Posted on 01/26/2006 12:00:29 PM PST by iPod Shuffle
Wow, thanks for that info. I'm glad to be more enlightened on the matter.
I don't know that there is anywhere where dog bites are tracked by whether the dog is registered. It's really not the point. With the fatal and near fatal mauling statistics in mind, can any sane person, looking at all the kinds of dogs out there, say that pit bull type dogs are "Particularly good with children"? In comparison to what, a tiger?
You're just reading marketing pieces. Don't forget the actual statistics.
Bulldogs are one of the most controversial topics on FR. I have decided.
So strange.
Crevo threads are worse, but only because they use a lot bigger words when they argue. :~D
That makes no sense.
Reminds me of a scene in a W.C. Fields movie. Fields played a barber and he had a man seated in his chair. As he cut the man's hair, the man looked down and saw a medium-sized mutt stationed next to the chair staring up at him. The dog's eyes never left the man in the barber chair so the man asks
"What's the story with the dog?"
"Welll," drawled Fields, "One day I sneezed and accidentally cut off a man's ear. Ever since then, he's been waiting for seconds."
>looking at all the kinds of dogs out there, say that pit bull type dogs are "Particularly good with children"? In comparison to what, a tiger?<
I am not arguing that the pit bull that you see on the end of the local thug's chain is a nightmare around children.
However, allowing people to lump all breeds of bull terrier into the "dangerous to kids" column is my pet peeve. How do you explain the breed's nickname? Why does the Bull Terrier, the "Target spot dog", get a free ride? There were 1,744 Bull Terriers registered with AKC, as opposed to only 856 Staffs. Staffs are way less common in this country. The average person will never even see one in the flesh, outside of a dog show, anyway.
The Staffordshire Bull Terriers you find in the US are not only very rare in the States, they are very far removed from their fighting roots, as is the Boston Terrier.
And, since there is no record of the breed we are discussing killing a person, I find it odd so many people are so quick to lump it in with the average thug-owned cur.
Well, fine then... I don't like playing semantic games to pretend there really are no pit bulls.
Of course there are Pit Bulls. Are you in favor of lumping dogs with no history of problems in with them? If so, why?
They split off a few dogs and changed their name to make them into show dogs. That's all.
Now that you've basically called me gullible and irresponsible...let me just say that my dog is "particularly good with children;" 9 years and two kids (and about a dozen nieces and nephews visiting) and three cats. Far better with children than my sister's welsh corgi, or my mother-in-law's Jack Russell, just to name two dogs I have seen "with children" first hand.
I hope you don't mind if I defer to my 40 years of experience with pit bulls/Amstaffs over your "expertise."
The older I get, the less impressed I am with "experts."
I wish you continued success.
Thank you.
ditto. Those who have real life experience with the breed know that their high pain tolerance and equanimity make them good with children.
I have had the same negative experience with Jack Russells.
"dogs are wolves that have been selectively bred over thousands of generations for their ability to handle domesticated life."
Selectively bred for what? Define "domesticated life." Is it the wolf's inability to get along with other wolves that make a wolf "undomesticated?"
Actually wolves get along very well within the pack structure. It is their inability to get along with people that makes a wolf undomesticated and unamenable to training.
This confirms that dog on dog aggression is not the same as dog on people aggression.
Most of the folks in the "Arab Republic of Egypt" (that is the English translation of the country's name, you know), formerly known as the "United Arab Republic" are, big surprise, Arabs. But don't let the facts get in your way. Read more here: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/eg.html
Correction noted, Hotshot.
Still, there are plenty of Muslim terrorists and Islamic extremists who are not Arabic. To assume so would be to say that Arabs are the only ethnic group in the Middle East (which they are not).
LOL!
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.