.

No one is seriously trying to take your dog or anyone else's dog away from you so why would anyone care if the breed went extinct in say, 20 years or so? What would be the impact to you or anyone else?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[baldguy]

121. Enforcing laws that work takes fewer resources than trying to enforce laws that don't work.

BSLs don't work - that's a simple fact. Targeting individual owners who behave irresponsibly does.

[randome]

124. Are you saying that banning doesn't work?

Or do you mean that when all BSLs are lumped together, some work and some don't and so therefore BSLs are meaningless?

Because I kind of think it's hard to get around a ban unless you live in a very remote, rural area. But banning is seldom designed to keep open areas of farmland safe. They are usually designed to keep a certain breed off the streets of cities.

And if that's the case, I would say bans are easier to enforce, since being seen in public with a banned breed would likely mean a heavy fine and removal of the dog.

And if a ban forces someone to keep their dog off the streets from fear of a fine and removal, well, that's a successful ban.

And again, I'm simply curious: what would be the impact to you or anyone else if pit bulls disappeared off the face of the Earth in 20 years or so?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[99Forever]

78. So, your premise is...

.. that specific dog breeds can't and haven't been bred for specific tasks and traits?

That about sum it up?

Fascinating. (Completely contrary to all reality, but fascinating, none the less.)

[baldguy]

91. Were Pit Bulls originally bred to fight? Sure. 200 yrs ago.

Just as German Shepherds were developed to herd sheep, small Terriers were developed to kill mice & rats, and Bull Dogs were developed to kill bulls for sport. But they ALL - WITHOUT EXCEPTION - were developed with the desire to please their human masters and to live in human society. Most people who own German Shepherds don't herd sheep, they have the dog as a family member & companion. Most people who have small Terriers don't let them chase & kill rats, they have the dog as a family member & companion. Most people who have Bull Dogs don't engage in bull-baiting with the dog, they have the dog as a family member & companion.

And most people who have dogs which are descended from the original "pit bulls" don't engage in dog fighting, they have the dog as a family member & companion. What's contrary to all reality is to deny that fact.

[Nine]

100. What are you claiming - that all these breeds can just "turn off" their instincts?

Newsflash. Herding dogs raised as pets still have a strong herding instincts. Terriers raised as pets still have strong vermin-chasing instincts. And fighting dogs raised as pets still have strong killing instincts. Do you honestly think that these instincts can be "turned off" by wishful thinking on the part of these dogs' "masters"?

[99Forever]

108. That's a lot of words, just to say...

... "nuh uh, is not." What a particular dog, does or does not do in it's daily life, has zero bearing on it's inbred traits. Zero. Wordsmith it all you please, that is a fact, not an opinion.

[baldguy]

109. You're trying to claim that breed is everything for a dog.

But much more time & effort has gone into breeding dogs to interact with humans & live in human society than has gone into promote breed characteristics for hunting, herding or sporting.

Because dogs have been interacting with humans & living in human society for about 30,000 years - long before any thought was given to breeding them for other purposes.

[99Forever]

113. Don't tell me what I'm "claiming"...

.. you don't speak for me, now or ever.

You can sidestep reality if that pleases you, but what it doesn't do, is change it. The reality is that different breeds of dogs have been bred for particular traits, period. Pit Bulls (or whatever name you prefer to call them by) were BRED TO FIGHT. Sorry that doesn't fit so well with the propaganda you are trying to sell, but that is the fact.

[baldguy]

118. You're arguing with your own argument.

Your claim is that 300 yrs of breeding entirely negates 30,000 yrs of breeding - but only for Pit Bulls, and not for any "normal" dogs. Your claim is unreasonable and illogical - and indefensible, too.

[99Forever]

123. You love those strawmen, doncha?

One more time: you don't speak for me, now or ever. Have fun making up silliness to argue with, you simply bore me.

[baldguy]

129. You do realize the entire case you're supporting against Pit Bulls is a straw man argument, right?

It works just like every other bigoted idea:

1) Identify a small problem.

2) Blow up the problem all out of proportion.

3) Create a boogyman to blame the problem on.

4) Make up shit about said boogyman.

5) Offer a simple solution: dispose of the boogyman.

If no one gets the hard job of actually thinking, then by definition it's a good solution.
And if people are harmed in the process? Who cares!
If it doesn't actually SOLVE the original problem? So much the better! Then you can use the same shit arguments to demonize something else!

[99Forever]

125. Education is a good thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2010/09/06/mans-new-best-friend-a-forgotten-russian-experiment-in-fox-domestication/

http://www.terrierman.com/russianfoxfarmstudy.pdf

[baldguy]

130. And what do you think that proves?

Go ahead, tell us.

(This'll be fun.)

[99Forever]

133. What it "proves" is that...

... unlike natural selection, as a motivator for evolutionary changes, forced selection can modify breed traits in a matter of a few decades instead of millenniums. Which is precisely what was done to breed Pit Bull fighting dogs. Nothing has been done in the breeding of them to reverse the sought after aggression and physical features that made them the breed of choice for dog fighting. NOTHING. They are called PIT BULLS for that very reason. You can continue to pretend it isn't so, but anyone with the bare minimum of thinking ability and reason, knows better.

No charge for the quick lesson, btw.

Was that "fun" enough for you?

[baldguy]

136. And if the genes just don't exist in an animals genome? What then?

Artificial selection isn't magic. It can't create traits that don't exist in an animal's genome. Cows can't be bred to sprout wings.

OTOH, artificial selection can bring about phenotypical expression of particular genes which do exist an animal's genome, but which may be "switched off". This is what is shown in the videos you posted. Canids have a wide range of genotypical variation, which is normally not expressed in the phenotypes of individuals. Artificial selection allows the breeder to bring out the expression of those variations.

What's interesting about those experiments is that the breeders only selected for one behavioral trait: docility toward humans, and de-selected for one trait: aggressiveness toward humans. Nothing else. Yet the resulting population displayed color variations in their coats, changes in their tails & ears, and the retention of other more "puppy-like" behavior which were not selected for.

How does this relate to Pit Bulls?

Well, first of all, Pit Bulls don't constitute a separate species from other dogs. All of the behaviors selected for during the creation of Canis lupus familiaris - everything that makes them a dog still exist today in all dogs - including the Pit Bull.

Second, as I've repeated several times: the primary traits dogs have been selected for throughout their history have been those which allow the dog to have the desire to please their human masters and to live in human society. Everything else - hunting, herding, sporting, whatever - is secondary. Your basic premise is that people will purposely & knowingly create things which will bring harm to themselves. Generally, as a group, people don't do that. And they certainly haven't done so with dogs.

And finally - and this has been repeated on DU before as well - there is no breed "Pit Bull". There are 6-7 distinct breeds which are tagged as Pit Bulls, all of which descend from common ancestors originating in the 18th & 19th century. These common ancestors descend from the original molosser line, which goes back about 4000 yrs - and whose descendants today include not just Pit Bulls, but some of the most popular and "gentlest" breeds around: the Boston Terrier, the French Bulldog, the German Shepherd dog, the Newfoundland dog, and Pugs. And they all still retain those traits commonly associated with Pit Bulls, even if those traits aren't expressed in their phenotype.

If, god forbid, anti-dog nutcases forced Pit Bulls to be driven to extinction, "forced selection can modify breed traits in a matter of a few decades" using these same breeds. The genes are all still there, and they're not going anywhere.

Thus Endeth The Lesson. My PIT BULL is demanding to be taken for a walk.

[Nine]

128. So close.

This describes how domesticated dogs came to be. Hint - humans did not create the domesticated dog; it created itself: http://www.nonlineardogs.com/100MostSillyPart1.html

And this describes how humans "began to breed the long lost killing bite back into dogs" about 200 years ago: http://www.nonlineardogs.com/100MostSillyPart3-2.html

And yes, those 200 years of selective breeding did undo thousands of years of natural selection.

[baldguy]

134. Who is Alexandra Semyonova?

What are her academic credentials? What degrees does she have? She describes herself on her website as an "animal behaviorist". Elsewhere, she claims to be a psychologist. Do you have any idea of what peer-reviewed papers she has published?

The fact is, she has no academic credentials or degrees. She has not published any papers for peer review. And her big book "The 100 Silliest Things People Say about Dogs" is a self-published work from a vanity press. Her major premise seems to be that dogs only operate normally within an extreme, rigid dominance hierarchy (aka "Alpha Theory&quot - except for Pit Bulls, who don't respond to or accept dominance. Therefore, they're not "normal" dogs. Of course, this is simply circular reasoning and there isn't a more pure strain of bullshit to be had anywhere.

There is not a single recent, credible study or paper defending dominance hierarchies and/or alpha theory. Anywhere. Semyonova even disputes her own premise in a blog entry on her own website:

“This study shows that the existence of the phenomenon "dominance" is questionable, but that in any case "dominance" does not operate as a principle in the social organization of domestic dogs. Dominance hierarchies do not exist and are in fact impossible to construct without entering the realm of human projection and fantasy.” -- The Social Organization of the Domestic Dog

Here are some of the things real scientists & canine professionals are saying about it:

http://www.dogster.com/forums/Behavior_and_Training/thread/553729

“Writers who refer to dominance and alpha behaviour in dog training are basing their message on outdated and now disproved theory (Steinker, 2007a). “ -- The Alpha Theory: based on a misguided premise - Debra Millikan, Chief Trainer of Canine Behaviour School in Adelaide

“Both he [Dr. Peter Neville] and Dr. John Wright believe in anthropomorphism when discussing the emotional states of dogs. His theory was that to change aggression, you must change the emotional state of the dog to do so, and release stress through activity. He does not accept that there are many true dominant dogs (if any) and therefore (in his opinion) the canine/human hierarchy is really a myth.” -- Training Bytes aggression symposium at the University of Guelph -- comment by Linda Hamilton

“It won't be hard to get the wolf pack mentality to go by the board simply because we don't think many of the experts ever really believed it. It is through social play behavior that animals learn from one another. Further, it is fun to play with our dogs even if none of us learn anything. It will certainly make more sense to the dog than to be tumbled onto its back and growled at by a human.” -- A Talk with Ray Coppinger, PhD & Lorna Coppinger

“However, scientists believe that a dogs do not have a sense of self so it could be more accurate to say that it behaves with no inhibition and it is uninhibited behaviour that we interpret as dominant behaviour. Owners often describe a belief that their dog is trying to increase its status over them. This would require that their dog has a capacity for forward planning and to know how its behaviour affects the feelings and thoughts of others, which we believe they are not capable of. So the notion that the dog behaves with lesser or greater inhibition according to who it is interacting with and the value of the resource in question may be a better way of describing what is going on.” -- Canine Dominance Revisited -- David Appleby MSc CCAB

“There is strictly no such thing [human-dog hierarchy] - people are predominantly parent figures to their dogs, not pack leaders in hierchical arrangements and there is a wealth of science from evolutionary biologists such as Professor Ray Coppinger to substantiate that view” -- Interview with Dr. Peter Neville

“The most significant problem with viewing dog-human relationships in the context of social dominance is that it implies and promotes an adversarial relationship between the two. It sets up a win-lose scenario, that actually ends up in a lose-lose scenario (as most win-lose scenarios do). It is incompatible with cooperation by its very nature, cooperation being something you need to promote an effective bond and training environment.” -- What’s Wrong with Dominance Theory & Aversives -- James O'Heare

“Dog trainers have commonly accepted a model of training based on a supposed emulation of the behaviors of wolves, particularly Alpha wolves. Central to this model is the notion of “dominance”. This model is conceptually flawed in that it rests on some serious misconceptions about wolf behavior as well as serious misconceptions about the interactions between dogs and humans.” -- Moving Beyond The Dominance Myth -- Morgan Spector

““Alpha” wolves (now called “breeders” by most wolf biologists) do not train other members of the pack. Current wolf studies have also shown that they are not always the leading animals when wolves travel, nor do they always lead in hunting or eat first when a kill is made.” -- Some Thoughts on Letting go of the Dominance Paradigm -- Beth Duman

“dominant and submissive behaviors aren’t what they seem: they’re more rightly called threatening and non-threatening postures. And they aren’t inherited traits in dogs and wolves, nor are they part of the pack instinct’s non-existent hierarchical structure; they’re simply communicative postures that express a dog’s inner anxiety.” -- Is Your Dog Dominant, or Just Feeling Anxious? -- Lee Charles Kelley

“Dominance theory is so muddled that it often contradicts itself. For example, if a "dominant dog" is acting aggressively and the solution is through "calm-assertive" energy which makes the human the "dominant pack leader," wouldn't a dominant dog act calm-assertive instead of aggressive?” -- The Dog Whisperer Controversy -- Lisa Mullinax CPDT

“Labeling a high-ranking wolf alpha emphasizes its rank in a dominance hierarchy. However, in natural wolf packs, the alpha male or female are merely the breeding animals, the parents of the pack, and dominance contests with other wolves are rare, if they exist at all. During my 13 summers observing the Ellesmere Island pack, I saw none. Thus, calling a wolf an alpha is usually no more appropriate than referring to a human parent or a doe deer as an alpha. Any parent is dominant to its young offspring, so "alpha" adds no information. " -- Canadian Journal of Zoology 77:1196-1203; Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs -- L. David Mech, Senior Scientist, Biological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey

“First, because it does not seem to occur in the wild, this article suggests the strong dominance hierarchy that has been described for wolves may be a by-product of captivity. If true, it implies that social behavior—even in wolves—may be a product more of environmental circumstances and contingencies than an instinctive directive. Second, because feral dogs do not exhibit the classic wolf-pack structure, the validity of the canid, social dominance hierarchy again comes into question.” -- Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science; Volume 7, Issue 4, 2004, A Fresh Look at the Wolf-Pack Theory of Companion-Animal Dog Social Behavior -- Wendy van Kerkhove

The sad fact is that there's so much really really good information out there, and there's no need to taken in by the insane anti-Pit Bull propagandistic bullshit.

[Nine]

138. Semyonova is 100% AGAINST dominance theory.

It's the central theme of her book and the website I linked to. I don't know how you could have missed that.

[baldguy]

139. You didn't bother to read your own links, did you?

She has no credentials, no degrees, no professional standing AT ALL, she misrepresents her experience & qualifications, and she repeatedly contradicts herself.

Your position isn't strengthened by latching onto the rantings of people who have less credibility than Fred Phelps reviewing a Gay Pride celebration.

[Nine]

140. Do you have any arguments other than personal attacks on those you disagree with?

First Colleen Lynn, now Alexandra Semyonova. You talk about credibility after you describe Semyonova's views as completely opposite to what they are. Where are you getting the information that Semyonova has no degrees? Show me how she misrepresents herself. Show me examples of where she contradicts herself. Or are you going to change the subject again as you did after saying that Colleen Lynn pockets money intended to help dog bite victims?

[PeaceNikki]

144. .

I'm. Just. Done.

[Nine]

146. Think about this.

You are fighting to perpetuate the unregulated breeding and owning of a completely human-created creature.


I am fighting to prevent more of this:






Your efforts to make me feel bad are not going to work.

[declanthope]

160. you're awesome

I know I'm a couple of years behind on this, but I just posted about how blatantly wrong this guy was, then I saw your post... I didn't even make the connection that his first link was to her website! Hysterical!

[declanthope]

159. Confusion

I am very confused by your post. Having read her book, I can attest that a large portion of it is spent debunking the myth of the dog hierarchy. You have stated that "Her major premise seems to be that dogs only operate normally within an extreme, rigid dominance hierarchy (aka "Alpha Theory&quot " whereas, in fact, her major premise was the opposite: dogs exist in ever-changing, dynamic groups where members are free to join or leave as they see fit. Here is a direct quote for example "dogs live in open, flexible groups, not in packs". Every chapter of her book ends with a list of references to the scholarly journal papers she bases her theories on. If you follow this link (https://www.amazon.ca/Silliest-Things-People-About-Dogs/dp/1904109187) you can look inside the book. I believe "dogs are not pack animals" is Myth 8 and is part of the preview you can read without paying for the book.

As for her credentials, the book says she was educated at John Hopkins University and University College London. It makes sense that she is referred to as both an animal behaviourist and a psychologist; animal behaviour falls under the umbrella of psychology.

Having read the book, I have no doubt that the chapters on fighting dogs would be upsetting and "insane anti-pit bull propagandistic bullshit". If you have real evidence to prove she is a fraud I would love to hear it so I don't go around quoting a nutjob, but I think it is important you check your facts regarding the points I made above.

[ozone_man]

112. There's a reason why they're named pit bulls.

[randome]

135. There is a reason for this bumper sticker I saw on the back of a pickup truck, too: Pit Bull Inside.

I wonder what that implied....

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

80. Here is the thing

If I am out walking my dachshund and about to come up to someone walking any kind of bully breed, I'm giving them a wide berth, because I can not have any knowledge just by looking on how this dog was raised or what the owner is like. But I do know that the dog does have the potential to hurt me or my dog.

Also, because I do love dogs I would and have stopped to help a stray, but I would not stop to help a pit, again, because I would have no way of knowing on sight, whether the dog was a lost and well raised dog or one that would hurt me.

It's definitely because of their potential to cause great harm, that I chose to avoid them.

[baldguy]

90. Do you do that upon seeing anyone with any large breed?

Just by looking at the dog - be it a Pit Bull, German Shepherd, Collie or what ever - you have no idea of how it was raised or what the owner is like.

What you're advocating is hypocrisy & racism.

[Nine]

95. This is what pit bull attacks look like.

Shaylee Crosson, age 3, before and after the attack. Eighty percent of her scalp was ripped off.




Natylee Murphy, age 3, before, one week after, and eight months (and ten surgeries) after the attack.




Amaya Hess was 2 when a pit bull attacked her in her stroller. This is what she looks like two years later.




Daniel Decembre was 8 years old and on a school playground when he was attacked.


Pitbull deniers sound like the NRA. Or like tobacco companies when they used to claim that cigarettes were good for you.

[PeaceNikki]

99. Can you find photos of the people injured/killed recently by

golden retrievers, German Shepherds, Labradors , or Rottweilers?

[Nine]

127. try again

1. The dog shown in your first link is not a golden retriever; it's a mix.



2. This dog in your third link is not shown but is described as "a 50-pound Labrador retriever mix with a black-and-white coat."

3. As for German Shepherds and Rottweilers, dog researcher Alexandra Semyonova addresses this here: http://www.nonlineardogs.com/100MostSillyPart3-2.html

There is now a second group of problematic dogs starting to arise: the breeds that are most commonly used as guard dogs and police dogs. These dogs are not only used and trained by police, but also by hobbyists who engage in competitions for points. In their anxiousness to gain points at contests, these hobbyists started to mess around with the breeds they work with. The German Shepherd and the rotweiler are the most common victims of this trend. In some countries, more local breeds have suffered the same fate. Some kennels breed these dogs to be both nervous (the hair trigger) and capable of real aggression.

When we breed dogs for these qualities, we are in fact breeding changes in their brains. Recent
research (Peremans 2002) has shown that this artificial selection results in abnormalities in the parts
of the brain that govern aggression and impulse control, and in the brain’s chemical housekeeping
(the neurotransmitters). The breeders make no secret of the fact that they do this. If you buy a dog
at a kennel that advertises its dogs for guard and police work, you know you will get a dog that bites
soon and doesn’t stop until a lot later. Unfortunately, we don’t live in a laboratory where our
experiments are securely contained. The German Shepherd and the rotweiler are also popular as
household pets. Owners don’t always know what kind of kennel they are visiting, and kennels don’t
always care who they sell to. The genetic selection for aggression has ended up leaking into the
general population of these breeds, and they are now becoming more generally problematic than
one would expect from pet breeds.

The fact that these police dog breeds are so strongly represented in the dog bite statistics is
sometimes used to prove that the truly aggressive breeds are no more dangerous than any normal
dog. After all, the German Shepherd and the rotweiler are old breeds with a long history as
household companions. Serious bite incidents with these dogs are cited in attempts to prove that the
all-out aggression of the triggered pit bull (or American Staffordshire terrier, or Presa Canaria, etc.)
is perfectly normal canine behaviour. People conveniently forget (or omit to mention) that for at least
several decades these breeds have been subject to the same slanted artificial selection that
produced the pit bull (etc) in the first place. The increasingly aggressive behaviour of these police
dog breeds constitutes, in fact, proof that breeding for aggression most certainly does get you a
genetically aggressive, abnormally dangerous dog. These breeds account, together, for almost one
hundred percent of serious to fatal dog bite incidents. Eighty percent of serious to fatal attacks (on
humans or other dogs) are committed by pit bulls/American Staffordshire terriers and other fighting
breeds. The remaining twenty percent is claimed mostly by the breeds that are used for police work.

[FarCenter]

110. An elderly neighbor always carried a golf club while walking his elderly Lab

How effective is a 9 iron in correcting aggressive dog behavior?

[randome]

114. I would think it depends on how hard they hit.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[snagglepuss]

126. English sheep dogs may die as a breed because they are no longer popular.

Where's they concern about sheep dogs? Breed are man made - worrying about extinction of a breed is utterly ludicrious. Worry about animal species which face extinction.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

132. i think that there should be some screening before inexperienced dog owners

or unethical ones are given large dogs that they are unlikely to be able to manage

i think pitbulls & other 'bully breeds' are a victim of their popularity with every idiot with little time and no training thinking that they can own a powerful dog with a strong prey drive.

[Rex]

137. It is real simple. Take away the pit bull and it is replaced

with the bull mastiff or Rotwiller or Doberman or a German Shepard or or or...the list in endless folks. Will you ban ALL big dog breeds because of your ignorance?

I think some here would.

Get over it folks, a pit bull is just another large breed dog. You need to stop anthropomorphizing dogs into criminals.

It is downright sad to watch.

And if ANY dog is breed to fight or protect or anything aggressive and it kills someone, how can you be surprised or shocked? And YES the dog needs to be put down...that is not up for argument at all. Maybe in a home invasion case, but none other I can think of.

Stop making certain dog breeds out to be 'criminals', it makes you look foolish.

[kwassa]

141. What I can't stand are the pit bulls breastfeeding at Olive Garden.

It just ruins my lunch.

[cynatnite]

143. You pit bull breastfeeding Olive Garden hater!

[kwassa]

147. Yeah, yeah, I know ...

such a stereotype to live in to.

[gejohnston]

145. I knew a dog trainer

that explained all dog's behavior is learned either by training or imprinting. Every expert on the breed claims that pits are not aggressive to humans, but can be to other animals and make poor guard dogs. That could explain why they are not used. My personal experience with the breed reflects just that.
That isn't to say that individual dogs don't have their own personalities and issues. They do. There is no "aggressiveness gene."

The breed of the decade hate is media hype and creation. One decade it was Dobermans, then Rotwielers, now Pits. Next decade or two it will be Dalmatians or St Bernards.

[MillennialDem]

148. Going to be hated for this but no pit bulls - and yes, it does seem to be a problem with the BREED,

not the owners!

My former landlords (and my SO's aunt and uncle) were the sweetest people and they had a pit bull from when she was a puppy. They were never mean to her and I was never mean to her - but she hated my guts. Thankfully she never bit me, but the snapping, the snarling, the charging up to me and barking.... she was *this close* to taking a finger off. I tried being nice to her and petting her (when she almost bit a finger off). I tried ignoring her. Nothing worked. She just hated me.

Is it possible she was the exception rather than the rule? Maybe. But sorry, I wouldn't risk my ass around another pit bull ever again - or unless I end up renting again and a LL or cotenant has one.

[flvegan]

149. Projected perception based on the experience with one.

Wow. Nice job there.

[MillennialDem]

150. Well, if you're worried about voting to ban your little snowflake, don't worry about it

because I won't.

But I'm not going to go over to a pit bull owner's house and risk a finger.

[flvegan]

151. Worried, me? Never.

Thankfully, the inept morons that believe in such stupidity that certain "breeds" are inherently "bad" and need to be banned are usually easily shouted down at most levels. That is, unless a contingency of additional morons line up behind them (like voters for republicans). Their Fox news induced paranoia (that many here rage against, until is suits them no less) being so laughably unfounded and dismissed makes it that much easier.

Psst...btw, you didn't get the meme. You don't risk a finger with a pitbull. No, no. You risk your very soul with these harbingers of evil, with their massive jaw muscles and inability to feel pain while mindlessly destroying lives. The great white sharks of the four legged world, be they.

[MillennialDem]

152. Don't put words in my mouth or mock me clown.

I know pit bulls aren't super human (or super dog) any crazier bite force or locking jaws or immunity to pain or any of that nonsense. I do think they are more aggressive though - and while the jury is still out (too much propaganda on both sides) on whether that's true or not I'm going to err on the side of caution.

Or go ahead and continue the mocking instead of having a real discussion.

[flvegan]

155. Clown? Interesting.

You should re-read my post. I simply explained why I wasn't worried (you suggested I shouldn't be), and then attempted to enlighten you to the current state of affairs here on this site.

You got all sorts of defensive and then aggressive. Is this normal for you?

[MillennialDem]

156. Nowhere does your post specify the forum as a whole rather than me. And aggressive? Project much?

All I said is that I would not spend time in the company of a pit bull. Is this a large problem for you?

[flvegan]

157. Thank you.

[Politicalboi]

153. I lived in a house with Rotties

Got them when they were puppies. Both 8 weeks old. We never abused them, and we let them get spoiled. We also had a Dalmatian who always got her way till the Rotties grew up. To make a long story short, they attacked her, and we had to put her down. Out of the 2 one seemed more aggressive than the other, even the day we got her, she hid in a bush, and growled. I am willing to bet, had the one Rottie not had her sister with her, she may never have attacked the Dalmatian.

So what I get out of this, each dog IS different. The one was influenced by the other to attack. Perhaps if she didn't, she would have felt threatened herself. I saw it one night. I was sitting in the living room with the Dalmatian on the couch, and the 2 Rotties came in and there was something in the air about it. I actually saw the dominate one look at the other one as to say, do it. We averted a disaster, but I could see it in the dogs eyes, her movements. She was aggressive from the start.

[KoKo]

158. Why are Pitt Bulls Blamed for EVERYTHING dogs do?