Unless this is the "pit bull" in question...
Posted on 04/08/2006 4:37:43 PM PDT by Wristpin
Pit bulls on the loose went on a rampage Thursday and terrorized a southwest Philadelphia neighborhood. The dogs escaped from their backyard at 53rd Street and Cedar Avenue and ran several blocks through the neighborhood, attacking several people. Their rampage ended with a policeman shooting one of the dogs.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbc10.com ...
These are selected quotes from the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull
The article quotes several sources which are linked and can be confirmed. Pit bulls were historically bred to display dominance aggression toward other dogs—a relic of the breed's dog fighting past. Even today, pitbulls are known to be predisposed towards dog aggression. However, a pit bull displaying the correct breed temperament is friendly towards humans, and is generally a poor choice as a guard dog [2]. Unfortunately, many unethical breeders do not breed to the standard, producing so-called "pitbulls" that are both human and dog aggressive.
Specifically, these dogs accompanied farmers into the fields to assist with bringing bulls in for breeding, castration, or slaughter. The dogs, known generally as bulldogs, protected the farmer by subduing the bull if it attempted to gore him. Typically a dog would do this by biting the bull on the nose and holding on until the bull submitted. Because of the nature of their job, bulldogs were bred to have powerful jaws, muscular bodies, and the resolve to hold onto a violently-struggling bull, even when injured.
Because pit bull is an all-encompassing term used to describe several breeds of dogs, determining whether a dog is a pit bull is often particularly difficult. A study [3] for the United States Department of Health and Human Services discusses some reasons why fatalities might be overstated for pit bulls, in large part because most people (including experienced dog owners) often can't distinguish a pit bull from any other stocky, broad-faced, or muscular dog. For additional discussions on this and dog-human aggression in general, see dog attacks.
The American Temperament Test Society, Inc. (ATTS) breed statistics as of December 2004 show an 83.4% passing rate for the American Pit Bull Terrier and a 93.2% passing rate for the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, as compared to an 81% average pass rate for all dog breeds. These statistics must be accepted as somewhat biased, as irresponsible owners and owners of aggressive dogs are unlikely to submit their dogs for temperament testing. However, the dogs tested display pitbull temperament at its best - stable, confident and friendly towards humans.
Those aren't my sites...those are pro Pit Bull industry sites!
The breed leads in deaths and serious maulings. It's genetics plain and simple.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060206fa_fact
That is a lie.
Of the 199 dog-attack fatalities in the USA between 1979 and 1996, dogs identified as pit bulls were responsible for 60 attacks—just under a third. The next most-dangerous group was Rottweilers, responsible for 29 attacks (statistics from the CDC). These statistics may be tainted by the fact that the breed recorded as responsible is taken from the reports of witnesses and is rarely confirmed by dog experts or registration papers.
The CDC even recognizes this fact as it classifies this breed in quotation marks followed by the word "types". IOW, it's "pit bull type" dogs. This can include other bullbreeds and mixes.
Road apples. Sad to say, the pit bull just happens to be the breed du jour for the thug culture. A couple of decades back, you saw German Shepherds and Dobermans as the "bad boys" of the canine world.
There are people in this world, that do not look upon dogs as the majority of people do. They want to have a dog which can "beat up your dog", or worse yet, a dog that can take you down. At this point in time, they can most easily get hold of the pit bull.
But, if pit bulls are banned, you still have the underlying problem, which is the evil, brutal, irresponsible segment of humanity. If they can no longer get pit bulls, you better hope and pray they cannot get Fila Brasiliera, or Tosa Inus, or Cane Corsos. There are many others, that have the potential to kill an adult human, much less a child.
Ban the really bad dogs, and they won't really go away. They'll simply go underground.
And, if the thugs and barbarians cannot get the very very dangerous breeds, they'll go back to Dobes and Shepherds.
What are you going to do, ban any dog over 20 pounds?
http://www.animaladvocates.com/dangerous-dogs/Dog%20attack%20deaths%20and%20maiming82%20to%20feb%202005.pdf
Here's something a little more recent...It doesn't include the carnage from 2005..a very bad year for Piticide.
These "statistics" are laughable. Out of 891 attacks in 23 years, less than 10% of those attacks resulted in death. Also, keep in mind the ratio of pit bulls to german shepherds etc. They outnumber them so the statistics will be higher. Also, the table shows pits averaging about 39 attacks per year. Look at the notes friend. Under german shepherd mix, an elderly person was killed by an overly rowdy greeting in which the victim was knocked down and suffered broken bones but no bites. That was not an attack. The pointer mix joined two pit bulls in attacking someone but didn't bite the victim? The rottie crushing an infant in bed is an attack? This table is BS.
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/OtherBreedBites/AllDogsBite.htm
These are the eeeevil pit bulls you never hear about.
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/HeroicPitties/HeroicPitties.htm
Mistaken identity?
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/MistakenIdentity/WrongId.htm
"babysitter child death"....Results 1 - 10 of about 980,000
Ban all babysitters!!
"accidental gun death"....Results 1 - 10 of about 2,380,000
Ban all guns!!
These attacks have real world consequences. Attacks are increasing since activists such as yourself seem hellbent on pushing these fighting animals as pets.
http://heraldnet.com/stories/06/03/27/100loc_a1pitbull001.cfm
Pit bull attack upends life
The victim remains in a Seattle hospital as Mountlake Terrace police investigate the attack, which they say was unprovoked.
By Scott Pesznecker
Herald Writer
Ora Dean Gordly was watching the ground for signs of a dog as she walked through the Mountlake Terrace apartment complex.
She never saw the pit bull lunge from above until it was too late.
Gordly, 61, of Spanaway remains in stable condition at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle more than a week after she was mauled by a pit bull while conducting a survey in Mountlake Terrace.
As a field researcher, Gordly keeps an eye out for dogs, looking for such things as water bowls and squeaky toys.
Since the attack, her life has been turned upside down.
Gordly, who values her freedom and physical fitness, couldn't feed herself Friday night in the wake of her first reconstructive surgery. A longtime friend, Janice Young, had to feed her.
The 2-year-old pit bull tore at Gordly's scalp and ripped chunks of flesh from her arms and legs, Young said. She's on pain medication and must be given daily baths to keep the bites from becoming infected.
"People get older, and regardless of how good of health we're in, we don't mend like we did when we were 25," Young said.
"When you still have got the risk of infection, you don't know if you're going to lose limbs. You just don't know."
>Attacks are increasing since activists such as yourself seem hellbent on pushing these fighting animals as pets. <
No, attacks are increasing because there are more slimebags in our country who do NOT keep their dogs from running loose, who torment their dogs to make them mean, or simply who buy the dog, then have not the first clue how to raise and train it.
Not one person on this forum who is against breed specific legislation is suggesting the pit bull is the dog breed for everyone. They are active, strong, they must be kept from roaming loose, and they MUST be socialized and trained.
Of course, the same can be said for any large powerful breed.
Attacks by all dogs have real world consequences.
I assume you care about all dog attacks.
What do you propose that will deal with all dog attacks?
Re your tagline...Shouldn't it say my pit bull attacked my tagline? We all know they just sit around waiting to attack something or somebody. /sarc
I am not an "activist" but I will be an advocate for the breed as not every pit bull is inherantly evil and dangerous. Banning the breed will not stop dog attacks nor will it minimize dog attacks in general. Another breed will be selected to "perform" and the cycle will begin all over again. If you could ban sick twisted humans who promote illegal activity and stupid humans who refuse to educate themselves about specific dog breeds, then you would see a drastic reduction in dog attacks of all kinds.
Ironically, Pit Owners despise today's dog fighters, yet the celebrate the dogfighters of yesteryear who nobly developed and selected the breed. A fascinating mass denial.
Daily Pit Bull shooting from yesterday:
City pit bulls attack woman; one dog shot
By PHILIP A. HOLMES pholmes@sungazette.com
City police were forced to shoot one of two aggressive pit bull dogs that attacked a woman Tuesday afternoon as she was walking her dogs in the 1500 block of Memorial Avenue, Capt. Keith Bowers said.
“She went out to walk her dogs and encountered the pit bulls. After she turned back toward her door, she was bitten on her wrist by one of the dogs,” Bowers said of the victim, whose identity and age were not released.
The woman was treated at Williamsport Hospital following the 3:45 p.m. attack, Bowers said. She was “extremely shaken” by the ordeal, he added.
When officers arrived, “the pit bulls were attacking a third dog, which was tied in a yard in the 400 block of block of Stevens Street,” Bowers said.
http://www.sungazette.com/index.asp
It's hard to keep all these sweet PitBull stories straight!
http://www.sungazette.com/articles.asp?articleID=3660
A clear distinction needs to be made between canine homicides (i.e., incidents in which dogs kill people) and the dog bite epidemic. The attention given to the homicides has put the spotlight on pit bulls and Rottweilers. Without a doubt, these two dogs are usually the number one and number two canine killers of humans. (See below, The dogs most likely to kill.) It therefore is correct to single out those two breeds when talking about canine homicides, because those two breeds cause half or more of the deaths. <i>However, an incorrect impression is given when talk shifts casually from the canine homicide issue to the dog bite epidemic.</i> These are separate problems, not to be confused with each other. While killings definitely are news, and while pit bulls and Rottweilers are definitely over-represented when considering human deaths, there must be a line drawn between the homicides, for which two breeds are largely responsible, and the dog bite epidemic, which involves many different breeds. Canine inflicted homicides have remained at the same general level (15 to 20 annually), which cannot be said for the number of dog bites, which is too high (5 million annually) and appears to be growing higher (see statistics, above). Considering the fact that there are 65 million dogs in the United States (see above), the homicide problem is minuscule. This is not to denigrate it, but to point out that eliminating it entirely would save only 15 to 20 people, out of the 5 million who are bitten by dogs. The confusion caused by discussing the homicides and the dog bites in the same breath has its most important ramification in the area of prevention. Some are advocating the banning of pit bulls and possibly other breeds, for reasons that range from their alleged dangerousness to the fact that they are very often treated inhumanely. Those who hear about the homicides often support breed bans. (See Breed Specific Laws, Regulations and Bans.) However, while banning the pit bull might lower the number of human deaths, such a ban would probably not reduce dog bites in any significant manner. After the United Kingdom banned pit bulls in the 1990s, a study showed that the number of dog bites remained the same even though the number of pit bulls had steeply declined. (Study cited in B. Heady and P. Krause, "Health Benefits and Potential Public Savings Due to Pets: Australian and German Survey Results," Australian Social Monitor, Vol.2, No.2, May 1999.) As a practical matter, the current tide of public outrage should be focused on the enactment of measures that would deal effectively with the broader problem, not the more narrow one. It would be unwise to enact all kinds of controls on one breed alone, not necessarily because it would be unfair, but because it would be ineffective. The war against crime isn't a war against just the bank robbers, but against all criminals; the war against drugs isn't a war against just the Colombian drug lords, but all drug lords. For the same reason, the dog bite epidemic must not focus on just one breed and stop there. We should be careful to distinguish between these two problems, because it would be a pity to miss what might be an opportunity to take a real bite out of the dog bite epidemic.
Just wait until you become concerned about all dog attacks, it'll really make your head spin!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.