its very unfortunate that this breed has been adopted by wanna be tough guys that think its cool to have a strong tough dog.
Pitbulls are not bad dogs. They are extremely strong and I have no interest in fighting with one but once again when properly trained and cared for they can be very calm and good dogs.
Dog owners who let their dogs run wild and attack others should be jailed. Fines are not enough they need to start serving jail time.
Ive had pitbulls, i'm not dumb, and i dont talk like him. stupid people shouldn't own a dog that is hard to control and train, idiots think that having a tough dog makes the tough, stupid idiot. The dog should be taken to a shelter instead of being killed, its not the dogs fault that the owner couldn't control or properly take care of his own pet. I hate the stereotype that surrounds pitbulls and pitbull owners.
My uncle has two pitbulls. Sweet dogs. Loving. Playful. People gave pitbulls bad names.
Boy, I dunno.
I've mentioned that I am volunteering at WARL (Washington Animal Rescue League). Guess what dogs seem to be in need of more rescuing than any other breed? Pit bulls.
I'll come right out and say it: I am not a fan of the breed. I think they are more likely to bite and to hurt. Plus, they are unbelievably strong. Even the claws on the puppies are like talons.
Part of the volunteering is "dog walking" and socializing. You leash a dog that needs to go out, you take it it to a fenced area and play with it for 10 minutes and let it do its business, and then you take it back to its den and go get the next dog. Not exciting, but it needs to be done.
The pit bulls are my least favorite dogs to take out. They are so strong that I can struggle to control them on a leash, although I can control my own 60-pound Aussie just fine. My teen son comes with me, and we work in tandem. A pit bull started jumping up and biting at my son's shirt, and I had to kind of punch the dog in the ribs to make it stop. And remember, we volunteers don't interact with the dogs until they have passed their temperament assessment -- so this dog was one of the "good" pit bulls.
In looking for a dogs, there are so many better choices. I don't understand the desire of anyone to own a pitbull, honestly.
I'll come right out and say it: I am not a fan of the breed. I think they are more likely to bite and to hurt. Plus, they are unbelievably strong. Even the claws on the puppies are like talons.
In looking for a dogs, there are so many better choices. I don't understand the desire of anyone to own a pitbull, honestly.
Does anybody understand what this guy is saying?
If anyone could make it through the whole video I would be surprised.
Which also brings up something that really irks me. If you have children please inform them that it is not a good idea to run up to pet random dogs. I understand that some kids love animals and are curious but they need to understand that not all dogs are comfortable with being run up to. My Aussie is used to it as the little boys next door love him but my older Jack Russel never was really socialized with kids and gets really nervous when they come running at her.
Boy, I dunno.
I've mentioned that I am volunteering at WARL (Washington Animal Rescue League). Guess what dogs seem to be in need of more rescuing than any other breed? Pit bulls.
I'll come right out and say it: I am not a fan of the breed. I think they are more likely to bite and to hurt. Plus, they are unbelievably strong. Even the claws on the puppies are like talons.
Part of the volunteering is "dog walking" and socializing. You leash a dog that needs to go out, you take it it to a fenced area and play with it for 10 minutes and let it do its business, and then you take it back to its den and go get the next dog. Not exciting, but it needs to be done.
The pit bulls are my least favorite dogs to take out. They are so strong that I can struggle to control them on a leash, although I can control my own 60-pound Aussie just fine. My teen son comes with me, and we work in tandem. A pit bull started jumping up and biting at my son's shirt, and I had to kind of punch the dog in the ribs to make it stop. And remember, we volunteers don't interact with the dogs until they have passed their temperament assessment -- so this dog was one of the "good" pit bulls.
In looking for a dogs, there are so many better choices. I don't understand the desire of anyone to own a pitbull, honestly.
You Tube videos are interesting but in reality there are a tremendous number of actual facts relating to dogs, dog attacks, breeds and legal issues surrounding all of these things. There is no question that our attempts to domesticate dogs have some real drawbacks.
Pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks.
I always argue these stats. How many dog bites go unreported?
.
I always argue these stats. How many dog bites go unreported?
It's a bad breed, no doubt.
Some things I find interesting:
(1) politically, local cities find it tough to enact ordinances against pitbull because the pitbull owners seem, themselves, threatening and unreasonable, and they make a lot of noise.
(2) here, where I live, pit bulls are often in the pound.
(3) we have had a few cases of exceptionally aggressive behavior in which people were seriously harmed.
(4) The danger is real. I'm in favor of some kind of pitbull regulation.
It's a bad breed, no doubt.
Some things I find interesting:
(1) politically, local cities find it tough to enact ordinances against pitbull because the pitbull owners seem, themselves, threatening and unreasonable, and they make a lot of noise.
(2) here, where I live, pit bulls are often in the pound.
(3) we have had a few cases of exceptionally aggressive behavior in which people were seriously harmed.
(4) The danger is real. I'm in favor of some kind of pitbull regulation.
No kidding. So many ankle biter dogs bite people all the time, it goes unreported because the bite does no damage. Ya' think the size of the animal may have an impact on how severe the injury is? I've personally encountered far more aggressive little yappy dogs than any other. The worst part is the owners of these dogs typically don't take it very seriously when their dog bites someone.
It ain't about the dog. It is well established that through time, different dog breeds have appealed to the type of dog owner, who frankly shouldn't have any dog breed (except stuffed animals). You know, the type who are likely to mistreat the dog and excourage aggressive behavior.
There was once a time when that group of owners owned German Shepherds, then they bought Dobermans, then Rottweilers, now it is Staffordshires. True at this time Staffies are overrepresented in maulings etc but it is a popularity thing. That is, back when the buffoons prefered Dobermans Staffordshires were not in the top ten of attacks, etc. When the idiots move on to another breed, the percentage of Staffies who are in these attacks will drop.
It's a bad breed, no doubt.
Some things I find interesting:
(1) politically, local cities find it tough to enact ordinances against pitbull because the pitbull owners seem, themselves, threatening and unreasonable, and they make a lot of noise.
(2) here, where I live, pit bulls are often in the pound.
(3) we have had a few cases of exceptionally aggressive behavior in which people were seriously harmed.
(4) The danger is real. I'm in favor of some kind of pitbull regulation.
First,...If You watch the video, I dont believe 'Pitbull' is the issue at hand. The 'issue' that i saw was a complete refusal to own responsibility by a 'dog owner' to the point of absurdity.I'm sorry, but you are completely ignorant of the situation. Please stop perpetuating the myth. I'm in favor of "some kind of regulation" against people who spout non-informed opinions on subjects they are uneducated about, who don't look at both sides of the coin.
Also, pit bull is a generic term for 20-something different breeds of dog. So which one of them is threatening your security? Or would it happen to be all? 20-something different breeds all happen to have the same angry, hateful disposition? If they have a good owner, like any dog, they will have the exact temperament that you claim your signature describes you.
I personally believe that dogs are like humans in that they are born Tabula Rasa. Clean slate. A dog will be what it is raised to be it is not born violent or aggressive.
It is not the dog's fault.
It is not the dog's fault.
Sure, they want the toughest animal they can get without going through legal red tape. And, something loyal to them, but not to others.People buy pitbulls in order to make a statement. The same reason used by people who buy AK-47 assault rifles. The same reason used by bodybuilders who pack 285 pounds of muscle on a 5 foot 9 inch frame. The same reason why a person would buy a 150,000 dollar watch. The same reason why someone would buy a 1,000 gallon aquarium and fill it with carnivorous fish and feed them small live animals. The same reason why some people can't get through a single conversation without name-dropping a famous person.
They all love to drive on the "road to excess" (as coined by William Blake).
These kinds of people usually nauseate me. Everything they do screams "Look at me, look at me, look at me..." Can't stand that.
Yes, but if the dog already has the propensity, ability, physiology, and temperament for fighting, then it will probably be raised for fighting.
Evolution works this way for a reason. Pit bull breeds have evolved that way for a reason. And it isn't just their bodies that have evolved. Their minds have evolved commensurately. Pit bull breeds are aggressive. Just like fish... not all are created equal. Oscars are incredibly tempermental and aggressive fish while a Molly is incredibly passive.
If I want to find an escaped prisoner or a dope stash, I'm probably going to employ a bloodhound and not a pit bull. For good reason. The bloodhound has evolved as the better breed for that kind of task.
I hear too many pit bull owners try to make the argument that how a dog is raised is the sole determinant of its temperament. That couldn't be further from the truth. Animal breeds are predisposed for temperament and ability. That is the reality. Get over it.
That's true. But that doesn't mean that the dog should be treated as if it were any other dog such as a toy poodle. All dogs are not created equal. And some are downright dangerous.
Yes, but if the dog already has the propensity, ability, physiology, and temperament for fighting, then it will probably be raised for fighting.
Ok. Physiology yes. Everything else you are absolutely wrong.
By your logic, my dog should be aggressive and ready to snap at anything that comes at it. But she's not.
She adapts to the people that are around her. If our kids our running around and playful, that's how she is. If my wife and are realaxing on the couch, she is relaxing with us.
If something is bothering her, she has ways to indicate it to us without becoming angered or aggressive. Why? Because that's how she was raised.
Evolution works this way for a reason. Pit bull breeds have evolved that way for a reason. And it isn't just their bodies that have evolved. Their minds have evolved commensurately. Pit bull breeds are aggressive. Just like fish... not all are created equal. Oscars are incredibly tempermental and aggressive fish while a Molly is incredibly passive.
Let's keep in mind that evolution takes an exceptional amount of time. You really think that it is reasonable to say that Pit Bulls, which were previously used as nanny dogs to keep after children in the mid to late 1800s and early 1900s, have in the span of appx. 100 years completely changed their demeanor to become aggressive attack dogs?
I don't think so. What has happened? PEOPLE have changed their attitudes and treatment of the animals to create new behaviors in the breed. It has nothing to do with the breed itself. I've seen mean dogs and nice dogs of all breeds. You cannot tell me that how that dog is raised and its owner's temperament have nothing to do with it.
If I want to find an escaped prisoner or a dope stash, I'm probably going to employ a bloodhound and not a pit bull. For good reason. The bloodhound has evolved as the better breed for that kind of task.
Of course dogs are raised with certain characteristics. Bloodhounds for scent ability, Greyhounds for sight. But ANY dog can be manipulated into aggressive and violent behavior.
I hear too many pit bull owners try to make the argument that how a dog is raised is the sole determinant of its temperament. That couldn't be further from the truth. Animal breeds are predisposed for temperament and ability. That is the reality. Get over it.
Sorry, but I think that you could not possibly have your head further up your butt. Maybe you should try reading a little bit more before you jump into a conversation such as this uninformed. There's wrong and then there is you.
That's true. But that doesn't mean that the dog should be treated as if it were any other dog such as a toy poodle. All dogs are not created equal. And some are downright dangerous.
Pit bulls are no more aggressive to other animals than Jake Russells or any other terrier. And fact is, they are not naturally aggressive towards humans. THAT is reality bud. Deal with that. Again, the main reason they are bred to fight is because they have a higher tolerance for pain than other breeds, not that they are more aggressive, Terriers, all terriers, are more aggressive towards other animals than other breeds. But you don't see Jack Russell fights going on, do you? I think they should probably put down all roosters as well. I hear they like to fight too.
That doesn't remove the fact that they still can be dangerous. You can have a very angry chihuahua and still nobody gets hurt or killed, but you can't say the same for an average size pitbull.
Nobody disputes that responsibility with dangerous dogs lies much with their owners. But since we can't regulate people's irresponbisibility and stupidity -- we would if we could -- the next best thing is to get rid of these animals altogether. The same goes for guns in private citizen's hands.
What isn't clear with this argument?
The great irony of this thread is that the type of emotion seen here, mainly from the ultra-passionate defenders of pit bulls, is exacerbating the problem and preventing solutions.
Whenever reasonable regulations that merely address facts (without assigning blame between humans and dogs) are adopted or even suggested, the "pit bull lobby" goes ballistic.
The result is that we do not have a clear, predictable and consistent set of rules nationally. That, in turn, means that we "solve" this in the 21st century's version of the jungle - the courtroom. Litigation on this front is going bananas, causing much bigger problems than simple breed-specific regulation. Indeed, one of the best known experts on dog bites (and the guy who runs www.dogbitelaw.com) is Ken Phillips - a personal injury lawyer!
It's clear that it's an unbelievably stupid argument. Are they killing or injuring nearly the amount that guns are? Are they just running wild in the street destroying people and property alike, at all times?
I mean gosh, a semi truck does a helluva lot more damage when it collides with other vehicles than a Smart car. Should we get rid of them too? I mean it is people causing these accidents, but we can't blame them right?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20020791-504083.html
http://www.startribune.com/local/11588186.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/22/national/main6703350.shtml
^^^a few articles obtained easily,....
the following is an excerpt from the web article that follows the excerpt.
The deadliest dogs
Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, has conducted an unusually detailed study of dog bites from 1982 to the present. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.) The Clifton study show the number of serious canine-inflicted injuries by breed. The author's observations about the breeds and generally how to deal with the dangerous dog problem are enlightening.
According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question. Clifton states:If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed--and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.Clifton's opinions are as interesting as his statistics. For example, he says, "Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all."
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html#Thedogbiteepidemic
There really isnt much of an argument to this,...these were the first 4 sites i found,....i could go on and on,...but really??...is the issue 'pitbulls'??
Good point!!...Why didnt I think of that???...in fact,..more people die in auto related deaths than by handguns so,...obviously we shouldnt concern ourselves with handguns then!!!....(or vice versa,..im taking the time to look that up,..You get the point..)It's clear that it's an unbelievably stupid argument. Are they killing or injuring nearly the amount that guns are? Are they just running wild in the street destroying people and property alike, at all times?
I mean gosh, a semi truck does a helluva lot more damage when it collides with other vehicles than a Smart car. Should we get rid of them too? I mean it is people causing these accidents, but we can't blame them right?
Your analogies are stupid and not applicable. We can't get rid of semi trucks, ie we need them, so we have to put up with the consequences. We can get rid of pitbulls or dangerous dogs as in we do not allow poisonous snakes, aligators to be owned as pet.
There are abundant other dogs that are harmless to own as pets. Nobody dies if pitbulls vanish tomorrow.
Good point!!...Why didnt I think of that???...in fact,..more people die in auto related deaths than by handguns so,...obviously we shouldnt concern ourselves with handguns then!!!....(or vice versa,..im taking the time to look that up,..You get the point..)
...Know when You have no argument as opposed to trying to 'force that square peg into that round hole'.
You're not addressing facts. Thank you.
By your logic, my dog should be aggressive and ready to snap at anything that comes at it. But she's not.
She adapts to the people that are around her. If our kids our running around and playful, that's how she is. If my wife and are realaxing on the couch, she is relaxing with us.
If something is bothering her, she has ways to indicate it to us without becoming angered or aggressive. Why? Because that's how she was raised.
Let's keep in mind that evolution takes an exceptional amount of time. You really think that it is reasonable to say that Pit Bulls, which were previously used as nanny dogs to keep after children in the mid to late 1800s and early 1900s, have in the span of appx. 100 years completely changed their demeanor to become aggressive attack dogs?
I don't think so. What has happened? PEOPLE have changed their attitudes and treatment of the animals to create new behaviors in the breed. It has nothing to do with the breed itself. I've seen mean dogs and nice dogs of all breeds. You cannot tell me that how that dog is raised and its owner's temperament have nothing to do with it.
You're right. Kill a bunch of innocent animals because humans are irresponsible and stupid. I bet that humans kill and maim more humans by far than any breed of animal, or all animals combined, every year. What is your solution to that genius?