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 ...
Wristpin has "conveniently" left out a lot in his postings.
They were originally made for controlling bulls - that's why "bull" is in the name (and bulls are real !@#$$@$!@#$). Just like their bulldog ancestors. Apparently unscrupulous people took that to the extreme and turned them all into bull-fighters - not dogs, bulls (again, real #!$#$%@#$!$). Dog-on-dog came later.
Excuse me, Please No More...My post was to Kanawa about the claim the An American Staffordshire terrier is not a Pit Bull.
Now please if you are going to jump in, please lose the emotional myopia and the reflexive discounting of documented history.
There are excerpting rules on FR and you should only post a few paragraphs with a link. I selected the pertinent paragrahs concerning the registrations of ASTs and APBTs.
These dogs are being shot by police at a rate of two a day by during sustained attacks on multiple people and other dogs.
I strongly suggest you work towards a constructive solution instead of deny, deny, deny or you won't have a breed in the future.
Thank you for your factual answer. Regardless of where one stands on an issue such as this, he/she should never withhold ALL of the facts and only dish out those which bolsters their opinions.
Actually:
"The fact is it was reported to be an AmStaff.
Here's my AmStaff..."
How did you get that kanawa said an AmStaff is not a pit bull from that? I couldn't surmise this from any of that post; i.e., that he was denying an AmStaf is a pit bull.
Actually, it's very interesting, the history of a type such as this. It shows how genetics can adapt the same type of breed to different things. Made as a drovers dog for controlling nasty bulls, too many became bred for extreme aggression toward bulls in the "sporting" pit. Then they were adapted to gain more dog agression. Then many were mutated into a more general pet. And more recently, many have become more generally agressive - particularly with humans.
Shows how malleable the dog can be.
Rebel watch it...
You'll be flamed for suggesting breeding has anything to do with the Pit Bull problem. It's a media and perception problem only.
Correct
I was speaking to the identification of the dog as an Amstaff.
I get flamed by everyone on these threads, usually. Everyone thinks I'm their enemy in these dog discussions. I just like to see the whole picture, but I do choose a side. In this case, I don't like handing over breed ID to idiots who don't know a Yorkie from a Silky from a small terrier mutt. I refuse to surrender my love for German Shepherds, who will be next, so I will not go down the path of breed bans, no matter what I think of the breed - or type (and no, I'm not a big fan of pits, but have little personal experience to base it on).
I'm not afraid of dogs. I'm leery of pit bulls, which are to dogs what hyenas are to cats. And, generally, I don't carry my 1911 while out for a stroll in the neighborhood after dinner, and I don't think I should have to. Civilization has its perks.
And my point was about breed misidentification.
My involvement was directed to the claim that it was an AmStaff,
which is a purebred dog, not to which type of dog it was.
In this particular case the director of the Humane society who actually saw the dog and not just a picture came to a conclusion different than yours about the type.
It's true she could see better than any of us can with a picture, but I'm sure the Director of the Humane Society, when searching her vast dog knowledge and experience for signs of this dog's ancestry, is also more than just a ~little~ interested in the BSL issue that was at stake.
Bull any time a kid has his face torn off or worse we hear about it even if it is a Pekinese. But the vast majority of fatal attacks are from killer dogs. They are bred to be like that so who could be surprised?
I must have missed where you linked the source for that.
Do you have it handy?
Probably. I hope so.
I had my own theory, based only on conjecture, about the dog.
The woman who owned the dog said she bought it through an ad in the paper.
It was advertised as an Amstaff.
Coincidentally the time when she bought the dog was also the time when the neighboring city, where I live, came out with a by-law banning "pit bulls",
but with an exemption for those who could prove their dog was an AmStaff.
The person that sold her the dog lived in my city.
My thought was that he would have had to move, put the dog down or sell it outside the city.
Wanting to make a few bucks on his "beloved" pet he put an ad in the paper calling it an AmStaff, a breed, which at that time in the public perception, was not associated with the "evil" pit bulls.
"These dogs are being shot by police at a rate of two a day by during sustained attacks on multiple people and other dogs. "
I would love to see the proof on this one. The media loves their "pittbulls" too much not to report a shooting.
Also, I don't think anyone here is denying what this breed has done and is capable of doing. But there is a difference in saying, "yes, pit bull type dogs have killed more people in the last few years than other dog breeds" and "yes, pit bulls are indeed evil". The statistics on deaths by breed are a great way to show how wrong that statement is.
Even though I have said this over and over on these threads, I will say it again just so anyone who actually IS paying attention will see: Out of around 65 million dogs in America, the pit bull takes up 10% of the population of them. That means there's about 6 million of 'em, but let's just say there's only 5 million. The only reliable statistic I have found on deaths by breed comes from the CDC. From 1979 to 1996 there were 60 fatalities from pit bulls, which equates to an average of 3.5 deaths a year.
Obviously, some years were way higher, but this is an average, and you can bet that if any reputable source counts the next few years, the numbers will be higher, as the population of the pit bull is ever rising. Now, take these numbers, and with simple math, you can see the percentage of pit bulls that cause death compared to their population.
Let's use Wristpin's home made statistic for 2005, being 15 deaths by pit bulls. 15 deaths out of 5 million dogs equals 0.000003% of their population. That means that 99.999997% of them didn't kill anyone.
Now people, please take a moment to think about this. 99.999997% of them didn't kill anyone. 100% had a chance to do something, I am sure, within a year's time. Do you think it's because pit bull owners everywhere are keeping their dogs safely on their property? Do you think that 99.999997% of all pit bull owners didn't allow their dogs access to anyone all last year??
The High risk industry has lobbied to keep the Government for maintaining such stats. I got 15 from actually counting them up on google one day. Good Luck.
The 4.8 million is constantly bantied about by solosmoke and it's been published on a few pit activist sites. We both know no one has any idea of the population with the back yard breeders and the massive number of pits being euthanized in the shelters.
Los Angeles alone "processes" 800 pit bulls a week, yet the blood sucking breeders keep cranking them out.
http://www.muttshack.org/MuttShack_news-pitbull.htm
One more thing...The last US Piticide occurred on December 30th, 2005. Through the first quarter of 2006 there have been zero deaths, but lots of Pits intervened(shot) during sustained attacks. Good luck?...maybe...Increased awareness by neighbors/police ...I don't know.
A good example of an intervention:
http://cbs5.com/pets/local_story_096130148.html
Where are you getting that from?
As far as I can see responsible owners and breeders are at the forefront of efforts to produce valid records of dog attacks and the breeds responsible for them.
That leave irresponsible owners and breeders.
Do really expect me to believe that gang bangers and such are lobbying the government?
I got 15 from actually counting them up on google one day.
Without better sourcing of your claim than that, I can't take it seriously. Sorry.
Thanks for posting that link. I hope everyone takes a look at it.
There in bold lies 99.9% of the problem with this breed. Humans!
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.