Reply
Tue 2 Jan, 2007 08:54 am
Pit bulls should not be family pets. They are too dangerous.
........................................
A 5-year-old British girl was fatally mauled by a pit bull that may have been spooked by New Year's fireworks.
Ellie Lawrenson was staying with her grandmother, Jackie Simpson, in St. Helens near Liverpool, The Independent reported. The pit bull belonged to her uncle.
Simpson heard the little girl screaming shortly after 4 a.m. Monday, police said. She dragged the dog out of the room, receiving injuries so severe that she had to be hospitalized.
Ellie died from "severe head and neck injuries."
Some neighbors told The Independent that some of Keele Simpson's dogs have been a problem. But one man said the pit bull was "soft as a puppy."
.
"I can only think that the noise, the flashes and bangs, from the fireworks have triggered the attack," Phil Davies said.
The dog, Ruben, was shot at the scene because officers decided it could not be safely removed.
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.
Quote:Chris Laurence, veterinary director of the Dogs Trust, said that a pit bull was no more dangerous than any other dog.
"The problem is not with the breed. They're bred to be aggressive to other dogs but not to humans, and are very obedient," he said. "But sadly, they're now being trained to growl and show aggression, because it's a macho dog to own ?- and if they're kept in a kennel outside, not interacting with humans, and not being supervised around children, it's a recipe for disaster. If they are properly trained, however, they're no more likely to bite you than a Jack Russell."
Last year, an undercover RSPCA operation uncovered dog-fighting pits across Britain, complete with carpet for the dogs to grip on to while they were fighting and "breaking sticks" that could be used to force the dog's jaw open as it locked itself on the face of its rival.
One man, who did not want to be named, told the Guardian that there were dozens of pit bulls bred on the Manchester estate where he lives.
"These young kids are breeding them to fight and sell them on for £100," he said. "They take a fighting dog and mate it with a dog with a bad temperament. Some of them put heavy studded collars on the dogs, then hang a weight off of it to strengthen its neck muscles and that's for fighting."
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)
Advertisement
Dog handlers nip at remark about pit bulls
By MIKE McKIBBIN and LE ROY STANDISH The Daily Sentinel
Friday, December 08, 2006
RIFLE ?- A Garfield County court judge caused a backlash Thursday from dog handlers and owners after he said Wednesday he would like to see all pit bulls killed.
Associate County Court Judge Jason Jovanovich said during Wednesday's sentencing of the owner of a pit bull that attacked and seriously injured an elderly Silt woman in September that he would push a big red button that would kill all pit bulls, if he could.
Two dog handlers, Chris McKelvey and Laura Van Dyne, both of Carbondale, said Jovanovich's statement would lead to more prejudice against pit bulls and was "very sad."
"Anytime you have a breed with a fighting origin, you have to train them maybe 10 times more just for the public perception," said McKelvey, who has trained dogs for 26 years. "These are dogs that were born to be aggressive, but it's their environment and how they're treated and trained that causes them to act out."
Every one of the pit bulls she has helped train "were cupcakes," she said.
Van Dyke said it was sad that Jovanovich said he wanted to eradicate an entire breed of dog.
"Any kind of dog can bite," she said. "If we kill all the pit bulls, where do the people who used to have pit bulls go? ... How far do we go?"
Van Dyke has taught people how to train their dogs for 10 years and said studies have shown that more people die of injuries caused while wearing bedroom slippers than from dog bites.
"I've had problem pit bulls as clients, as well as other dogs," she said. "And some of the best dogs I've known were pit bulls."
Tim Larson of Battlement Mesa said he has owned a pit bull for four years and "took umbrage" when he read Jovanovich's statement in Thursday's Daily Sentinel.
"I get upset when I read statements like that because it causes a nationwide hysteria against pit bulls," he said. "People get even more leery of the dogs, and the dogs get the short end of the stick."
Larson said the term "pit bulls" refers to three different breeds: American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier and Staffordshire bull terrier.
Garfield County Sheriff Lou Vallario said he had heard from others that Jovanovich had made similar statements against pit bulls in other court cases.
Jovanovich could not be reached for comment Thursday.
Mesa County Animal Control Director Penny McCarty provided figures that showed 230 dog bites in the first 10 months of 2005, the most current numbers she had available. Of those, small breeds, such as terriers, Pekingese and schnauzers, bit 53 people in the county.
Working dogs, such as border collies, bit 38 people, while pit bulls bit 28.
Vallario said his department does not keep similar statistics in Garfield County because state statutes prevent breed-ban legislation in counties.
"We treat all dogs the same," he said.
"If Fluffy the little terrier bites someone, we'll cite her owner just like any other dog."
McCarty said some dog breeds are "hijacked by a certain segment of the population that is irresponsible in many ways."
Thirty years ago, it was German shepherds; 20 years ago, it was Rottweilers; today it's pit bulls, she said.
They're seen as status symbols, McCarty said, and are used as protection by those involved with methamphetamine.
"Some of the dogs we have seen recently have had contact with methamphetamine," she said.
"It can certainly make them unpredictable."
Local law enforcement officials, however, said they have not seen an increase in such dangerous dogs, such as when serving warrants.
"I don't know that pit bulls are unique to any individual or type of individual," said Tom Gorman, resident agent in charge for the Drug Enforcement Agency.
"We have had two dog-related shootings this year as far as the task force is concerned. If you are threatened, you want to take care of the threat. Some dopers have them; some don't."
Sgt. Matt Lewis, a five-year veteran of the Mesa County Sheriff's Department's SWAT team, said he has encountered vicious dogs in raids.
"Absolutely there are drug dealers out there with pit bulls, and there are fine upstanding people with pit bulls, and that has nothing to do with the dog," he said.
"I truly believe it is the way you treat the animal, the way you train the animal."
"A lot of it is that pit bulls have kind of become the epitome of a dog that someone in the counterculture would want to own," said Cindy Haerle, a rescue coordinator for Mesa County Animal Services.
"It is tough-looking, and all sorts of the wrong people want to own pit bulls."
But there are many responsible owners who love the dogs because of their loyalty, intelligence and strength, she said, adding they often are used as search-and-rescue and police dogs.
Mike McKibbin can be reached via e-mail at mmckibbin@gjds. com.
~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
Quote:Mesa County Animal Control Director Penny McCarty provided figures that showed 230 dog bites in the first 10 months of 2005, the most current numbers she had available. Of those, small breeds, such as terriers, Pekingese and schnauzers, bit 53 people in the county.
Working dogs, such as border collies, bit 38 people, while pit bulls bit 28.
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.
Lord Ellpus wrote: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.
Lord Ellpus wrote: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)
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.
Bella Dea wrote:Lord Ellpus wrote: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.

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.