Pit bull kills 5-year-old girl.

I really don't think this is a breed problem but a breeder/owner problem.

A lot of people are attracted to the breed for macho image reasons. Breeders (some of them) breed the dogs to be agressive because that is what a lot of people want.

A responsible breeder and a competent owner can raise up a nice dog.

Stereotyping animals is as bad as doing it to people.
Yes, there are born bad dogs, like there are with people. But for the most part, it's all in how you raise an animal. And some dogs are easier to train then others. The thing about Pitbulls or any of their counterparts, is that they love to do what their owners what them to do. They love to please. Yes, they are strong, determined dogs. But can't you see, it'd like saying guns kill people.
And then there's the media frenzy... Do you really believe what they write?
As to this story, I question, how do the fireworks upset the dog at 4 am? And what was that child doing at 4 am? And then there's the whole thing where "some of Keele Simpson's dogs have been a problem" Okay, how many dogs? And what kind of problem? was the child sleeping with a pack of untrustworthy dogs that had been mistreated or trained to be dangerous? If this uncle's dogs have had problems, what's been done about it?

If the dog had been a Cocker Spaniel, would it have made the papers? Would they have mentioned the breed?

Blame the deed, not the breed.
And punish bad owners

Punish the deed, not the breed.

Pit bulls are fiercely loyal to their owners however they are not vicious monsters like everyone makes them out to be.

Can they attack? Sure. But so can any other dog.

People are terrified of my boxer because she has the short muzzle and "looks scary". But anyone who knows about boxers knows they'd lick you to death before hurting you.

I hate how people blame the animal, when it is the human that trains the animal to kill. Abuses the dog until it is mean, and locks it up until it is scared of everything that moves... All so they can have " a tough dog"


when will we start putting down bad humans?

Actually, any pitbull in the UK had to be 18 years old, at minimum: these dogs (and similar) are outlawed in the UK since 1991.

source: today's The Guardian, page 11

Pitbulls were specifically bred to round up Bulls, or go into a pit and fight a bull.

Bloodhounds were specifically bred to follow a scent trail.

All purebred dogs were bred for a specific purpose, and no matter how the dog is raised, it has generations of genetic crossbreeding within it to give it specific physical capabilities and behavioural traits.

I agree, the owners are probably at fault in most cases like this, but when all is said and done, a Pitbull has more than enough genetic inheritance to be a formidable, fearless killing machine. It's what we designed it to be.

To choose one purely as a family pet (I'm not talking about someone wanting a guard dog, as that's different), when there are many other breeds of dog out there who are known to be more passive and friendly by nature, seems illogical to me.

All dogs can turn, and different dogs react to different "triggers". IF they turn, all dogs can be dangerous.
However, I would rather face an angry "waggy" dog than a Pitbull/Staffy/Rotweiller/Towser any day of the week.

From Wikipedia.....

"These dogs were used in battle and for guarding, but they also served utilitarian purposes, such as farm work. Specifically, these dogs accompanied farmers into the fields to assist with bringing bulls in for breeding, castration, or slaughter. The dogs, known generally as bulldogs, protected the farmer by subduing the bull if it attempted to gore him. Typically a dog would do this by biting the bull on the nose and holding on until the bull submitted. Because of the nature of their job, bulldogs were bred to have powerful, muscular bodies, and the resolve to hold onto a violently-struggling bull, even when injured....."

I'd pick a pit as a pet. And I have. And I will again. And purely as a family pet.

The dog in my avatar is mostly pitbull. She might not look like the typical.

Do you know there is no sceintific way to know if a dog is a particular breed? It's all by looks.
I heard a story that out of a litter of puppies, 6 were "deemed" pitbulls by authorities, in a county that banned pitbulls, and were put down and two were left to live.
Does this make sense?

Again....from Wikipedia....


..."The Clifton study[2] revealed that pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks on children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal being studied......"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull#_note-1 (reference no.2 at bottom of page)

~Do Pit Bulls bite more than any other breed? Do they really top some "most dangerous dog" chart? Does such a chart even exist? These answers to this questions are, respectively: "There is no way to know", "No", and "No". Want more information? Read on.

Millions of people are bitten by dogs across the US every year, and the population is clamoring for a scapegoat on which to place the blame. Supposed "bite statistics" allow an outlet for such anxiety. However, how accurate are these stats, really?

1) There is no national registry for such information. Most communities keep their own stats. In my county, for example, they are kept by the health department.

2) Most bite reports are based on information collected from the victim and/or a witness. This means that the dog's breed is named by the victim. Since both my Rottweiler and French Bulldog have been referred to as "pit bulls" by passersby I give very little credence to the victim's identification of a dog involved in a bite case.

3) Mixed breeds may or may not be lumped in with purebred dogs in such stats. I have seen the raw data collected by my county, and then heard the numbers released to the media..... they usually don't add up..... hmmmmmm

4) Without knowing the population of a given breed in a particular area, there is no way of knowing whether 10 bites by a given breed represent one really evil dog who has bitten many people, or 10 dogs who have each had a single incident.

5) Statistics are only as good as their interpretation. Any researcher will tell you so. "Who funded the study??"~

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/sadreality.html
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/sadreality.html
http://www.dogwatch.net/links.html
http://www.austinlostpets.com/kidskorner/2October/pitbull.htm
http://www.pbrc.net/home.html
http://www.lucydog.com/press.html
http://www.pitbulls.com/stuff/press.html
http://www.furryfriendsfoundation.com/Truth03/Truth03.htm
http://www.badrap.org/rescue/
~My Viscious APBT~
http://www.msnusers.com/LiLPinkyPittie/shoebox.msnw

Could it be any more clear than that?
23% of the bites were from small breeds.
17% of the bites were from working breeds.
12% of the bites were from pit bulls.
48% unknown (it would be interesting to see what breeds the other half made up)

Like I said....ALL dogs can be dangerous, and all dogs can bite.

I think I'd have more of a chance in removing a dachshund from my face though. Even a Labrador.

That wasn't suppose to be funny, I know but all I could envision was a weiner dog stuck to your face.

from wikipedia also
The American Temperament Test Society, Inc. (ATTS) breed statistics as of December 2005 show an 83.5% passing rate for the American Pit Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Terrier and an 84.7% passing rate for the Staffordshire bull terrier, as compared to an 81.2% average pass rate for all dog breeds.



You a can find information to back any arguement. If you want to believe that pitbulls are dangerous, then you can find the information to defend you postion. That's a no brainer.

All I'm saying is:
It's not fair to blame a breed of dog. and it's never fair to ban a particular breed.
If you don't want to be around a particular dog, fine, but I would hope you realize it's a prejudice. Much like "I don't want that Black man in my house, he'll steal something" or "That white man can't play basketball on my team"

"Look out, that guy looks like a serial killer"

"If you are from West Virginia, then you must be married to your cousin or brother"

I personally don't trust min pins


but I'm sure they make great pets for some people.

Weiner dog! Ha!

We just call them sausage dogs here. I'll have to look up exactly what a weiner is. I know the rude meaning, and can therefore only assume it is a sausage or frankfurter?

I agree with Ellpus. These dogs were bred for a specific purpose and anybody who would leave a small child or baby unsupervised with such an animal is fookin stupid. Maybe they don't bite as much as other breeds and maybe they aren't more aggressive than other breeds but when they bite they cannot let go and they will not stop until they have killed (sounds like terminator). The current trend for people here in the UK to have these dogs to portray this supposedly macho image makes me sick.

Lord Ellpus is right. Dogs that bite to kill should be banned.
.
We cannot wait until they attack, it is too late to save the victim.
.
We are all upset when the police does not act in cases of a woman being threatened by a deranged man. The correct way is to prevent another murder.
.
Ban all breeds that kill. There are plenty of other dogs one can buy.