If you believe Pit Bulls are inherently dangerous animals, & you support BSL to ban them

[baldguy]

Then you don't know anything about Pit Bulls. Or dogs

(Yes, it's time for this again.)

Does Breed Specific Legislation reduce dog aggression on humans and other animals? A review paper

https://stopbsl.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/doesbslreducedogaggression.pdf

Key Points
• Breed specific legislation has not been shown to reduce the incidence of dog bites in any part of the world despite a twenty-year history. By its nature it is unjust.

• Breed specific legislation removes responsibility for dog biting incidents from dog owners and places the blame on dogs. This is a dangerously simplistic solution to a complex problem.

• Breed specific legislation engenders a false and dangerous perception that breeds not included will not show aggression.

• Enforcing and administering any law comes at some monetary cost. This would be better used implementing non-discriminatory laws which have an ability to enhance public safety.

• Aggression is a normal canine behaviour and can be shown by any dog of any breed or type.

• To reduce the incidence of dog aggression, all dogs should be socialised, obedience trained, understood and managed competently by their owners.

• People determine whether dogs will be useful inhabitants of a community or nuisances. It is the people who either intentionally or unintentionally foster viciousness in dogs whom legislators must endeavour to control.

• As the dog bite statistics demonstrate, every breed of dog will bite. The likelihood of an unwarranted bite is determined by the circumstances and level of control/restraint. The dog’s breed is not relevant. It is more about owner competence than anything else.



Pit bulls myths: Fear vs. Fact

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiNusXt6MfPAhVJFT4KHaIBC_IQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dogwise.com%2Fdownloader.cfm%3Fitemid%3Dpitbullplacebo%26format%3Dpdf&usg=AFQjCNFGQOvU9agPuYtO8ruf9_A2AHWpIQ&sig2=nPPyrKJ-InkZb-gkGViX3A&bvm=bv.134495766,d.cWw

FEAR:
Pit Bulls have "locking jaws."

FACT:
"We found that the American Pit Bull Terriers did not have any unique mechanism that would allow these dogs to lock their jaws. There were no mechanical or morphological differences..." Dr. I. Lehr Brisbin, University of Georgia


FEAR:
Pit Bulls have massive biting power measuring in 1,000s of pounds of pressure per square inch. (PSI)

FACT:
On average, dogs bite with 320 lbs of pressure per square inch. The bite pressure of a German Shepherd, an American Pit Bull Terrier and a Rottweiler were tested. The American Pit Bull Terrier had the least amount of bite pressure of the three dogs tested. Dr. Brady Barr, National Geographic


FEAR:
Pit Bulls attack without warning.

FACT:
"Pit Bulls signal like other dogs." The Institute of Animal Welfare and Behavior of the University of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover, Germany temperament tested over 1,000 dogs.


FEAR:
Pit Bulls are "ticking time bombs" that turn on their owners.

FACT:
"Attacks by family dogs of any breed or type are extremely rare, and should not to be confused with incidents involving resident dogs. Resident dogs are maintained outside the home (on chains, in kennels, or in yards) and/or are obtained for negative functions (guarding, fighting, protection, indiscriminate/irresponsible breeding). Resident dogs cannot be expected to exhibit the same behaviors as family dogs which have been afforded the opportunity to interact with humans on a daily basis and in positive and humane ways."

"There is no documented case that a single, spayed/neutered American Pit Bull Terrier, maintained exclusively as a household pet, has been involved in a fatality in the United States." Karen Delise, NCRC Founder and Director of Research, Author.


FEAR:
While there are some pit bulls with good temperaments, they are the exception not the rule.

FACT:
The American Temperament Test shows pit bulls consistently score above the average for all breeds tested, year in and year out! The American Temperament Test Society, www.atts.org

[Major Nikon]

1. Obviously pomeranians are the real problem

Just in 2016...

http://www.wxii12.com/article/infant-dies-after-grayson-county-dog-attack-2-caretakers-arrested/2062072

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article53003700.html

http://wbtw.com/2016/01/24/7-year-old-child-attacked-and-killed-by-dogs-in-lumberton/

http://www.farrahgray.com/mother-two-mauled-death-pit-bull-adopted-week-ago-good-children/

http://raycomgroup.worldnow.com/story/31581065/911-call-in-deadly-dog-attack-my-dogs-attacked-and-really-hurt-her

http://www.dailycommercial.com/article/20160401/News/304019956

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/23/pit-bull-kills-newborn-baby-in-bed

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/news/2016/05/09/woman-mauled-by-pack-of-dogs-in-southern-dallas-has-died

http://www.riverfronttimes.com/stlouis/mauled-to-death-by-a-pit-bull-adonis-reddick-was-nobodys-victim/Content?oid=3081136

http://fox61.com/2016/06/22/new-haven-woman-loses-arm-leg-eyesight-after-2-pit-bulls-attack/

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article81923717.html

http://www.wmtw.com/article/sheriff-boy-7-attacked-killed-by-pit-bull/2013509

http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article86313057.html

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2016/07/16/pit-bull-attack-detroit/87204668/

http://khon2.com/2016/08/02/medical-examiner-says-dog-behind-kalihi-homeless-mans-death/

http://www.myajc.com/news/news/local/woman-killed-by-boyfriends-pit-bull/nr878/?icid=ajc_internallink_myajcinvitationbox_feb2014_viewoffers_post-purchase

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/aug/17/child-dies-after-pit-bull-attack-in-east-valley/

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/30/fatal-conifer-dog-attack-911-call/

http://ksnt.com/2016/09/26/family-reacts-to-daughter-being-killed-by-two-pit-bulls/

[standingtall]

70. Some of the dogs are not even Pit bulls

in the photos. Pit bulls don't have have basketball shaped heads and they don't get bigger than 60 or 70lbs tops. The dogs with basketball heads are most likely American bullies which is a fairly new breed. That's another problem with BSL. The possibility that people are likely to misidentify dog breeds.

[Major Nikon]

93. They are all pomeranians until proven otherwise

Meanwhile...

Founded in the United States between 1980 and 1990, the American Bully was produced using a foundation of American Staffordshire Terriers and American Pit Bull Terrier.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Bully

The American Staffordshire Terrier, also known as Amstaff (in the United States) or simply Stafford, is a medium-sized, short-coated American dog breed. It is one of several breeds commonly known as pit bulls

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Staffordshire_Terrier

[napi21]

2. NO DOG BREED that I know of is inherantly viscious. The tempermant depends

on how they are trained as puppies.

As an example, my son & DIL raised a Cane-Corso from age 8 weeks. Cane-Corso is the Italian breed that is similar to the American Bull Mastiff. They are very large dogs and have a reputation for being mean, mostly because they are usually raised to be guard dogs, much like the Pitt here in the US. My son's dog Ares was 36" tall at his shoulder and weighed around 160#. He was also the tamest, kindest, and friendliest dog I've ever met. They stayed with us for 6 weeks and Ares made friends with my Yellow Lab and my Bichon Frise He also made friends with the neighbors cat and all our neighbors.

Ive had friends & relatives who raised Pitts, Rotties, and an Akita. All have a bad rep, bit the ones I've personally met and played with were every bit as tame and friendly as my Bichon is, and he's just a little fluffy white circus clown.

I'm absolutely positive any dog's temperament is the result of their owner and how they were trained.

[baldguy]

3. People who understand dogs understand that.

People who don't or refuse to understand dogs are the ones who cause the problems - like instituting BSLs, blaming the dogs & absolving the humans.

[Drahthaardogs]

21. That is mostly bunk

I have been a pro trainer for years and I can assure you that genetics essentially lay the foundation of what a dog will or will not be. You can train around genetics to a point, but the whole "it is how you raise them" stuff is mostly bunk.

[Major Nikon]

104. Exactly. The ignorance contained in these threads is often overwhelming

I've owned several border collies throughout my life and more than half of them had an inherent herding tendency with no training whatsoever. I've seen retrievers point and fetch birds with no training whatsoever. I've seen hounds track prey with no training whatsoever. While it may be true that other breeds will also naturally do all of these things, they are far less likely to do so than the breeds which are specifically selected for those tasks.

You don't see labradors at the national sheep dog championships. You don't see bird hunters with collies. You don't see the Michael Vics of this world raising sheppards as killers. The idea that the breed doesn't matter is silly.

[Drahthaardogs]

106. Because most of the people here have a thimblefull

of dog knowledge but think they can train dogs. Put your hands on a couple hundred dogs, train a few schutzhund or french ring winners, maybe handle a retriever to a AF C or at least a few hunt tests above a started dog, then come and talk to me.

Therein lies the problem. Pitbulls, cane corsi, and other large protection breeds should be bred and handled by truly knowledgeable people only. They have the mental and physical characteristics to do real damage. Sadly, they are the dog of choice of so many who have no business owning a serious breed.

[standingtall]

113. Your attitude towards Pit Bulls

Leads me to believe you have not raised or breed Pit Bulls so I don't value your expertise as an authority on the subject of Pit Bulls. And even if you have breed or raised Pit Bulls. There are plenty professional trainers who have breed and raised Pit Bulls that will disagree with your assumptions. How you raise any dog does matter especially Pit Bulls. To train a dog properly you first must know what it is. A Pit Bull is not walk around in a circle show dog. It is a working breed. They tend to be dog and animal aggressive,but they are not generally people aggressive. Most of the time when people are bit by Pit Bulls it was,because they were breaking up a fight between a Pit Bull and another dog.

[Drahthaardogs]

114. A well bred pitbull, say as a catch dog for hogs

Has proper prey and fight drives. The problem with many of these backyard bred dogs are poor drives and the inability to contain them. They leak and then they are man aggressive but not in a territorial way. It's mostly genetic and a good trainer can get around that stuff but a dog like that is never really trustworthy.

[ronnie624]

4. If you don't "believe" some dogs are more likely to attack and kill than others

as a result of selective breeding that heightens characteristics like strength, tenacity and aggression, then you obviously have a strong emotional stake in the issue, and aren't really capable of discussing it rationally.

Either that or you don't have a firm understanding of biology.

[Major Nikon]

6. The statistics on Cocker Spaniels killing humans betray your notion

Oh wait, no it doesn't. My bad.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

13. .

[ronnie624]

15. lol

Hadn't seen that one.

[standingtall]

71. Yes there is

it's called the American Pit Bull Terrier and it's begin a recognized breed sense about the 70's or early 80's. The stock it comes from is the Old English bulldog and the Old English Terrier.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

72. I don't believe it until you provide me DNA samples

[standingtall]

75. Impossible to provide dna samples to prove any breed of dog exist period

what constitutes dog breeds is completely arbitrary because all domestic dogs have been cross breed and interbreed as far back as anyone can remember. There are a couple of organizations that are the authorities on recognizing dog breeds one is the United Kennel Club and the other is the American Dog Breeder's Association. Both recognize the American Pit Bull Terrier. If you want to say that dog breeds don't really exist at all. I will agree. They are completely an invention of man.

[kristopher]

78. Psssst.

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1706.full

[baldguy]

7. Dogs that are not properly trained & solcialized, or are subject to abuse & neglect can be dangerous

The breed doesn't matter. If it did, then there would be an issue with every breed involved in blood sports: retrievers, pointers, bully breeds, all kinds of terriers, etc etc. There isn't.

The real reason that Pit Bulls have a bad rap is because for ignorant journalists looking for headlines, any dog that bites is a "Pit Bull", no matter what it's actual parentage is. Then there's the less-than-honest pornographers who get off on seeing people & dogs hurt & bloody, who disseminate those inaccurate stories.

[Major Nikon]

14. Excellent point, these killer dogs are obviously NOT pit bulls, but have been maligned by the media

[kristopher]

73. I think you're on your way to setting a record...

I mean, I don't think I've ever seen anyone rack up so many blatantly obvious logical reasoning errors in one thread before.

Do you select these gems just to make people laugh at you?

[Major Nikon]

94. Your powers of reasoning are definitely overwhelming and you make an excellent argument here

Oh wait, you didn't actually make an argument at all, but instead just asserted I'm wrong with exactly zero proof other than your utterly unsupported opinion without anything remotely approaching a fact.

So thanks for offering your own little gem. I got a good belly laugh out of it.

[Drahthaardogs]

92. Wrong.wrong and more wrong

Most hunting dogs are using food drives not fight drive. Prey drive vs fight drive is completely different. The blood sport comment is just uninformed

[baldguy]

116. You do realize that most dogs are not bred & trainded for hunting, right?

And that hunting, by it's very nature, is a blood sport?

[Drahthaardogs]

120. Comparing a pointer on point

To a pit bull kill shaking a grandma is ridiculous...

[baldguy]

124. Not acknowledging that hunting is a blood sport is dangerous & naive.

As is believing that "shaking grandma" is the only thing Pit Bulls are capable of doing. Such ignorance leads directly to having too many dog bites, too much dog aggression, and too many (millions) of dogs killed with BSLs.

[Drahthaardogs]

125. I have already said prey drive vs fight drive

The pits drives are screwed up and this is genetic and cannot be removed but can be trained around.

How many dogs have you titled and in what venue? Show dogs don't count. I mean real working dogs. What qualifies you to speak to genetics?

[baldguy]

127. God help the people you train companion dogs for.

[Drahthaardogs]

130. In other words..zero

about what I figured.

[baldguy]

131. BSL restrictions aren't based on genetics.

As a "professional" involved in dog training & trying to pass as an expert, that's something you should know.

[Kathy M]

19. ^ This

[milestogo]

45. + a brazillion

[JonathanRackham]

5. The issue is not the dog, it's more a problem of a bad owner.

Sometimes owners are poorly trained and bite off more than they can chew if you'll pardon the pun.

[Midnight Writer]

17. Exactly. Bad owners and bad breeders.

I was a mailman in a rural area and kept a close eyes on dogs on my route. There were a lot of good old boys who bought pit bulls because they thought they were bad ass, and they trained these dogs to attack.

At one home, they kept six chained up in the yard. These yahoos strung dummies up from a tree in the yard and taught the dogs to attack. The dogs would bite into the dummies, and the idiots would grab the rope and hoist the dogs into the air. I saw these fools (there were often a couple of dozen or so, including women and little kids) teasing these dogs, whipping them with sticks, hooting and hollering and kicking at them, throwing meat just out of reach of their chains, shit, just about any stupid ass crap you can think up.

I dreaded walking up to that house everyday. Those dogs would go crazy, lunging on their chains, barking, just going nuts trying to get at me. I had a dozen imaginary escape routes in my head at all times, just in case one of those suckers got lose.

And yes, today as a senior citizen who walks several miles a day for exercise, I am afraid of pit bulls, bull terriers, whatever you call them. I don't believe the breed is bad, but there are so many folks who keep them precisely because they want a bad ass intimidating dog. And there are unscrupulous breeders who mate close relatives and do not socialize the puppies.

[Drahthaardogs]

23. The breed is a genetic mess

brought about by poor breeding practices by stupid people. Every time these threads come up I pop i and say as a pro trainer anyone who discounts breeding and genes has no fucking idea what they are talking about. i have played all the doggie games since I was a boy and I have won several breeders awards for some really nice litters that I thought out very well.

[kristopher]

77. Let me throw this out for review.

I have only skimmed it but did find this interesting bit that I think might be destined to rile the discussion even more:

The canine genome
Elaine A. Ostrander1,3 and Robert K. Wayne2
1 Cancer Genetics Branch, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA
2 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA

"Common to the origin and development of many breeds is a founder event involving only a few dogs and, thereafter, reproductive dominance by popular sires that conform most closely to the breed standard. These restrictive breeding practices reduce effective population size and increase genetic drift, resulting in the loss of genetic diversity within breeds and allele frequency divergence among them. For example, in a genetic study of 85 breeds, Parker et al. (2004) showed that humans and dogs have similar levels of overall nucleotide diversity, 8 × 10-4, which represent the overall number of nucleotide substitutions per base/pair. However, the variation between dog breeds is much greater than the variation between human populations (27.5% versus 5.4%). Conversely, the degree of genetic homogeneity is much greater within individual dog breeds than within distinct human populations (94.6% versus 72.5%). Furthermore, in some breeds, genetic variation has been additionally reduced by bottlenecks associated with catastrophic events such as war and economic depression, making them analogous to human populations of limited genetic variation used for disease-mapping studies such as the Finns, Icelanders, and Bedouins. As a result, the unique pattern of LD in dogs provides an exceptional opportunity to study complex traits that are relevant to human biology using robust approaches that would not be possible in human populations."

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1706.full

Seems relevant.

[standingtall]

101. Pit Bulls are not a genetic mess

They are a healthy breed when compared to other breeds. They live about 12 to 15 years which is pretty good. When I'm talking about Pit Bulls I'm specifically referring to the American Pit Bull Terrier.

The natural live span of Pit Bulls disproves your claim that they are a genetic mess. If Pit bulls are a genetic mess so is about every other breed of dog including the ones you breed. Mutts are healthier. Breeders have cross breed and interbreed dogs to death. Breed father to daughter,mother to son,brother to sister,and cousin to cousin,and breeds are a fake thing anyway made up for people to make money off of. There is no such thing as pure breed anything when it comes to dogs.

[Drahthaardogs]

103. There is a whole list of triats other than health one must consider

when breeding a littler. Your breed comment is nonsense. Most breeds were developed to do a specific job.

[standingtall]

109. My breed comment is not nonsense it's a matter of historical record

And many veterinarians agree that mutts are healthier than the dogs that are breed by breeders. Mutts are reproducing closer to their natural state than dogs that come out of breeding kennels. Health matters of above all as I'm concerned. Kind of cruel to breed a type of dog that's only going to live 5,6,or 7 years. Don't you think? Regardless of the purpose.

[Drahthaardogs]

112. Well then, by all means

one of my favorite breeds is the Deutsch Kurzhaar. The breed books go back to WWI. They are immaculate. Each puppy is tatooed and records kept. Please show me the poor breeding and incestious breeding that concerns you. The records are quite searchable so give me litter names and numbers please.

I have been doing this a long long time and I have forgotten more about dogs and breeding than most will ever know. I know what the hell I am talking about. Well bred dogs can be and are usually very healthy. My breed has an incident of hip dysplasia of .4%. Far better than most mutts. AKC dogs are a fucking mess, but AKC is a joke. FCI dogs do not have the same problem because the FCI demands responsible breeding.

[missingthebigdog]

8. I don't support a ban, but....

How do we address the problem of irresponsible owners who, either intentionally or through ignorance, laziness, or apathy, end up with a vicious dog? Or a pack of them, which really seems to be the thing that puts people most at risk?

A pack of pit bulls killed a man nearby recently. It was not their fault- they were doing what their owner intended, "guarding" his shop. They managed to get under the fence, and killed a man who was there to get his car fixed. The dogs were killed. Their owner has been charged.

Understand that I am not singling out pit bulls. I still grieve the loss of our sweet, beloved Biskit, a pit who shared her home and yard with our cats, goats, and chickens. But how do we keep people safe from animals capable of doing great harm? Taking the dogs away after they have hurt or killed someone isn't adequate, nor is prosecuting the owner once the damage has been done. Would requiring owner training help? Would the training be the same for all dog breeds?

[baldguy]

9. Just like any other rational response to an individual posing a threat to public safety.

We deal with them individually - human or dog.

What BSL does is mistakenly assign collective guilt for all of the canine world's supposed sins against humanity.

[missingthebigdog]

20. So, nothing we can do proactively?

We have to wait until a dog injures or kills someone before dealing "individually" with its owner? How does that help the person attacked? How does it help the dog?

[baldguy]

29. So, kill certain dogs based on what they *might* do, and ignore other dogs?

We know what causes canine aggression toward humans: lack of socialization, lack of or adverse training, abuse, not spaying or neutering, and other things that fall entirely under the responsibility & control of humans.

BREED HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT and never has.

BSLs ignore human responsibility and focuses on the breed entirely.

[missingthebigdog]

32. Where did I say kill dogs?

I thought I made it clear that I do not support breed-specific bans, and that I have no issue with pit bulls.

I do have an issue with irresponsible and/or ill intentioned people continuing to have the opportunity to obtain and mistreat dogs, and the resulting attacks on people.

If we don't come up with some approach to address the problem, communities will continue to do just the thing you are advocating against- banning specific breeds, and euthanizing dogs based upon how they look.

Society is not going to accept that death by dog attack is just one of those things that happens sometimes, and it's the trade off we have to make so that people can be free to have whatever kind of dog they want.

[get the red out]

79. I agree!

Humans have created this whole mess! A lot of bad people own Pit Bulls for reasons other than companionship, that's why so many are abused and abandoned in shelters. I also believe a lot of people breed them terribly to supply the worst dog owners with dogs.

There really needs to be more laws that address animal abuse, I believe it would save human lives by keeping at least some people from being able to keep obtaining and abusing dogs.

[Mariana]

64. People who own a dog that bites

should be severely punished the second time it happens. The first time they can reasonably claim they had no idea their dog was a biter, the second time they can't say that. They knew and didn't take adequate precautions.

Personally, if I had a dog that bit a human being without a very good reason, that dog would be PTS immediately.

[missingthebigdog]

67. I agree, but that doesn't address prevention.

How do we prevent aggressive dogs? How do we minimize the risk of first attacks? Often, it only takes one time. . . .

People can't always reasonably claim they had no idea the dog would bite; in the case I cited above, the dogs were there to protect his shop. The owner knew they would bite- that was their purpose. He just didn't know they would escape the premises and bite.

One problem is that people believe that it is appropriate to have dogs to protect property. Even if someone had broken into the auto repair shop in the midst of the night, are we really okay with thieves being ripped apart by dogs?

[Mariana]

80. It's hard to take steps against someone

until something bad has actually happened. I don't know how to prevent that.

[missingthebigdog]

81. Well, let's see. . . .

A vehicle is potentially dangerous, so we limit who can drive one to those who have proven that they understand the rules, have demonstrated their ability, and have taken financial responsibility via liability insurance.

We restrict and monitor the sale of cough medicine.

Most states require hunter education before they will issue hunting licenses.

Most of us are already required, by law, to immunize our pets against rabies, and to license them with the municipality in which we reside.

It seems like there is, maybe, something we could do.

I would like to see more strict sterilization programs, as a start. Not just for pit bulls. Some cities have facilitated this by charging only a nominal fee to license your dog if it is altered, and a significantly higher fee if it is not. Possession of an unaltered dog without a permit garners even higher fines.

People who really care about the welfare of these dogs need to step up and get serious about coming up with solutions. Every tragedy involving them pushes them closer to being exterminated.

[Mariana]

87. Comparing dog ownership to driving

isn't a good analogy, really. Serious and fatal car accidents are common, even with all the testing and licensing. Serious and fatal dog bites are extremely rare. Last year there were 34 deaths in the US from dog attacks. In contrast, there were 38,300 people killed on the roads, and 4.4 million injured.

[Drahthaardogs]

110. And therein lies the problem

When you own a protection or aggressive dog or breed, who you know has the propensity to bite, you have a whole new level of responsibility. I have had and do have dogs with aggression. They are working dogs but I know they will protect their territory. It is one of the reasons I live in the country. I also keep the dogs on concrete and preifert kennels when unattended. All are trained to extremely high performance levels.

Owning an aggressive breed means taking certain precautions. Pretending the dog does not have the streak does no one any favors. Admit what you have, embrace it, and take appropriate steps to keep the dog and other people safe.

[LongtimeAZDem]

10. Ever notice how some anti-gun people use similar arguments to defend pit bulls

to those that pro-gun people use to defend guns?

[baldguy]

11. Bullshit.

30,000 vs 20. Dogs can - AND SHOULD - be trained not to kill humans. A gun that's unable to kill humans has no reason to exist. There is no comparison.

Take your fucking evil RW NRA shit somewhere else.

[Hoyt]

22. +1.

[LongtimeAZDem]

24. Every time a pitbull kills a person, you guys say, "it's not the dog, it's the owner"

You're the same as the gun folks.

[baldguy]

25. The NRA and their allies advocate policies with exasperate the problem of gun violence.

Show me the national political organization with the multi-million dollar budget that supports torturing dogs to make them more aggressive & promotes amateurs training dogs to attack humans for "protection".

So, no. It's not the same at all, in any way.

Again, take your evil lying RW bullshit and GO AWAY!

[LongtimeAZDem]

30. Wow; talk about "temperament"

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the NRA; I am, however, a regular contributor to the Humane society, and my family fosters dogs.

The fact is that Pit Bull types commit the vast majority of lethal dog attacks. So, either Pit Bull types are the problem, or people who own Pit Bull types are the problem.

It's not lying to point out that you use the exact same argument as those that make you foam at the mouth.

[baldguy]

34. Pit Bulls do not commit the vast majority of lethal dog attacks. That is a lie.

You would massacre millions of animals & rip apart millions of families based on that lie.

And by trying to link dogs and guns you're carrying the NRAs water for them, trying to normalize gun violence.

And finally, the Humane Society of the United States adamantly opposes BSLs on all forms:

"Neither science nor statistics support policies that discriminate based on breed or physical appearance"

[LongtimeAZDem]

35. You will note that I said "pit bull types", not pit bulls

Your reading is apparently as selective as your reasoning.

And nowhere was I "trying to link dogs and guns"; I just pointed out that Pit Bull owners use the same arguments as gun owners. You're just upset that the hypocrisy is being pointed out.

[baldguy]

117. "Pit Bull types" = anything with 4 legs and a tail.

It's a cop-out to justify the wholesale slaughter of dogs for no reason.

What is it about you RW NRA types that makes you love bloodshed so much?

[LongtimeAZDem]

118. Again, I am neither right wing nor NRA; your accusation is a lie

I have not called for the "slaughter of dogs" anywhere, your comment is a lie

I abhor bloodshed, and nowhere did I state anything to the contrary; your assertion is a lie.

You have made numerous unsupported claims and hypocritical arguments, and when called on it, you respond with insults and profanity, because you clearly have nothing else.

[baldguy]

121. I'm just using the same standards the BSLs you support use.

If you use a RW NRA argument then you're a RW NRA apologist.

And I guess you've missed the many, many links I've provided to peer-reviewed studies, and the public policy positions to nationally and internationally recognized organizations that oppose BSLs.

Or, more likely, considering your RW position, you just ignored them.

[LongtimeAZDem]

123. Nowhere in my comments have I supported breed-specific legislation; you comment is another lie

My entire discussion has been about your tactics, since you are the one using "RW NRA" style arguments.

Since you cannot refute that, you resort to lying, insults, and unsupported accusation.

[baldguy]

126. You're the one who nonsensically brought guns into a conversation about dogs.

If that's not a RW tactic, I don't know what is. And I've more than proven that they have nothing even remotely to do with one another.

So, you can just drop the pretense with the phony protestations.

[LongtimeAZDem]

128. Nope; I merely pointed out that you use the same arguments as those you oppose

In response you have attacked using lies, insults, and profanity.

I understand why you like pit bulls.

[baldguy]

129. And now you're denying the thing that you did, that everyone can see that you did.

Taking debate pointers from Mike Pence, now?

[ileus]

31. except guns can't act on their own.

and dogs can...

our GSD is an active home defense animal that works when we're away, while our HD firearms can't do anything but be passive until we arrive.

[LongtimeAZDem]

42. Indeed; and as long as you take the appropriate care to ensure that neither

your dogs nor you guns can harm an innocent person, I personally have no issue with either.

[ileus]

49. well the dog is a little sketchy...

His only restraint is a wireless receiver around his neck that's proven not to be much of a deterrent if something should pique his interest beyond his boundary. (other dogs)

[Doremus]

91. What is "GSD"? And why is it "sketchy"? nt

[ileus]

122. German Shepherd Dog

[Bonx]

115. At least a gun requires a human to kill. A pit bull is a 'gun' with free will.

[nadine_mn]

12. I am so tired of this bullshit

I have a german shepherd and his bite force is stronger than a pit bull's. Rottweilers, Dobermans, shepherds ... All have been villainized because of bad human behavior.

Breed bans don't address the issue of shitty people...just punish dogs who did nothing wrong. And oooh if a breed is banned and deemed dangerous guess what...more assholes are going to want to own them, breed them and fight them.

And I don't believe that dogs just "snap".. this myth that they are ticking time bombs waiting to go off. There are in every breed a few bad apples (just like with any species) that no amount of training can help, but this is rare. When I was a kid we had a little ankle biter that was seriously unstable (turns out parents were brother and sister) but because she was so little, it was more annoying than harmful. If you had put just an ounce of her madness in a larger dog, it would have killed you.

I just really hate the anti-pit sentiment that gets rolled out here.

[Daemonaquila]

16. But... but... you're making sense!

How dare you! How dare you bring facts and reason into a perfectly good atmosphere of hysteria over vicious dogs that might lick and drool you to death?!?!

[Egnever]

57. Hysteria is pretending the bite of a yorki is equal to the bite of a pit

That yorki could gnaw on my leg for most of the day and I might end up with stitches a pit bull does it I will need prosthetics(if I live through it).

It is all about the level of destruction when things go wrong.

He never showed any aggression is something you hear over and over when any dog bites. My dog can go completely psycho and it would at best break my skin my friends american bulldog went after someone who came in his house drunk late at night and left him with a deformed arm and massive muscular damage. The dog was protecting his home and I don't blame the dog at all. That wont make a bit off difference in the guy's life who was mauled and will live forever with the damage that was caused,

All dogs bite. Some do serious damage when they do so, others you laugh at and punt like a football.

[baldguy]

134. Hysteria is pretending one type of dog is responsable for the actions of humans who mistreat dogs.

[Egnever]

137. Nah hysteria is pretending a firecracker and a pipe bomb are the same thing.

no matter how they are treated.

[baldguy]

138. Right. You're thinking any kind of pipe should be treated like a pipe bomb.

And forget about the sick humans who build them. THAT'S hysteria. The kind that gets people hurt.

Are happy seeing people get hurt?

[Egnever]

139. No I am thinking pipe bombs are not something you take the risk with for a reason

Sure if you know what you are doing nothing wrong with a pipe bomb. If you don't they are deadly. We don't let people fuck around with pipe bombs because mistakes are deadly some places won't even let you screw around with firecrackers.

It is entirely possible pit's are no more aggressive than any other dog. The difference is most other dogs aren't capable of the same damage when they are aggressive.

You know this to be true you just refuse to admit it.

All dogs can be aggressive, some can give you light puncture marks when they become so and some can fuck you up for life.

I used to own an american bull dog given to me as a puppy by my neighbor. She was an incredible dog I loved her dearly and she loved us. She was a beast. One time I called her from where she was playing in a park and she ran right through a construction fence to get to me. Just blasted right through it. Another time she ran through my kid when she was chasing a ball my wife threw behind the kid just ran through him like he wasn't there flipped him in in the air as she went after the ball. She never showed any aggression ever to us.

One day a neighbors dog attacked her and she finished it. Took a chunk right out of the neighbors dogs chest. She didn't start it the other dog came after her but she sure as hell finished it. It wasn't her fault the other dog attacked her and she was just defending herself but her power was unreal.

When we had a baby on the way I had to rehome her I was not willing to take a chance with the baby. I wept that day but she has a good home on a ranch with a lot of land and is happy. Chances are she would never have hurt our kids she never showed aggression to any human ever but dogs get sick or have sore teeth or any number of things can go wrong with them that can change their tolerance level and something that was a fun play session the day before can become deadly the next day because the dog is in some sort of pain and you are unaware. Again not a chance I was willing to take even though that was probably one of the best dogs I ever owned.

When that dog attacked her I got a good look at how much damage she could actually do when threatened. No way I was going to take that chance with a baby no matter how small the risk.

[baldguy]

140. And still the people that create aggressive dogs have no responsibility in your eyes.

You believe the lie that dogs just snap for no reason & bite people.

Dogs don't just snap for no reason & bite people. Don't believe me? Believe the ASPCA.

[Egnever]

142. You keep hanging on to that

but it doesn't change a thing.

Of course people have an effect on a dogs temperament. I would laugh at anyone who thought otherwise. That doesn't change a thing.

From your own link

Pain-Elicited Aggression

An otherwise gentle, friendly dog can behave aggressively when in pain.

And that right there is when the otherwise friendly dog that can do real damage becomes a problem despite anything you have done right or wrong. Again the little mutt I have now has an issue and attacks me or my kids worse case scenario it is a couple of stitches with my old bully it could have been life changing.

It has little or nothing to do with the temperament of the dogs it is simply a matter of the damage they are capable of when something goes wrong.

Same as guns same as fireworks same as every other thing on the planet that we regulate because of it's potential to cause damage.

I get it they can be great dogs. Here is my girl. She was an incredible dog. She still had the capability to do real damage and did so when attacked once.

[duncang]

18. Never had a pit bull

And kind of doubt if I will. Just because I have always liked great danes and dobermans.

Dobermans also have a bad rap. Not as bad as a pit bull. But in the end it all depends on the owner. It is all in how they are trained and socialized. The great danes and dobermans we had have been great with anybody. The only problem with any of our dogs has been the great danes spinning around in circles wanting someone to throw the ball and whipping anybody close by with their tails. When the kids were young they could crawl all over them, pull their ears, etc. Never a bite from any of them.

[Nye Bevan]

26. Damn those golden retrievers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States#Fatalities_reported_in_2016

Oh, did I say "golden retrievers"? I meant "pit bulls", of course.

[baldguy]

27. "Pit Bull" indentified visually - when identifying a breed visually is no better than random chance.

https://stopbsl.org/bsloverview/impossibleid/

"The primary means of breed identification for non-pedigreed dogs and mixed-breed dogs is a visual glance and a guess. The dog may be compared with the breed standard for a breed; again, this is based on visual assessment. It is entirely subjective."

http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/ineffective-policies/visual-breed-identification

"Research has consistently shown that visual breed identification is very often inaccurate and scientists have known for decades that even first generation crossbreeds usually look dramatically different than either parent5. Moreover, recent research also indicates that even experts have very little agreement when visually determining breed."

http://www.maddiesfund.org/incorrect-breed-identification.htm

"Because the observers' identifications were so inconsistent, visual identification of breed is unreliable."

You keep repeating the lie; it doesn't make it any less untrue.

[Nye Bevan]

37. Anyone can edit Wikipedia.... maybe you should go fix those "mistakes"? (nt)

[baldguy]

39. Says someone who has no clue about how Wikipedia works.

[Major Nikon]

95. Excellent point, they were obviously pomeranians

[SouthernLiberal]

106. Actually, the most vicious dog I ever knew....

Yes! It was a Golden Retriever! Perfectly fine with his owner, but had to have his own room, with locking door, because he had attacked the owners teenage son and husband. On the other hand, the only dog that ever hurt me was (at least according to his owner) a pit bull. Sweetest little puppy I've ever known. But he made several cuts on my arm, while trying to get up into my lap. The owner hadn't bothered to have his nails trimmed. Of course, even sharp puppy nails are not that dangerous. I did have a few cuts, but I don't blame the puppy at all.

[ileus]

28. Why one of those ugly things, when you can get a GSD.

[baldguy]

38. Because a dog's physical appearence is the least important part.

And I got my beautiful Orchid



After my equally beautiful Zelda died

[Mariana]

145. There are plenty of ugly GSD out there.

I've seen some absolutely hideous roach backed things. There are lots of beautiful ones, too.

[Coventina]

33. I appreciate your efforts.

I hope you can change at least one mind.

[Jim Beard]

36. I say bullshit to the love the these killers

I don't give a damn what you think, My 92 year old mother and I had returned from dining out a month ago and when we were leaving the car, we were approached by two dogs, on our property. They were pits and didn't just bark but were agressive. When I tried to scare and shout them away, they became more aggressive. I thought I was going to need to use my mothers cain to beat the bastards,

I have never been threatened by dogs where they were not defending their territory.

Post all the pictures you want. They don't change my mind, they are with their OWNERS.

[baldguy]

41. So, you want to kill MY dog b/c the owner of some random dog in your neighborhood is a callous jerk?

[Jim Beard]

59. If it solves the problem

Yes, you knew what the breed was like when you obtained it. Are you a breeder?

[MicaelS]

65. Only if your dog bites someone..

But you can bet I would throw your ass in jail for a very long time if your dog kills someone.

[Act_of_Reparation]

40. Wow.

Look, I like dogs. I don't support banning specific breeds, but Christ on a pogo stick, these are some godawful talking points.

Breed specific legislation has not been shown to reduce the incidence of dog bites in any part of the world despite a twenty-year history. By its nature it is unjust.

Straw man.

All dogs bite. Not all dogs bite with the same severity. If we want to compare breeds from a public health perspective, we would look at how many people people were killed or seriously injured by what breeds. Just looking at bites is fucking pointless.

Breed specific legislation removes responsibility for dog biting incidents from dog owners and places the blame on dogs. This is a dangerously simplistic solution to a complex problem.

To illustrate fully how incredibly stupid that point is, let's substitute the word "dog" with "gun".

"Gun-specific legislation removes the responsibility for gun-related incidents from gun-owners and places the blame on guns."

Hm. Now, that's not very compelling at all, is it?

Breed specific legislation engenders a false and dangerous perception that breeds not included will not show aggression.

Says who?

Enforcing and administering any law comes at some monetary cost. This would be better used implementing non-discriminatory laws which have an ability to enhance public safety.

So what? Enforcing emissions standards costs money. Should we stop doing that?

Aggression is a normal canine behaviour and can be shown by any dog of any breed or type.

The same straw man presented again.

A Rottweiler can be aggressive. A Papillon can be aggressive. If a Papillon gets aggressive with me, I'm not overly concerned. If a Rottweiler gets aggressive with me, I'm probably going to the fucking ER.

To reduce the incidence of dog aggression, all dogs should be socialised, obedience trained, understood and managed competently by their owners.

No shit.

This should be the thrust of her argument, but for some reason it's tucked beneath a mountain of bullshit. Dogs should be socialized. They should be trained. They should be understood by their owners.

In other words, people should be licensed to own dogs like they are licensed to drive cars or own guns. If you can't competently handle your animal, then you shouldn't own one.

The trouble is, people tend to be stubborn and stupid in equal measure, and we just can't fucking rely on them to understand the limitations of their abilities. Shitty dog owners think they're fucking fantastic dog owners, and no one in the world could convince them otherwise. So, there's no way to gently suggest people train and/or socialize their dogs. It has to be enforced to be effective, which means legislating restrictions on ownership.

People determine whether dogs will be useful inhabitants of a community or nuisances. It is the people who either intentionally or unintentionally foster viciousness in dogs whom legislators must endeavour to control.

Let's play the substitution game again: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

As the dog bite statistics demonstrate, every breed of dog will bite. The likelihood of an unwarranted bite is determined by the circumstances and level of control/restraint. The dog’s breed is not relevant. It is more about owner competence than anything else.

Again, bites aren't the problem.

This cat bites:



This cat bites:



Their bites aren't the same.

Which is why you may own as many tabbies as your heart desires, but if you want a tiger, you're gonna need a fucking license.

[baldguy]

44. The entire intent & rationale for BSLs is to reduce dog bites. They don't do that.

Because they focus of the breed of the dog - which is the least important factor in dog aggression.

And you feed into the BSL hysteria by saying Pit Bulls::dogs = tigers::house cats. Pit Bulls aren't any more aggressive or any more powerful than any other large dog. Putting them in a special, separate category - which BSLs do - fosters the lie & can only result more dog bites a less public safety.

[Act_of_Reparation]

54. No.

The entire intent & rationale for BSLs is to reduce dog bites.

No. The entire intent & rationale for BSLs is to reduce attacks, not bites.

People haven't gone completely crazy-go-nuts because they're afraid of being bitten. They're scared of being fucking mauled by a dog they have no chance of fending off. That is the driving mentality behind BSL's.

If you're going to make an argument against BSL, then you actually have to address what people are afraid of.

And you feed into the BSL hysteria by saying Pit Bulls::dogs = tigers::house cats.

Except I didn't do that all. The point is not all animal bites are equally damaging, and I made this point with a hyperbolic semi-humorous comparison between small cats and really big cats. I didn't say large dogs are to tigers as tigers are to house cats, and nowhere did I even mention pitbulls by name.

[Separation]

133. Careful now!

You might get labeled as a RWNJ spouting NRA talking points when changing the word "gun" for "dog".

However I totally agree with most if not all talking points you had.

[womanofthehills]

43. Some towns in USA ban pit bulls

Here in NM, the village of Tijeras bans pit bulls, and in Elephant Butte, NM you to have $100,000 insurance policy if you have a pit bull, German shepherd or Rottweiler.

http://www.dogsbite.org/legislating-dangerous-dogs-state-by-state.php

http://www.kvia.com/news/elephant-butte-requires-residents-to-insure-aggressive-dogs/53222525

[baldguy]

46. Dogsbite.org is a hate site full of false anti-Pit Bull propaganda.

And a lot of places have banned Pit Bulls - ostensibly as a "public safety" measure to reduce dog bites. The fact that BSLs tend to fail to reduce dog bites seems to be lost on BSL advocates.

[womanofthehills]

53. I guess I have little sympathy because I was recently almost attacked by two neighborhood pits

who were biting my dog on my porch on my fenced in property.

I know my dog would never go over to their property and do this.

[TexasBushwhacker]

47. They may repeal the 1989 pit bull ban in Miami

https://shelterme.tv/news/miami-may-be-getting-rid-of-its-three-decades-old-pit-bull-ban/

Why? Because it didn't reduce the incidence of dog bites.

Personally, the only dog that ever bit me was not a pit bull. The only pit bull I ever got to know was a roommate's dog and he was a sweetheart. He used to climb up into my lap and put his arms around my neck.

The thing is, BSL always targets pit bulls. They never include other aggressive breeds. Right now, pit bull type dogs are popular, therefore there are lots of them. If you have lots of one type of dog, there will be more records of bites by them. Back when Dobermans were more popular, SURPRISE, there were more bites were by Dobermans.

[Jim Beard]

61. If you had been bitten by one of these man killers instead, you would not be posting today

[LanternWaste]

48. The important thing is that...

The important thing is that everyone believe themselves to be absolutely accurate and right, brook no possibility of nuance, and imply anyone who believes differently is an idiot to better validate our own biases.

Nice work.

[baldguy]

50. The difference is that the anti-BSL side has actual science on their side.

Not to mention that there are no dog experts or veterinary professionals anywhere that support it. It is opposed by the very people that know the relevant law, medicine & canine behavior - the Humane Society of the United States, the American Veterinary Association, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Kennel Club, the American Bar Association, and the National Canine Research Council. None of them support BSLs.

[Major Nikon]

97. The "actual science" says certain breeds are more likely to kill, contrary to your propaganda

The AVMA is against BSL, but acknowledge that fatal dog attacks are a "breed-specific problem".

Abstract
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
September 15, 2000, Vol. 217, No. 6, Pages 836-840
doi: 10.2460/javma.2000.217.836

Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998
Jeffrey J. Sacks, MD, MPH Leslie Sinclair, DVM Julie Gilchrist, MD Gail C. Golab, PhD, DVM Randall Lockwood, PhD
Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, US Department of Health and Human Services, US Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE (MS K-63), Atlanta, GA 30341. (Sacks, Gilchrist); Present address is National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE (MS K-45), Atlanta, GA 30341. (Sacks); The Humane Society of the United States, 2100 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037. (Sinclair, Lockwood); Present address is Shelter Veterinary Services, 9320 Jarrett Ct, Montgomery Village, MD 20886. (Sinclair); Division of Education and Research, American Veterinary Medical Association, 931 N Meacham Rd, Ste 100, Schaumburg, IL 60173. (Golab)

Objective—To summarize breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks during a 20-year period and to assess policy implications.

Animals—Dogs for which breed was reported involved in attacks on humans between 1979 and 1998 that resulted in human dog bite-related fatalities (DBRF).

Procedure—Data for human DBRF identified previously for the period of 1979 through 1996 were combined with human DBRF newly identified for 1997 and 1998. Human DBRF were identified by searching news accounts and by use of The Humane Society of the United States' registry databank.

Results—During 1997 and 1998, at least 27 people died of dog bite attacks (18 in 1997 and 9 in 1998). At least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in 238 human DBRF during the past 20 years. Pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers were involved in more than half of these deaths. Of 227 reports with relevant data, 55 (24%) human deaths involved unrestrained dogs off their owners' property, 133 (58%) involved unrestrained dogs on their owners' property, 38 (17%) involved restrained dogs on their owners' property, and 1 (< 1%) involved a restrained dog off its owner's property.

Conclusions—Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates. Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog's breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:836–840)

http://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs/10.2460/javma.2000.217.836?journalCode=javma

[Cakes488]

51. Banning dogs by breed or size is BULLSHIT...

[meadowlark5]

52. I always find this debate interesting

But what is the solution?

If it's owner failure to properly train the dogs, how do you control that? Like guns, many that own them are unfit to own them, either have some mental disability or untrained and ignorant. The solution for many gun control legislation advocates is to make it harder to get guns, by background checks, waiting periods, maybe even mandating licensing by proof of a marksmanship class, carrying insurance on the gun in the event of death/injury. None of which has been done but could be done.

I'm not being snarky here, what is the solution to allow people to have these dogs without bans but do so in a responsible manner? How can that be controlled?

Too bad guns can't get as much scrutiny as biting pit bulls

[Daemonaquila]

58. There is an easy legislative solution.

Too bad attention-whores like PETA can't be bothered to push for these measures.

Existing legislation provides a framework for new laws banning dog owners who have a history of negligence from owning dogs. There are several existing precursor components to this.

(1) People who have been convicted of animal abuse or neglect (which is often the case where an owner has had one or more dogs biting people; also in about 25% of fatal dog bite cases, the owner has been involved in some form of dog fighting) can be barred from owning another animal as part of their sentences (usually these are misdemeanors). (2) Already in about half the states, domestic abuse laws (restraining orders) extend to barring an abuser from having contact with ANIMALS as well as people. The "it's an animal, not a person" barrier to having a right to protection has already been broken in those jurisdictions. (3) Most states have strict liability laws for dog bites, making it the owner's responsibility no matter what, and the CIVIL process of impoundment of dogs under those circumstances.

So, you combine these concepts to deal with the problem both through the criminal justice system (already available in cases of neglect or abuse discovered when a dog bites a person) and in new civil case legislation that is based on both the existing strict liability or preferably a negligence standard, and the concept of animal right to protection from abusive humans. Such as statute might best be extended from impoundment statutes that additionally allow for a restraining-order type prohibition against animal ownership after a certain severity of incident (i.e. criminal conviction resulting from the incident whether it's an assault, neglect/cruelty, etc., or a fatality) occurs, or after a certain number of incidents occur, or whether certain aggravating circumstances exist (multiple investigated complaints/citations for dogs being allowed to run free, etc.)

Not really that hard.

[meadowlark5]

66. I would assume that takes funding on a state or local level?

Some agency would need to police these people, maybe have staff, a data base, etc. And since the mindset in this country is to cut, cut, cut and do more with less, that's probably a stretch, especially if it's easier and more cost effective to just ban the breed.

I have dogs and always keep an eye on them when new people are around. Especially kids. I think I train them well, but I am trained well too. I keep a watch on them because I am responsible for those dogs and their behavior.

Thanks for the outline.

[haele]

55. My late Shari was a Aussie Cattle Dog/Aussie Shepherd/Yellow Lab mix

She was a short-coat medium sized dog, cream with a tan saddle/cap and some other spotting on her coat. She had the beefy looking cattle dog chest and head; the rest of her body was pretty close to the sleeker shepherd build. If you looked at her straight on, she'd look like a stereotypical pit bull mix - and was occasionally mistaken for one at the dog park. Over the 16 years she was alive, we had to present her vet file with the breed distinctly indicated when getting homeowner/renter's insurance or in two occasions, when signing a rental lease, so we wouldn't get the extra charge of having a "dangerous breed" dog.

Sweet, but really dumb; because she had a genetic issue with her hearing and the pupils of her eyes (they were both set in the inside corner of her eyes rather than centered), she had a bad habit of snapping when startled - never broke skin, but it could be scary if you weren't expecting that reaction from a 50 lb dog. We always had to watch her around strangers and children who might approach her without her realizing it. She was fine with other animals, it was just people, for some reason. And try as we did, we could never train "startled" out of her.

Haele

[hamsterjill]

56. Good grief! Some of these responses make this thread sound like Free Republic.

I do not understand the desire to kill someone's beloved pet that has not done anything other than be born a certain breed.

THAT is what BSL does when put into practice.

The behavior of the dog - ANY dog - is the responsibility of its owner. Hold more owners accountable for dog attacks, etc., and you will start seeing this problem resolve. If you own a dangerous dog, you don't keep it confined, it hurts someone, you are RESPONSIBLE.

Too many local animal control agencies consider a problem solved when the offending animal is euthanized. They don't follow up by filing charges against the owner. The owner then goes out, gets another dog, and the process starts all over again. The cycle repeats.

Human beings are the problem.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

60. Thanks for posting and keep it up

People need to hear it and learn!

[GOLGO 13]

62. Pit Bulls are the most dangerous & violent breeds on the planet.

Never, ever will trust the animal.

[DrDan]

99. I am with you 100% - and their apologists are doing a disservice to so many who pay the price

%

[Jim Beard]

63. I know of people who can and do train these best

these beast to be aggressive because it is easy. Because they are so easily trained because of their genetics by any fool can train them to be mean. They have the power to tear a persons leg off and drag it down the street. After my experience, I will get my shotgun and take care of any stupid owner of these deadly beast if I have problems again.

[Rex]

68. Large dog breeds are aggressive, to blame just one breed is stupid.

IMO. You take your chances, anyone that has ever owned a dog knows they are a reflection of the people that raise them.

[KG]

74. I lulz'd

[Oneironaut]

76. Pitbulls are not a good pet for children, and can be aggressive.

All other dogs can be aggressive too, but a chihuahua has less of a chance of overpowering someone and mailing them vs. a big, muscular dog. I don't believe in breed-specific legislation, but we do need to be honest. At the dog park, a pitbull is much more dangerous than a cocker spaniel or basset hound.

The problem of pitbulls is 99% owners' faults. They buy them for the wrong reasons and have no idea what they're doing. The same is true with German Shepards and Rottweilers.

[standingtall]

83. There is some truth to your post

but,not all of it is necessarily true. I will not say no Pit Bull has ever attacked a child,but Pit Bulls have the temperament to do very well around children and many Pit Bulls are great with children. Yes a Pit Bull can be more dangerous than many other breeds at a dog bark. That's because a Pit Bull is not a lap down or a show dog it's a working dog. Has a higher prey drive than most other breeds. So they are known to be dog aggressive and generally animal aggressive however they are not generally people aggressive. Most the time when someone is bit by a Pit Bull it's because they were breaking up a fight between a Pit Bull and another dog. So people need to be careful when socializing these animals.

[Jim Beard]

88. All owners say "He won't bite' (me), They forget to say me.

Of course they are good to their owner but away from them, they a damn agressive.

[standingtall]

96. Your generalization is not true

being one that has raised Pit Bulls I can affirm it's not true. I have never had any dog I've raised bite a person even when I'm not around. One of neighbors kept my dog for a couple of days when I was out of town and had no problem with him. Of course most people say their dogs will never bite anyone until they do regardless of breed. You might want to consider the circumstances of why people get bit by dogs. People who have the attitude that dogs are viscous is of fear and dogs can read fear. They can interpret your fear as threat to them. You are bigger than a dog so you shouldn't fear them.

[Major Nikon]

100. Your generalization is not true

Dogs do not differentiate between dogs and humans. If you have a pet dog, it thinks it's a member of your pack. That's why they socialize with humans to begin with and virtually all dog training uses this fact as a foundation and establishes the pet owner as the leader of the pack. Dog behavioral problems are generally an issue with the dog trying to establish dominance over the human because the dog thinks of the human as just another dog.

The idea that someone shouldn't fear a vicious dog that is smaller than them is utterly ridiculous. Dogs can and do cause death and great bodily harm without any provocation whatsoever and pound for pound they are many times stronger than a human and far more adept at using their jaws and teeth both defensively and offensively.

[standingtall]

105. A bite of an exaggeration on your part

No dog is equivalent to a lion or a tiger. I didn't say there were no cases of dogs attacking humans without any provocation,but that's usually not the case. No you shouldn't fear them,because that's your best defense. In a fight between a healthy human and a dog the human being is going to come out on top far more times than not.Even unarmed The dog has far more reason to be fearful of you than you do of it. Yes some dogs can rip limbs off,but that is not easy for them to do. They would have to spend a good bit of time gnawing first. Usually when grown people have their limbs ripped off it's by a pack of dogs and not an individual dog.

[Major Nikon]

108. Kinda funny how you use obvious strawman to claim exaggeration on my part

If you want to refute what I said, then I'll thank you to limit yourself to what I actually wrote and not what you imagined I wrote which contained nothing about comparing dogs to large cats and no mention of ripping off limbs. I'm not going to entertain such rhetoric other than calling it out as gibberish.

[standingtall]

111. My comment about the ripping off of

limbs was actually referring back to what someone else said on this thread said. Got the two of you confused. So I apologize for that.

[Doreen]

82. Before the bullshit

with people taking these dogs and using them in dog fighting rings they were originally considered "the nanny dog" trusted dogs to watch your children then bad violent drug people who saw they are strong and can bring down actual bulls to protect people working in the pits with them decided to badly breed them for fighting. People see these dogs attack and are unwilling to look at the living condition of the dog. It is an easy way out to blame the breed and not the deplorable people who abuse them causing them to attack. Blaming the breed is no different than Trump calling Mexicans rapists and murderers just because they are Mexican.

[Jim Beard]

89. How are they when someone else's child makes the other child cry.

Does the dog know the difference.

[DrDan]

98. that nanny-dog story has been debunked - it's a myth

[citood]

84. I used to volunteer at the dog shelter

Part of the shelter was 'doggie jail'...where dogs were held if they were accused of biting somebody, or killing another pet, while the court decided whether or not to destroy them.

It was 80 percent pit bulls

No, I didn't test their DNA to see if they were 2.3% Bulldog - but to my eye, week after week, it was mostly pit bulls.

Oh yeah...the latest local pit bull death (2 year old girl):

http://www.wibw.com/content/news/Piper-Dunbar-394759751.html

Oh, another local follow up story about how and why this happened:

http://www.animals24-7.org/2016/09/26/repeal-of-pit-bull-bylaw-contributes-to-death-of-two-year-old/

I can't quite put my finger on it...but I think there has to be some hidden reason that Vick chose Pit Bulls over Labs for dog fighting...

[Blue_Tires]

85. So if someone doesn't properly train their pit

or raises it to be a pure sport fighter and nothing else, and it "accidentally" mauls a kid to death, what should be the punishment for the owner?

I only ask because the current punishments don't seem enough of a deterrent...

[Separation]

86. I know it's not a pit bull attack

But has anyone seen the video of the cat rescuing the boy being attacked by the neighbors dog? I believe the neighbors dog was a Chow/Labrador mix. Anywho, here it is. Family cat saves boy from neighbors dog

[jack_krass]

136. Cool video. Good kitty!

[madinmaryland]

90. What about Weiner Dogs???

All I have seen from them is wanting to sit on my lap.

[TonyPDX]

102. Fatal dog bites, 2016

http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2016.php

[baldguy]

119. The Academic Impostor Behind the Pit Bull Hysteria

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/douglas-anthony-cooper/merritt-clifton-pit-bulls_b_5866176.html?utm_hp_ref=pit-bulls

[Rex]

143. LOL. She even has a link to dog bite attorneys.

Hate is a horrible drug.

[CRF450]

132. I was brutally attacked by one these dogs for no reason 15 years ago

Many lacerations on my arm and many surgeries had to be done to my wrist. The dog and its owner lived a good 300 feet away from my home, it managed to jump right over the 4 foot chain linked fence and took me down in my own yard. Dad came running out of the house with his gun, killing it. My traumatizing experience, many videos I've seen, and the consistent statistics, these are truly dangerous dogs.

I respect those who have managed to raise one or multiples of them as very well mannered and temperamental pet, but still, there's a reason why statistics say they are by far #1 with human fatalities, not even law enforcement or the military use them. It doesn't have to be bites, just about every breed are capable of aggressive tendencies. Pit Bulls are different. They're breed to be a 70lbs mass of muscle with jaws that clamp down and shake violently nonstop, and will not stop for anything when in attack mode! A labrador retriever couldn't to the damage that pits can do.

If you say your pit is a lovable dog that the most it will do is lick any anyone to death, good for you. I still don't want to be in the same space alone with one because of my experience and what I've seen over time.

[baldguy]

135. So, you put all the blame on the dog.

I'm sorry that you were harmed, but you should realize that the blame lays with the owner of the dog, not the dog itself. And certainly not some unrelated dog 1000 miles away that never came in contact with it or it's owner.

[CRF450]

141. Yes I'm blaming the breed, I make no bones about that

A large lab can't inflict the same kind damage. You're delusional if you think all dogs of the same weight range attack others the same way. It's not about the bite. When a pit clamps its jaws on someone or another animal to kill, they have the head and neck structure and strength to shake and thrash more violently than any other breed. And the vast majority of the time, they won't stop until its victim is dead.

[baldguy]

144. A large lab can't inflict the same kind damage? Tell that to Isabelle Dinoire.

[CRF450]

146. I laid out what these dogs can do and you just gloss right over it

A woman passed out in a suicide attempt with her lab mauling her face (frantically trying to wake her up? Who knows...) for God only knows how long that took place, vs an outright attack loaded with adrenaline and killing intent that goes on from seconds to many minutes. Apple to oranges comparison. In my case the attack on me was a 30 second ordeal, and the doctors had at one point considered amputating my hand.


Believe what you want, I'm done with this argument. I've experienced and seen things that has shaped my thoughts on this particular breed and many of its crap ass owners.

When the attitude of "it's just like any other dog" continues, those hight human death rates caused by pits will continue to be high. They will continue to be banned in certain neighborhoods and residential living spaces. I'm not advocating an outright ban on them. I want to see more responsible ownership and precautionary measures taken to protect others, and education on what makes these dogs different than others.

[baldguy]

147. You laid out what ***ANY*** dog can do, and does. You just deny the facts.

Blind fear and arrogant ignorance makes for bad decisions. In your case you would require that millions of people to come to harm from dog bites simply because the dogs may not be "Pit Bull" enough for you to kill, and you would kill millions of innocent "Pit Bull" dogs that never harmed anyone & never would.