Stophovr6 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 I agree 100%. My only point was that some people who have pit or pit-mixes are not doing it for a statement/to be cool/or because they NEED pits, etc. but because that is what they found and connected with. That's what my friends did. Like I said, that dog is sweet, but it still tried to rip apart a ****zu. We don't trust it around our Aussie. It's a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gortiz Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 America's Nanny Dog http://www.times-standard.com/opinion/ci_6993026 According to rigorous testing by The National Canine Temperament Testing Association, the golden retriever, poodle, border collie, English setter, German pointer and numerous other breeds are considered more likely to become aggressive than pit bulls. The average score of the 122 breeds tested was a mere 77 percent. Pit bulls scored a 95.2 percent on these testings. (The higher the better.) It seems that many people have forgotten how America has loved this breed over time, and have forgotten that many choose this breed of dog today for a reliable and loving family dog. This was the breed that was affectionately known as “America's Nanny Dog.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Maybe someone can describe what a "pit bull type" dog is, because I listed about 20 dogs earlier that are lumped in with "pit bull" and only one is American Pit Bull Terrier. People who think the breed is to blame just don't understand dogs. It's that simple. To eradicate a breed based on ignorance, well then what should we do with Boxers, or Akitas, or German Shepherds, or Dobermans or any host of other breeds that look menacing and can put a big hurt on you. While we're at it, lets get rid of horses, because they have to be tamed, and when they kick, if they hit you in the head it can kill you. They're animals. They're dangerous. Do what I do. Carry a sharp blade and be prepared to cut the jugular of a dog that attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Maybe someone can describe what a "pit bull type" dog is, because I listed about 20 dogs earlier that are lumped in with "pit bull" and only one is American Pit Bull Terrier. People who think the breed is to blame just don't understand dogs. It's that simple. To eradicate a breed based on ignorance, well then what should we do with Boxers, or Akitas, or German Shepherds, or Dobermans or any host of other breeds that look menacing and can put a big hurt on you. While we're at it, lets get rid of horses, because they have to be tamed, and when they kick, if they hit you in the head it can kill you. They're animals. They're dangerous. Do what I do. Carry a sharp blade and be prepared to cut the jugular of a dog that attacks. Actually, i think we should stop pure breeding all together. What's the point? German Sheppards have horrible hips for the most part. How is that a good trait to have in a dog? Most of them become paralyzed. It's really kind of selfish, in my mind, to keep breeding "cousins" just to get certain characteristics or looks from them. Maybe I'm crazy or misinformed on this. Take for instance my girlfriends australian sheppard. She was bred as a show dog and had two litters of pups herself. She is blind now because of cataracts. I can almost garantee this trait was apparent in her family tree and wouldn't be surprised to find out her pups are for the most part going blind. Did the breeder care? No, because for two years she had a perfect show dog. Makes me mad. The whole pure breed thing seems so outdated and silly to me. I don't see why we need pit bulls, german shepards or australian sheppards when a mix of all three would probably work out better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Maybe someone can describe what a "pit bull type" dog is, because I listed about 20 dogs earlier that are lumped in with "pit bull" and only one is American Pit Bull Terrier. People who think the breed is to blame just don't understand dogs. It's that simple. To eradicate a breed based on ignorance, well then what should we do with Boxers, or Akitas, or German Shepherds, or Dobermans or any host of other breeds that look menacing and can put a big hurt on you. While we're at it, lets get rid of horses, because they have to be tamed, and when they kick, if they hit you in the head it can kill you. They're animals. They're dangerous. Do what I do. Carry a sharp blade and be prepared to cut the jugular of a dog that attacks. And the resident dog expert is back, it is the freaking breed/type, why do you think most terriers are used for hunting, it isn't because they are docile lovable puppies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeysc23 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 GoSkins and other anti-Pitt Bull advocates I have a question for you. Since many of you believe that Pitt Bulls are bad because it is their nature (i.e. genetically predisposed to "snap") then what would happen say if we found a gene in humans that indicated they would be able to kill other people, or hurt and rap. Would you advocate we eliminate this group of people without giving them a chance to change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljs Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 And the resident dog expert is back. What the hell? I lay out my credentials on here several times and DockeryFan gets the "resident dog expert" tag. Bull**** I say! Total crap. I want that title!:saber: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 GoSkins and other anti-Pitt Bull advocates I have a question for you. Since many of you believe that Pitt Bulls are bad because it is their nature (i.e. genetically predisposed to "snap") then what would happen say if we found a gene in humans that indicated they would be able to kill other people, or hurt and rap.Would you advocate we eliminate this group of people without giving them a chance to change? We don't chose who humans breed with. And if they are predisposed to do something, such as "snap" or "rap", what exactly can you do to change them? Why bother to breed them if they have this predisposition, if you can just NOT breed them. For the most part dog breeding(pure breed anyways) is done by humans and the pairs are picked by humans. I for one wouldn't breed two of the same that I knew might have any issue with temperament or genetic problems. There are people right now, breeding pits/rots/chows BECAUSE they(the individual dogs, not them as a breed) have a nasty temperament, that's the biggest problem. I don't advocate that we just put down all pitbulls and never breed them again. I'm advocating we cut out all the incest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kubstix Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 And the resident dog expert is back, it is the freaking breed/type, why do you think most terriers are used for hunting, it isn't because they are docile lovable puppies. Or someone who actually see's the light? Your ignorant, you hate pitbulls and you think you know everything......we know...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 GoSkins and other anti-Pitt Bull advocates I have a question for you. Since many of you believe that Pitt Bulls are bad because it is their nature (i.e. genetically predisposed to "snap") then what would happen say if we found a gene in humans that indicated they would be able to kill other people, or hurt and rap.Would you advocate we eliminate this group of people without giving them a chance to change? ummm don't you think you are getting a bit ridiculous. Pit bulls are animals that have a purpose, however that purpose isn't in the homes of your average joes (most of us) especially if thier are children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 What the hell? I lay out my credentials on here several times and DockeryFan gets the "resident dog expert" tag. Bull**** I say! Total crap. I want that title!:saber: Well he has said that several of us "obviously know nothing about dogs" several times, I always wonder how he knows this so well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Actually, i think we should stop pure breeding all together. What's the point? German Sheppards have horrible hips for the most part. How is that a good trait to have in a dog? Most of them become paralyzed. It's really kind of selfish, in my mind, to keep breeding "cousins" just to get certain characteristics or looks from them. Maybe I'm crazy or misinformed on this. Take for instance my girlfriends australian sheppard. She was bred as a show dog and had two litters of pups herself. She is blind now because of cataracts. I can almost garantee this trait was apparent in her family tree and wouldn't be surprised to find out her pups are for the most part going blind. Did the breeder care? No, because for two years she had a perfect show dog. Makes me mad. The whole pure breed thing seems so outdated and silly to me. I don't see why we need pit bulls, german shepards or australian sheppards when a mix of all three would probably work out better. While I think you make a good point - there are a lot of very responsible breeders out there who do their very best to breed out the negative traits that you discuss in your post. Having a bunch of mixed-breeds isn't ideal either - besides the fact that it can make it very difficult to predict temperament they also have a good chance of inheriting the bad traits that run in the bloodlines. Also, many purebred dogs are bred to perform a specific task and have genes that assist in this - so breeding from these lines is extremely important. It's certainly possible to have a purebred dog that hasn't come from close cousins - and IMHO breeding dogs should require some sort of license and there should be heavy fines against those who breed without them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Or someone who actually see's the light? Your ignorant, you hate pitbulls and you think you know everything......we know...... I know dogs very well, I have raised many JAck Russels, hell I bet I am one of the only people on ES to raise racoons as pets. I have owned a Pit Bull, he was a great dog, he never hurt a fly, I could walk him without a leash down city streets and he would never leave my side. Unfortunately we were in the yard one day and I was not paying attention, so he decided to chase a rabbit in front of a car. The one thing that always facinated me about pits is thier ability to learn to walk without a leash. I still have yet to train another dog to do that, my current dog acts like a ***** some times and needs a leash. With that being said there are way to many idiots that own Pits. My current dog was attacked by a Pit, I was amazed at how much damage a 7 month old Pit could do in less that 10 seconds to a pretty fit older dog twice her age. This pit was raised by a nice family, had good owners, I saw the owner outside working with her on several occasions. She flipped on day and decided to rip my dogs hind quarters to shreds (100+ stitches). Since then I have paid attention to Pits, researched them in an effort to talk my neighbor to get rid of his. I can't count the number of articles I have read about "a family pet mauling a (blank) year old child to death". These are not dogs to have around kids, if for the slightest chance they do bite, they rip the crap out of what ever they bite. I know all dogs bite, facts state Pit Bulls maul and kill people more than any other breed. (period) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljs Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Goskins- how did your neighbors dog get to yours? why were your dogs (and neighbor dogs) not in their own fenced yard? Did one get out? just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Goskins- how did your neighbors dog get to yours? why were your dogs (and neighbor dogs) not in their own fenced yard? Did one get out? just curious. My dog doesn't need a fence ( she thinks there is an undergrouind electric fence), the neighbors put would stand at the fence, with it's feet on the top rail looking for my dog all of the time. The other dog jumped the fence and went straight on my dog, pretty much without any ass sniffing. I wish I could find the before and after pictures my vet snapped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamB Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Maybe someone can describe what a "pit bull type" dog is, because I listed about 20 dogs earlier that are lumped in with "pit bull" and only one is American Pit Bull Terrier. "Pit Bull" is a generic term which some research indicates first appeared around the 17th century. The term was used for any bulldog or bulldog cross which was used in a fighting ring or pit (hence "pit bull"). This included dogs used in bull baiting (for sport, not the actual farm task), ratting competitions (see the Boston Bulldog, the basis for the modern Boston Terrier), bears, other dogs, etc. Over time, "pit bull" came to primarily refer to bull dog/terrier crosses. The APBT is not the only breed which still can acurately be described as a pit bull, just the only one with the term as part of its name, and that only came about in the late 19th century. It was/is not uncommon for those raised in the late 19th/early 20th century to still refer to them simply as bull dogs, such as Laura Ingles Wilder did in her books, Helen Keller did in her writings, or my grandmother did until a few years ago when she realized what people were talking about when they said pit bull (turns out she had one growing up in the 1920's, just did not know that was the dogs they were refering to) "Pit Bull Type" primarily refers to the ABPT, the American Staffordshire Terrier (which was the same breed, and is still so closely related there are individual dogs there have been registered as both with the AKC and UKC), and the Staffordshire (English) Bull Terrier. The Bull Terrier is occasionally included in that group as well depending on who one is talking to. Media and others have expanded that to also include pretty much any mix-breed which shows similar physical characteristics (short coat, non-pointed muzzle, etc) and other bull dog breeds (American Bulldogs and so on). Hence why the term is useless for determing how often one particular breed is involved in an incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 my 15 year old beagle is constantly attacking biting growling at my poor 3 year old pitty... my beagle makes him pee sitting down. and can only eat after my beagle has finished his meal. it's really quite tragic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 "Pit Bull" is a generic term which some research indicates first appeared around the 17th century. The term was used for any bulldog or bulldog cross which was used in a fighting ring or pit (hence "pit bull"). This included dogs used in bull baiting (for sport, not the actual farm task), ratting competitions (see the Boston Bulldog, the basis for the modern Boston Terrier), bears, other dogs, etc. Over time, "pit bull" came to primarily refer to bull dog/terrier crosses. The APBT is not the only breed which still can acurately be described as a pit bull, just the only one with the term as part of its name, and that only came about in the late 19th century. It was/is not uncommon for those raised in the late 19th/early 20th century to still refer to them simply as bull dogs, such as Laura Ingles Wilder did in her books, Helen Keller did in her writings, or my grandmother did until a few years ago when she realized what people were talking about when they said pit bull (turns out she had one growing up in the 1920's, just did not know that was the dogs they were refering to) "Pit Bull Type" primarily refers to the ABPT, the American Staffordshire Terrier (which was the same breed, and is still so closely related there are individual dogs there have been registered as both with the AKC and UKC), and the Staffordshire (English) Bull Terrier. The Bull Terrier is occasionally included in that group as well depending on who one is talking to. Media and others have expanded that to also include pretty much any mix-breed which shows similar physical characteristics (short coat, non-pointed muzzle, etc) and other bull dog breeds (American Bulldogs and so on). Hence why the term is useless for determing how often one particular breed is involved in an incident. Exactly my point. People like Goskins go on a tirade about how it's the breed that is the problem. All the bites reported get lumped into "pit bull type" dogs. Is it any wonder why the statistics would be overwhelming? Yet it isn't one breed at all, it's a mix of breeds, making an overwhelmingly large number of dogs. If I have ten dalmations, and 2 of them bite, and I have 1000 "pit bull type dogs" and 100 of them bite, which looks worse? 100 vs 2...sure looks like a problem with the "pit bull type" dogs, right? But in the Dalmation case 20% of the dogs are biting, and only 10% with the "pit bull type". With these numbers, the Dalmations would be 2x as dangerous. There in lies the problem. These statistics are wrong to begin with. Add poor ownership, which is the reason the dogs attack other dogs to begin with, and fear with the dog fighting reports, and you get one breed blamed. People like GoSkins think that his neighbors were good dog owners, but they were not. They never properly socialized their dog, and they couldn't control it. How is that being a good owner? We cannot just do away with one breed because people do not know how to socialize their dogs. I guarantee you if we got rid of APBT, there would be another "dangerous breed" that would take it's place in the public forum, and would be equally shunnned. Here is one of Michael Vick's breeding dogs Georgia. http://network.bestfriends.org/campaigns/pitbulls/news.aspx?pID=12091 Even this abused dog can be rehabilitated, and her entire existence was abuse. Proper ownership, training and control. Goskins neighbor didn't have it, and that was why the attack happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Exactly my point. People like Goskins go on a tirade about how it's the breed that is the problem. All the bites reported get lumped into "pit bull type" dogs. Is it any wonder why the statistics would be overwhelming? Yet it isn't one breed at all, it's a mix of breeds, making an overwhelmingly large number of dogs. If I have ten dalmations, and 2 of them bite, and I have 1000 "pit bull type dogs" and 100 of them bite, which looks worse? 100 vs 2...sure looks like a problem with the "pit bull type" dogs, right? But in the Dalmation case 20% of the dogs are biting, and only 10% with the "pit bull type". With these numbers, the Dalmations would be 2x as dangerous. There in lies the problem. These statistics are wrong to begin with. Add poor ownership, which is the reason the dogs attack other dogs to begin with, and fear with the dog fighting reports, and you get one breed blamed. People like GoSkins think that his neighbors were good dog owners, but they were not. They never properly socialized their dog, and they couldn't control it. How is that being a good owner? We cannot just do away with one breed because people do not know how to socialize their dogs. I guarantee you if we got rid of APBT, there would be another "dangerous breed" that would take it's place in the public forum, and would be equally shunnned. Here is one of Michael Vick's breeding dogs Georgia. http://network.bestfriends.org/campaigns/pitbulls/news.aspx?pID=12091 Even this abused dog can be rehabilitated, and her entire existence was abuse. Proper ownership, training and control. Goskins neighbor didn't have it, and that was why the attack happened. IF, you knew anything about the Pit Bulls nature, they are "dog aggressive" period. The same way you better not own a cat if you have a Rhodesian Ridgeback. I can go on, Beagles tend to follow thier nose and wander away, Huskies are not the best of dogs to have off a leach because they tend to run, Jack Russels have a natural tendency to go into holes, again Pit Bulls have a natural tendency to be aggressive towards other dogs, as do Boxers. You love to assume, and you really have no clue about my neighbors, how much he worked with the dog, and if the dog was socialized. Even though I have mentioned this several times, the dog was only 7 months old, I saw him working with the dog onleash on many occasions. As for socialization amd as a matter of fact, I know for a fact that after talking with my neighbor,after the attack, the dog use to spend plenty of time at his brothers house, with his brothers "small dogs". Again you are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botched Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I disagree, but I think we will never come to common ground on this, so we will have to agree to disagree in the end i think. I don't see the need to eliminate an entire breed of dog because .004% (which is the highest even possible, the actual is much more around.0004% most likely) have been involved in fatal attacks. .004%-.0004%.I have said now 20 times - I think SOMETHING needs to be done. Destroying the breed is not one of them in my mind. Strict licenses and mandatory training makes a ton more sense. I agree. I don't get why people adopt or buy certain breeds. I am a pound/shelter guy. I go inside and find the right dog for me - regardless of breed. 99% of the people I know with Pit-mixs, got them from a shelter. Not because they were a Pit, but because it is the dog that connected with them. Strict licensing and training is fine with me. I think we're probably on the same page here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Pit Bulls / Dog Aggressive http://www.rescueeverydog.org/pitbull_breed.htmlWhat would be the ideal owner for this breed? The ideal owner of a pit bull is an extremely responsible person committed to the care, training and exercise of their dog. Such an owner should be knowledgeable about the breed (or at least willing to learn), very aware of the dog aggressive but people loving nature of the breed, and dedicated to protecting not only their dog, but also the breed as a whole from the continuing media hysteria generated by bad press and bad owners. The ideal owner of a pit bull would never allow their dog to roam the neighborhood, be off leash in a public place or around strange dogs, and would not leave their adult pit bull alone and unsupervised with another dog of any breed, since fights can start between unsupervised dogs, especially dogs of the same sex, and such fights can have serious consequences. This owner would spay/neuter, make sure their dog remains socialized with all types of people, contain their dog securely when not supervised by an adult, obedience train their dog, and insure that their dog is well exercised every day. This owner would NOT be looking for a guard dog, as pit bulls are typically very people friendly and not naturally inclined toward "man work." This owner would either have no other dogs or an altered dog of opposite sex, since many pit bulls are same sex aggressive and can be placed with a non-dominant dog of opposite sex. Is this breed good with other dogs in general? The short answer is no. Developed for the purpose of fighting other dogs, most pit bulls are dog aggressive, at least to some degree. Some pit bulls will simply not tolerate any other dogs, regardless of sex. A few pit bulls will remain dog friendly their entire lives, but they are a minority.The majority of pit bulls are at least same sex aggressive and as adults will not do well with other dogs of the same sex or those that are "pushy" with them, although as pups they may get along fine (this can be very misleading to a novice pit bull owner). Pit bulls will commonly start developing signs of dog aggression between the ages of 8 months and 2 years, although it can develop at any age and can come on either gradually or quite suddenly. It is important to note that many pit bulls do not display the "typical" signs of dog aggression before a fight. They may not growl, bark, or posture at all, but simply alert and raise up on their toes. Owners of dog aggressive pit bulls learn to "read" their dogs and recognize the subtle signs indicating impending dog aggression. Training will not eliminate dog aggression in the pit bull but, when combined with responsibility and vigilance, training can bring these natural tendencies under control in on-leash situations. Where housemates are concerned, if one is a pit bull, extra care should be taken to prevent tension over food, desirable treats (like bones), and favored toys. These items are often "triggers" for spats or fights between dogs sharing the same house and owners should be very aware of them. This is also the reason that an adult pit bull should NOT be left alone with housemates or other dogs. Due to their fighting heritage, many pit bulls do not recognize signs of submission given by a dog they are fighting and, if they are unsupervised, the results can be disastrous. It should be noted that many breeds have dog aggressive tendencies, and leaving any such breed unsupervised with another dog, especially a dog of the same sex, can lead to a tragedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 So we get rid of all high prey drive dogs? First, it is untrue that certain breeds are unable to be properly socialized around other dogs. There is no evidence of that, because there are dogs of every breed that are properly trained. Second, what is your solution to prevent dog-dog and dog-human attacks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamB Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 While I disagree with GoSkins561 on a lot of views when it comes to pits (we have already gone around a few times during past official semi-annual ES pit bull threads ) he is correct on his point concerning the pit bull breeds and dog aggression. Dog aggression is not an issue of socialization, though it can help minimize the effects depending on the individual dog. For example, socialization may help with a pit bull whose level of dog aggression is "tolerant" (versus friendly), but is unlikely to have an effect on one which is full blown dog aggressive. It is important for all dog owners, but especially those who own terriers, specifically pit bulls, to realize that dog aggression is not a yes or no proposition. A dog might be completely dog friendly, tolerant but not friendly, or outright aggressive. They also may fall into the "selective" category, which it sounds like his neighbor's dog did - friendly with most, aggressive towards others. This last one is the type that is most dangerous since it is unpredicatable (an outright dog aggressive animal can be controlled since the owner knows it is aggressive). A good pit bull owner will keep this in mind and take common sense precautions. For example, my 4 year old pit is very friendly with other dogs, even strange ones (as well as being fairly submissive). However, I never assume that will always be the case, so she is never out of the yard without a leash and I keep a soft-muzzle in my back pocket if there is a good chance she will encounter another dog and begins to display signs of getting ramped up (I have not had to use it yet). It is also important to remember that dog agression and human aggression are not the same things - a dog highly aggressive towards other dogs may be completely non-aggressive towards humans, and vice-versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 thats sad, another reason not to own a pitbull.....also...R.i.P....redskin fan or not....thats a sad way to go out, and hes only 19 years old..... I don't think it is sad. I think it's personal responsibility, this kid had it and paid the price. I think this outcome is 1000% better than if the dog had killed somebody else as is what usually happens when irresponsible people adopt a dangerous animal.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Pit Bulls / Dog Aggressive That's simply not true. Most dog bits in this country occur with Labs not terriors. I've known many Pit Bulls which were great dogs. Problem is when they do go off, a pit bulls jaw has about 10x the bite strength of a lab, and can do a lot more damage. I wouldn't say the Pit Bull is more agressive as a breed than say a Chow Chow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.