nicolesheridan 0 #26 November 6, 2005 Farmers Branch, Texas, a suburb of Dallas, has kept accurate records since 1980. During a 7 year period from 1980 through 1987, this is what was recorded. Total bites: 1,593. Pit bulls, 30 bites, or 1.89% of the total (or 96th on a list of 100 breeds). Other studies tend to show the same results and because of so many mongrels that have similar features and the unfair lumping in with the American Pit Bull Terrier ( APBT ), it seems reasonable to assume that the figures are actually much lower. The American Temperament Test Society continually ranks Pits better in temperamnet than many other breeds such as the Airedale Terrier, Basenji, Beagle, Bichon Frise, Border Collie, Chihuahua, Collie, Dachshund(4 of 6 varieties), English Setter, Lhasa Opso, Pomeranian, Shar-Pei, Shiba Inu, Shih Tzu, Schnauzer, and Toy Poodle. Check out: www.atts.org."People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But, the self is not something that one finds. It is something that one creates"- Thomas Szasz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelel01 1 #27 November 6, 2005 Sounds like the test might not ave been conducted accurately, unless the same number of each type of dog was used. What if it was based on typical ownership numbers, and there were 30 pit bulls to 800 retrievers? Also, I think a pit bull's bite could be (or is normally) much more devastating than a retriever's. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #28 November 6, 2005 QuoteQuoteObviously, it's the owners, not the dogs. When I see a pit-bull, tied to a stake with about 30' of log-chain, I know what that's about! I've known folks with pit-bulls, Rotweillers, Dobermans, etc. that thought they were lap-dogs and would love you to death before they'd bite. I don't believe, these dogs are mean and nasty, by nature but are mean by their raising. I've seen mean cocker spaniels and mean horses, for that matter. It was the owner. Maybe, I'm naieve!? I don't know, I used to think that way. That it's how the dog was raised, not it's breeding. I raised/trained/raced sleddogs for several years. You don't have to teach the dog to run, it's bred into them...it's what they do. IMO it's that way with the aggressive breeds. Not that good training can't mellow them out and help in control, but the aggression is still there and must be considered. ____________________________________ O.K., I learned something. I do know, from working horses, you can take a sweet animal and make a real mess out of it. I may be comparing apples to oranges, too. For example, I loaned my horse to a guy to rope off of, competitively. After about 6-weeks, my horse was a mess. He was suddenly, very hyper. It took me about a year, to get the hyper out of him and back to the calm gentle horse, he was before. On the other hand, from reading this thread, this may not be the case with dogs. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #29 November 6, 2005 QuoteQuoteObviously, it's the owners, not the dogs. I've known folks with pit-bulls, Rotweillers, Dobermans, etc. that thought they were lap-dogs and would love you to death before they'd bite. I think you have a valid point with regard to owners. That said, the pit that mauled my greyhound was a sweetheart when it came to people, it was only around other dogs that his instincts swam to the surface. That kind of territoriality (word?) on the street NOBODY needs. ___________________________________ For sure! I've seen that with various animals. The 'Alpha male' thing or 'Alpha female' thing. From the greyhounds that I've been around, they were all, very timid and almost 'nervous', yet gentle dogs. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Vectracide 0 #30 November 7, 2005 So according to your own source of information, you have proven yourself wrong on the Golden Retriever Tested Passed Failed % Golden Retriever 659 551 108 83.6% Labrador Retriever 644 587 57 91.1% American Pit Bull Terrier 469 391 78 83.4% Now I threw in the Labrador Retriever in there, as many get the Golden and Lab breed confused as they are very close Genetically. Your information was based on a old study, not current to 2004. Either way, the study is missing one key piece of information that makes it invalid, socialially diverse testing. The study you say was done in a suburd in Texas. It is unfair to test temperment in dogs if you do not test the same breed in all social/economic classes. It is widely known, that the Pit Bull breed is more prevelently owned by those in the lower social/economic class. Either for the "I have a big mean dog, so I am big and mean too" loser, or the fighting dog owner. Of course there are exceptions to this rule, as I am sure you are. A middle class person that loves the breed and raises it accordingly. The problem is that the APBT is sought out by morons for its specific aggresiveness and singlular loyalty to the owner. These are the individuals that are generally the idiots in the news. Please don't get me wrong, as I stand by the statement that a dogs temperment has alot to do with nurture. But you cannot deny/ignore certain dogs nature. I am not crosshairing the APBT, but alot of other dogs you have pointed out as well. The little yapper napolian complex rats out there are some of the worst biters of them all, but they lack the ability to do much harm to an 10+ child and adults. Therefore they do not get the negative attention that they should. When is the last time you heard this.... "A wild pack of Toy Poodles when on a killing rampage in the streets of Dallas today. Local deputies had to empty thier guns into the viscious dogs after they had mauled 4 people, killing one." Yeah.....I'd like to see that... ------------------------------ Controlled and Deliberate..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites D22369 0 #31 November 7, 2005 your dogs have NO BUSINESS wandering around un supervised EVERQuote I agree, and would never let mine wander with the exception of the dropzone where he has many people that he knows are the "bosses" to stop him from any bad behavior Those who are not familiar Pit Bulls have jaws that will lock shut, allowing them to shread the hell ouf of who ever they are attacking. uhhh, no they dont. They are just very tenacious and have very developed jaw muscles. This is a myth that just keeps getting perpitrated. If that breed has a tendancy to attack Before you make these assumptions, you really should do some research on the subject. Pitbulls are naturally very agressive, but towards humans-generally not vicious, it depends on the level of socialization, and a good owner that knows how to handle/train the animal. My unferocious 4 1/2 year old 105lb pitbull has never attacked anyone. He was raised on the dropzone with tandems, students and new people showing up all the time, (I lived there four nights per week) and he was never chained unless he was being a pest and running across canopy's or interfering with jumpers landing. As a matter of fact, there was one jumper he dislikes completely, when this jumper shows up, Turbo growls, and walks away - letting this jumper know to leave him alone, never once inspite of his dislike has he every tried to bite him. go to petsmart and purchase the book called "bully breeds". you will learn a lot about the subject of pitbulls. The owners had better be charged*** on this I agree completely with you. RoyThey say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nicolesheridan 0 #32 November 7, 2005 No, you are looking at two different things. The scores you listed are for temperament testing, not for actual bites. The other study (the Texas one) is the one that placed Goldens above APBTs as far as ACTUAL bite occurences. There is also a listing in my vet's office of reported dog bites per year by breed. It is cross referenced by number of dogs of that breed registered in that given year (so all dogs are purebred...this does not cover mixes or mutts) and then assigns a percentage to each (ex. x% of all Basset hound bit a human in a given year). This eliminates the problem of "well there could be more of this dog breed than that, how do you compare?" On that list, APBTs have been listed below 20th every year for the past four (that's as long as I have been going to this vet so I am not aware of info before this.) I will see if they will fax me a copy of this list in the next few days. While I agree that a bite form a Pit or any other large powerful dog is probably going to do more damage than a bite from a small dog, it does not mean that these dogs, when raised properly (like any dog) are more viscious than any other breed, As far as a nature vs. nurture arguemnet goes, remember this breed was created to fight hence the dog agression they exhibit. They were not bred to be aggressive towards humans and in fact the opposite is true. Of course, you can train this quality into any dog, but it is not something that is in the bloodline of PUREBRED registered APBTs. The only point I am trying to make in my posts is that APBTs should not be lumped into one big group and be made monsters of. Statistics show that these dogs score as well on temperament testing and rank lower on bite indexes than dogs of many other breeds, yet people continue to pass on inaccurate information regarding the breed, incorrectly identify dogs involved in many attacks as "pit bulls" when in fact they are not purebred dogs of any kind, and make a general media monster out of the entire breed."People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But, the self is not something that one finds. It is something that one creates"- Thomas Szasz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites eeneR 3 #33 November 7, 2005 QuoteIf that breed has a tendancy to attack -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Before you make these assumptions, you really should do some research on the subject. Pitbulls are naturally very agressive, but towards humans-generally not vicious, it depends on the level of socialization, and a good owner that knows how to handle/train the animal Well first off...that comment is geared towards ANY breed that is showing a history of attacking. I dont care what it is. Dogs that are bred to hunt and take down prey are also bred to attack. So before you tell me to do my research on dogs you had better undersand what I said. I have done quite a bit of research on animal behavior. Not specific to the pit bull, but to behavior of canine in general. I admit I was wrong about the locking jaw, but as it has been said the jaw is very strong and well formed. And you cannot deny they have the ability to tear the shit out of a kid. If you disagree...how about talking to the poor kid sitting in the hospital here who has been mauled so severly he will need a shit load of reconstruction to ever remotely be normal, and that isnt from the news...but from someone I know AT the hospital, who has been a friend of mine for YEARS. These dogs can harm if in the wrong hands...period. I worked at a shelter, I have seen what people can do to a perfectly good dog....I have also seen what happens to these dogs, as well as what these fucked up people have done for the rest of us who do have dogs and take responsibility for them. If breeders would screen both the dogs better and the owners it probably wouldnt be so bad, and yes I know there are a lot of good breeders out there, but unfortuantly there are a lot that are not. That is where the problem comes in. My issues are not specific to pit bulls, my issues come from owners not respecting the breed they have and what they are capible of doing to people.....that is my problem. It goes FOR ALL DOGS period.She is not a "Dumb Blonde" - She is a "Light-Haired Detour Off The Information Superhighway." eeneR TF#72, FB#4130, Incauto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SniperCJ 0 #34 November 7, 2005 Thankfully someone set you straight on the locking jaw thing. Thank you nicolesheridan! Now lets work on the other stuff... QuoteHer other bud was an American Staff (not to be confused with a pit bull, look similar but are not) The AmStaff IS a 'pit bull' There's no such 'breed' as pit bull. Any 'fighting' dog can be called a 'pit bull', although several different breeds are commonly referred to as pit bulls, namely the APBT, the American Staffordshire Terrier (AmStaff), the Bull Terrier, American Bulldog, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. They all originated from the same general pit-fighting stock from over 100 years ago. Just as the cute little Jack Russell terrier was bred for a specific purpose (fighting badgers), the 'pit bulls' were bred to fight, be it bulls (bull baiting), bears (bear baiting) or other dogs (pit fighting). Animal (dog) aggressive stock was encouraged while human aggressive stock was culled. They were never bred for human aggression. It was discouraged in the strongest sense. These dogs are not for the first time dog owner. They require a strong hand, firm discipline, and socialization. It would be good to note that although Labs are a very popular first dog, they also arent the ideal first time dog. Theyre distructive if left to their own imaginations, require lots of attention, and the willingness to exercise all that pent up energy. (Why is Lucky digging up the yard??) You may have done "quite a bit of research on animal behavior", but it seems a little more research is in your future if you want to be properly informed. Also, this thread MIGHT want to be moved to Speakers Corner. It IS gonna get out of hand... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skycat 0 #35 November 7, 2005 QuoteI'm not sure if you've ever owned/raised a working breed dog. They are NOT for inexperienced dog owners. They require extremely firm and consistent discipline and need to always understand their place in the "pack" (i.e. human family). All these dogs are highly intelligent, energetic and quite territorial. This is the best line of this entire thread. I never knew the joys and the pains you can get from raising a working breed dog (Belgian Sheepdog). When that dog is confident, dominant, and trying to climb the social ladder you can not for one minute slip in your control of him/her. We got our boy at 9 months and he was well on his way down the wrong track. Five months later he is obedient and knows he has to do what he is told or there are consequences for his actions. Even though he is very sweet to the neighbor kids I would never ever trust him alone with one, those small running people would bring out his prey drive in a heartbeat, and this dog has prey drive in spades. The best thing someone can do for their working breed dog is give it a job. Keep it mentally and physically stimulated and both dog and owner will be happy.Fly it like you stole it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skycat 0 #36 November 7, 2005 QuoteWhile it is true that the number of fatal bites is greater among large powerful breed breeds, data from CDC studies show that small dogs such as dachshunds, cocker spaniels and even a Yorkshire terrier have killed humans. In Los Angeles last year, a Pomeranian caused fatal injuries to a 6-week-old baby in her crib. "Bites by Chihuahuas are probably as numerous as bites by German shepherds," says Bonnie Beaver, executive director of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists at Texas A&M University Is this the CDC report you were looking at titled, "Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998," says among the more than 300 deaths that occurred from dog attacks over 20 years, pit bulls were the attackers in 118 cases, Rottweilers in 67 cases, German shepherds in 41 cases, and huskies in 21 cases. The remainder of fatalities were caused by several other breeds. What is interesting is, the document suggests controlling dogs based on behavior instead of breed, and punishing owners on the basis of behavior instead of breed. http://www.9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=5dbf5572-0abe-421a-01f9-06dd8ab03794&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bfFly it like you stole it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites D22369 0 #37 November 7, 2005 These dogs can harm if in the wrong hands...period. Quote I agree completely. I have seen what people can do to a perfectly good dog so have I, and it makes me sick... My issues are not specific to pit bulls, my issues come from owners not respecting the breed they have and what they are capible of doing *** again I agree completely. I get so sick of the jerks --> and not all of them are men <-- who get this breed because its a penis extension...... the idiots with the "oh look, I have a vicious animal, I must be cool" mentality piss me off. They do require a greater degree of socializing than other breeds. Some people do not care to give the animal the training and discipline needed..... A lot of the respectable breeders are now trying to foster a milder temperament to pitts. Rather than breeding the most agressive to the most agressive.... but still trying to keep the traits that make some of us love them so much. I hope that the owner is tossed in jail for a good amount of time and banned from owning animals, he obviously isnt smart enough to have them.... not that that will make everything right... RoyThey say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nicolesheridan 0 #38 November 7, 2005 Yes, and I totally agree with you. Just as we humans should be judged on our bahavior and not on our sex, religion, race, etc. dogs should be judged based on their behavior....period."People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But, the self is not something that one finds. It is something that one creates"- Thomas Szasz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites eeneR 3 #39 November 7, 2005 QuoteYou may have done "quite a bit of research on animal behavior", but it seems a little more research is in your future if you want to be properly informed. Again you are missing my point, I never said breed traits was what I studied, it is canine behavior...which doesnt mean I know where what breed comes from where. I can tell you if you call an amstaff a pit bull the owner might bit you They are just as protective of the breed as the pit owners are in keeping a good reputation, course those are also the ones that give a shit, and understand what they are dealing with. More of those less problems with the dogs. QuoteAlso, this thread MIGHT want to be moved to Speakers Corner. It IS gonna get out of hand... So be it. My main point of all of this is that owners need to not pretend that ANY dog no matter what the breed need to take responsibility of it, and fully understand what it is capable of. Yes it may be a couch potato, but at any given point if it so chooses can attack...PERIOD. I am done, cause it seems everyone wants to defend the breed, when really yes that is part of it, but the bigger issue is the owners not understanding what they are dealing with. Yes I agree ALL dogs can be good dogs in a right home, but that is what is not happening, these (to clarify, any dog with the ability to do harm to a child or adult) dogs are getting into the hands of people not equipped to give them the correct enviroment. You can give me all the shit about not knowing everything about every breed, what I do know is some have much stronger jaws, can move faster and tend to do more damage when they are provoke to attack. I never said it was breed specific, i am human and can be givin wrong information. Shit happens. I am going to say this one more time, so maybe it sinks in....THIS GOES FOR ALL DOGS, THEY ALL HAVE THE ABILITY TO CAUSE HARM. THEY ARE NOT LITTLE PLAY TOYS, THEY ARE ANIMALS.She is not a "Dumb Blonde" - She is a "Light-Haired Detour Off The Information Superhighway." eeneR TF#72, FB#4130, Incauto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites eeneR 3 #40 November 7, 2005 Quoteand huskies in 21 cases. It is funny how many people do not realize that huskys have attacked. It is one thing I make damn sure with Dakota, he is kept in his place at all times. Same thing with my Shiba. I did all my research on these two breeds before I got them and understood what the pro's and con's were as well as what I needed to do. QuoteWhat is interesting is, the document suggests controlling dogs based on behavior instead of breed, and punishing owners on the basis of behavior instead of breed. This right here is the key, yes some breeds have certain traits, but not all the dogs do. Goes both ways, the specific animal behavior is what you need to key into. The more agressive dogs will show certain behaviors which need to be nipped in the ass IMMEDIATLY to stop them from becoming a major problem. Getting the dog as a pup allows to do do the molding with these traits, but in the same token people have successfully rescued an older dog and turned it around. But this is where the owner needs to understand what they are dealing with. These are not just cute fuzzy lil things...you need to do more then feed and walk them. Alot of people see some of these behaviors when the dog is a pup and think it is cute or no big deal, only to have it manifest into something much worse.She is not a "Dumb Blonde" - She is a "Light-Haired Detour Off The Information Superhighway." eeneR TF#72, FB#4130, Incauto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lindsey 0 #41 November 7, 2005 Renee, as much as I love dogs, I think that dogs (or their owners) who repeatedly cause the injuries that Pit Bulls cause should be scrutinized. When children are killed by dogs, a large percentage of the attacks are by Pit Bulls. Or does the media just cover the rest of them up in order to make the breed look bad? I doubt it. I don't know how prone they are to attack vs. other dogs, but you just don't hear stories of the neighbor's labrador killing a child.... I love dogs, and I think that most Pit Bulls are probably good dogs. But I also have no problem with making ownership of them difficult because of their potential to cause such serious harm. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AlexCrowley 0 #42 November 7, 2005 I think the issue here is that you're perception is biased by media stories. Dog attacks are common among all breeds. Pits are powerful, but there are many other breeds just as capable, but with a less sordid public past and less photogenic (a pit is a brick of muscle and jaws). Pits just have a reputation. Any other breed attacking a kid is an anomaly - the owner will be taken to task for the attack, but it's isolated and rarely even makes the paper. A pitbull attacking a human merely reinforces the fact that "Everyone already knows" that pitbulls are dangerous dogs. A non-pit bite will only get coverage if it's fatal. I'm not suggesting any conspiracy, only pointing out that editors love pitbull horror stories. Anyone can see how evil they are. It's tougher to sell a black labrador as an evil threat to children. Dogs are dogs. rigs are rigs. If you dont know what you're doing with your rig, you choose the wrong style or size canopy, you turn too low, you dont turn on your cypres....you break your leg landing, or worse. Is it the canopy at fault? The canopy is a canopy. If you dont know what you're doing with a dog you might choose the wrong breed, from the wrong breeder, and not train him properly, not take time to get him to the vet, not discipline him properly, not handle any psychological issues that become apparent during his youth. If the dog then hurts a human being is that the dogs fault? The dog is a dog. That goes for any breed. I have deep scars from a black lab bite I got when a friend brought me into their house. My brother in law was bitten and hospitalized from a retriever bite after he decided to try and help it after being left outside by it's owner and tied up outside a store (yeah, he realized it was more his fault for doing it). I've had the family cocker spaniel (a breed known for epilepsy) have a seizure and try to attack me when I was younger. I currently have a rescued beagle/basset that I've recently discovered has some food aggressive tendancies that I'm working on breaking him out of - based on his behavior he's a dog who's been heavily abused at some point in his 6 years of life. I have a close friend who's kept pit bulls for decades, they are demanding to train and discipline, but he always gets them from reputable dealers or rescue groups, always tests their behavior and then works with them intensively. His dogs would play with my 5 year old and never once react badly to anything a boisterous 5 year old can get up to while under supervision. In fact the bond of 'you're a little person who drops food' led to a deep friendship between them both. His pits love humans and would never - in normal life - harm a person. However, when out on walks the owner carries a stick to prise open the dogs jaws, explains how to say hi to his dog when children ask, and pays particular attention to other dogs (Pits are often dog aggressive). Recently inner city "breeders" have been introducing human aggressiveness as a way to make them more 'useful'. Which to me makes working with a reputable breeder/rescue home even more imperitive. Oh crap, this is the Bonfire? Sorry, thought this was SC for a second there. I'll get me coat.... TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ladyskydiver 0 #43 November 7, 2005 I've owned pit bulls. And they have been the biggest babies. I've owned Rotts, and again...babies. I've owned Akitas, again, lap dog babies. I've owned breeds that are dog aggressive, protective of family and home, etc. And I've managed to raise babies. HOWEVER, I've also been very aware that with ANY dog, the owner has a very great responsibility in how it is being raised and how the dog turns out. There is a chance that no matter what, the dog will be aggressive (and I've seen cocker spaniels that'd sooner rip your ankle apart than let you pet them). And in that kind of a situation, the owner needs to seriously sit down and reflect on what they need to do with the dog - no matter what breed. I'm in full agreement with someone requiring a person who is getting a dog - no matter what breed, age, etc. - be required to go through training on how to handle the breed. The reality is that there are people out there that should never own a dog, who neglect the dog, etc. and then wonder why the dog is anti-social and attacks. Around 6 months of age, a dog will start testing it's owner for the "leader of the pack" position. And at that time, the owner ends up in a situation that will determine the outcome of the dog's temperament. If the owner puts the dog in place and shows the dog that they are boss, the dog will test the owner a couple of more times and then will back off as dominance has been established. And I'm not talking the owner gets violet with the dog as that will bring into play a whole 'nother set of issues to be dealt with where the dog feels it must defend itself - against anyone who displays whatever sign the dog has recognized as a prerequisite to being injured. Keep in mind that dogs are pack animals and will protect their territory, owners, etc. To specifically single out pit bulls is bull! To single out rotten owners who should never have been allowed to raise any dog is a very valid point. Pit bulls were given a reputation and now people are automatically saying that they're bad when they fail to look at the owners. IT IS THE OWNERS RESPONSIBILITY TO BE FULLY AWARE OF ALL OF THE BREEDS CHARACTERISTICS AND TENDENCIES AND TO APPROPRIATELY HANDLE AND MITIGATE ANY POSSIBLE ISSUES. If the owner is incapable or unable to do so, they should not own ANY breed.Life is short! Break the rules! Forgive quickly! Kiss slowly! Love truly, Laugh uncontrollably. And never regret anything that made you smile. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lindsey 0 #44 November 7, 2005 I don't think my perception is biased by the news media. I think if Labradors killed children frequently then they'd be in the media. Fact is that all dogs bite. Last dog I was bitten by was a little bitty tiny dog. But know what? It didn't kill me or try to kill me. While nobody wants to be scarred by a dog, the dogs that put children in ICU or in the morgue with relative frequency need to be under scrutiny. The bottom line, after all the justifications and statistics, is that those particular dogs mortally wound people far too often. I don't think they should be banned, but I do think their ownership should be difficult.... Peace~ linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites grue 1 #45 November 7, 2005 Make no mistake, the media loves to sensationalise things. Remember the summer a couple years ago with "all the shark attacks"? That year was below average for shark attacks, the media just needed something to blow out of proportion.cavete terrae. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,565 #46 November 7, 2005 OK, I'll chime in. I've owned dogs almost my whole life, from puppies when I was little to my current pair, a small Rottweiler, and a rescued Dachshund mix. I'm used to laid-back mongrels. The Rottweiler (who was sort of a rescue, in that it was either me or the pound when her owner was going to be in an apartment for 2-3 years) is nothing like a laid-back mongrel. She is very sweet; the neighbor kids all know that she's more than safe to pet and they like her (which is more than can be said about the small one -- he was abused at some time and gets territorial at unpredictable times). But she is the stubbornest dog I've ever owned, and thoroughly focused on food, and small critters. She does well on a leash, until a cat or a squirrel (well, or a truck with a noisy trailer) goes by. Then I have to very actively hold her. I regularly remind her of who is boss, make her wait for her food, etc. And yes, she regularly tests me to see what she can get away with. It has to always be the same -- absolutely nothing. I love her dearly -- she's the most interesting dog I've ever owned, and the world is always a new and exciting experience to her. But definitely challenging. Very definitely. It's not just the owners. The same owner who can do a great job with many dogs might not be the right one for a rottweiler (or a spaniel -- they need a lot of attention), or other dogs. Talk to someone who knows something about breeds, and be honest about how much and what kind of attention you're likely to give. It's not like having a child, where you can't pick what kind of child. With a dog, you get a head start when you pick a breed. It might not work out the way you planned, but it's more likely to. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites eeneR 3 #47 November 7, 2005 QuoteMake no mistake, the media loves to sensationalise things. Remember the summer a couple years ago with "all the shark attacks"? That year was below average for shark attacks, the media just needed something to blow out of proportion. That is understood....however seeing I know someone who works at the hospital, and worked on 2 of the kids brought in on this specific attack...I can tell you it was bad...not just the media.....and this person isnt some random person, she and I have been best friends for almost 18 years now. She doesnt call upset in the middle of the night for no reason. People not taking responsibilty for the pets they have pisses me off....only reason this was posted.She is not a "Dumb Blonde" - She is a "Light-Haired Detour Off The Information Superhighway." eeneR TF#72, FB#4130, Incauto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AlexCrowley 0 #48 November 7, 2005 Quote It's not just the owners. The same owner who can do a great job with many dogs might not be the right one for a rottweiler (or a spaniel -- they need a lot of attention), or other dogs. Talk to someone who knows something about breeds, and be honest about how much and what kind of attention you're likely to give. It's not like having a child, where you can't pick what kind of child. With a dog, you get a head start when you pick a breed. It might not work out the way you planned, but it's more likely to. Wendy W. Hmm I agree and disagree. I completely agree with everything that you have in your post except the first sentence of the above paragraph. The dog doesnt get to choose who takes him home, the owner does. I firmly believe that it's a potential dog owners responsibility to investigate the various options using the criteria you described. For example, I've wanted a staffordshire terrier - personality wise it's the perfect dog (on paper) for me as an individual. However it was obvious to me that my current life wasnt a good match for that breed and went back to the drawing board for an animal that fit into the current variables in my life. In a few years when things change I'll revisit the idea of a staffie. The cost of my decision? A couple of beers for the dog owners I talked to and the price of a couple of breed specific books. (and a copy of The Dogs Mind) edited to add the following..I did some digging for a source that wasnt trying to be pro or anti bully dogs and came up with the following, which raises some interesting issues - especially the media reporting issues involved in dog attacks. National Canine Research Foundation a group recognized by the American Kennel Club. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skycat 0 #49 November 7, 2005 QuoteAround 6 months of age, a dog will start testing it's owner for the "leader of the pack" position. And at that time, the owner ends up in a situation that will determine the outcome of the dog's temperament. If the owner puts the dog in place and shows the dog that they are boss, the dog will test the owner a couple of more times and then will back off as dominance has been established. And I'm not talking the owner gets violet with the dog as that will bring into play a whole 'nother set of issues to be dealt with where the dog feels it must defend itself - against anyone who displays whatever sign the dog has recognized as a prerequisite to being injured. Just in case someone doesn't know what she means by enforcing dominance over a dog without violence, here is an example of one of the many things we did with our social climbing male. At his worst he had to down (most submissive posture) for everything and I fed him by hand piece of food by piece of food. He had to make eye contact with me and down before getting each and every morsel. He got two tries if he didn't do it I took the food dish away and he missed a meal. In total he missed 3 meals (not in a row), but he quickly got the fact that he had to obey to get anything he wanted. Now when I go and fill his dish he is already laying down in the spot where his dish sits ready to eat. When a dog like him comes up to you wanting attention you have to ignore him you have to make sure attention is on your terms you called him over made him sit or down and then petted him. Everything has to be a training session whether it is doggie push ups or heads up heal, he has to work for it all. Training and obedience is a lifestyle, not just a 6 week course. Plus if you want to get into a real debate and move this to SC, I'll toss out there that 100% positive training(petsmart clicker training) is the worst things for dominant dogs, they need to know there are consequences for their actions.Fly it like you stole it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,565 #50 November 7, 2005 I guess my point is that people who think that loving kindness will make any dog into a sweetie are probably fooling themselves. Dogs have natures, and some of those natures are breed-specific. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 2 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Vectracide 0 #30 November 7, 2005 So according to your own source of information, you have proven yourself wrong on the Golden Retriever Tested Passed Failed % Golden Retriever 659 551 108 83.6% Labrador Retriever 644 587 57 91.1% American Pit Bull Terrier 469 391 78 83.4% Now I threw in the Labrador Retriever in there, as many get the Golden and Lab breed confused as they are very close Genetically. Your information was based on a old study, not current to 2004. Either way, the study is missing one key piece of information that makes it invalid, socialially diverse testing. The study you say was done in a suburd in Texas. It is unfair to test temperment in dogs if you do not test the same breed in all social/economic classes. It is widely known, that the Pit Bull breed is more prevelently owned by those in the lower social/economic class. Either for the "I have a big mean dog, so I am big and mean too" loser, or the fighting dog owner. Of course there are exceptions to this rule, as I am sure you are. A middle class person that loves the breed and raises it accordingly. The problem is that the APBT is sought out by morons for its specific aggresiveness and singlular loyalty to the owner. These are the individuals that are generally the idiots in the news. Please don't get me wrong, as I stand by the statement that a dogs temperment has alot to do with nurture. But you cannot deny/ignore certain dogs nature. I am not crosshairing the APBT, but alot of other dogs you have pointed out as well. The little yapper napolian complex rats out there are some of the worst biters of them all, but they lack the ability to do much harm to an 10+ child and adults. Therefore they do not get the negative attention that they should. When is the last time you heard this.... "A wild pack of Toy Poodles when on a killing rampage in the streets of Dallas today. Local deputies had to empty thier guns into the viscious dogs after they had mauled 4 people, killing one." Yeah.....I'd like to see that... ------------------------------ Controlled and Deliberate..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D22369 0 #31 November 7, 2005 your dogs have NO BUSINESS wandering around un supervised EVERQuote I agree, and would never let mine wander with the exception of the dropzone where he has many people that he knows are the "bosses" to stop him from any bad behavior Those who are not familiar Pit Bulls have jaws that will lock shut, allowing them to shread the hell ouf of who ever they are attacking. uhhh, no they dont. They are just very tenacious and have very developed jaw muscles. This is a myth that just keeps getting perpitrated. If that breed has a tendancy to attack Before you make these assumptions, you really should do some research on the subject. Pitbulls are naturally very agressive, but towards humans-generally not vicious, it depends on the level of socialization, and a good owner that knows how to handle/train the animal. My unferocious 4 1/2 year old 105lb pitbull has never attacked anyone. He was raised on the dropzone with tandems, students and new people showing up all the time, (I lived there four nights per week) and he was never chained unless he was being a pest and running across canopy's or interfering with jumpers landing. As a matter of fact, there was one jumper he dislikes completely, when this jumper shows up, Turbo growls, and walks away - letting this jumper know to leave him alone, never once inspite of his dislike has he every tried to bite him. go to petsmart and purchase the book called "bully breeds". you will learn a lot about the subject of pitbulls. The owners had better be charged*** on this I agree completely with you. RoyThey say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nicolesheridan 0 #32 November 7, 2005 No, you are looking at two different things. The scores you listed are for temperament testing, not for actual bites. The other study (the Texas one) is the one that placed Goldens above APBTs as far as ACTUAL bite occurences. There is also a listing in my vet's office of reported dog bites per year by breed. It is cross referenced by number of dogs of that breed registered in that given year (so all dogs are purebred...this does not cover mixes or mutts) and then assigns a percentage to each (ex. x% of all Basset hound bit a human in a given year). This eliminates the problem of "well there could be more of this dog breed than that, how do you compare?" On that list, APBTs have been listed below 20th every year for the past four (that's as long as I have been going to this vet so I am not aware of info before this.) I will see if they will fax me a copy of this list in the next few days. While I agree that a bite form a Pit or any other large powerful dog is probably going to do more damage than a bite from a small dog, it does not mean that these dogs, when raised properly (like any dog) are more viscious than any other breed, As far as a nature vs. nurture arguemnet goes, remember this breed was created to fight hence the dog agression they exhibit. They were not bred to be aggressive towards humans and in fact the opposite is true. Of course, you can train this quality into any dog, but it is not something that is in the bloodline of PUREBRED registered APBTs. The only point I am trying to make in my posts is that APBTs should not be lumped into one big group and be made monsters of. Statistics show that these dogs score as well on temperament testing and rank lower on bite indexes than dogs of many other breeds, yet people continue to pass on inaccurate information regarding the breed, incorrectly identify dogs involved in many attacks as "pit bulls" when in fact they are not purebred dogs of any kind, and make a general media monster out of the entire breed."People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But, the self is not something that one finds. It is something that one creates"- Thomas Szasz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eeneR 3 #33 November 7, 2005 QuoteIf that breed has a tendancy to attack -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Before you make these assumptions, you really should do some research on the subject. Pitbulls are naturally very agressive, but towards humans-generally not vicious, it depends on the level of socialization, and a good owner that knows how to handle/train the animal Well first off...that comment is geared towards ANY breed that is showing a history of attacking. I dont care what it is. Dogs that are bred to hunt and take down prey are also bred to attack. So before you tell me to do my research on dogs you had better undersand what I said. I have done quite a bit of research on animal behavior. Not specific to the pit bull, but to behavior of canine in general. I admit I was wrong about the locking jaw, but as it has been said the jaw is very strong and well formed. And you cannot deny they have the ability to tear the shit out of a kid. If you disagree...how about talking to the poor kid sitting in the hospital here who has been mauled so severly he will need a shit load of reconstruction to ever remotely be normal, and that isnt from the news...but from someone I know AT the hospital, who has been a friend of mine for YEARS. These dogs can harm if in the wrong hands...period. I worked at a shelter, I have seen what people can do to a perfectly good dog....I have also seen what happens to these dogs, as well as what these fucked up people have done for the rest of us who do have dogs and take responsibility for them. If breeders would screen both the dogs better and the owners it probably wouldnt be so bad, and yes I know there are a lot of good breeders out there, but unfortuantly there are a lot that are not. That is where the problem comes in. My issues are not specific to pit bulls, my issues come from owners not respecting the breed they have and what they are capible of doing to people.....that is my problem. It goes FOR ALL DOGS period.She is not a "Dumb Blonde" - She is a "Light-Haired Detour Off The Information Superhighway." eeneR TF#72, FB#4130, Incauto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SniperCJ 0 #34 November 7, 2005 Thankfully someone set you straight on the locking jaw thing. Thank you nicolesheridan! Now lets work on the other stuff... QuoteHer other bud was an American Staff (not to be confused with a pit bull, look similar but are not) The AmStaff IS a 'pit bull' There's no such 'breed' as pit bull. Any 'fighting' dog can be called a 'pit bull', although several different breeds are commonly referred to as pit bulls, namely the APBT, the American Staffordshire Terrier (AmStaff), the Bull Terrier, American Bulldog, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. They all originated from the same general pit-fighting stock from over 100 years ago. Just as the cute little Jack Russell terrier was bred for a specific purpose (fighting badgers), the 'pit bulls' were bred to fight, be it bulls (bull baiting), bears (bear baiting) or other dogs (pit fighting). Animal (dog) aggressive stock was encouraged while human aggressive stock was culled. They were never bred for human aggression. It was discouraged in the strongest sense. These dogs are not for the first time dog owner. They require a strong hand, firm discipline, and socialization. It would be good to note that although Labs are a very popular first dog, they also arent the ideal first time dog. Theyre distructive if left to their own imaginations, require lots of attention, and the willingness to exercise all that pent up energy. (Why is Lucky digging up the yard??) You may have done "quite a bit of research on animal behavior", but it seems a little more research is in your future if you want to be properly informed. Also, this thread MIGHT want to be moved to Speakers Corner. It IS gonna get out of hand... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycat 0 #35 November 7, 2005 QuoteI'm not sure if you've ever owned/raised a working breed dog. They are NOT for inexperienced dog owners. They require extremely firm and consistent discipline and need to always understand their place in the "pack" (i.e. human family). All these dogs are highly intelligent, energetic and quite territorial. This is the best line of this entire thread. I never knew the joys and the pains you can get from raising a working breed dog (Belgian Sheepdog). When that dog is confident, dominant, and trying to climb the social ladder you can not for one minute slip in your control of him/her. We got our boy at 9 months and he was well on his way down the wrong track. Five months later he is obedient and knows he has to do what he is told or there are consequences for his actions. Even though he is very sweet to the neighbor kids I would never ever trust him alone with one, those small running people would bring out his prey drive in a heartbeat, and this dog has prey drive in spades. The best thing someone can do for their working breed dog is give it a job. Keep it mentally and physically stimulated and both dog and owner will be happy.Fly it like you stole it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycat 0 #36 November 7, 2005 QuoteWhile it is true that the number of fatal bites is greater among large powerful breed breeds, data from CDC studies show that small dogs such as dachshunds, cocker spaniels and even a Yorkshire terrier have killed humans. In Los Angeles last year, a Pomeranian caused fatal injuries to a 6-week-old baby in her crib. "Bites by Chihuahuas are probably as numerous as bites by German shepherds," says Bonnie Beaver, executive director of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists at Texas A&M University Is this the CDC report you were looking at titled, "Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998," says among the more than 300 deaths that occurred from dog attacks over 20 years, pit bulls were the attackers in 118 cases, Rottweilers in 67 cases, German shepherds in 41 cases, and huskies in 21 cases. The remainder of fatalities were caused by several other breeds. What is interesting is, the document suggests controlling dogs based on behavior instead of breed, and punishing owners on the basis of behavior instead of breed. http://www.9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=5dbf5572-0abe-421a-01f9-06dd8ab03794&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bfFly it like you stole it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D22369 0 #37 November 7, 2005 These dogs can harm if in the wrong hands...period. Quote I agree completely. I have seen what people can do to a perfectly good dog so have I, and it makes me sick... My issues are not specific to pit bulls, my issues come from owners not respecting the breed they have and what they are capible of doing *** again I agree completely. I get so sick of the jerks --> and not all of them are men <-- who get this breed because its a penis extension...... the idiots with the "oh look, I have a vicious animal, I must be cool" mentality piss me off. They do require a greater degree of socializing than other breeds. Some people do not care to give the animal the training and discipline needed..... A lot of the respectable breeders are now trying to foster a milder temperament to pitts. Rather than breeding the most agressive to the most agressive.... but still trying to keep the traits that make some of us love them so much. I hope that the owner is tossed in jail for a good amount of time and banned from owning animals, he obviously isnt smart enough to have them.... not that that will make everything right... RoyThey say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nicolesheridan 0 #38 November 7, 2005 Yes, and I totally agree with you. Just as we humans should be judged on our bahavior and not on our sex, religion, race, etc. dogs should be judged based on their behavior....period."People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But, the self is not something that one finds. It is something that one creates"- Thomas Szasz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eeneR 3 #39 November 7, 2005 QuoteYou may have done "quite a bit of research on animal behavior", but it seems a little more research is in your future if you want to be properly informed. Again you are missing my point, I never said breed traits was what I studied, it is canine behavior...which doesnt mean I know where what breed comes from where. I can tell you if you call an amstaff a pit bull the owner might bit you They are just as protective of the breed as the pit owners are in keeping a good reputation, course those are also the ones that give a shit, and understand what they are dealing with. More of those less problems with the dogs. QuoteAlso, this thread MIGHT want to be moved to Speakers Corner. It IS gonna get out of hand... So be it. My main point of all of this is that owners need to not pretend that ANY dog no matter what the breed need to take responsibility of it, and fully understand what it is capable of. Yes it may be a couch potato, but at any given point if it so chooses can attack...PERIOD. I am done, cause it seems everyone wants to defend the breed, when really yes that is part of it, but the bigger issue is the owners not understanding what they are dealing with. Yes I agree ALL dogs can be good dogs in a right home, but that is what is not happening, these (to clarify, any dog with the ability to do harm to a child or adult) dogs are getting into the hands of people not equipped to give them the correct enviroment. You can give me all the shit about not knowing everything about every breed, what I do know is some have much stronger jaws, can move faster and tend to do more damage when they are provoke to attack. I never said it was breed specific, i am human and can be givin wrong information. Shit happens. I am going to say this one more time, so maybe it sinks in....THIS GOES FOR ALL DOGS, THEY ALL HAVE THE ABILITY TO CAUSE HARM. THEY ARE NOT LITTLE PLAY TOYS, THEY ARE ANIMALS.She is not a "Dumb Blonde" - She is a "Light-Haired Detour Off The Information Superhighway." eeneR TF#72, FB#4130, Incauto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eeneR 3 #40 November 7, 2005 Quoteand huskies in 21 cases. It is funny how many people do not realize that huskys have attacked. It is one thing I make damn sure with Dakota, he is kept in his place at all times. Same thing with my Shiba. I did all my research on these two breeds before I got them and understood what the pro's and con's were as well as what I needed to do. QuoteWhat is interesting is, the document suggests controlling dogs based on behavior instead of breed, and punishing owners on the basis of behavior instead of breed. This right here is the key, yes some breeds have certain traits, but not all the dogs do. Goes both ways, the specific animal behavior is what you need to key into. The more agressive dogs will show certain behaviors which need to be nipped in the ass IMMEDIATLY to stop them from becoming a major problem. Getting the dog as a pup allows to do do the molding with these traits, but in the same token people have successfully rescued an older dog and turned it around. But this is where the owner needs to understand what they are dealing with. These are not just cute fuzzy lil things...you need to do more then feed and walk them. Alot of people see some of these behaviors when the dog is a pup and think it is cute or no big deal, only to have it manifest into something much worse.She is not a "Dumb Blonde" - She is a "Light-Haired Detour Off The Information Superhighway." eeneR TF#72, FB#4130, Incauto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #41 November 7, 2005 Renee, as much as I love dogs, I think that dogs (or their owners) who repeatedly cause the injuries that Pit Bulls cause should be scrutinized. When children are killed by dogs, a large percentage of the attacks are by Pit Bulls. Or does the media just cover the rest of them up in order to make the breed look bad? I doubt it. I don't know how prone they are to attack vs. other dogs, but you just don't hear stories of the neighbor's labrador killing a child.... I love dogs, and I think that most Pit Bulls are probably good dogs. But I also have no problem with making ownership of them difficult because of their potential to cause such serious harm. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #42 November 7, 2005 I think the issue here is that you're perception is biased by media stories. Dog attacks are common among all breeds. Pits are powerful, but there are many other breeds just as capable, but with a less sordid public past and less photogenic (a pit is a brick of muscle and jaws). Pits just have a reputation. Any other breed attacking a kid is an anomaly - the owner will be taken to task for the attack, but it's isolated and rarely even makes the paper. A pitbull attacking a human merely reinforces the fact that "Everyone already knows" that pitbulls are dangerous dogs. A non-pit bite will only get coverage if it's fatal. I'm not suggesting any conspiracy, only pointing out that editors love pitbull horror stories. Anyone can see how evil they are. It's tougher to sell a black labrador as an evil threat to children. Dogs are dogs. rigs are rigs. If you dont know what you're doing with your rig, you choose the wrong style or size canopy, you turn too low, you dont turn on your cypres....you break your leg landing, or worse. Is it the canopy at fault? The canopy is a canopy. If you dont know what you're doing with a dog you might choose the wrong breed, from the wrong breeder, and not train him properly, not take time to get him to the vet, not discipline him properly, not handle any psychological issues that become apparent during his youth. If the dog then hurts a human being is that the dogs fault? The dog is a dog. That goes for any breed. I have deep scars from a black lab bite I got when a friend brought me into their house. My brother in law was bitten and hospitalized from a retriever bite after he decided to try and help it after being left outside by it's owner and tied up outside a store (yeah, he realized it was more his fault for doing it). I've had the family cocker spaniel (a breed known for epilepsy) have a seizure and try to attack me when I was younger. I currently have a rescued beagle/basset that I've recently discovered has some food aggressive tendancies that I'm working on breaking him out of - based on his behavior he's a dog who's been heavily abused at some point in his 6 years of life. I have a close friend who's kept pit bulls for decades, they are demanding to train and discipline, but he always gets them from reputable dealers or rescue groups, always tests their behavior and then works with them intensively. His dogs would play with my 5 year old and never once react badly to anything a boisterous 5 year old can get up to while under supervision. In fact the bond of 'you're a little person who drops food' led to a deep friendship between them both. His pits love humans and would never - in normal life - harm a person. However, when out on walks the owner carries a stick to prise open the dogs jaws, explains how to say hi to his dog when children ask, and pays particular attention to other dogs (Pits are often dog aggressive). Recently inner city "breeders" have been introducing human aggressiveness as a way to make them more 'useful'. Which to me makes working with a reputable breeder/rescue home even more imperitive. Oh crap, this is the Bonfire? Sorry, thought this was SC for a second there. I'll get me coat.... TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ladyskydiver 0 #43 November 7, 2005 I've owned pit bulls. And they have been the biggest babies. I've owned Rotts, and again...babies. I've owned Akitas, again, lap dog babies. I've owned breeds that are dog aggressive, protective of family and home, etc. And I've managed to raise babies. HOWEVER, I've also been very aware that with ANY dog, the owner has a very great responsibility in how it is being raised and how the dog turns out. There is a chance that no matter what, the dog will be aggressive (and I've seen cocker spaniels that'd sooner rip your ankle apart than let you pet them). And in that kind of a situation, the owner needs to seriously sit down and reflect on what they need to do with the dog - no matter what breed. I'm in full agreement with someone requiring a person who is getting a dog - no matter what breed, age, etc. - be required to go through training on how to handle the breed. The reality is that there are people out there that should never own a dog, who neglect the dog, etc. and then wonder why the dog is anti-social and attacks. Around 6 months of age, a dog will start testing it's owner for the "leader of the pack" position. And at that time, the owner ends up in a situation that will determine the outcome of the dog's temperament. If the owner puts the dog in place and shows the dog that they are boss, the dog will test the owner a couple of more times and then will back off as dominance has been established. And I'm not talking the owner gets violet with the dog as that will bring into play a whole 'nother set of issues to be dealt with where the dog feels it must defend itself - against anyone who displays whatever sign the dog has recognized as a prerequisite to being injured. Keep in mind that dogs are pack animals and will protect their territory, owners, etc. To specifically single out pit bulls is bull! To single out rotten owners who should never have been allowed to raise any dog is a very valid point. Pit bulls were given a reputation and now people are automatically saying that they're bad when they fail to look at the owners. IT IS THE OWNERS RESPONSIBILITY TO BE FULLY AWARE OF ALL OF THE BREEDS CHARACTERISTICS AND TENDENCIES AND TO APPROPRIATELY HANDLE AND MITIGATE ANY POSSIBLE ISSUES. If the owner is incapable or unable to do so, they should not own ANY breed.Life is short! Break the rules! Forgive quickly! Kiss slowly! Love truly, Laugh uncontrollably. And never regret anything that made you smile. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #44 November 7, 2005 I don't think my perception is biased by the news media. I think if Labradors killed children frequently then they'd be in the media. Fact is that all dogs bite. Last dog I was bitten by was a little bitty tiny dog. But know what? It didn't kill me or try to kill me. While nobody wants to be scarred by a dog, the dogs that put children in ICU or in the morgue with relative frequency need to be under scrutiny. The bottom line, after all the justifications and statistics, is that those particular dogs mortally wound people far too often. I don't think they should be banned, but I do think their ownership should be difficult.... Peace~ linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grue 1 #45 November 7, 2005 Make no mistake, the media loves to sensationalise things. Remember the summer a couple years ago with "all the shark attacks"? That year was below average for shark attacks, the media just needed something to blow out of proportion.cavete terrae. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,565 #46 November 7, 2005 OK, I'll chime in. I've owned dogs almost my whole life, from puppies when I was little to my current pair, a small Rottweiler, and a rescued Dachshund mix. I'm used to laid-back mongrels. The Rottweiler (who was sort of a rescue, in that it was either me or the pound when her owner was going to be in an apartment for 2-3 years) is nothing like a laid-back mongrel. She is very sweet; the neighbor kids all know that she's more than safe to pet and they like her (which is more than can be said about the small one -- he was abused at some time and gets territorial at unpredictable times). But she is the stubbornest dog I've ever owned, and thoroughly focused on food, and small critters. She does well on a leash, until a cat or a squirrel (well, or a truck with a noisy trailer) goes by. Then I have to very actively hold her. I regularly remind her of who is boss, make her wait for her food, etc. And yes, she regularly tests me to see what she can get away with. It has to always be the same -- absolutely nothing. I love her dearly -- she's the most interesting dog I've ever owned, and the world is always a new and exciting experience to her. But definitely challenging. Very definitely. It's not just the owners. The same owner who can do a great job with many dogs might not be the right one for a rottweiler (or a spaniel -- they need a lot of attention), or other dogs. Talk to someone who knows something about breeds, and be honest about how much and what kind of attention you're likely to give. It's not like having a child, where you can't pick what kind of child. With a dog, you get a head start when you pick a breed. It might not work out the way you planned, but it's more likely to. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eeneR 3 #47 November 7, 2005 QuoteMake no mistake, the media loves to sensationalise things. Remember the summer a couple years ago with "all the shark attacks"? That year was below average for shark attacks, the media just needed something to blow out of proportion. That is understood....however seeing I know someone who works at the hospital, and worked on 2 of the kids brought in on this specific attack...I can tell you it was bad...not just the media.....and this person isnt some random person, she and I have been best friends for almost 18 years now. She doesnt call upset in the middle of the night for no reason. People not taking responsibilty for the pets they have pisses me off....only reason this was posted.She is not a "Dumb Blonde" - She is a "Light-Haired Detour Off The Information Superhighway." eeneR TF#72, FB#4130, Incauto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #48 November 7, 2005 Quote It's not just the owners. The same owner who can do a great job with many dogs might not be the right one for a rottweiler (or a spaniel -- they need a lot of attention), or other dogs. Talk to someone who knows something about breeds, and be honest about how much and what kind of attention you're likely to give. It's not like having a child, where you can't pick what kind of child. With a dog, you get a head start when you pick a breed. It might not work out the way you planned, but it's more likely to. Wendy W. Hmm I agree and disagree. I completely agree with everything that you have in your post except the first sentence of the above paragraph. The dog doesnt get to choose who takes him home, the owner does. I firmly believe that it's a potential dog owners responsibility to investigate the various options using the criteria you described. For example, I've wanted a staffordshire terrier - personality wise it's the perfect dog (on paper) for me as an individual. However it was obvious to me that my current life wasnt a good match for that breed and went back to the drawing board for an animal that fit into the current variables in my life. In a few years when things change I'll revisit the idea of a staffie. The cost of my decision? A couple of beers for the dog owners I talked to and the price of a couple of breed specific books. (and a copy of The Dogs Mind) edited to add the following..I did some digging for a source that wasnt trying to be pro or anti bully dogs and came up with the following, which raises some interesting issues - especially the media reporting issues involved in dog attacks. National Canine Research Foundation a group recognized by the American Kennel Club. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycat 0 #49 November 7, 2005 QuoteAround 6 months of age, a dog will start testing it's owner for the "leader of the pack" position. And at that time, the owner ends up in a situation that will determine the outcome of the dog's temperament. If the owner puts the dog in place and shows the dog that they are boss, the dog will test the owner a couple of more times and then will back off as dominance has been established. And I'm not talking the owner gets violet with the dog as that will bring into play a whole 'nother set of issues to be dealt with where the dog feels it must defend itself - against anyone who displays whatever sign the dog has recognized as a prerequisite to being injured. Just in case someone doesn't know what she means by enforcing dominance over a dog without violence, here is an example of one of the many things we did with our social climbing male. At his worst he had to down (most submissive posture) for everything and I fed him by hand piece of food by piece of food. He had to make eye contact with me and down before getting each and every morsel. He got two tries if he didn't do it I took the food dish away and he missed a meal. In total he missed 3 meals (not in a row), but he quickly got the fact that he had to obey to get anything he wanted. Now when I go and fill his dish he is already laying down in the spot where his dish sits ready to eat. When a dog like him comes up to you wanting attention you have to ignore him you have to make sure attention is on your terms you called him over made him sit or down and then petted him. Everything has to be a training session whether it is doggie push ups or heads up heal, he has to work for it all. Training and obedience is a lifestyle, not just a 6 week course. Plus if you want to get into a real debate and move this to SC, I'll toss out there that 100% positive training(petsmart clicker training) is the worst things for dominant dogs, they need to know there are consequences for their actions.Fly it like you stole it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,565 #50 November 7, 2005 I guess my point is that people who think that loving kindness will make any dog into a sweetie are probably fooling themselves. Dogs have natures, and some of those natures are breed-specific. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
