I never apologize for any dog, of any breed, "pit bull" or otherwise, that bites
and you are a damn fool for suggesting it.
And you're no gentleman for attacking the poster above for being an "apologist"
Present one fact that refutes the FACT that pit bulls are statistically the most dangerous dog in America
Here's a fact for you grasshopper, from the CDC study...
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 Assoc2000;217:836–840)
And if you care to put aside your preconceptions for a moment and look at Table 1 in the above link you'll find that in the later years of the study, 93-98, "pit bull" type dogs did not account for the greatest number of fatalities.
I take all bites seriously and fatal attacks with even greater concern.
Here's a few more facts for you...
All dogs are potentially dangerous.
Larger dogs are potentially more dangerous.
Large dogs in the hands of irresponsible owners are potentially the most dangerous of all.
Now you can jump on the 'ban' wagon and eliminate "pit bulls" and figure you have done your nanny duty,
But there will still be at least 24 other breeds out there that have been involved in fatal attacks.
Any fatal attack is unacceptable, right?, so we must destroy those breeds as well.
In fact to completely eliminate all disfiguring bites, which are tragic and unacceptable, we should ban all dogs because even small dogs are capable of causing great injury.
And when we're done with dogs we can focus on those pesky handguns 'cause let's face it no one really needs them and lots of children die through their use. < /lib >
I prefer a comprehensive approach that educates people of their responsibilities with regard to dog ownership
and targets irresponsible owners of any breed with severe consequences for their behavior.
My approach emphasizes personal responsibility, a conservative value.
You delusional types are actually more danger to society than runamok pit bulls, because of the way you manipulate information, for the purposes of disinforming people--all to feed your agenda, which is to convince us (and yourself, no doubt), that pits are just sweet little creatures.
You cite a study, BUT DON'T MENTION THE KEY FINDINGS! Let me quote the study that YOU dug up when I asked for FACTS:
"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 [dog bite-related fatalities] during the past 20 years. Pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers were involved in more than half of those deaths."
You say I am no gentleman for calling someone a member of the pit bull apologist brigade (of which, it's now clear, you are the commander). Sorry, when people knowingly tell outright lies in order to decieve people, I am unable to be a gentleman. You are an intellectually dishonest poltroon...uh, but just in my opinion, of course.
You didn't mention the ONE death in the study caused by a labrador retriever attacking a person. Isn't that the crux of your argument? That pit bulls don't cause ALL dog-related deaths?
My argument (and that of every other person on this and past pit bull threads here on FR in which we come up against liars) is: MOST deaths, and MOST serious maulings and maimings from dogs...come from pit bulls.
Time you admitted it. Just say, Hey, I own a pit bull and I don't care what the truth is about them.
That, we can respect.