Posted on 04/05/2010 8:33:22 PM PDT by Chet 99
Dog gone.
With all due respect, I have some doubts about this one. Pit bulls are tenacious (they’re terriers), and generally require the use of a breaking stick when they attack. Consequently, pit bull attacks, though nowhere near as frequent as other types of dog bites, are generally far more serious in nature. A parent “scaring off” a pit bull is highly unlikely, IMO, so I think it was more likely a cranky labrador or some other type of dog - as yourself, is a labrador attack news? I know a little about pitties, as I have had two of them for more than 15 years now, and have one sleeping with my kids in the next room.
Ahhhh..I thought you meant the dogs were on an Easter egg hunt.
Go to the news site and look at the movie, that doesn’t look a lot like a Labrador in the Spokanimal cage.
That noted, that bite looks like a mere nip, as dog assaults go. An obvious question is why didn’t the neighbor keep the dogs tied or fenced in?
I call bull (pitt?), can you provide me with any references that state that pitt bulls are NOT responsible for most dog bites, or provide me with a study that says which dogs you claim bite more often? Because according to EVERY source I’ve ever seen, pitt bulls are responsible for most dog bites in the U.S.
http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-statistics.htm
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html
http://www.dog-bite-law-center.com/pgs/stats.html
The situation is made more complex when it is noted that most people who WANT attack dogs will choose pits and then raise them likewise.
WHen I used to live in cities we would take walks regularly, and had to carry sticks and pockets of rocks because there were so many vicious dogs. Didn’t have concealed carry permits then. Now we do. Any problems will be solved quickly.
have had two of them for more than 15 years now, and have one sleeping with my kids in the next room
you must be out of your mind......I wouldn’t trust a pit bull with my pet Grizzly Bear......pit bulls eat kids....good luck with yours.....you can always whine and say “they were such gentle animals, how could I have known that they were vicious”....make sure to cry, the jury will be overwhelmed.
I got bit in the leg by a pit bull. Two were running loose when my pregnant wife and I were out for a stroll. They came over towards us wagging their tails then one decided to chomp me while the other snarled and started barking. I got one punch in and those dogs went running. I chased the pieces of crap for a block and a half hoping they would have turned to fight. I would have killed them with my bare hands.
Oh, I have every reason to believe that (I am from the inner city, of a large area —Vegas), and understand that pitt bulls are often trained as weapons when one cannot have a gun, besides their use in fighting.
I’m just tried of people making up “facts” because they don’t like real ones. I’ve owned two pitt bulls, and they were calm, and gentle, as they had been well socialized. Animals, like people, get their personality traits from socialization, as well as genetics.
It’s just ridiculous to make the statement that other dogs bite more, when EVERY source I have every read from EVERY credible institution (I only posted the reliable easy too find ones—I read some studies over the weekend because my roomate’s sister made the same outlandish claim), indicates otherwise.
I want people who make this (lie) alligation to show me the money, with fact. Not conjecture, or opinion as a anecdotal ovner of one, or even a set of dogs.
Exactly. “They were always so gentle.” But then, one day, they may not be. I was lucky with the two we had growing up (I had about 15-20 dogs, only pitts, one half, over my childhood). But I know of so many who were not, my brother being one.
Is this calculated per furry capita, or in the absolute, or what?
That last part was for nysuperdoodle, BTW
Good owner.
I assume you’re asking about the statistics? They take total number of incidents [If you read, most studies will break down by fatal, non fatal, severly injured (determined by study), requiring medical attention, whatnot] and then they take the numbers of injuries, and separate them by the breed of dog, and the number of injuries by breed.
The last (8 year I think) study I was reading only broke down the absolute number of sever attacks (those requiring medical attention), and it listed the breed, number of attacks sub categorized into fatal, or non fatal, and then by severity.
I don’t know all of the statistics, nor do I care to find all the data (simply because I’m not pushing for an outlaw of pitts—which, by the way, has not significantly reduced the number of bites in Britain, but who knows if there were many of them anyway). I do, however, have a problem when people appear to be (or actually are) just making things up, which is why I asked for references.
But in summary, from what I know, it’s in absolute terms, as pitts account for around 60%+ (59% of fatalities, I think is the one I see most cited) of all bites in the U.S., but I can pretty well surmise that is an overrepresentation (ie, there are not enough pitts to amount to 60% of the population.)
But, with all fairness, pitts, with rotwilers and wolf breeds, make up around 80%, so the other two highest biters do bite a lot, but less than 1/4 of what pitts do (each), combined—about 1/3 of the bites.
What??? Are you in denial, because you own two of these unpredictable devil monsters? These dogs ought to be allowed!!!
In Ill-noise, if you even get a red scratch from the nip of your own house cat, you’re supposed to tell the health department. This one is doubtlessly widely ignored.
I like pits and many of them are excellent dogs. However, there are many strains bred for fighting by creepy gangsta types, and they select out for vicious dogs.
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.