Another Dog Shot... Since we have been discussing this...

[Harley Quinn]

I have posted this before but it is appropriate at this point. I own this book and about 8 others on this breed and similar types.

http://www.kateconnick.com/library/semencicpit.html

I have bred this breed for a long time since the 70's and it is a sad situation that happens to a major proportion of these dogs. The reason I quit breeding them and the last female I had was a few years ago.

I currently own no dogs but if I had to have another one, it would be the Bull and terrier mix of some sort.

The "Working Pitbull" is another very good book, by Diane Jessup...

This is some information about the dog we are talking about:

http://ourworld.cs.com/_ht_a/Dreadlives609/id29.htm

When I see one of these loose I feel like there is going to be a problem for a dog and his owner soon.

 

[whited]

.

Why did the guy stop shooting? If something is worth shooting, it's worth shooting twice...at least.

+1
That was also my first thought after reading the article.

 

[Crunker1337]

There's only one thing that really needs to be said about this:

Good shot.

 

[Diggers]

All I know is dogs are WAAAAAAAY tougher then humans are. I saw a video where 2 cops were dealing with an aggressive dog in a neighborhood. They decided to try to taser it to make it go away.

Well they hit it with the taser, and what would have put any of us down in a second flat cranked this dog up to mach speeds as it raced off toward the house it came from.

Pretty effective way to make the dog back off, but it also shows how tough they are.

 

[ilbob]

I don't care if it is a "real" pit bull or not. If it is aggressive toward human beings without good cause it needs to be put down.

A big part of the problem with pits is the unpredictable nature of the breed, coupled with its incredible strength and determination.

Couple that with the negligence of a substantial percentage of pit owners who refuse to train them properly and keep them confined, and you have a recipe for disaster. It seems like a lot of pit owners think they are cool for having a dangerous dog and also think they are expert dog trainers. Most are just fools with all but untrained dogs.

I think the answer is that if you have an aggressive dog and it gets out and attacks someone or another dog, the aggressive dog gets put down and the owner pays a big fine and goes to jail. I am thinking $10,000 and 90 days for the first offense.

Not a lot different than what happens if you decide to fire off a few shots in the air to celebrate new year's eve and manage to hit someone down the street. Letting an aggressive dog loose is every bit as dangerous to others, maybe more so.

 

[Helmetcase]

Not sure the "assault dog" = "assault rifle" comparison has merit.

Despite their "scary" appearance, "assault rifles" are used in less than 2% of gun crimes.

Ok, fine. Consider handguns--the most commonly used gun in gun crimes. The argument still stands--it's not the gun, it's the gun possessor.

big part of the problem with pits is the unpredictable nature of the breed, coupled with its incredible strength and determination.

Go read my post again--before pits where the dog du jour in the hood, other breeds were far and away the breed to watch in so called dog bite stats. The only thing predictable about them is they tend to NOT be human aggressive. What part of "it's the owner, not the breed" is hard to understand?

They near mythic physical prowess you guys assign to the breed is largely bunk; get rid of all the pits and the ghetto bangers and trailer trash will find another strong, readily available breed to abuse.

 

[MrChicken]

It was not a breed problem before, and it's not every dog in the breed. I think you can safely say that at this point the people that breed pits for aggressiveness, whether for fighting or to guard their drug house are changing the breed. Perhaps you could say it's a splinter or tainting of the breed, but there is no denying that when you keep breeding aggressive dogs for the purpose of aggression, the dog is a problem. It's not the dog's fault, they didnt choose the genetics, but they are still a problem.

It may actually take restrictive laws to save the breed from what it may become.

I also believe you're correct, just as the same type of people moved from Dobe's, Shepard's and Rott's, if they can't own Pitt's they'll find another breed to screw-up.

 

[Choclabman]

I was attacked by a Pit-Bull-- uh Beagle when I was 10.
I still have scars above my left eye, and on my forehead.

You have bad people and bad dogs. Such is life. You cannot blame a race, nor can you blame a breed.
Blame the idiots, who make dogs mean.

 

[Ready2Defend]

Its not a pack of wild dogs, It is a target rich enviroment.

 

[OpFlash]

To anyone thinking that this speaks badly of the 9mm, the .45 would have penetrated less in this scenario. 9mm punches through hard barriers better than .45, especially in glancing blows.

 

[Colt]

The argument still stands--it's not the gun, it's the gun possessor.

With respect, that's not the argument you were trying to make.

You contended that labeling a pitbull as a dangerous breed is like labeling black rifles with bayonette lugs or pistol grips as assault rifles.

Pitbulls are associated with maulings for good reason- they're involved in a disproportionate amount of them. "Assault rifles" are associated with crime for no reason at all, as they are used in less than 2% of gun crimes.

Your "possession" argument is also a non-starter. Once a gun is taken away from a psycho, the gun itself is no longer "dangerous." But once a pitbull is incorrectly trained/abused, it's always going to be dangerous, no matter who owns it. And it won't require a "bad" owner to be a threat to society.

Dogs can be trained. Guns can't.

 

[Harley Quinn]

If the firearm has shot someone does it remember and shoot them again

 

[USGuns]

Dog tasered

All I know is dogs are WAAAAAAAY tougher then humans are. I saw a video where 2 cops were dealing with an aggressive dog in a neighborhood. They decided to try to taser it to make it go away.

Well they hit it with the taser, and what would have put any of us down in a second flat cranked this dog up to mach speeds as it raced off toward the house it came from.

Pretty effective way to make the dog back off, but it also shows how tough they are.

Dogs are tough but in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgZZiXPajAc the dog is totally paralyzed until the Taser releases him, then takes off the other direction!

 

[Helmetcase]

With respect, that's not the argument you were trying to make.

Respect would entail actually reading what I was saying and avoiding strawmen. That's exactly the argument I was making--media hype about pitbulls is no different than media hype about Saturday Night Specials, gun show loopholes, and those imaginary $200 AKs on the shelves at K-Mart. In other words...the media is distorting the truth to sell ad copy. I don't recall saying anything about bayonnet lugs and assault rifle crime gun percentages. You incorrectly inferred that. I was simply pointing out that media bias and hype leads to a misinformed public...hence all the unsupported, misguided, thoroughly untenable assertions about pits as "unpredictable" monsters.

Your "possession" argument is also a non-starter. Once a gun is taken away from a psycho, the gun itself is no longer "dangerous." But once a pitbull is incorrectly trained/abused, it's always going to be dangerous, no matter who owns it. And it won't require a "bad" owner to be a threat to society.

Once again I think you're picking a nit that doesn't need picking. The point I'm making is simple--the dog becomes dangerous because a human mishandles it. The gun becomes dangerous when it's mishandled as well. That's all. It's a ridiculously picayune, pedantic point to note that dogs are animate creatures while guns are inanimate pieces of metal. The only point I'm making is all this hype ignores the human responsibility element.