Cripple Creek Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 1 hour ago, Gugny said: There is a chance that I may have mistaken another breed for a pit. It's really not sad, because all I do is politely avoid them. No harm, no foul. The only other species I feel similarly about is mustachioed men. They give me the creeps. But, not sharks. Interesting.
plenzmd1 Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) 53 minutes ago, LeviF91 said: Even assuming that 20% is right (seems high but whatever) that means 20% of the dog population is responsible for 66% of attacks that result in a death over the last thirteen years. Still a bit out of proportion. The reason that is so high is cause pits are trained way more than other breeds to be aggressive and are way more likely to be abused and mistreated than other dogs. Look at the dog bite/fatalities from mid century to the late 90's..all Shepards, Rots, and Dobermans for the most part. Cause back then, they were the 'cool" dog for toughness and protection etc...and pits were not demonized the way the are today. It is not the breed, it is the individual dog and how it has been socialized, treated, etc. And just we's we all clear on the stats being quoted here. from dogbite.org and as someone mentioned ..just use google..and google more about that organization. dogbite.org the below directly from their website about their founder Quote olleen Lynn resides in Austin, Texas and operates Lynn Media Group. On June 17th, 2007, she was attacked for approximately 5-seconds by a leashed pit bull while jogging in her former Seattle neighborhood. She was hospitalized for two days at Harborview Medical Center after undergoing surgery to repair a severe bone fracture. Four months later, she launched DogsBite.org. Learn more about Colleen Lynn by reading her four-year anniversary blog post about her attack. Yep, sure she has no ax to grind...take a look at the site, their clearly defined mission is to ban the breed, I am sure no bias shows up in their stats...and that should be fun trying to define the breed! All these sites that debunk her work and her stats... https://www.avma.org/javma-news/2017-11-15/dangerous-dog-debate https://www.reddit.com/r/AntiBSL/comments/9g24ak/dogsbiteorg_lied_about_the_breed_of_dogs_involved/ https://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2010/03/the-truth-behind-dogsbiteorg.html So I am not saying pits are not involved , just make sure we are using stats from a non biased site that does not make its money by representing and testifying in dog bite cases. Edited January 30, 2020 by plenzmd1
BarleyNY Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 I’ve been thinking about this and looking up some facts and I have some thoughts: A big factor is the physical abilities that have been bred into pits. They were bred to fight bulls, bears and other dogs. They have incredible jaw strength to bite and hold. It makes sense that a dog breed that is as physically gifted in those areas as pits are would be effective killers. Another factor is their prevalence and social unacceptability. There are a lot of them - although not nearly as many as would account for the number of attacks by them. Still there are a lot. They are shunned socially. They aren’t allowed in many cities (okay, suburbs mostly) and are often uninsurable. Those are probably a big reason they are all over adoption places. They are also often purchased as guard dogs in places where break ins and burglary are a real threats. I’m guessing most are not trained well in those circumstances. They really don’t need to be as no one in their right mind is breaking into a house with a pit when they can just move to the next one. So you get a mix of those dogs winding up at adoption places. There are many great pits out there, but I’d wager that there is a bigger percentage of maladjusted pits than other breeds at shelters. If you won’t ever trust a pitbull regardless of circumstance, then I think that’s unfair. But if people like Gungy want to avoid dogs of that breed that they don’t know to be safe, I don’t blame them. As I said before, I wouldn’t have a pitbull in the house with small children. There are other breeds - Akita comes immediately to mind - that I also wouldn’t have around kids. A pit isn’t just going to just snap one day because they are a pit. Good dogs are good dogs, but they are still dogs. And that breed can do some real damage if motivated so there’s no harm in some caution. Still, I have two friends with two pits each and they are fantastic dogs I trust as much as any other. 1
LeviF Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 9 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said: The reason that is so high is cause pits are trained way more than other breeds to be aggressive and are way more likely to be abused and mistreated than other dogs. Look at the dog bite/fatalities from mid century to the late 90's..all Shepards, Rots, and Dobermans for the most part. Cause back then, they were the 'cool" dog for toughness and protection etc...and pits were not demonized the way the are today. It is not the breed, it is the individual dog and how it has been socialized, treated, etc. And just we's we all clear on the stats being quoted here. from dogbite.org and as someone mentioned ..just use google..and google more about that organization. dogbite.org the below directly from their website about their founder Yep, sure she has no ax to grind...take a look at the site, their clearly defined mission is to ban the breed, I am sure no bias shows up in their stats...and that should be fun trying to define the breed! All these sites that debunk her work and her stats... https://www.avma.org/javma-news/2017-11-15/dangerous-dog-debate https://www.reddit.com/r/AntiBSL/comments/9g24ak/dogsbiteorg_lied_about_the_breed_of_dogs_involved/ https://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2010/03/the-truth-behind-dogsbiteorg.html So I am not saying pits are not involved , just make sure we are using stats from a non biased site that does not make its money by representing and testifying in dog bite cases. So pits are more aggressive but people are lying about them being more aggressive. Got it. My point still stands. A dog is an animal. A large, aggressive dog is, at best, a useful tool IF (IF IF IF IF) it is particularly well trained from a very young age. It's not a pet. It's not a kid. It's not a family member. It's an animal and needs to be treated like one. The ***** dog cult kills me sometimes. "MY baaaaaby would never hurt aaannnyyyyone!" Yes, your *ANIMAL* would hurt someone. That's the point of their existence.
plenzmd1 Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 Just now, LeviF91 said: So pits are more aggressive but people are lying about them being more aggressive. Got it. My point still stands. A dog is an animal. A large, aggressive dog is, at best, a useful tool IF (IF IF IF IF) it is particularly well trained from a very young age. It's not a pet. It's not a kid. It's not a family member. It's an animal and needs to be treated like one. The ***** dog cult kills me sometimes. "MY baaaaaby would never hurt aaannnyyyyone!" Yes, your *ANIMAL* would hurt someone. That's the point of their existence. are you really this dense? Individual Pits are trained to be aggresive and/or are abused much more often than other breeds, hence logic dictates those individual dogs are going to be more aggresive than my dogs that have been brought as pets , in the house etc. A large dog does not mean aggresive, in my experience has been quite the opposite. Small to medium size dogs seem to be way more aggressive to me. And my dogs are family members and friends, trust them more than I would most people at TBD tailgates in Hammers...
Gugny Posted January 30, 2020 Author Posted January 30, 2020 7 minutes ago, LeviF91 said: So pits are more aggressive but people are lying about them being more aggressive. Got it. My point still stands. A dog is an animal. A large, aggressive dog is, at best, a useful tool IF (IF IF IF IF) it is particularly well trained from a very young age. It's not a pet. It's not a kid. It's not a family member. It's an animal and needs to be treated like one. The ***** dog cult kills me sometimes. "MY baaaaaby would never hurt aaannnyyyyone!" Yes, your *ANIMAL* would hurt someone. That's the point of their existence. You mad, bro? 1
plenzmd1 Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Gugny said: You mad, bro? he is..and ugly Edited January 30, 2020 by plenzmd1 1
LeviF Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said: are you really this dense? Yes, you know this. 14 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said: Individual Pits are trained to be aggresive and/or are abused much more often than other breeds, hence logic dictates those individual dogs are going to be more aggresive than my dogs that have been brought as pets , in the house etc. A large dog does not mean aggresive, in my experience has been quite the opposite. Small to medium size dogs seem to be way more aggressive to me. And my dogs are family members and friends, trust them more than I would most people at TBD tailgates in Hammers... You can take Lenz out of the lot but you can't take the lot out of Lenz! To be fair there are some people I would trust to raise their dogs right and know when their dogs are on edge/acting out of the ordinary. Some people aren't most people and are ignorant as to dog behavior and warning signs. Fun aside - one of the best dogs I know is a pit mix. Raised from a pup (abandoned and adopted from a shelter) by a little 4'11" Italian girl. Snaps to attention whenever she talks. I still maintain that pits (and other breeds) are bred to be killers as a whole. That was the whole point of making them. Pits didn't naturally evolve to what they are now, we made them for a purpose: bloodsport. 11 minutes ago, Gugny said: You mad, bro? Yes, you know this. 6 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said: he is..and ugly Also this. Edited January 30, 2020 by LeviF91 2
plenzmd1 Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 17 minutes ago, LeviF91 said: Y To be fair there are some people I would trust to raise their dogs right and know when their dogs are on edge/acting out of the ordinary. Some people aren't most people and are ignorant as to dog behavior and warning signs. Our pit mix (Taylor..named after TT) is truly the sweetest, most submissive, biggest lapdog(75lbs of solidness) i have ever been around. In terms of the point above, last time i took the 8 year old lab to the vet(Fitz), his eyes just looked a little goofy to me as the tech was starting to do some examinations. He has never even nipped at a human, let alone bite one, nor ever shown any aggressiveness to a human..but he just looked goofy. No hair up, no ears pinned,tail was fine.. nothing to show agitation..but i still asked her to put a muzzle on. He had never had one on before at the vet, but i just felt uncomfortable with that look. He was fine, no worries, but she did say something to the effect of thanks for asking for the muzzle, most people think their little darlings could never snap! 1
GoBills808 Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 2 hours ago, LeviF91 said: Even assuming that 20% is right (seems high but whatever) that means 20% of the dog population is responsible for 66% of attacks that result in a death over the last thirteen years. Still a bit out of proportion. Not when you consider the number of dogs that aren't capable of causing a fatal attack (too small)
bbb Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 6 hours ago, Cripple Creek said: I would guess that those stats are all about how the dog (owner or first responder) self identifies. I know a Yorkie that identifies as a pit. 1
plenzmd1 Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 Just now, bbb said: I know a Yorkie that identifies as a pit. And i know a pit tat identifies as a "snuggly bear" according to my wife! 1
GaryPinC Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 1 hour ago, plenzmd1 said: The reason that is so high is cause pits are trained way more than other breeds to be aggressive and are way more likely to be abused and mistreated than other dogs. Look at the dog bite/fatalities from mid century to the late 90's..all Shepards, Rots, and Dobermans for the most part. Cause back then, they were the 'cool" dog for toughness and protection etc...and pits were not demonized the way the are today. It is not the breed, it is the individual dog and how it has been socialized, treated, etc. And just we's we all clear on the stats being quoted here. from dogbite.org and as someone mentioned ..just use google..and google more about that organization. dogbite.org the below directly from their website about their founder Yep, sure she has no ax to grind...take a look at the site, their clearly defined mission is to ban the breed, I am sure no bias shows up in their stats...and that should be fun trying to define the breed! All these sites that debunk her work and her stats... https://www.avma.org/javma-news/2017-11-15/dangerous-dog-debate https://www.reddit.com/r/AntiBSL/comments/9g24ak/dogsbiteorg_lied_about_the_breed_of_dogs_involved/ https://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2010/03/the-truth-behind-dogsbiteorg.html So I am not saying pits are not involved , just make sure we are using stats from a non biased site that does not make its money by representing and testifying in dog bite cases. The breed most definitely has a role to play. I won't argue that dogbite.org has an agenda. So do you. You seem to ignore that breed plays any role. It has to be carefully considered, along with maltreatment the animal has received. Your first source debates breed specific laws, a vet's quote at the bottom: Breed "absolutely" influences a dog's behavior and is one of several factors that shape an animal's temperament, explained Dr. Sagi Denenberg, a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists and the European College of Animal Welfare and Behavioral Medicine. "No one bred a Golden Retriever to look golden. They bred dogs that can swim and spend a lot of time in the water without getting cold. We essentially bred dogs for thousands of years for their behavior," said Dr. Denenberg, an instructor and researcher at Bristol Veterinary College in the United Kingdom. Back a couple of pages, I touched on a story where a pit bull was eyeing up my son. The dog we were there to adopt was a pit bull mix. We named her Ginger, she was a brindled mutt but definitely the head was pit bull. She was so friendly, shelter employees called the fostering service and she got rescued before being put down. My wife at the time and daughter were in petsmart when they met Ginger. Ginger was the star of the show, completely affable and submissive to whoever happened by, kids and adults. Nice and very intelligent. I'm not big on adopting anything other than pups given I have kids in the house, but the family begged me to adopt her and given her nature I agreed. Ginger was 2 1/2 to 3 years old. Given the entire situation, I was very careful with Ginger in terms of training (almost none) and correcting so she could settle in. She was very obedient and well-behaved anyway. Boy, did she. After about a month of walking her everyday, she started acting aggressively to anyone I met on the street. Pulling to the end of her leash, aggressive stance and barking angrily. Scaring them away, and I had to have a tight grip on the leash. After about 2 months she started getting aggressive with my loopy English setter(after getting along great when she first arrived). It advanced to intimidation and bullying. After a month of this my Setter was allowed to sit on one couch, constantly on alert for Ginger. Then Ginger started attacking her, grabbed her by the back of the neck and tried to shake her (setter's too big though). Trying to figure out what to do next when it happened again with my ex-wife trying to break up the fight and Ginger turned on her and tore up her hand a bit. Minor surgery and full recovery but the dog was put down. I felt Ginger became very possessive of our family, wanting strangers and my other dog out. She was always great with the kids but we only had her a little over 3 months. You can argue she must have been mistreated previously but who really knows and to what extent? Would other dogs have been as affected as she was? Thank God my English setter went back to normal with zero long term issues. I've been around rescues and adoptions my entire life, they're always screwed up on some level but I've never seen behavior quite like that. I would still consider adopting a pit or mix but only as a pup, and knowing full well aggression can be a problem with the breed over most others.
plenzmd1 Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 Fair points @GaryPinC, and I am prolly not making my argument, and that’s on me. I prolly am a bit biased as the breed takes such a beating, and I believe it is more on a dog to dog basis. Guess the big difference is pit can no doubt do more damage than a schnauzer can. and I would have taken same actions with you with a Ginger!
GaryPinC Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 32 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said: Fair points @GaryPinC, and I am prolly not making my argument, and that’s on me. I prolly am a bit biased as the breed takes such a beating, and I believe it is more on a dog to dog basis. Guess the big difference is pit can no doubt do more damage than a schnauzer can. and I would have taken same actions with you with a Ginger! Hey, I agree that environment plays a bigger role most of the time. Just don't dismiss genetics, it can make a big difference. Unrelated but funny example. My SIL rescues Boston Terriers for pets. Her previous one, Buster was definitely overbred. Bug-eyed, a bit cross eyed and very lovable. Happy, scared of his shadow and the cold, but loved being with people. Completely deferential. Well-aged a few years ago when she left Buster at her dad's. There was a gopher hole about 20 yards from his door. Dad woke up, opened the door to get his paper, heard loud scuffling noises behind him, turned around to look for the dog. No dog. Scratched his head. Turned back around to pick up his paper, Buster was out at the hole, offing the gopher with 5 seconds of violent neck shaking. Thing was at least half as big as him. Came trotting back in and resumed his normal chicken-poop pacifist life. ? ? ? We all had a newfound respect for that little dog! Gophers are just oversized rats! 1
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 (edited) I suggest keeping any dog away from a 2 year old child but who ever owned that mutt should be held accountable. I mean, I hate to question intelligence here but a pit bull (or any large dog that can potentially kill or maim) around and close enough to kill a child. no, not too smart and they will now have to live with that hell. I wont get in to any type of pits are this and pits are that. those little mutts can do some damage but a pit, that's another story. I know I would never own one and I have seen what they can do. 1500 pounds pressure in that bite and a jaw that locks once its gripped on its victim. I was at a 4th of july party years ago, weekend camping out in the country and everyone brought their dogs and for the most part all animals were well behaved and kept close to their owners. but, some idiot let his pit run loose and it snatched on to a collie and had it by the throat. needless to say the pit met its demise with a .45 to the head. not a pretty site and the owners, a couple, were asked to leave and believe it or not did not put up any type fight over the killing of their mutt. the collie survived though after attention from the local vet. no, pit bulls are a breed that needs to be muzzled and on a lease when around humans and anyone with half a brain should know better then to have them around children. I don't believe a french poodle would of killed that child. Edited January 31, 2020 by DaBillsFanSince1973
SydneyBillsFan Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 All I will say is that it appears as though the young child was left unsupervised with adult dogs. For those who understand the concept of pack hierarchy, this is always a bad idea - irrespective of breed.
Johnny Hammersticks Posted January 31, 2020 Posted January 31, 2020 Good friend of mine got half of her face ripped off by a Pit bull at a music festival at Hobart College. I’ve seen pics of her in the hospital, and pics of what she looks like now. I will never trust that breed ever again.
RaoulDuke79 Posted February 1, 2020 Posted February 1, 2020 On 1/28/2020 at 11:41 PM, Augie said: When is the last time you read this story and it was a Bijon or a Golden Retriever? It may have happened that one snapped, but you don’t worry that it could happen on a daily basis. If you have a Pit Bull it should be a concern at every moment. People will come here and argue for them, and they will be wrong. Pay attention and that is obvious. Bad stats will be presented, I’ve seen all this before. They are overly dangerous animals. Goldens all day every day......on my 2nd both growing up with young children who pick, prod, pull, smack, poke, wrestle, etc......a little excitable, but you couldn't ask for a better breed. Not a mean bone in the body. 1 1
GoBills808 Posted February 1, 2020 Posted February 1, 2020 5 minutes ago, RaoulDuke79 said: Goldens all day every day......on my 2nd both growing up with young children who pick, prod, pull, smack, poke, wrestle, etc......a little excitable, but you couldn't ask for a better breed. Not a mean bone in the body. https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/dog-killed-2-month-old-baby-ripped-child-legs-father-slept-room-police-article-1.1065711
Recommended Posts