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

[lamont]

all the pitbulls that i've known have been incredibly sweet dogs.

really i think with any large, muscular breed you're going to have the potential to have viscious dogs (pitbulls, rotties, german shepherds, huskies, great danes, dobermans, etc, etc). when i was in jr. high school i remember it was dobermans that everyone was freaked out about, later it changed to pitbulls...

 

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

And I also wanted to make the point that a Rottie, or a daschund, or a lab(or even one of our beloved aussies) has about the same chance of being a victim of bad genetics as a pit.

This is so totally untrue. Even the pit bull advocate sites on the web don't push such nonsense.

You're taking your politically correct dog argument too far. Yes, any dog can be bred badly (why so many labs have hip displasia). Yes, you can train any dog to be vicious.

But pit bulls are far more likely because of their breeding to be aggressive toward other dogs. It's a fact. It's WHAT THEY WERE BRED FOR.

Why, after all, would all dog breeds have miraculously ended up with the EXACT SAME genetic propensity toward aggression, as you seem to suggest? After all, each breed of dog was bred with totally different goals in mind. And yet your stance is that the genetic tendency toward aggression ended up exactly the same in all dog breeds despite so many other genetic differences? It's really absurd on the face of it.

Like I said...political correctness, applied to dogs and taken to a ridiculous extreme...

 

[lamont]

You're taking your politically correct dog argument too far.
[...]
Like I said...political correctness, applied to dogs and taken to a ridiculous extreme...

the anti-PC argument has officially hit its end when you start apply it to dogs. get a grip.

i haven't seen pitbulls with any more tendency towards aggression than any other large dog breed. that isn't PC, that's just my experience. try to deal with that directly.

 

[NadMat]

This is so totally untrue. Even the pit bull advocate sites on the web don't push such nonsense.

You're taking your politically correct dog argument too far. Yes, any dog can be bred badly (why so many labs have hip displasia). Yes, you can train any dog to be vicious.

But pit bulls are far more likely because of their breeding to be aggressive toward other dogs. It's a fact. It's WHAT THEY WERE BRED FOR.

Why, after all, would all dog breeds have miraculously ended up with the EXACT SAME genetic propensity toward aggression, as you seem to suggest? After all, each breed of dog was bred with totally different goals in mind. And yet your stance is that the genetic tendency toward aggression ended up exactly the same in all dog breeds despite so many other genetic differences? It's really absurd on the face of it.

Like I said...political correctness, applied to dogs and taken to a ridiculous extreme...

Nowhere did I state that all dogs end up with the exact same genetic propensity for aggression.

What I said( or was trying to convey) is that any breed can be a victim of bad breeding, and that can make for a schitzy and untrustworthy dog. Point being that Catherine should not blindly trust her kids with all other dogs just because they come from 'nice' breeds.

As far as politically correct, if you knew me at all you would know I am not a very PC person.

 

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

the anti-PC argument has officially hit its end when you start apply it to dogs. get a grip.

i haven't seen pitbulls with any more tendency towards aggression than any other large dog breed. that isn't PC, that's just my experience. try to deal with that directly.

Well if it isn't PC-type argument, then what is it? It's absurd to say that all dogs are genetically equivalent in their tendency to be aggressive. Call it what you want.

My experience differs completely from yours. Apparently the experience of a lot of people differs from yours, since whole cities and countries have banned the dogs. But neither your nor my experience has a thing to do with it. I've never seen a shark eat a fish, but I still belive they eat fish. Are you truly so egocentric as to only believe in something if you have personally seen it?

And what kind of half-witted argument is it to say "Well, I've never seen it so there"? Why don't you post some real data to support your arguments that pit bulls are not aggressive. I have posted plenty of sources that say they are.

 

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

Nowhere did I state that all dogs end up with the exact same genetic propensity for aggression.

Yes you did.

And I also wanted to make the point that a Rottie, or a daschund, or a lab(or even one of our beloved aussies) has about the same chance of being a victim of bad genetics as a pit.

Why do you so vigorously try to make the case that there are no significant genetic differences between dogs when it's so clearly untrue? You seem perfectly willing to accept that positive traits can be bred into dogs, but unwilling to accept that negative traits can as well.

 

[NadMat]

Yes you did.

quote it then

Why do you so vigorously try to make the case that there are no significant genetic differences between dogs when it's so clearly untrue? You seem perfectly willing to accept that positive traits can be bred into dogs, but unwilling to accept that negative traits can as well.

once again, quote that statement by me.

 

[lamont]

Well if it isn't PC-type argument, then what is it? It's absurd to say that all dogs are genetically equivalent in their tendency to be aggressive. Call it what you want.

What's really absurd is how well-trained you are to scream about political correctness.

My experience differs completely from yours. Apparently the experience of a lot of people differs from yours, since whole cities and countries have banned the dogs. But neither your nor my experience has a thing to do with it. I've never seen a shark eat a fish, but I still belive they eat fish. Are you truly so egocentric as to only believe in something if you have personally seen it?

And I thought the anti-PC argument was absurd... Yikes.

And what kind of half-witted argument is it to say "Well, I've never seen it so there"? Why don't you post some real data to support your arguments that pit bulls are not aggressive. I have posted plenty of sources that say they are.

Yes, you've made quite the arguments from authority. That's not the same thing as real data. Real data would be to show a random sample of dogs, raised comparably, and their outcome of aggressiveness. I doubt that knowledge exists anywhere, all we've got is a correlation (and probably questionable at that) between pitbulls and abusive owners and agressiveness and no way to determine what is casual. And yes, given that different breeds have been feared over time, I am skeptical, and given my experience of running into aggressive rottweilers, dobermans and great danes, but consistantly coming across very even-tempered pitbulls, I am extremely suspicious based on my experience.

 

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

Lamont, if you took the time to read the thread, you would see the sources I have posted that say pit bulls have a natural tendency toward dog-aggression. If you don't have any evidence to back up your stance, that's fine. Call it what you will, but declaring that all dogs are identical in their genetic tendency toward aggression is absurd. That's what you believe I guess. But since the only evidence you can post is sad attempts to ridicule me, I'll assume you're pulling your argument out of thin air.

So, since you know so much about real data, post some to support your side. Because until you do, all your "argument" has going for it is the fact that you have never seen pit bull aggression.

There's a lot you haven't seen that's still true.

 

[Cacia]

The last link was actually some official Pit Bull site and if you go to the "responsible Pit Bull Owner" page it has five criteria. Guess what number one is? Not to breed these dogs. There is an explosion of them, they say. Why? Because a higher percentage of irresponsible people (uncontrolled litters, fighting, neglect, whatever the reason) have an affinity for these dogs and are allowing them to procreate in an uncontrolled fashion. If you know anything about genetics and assume (incorrectly) that they are all starting the same, this factor alone would naturally select for the most aggressive animals to survive. I am not convinced that there are many pro-Pit people in this debate who really have an understanding of genetics and natural selection. I am guessing Oren does and I cannot explain his position. I would really like to know who has taken genetics and who has not, just for my own understanding. If you have had genetics or have a degree in Biology, I am all ears. Not that your opinion does not matter if you have a Hospitality degree or did not go to college, but there is a point where if you say "natural selection" and someone tells you about their dog Brutus...well..we are going in circles here. It is a multifactorial result, no doubt, but you can argue all day about training and it cannot negate the genetic variable.