Re: Pitbulls...........again

[body88]

Any dog can attack and bite someone, but some breeds are known for NOT doing that no matter the size. 

St Bernard's can be pretty aggressive if unsocialized. I came across a intact male who had spent his whole life in the owners back yard. The owner was never around so he was unsocialized. He had never really been worked with training wise at all. The dog was extremely aggressive / Territorial. Seeing as though he was about 200 lbs that posed a huge problem. Ended up that he had to be taken in by a breeder. I know what you are saying tho. I have never really hear about aggressive Danes.

[Euro-monster]

St Bernard's can be extremely aggressive if unsocialized. I know what you are saying tho. I have never really hear about aggressive Danes.

A good friend of mine has one...

If he gets near another dog he will snap at it and I've seen it with my own eyes when he tryed to kill Roma on their first encounter outside!!!

[~flower~]

Lots of people in my neighborhood have the Little terriers and others and most of them are complete monsters!!  The people never socialized them with anyone or other dogs and the things will snap and snarl.  My dog Cody the Lab just looks at them like what the hell?  He has been in packs of dogs since he was 3 months and knows how to approach another dog, as we walk past these little dogs are all teeth and barks!  The owners are there like dumb asses thinking it is no big deal "thats just the way little fefe is"  Not all are like this but the numbers are disproportionately high against them too.

  This can be the inbred temperament of the breed.  I have a Chihuahua who has been brought to work with me regularly since he was 8 weeks old.  He still gets pissy with people even though he has met lots and lots of people.  He is all snarl and no bite, but he can make himself look like the tazmanian devil if he wants too!  He has been raised with 2 danes and a dane mix and while he has no fear of them (he will be submissive to them when he knows he has pushed it) he wants nothing to do with other dogs on our walks. When we see another dog he doesn't try and go running over to it or start barking at it like he's a tough guy. 

  I correct him at work when he gets territorial with people, it is not acceptable, but I do honestly believe it is "in him" to act that way.  Knowing that I try and keep a careful eye on him and anybody around him.  He is not the dog I would encourage people to pet on our walks or outings! 

  People shouldn't just laugh off that behavior, but I think to a degree it does come with the toy breeds and people should know that when they get one.

[body88]

A good friend of mine has one...

If he gets near another dog he will snap at it and I've seen it with my own eyes when he tryed to kill Roma on their first encounter outside!!!

Really? Growing up as a kid my uncle owned a few. The people down the street from me have 3 of em. All the danes I have come across have always been pretty calm. Ob any breed can be aggressive. I never really hear about Danes tho. Until now!

Is is a male? Intact?

[~flower~]

St Bernard's can be pretty aggressive if unsocialized. I came across a intact male who had spent his whole life in the owners back yard. The owner was never around so he was unsocialized. He had never really been worked with training wise at all. The dog was extremely aggressive / Territorial. Seeing as though he was about 200 lbs thats posed a huge problem. Ended up that he had to be taken in by a breeder. I know what you are saying tho. I have never really hear about aggressive Danes.

Any dog can be aggressive.   Great Danes have bit people and in one case I know about a group of 4 or 5 attacked and killed the kid who was watching them.  He lived next door and the dogs had known him all their lives.  The owners went on vacation and he was taking care of them.  No one knows what sparked the attack.  They had never been known to be aggressive in the past. My theory is that one dog started it, and the pack mentality kicked in and some or all of the other dogs joined in.  Or maybe he was breaking up a tussling between two and it escalated. 

 Great Danes are on a few list of breeds people want banned just because of their size.

[body88]

Any dog can be aggressive.   Great Danes have bit people and in one case I know about a group of 4 or 5 attacked and killed the kid who was watching them.  He lived next door and the dogs had known him all their lives.  The owners went on vacation and he was taking care of them.  No one knows what sparked the attack.  They had never been known to be aggressive in the past. My theory is that one dog started it, and the pack mentality kicked in and some or all of the other dogs joined in.  Or maybe he was breaking up a tussling between two and it escalated. 

Great Danes are on a few list of breeds people want banned just because of their size.

I kno. My point was a aggressive 200 lb st bernard can kill a man much easier then say a 50 lb pit. If people want to ban breeds on the potential danger they can pose to humans I wonder why dogs like the St's are never brought up.

That is a good theory as to why the Danes attacked that boy.

[Vet]

A good friend of mine has one...

If he gets near another dog he will snap at it and I've seen it with my own eyes when he tryed to kill Roma on their first encounter outside!!!

We did a bite investigation a few years back in Missouri on a group of great danes where three of them had gotten loose and essentially turned a smaller dog inside out.  The smaller dog was leashed outside to a small doogloo type wooden doghouse.  The danes started pulling on the dog, ripping the kennel of its foundation and dragging the smaller dog across the yard. When the doghouse wedged between two trees, the danes skinned the smaller dog----obviously it was dead by this point.  It was a pretty gruesome attack. 

I consider this type of attack, considering great danes were the breed (one was a mix, the other were registered) involved very, very unusual, but they can happen.  I also have to wonder about the house those dogs came from. 

[Vet]

Any dog can be aggressive.   Great Danes have bit people and in one case I know about a group of 4 or 5 attacked and killed the kid who was watching them.  He lived next door and the dogs had known him all their lives.  The owners went on vacation and he was taking care of them.  No one knows what sparked the attack.  They had never been known to be aggressive in the past. My theory is that one dog started it, and the pack mentality kicked in and some or all of the other dogs joined in.  Or maybe he was breaking up a tussling between two and it escalated. 

 Great Danes are on a few list of breeds people want banned just because of their size.

The thing that needs to be considered is the drive of the animal----remember dogs have three basic drives: prey (to hunt and kill something because it runs from them), territory (to guard their turf) and reproductive (sex).   Depending on the trigger, activation of any of these three drives can result in aggressive behavior.  And like you said in your post, a pack mentality can lead to further aggression---typically via activation of prey drive. 

[~flower~]

The smaller dog was leashed outside to a small doogloo type wooden doghouse. 

 Another reason I don't like chaining dogs up, it leaves them very defenseless!  And they know it which is probably why chained dogs do get aggressive.  They almost have to develop aggression to feel safe.   

  Horrible story btw.   

[Vet]

A pitbull type includes about 10 different breeds and also the muts. That is hardly accurate when talking about American pitbull terriors. Pitbull type's can include apbt's, bandogg's, American bull's ( all four types), dogos, presa's, staffys, bull terriors, boxers any type of pit to name a few.

Exactly.  This group of statistics has been heavily criticized because of that fact.  Too many people associate any dog with a big head as being a "pitbull" and there were no criteria established to positively determine the breed the dog was---for the most part it was based on someones opinion, not breed standards.    I've had to euthanize laboradors (based on physcial characteristics meeting breed standards) at the humane society becuase someone decided they LOOKED like a pit or a pit mix.  

A couple of  good sites to look at to see this further are:  http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

and http://members.aol.com/radogz/find.html


The other thing to consider is local ordinances based on dog bites.  Some areas are mandatory reports for all bites, some are based on breeds (ie only certian breeds are mandatory reports), some are optional (they are only reported if there is "Severe" injury).  This can also all skew the statistics---for or against a certian breed.  

I had to do a bite report in Ohio on a great clients labs because they were roughhousing, fell into their toddler, the kid fell over and scratched his head on the coffee table.  The head injury was a head injury, it bled alot, so the owners took the kid to the hospital, where the doctors filled out the paperwork required by law.  The dogs did nothing even remotely close to biting the child, but based on city ordinance, the one lab has a bite report with his name on it.  

[rockyfortune]

I volunteer with a city animal shelter and it's disgusting when you see what people put these animals through...yet they come back from the brink and still love to be around people---yet they get a bad rap from day one and are almost always the first dogs put down when incidents happen.  I don't think shelters even realize that pits (whatever type) are best kept in single dog homes...we've had more incidents where two pits adopted out end up getting into it at an adopter's home--they are then returned and put down--needlessly...it's the ignorance that kills these animals. 

[knny187]

So that list is just dog attacks or bite's?

Why are only larger dogs listed?  I guess it's because they imposed a greater injury?

Where's the data of injuries obtained?

It's a very biased list.  If you put terriers or chi's on that list you'll see a greater amount of numbers.  I would bet it would be doubled.  If a Chi snaps at a child & cuts their cheek or face...wouldn't that be considered an serious injury?

When I was younger, my brother was running/playing with his Labrador & the dog grabbed his arm like "tag...your it" & opened up his upper inside of his arm requiring stitches.

Any dog can inflict pain or injury.  It's not always the size of the dog.

If you want to talk 'deaths' caused by a dog.....provide that list

[gtbro1]

     My point was you calling them "little yappy pieces of crap" is like someone calling pits "man eating pieces of crap".  Neither dog is a piece of crap.  

Well....they would be eventually...if they were eaten by a bear.

[~flower~]

I had to do a bite report in Ohio on a great clients labs because they were roughhousing, fell into their toddler, the kid fell over and scratched his head on the coffee table.  The head injury was a head injury, it bled alot, so the owners took the kid to the hospital, where the doctors filled out the paperwork required by law.  The dogs did nothing even remotely close to biting the child, but based on city ordinance, the one lab has a bite report with his name on it. 

That is bullshit, IMO.  The dog didn't bite the child or even mean to knock the kid over.   

   If that was my dog I would of fought that being put on the dog.  Or I would of said the kid fell down which is the truth.

  When his brother accidentally knocks him over the city better file assault charges on the kid!    

[~flower~]

Well....they would be eventually...if they were eaten by a bear.

   

[Hedgehog]

So that list is just dog attacks or bite's?

Why are only larger dogs listed?  I guess it's because they imposed a greater injury?

Where's the data of injuries obtained?

It's a very biased list.  If you put terriers or chi's on that list you'll see a greater amount of numbers.  I would bet it would be doubled.  If a Chi snaps at a child & cuts their cheek or face...wouldn't that be considered an serious injury?

When I was younger, my brother was running/playing with his Labrador & the dog grabbed his arm like "tag...your it" & opened up his upper inside of his arm requiring stitches.

Any dog can inflict pain or injury.  It's not always the size of the dog.

If you want to talk 'deaths' caused by a dog.....provide that list

knny... that is the list of deaths caused by a dog.

You're asking why only larger dogs are listed. And claim the list is biased. How can it be biased if the dog breeds not listed haven't killed any humans?

My guess is that the listed dogs have kills. Could that be a reason maybe?

Why not take the time to read the report?

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/breeds-causing-DBRFs.pdf

-Hedge

[body88]

knny... that is the list of deaths caused by a dog.

You're asking why only larger dogs are listed. And claim the list is biased. How can it be biased if the dog breeds not listed haven't killed any humans?

My guess is that the listed dogs have kills. Could that be a reason maybe?

Why not take the time to read the report?

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/breeds-causing-DBRFs.pdf

-Hedge

Right , but you are using a list with flawed stats. A pitbull type is not a apbt. Those stats are not accurate if you are talking about apbt's. A pitbull type includes several different types of dogs and also mutts.

As vet and I where saying, a pitbull type can include any big headed muscular dog. Pitbull types include pitbulls, staffys, staffy mixes, bandoggs, all four types of American bulldogs (smaller standard American bulls are always mistaken for large pits), boxers, pitbull mutts, English staffys , dogos, smaller presa canarios and mixes off all the types listed.

If you can find me a list that outlines apbt's with accurate stats then it would be valid for this discussion. A pitbull type is not a apbt.

Basing the bite stats of many pure bred breed's against the stats of several breeds combined, and mutts is not even close to accurate.

[Hedgehog]

Right , but you are using a list with flawed stats. A pitbull type is not a apbt. Those stats are not accurate if you are talking about apbt's. A pitbull type includes several different types of dogs and also mutts.

As vet and I where saying, a pitbull type can include any big headed muscular dog. Pitbull types include pitbulls, staffys, staffy mixes, bandoggs, all four types of American bulldogs (smaller standard American bulls are always mistaken for large pits), boxers, pitbull mutts, English staffys , dogos, smaller presa canarios and mixes off all the types listed.

If you can find me a list that outlines apbt's with accurate stats then it would be valid for this discussion. A pitbull type is not a apbt.

Basing the bite stats of many pure bred breed's against the stats of several breeds combined, and mutts is not even close to accurate.

Ok.

I thought those were covered in the  pit-bull mixed breed category. I may be wrong on that though.

It is interesting to read that 60% of the kills were attributed to rottweilers and pitbulls.

My point is basically this: There is so few kills attributed to golden retrievers, and pitbull and bull dog owners can argue all day long that the breeds aren't specified enough.

But why not try to discuss what can be done to make these kinds of dogs as safe as golden retrievers?

Why constantly try to dodge the issue, why not offer a solution?

Here's my point of view, not being a dog owner: If the owners of these kinds of breeds themselves would offer a solution, then the rest of the society wouldn't rage against these breeds.

It's about controlling the agenda, and right now, like it or not, the pitbull dog owners aren't in control.

Act, don't react.

-Hedge

[knny187]

knny... that is the list of deaths caused by a dog.

You're asking why only larger dogs are listed. And claim the list is biased. How can it be biased if the dog breeds not listed haven't killed any humans?

My guess is that the listed dogs have kills. Could that be a reason maybe?

Why not take the time to read the report?

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/breeds-causing-DBRFs.pdf

-Hedge

Ok read it..but...some of the data is incomplete.  Although they were trying to be "breed specific" it seems the opinion I gathered that it boils right down in the end as the responsibility/negligence of the owner as a main culprit.

It also seems if one breed is regulated or eliminated...an owner will substitute the breed to a unregulated breed with like characteristics & then the data may turn towards that specific breed.  Mixed breeds will be almost impossible to regulate except for expensive DNA testing on every dog.

It a nutshell....I gathered from this....owners need to be more responsible & held accountable for their dogs...not the specific breed per se.

[body88]

Ok.

I thought those were covered in the  pit-bull mixed breed category. I may be wrong on that though.

It is interesting to read that 60% of the kills were attributed to rottweilers and pitbulls.

My point is basically this: There is so few kills attributed to golden retrievers, and pitbull and bull dog owners can argue all day long that the breeds aren't specified enough.

But why not try to discuss what can be done to make these kinds of dogs as safe as golden retrievers?

Why constantly try to dodge the issue, why not offer a solution?

Here's my point of view, not being a dog owner: If the owners of these kinds of breeds themselves would offer a solution, then the rest of the society wouldn't rage against these breeds.

It's about controlling the agenda, and right now, like it or not, the pitbull dog owners aren't in control.

Act, don't react.

-Hedge

Hedge I am reffering to the list you posted that included the  "pitbull type" category.


No one is dodging any issue. You are posting inaccurate stats that are not only unfair, they are incorrect. A pitbull "type" or "mix" is not a pitbull. If a lab / pit mix kills someone where is the outrage over the fact the dog was half lab? I don't see anyone whining about the other breeds that get lumped into the "pitbull" group. Where is the outrage over boxers? How would medical studies work if the docs used inaccurate stats?

Golden retrievers are embraced by middle America. Pitbulls have been embraced by criminals and dog fighters. Inner city thugs and punks. Before pits it was rots. How many pitbulls do you hear about attacking people that where brought up correctly in some suburb in middle America with love and direction? A crazy dog is a crazy dog. It is not a pitbull thing. Pitbulls are sensationalised by the media. I could show you HUNDREDS of attacks that never make the news. I posted the link before, do you remember? No one cares if Betty the cocker spaniel maims a kid, but if a pit does it watch out!!! I posted a sight with thousands of fatal dog attack parpetrated by breeds ranging from Goldie's to jack russel's. You never hear about any of that tho do you? People think a pitbull is born aggressive towards humans. Nothing could be farther from the truth. You might want to look at how pits are exploited by humans.
Even with all the scumbags and thugs who own pits now in days you still have a better chance of dying from a lighting strike then being killed by a pit.


Lastly by the logic many anti pit people have the entire black race should be banned. Since it is impossible for people / animals to be a product of environment or upbringing blacks must naturally be aggressive, murders and criminals. Ban em all, right hedge?

[knny187]

.

[body88]

A properly socialzed / trained pitbull is no diff then a properly socialized lab mentally.The difference is in the athletic ability and strength.

Should people who are bigger and stronger then others be penalized sicne they COULD harm you further then Joe schmoe. Me thinks most on this board would fall into this catogory.


Pitbulls are far more likley to be abused, fought, trained incorrectly or exploited then any goldie or lab.

[big L dawg]

blacks shouldn't own pits?Why?every time a black person commites a crime they blame there actions on society(victim of society)I only sold drugs or beat that person or robbed that person because I live in the hood.My mom was a dope fiend and my dad was in prison when I was growing up.I wasn't raised good.I wasn't properly socialzed,hey wait a minute this sounds alot like bodys pitbull defense.the next time some black kid commets a crime instead of punishing him we'll just let him off since he probably just wasn't trained right or socialized as a kid.

[body88]

blacks shouldn't own pits?Why?every time a black person commites a crime they blame there actions on society(victim of society)I only sold drugs or beat that person or robbed that person because I live in the hood.My mom was a dope fiend and my dad was in prison when I was growing up.I wasn't raised good.I wasn't properly socialzed,hey wait a minute this sounds alot like bodys pitbull defense.the next time some black kid commets a crime instead of punishing him we'll just let him off since he probably just wasn't trained right or socialized as a kid.

Last time I checked animals did not have the ability to dichiper right from wrong. They need to be socialized and trained to act correctly. They are um ANIMALS. My argument was mearley a reference that was not meant to be taken in the sense you twisted it. It was a analogy to show that people are not BORN bad. Unless they are deranged , but that is rare. I bet a kid who grows up in a good home with good parents is just as likely to commit crimes as some kid who grows up in a shithole with no parents and surrounded by violence? It should not be an excuse, but it cannot be ignored. Good for you for overcoming the odds with the upbringing you had. To bad for every you there is a 1000 who don't make it.

Btw not giving a crap about your kid and allowing him or her to do whatever they want might make them more apt to commit crimes. You know since that whole teaching right from wrong thing and raising your kids is what makes them able to decipher how to act in society. You are a extreme minority. Humans need love and guidance as youths. Most would not make it given the circumstances you had.

[trab]

Ok.

I thought those were covered in the  pit-bull mixed breed category. I may be wrong on that though.

It is interesting to read that 60% of the kills were attributed to rottweilers and pitbulls.

My point is basically this: There is so few kills attributed to golden retrievers, and pitbull and bull dog owners can argue all day long that the breeds aren't specified enough.

But why not try to discuss what can be done to make these kinds of dogs as safe as golden retrievers?

Why constantly try to dodge the issue, why not offer a solution?

Here's my point of view, not being a dog owner: If the owners of these kinds of breeds themselves would offer a solution, then the rest of the society wouldn't rage against these breeds.

It's about controlling the agenda, and right now, like it or not, the pitbull dog owners aren't in control.

Act, don't react.

-Hedge

Goood 1 person who's not letting emotion rule logic.

ANYONE who compares a Pitt Bull bite to a run-of-the-mill dog bite is in La La Land.  esp a DMV.
Like comparing a .22 cal wound to a .44 Magnum (sorry inner city Gun Fearers, we like guns out here in Farmland.)

Here's how the problem will go away, but its gonna take awhile because of Pitts deeply inbred  TENNACIY (Hey Vet, redefine tenacity too here )

The breed IS being bred into nothing. It would be better off if Pitts had stayed in the hands of The guys who
fought and bred them in the 1940s - late 1970s  when every idiot started bringing one to town.

Esp troubling now in big American cities. I'd suggest the guy talking about keeping guns locked keep one ready to use,
if its legal for him, He might have to quickly Kill his or another dog to save a kid.

Go REREAD Vets 3 "Triggers" for K9's.   (OH Oh, did he inadvertently make a Dog/firearm compare?)
Don't forget they are animals. Fact is most K9s are ill trained.

There are SO many over The Top maulings in hospital and legal records by these animals that ignoring it is
embarrassing and irresponsible.

Don't be as stupid as the media by going 180 degrees from the facts.