The Real Hawkeye
member
That only applies to the .40 caliber Pits.
Pit Bull Kills Boy, 12
- Thread starter Travis McGee
- Start date
- Status
280PLUS
Member
Just once I'd like to read:
Man with gun kills Pit Bull, Saves boy's life.
:banghead:
Man with gun kills Pit Bull, Saves boy's life.
:banghead:
I know bad owners are to blame much of the time. What's the percentage, no one really knows.
But the point is this: pit bulls do more damage while attacking than do the other breeds. So it really doesn't matter what the reasons are for them attacking. Pit bulls can be the victims of bad ownership just like most other breeds, so it doesn't really matter that it is the owner that is a poor handler.
The bottom line is, when other breeds of dog attack because of poor owners, they don't usually mangle or kill someone.
And a child certainly shouldn't have to lose his face or his life because he tugged on a dog's ear or tail. Why would anyone want that kind of dog in the house?
But the point is this: pit bulls do more damage while attacking than do the other breeds. So it really doesn't matter what the reasons are for them attacking. Pit bulls can be the victims of bad ownership just like most other breeds, so it doesn't really matter that it is the owner that is a poor handler.
The bottom line is, when other breeds of dog attack because of poor owners, they don't usually mangle or kill someone.
And a child certainly shouldn't have to lose his face or his life because he tugged on a dog's ear or tail. Why would anyone want that kind of dog in the house?
The Real Hawkeye
member
Jeff, you're way off the mark, and you don't have any idea how far. 1) There are plenty of breeds capable of doing approximately the same amount of damage, on average. 2) Why doesn't it matter that most bites are the owners fault? If they didn't have a Pitbull, they'd have an American Bulldog, or a Fila Braziliaro, or fill in the blank, and that'd be the dog that mauls someone. 3) It is not true that Pitbulls "usually mangle or kill someone." They usually love to play fetch, and wag their tails. When they do bite unprovoked (extremely rare, even for poorly raised individuals), they usually don't do serious harm. How can you look at the stats (about 7 Pitbull fatalities a year -accepting the most liberal numbers available - and millions of Pitbulls in people's homes across the country) and say they usually mangle or kill someone? Kids are safer playing with a Pitbull than on their bicycles, for God's sake. Please rethink your hysteria. Think about the hard facts. This hysteria really is just like the hysteria the media conjures up in the minds of the un-informed public regarding guns. It is as frustrating for us to hear this stuff as it is for you to hear someone say that "a gun in the home is seven times more likely to kill a member of the family than to defend that family from a crime." To someone who knows the facts, that kind of statement is ridiculous. Same for your kinds of statements about Pitbulls.
The Real Hawkeye
member
How about, Boy Saved From Drowning by an American Pitbull Terrier, or American Pitbull Terrier Rescues Boy From Attack by Great Dane, or Boy Saved From Mountain Lion Attack By Family Pet, An American Pitbull Terrier. Those and similar things happen all the time, but you never hear it because it doesn't fit into the mold of Pitbull = bad dog that the media has decided on propagating. When you have a dog as popular as the American Pitbull Terrier, the percentage of bad dogs can remain very low, but the raw number of bad dogs can be large enough so that every few months you will hear about an attack by one somewhere in the country, because that's the kind of story the press is looking for. Even including those dogs who are raised to be vicious and mean on purpose, the actual number of attacks is extremely tiny as a percentage of the total number of dogs of this breed now living in the United States.
You have been manipulated by the press to accept the notion that Pitbull = bad dog. The way they do it is by reporting every case, nation-wide, of an attack, and by calling about five different breeds, and an untold number of mixed breeds, "Pitbulls." It sells papers. Not saying it doesn't happen, but this is a case of one breed being targeted. When I was a kid, it was Dobermans. Before that Boxers were said to be extremely dangerous and unpredictable. Bulldogs before that. They always pick a breed and try to destroy it in the media, because they have discovered that the story of a Devil Dog breed sells. Always has and always will. Think about it.
George Hill
Member
"It could be that "pit bull" is the "assault rifle" of the dog world where the media's concerned."
Yeah, but my rifles don't just go off by them selves.
Yeah, but my rifles don't just go off by them selves.
The Real Hawkeye
member
Pitbulls are no more likely to "go off by themselves" than any other breed. You are a victim of media induced hysteria. They are playing you the way they play the average un-gun-savvy urbanite on the gun issue.
Exactly, all these breeds, and others like the Old English Mastiff (largest weight breed in the world often reaching well over 200 lbs) are capable of doing severe damage.
IMO, Pits seem to have one of the strongest size-strength ratios, but it doesn't matter....all of these breeds above are comparable in damage potential.
And Pits when bred, trained, and socialized properly ARE far less likely to bite HUMANS than many of the above breeds, I agree there.
The main problem that haunts even "good" Pits IMO is animal aggression--it is very hard for a Pitbull (bred to fight for a couple hundred years) to back down once a dog fight starts. In fact, one of the ladies that I met at a dog class had a Pit Bull and another type of terrier--the dogs got along for FIVE years, and then they had a minor scuffle and the Pit killed the smaller terrier (IIRC, a Jack Russell). The problem ended up being that both dogs, being terriers (which tend to NOT back down) kept esculating the fight until the Pit got the other one by its neck and crushed it--it did start minor, but neither dog gave in and it got ugly quickly according to her. This same Pit Bull was great with people, never bit a person OR EVEN GROWLED AT A PERSON. It just couldn't get past its instinct to fight and win though I guess.
The Real Hawkeye,
Alameda county, CA, for a while had three Pit Bulls used for search and rescue for people (they still might, I don't know for sure).
One was fully trained, and had saved kids and adults several times.
The other two were younger dogs (teenager dogs) and were in training. Apparently, even the authorities trusted Pit Bulls enough to put them in search and rescue missions. Just thought I'd pass this good news along, NOT ALL FOLKS in Government are ignorant about Pit Bulls.
Alameda county, CA, for a while had three Pit Bulls used for search and rescue for people (they still might, I don't know for sure).
One was fully trained, and had saved kids and adults several times.
The other two were younger dogs (teenager dogs) and were in training. Apparently, even the authorities trusted Pit Bulls enough to put them in search and rescue missions. Just thought I'd pass this good news along, NOT ALL FOLKS in Government are ignorant about Pit Bulls.
The Real Hawkeye
member
Thanks, Surefire. 
Perhaps there are. Presa Canarios are pretty lethal when aggravated. They're not very popular, however. But they were responsible for ripping that female lawyer to pieces in San Francisco. Filas are very rare. Too expensive for gang-bangers and other poseurs.
And I don't even want to know what would happen if a couple of angry Tosas got loose. They would kill a grizzly bear.
The point is, pit bulls are relatively popular and they have been responsible for a drastically high-percentage of dog attacks in this country.
Please don't distort what I said. I said when they do attack...
What does "provoked" mean? Like a child tugging on the ear or tail, or an armed intruder pistol whipping the owner? Big difference between the two. I have yet to read any proof that states the majority of pitbull attacks are relatively minor. I'm not syaing it doesn't exist, but I haven't read or heard anything to say otherwise. Perhaps the media has done a good job of demonizing these dogs and instilling fear/loathing in people in regards to them-- it wouldn't be the 1st time the media would be responsible for something like this.
Because the those types of stats wouldn't include the number of pitbull attacks. Again, I'm saying WHEN they attack....don't distort what I am saying because I have been VERY clear.
Says who??? When every kid in the country has a pitbull to "play" with, like they do bicycles, then we will talk. Until then, this statement is ridiculous.
Who the hell is hysterical? I've got to be hysterical because I call it the way it is? Please. So I guess everyone is hysterical unless they are total apologists for the breed? Get real.
Facts such as pitbulls and pitbull types have been responsible for 17% of all dog fatalities from statistics taken from 1994-99. That wouldn't be a bad percentage if there were only six breeds of dog in the country. But considering there are probably 200-250 breeds that are more popular than pitbulls alone (and not even counting the ones that aren't), that 17% is a pretty high figure. Rottweilers are even higher. Although I think they were way more popular in the mid-nineties than pitbulls.
A guy named Merritt Clifton (a self-proclaimed dog activist; he's probably a liberal-weenie bed wetter) has been keeping records of dog attacks since 1982. Take it for what it's worth.
He claims that pits have been involved in 831 attacks since this time; rottweilers are second at 373. Supposedly no other breed of dog was in the double digits. (The attacks are of a nature severe enough to make media coverage. If there is a media bias against pits, then the numbers could indeed be exaggerated.)
The Centers for Disease Control listed fatal pitbull attacks, between 1979-94, at 57, more than twice as many for the next offender, the rotty. A 2000 study by the Journal of American Veterinary Medical Association cites 65 fatal pit attacks between 1979-98, twice more than rotties and three times more than German Shepherds. (Although based on the other studies, it sounds as if the rottweiler starting taking over the top spot later in the time period.)
Again, guns don't have minds of their own. That makes them less dangerous than certain breeds. It does.
I guess I would like to know what your facts are.
The Real Hawkeye
member
Surefire, I agree with you on that point of criticism, if it can be called that. Pitbulls really do seem to take pleasure in a good rumble with another dog. My Doberman, in his 13 years of life, had about six accidental fights. My current Pitbull, only about six years old, has been in about 9 accidental fights, and you can see clearly that he enjoys it, and is upset when it gets broken up. Interestingly, in all but one case (which was simultaneously started), the fight was started by the other dog. Usually, a dominant dog would come up to him and do all the dominant posturing, which (very undoglike) my dog would entirely ignore. Ignoring a dominant posture is a huge insult to a dominant dog, and my dog had to be "taught some manners."
It is hard to get a Pitbull to stop once a fight is on. I know from personal experience, but the same Pitbull that caused a 200 pound very dominant Mastiff to squeal like a stuck pig within seconds of being attacked by said Mastiff would sweetly allow a toddler, a complete stranger to him, to take his favorite toy out of his mouth, wagging his tail in amusement. Enjoying a scuffle with another dog simply has zero relationship with being aggressive to human beings, and this is something that non-savvy people have a hard time understanding. Naturally, this is the reason Pitbulls must not be allowed to roam free, but then no dog should be allowed to do that.
Last edited:
XLMiguel
Member
Breedism = racism for all intents, IMO. Pits get more than thier share of bad press because it's sensational, just like hip-hop druggie gangstas tar all blacks and MS-13 make all Hispanics into sleazy thugs. [Insert ethinic slur of choice].
Animals should be judged and dealt with based on thier behavior, just like people. I've been bitten by more small yappy dogs handled by annoying over-indulgent [predominently women] owners. Dogs aren't that hard to read, all'n all. Undisciplined dogs, like undisciplined kids, are the product of stupid and irresponsible owners/parents.
Viscious dogs need to be put down, and their owners need to be held responsible, regardless of breed.
Animals should be judged and dealt with based on thier behavior, just like people. I've been bitten by more small yappy dogs handled by annoying over-indulgent [predominently women] owners. Dogs aren't that hard to read, all'n all. Undisciplined dogs, like undisciplined kids, are the product of stupid and irresponsible owners/parents.
Viscious dogs need to be put down, and their owners need to be held responsible, regardless of breed.
The Real Hawkeye
member
Don't you see the inherent unfairness of that statement? There is no "German Shepherd Type" category. Only German Shepherds are grouped into the German Shepherd category. With Pitbulls, it is a whole "type." Any dog that has a big head, thick body and short fur is put in that category. Don't you see how this could inflate numbers attributed to the breed?
Add to that the fact that the Pitbull has in recent years become the choice of the scum of the earth (generally not people known for raising animals of sweet disposition), and you see the unfairness of the hysteria. What should amaze us is that Pitbulls are not killing someone every day. This speaks volumes for their inherently placid disposition towards people. If as many German Shepherds were owned by drug dealers, I imagine the number of deaths would be significantly higher, as this breed was bred specifically to remove any natural aversion towards human-aggression, whereas human aggression was intentionally bred out of the American Pitbull Terrier over many centuries.
By all accounts, the dogs (or dog, pending forensic results) in this latest attack were pretty easy-going dogs. The dogs were very close and played well with all three children.
So exactly how, Mike, do you explain their vicious actions if you think all pitbull attacks come at the hands of bad owners, or that they have some sort of history of bad behavior?
You couldn't "read" these two dogs any more than I can read Sanskrit.
So exactly how, Mike, do you explain their vicious actions if you think all pitbull attacks come at the hands of bad owners, or that they have some sort of history of bad behavior?
You couldn't "read" these two dogs any more than I can read Sanskrit.
The Real Hawkeye
member
Some dogs can be triggered in ways no one can observe. It can happen, but is very rare. Often a brain tumor is found in dogs that suddenly attack their family members, but this conduct is not breed specific. Cockers, however, are the most common culprits is such situations.
My interpretation of "pit bull types" was the inclusion of an American Pit Bull Terrier, or the Staffordshire terrier, or a mix of one of these with another breed. I could be totally wrong, but if the breed of the dog was known, I don't know why they would directly misconceive. It's possible that in some of those incidences the breed wasn't confirmed, which would make the term "pit bull type" disingenuous. I agree with your concern.
However, the percentages are still very, very lopsided considering how many breeds of dog there are.
And yes, the pitbull does seem to be a favorite amongst the scum of the earth. No quarrel there. But many pitbull attacks are not the dogs owned by the thugs in question, such as this last incident.
However, the percentages are still very, very lopsided considering how many breeds of dog there are.
And yes, the pitbull does seem to be a favorite amongst the scum of the earth. No quarrel there. But many pitbull attacks are not the dogs owned by the thugs in question, such as this last incident.
There was that freakish cat attack I read in Fark a few months back. Totally wacked stuff. This beloved family feline that this family owned for years suddenly went ballistic one day and viciously attacked the daughter. When the father tried to confront the cat, he tried to attack him. It was hissing and was making really strange sounds. The cat finally had to be shot with a .357 by a sherrif or animal control officer.
That could have been a brain tumor.
My guess is that many of these pit bulls have bad lineage.
That could have been a brain tumor.
My guess is that many of these pit bulls have bad lineage.
XLMiguel
Member
Point taken, some things have no rational explaination. As far as 'reading' dogs, I was referring to meeting an unfamiliar animal, I have no idea why previously 'stable' family pets go off. Overbred/inbred? Pack mentality? Maybe the kid did something to make them think he was prey or otherwise triggered a hunting response. It's a tradgedy regardless, and the surviving dog should be destroyed. Animals are still animals, and will revert to animal behaviour when weird stuff happens.
Yes, agreed.
Some dogs (of any breed) like everything (humans and animals), some are animal-agressive only, some people aggressive only (these dogs should be put down IMO), and some dogs are agressive to both people and animals (these dogs should be put down as well). One does not lead to the other though, in most cases.
IMO.....cats are just.....weird. Harder to predict than most dogs. IIRC, cats are also LESS domesticated than dogs are--which might explain why its hard to have a cat and NEVER get bit or scratched up by it (I know most cats I've pet has scratched or bit me when they are in a bad mood).
One of my ex-co-workers (an elderly lady) was mauled by a housecat that freaks out everytime it sees another cat through a window. It takes its aggression out on anyone in the room and viciously attacks. It literally ripped her leg open so much, that the doctor thought a bigger cat attacked her (like Bobcat size). To make the story short, the people that asked her to babysit the cat forgot to tell her that it was a pyschokitty and goes ballistic everytime it sees another cat. Bad owners right there. The cat had actually done this before (to the male owner).
I live near Wilmington, DE, which has enacted breed specific legislation against pit bulls and mixes. Let me tell you how effective it has been.
1) Pit bull confiscation has gone down but unsurprisingly, to those of us who resisted this legislation, it has not disappeared. The same problem figures in the community that owned pit bulls prior to the legislation still get pit bulls. Dog fights are still going on, pit bulls are still being abandoned at the humane association in town.
2) Law abiding citzens who own pit bulls are now forced to pay a $60 licensing fee on top of the county dog licensing fee every year.
3) Larger breeds, Rottweilers, Bullmastiffs, Mastiffs and Great Danes are starting to show up in town and at the animal shelters. If you think placing a 55 pound pit bull is tough, try placing a 150 pound Mastiff in a good home.
Just some food for thought. There are exactly two dog breeds bred for work against humans. They are the Doberman Pinscher and the Bullmastiff. The Doberman was bred to protect German tax collectors and the Bullmastiff was bred to work with English foresters, working against poachers. Interestingly, the Bullmastiffs were trained to NOT bite, because a dog that large and powerful could easily break the arm of a poacher if it bore down.
1) Pit bull confiscation has gone down but unsurprisingly, to those of us who resisted this legislation, it has not disappeared. The same problem figures in the community that owned pit bulls prior to the legislation still get pit bulls. Dog fights are still going on, pit bulls are still being abandoned at the humane association in town.
2) Law abiding citzens who own pit bulls are now forced to pay a $60 licensing fee on top of the county dog licensing fee every year.
3) Larger breeds, Rottweilers, Bullmastiffs, Mastiffs and Great Danes are starting to show up in town and at the animal shelters. If you think placing a 55 pound pit bull is tough, try placing a 150 pound Mastiff in a good home.
Just some food for thought. There are exactly two dog breeds bred for work against humans. They are the Doberman Pinscher and the Bullmastiff. The Doberman was bred to protect German tax collectors and the Bullmastiff was bred to work with English foresters, working against poachers. Interestingly, the Bullmastiffs were trained to NOT bite, because a dog that large and powerful could easily break the arm of a poacher if it bore down.
Sindawe
Member
I risk to differ. Cats have a different language than dogs, but it can be read with ease once you know it. It is much more ear, eye and whisker centered, with the tail playing less of a role. Some head motions also come into play, ie: a head shake combined with a strong nasal exhalation seems to be a dismissive gesture, akin to a "Talk to the hand" in us. They also have a wider range of vocalizations. After living multiple cats for 15 years, I can almost read their minds, and know when one is up to no good, feeling anxious, content or playfull.
The ONLY time I've been seriously bitten by any of my cats is when I've asked for it, harassing the animal beyond its tolerance and ignoring its warnings to quit being a pain. This differs from an affectionate mouthing, or even a nip to get you to stop what you are doing. It could also be that you are not petting the cat in the fashion it likes. I have one that only likes the lightest of strokes, and only for a bit. I meet another cat years ago that liked to be spanked, not petted.
Redirected aggression. Cats are territorial by nature. I've seen this with my own cats as well. One tom will moan at a cat outside in hostility, then charge the other tom. The other tom being a neurotic nutcase anyway freaks and screams, which induces to first tom into even more hostility.
fjolnirsson
Member
And we all know the good folks there are very careful not to muddle or "spin" statistics or distort the truth in any way.
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
280PLUS
Member
I know full well that a pit bull is no different than any other dog and the OWNER is the one who is at fault when a dog is vicious. I had a friend once who raised Pit Bulls and I wallowed through many a pack of them. To us they were nothing more than just dogs with not a mean streak in any of them.
Maybe I should have said:
Just once I'd like to read, "Man with gun kills DOG, saves boy's life."
Apologies to the Pit Bull people,
I was trying to make reference to the idea that if ANYONE at the scene had a firearm handy the kid might not be dead now.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
