Family dog attacks and severely hurts child, 6 (Pit bull, again)

Anchorage Daily News ^ | August 13, 2008 | By JAMES HALPIN

[AnnGora]

Exactly.

[goodwithagun]

Did you not read my reply? As to your question, I would also like to know why it is not reported. Maybe because there are more important matters to report on? Georgia and Russia maybe?

[StoneIsland]

From Dog Bite Law (http://www.dogbitelaw.com/): The most commonly reported dog breeds involved were pit bulls (24 deaths), followed by Rottweilers (16 deaths), and German shepherds (10 deaths). and, There have been many news reports about deaths caused by dogs in the USA. The attention given to the homicides has put the spotlight on pit bulls and Rottweilers. There is a very good reason for focusing on these two breeds: in recent years, they have usually been the number one and number two canine killers of humans. (See below, The breeds most likely to kill.) It therefore is correct to single out those two breeds when talking about canine homicides, because those two breeds lately have caused half or more of the deaths -- a disgraceful statistic whether it is regarded as the fault of the dogs, their breeders, their owners, or all three. However, the focus on death cases may leave the public with the false impression that pit bulls and Rottweilers are responsible for the dog bite epidemic. It is a much broader problem than that, involving all dogs and all dog owners. While pit bulls and Rottweilers inflict a disproportionate number of serious and even fatal injuries, the dog bite epidemic involves many different breeds, and results from many different causes. A clear distinction needs to be made between canine homicides (i.e., incidents in which dogs kill people) and the dog bite epidemic. 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, Rottweilers 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 the number 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.) So, I think that the smart thing to do would be to increase the penalty on the owner of a dog that bites, i.e., to increase their liability, while shying away from focusing too much on any particular breed. By the way, the author of the site from whence the above were quoted is a lawyer whose practice is made up of dog bite cases, i.e., grain of salt, please. This, from Dog Bite Statistics (http://www.dogexpert.com/Dog%20Bite%20Statistics/DogBiteStatistics.html) Mixed breeds and not pure bred dogs are the type of dog most often involved in inflicting bites to people. The pure-bred dogs most often involved are German shepherds and Chow chows. And, In a study reported by a retired professor from California State University at Chino, Robert Plum, it was found that one dog in 55 will bite someone seriously during the course of a year. With respect to breed differences in the tendency to inflict serious injury, Plumb estimates that when a pit bull bites a human, one in 16 (e.g. 1/16) will inflict serious injury; this contrasts with a ratio of 1/296 Dobermans, and 1/156 German shepherds. So, pit bulls don't necessary bite more than other dogs, it's that they're more likely to kill or seriously injure when they do bite.

[arthurus]

I hear it often, every time one of these things happens.

[StoneIsland]

Wow, sorry for the brick of text. I thought I put some breaks in there. Guess not.

[goodwithagun]

Of these Rots and pitbulls, how many were dogs that were abused to fight?

[LongElegantLegs]

Thank you for that post, I totally agree!

[goodwithagun]

According to the text in message 63: So, pit bulls don’t necessary bite more than other dogs, it’s that they’re more likely to kill or seriously injure when they do bite.

No kidding, they are very strong. I was on the NCAA rifle team at the University of Akron. With my gun, I am “more likely to kill or seriously injure” someone if I choose to. My parents raised me differently. My pitbull is raised differently. We need to punish those that abuse these dogs to act this way.

[Vinnie]

They are nasty little dogs.
But what sets pit bulls apart is their natural power, ‘kill’ instinct.
Not many dog breeds will turn on their master and try to kill their master.

They are bred to fight just as herding is natural in a border collie, pointing in bird dogs, acting candya$$ in poodles(I can say that, I have a poodle).
They do it naturally.

When a pit bull attacks it goes beyond ‘stay away from my stuff’. It goes to ‘You got near my stuff and I’m going to kill you.’

[StoneIsland]

I think you’re missing the point.

First, a fighting dog (like a pit bull) that attacks humans is about the last thing that a breeder could want.

Second, it’s clear that there are other breeds of dogs that bite humans much more often than either pits or rots. Indeed, some of the sources I posted about made it clear that mixed breed dogs are more likely to bite (making a breed specific ban iffy at best).

Third, when pits and rots do bite, they’re much more likely to cause a fatality. Pits were bred to be fighting dogs, rots were working dogs. They’re both bred to be strong. A stronger dog, regardless of breed, is more likely to kill than a weaker dog.

So, as Dog Bite Law makes plain, there are two problems that need to be addressed here:

1. The dog bite epidemic (as he calls it)
2. The dog fatality problem

A breed ban may take care of #2, but it misses the importance of #1.

[AnnGora]

So the media is going to take the time to report a child mauling as long as it is done by a Pit Bull but, if a German Shepherd rips a child’s throat out, reporters are more likely not to bother covering that story and instead report on the local garbage pickup schedule. Most vicious dog maulings are local news, anyway.

One more time: how can you say other breeds attack humans just as much as pit bulls when there is no evidence for it? Obviously, it cannot be a media conspiracy. I am just asking for proof.

[TChris]

CDC

Hmm... That's odd.

The CDC report available here says that Pit Bulls are the #1 most frequent fatal dog attack.

Apparently the chihuahua's aren't doing much damage.

Total Dog-Bite-Human Fatalities 1979-1998, by breed
---------------------------------------------------
[Purebred]
Pit Bull	66
Rottweiler	39
German Shepherd	17
Husky	15
Malamute	14
Doberman	9
Chow Chow	8
Great Dane	7
St. Bernard	7

[arthurus]

When I used to run in the neighborhood (when my knees worked) I enjoyed both the dogs that barked at me and the couple that met me somewhere on my route and accompanied me on my run. The neighborhood was safer then with no successful B&Es and no stolen cars. I loved having those dogs patrolling the neighborhood at night. One took hold of a fellow trying to go through a back window of someone else’s house and didn’t turn him loose until the police cars arrived after a neighbor saw the commotion. That fellow just got out of jail and went somewhere else.
There are no larger dogs now and no barkers in yards and the crime rate is definitely up. We got a couple of new residents that objected to the dogs and got most of them “picked up.” They live in the more expensive-looking houses and have been the targets of breakins several times. No one sympathizes.

[goodwithagun]

The proper name for a pit is American Stafforshire Terrior. Pitbulls are bread to fight, AST’s are not. The fighting dogs that are brought in to our shelter have litterally made me throw up. The human beings that are capable of training and using a dog in this manner are disgusting. That is the point I am trying to make. The dogs that are pitbulls can be dangerous because they are trained from birth to be aggressive by having food witheld. Any dog will become aggressive due to this training. AST’s do not have this problem.
The bigger picture is that if the humans responsible were actually held responsible, we would learn much more. The homes that we go into to take dogs out of are disgusting. We often contact social services because of the living conditions and the child neglect. It is not just about the violent dog. If a pit mauls a child, it is likely due to abuse for fighting.

[LongElegantLegs]

I respect your experience and thank you for your efforts to rescue these beautiful dogs.

My pitbull ownership predated my love for the breed; we adopted what we thought was a lab mix from the pound, as a companion for our four children. As he lost weight, I realized that he was actually a pitbull mix, and I would have gotten rid of him if I had not found a sort of pitbull advocacy group that helped me through his behavioral issues.
One thing they always insisted upon was respecing the pit’s potential to attack. They never tried to convince us that a pitbull in his ‘purest’ state was a malleable pushover that could be treated like any other dog.
Because of their honesty I feel confident that I can keep this dog and my children safe and happy. I know what he needs, and I know what can happen if he doesn’t get it.

I think the biggest problem for the pit bull is people who want the image of power but not the responsibility, and I’m not talking about dog fighters. I’m talking about nice little families with nice little kids who buy into the line that a pitbull is no different from any other dog, without considering what the dog was bred to do. If people took the breed’s purpose more seriously, I think we’d see less of these maulings.

[goodwithagun]

Tried to give it, you won’t pay attention.

[StoneIsland]

Statistical Sources (http://www.dogbitelegalcenter.com/resources/dogbite-statistics.html): Nonfatal Dog Bite-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments - United States, 2001. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5226a1.htm. Vet Med Today: Special Report, Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998 (JAVMA, Vol. 217, No. 6, September 15, 2000); Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Dog-Bite-related Fatalities - United States, 1995-1996 (MMWR, Vol. 46/No. 21, May 30, 1997).

I’m sure there’s more out there.

[arthurus]

The only dog that ever did me any damage was a Chihuahua that ate up my hand when I was ten. It didn’t understand when I said, “Nice doggie.” And my folks didn’t sue anyone. Mom just wrapped up my hand and told me,”Let that be a lesson to you!”

[goodwithagun]

This info is not only outdated, it is from a 20 year time-span. Both of these factors do not include popularity. Every so many years, certain breeds become more popular. Dalmatians when the Disney movie came out, Chihuahuas with the Taco Bell ads, etc.

[goodwithagun]

The little ones can be nasty. My other grandparents raised Pomeranian. They kept two on the farm, Minnie and Ernie. These two mini-tyrants would chase any dog, large or small, off the farm. It was amazing to see them do it. My pit might lick someone to death if they came into my home.