Yet another Pitt Bull attack (2 Viewers)

[Chaos Commish]

Pit Bull attacks 7 yr old.

Thanks. This is a great example of some issues. Would you believe the dog was probably a mixed breed and not a pitbull? And would you believe the family's other dog, a pure bred pitbull named Kumar, came to the kid's rescue? And would you believe the family owned both dogs but denied ownership of the dog that attacked the kid? Would it be interesting if the local police wrote the family five citations, four for having two unlicensed and unvaccinated dogs and another citation for obstruction of the investigation?Heroic family pitbull helps save 7 year old from vicious mongrel.

This quote is from someone who gets it.

The executive director at the Coulee Region Humane Society said all too often pit bull bites are sensationalized.

"To be honest with you, any dog can be vicious,” said Heather Schmid, executive director of the Coulee Region Humane Society. “Any dog can be vicious and any dog can be loving and wonderful. There are bites across any breed, any size dog, and I think that the bigger the dog, clearly the more damage that can be done."

eta: even though the dog was not a pitbull, I wanted to add that the family was obviously negligent dog owners.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Kid fighting cancer attacked by pit bull.

What a a gratuitous headline.

And here is todays (past 24hours) google search.... https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=pit+bull+attack&oq=pit+bull+attack&aq=f&aqi=d2&aql=&gs_l=news-cc.12..43j43i400.2733.2733.0.3739.1.1.0.0.0.0.71.71.1.1.0...0.0.#q=pit+bull+attack&hl=en&safe=off&gl=us&tbm=nws&source=lnt&tbs=qdr:d&sa=X&ei=8SG0T__LPI3RiALa7fGZAg&ved=0CCYQpwUoAg&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=8178af5ea1cd9e14&biw=1876&bih=954

attacking cows, horses, other dogs, attacking children, women, men, people in wheelchairs and police officers.

Why didn't it say Kid fighting cancer attacked by Labrador Retriever? It would have probably been MORE accurate.From your link:

The black labrador-pit-bull mix is quarantined at the Hobbs Animal Shelter.

Pitbulls do not bark during a chase, so I was skeptical of the breed ID before getting to the quote. For that matter few labs do either. There are plenty of dogs that do and whatever this mix is, it probably isn't half of anything, but Pitbull wins the headline every time.eta: even though the dog wasn't a pitbull I wanted to add that keeping a dog on a chain is a good way to make one vicious and psycho, so again bad owners in this story too.

 

[DrJ]

56 people per year who had no intention of interacting with lightning still get killed by lightning. This weather must be stopped!

If we could prevent lightning, I'd be all for it. I'm not aware of any benefits, and along with deaths it destroys a lot of property.

 

[Charlie Frown]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

 

[DrJ]

Nevermind, it appears that lightning creates nitrates and is pretty important to life. We could get by without pitbulls far easier than lightning.

http://www.dandydesigns.org/id22.html

 

[parasaurolophus]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

 

[jomar]

Pit Bull attacks 7 yr old.

its on the internet, it must be true

The newspaper lied?

I have no idea if they lied as there is no picture of the dog. All they have is the report of a pit or pit mix. Unfortunately, a lot of dogs that aren't pits are identified as such.

 

[parasaurolophus]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

No, the only true distinction is that a careful person with no intention of interacting with a potential killing machine could still me killed. For example, say, a person walking down the street with no intention of interacting with a dog vs. a parent not watching her 6 year old kid walk around and accidentally fall into a pool.Pools are predictable. Pitbulls aren't yet are still owned at a high rate.

I am not going to look too deeply into this one but apparently there are around 10 million swimming pools in the U.S. and about 4.5 million registered pitbulls (so probably double that with ones that are unregistered or misidentified as pitbulls). Either way it looks like the rates of ownership are close and swimming pools kill far more people every year.And I am fairly certain that plenty of people who drowned had no intention of entering a swimming pool and drowning but still managed to do it. But you're right, they choose to go to a location with a pool (or any body of water) so #### 'em.

Can I see a link to the 4.5 million registered pit bulls? Certainly possible since I think about one out of every 60 people I know owns a pit, just would like to see the data. Would like to see other dog data too if you have it.

 

[jomar]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

Exactly. If an owner took down his fence and a 2 year old wandered in and drowned, what we be screaming at the pool or the dumb ### owner?

 

[DrJ]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

I'd be willing to force pit owners to keep their dogs behind fences at all times as a compromise rather than punching them in the face. Dog gets out, it's legal to shoot it down.

 

[jomar]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

I'd be willing to force pit owners to keep their dogs behind fences at all times as a compromise rather than punching them in the face. Dog gets out, it's legal to shoot it down.

Why not all dogs? Although its better than dying, I don't want a few stitches from a schnauzer attack either.

 

[DrJ]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

I'd be willing to force pit owners to keep their dogs behind fences at all times as a compromise rather than punching them in the face. Dog gets out, it's legal to shoot it down.

Why not all dogs? Although its better than dying, I don't want a few stitches from a schnauzer attack either.

Because pits are unusually dangerous. You've been following the thread, right?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Because pits are unusually dangerous.

Without a doubt.

 

[Chairshot]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

I'd be willing to force pit owners to keep their dogs behind fences at all times as a compromise rather than punching them in the face. Dog gets out, it's legal to shoot it down.

Why not all dogs? Although its better than dying, I don't want a few stitches from a schnauzer attack either.

Because pits are unusually dangerous. You've been following the thread, right?

So, if a kid gets mauled by a Rottie, that's cool?

 

[DrJ]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

I'd be willing to force pit owners to keep their dogs behind fences at all times as a compromise rather than punching them in the face. Dog gets out, it's legal to shoot it down.

Why not all dogs? Although its better than dying, I don't want a few stitches from a schnauzer attack either.

Because pits are unusually dangerous. You've been following the thread, right?

So, if a kid gets mauled by a Rottie, that's cool?

No, but that's less likely than a dog that was bred specifically to tear other creature's faces off.

 

[Chairshot]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

I'd be willing to force pit owners to keep their dogs behind fences at all times as a compromise rather than punching them in the face. Dog gets out, it's legal to shoot it down.

Why not all dogs? Although its better than dying, I don't want a few stitches from a schnauzer attack either.

Because pits are unusually dangerous. You've been following the thread, right?

So, if a kid gets mauled by a Rottie, that's cool?

No, but that's less likely than a dog that was bred specifically to tear other creature's faces off.

How likely does it need to be for all owners to be responsible for their dogs?

 

[DrJ]

We're all in favor of making swimming pools illegal, right? We should probably do something about all those oceans too.

Because swimming pools just jump out of nowhere and drown 7 year olds on the sidewalks?Horrible analogy.

Just because you call it a horrible analogy does not make it so. Isn't all this pitbull hysteria ultimately about preventable causes of death? What difference does it make if that preventable death jumps out and kills you or you fall into it? The answer is "none" it makes no difference. The only true distinction is that the anti pitbull crowd is scared of pitbulls and not scared of swimming pools even though swimming pools are far more dangerous.

Pretty sure most cities have laws requiring a fence around swimming pools at all times. They even have height and material requirements. Actually pretty darn good analogy Chaka.

I'd be willing to force pit owners to keep their dogs behind fences at all times as a compromise rather than punching them in the face. Dog gets out, it's legal to shoot it down.

Why not all dogs? Although its better than dying, I don't want a few stitches from a schnauzer attack either.

Because pits are unusually dangerous. You've been following the thread, right?

So, if a kid gets mauled by a Rottie, that's cool?

No, but that's less likely than a dog that was bred specifically to tear other creature's faces off.

How likely does it need to be for all owners to be responsible for their dogs?

Huh?

 

[Chairshot]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

Yes there is, an advantage of human safety.

 

[DrJ]

Here's the fatal dog bite statistics.

http://www.dogsbite.org/dogsbite-recent-dog-bite-statistics.php

Pitbulls account for 71% of them in 2011, while accounting for less than 5% of the dog population.

Pitbulls account for 67% in 2010, while accounting for about 5% of the dog population.

Pitbulls account for 44% in 2009, while accounting for about 5% of the dog population.

Pitbulls account for 65% in 2008, while accounting for about 5% of the dog population.

Pitbulls account for 60% in 2008, while accounting for about 5% of the dog population.

Pitbulls account for 60% in 2007, while accounting for about 5% of the dog population.

Pitbulls account for 58% in 2006, while accounting for about 5% of the dog population.

Pitbulls account for 57% in 2005, while accounting for about 5% of the dog population.

Not only is the dog far more dangerous than others on average, but it's getting worse

 

[DrJ]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

These laws already exist. Doesn't stop pitbulls from killing at a very frequent rate.

 

[Chairshot]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

Yes there is, an advantage of human safety.

Even if you believe that pits are inherently dangerous, what possible advantage would there be in saying that only pits need to be treated a special way. There are plenty of breeds of dogs that can hurt people. Why on earth would we single only one breed out?

 

[Chairshot]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

These laws already exist. Doesn't stop pitbulls from killing at a very frequent rate.

Not really, no. As mentioned more than once in this thread, many, many municipalities have no dangerous dog laws on the books.

 

[DrJ]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

Yes there is, an advantage of human safety.

Even if you believe that pits are inherently dangerous, what possible advantage would there be in saying that only pits need to be treated a special way. There are plenty of breeds of dogs that can hurt people. Why on earth would we single only one breed out?

Because they behave a special way, a way that poses a far greater risk to people. It bears out in the statistics.

 

[DrJ]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

These laws already exist. Doesn't stop pitbulls from killing at a very frequent rate.

Not really, no. As mentioned more than once in this thread, many, many municipalities have no dangerous dog laws on the books.

They have dog laws. I've never lived anywhere that you could walk your dog around without a leash legally. But these laws aren't stopping pitbulls from maiming and killing people far more frequently than all other dogs combined, despite them making up a very small percentage of the dog population.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

Yes there is, an advantage of human safety.

Even if you believe that pits are inherently dangerous, what possible advantage would there be in saying that only pits need to be treated a special way. There are plenty of breeds of dogs that can hurt people. Why on earth would we single only one breed out?

Its not because they can, its because they frequently do.

 

[DrJ]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

 

[Chairshot]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

These laws already exist. Doesn't stop pitbulls from killing at a very frequent rate.

Not really, no. As mentioned more than once in this thread, many, many municipalities have no dangerous dog laws on the books.

They have dog laws. I've never lived anywhere that you could walk your dog around without a leash legally. But these laws aren't stopping pitbulls from maiming and killing people far more frequently than all other dogs combined, despite them making up a very small percentage of the dog population.

If you want to go to one anti-pit bull site and buy the questionable "studies" that they have there, that's up to you. But anyone who is paying attention knows that pits do not make up a very small percentage of the population. It's virtually impossible to tell how many there are of any breed of dog. It's not even known for sure how many dogs there are period.

 

[Chairshot]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

I think that probably says it all. You've got your point of view and it won't be changed.

 

[DrJ]

Huh?

There is no advantage to creating a law where only one type of dog owner has to be responsible for keeping their dog under control. Just make a law where all owners are responsible for keeping control of their dog.

These laws already exist. Doesn't stop pitbulls from killing at a very frequent rate.

Not really, no. As mentioned more than once in this thread, many, many municipalities have no dangerous dog laws on the books.

They have dog laws. I've never lived anywhere that you could walk your dog around without a leash legally. But these laws aren't stopping pitbulls from maiming and killing people far more frequently than all other dogs combined, despite them making up a very small percentage of the dog population.

If you want to go to one anti-pit bull site and buy the questionable "studies" that they have there, that's up to you. But anyone who is paying attention knows that pits do not make up a very small percentage of the population. It's virtually impossible to tell how many there are of any breed of dog. It's not even known for sure how many dogs there are period.

Fine, there's probably a bunch of unregistered pits because their owners are lowlifes. That makes it better.

 

[DrJ]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

I think that probably says it all. You've got your point of view and it won't be changed.

Them owning a pitbull says it all. Everyone knows the reputation of the dog. That's why people get them. And that makes them a lowlife.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

I think that probably says it all. You've got your point of view and it won't be changed.

He's is just on the other side of the coin as you. It was a response to you ignoring post #984 and the truth of it.

 

[DrJ]

Seriously - what's the point of getting this dog if you aren't intending to inspire fear and intimidation?

 

[Chairshot]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

I think that probably says it all. You've got your point of view and it won't be changed.

He's is just on the other side of the coin as you. It was a response to you ignoring post #984 and the truth of it.

I don't feel like I'm some sort of pro-pit zealot. All I'm advocating is that all owners be held responsible for their dog, including myself. I'm not sure how that is all that extreme.I felt like I did address post #984 in saying that there is absolutely no way to know how many there are of any dog. I also feel like I've addressed the numbers game earlier in the thread.This is obviously an issue where people don't get swayed. I'm not trying at all to convince people they should adopt a pit. All I'm saying is that people should be held responsible for their dogs, regardless of what kind of dog it is.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

All I'm advocating is that all owners be held responsible for their dog, including myself.

Its problem that goes beyond the owners.

 

[TexanFan02]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

I think that probably says it all. You've got your point of view and it won't be changed.

He's is just on the other side of the coin as you. It was a response to you ignoring post #984 and the truth of it.

I don't feel like I'm some sort of pro-pit zealot. All I'm advocating is that all owners be held responsible for their dog, including myself. I'm not sure how that is all that extreme.I felt like I did address post #984 in saying that there is absolutely no way to know how many there are of any dog. I also feel like I've addressed the numbers game earlier in the thread.This is obviously an issue where people don't get swayed. I'm not trying at all to convince people they should adopt a pit. All I'm saying is that people should be held responsible for their dogs, regardless of what kind of dog it is.

Are you the one that lets his Pit Bull play with his kids? I think you're nuts.

 

[Chairshot]

Seriously - what's the point of getting this dog if you aren't intending to inspire fear and intimidation?

We've been over this stuff earlier, but I'll go one more time.There are a number of reasons I own the breed. They are the most loyal dog I've ever seen. Smart, athletic and a ton of fun to play with. They are absolute clowns and lap dogs. I love having them around. I've never once used my dogs to try to intimidate or inspire fear. Everywhere I bring them, I introduce them to people who are interested in meeting them.I've been around pits all my life. My wife is a vet nurse and given the fact that pits are over running shelters, it's not uncommon for people in that field to be sensitive to how many are being laid down. Both mine are rescues. I wanted a dog, had great experiences with pits historically and think it's senseless that they are being rounded up and put down. So, I went to the shelter and rescued one. Later, I rescued another. They are curled up on the couch with me right now and I couldn't be happier to have them.I don't argue that many people get this breed to look tough. It's unfortunate. They make the rest of us look bad. If you don't get it, that's fine. I'm not asking you to get one. I'm just asking you to leave me to have mine. I'll hold up my end of the bargain.

 

[Chairshot]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

I think that probably says it all. You've got your point of view and it won't be changed.

He's is just on the other side of the coin as you. It was a response to you ignoring post #984 and the truth of it.

I don't feel like I'm some sort of pro-pit zealot. All I'm advocating is that all owners be held responsible for their dog, including myself. I'm not sure how that is all that extreme.I felt like I did address post #984 in saying that there is absolutely no way to know how many there are of any dog. I also feel like I've addressed the numbers game earlier in the thread.This is obviously an issue where people don't get swayed. I'm not trying at all to convince people they should adopt a pit. All I'm saying is that people should be held responsible for their dogs, regardless of what kind of dog it is.

Are you the one that lets his Pit Bull play with his kids? I think you're nuts.

I don't have kids. But I was around them plenty when I was a kid. Survived without a scratch, somehow.

 

[pantherclub]

You let your 2 dogs get on your couch? You are kindof giving off the vibe that was alluded to earlier.

 

[DrJ]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

I think that probably says it all. You've got your point of view and it won't be changed.

He's is just on the other side of the coin as you. It was a response to you ignoring post #984 and the truth of it.

I don't feel like I'm some sort of pro-pit zealot. All I'm advocating is that all owners be held responsible for their dog, including myself. I'm not sure how that is all that extreme.I felt like I did address post #984 in saying that there is absolutely no way to know how many there are of any dog. I also feel like I've addressed the numbers game earlier in the thread.This is obviously an issue where people don't get swayed. I'm not trying at all to convince people they should adopt a pit. All I'm saying is that people should be held responsible for their dogs, regardless of what kind of dog it is.

Agreed, all owners should take care of their dogs. The people that tend to gravitate towards a dog with a reputation like a pit are typically missing a screw. People across the street from me got one, with a fence made of toothpicks. I live in a nice quiet family neighborhood - swingsets and kids all over the place. Meanwhile I got to witness their home being invaded by cops with riot gear one day when I came home from lunch. That's the type of people that get these dogs, because of the reputation. And of course the toothpick fence couldn't contain this damned thing, and I'm fairly certain they suck at training animals. Luckily they're gone - I was getting to the point where I was going to buy a gun specifically for this and just shoot the thing down if it came on my property again.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

All i can add is there is a reason pugs and other dog breeds arent used in dogfights, and a reason pitbulls are.

 

[pantherclub]

If you choose to own this pet, I automatically categorize you as a lowlife.

I think that probably says it all. You've got your point of view and it won't be changed.

He's is just on the other side of the coin as you. It was a response to you ignoring post #984 and the truth of it.

I don't feel like I'm some sort of pro-pit zealot. All I'm advocating is that all owners be held responsible for their dog, including myself. I'm not sure how that is all that extreme.I felt like I did address post #984 in saying that there is absolutely no way to know how many there are of any dog. I also feel like I've addressed the numbers game earlier in the thread.This is obviously an issue where people don't get swayed. I'm not trying at all to convince people they should adopt a pit. All I'm saying is that people should be held responsible for their dogs, regardless of what kind of dog it is.

Agreed, all owners should take care of their dogs. The people that tend to gravitate towards a dog with a reputation like a pit are typically missing a screw. People across the street from me got one, with a fence made of toothpicks. I live in a nice quiet family neighborhood - swingsets and kids all over the place. Meanwhile I got to witness their home being invaded by cops with riot gear one day when I came home from lunch. That's the type of people that get these dogs, because of the reputation. And of course the toothpick fence couldn't contain this damned thing, and I'm fairly certain they suck at training animals. Luckily they're gone - I was getting to the point where I was going to buy a gun specifically for this and just shoot the thing down if it came on my property again.

If you have a pit move in near you just read the first post on this thread. It works like a charm.

 

[Chairshot]

You let your 2 dogs get on your couch? You are kindof giving off the vibe that was alluded to earlier.

Good lord, you guys are relentless. I guess I'm asking for it by replying, tho.Yes, sometimes I let the dog on the one couch where I crash when I'm watching TV. They have their own beds and they have to be invited onto the couch. They are trained just fine.

 

[DrJ]

Seriously - what's the point of getting this dog if you aren't intending to inspire fear and intimidation?

We've been over this stuff earlier, but I'll go one more time.There are a number of reasons I own the breed. They are the most loyal dog I've ever seen. Smart, athletic and a ton of fun to play with. They are absolute clowns and lap dogs. I love having them around. I've never once used my dogs to try to intimidate or inspire fear. Everywhere I bring them, I introduce them to people who are interested in meeting them.I've been around pits all my life. My wife is a vet nurse and given the fact that pits are over running shelters, it's not uncommon for people in that field to be sensitive to how many are being laid down. Both mine are rescues. I wanted a dog, had great experiences with pits historically and think it's senseless that they are being rounded up and put down. So, I went to the shelter and rescued one. Later, I rescued another. They are curled up on the couch with me right now and I couldn't be happier to have them.I don't argue that many people get this breed to look tough. It's unfortunate. They make the rest of us look bad. If you don't get it, that's fine. I'm not asking you to get one. I'm just asking you to leave me to have mine. I'll hold up my end of the bargain.

Fair enough. Let's say for the sake of argument we charged people with criminal behavior if their dog killed someone. What do you think that would do to the ownership of pits?

 

[Chairshot]

Seriously - what's the point of getting this dog if you aren't intending to inspire fear and intimidation?

We've been over this stuff earlier, but I'll go one more time.There are a number of reasons I own the breed. They are the most loyal dog I've ever seen. Smart, athletic and a ton of fun to play with. They are absolute clowns and lap dogs. I love having them around. I've never once used my dogs to try to intimidate or inspire fear. Everywhere I bring them, I introduce them to people who are interested in meeting them.I've been around pits all my life. My wife is a vet nurse and given the fact that pits are over running shelters, it's not uncommon for people in that field to be sensitive to how many are being laid down. Both mine are rescues. I wanted a dog, had great experiences with pits historically and think it's senseless that they are being rounded up and put down. So, I went to the shelter and rescued one. Later, I rescued another. They are curled up on the couch with me right now and I couldn't be happier to have them.I don't argue that many people get this breed to look tough. It's unfortunate. They make the rest of us look bad. If you don't get it, that's fine. I'm not asking you to get one. I'm just asking you to leave me to have mine. I'll hold up my end of the bargain.

Fair enough. Let's say for the sake of argument we charged people with criminal behavior if their dog killed someone. What do you think that would do to the ownership of pits?

Eventually, I think you would have far fewer people getting them for the wrong reasons and more getting them for the right reasons.My hope is that we would eventually have a population that was well cared for. Right now, and this gets back to the numbers argument, there is a glut of pits, at least in my estimation. There are a ton of them. Every wanna be thug is a backyard breeder. The shelters are over run with them. I feel the majority are neglected or outright abused. The disgusting practice of dog fighting is still prevalent in many places. I firmly believe that there is not a more neglected and mistreated breed out there than pits.I'm much rather see a smaller population of well cared for and loved dogs than what we have now.

 

[DrJ]

Also, I was a tad harsh with the all pit owners are low lifes comments. My apologies. But the pit owners I've known are typically like that. I did see one at the dog park this weekend - cool that they were taking their dog to the park and it was 2 ladies. But they had 6 dogs between them and they couldn't handle it because none of them appeared to be trained all too well. Pit came and jumped up on me at one point. Made me uncomfortable, I don't like them. You have to know that if you take that dog out in public people are going to be uneasy around it. Especially if it's trained like crap like that.

We got a yellow lab 2 weeks ago, and the guy that sold it to us was telling us he just got a new puppy. When he told me it was a pit, in the back of my head I think he has a screw missing. He knew a lot about dogs and would definitely fall into what I would think would be a good owner of the thing. Still, I think he's missing a screw and wonder what his motivation was for getting this dog.

Even if you think they're great and the nicest dogs, realize that most people don't feel that way and you are striking some fear and intimidation even if you don't mean to with the thing. Whether you consider that irrational or not, most people don't like your dog.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

All i can add is there is a reason pugs and other dog breeds arent used in dogfights, and a reason pitbulls are.

They were bred to kill Bulls by mauling them to death.

 

[DrJ]

Seriously - what's the point of getting this dog if you aren't intending to inspire fear and intimidation?

We've been over this stuff earlier, but I'll go one more time.There are a number of reasons I own the breed. They are the most loyal dog I've ever seen. Smart, athletic and a ton of fun to play with. They are absolute clowns and lap dogs. I love having them around. I've never once used my dogs to try to intimidate or inspire fear. Everywhere I bring them, I introduce them to people who are interested in meeting them.I've been around pits all my life. My wife is a vet nurse and given the fact that pits are over running shelters, it's not uncommon for people in that field to be sensitive to how many are being laid down. Both mine are rescues. I wanted a dog, had great experiences with pits historically and think it's senseless that they are being rounded up and put down. So, I went to the shelter and rescued one. Later, I rescued another. They are curled up on the couch with me right now and I couldn't be happier to have them.I don't argue that many people get this breed to look tough. It's unfortunate. They make the rest of us look bad. If you don't get it, that's fine. I'm not asking you to get one. I'm just asking you to leave me to have mine. I'll hold up my end of the bargain.

Fair enough. Let's say for the sake of argument we charged people with criminal behavior if their dog killed someone. What do you think that would do to the ownership of pits?

Eventually, I think you would have far fewer people getting them for the wrong reasons and more getting them for the right reasons.My hope is that we would eventually have a population that was well cared for. Right now, and this gets back to the numbers argument, there is a glut of pits, at least in my estimation. There are a ton of them. Every wanna be thug is a backyard breeder. The shelters are over run with them. I feel the majority are neglected or outright abused. The disgusting practice of dog fighting is still prevalent in many places. I firmly believe that there is not a more neglected and mistreated breed out there than pits.I'm much rather see a smaller population of well cared for and loved dogs than what we have now.

Yeah, I guess many people suck more than pits. But we can't ban them. :(

 

[Chairshot]

Also, I was a tad harsh with the all pit owners are low lifes comments. My apologies.

No worries.

Even if you think they're great and the nicest dogs, realize that most people don't feel that way and you are striking some fear and intimidation even if you don't mean to with the thing. Whether you consider that irrational or not, most people don't like your dog.

I'm very clear about how people feel about my dogs, trust me. Good or bad, people are often generous with sharing their opinions. I've had all kinds of reactions. But I have to tell you, just my own experience, I get more compliments then I do complaints or nasty looks. And I've had more than one occasion where I was able to introduce my dogs to people who were apprehensive and have them walking away pleasantly surprised.I understand that some people are afraid. That's a shame, but I don't completely blame them, given what they see media wise. If they give me the opportunity, I show them the other side with my dogs. If not, I go on my merry way and I try not to inconvenience anyone else in the process.Like I said, my goal isn't to convince people that pits are the greatest dogs in the world, even though I personally believe that. My point is that I would like all municipalities to have strong dangerous dog laws. Not leash laws, not some basic licensing laws (even though those are fine), but strong dangerous dog laws that protect everyone from all dangerous dogs, regardless of breed. It's the only thing that makes sense to me.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I think the real question people have to ask is would you let your 4 year old child play with a pit bull that was not yours?