Pit bull coming at me, owner screaming "Vicious NO"

[ShakaZulu]

Funny, if you take a PitBull and a Labrador, both owned by a UFC kind of person, and let a cat into the yard, I bet the PitBull will destroy the cat first.

In fact, my uncle used to breed Pitbulls, and these dogs would catch a rat before it crossed the yard. He came home one day with his wife on the firdge, one of the dogs decided he wanted to eat her.........

 

[DennisW]

I'm going to jump in here once again.

I would never advocate banning a breed of dog. I would advocate banning the breeders. Ok, that's just sarcasm, but it could be one answer.

I would also not advocate killing an animal because it looks dangerous. I would, however, kill an animal if I thought my life or someone elses life was in danger. However, an animal that has been proven to be vicious should be put down. Then the owner should be put down, because the reason the animal is vicious is the owner. Ok, that was some more sarcasm.

I believe that an animal can be vicious because of it's personality, animals also have distinct personalities. Hell, people can be bad because of their personality. What do you do with either of them? One gets put down, the other goes to jail or gets put down. That isn't sarcasm, it's fact.

Animals can also be vicious because they are trained to be vicious. Many people own big, scary dogs, so they can feel tough and scary themselves. Those people may very well train their dogs to be mean. Those people should be banned from owning dogs or any animal.

An American Pit Bull in my old neighborhood was put down because his owner kept letting him out in the neighborhood. The dog killed several other dogs and cats in the neighborhood because he was trained to do so. The dog killed my wife's cat and the cat was in our screen porch at the time. The dog was finally captured and there was a trial in the county court. The Judge was furious with the owners and very upset because she had no recourse but to have the animal destroyed. She owned Pit Bulls herself and loved animals. There was a very heavy fine and all of the owner's other animals were confiscated.

There is not a real solution that you will come up with in this thread. I certainly don't have an answer. Maybe people should have to obtain a license to own a pet.

 

[SDAnderson]

In one post you say: "you know, there are no bad dogs, just bad owners.", and, in another, you state; "there are no bad dogs. there are bad owners." I criticized these statements for being incorrect and counter-productive to your over-arching position, inasmuch as it ignores the reality that there are bad dogs. You respond by telling me I missed the point, yet you also clearly present a changed perspective: "it does matter why they are bad dogs."

Despite your hyperbole, we agree that bad owners are a root cause of problems with all dogs, including pit bulls. Good owners train themselves, their family members and their dog and conscientiously control the behavior of their charges. Bad owners don't. Where we differ is on whether or not pit bulls themselves are also part of the problem. You ignore that they have been bred for millenia - despite modest attempts in recent history - to be fighters and the resulting threat that their genetics represents.

Sure, any dog can bite, that is part of what being a dog is. I'm even willing to accept that there are other breeds that are just as vicious as the APBT, but the argument that there is no justification for a heightened concern with pit bulls as a breed (compared to wolfhounds or collies or spaniels, as examples of other large breeds) defies reality and is, in itself, a sign of a bad owner. In legal parlance, the argument that there are no bad breeds and no bad dogs fails the smell test and comes across to most of the world as a partisan spin job.

 

[airsix]

Some of you are assuming the puppy is a blank slate. he is not.

I agree with Catherine's comments in this thread (and several others). You can't water-down an animal's biology with political-correctness talk. Dogs are predators/carnivores, and they are oportunistic. Above all else when dealing with a predator you MUST always remember that they are fundimentally oportunistic. You can use training to reinforce certain behaviors, but given the right conditions (opportunity) you do not know whether the training will hold up or not. It is irresponsible to anthropomorphize dogs (or any other top-level predator) as things they are not. I like dogs, but I'm not naive enough to think that you can teach any dog to love everybody. You can take a pit bull (generic term, I know) and through training have a loyal friendly personal companion... who under the wrong conditions will be seized by the oportunity to eat the neighbor's child. You can not turn a top-level predator into Barney the purple dinosaur. The perfect example is Sigfreid & Roy. They were stunned that one of their tigers would decide to eat Roy's face. It wasn't for lack of training. The fact is that regardless of how you condition it, the animal is still fundimentally what it was born to be. In the case of a big dog that is a predatory carnivore seeking higher social status.

-Ben

ps - If being charged by a large dog, rather than wrist guards I suggest .45ACP

pps - I am an animal lover, but in loving them I accept them as they are.

 

[H2Andy]

reef... you're missing the point... let's put scholarship aside for a second

i am not arguing that every dog is a saint who will die and go to heaven.

i am arguing that at the root cause of any dog's "badness," you will find a bad
owner, who either did not train, did not control, or did not understand the
dog.

thus my statement.

you did not quote when i state that, in determining a dog's badness,
breed is not as important as the owner.

this is all in the context of banning pit bulls.

that misses the point. there's no point in banning pit bulls. bad guys
will get their hands on rotts and turn them into killers.

likewise, it's a false sense of security to drop your kids with
labs because they're "nice dogs." in the hands of idjet owners,
they can bite your kid. at the same time, a pit bull in the
hands of good owners will be safe for your kids.

the real problem is not the breed, but the idjet owners.

this is like the fith time i repeat all these points, and i think my last.

 

[Green_Manelishi]

the real problem is not the breed, but the idjet owners.

this is like the fith time i repeat all these points, and i think my last.

The owners can certainly be a problem but usually when they begin with a dog breed with a genetic makeup and years of manipulation by breeders to create a dog that wants to fight and win.

My dog, a Border Collie, was not meant to fight. He was bred to herd sheep. I can deny it all I want but that's the facts "jack". And he illustrates that fact almost every minute of every day by staring down balls that we have scattered all over the house.
As soon as I begin to pick up a ball he immediately circles and crouches in anticipation of the work that is to begin.

So, begin with a dog whose years-ago-intent was to be a fighter and you are more likely to have a problem than if it's not bred to be a fighter.

 

[H2Andy]

So, begin with a dog whose years-ago-intent was to be a fighter and you are more
likely to have a problem than if it's not bred to be a fighter.

yes, i agree, but any dog can bite and do damage. remember that Pomenarian (10 lbs) that killed the baby back in 2000? you can't assume that because it wasn't
"bred to fight" that it won't do damage.

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/10/09/pomeranian.kills.ap/

From 1979 through 1998, at least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in 238 human dog bite related deaths.

Pit Bulls and Rottweilers were involved in more than 50 percent of these deaths.

that leaves almost 50 percent of these deaths split among 23 other breeds.

http://www.dogbitelegalcenter.com/resources/dogbite-statistics.html

 

[Walter]

That's a very high per centage for two breeds if breed isn't important.

 

[H2Andy]

well... it goes to what the owners did

if these dogs were obtained and trained "to fight", the breed doesn't really
matter. it's the owner who ruined these dogs. they would have ruined
any dog they got.

i am almost willing to bet that these "out of control" dogs started as a
"fighting dog" project, or were neglected or poorly trained dogs, initially
attractive to their owners becuase of their reputation

also, consider the reverse. what percentage of pit bulls and
rotts kill anybody?

a VERY low percentage... you're talking, max 60 pit bulls and 60 rotts,
during a 20 year period, out of a total US population of what?

infinitesimal.

if it were the breed, i would expect a LOT MORE pit bulls out of control,
biting and killing. if it were in the genes, they would ALL go out on rampages.

if it were the breed, no dog that didn't belong to the "fighting breeds" would
ever bite anybody.

 

[Walter]