We have an ingenious plan to hide Swiper if this malarky becomes official...
What pit bull? Nobody here but the baby and his blanky...
Posted on 11/14/2010 4:34:17 PM PST by george76
Well, but we have been told right here on this thread by an *expert* that we will know one when we see one! ;) It has come to my attention, from reading this thread, that one only need read some articles to become an expert on pit bulls, in order to make a fully formed decision that the breed should be banned and deleted from existence. Then, life will be good. This sounds vaguely familiar to me...
;)
BTW how are you?
There are new people and espeically young ones who are just learning the deeper thought and experience behind conservative values. Some never really learned about the original intent of the constitution and don’t understand why it is designed as it is.
And then there are absolute leftist trolls pretending to be “conservatives.” I had a globalist troll tell me he’s proudly an “elitist” the other day. LOL
I guess it’s the price we pay for free speech, but why does this battle have to be fought over and over. Of course, it’s most annoying to me because we keep losing to the animal right loonies all over the country. In Palm Beach County we now have a mandatory spay/neuter law now. Breed bans are all part and parcel of the animal rights anti pet push.
Different dogs have been bred over decades and more to serve specific purposes. My terrier goes nuts when there is a chipmunk in the garage for a reason. My friends' border collie herds his kids for a reason. When the spaniel I had as a kid combed fields and flushed pheasants it was not because I taught her to do it. Dogs tend to do what they were bred to do. What have pits been bred to do?
A lot of people out there do not know how to train dogs. I've seen it often; many people have. When an owner wants to treat a bichon frisee like a child, like a member of the family, chances are that no one will be seriously hurt. But there is still an inherent risk – it is a dog. When the dog is larger that risk grows; there will be more damage if that dog tries to assert its position in its “pack”. If that dog is more likely to attack based on its breed and/or temperament the risk is greater still. Only someone who is ignorant or self deluded would think otherwise.
From a statistical standpoint it is unlikely that someone will be attacked by a pit, or any other dog for that matter. I think it is also safe to say that the overwhelming majority of pits are wonderful dogs. That doesn’t change the statistics that show that pits are disproportionately involved in serious and deadly attacks. And, as mentioned in an earlier post, unlike other dogs, pits are a lot less likely to stop attacking once they initiate.
So you can tell us how nice your pit is. I’m glad for you. You can tell us you are a responsible owner and that you know a lot about dogs. How nice. So then, of the two categories cited, that may tend to eliminate “ignorant”.
What pit bull? Nobody here but the baby and his blanky...
The difficulty we are experiencing with this freedom, along with many others, is that we, as a society, are not responsible. Liberals use our irresponsibility to take away freedoms. Having any dog requires the owner to be responsible. Many owners do not even educate themselves regarding the basics.
The sad thing, I fear, is that many of the people with out of control dogs, out of control kids, and out of control lives are more often liberals. They project their own inadequacies onto society and vote accordingly - for the Obamassiahs that will deliver them from themselves.
I've done this many times. At least twenty, with nary a bite or a scratch. What do I win?
I've done this many times. At least twenty, with nary a bite or a scratch. What do I win?
Same here, but not as many - 10 or so pits. Lots of others of all breeds. Years ago I had a job that took me into many homes. Dogs would approach me and let me pet them. Cats too (Owners would sometimes comment that their pet never goes near strangers).
One needs to know how to read a dog. It is also a good idea to ask the owners permission.
Last week, when he was done working, the bomb sniffing dog at the train station got a good "thank you" scratch behind his ears from me. The cop who gave me permission seemed to appreciate the attention I gave his dog, too.
you and I know what you won...
Look it up, the top 4 biters by breed are German Shepherds, Rottweillers, Cocker Spaniels, and Golden Retrievers...
First, I don’t own a pit. Second, my experience with dogs is actually experience, not things I have read in books. None of the pits in any of my training classes ever acted like the dogs you describe. I’m no more willing to pass laws focused on one breed of dog than I am to pass laws banning guns. The vast majority of people touting these laws and crying about the menace posed by “pit bulls” are not dog experts.
LOL cute! I guess Chet had some protoges.
“Please don’t bother with the “sure they are fighters - with other dogs” argument unless you can adequately explain why my friends’ border collie herds his kids.”>>>>>>>>>>
Were border collies trained NOT to herd people while they were being trained to herd animals?
“For anyone thinks it is inappropriate to be swayed toward this law by a negative opinion of pits, I wonder why you may think it is acceptable to be against this law because you favor the breed.”>>>>>>>>>>>
There’s nothing wrong with being upset about the fact that people are being killed by dogs. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to do something about it. However, there is something wrong with trying to pass a law that has been proven ineffective in every place it has been used. I am all for public safety, but this kind of thing is going about it the wrong way.
How about laws requiring owners to be responsible and careful with their dogs, no matter the breed? After all, before pit bulls were even registering a single death on the list, other breeds killed people, leaving the average the same no matter what breed is at the top.
I think part of the problem is that the media chooses to use outdated, biased, or just plain wrong information in these stories. The Merritt Clifton study was used in this story, even though it is well-known that the study is biased and false in many ways. The author of the study refused additional information that would make his numbers a more likely representation of reality, and when asked for the stories he has used to compile his numbers, he has been unwilling to give them up. He also used the wrong information for many of the breeds he described, making some of us wonder what expertise other than editing he has to even make claims such as these. One of the worst issues with his study is that there are 2 thousand attacks requiring hospitalization every DAY in this country (this is according to public health records, not media reports), yet his numbers say something way different (from 1982 to 2006, there were only 2,209 dog attack victims requiring hospitalization, according to him). It seems he was only counting certain stories for his study and ignoring the rest.
I really hope that we can figure out a way to make things safer without taking people’s rights away. Calgary did something like this, and their attack numbers have declined by quite a bit. They didn’t have to ban any breeds, yet they are seeing better results than the places with strict bans. The places that have banned pit bulls and other “bad” breeds have only bragged about a reduction in bites from those dogs, due to the fact that the overall number of attacks has not decreased. Canada is a great example of this. In the past 45 years, Ontario has had one death from a pit bull. They banned the breed, and have since seen no reduction in their yearly death toll (average of 2 a year), because most of the deaths are from sled-type dogs.
One bit of info that would be important would be to know total number of pit bull type dogs so you could compare bites to total number of dogs. I cannot find that number anywhere. (I doubt those stats are kept since most are not AKC registered which is probably the only place that would keep any sort of good numbers on breed). Otherwise you are just shooting out meaningless numbers to further an agenda. If you go to shelters, they are FILLED with pit and pit mixes, so it is likely that dogs who bite are probably pit or pit mixes why? Because there are so many of them out there because they got so popular, especially with people who were so irresponsible they allowed their bitches to have large numbers of litters that they didn’t care for or socialize etc etc. (and they ended up in shelters).
If I recall correctly, for awhile labs were at the top. When I worked for a vet (a number of years ago) the two breeds I was careful around were chows and cocker spaniels. I never did get bitten, but chows would not warn you beforehand and cockers, well, most were sweet, but some could be amazingly sharp. Fortunately I was fast and could read them most of the time. I came out with all of my fingers. ;)
“Don’t blame the Golden Retrievers....blame the owners. LMAO. See how your argument just doesn’t hold water. We could go back over the last six months and find thread after thread about someone being killed/maimed by a pitbull....but not one about a similar situation with a Golden Retriever. This proposed law seems a little silly because of the problem with identifying a “pitbull mix”, etc....but to pretend like there is not a problem with the breed is ludicrous.”>>>>>>
A couple decades ago, Golden Retrievers were responsible for more fatalities than Doberman Pinschers. After that, Great Danes were the number one. A hundred years ago, bloodhounds held the title of the most dangerous dog. It has much more to do with what the owners want out of their dogs. You don’t see many people chaining their goldens, or encouraging their brittany spaniels to be aggressive. (www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com, www.cdc.gov)
You know that there are lots of breeds that were never required to do “dirty” jobs, yet these dogs have still taken lives. The CDC states that the most common factor in all dog bite related fatalities is the care the dog receives, not the breed. Every few decades, a new breed of dog comes along and gains popularity with the wrong crowd, becoming number one on the list, but the average number of fatalities does not increase or decrease depending on the breed at the top. The average has been slowly increasing due to the increase in population of people and dogs, but nothing else has had an impact in this country.
The reason why you are only seeing pit bull attack stories is not because they are the only ones attacking or causing injuries. Public health records indicate that two thousand people end up in the hospital every day from dog attacks, yet we only ever see a couple of stories involving pit bulls. It can’t be because the stories are of bigger incidents, because there have been several stories posted on this very site that resulted in no injuries (why it was news is anyone’s guess), and several incidents involving hospitalizations and surgeries that never made it to the news.
You are correct. It would be great to have a solid number. I know a few years back, the UKC released their registration numbers, and it was something like 250 thousand APBT registered at that time. I know the ADBA registers far more than that, and of course the shelters are always a good place to look for what is being represented on the streets. I have seen estimates ranging from five to ten million for this type of dog, and I believe this is pretty close. I know my shelters here are overrun with them, and many of my neighbors have them (in multiples of two, it seems). When I take my dogs anywhere, I always get comments like “I have two at home”, so yes, they are extremely popular right now. I really wish there was a way to count them all.
It actually surprises me how little interest there is in counting the numbers. I have combed the net. I finally gave up (so if there are estimates recently I am unaware). Of course, the other problem is, when a dog bites, I think they are often assigned as a pit bull if they are any sort of short coated medium sized mix.
The stats are likely very skewed.
And again. I do not have any of the bully breeds. I show and raise golden retrievers (and until recently spinoni). I don’t have a dog in this hunt other than to stamp out stupidity and general nanny state intervention in pet ownership.
“Of course, the other problem is, when a dog bites, I think they are often assigned as a pit bull if they are any sort of short coated medium sized mix.
The stats are likely very skewed.”<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I agree, and I don’t believe it’s a media conspiracy. I think they simply know what sells. Just looking at youtube, you can see what’s more interesting. Videos with “pit bull attack” are far more popular than the same title with any other breed, and when stories are posted here involving other dogs (in attacks), the amount of attention is tiny compared to the pit bull stories. It’s just business in the media’s opinion.
As for breeds being misidentified, it does happen, as there are no experts going to these places to make sure the dog has been correctly identified, and animal control is notorious for having no clue about the breeds they encounter. I don’t think it really matters, though, because of the popularity of the breed right now. So a couple dogs are mistaken for pit bulls. If we had the correct breed every time, pit bulls would most likely still be on top, but for a different reason than most would think. It’s unfortunate that people on this site believe our rights should be taken away (I wonder, why are they here? lol) because other less than stellar dog owners can’t do the right thing. It’s all about personal accountability, in my opinion.
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.