Let's Ban Pit Bulls

Ikari said:

What's 22/1000000 again?

Click to expand...

You are misusing statistics.

Take a look at a some research by professionals:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51034290_Mortality_Mauling_and_Maiming_by_Vicious_Dogs

One small clip:

The unacceptable actuarial
risk associated with certain breeds of dogs (specifically, pit bulls)
must be addressed. These breeds should be regulated in the same way
in which other dangerous species, such as leopards, are regulated.
Individual municipalities need the power to enact ordinances that can
protect their citizens from this risk. If they are to obtain such power,
the issue must be addressed at the local, county, and state legislative
levels.

Publication (PDF): Mortality, Mauling, and Maiming by Vicious Dogs. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51034290_Mortality_Mauling_and_Maiming_by_Vicious_Dogs [accessed Mar 31, 2017].

Click to expand...

Vox said:

I was pleased to see that pit bulls are banned in the UK and I wish the U.S. would do the same.

This death was apparently caused by a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, which can still be legally owned--although the details had not been finalized at this writing. The dog may have been a mixed breed containing pit bull blood.

The incredible irony here is that reports have surfaced that the man was killed by his own dog in the middle of an interview that included his statements about how these "Bully Breeds" are good dogs to own and how unfair it is that they are portrayed as dangerous.

The BBC is refusing to reveal what the story was about.

Man killed by his own dog in Wood Green while BBC filmed him for a documentary | Metro News

Click to expand...

There is no creditable evidence that pit bulls - which aren't even a breed - are more vicious than other dogs.

Owners of pit bull-type dogs deal with a strong breed stigma,44 however controlled studies have not identified this breed group as disproportionately dangerous. The pit bull type is particularly ambiguous as a "breed" encompassing a range of pedigree breeds, informal types and appearances that cannot be reliably identified. Visual determination of dog breed is known to not always be reliable.45 And witnesses may be predisposed to assume that a vicious dog is of this type.

It should also be considered that the incidence of pit bull-type dogs' involvement in severe and fatal attacks may represent high prevalence in neighborhoods that present high risk to the young children who are the most common victim of severe or fatal attacks. And as owners of stigmatized breeds are more likely to have involvement in criminal and/or violent acts46—breed correlations may have the owner's behavior as the underlying causal factor.

Click to expand...

--- The Role of Breed in Dog Bite Risk and Prevention, The American Veterinarian Medical Association

Vox said:

You are misusing statistics.

Take a look at a some research by professionals:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51034290_Mortality_Mauling_and_Maiming_by_Vicious_Dogs

One small clip:

Click to expand...

I'm not missing the statistic. By an large, the breed is not running the streets killing every living thing they come across. It's isolated cases, and in most cases likely has more to do with the upbringing/training of the animal than the breed itself. This is evident by having millions of pit bulls in the country and only 22 deaths last year because of them.

Vox said:

Yes, if he had a few noisy parties that bothered the neighbors.......that would prove that he was a bad dog owner.

:roll::roll::roll:

However, the record of pit bulls is pretty clear.......no matter who the owner.

Fatal Pit Bull Attacks - The Archival Record - DogsBite.org

Click to expand...

That is just untrue. It has everything to do with how the dog is brought up. Any dog can be vicious if handled improperly.

Vox said:

The "biology" you mention is indeed a big part of the problem.......the massive jaws can and do often take a child's head inside of them and crush it or rip the entire scalp off.

The incredibly heavy and muscular body gives them the strength to do what no other dog can do.

And.....you say, "Happy?"

Yes, they're all clowns.........until a random action or motion triggers the kill instinct.

And it happens without warning in so many cases.

:2usflag:

Click to expand...

where are all these "many" cases of dogs that just snap and bite childrens scalps off? German Shephards are responsible for more bites last I checked.

Mycroft said:

We've talked about these dogs a lot on DP. I've made my position quite clear.

All I'll say on this topic is...the only good pit bull is the one with a bullet hole between its eyes.

Click to expand...

That's pretty harsh to condemn a whole breed like that

holbritter said:

That's pretty harsh to condemn a whole breed like that

Click to expand...

Everyone has an opinion...right?

Mr Person said:

There are around 14,000 homicides in America every year, and about 10,000 of them are with guns. Now why do I get the feeling that you wouldn't say "ban guns"?

Click to expand...

Why do I get the feeling that you don't understand that governnment's power to regulate is more sharply limited when the regulation involves a constitutionally guaranteed freedom? There is no constitutional right to own a dog, and any state is free to ban ownership of certain breeds under its inherent authority to make laws and policies regarding public safety.

Mycroft said:

We've talked about these dogs a lot on DP. I've made my position quite clear.

All I'll say on this topic is...the only good pit bull is the one with a bullet hole between its eyes.

Click to expand...

Out of curiousity, have you or anyone close to you even been attacked by a pit bull?

I'm torn on this issue.


As a utilities tech I've met literally thousands of OPDs (Other People's Dogs). Any breed can be a problem. Most Pits I've met were sweet dogs.

OTOH there's no arguing there's more problems with Pits and Pit-mix dogs than any other by FAR. When a Pit "goes off" and aggresses when he shouldn't, they're extremely dangerous. They're incredibly strong, tough and "mission oriented" (ie not easy to stop or distract). And they DO "go off".

Evidence leads me to believe the biggest problem dogs are actually Pit-mix dogs, especially where Pitts have been cross bred with other breeds known for aggression.

I have first hand knowledge, having survived a Pitt attack. My hometown also suffered a tragedy where two small children were killed by the family Pitts.

Also I had a pitt-mix once. He was my then-4yo son's dog. We never did anything to make him aggressive. He was great with US alone, but thought everyone and everything else in the world needed to be killed. Scary. I'll never again have a Pitt or Pitt-mix.



Yes, often it is the owner's fault for not properly training and/or socializing the dog. But not always. Dogs are not humans; they have their own drives and agenda, which are not always comparable or easily understood by humans. I've been to professional training on dog behavior conducted by a national-level trainer, and that message was clear: dogs are not humans, they are pack-oriented predators with drives which have no direct correlation to human behavior. There are things that can set them off which most humans would not understand or be aware of.


Nor is the comparison with guns accurate. Guns are not self-willed, they don't do things on their own. Dogs do.


Now I'm not big on banning things. For one thing, people often ignore bans they don't agree with and enforcement is problematic. For another it is a rather drastic way to deal with a statistically rare problem. For a third, it is a drastic action in a free society that ought to be reserved for only for the greatest necessity.

OTOH it might well save lives, and save even more people from being maimed, crippled, or disfigured, or suffering other serious injury.


Possibly a PSA campaign to raise awareness of the issues around Pitts and Pitt-mix dogs.


But regardless, they ARE potentially dangerous and it isn't always a "bad owner". I know some of you want to say "there are no bad dogs only bad owners", sorry that's bull**** in my experience.

Vox said:

I was pleased to see that pit bulls are banned in the UK and I wish the U.S. would do the same.

This death was apparently caused by a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, which can still be legally owned--although the details had not been finalized at this writing. The dog may have been a mixed breed containing pit bull blood.

The incredible irony here is that reports have surfaced that the man was killed by his own dog in the middle of an interview that included his statements about how these "Bully Breeds" are good dogs to own and how unfair it is that they are portrayed as dangerous.

The BBC is refusing to reveal what the story was about.

Man killed by his own dog in Wood Green while BBC filmed him for a documentary | Metro News

Click to expand...

An incredibly ****ing stupid opinion based PURELY on your own ignorance of dogs.

Here is one SIMPLE fact...DOGS BITE. They ALL have teeth. Period. The ONLY reason the genetically inferior pure bred dogs bite "less often" is because they are owned (typically) by more involved and experienced owners with money.

I have a better idea. Let's not let people who don't actually understand dogs make laws based on them.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mycroft said:

Everyone has an opinion...right?

Click to expand...

yup, they do

OlNate said:

I hate breed banning. It demonizes animals and removes the responsibility from the owners. How about we hold dog owners accountable instead? Some good thoughts here:

The Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics Behind Dog Bites | The Huffington Post

Besides, do you really think that a country that allows people to walk around with concealed fire arms is going to ban a dog breed? Wouldn't you find it ridiculous if they did? lol... If protecting Americans was important, I'd suggest, based on a comparison of number of deaths, there are other places to start.....

Click to expand...

That article, of course, is deceptive.......because?

Pit bull apologists would rather turn the conversation to "bites."

The problem is not BITES.......it's--first of all--the many thousands of maimed and killed children.......innocent toddlers and babies.

It's also the many maimed and killed elderly people.

It's also even some strong healthy adults who are unable to survive these pit bull attacks.

And.......do not minimize the heartbreak of the MANY, MANY thousands of owners of small pets that are killed in a heartbeat without warning by these killing machines.

Just out for a walk with their dog......and get to watch it torn apart in front of them with no way to stop it.

Or seeing their cat ripped apart in their own back yard.

Nothing can overcome the hundreds of years of genetic programming that has made pit bulls what they are.......DEADLY.

:2usflag:

Vox said:

Yet if you read the almost daily reports of pit bull attacks (not just bites, but attacks that maim or at least do serious damage) you will repeatedly see the owners saying that the dog never showed any signs of aggression before).

The reason? Pit bulls got their name because they have been bred for hundreds of years to kill other dogs, bears and bulls. "Pit" comes from the fact that these fights were held in pits to protect spectators from the dogs.

They are programmed to kill. This programming is shared by no other dog breed.

The genetic programming can't be undone by a loving owner........in fact, loving owners are often the victims of their own misguided love.

Click to expand...

And



And



People have no clue what. A "pit bull" is. And they will label a dog a "pit" if it looks like...but is not actually a pit.

https://askabiologist.asu.edu/plosable/dna-dogs

Seriously. Spend some time in an animal hospital and get to know the actual dog you want banned. Seriously. You will realize that the worst dogs are owned by bad owners. Do you realize how infrequently other dog bites get reported?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vox said:

I was pleased to see that pit bulls are banned in the UK and I wish the U.S. would do the same.

This death was apparently caused by a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, which can still be legally owned--although the details had not been finalized at this writing. The dog may have been a mixed breed containing pit bull blood.

The incredible irony here is that reports have surfaced that the man was killed by his own dog in the middle of an interview that included his statements about how these "Bully Breeds" are good dogs to own and how unfair it is that they are portrayed as dangerous.

The BBC is refusing to reveal what the story was about.

Man killed by his own dog in Wood Green while BBC filmed him for a documentary | Metro News

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

There are around 14,000 homicides in America every year, and about 10,000 of them are with guns. Now why do I get the feeling that you wouldn't say "ban guns"?

Click to expand...

matchlight said:

Why do I get the feeling that you don't understand that governnment's power to regulate is more sharply limited when the regulation involves a constitutionally guaranteed freedom? There is no constitutional right to own a dog, and any state is free to ban ownership of certain breeds under its inherent authority to make laws and policies regarding public safety.

Click to expand...

That's a really stupid response.

If I really have to explain it again: guns, like pitbulls, kill when misused by humans. (Well, guns kill when used correctly too). If someone's going to scream about banning pit bulls, they should also be screaming about repealing the 2nd Amd. and banning guns too.





Make sense yet? I know you were really itching to throw a gotcha at me, but to assume I don't realize that the 2nd amendment exists? Really?

Mr Person said:

That's a really stupid response.

If I really have to explain it again: guns, like pitbulls, kill when misused by humans. (Well, guns kill when used correctly too). If someone's going to scream about banning pit bulls, they should also be screaming about repealing the 2nd Amd. and banning guns too.





Make sense yet? I know you were really itching to throw a gotcha at me, but to assume I don't realize that the 2nd amendment exists? Really?

Click to expand...

Dogs and guns shouldn't be discussed in the same thread

Unless we are taking about hunting. In which case:

My pit retriever...






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vox said:

That article, of course, is deceptive.......because?

Pit bull apologists would rather turn the conversation to "bites."

The problem is not BITES.......it's--first of all--the many thousands of maimed and killed children.......innocent toddlers and babies.

It's also the many maimed and killed elderly people.

It's also even some strong healthy adults who are unable to survive these pit bull attacks.

And.......do not minimize the heartbreak of the MANY, MANY thousands of owners of small pets that are killed in a heartbeat without warning by these killing machines.

Just out for a walk with their dog......and get to watch it torn apart in front of them with no way to stop it.

Or seeing their cat ripped apart in their own back yard.

Nothing can overcome the hundreds of years of genetic programming that has made pit bulls what they are.......DEADLY.

:2usflag:

Click to expand...

Pure blood Pitts were actually bred to be aggressive and deadly to other dogs, while NOT attacking humans in the fighting ring.

I actually had a long conversation with a reformed ex-dogfighter about this. The dog fights have humans in close proximity, who rarely ever get bitten. The breeders and handlers put down any dog that shows any sign of aggression towards humans.

The ex-fighter's opinion was most problem Pitts were Pitt-mixes, and my experiences agree with his opinion.

Thing is a LOT of the "Pitt bulls" out there are not pure blood and ARE mixed breeds.


Now you are right about one thing... and this relates to training I had with a professional dog trainer... most dogs bite and release. They may do it multiple times. These bites are usually minor injuries.

Dogs that bite down and keep the bite, shaking their heads to tear off a chunk of flesh, are the ones that inflict terrible injuries... fatal or resulting in crippling or disfiguring injuries. Some breeds are more inclined to do this than others. Pits and Pit-mixes being one such type, so their attacks tend to result in more serious injuries.


Statistically speaking, very few Pits are actually a problem. The problem is in their POTENTIAL for mayhem if they do attack... and owners that are in denial because their dog is mild and affectionate and sweet TO THEM. How dogs act towards their family (pack mates) is one thing, how they act towards others is often very different.


While I don't necessarily agree with a ban, I'll tell you plainly I will never have another Pitt or Pit-mix dog. The one I had adored me and my son and never acted at all problematic towards us... but when fully mature he decided everyone else only existed to be killed and eaten. Scary dog.

Skeptic Bob said:

Don't engage 11Bravo.

Click to expand...

But it's funny...

Mr Person said:

That's a really stupid response.

If I really have to explain it again: guns, like pitbulls, kill when misused by humans. (Well, guns kill when used correctly too). If someone's going to scream about banning pit bulls, they should also be screaming about repealing the 2nd Amd. and banning guns too.

Click to expand...

Just what a measure to ban a breed of dog as unacceptably dangerous has to do with repealing a part of the Constitution which guarantees a fundamental individual right, only you know. But I am glad to see you make your animosity toward that fundamental right so clear.

Goshin said:

Pure blood Pitts were actually bred to be aggressive and deadly to other dogs, while NOT attacking humans in the fighting ring.

I actually had a long conversation with a reformed ex-dogfighter about this. The dog fights have humans in close proximity, who rarely ever get bitten. The breeders and handlers put down any dog that shows any sign of aggression towards humans.

The ex-fighter's opinion was most problem Pitts were Pitt-mixes, and my experiences agree with his opinion.

Thing is a LOT of the "Pitt bulls" out there are not pure blood and ARE mixed breeds.


Now you are right about one thing... and this relates to training I had with a professional dog trainer... most dogs bite and release. They may do it multiple times. These bites are usually minor injuries.

Dogs that bite down and keep the bite, shaking their heads to tear off a chunk of flesh, are the ones that inflict terrible injuries... fatal or resulting in crippling or disfiguring injuries. Some breeds are more inclined to do this than others. Pits and Pit-mixes being one such type, so their attacks tend to result in more serious injuries.


Statistically speaking, very few Pits are actually a problem. The problem is in their POTENTIAL for mayhem if they do attack... and owners that are in denial because their dog is mild and affectionate and sweet TO THEM. How dogs act towards their family (pack mates) is one thing, how they act towards others is often very different.


While I don't necessarily agree with a ban, I'll tell you plainly I will never have another Pitt or Pit-mix dog. The one I had adored me and my son and never acted at all problematic towards us... but when fully mature he decided everyone else only existed to be killed and eaten. Scary dog.

Click to expand...

Bad owners make bad dogs.

Or

Ignorant owners

I'm curious. Sense obviously your pitt was in the past...were you a newer owner at that time? How much socialization did it have?

Me and my girlfriend have ours out in public ALL the time. Bass pro, dog park, walks, beach, restaurants. She has never offered to bite anyone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

blackjack50 said:

An incredibly ****ing stupid opinion based PURELY on your own ignorance of dogs.

Click to expand...

Except......I have worked with dogs......trained and used working dogs of several breeds, for about 60 years.

Since I was a child.

And I love dogs.

So get off your high horse.

Pit bulls are genetically programmed to kill. Nothing can change that fact. If triggered they are programmed to focus, finish the job......eliminate the opponent. They have the tools to do it.

Though most are nice dogs, especially those raised by good owners.......They ALL have the programming to some extent, and nobody can tell which of them will suddenly and without warning be triggered to kill something or someone.

Don't think a mixed breed is immune........a pit/Labrador mix may retain a huge amount of the killing instinct......no way to tell until it happens.

Bottom line.....no way to predict anything with a pit bull or pit bull mix.

So don't let your emotions rule your thinking on this........it's a decision to be made based on facts.

:2usflag:

Midwest Lib said:

Out of curiousity, have you or anyone close to you even been attacked by a pit bull?

Click to expand...

Yes....

Vox said:

That article, of course, is deceptive.......because?

Pit bull apologists would rather turn the conversation to "bites."

The problem is not BITES.......it's--first of all--the many thousands of maimed and killed children.......innocent toddlers and babies.

It's also the many maimed and killed elderly people.

It's also even some strong healthy adults who are unable to survive these pit bull attacks.

And.......do not minimize the heartbreak of the MANY, MANY thousands of owners of small pets that are killed in a heartbeat without warning by these killing machines.

Just out for a walk with their dog......and get to watch it torn apart in front of them with no way to stop it.

Or seeing their cat ripped apart in their own back yard.

Nothing can overcome the hundreds of years of genetic programming that has made pit bulls what they are.......DEADLY.

:2usflag:

Click to expand...

Very emotional response...but unfortunately unfounded. All dogs, every single one, has the potential to be dangerous, because they are animals. With all due respect, by ignoring the impact of owners in favor of over simplistic breed banning, you're the one minimizing impacts. If what you're saying is true, then every single pit bull should be a menace, ripping people apart uniformly across every example of the breed. That's not happening, so breed banning is BS.

Also...I posted statistics, how about you post some yourself, or are we supposed to just believe that there is the epidemic of "thousands and thousands maimed and killed children" just because you say so...do you mean in the last year, the last decade, the last millennia? lol... come on, Vox, I understand you're passionate about this, but most people on here do a bit of fact checking, how about sticking to the facts and presenting them?

Mycroft said:

Yes....

Click to expand...

Then thats a much more reasonable response than my gut instinct told me. Thanks for clarifying
I, like others, have had no bad pit experiences (quite the opposite) so i fall into the bad owner rather than bad dog camp but i imagine id feel differently if personally affected