If you believe Pit Bulls are inherently dangerous animals, & you support BSL to ban them

[baldguy]

Then you don't know anything about Pit Bulls. Or dogs



Does Breed Specific Legislation reduce dog aggression on humans and other animals? A review paper

http://www.edba.org.au/PAPER%20FOR%20UAM%20CALOUNDRA%20-%20LINDA%20WATSON-1.pdf

Key Points
• Breed specific legislation has not been shown to reduce the incidence of dog bites in any part of the world despite a twenty-year history. By its nature it is unjust.

• Breed specific legislation removes responsibility for dog biting incidents from dog owners and places the blame on dogs. This is a dangerously simplistic solution to a complex problem.

• Breed specific legislation engenders a false and dangerous perception that breeds not included will not show aggression.

• Enforcing and administering any law comes at some monetary cost. This would be better used implementing non-discriminatory laws which have an ability to enhance public safety.

• Aggression is a normal canine behaviour and can be shown by any dog of any breed or type.

• To reduce the incidence of dog aggression, all dogs should be socialised, obedience trained, understood and managed competently by their owners.

• People determine whether dogs will be useful inhabitants of a community or nuisances. It is the people who either intentionally or unintentionally foster viciousness in dogs whom legislators must endeavour to control.

• As the dog bite statistics demonstrate, every breed of dog will bite. The likelihood of an unwarranted bite is determined by the circumstances and level of control/restraint. The dog’s breed is not relevant. It is more about owner competence than anything else.



Pit bulls myths: Fear vs. Fact

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/fearfactncrc1.pdf

FEAR:
Pit Bulls have "locking jaws."

FACT:
"We found that the American Pit Bull Terriers did not have any unique mechanism that would allow these dogs to lock their jaws. There were no mechanical or morphological differences..." Dr. I. Lehr Brisbin, University of Georgia


FEAR:
Pit Bulls have massive biting power measuring in 1,000s of pounds of pressure per square inch. (PSI)

FACT:
On average, dogs bite with 320 lbs of pressure per square inch. The bite pressure of a German Shepherd, an American Pit Bull Terrier and a Rottweiler were tested. The American Pit Bull Terrier had the least amount of bite pressure of the three dogs tested. Dr. Brady Barr, National Geographic


FEAR:
Pit Bulls attack without warning.

FACT:
"Pit Bulls signal like other dogs." The Institute of Animal Welfare and Behavior of the University of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover, Germany temperament tested over 1,000 dogs.


FEAR:
Pit Bulls are "ticking time bombs" that turn on their owners.

FACT:
"Attacks by family dogs of any breed or type are extremely rare, and should not to be confused with incidents involving resident dogs. Resident dogs are maintained outside the home (on chains, in kennels, or in yards) and/or are obtained for negative functions (guarding, fighting, protection, indiscriminate/irresponsible breeding). Resident dogs cannot be expected to exhibit the same behaviors as family dogs which have been afforded the opportunity to interact with humans on a daily basis and in positive and humane ways."
"There is no documented case that a single, spayed/neutered American Pit Bull Terrier, maintained exclusively as a household pet, has been involved in a fatality in the United States." Karen Delise, NCRC Founder and Director of Research, Author.


FEAR:
While there are some pit bulls with good temperaments, they are the exception not the rule.

FACT:
The American Temperament Test shows pit bulls consistently score above the average for all breeds tested, year in and year out! The American Temperament Test Society, www.atts.org

[donco6]

1. I can pull my 9 lb rat terrier off my ankle.

I can't pull a 90 lb dog made of pure muscle off a little girl's throat.

Pretty simple.

[baldguy]

4. If you were a responsible dog owner who trained them properly you wouldn't have to.

The most vicious & dangerous dog I ever had regular contact with was my mother's 9-lb Silky. It killed a cat, beat up & injured a 40-lb Akita and bit my niece before we could convince her to put the damn thing down.

[donco6]

9. The world is full of irresponsible dog owners.

I wish it weren't so.

Look, I don't support bans of any breed. I just would never, ever own a pit bull or any other large, muscular dog like that. Ever.

And I wouldn't cross the street to fight a ban, either.

[LakeSamish706]

17. I don't believe that it is in the breed, but more in the owners of the breed....

If animals are abused, then they tend to transfer that abuse to anything that they can. There are things like Jealousy, etc. that come into the situation.

[DrDan]

164. not always

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

just a couple of days ago

[donco6]

341. Nope.

In fact, the cases that have occurred around here are never the result of an abused dog, but rather a loving member of the family that one day went berserk. No one knows why. It's always a mystery. Meh.

[uppityperson]

59. my ex's undisciplined terriesr shattered cat's leg, bit kid in face and on penis

(don't walk around without pants on if you are a toddler and live with undisciplined terriers), bit kid on hand also. Ex got really pissed when was reported for the dog biting, telling kid that I "wanted to get our loved pet killed".

Those dogs were vicious, untrained, undisciplined. I finally met a really sweet terrier of the same type and was amazed at how nice it was.

Irresponsible pet owners should not be allowed pets.

[ThomThom]

270. but they should have kids?

some dogs have been so in-bred that they have real problems. Standard poodles for example are one of the smartest breeds but toys and the littler ones are brainless. Dogs that are bred to fighting are a danger to the rest of us. Why would we want them around? We don't consider dogs more than just possessions.

[smalll]

78. BUT SOCIETY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO COUNT ON ---

some Frankenstein of a breed, all muscle and violence, to be pulled off by some "responsible dog owner."

Ban the breed.

[uppityperson]

84. Ban all dogs of what size? Serious question.

What makes a "breed"? That's a bonus question.

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[smalll]

102. Stop compensating for your misanthropy with love of pitbulls.

I'm sincerely sorry about whatever happened with your parents/first marriage. Everybody hurts. But please, find a way to let the healing begin. :shrug:

[OffWithTheirHeads]

103. Can we extend that to Dick Cheney?

[Bonn1997]

153. Why not? We count on people to be responsible car drivers

[DrDan]

154. agree

should be bred out of existance

[uppityperson]

42. Can you pull your 9# rat terrier off a little girl's throat?

Do you support a ban on any dog larger than...what, since that seems to be what you are saying.

[baldguy]

47. The problem isn't the dog breed - it's the irresponsible owner.

The most dangerous animal is the human being that's too stupid or lazy to neglect their dog, or too ignorant to train it to attack people.

[uppityperson]

55. I know, was hoping donco might like to tell me more of his/her hatred of large dogs

Thank you for posting this thread. I really tire of having to counter the myths.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

101. +1

[meow2u3]

210. Agreed

There ought to be laws beefing up penalties for animal cruelty if people decide to use the animals in their care as weapons instead of companions. The dog has no choice in whether or not he or she will end up as some criminal's weapon, or left alone with no food, water, or vet care, or even actively abused, i.e., beaten up or used in evil experiments.

Aggravated assault (assault with a deadly or dangerous weapon) charges are in order for those two-legged beasts who use their four-legged animals to attack other humans or animals. Animal cruelty laws in some states amount to little more than a slap on the wrist.

I see firsthand the aftermath of animal cruelty every weekend I go to volunteer at my local animal shelter--and some of the stories of cruelty both breaks my heart and angers me. Just yesterday, I saw a cute little kitten who had his left front leg amputated because of cruelty. I have to be careful not to become too attached to the animals I care for at the shelter because my job is to make sure these animals will end up in better shape than the way they were brought it.

[baldguy]

234. Training proves premeditation.

If you train your dog to attack human beings, any resulting attack or death should be treated as premeditated assault & murder.

REGARDLESS OF THE BREED.

[donco6]

182. I don't support any bans.

But a responsible parent wouldn't put their child in the way of an animal that cannot be controlled by the child.

[donco6]

340. What I'm saying is simple.

If a child cannot control an animal, it shouldn't be left with it. Ever. It's as stupid as leaving a child in a bathtub. The smaller the dog, the sooner a child can physically dominate it. It's doubtful a human could ever dominate some of those large, muscular breeds - so I would never, ever allow a child to be alone with it.

People who choose pit bulls, in my opinion, do it for the same reason people buy Hummers. They want to be in other people's face about it. "I've got the biggest, badass dog there is . What're you gonna do about it?" Stupid. I have little sympathy for them when tragedy strikes.

[flvegan]

400. Very true.

What you are saying is very simple minded.

Glad you recognize that. Your entire second paragraph being absolute opinionated bullshit and all.

[thenooch]

114. get a "Moses"

Chessies are the Bestestetstettst!1111!

[nomorenomore08]

127. Actually, most pure-bred pit bulls aren't anywhere near that big, maybe 40-50 lbs.

They really aren't huge dogs. What you're probably thinking of is the cross-breeding of pits with larger breeds like akitas, mastiffs, etc.

[lukasahero]

174. Then I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able

to pull my 115 lb lab off her either. Are you sure you want to use size as your only determining factor?

Your terrier is far more likely to attack than my lab but if size is your only measure, then we should ban ALL dogs greater than ? what? You tell us.

[EndersDame]

180. Should we ban all large dogs? My brothers girlfriend has a 110 newfie

[The Doctor.]

232. That was my question as well.

Where's the perspective?

Pit Bulls only attack because they've been trained to. You can do the same with Mastiffs.

[guitar man]

195. If it's 90lb

It's most likely not an American Pit Bull Terrier or Staffordshire Terrier, it's probably something with a similar look that the media wants to call a "pitbull" to be sensationalistic.

[LakeSamish706]

2. It is and always has been the owners that are the problem with pets....

We have two Yorkies... and they are my wife's dogs.... They suck big time, cause she doesn't make them behave... I am offering to send all of them to obedience training... My biggest problem is the fact that they urinate/and crap in the house.. Oh, and also yap non stop... Give me that baseball bat... grrr....ugh.

[flvegan]

3. You and your facts!

How dare you impede the right of the people to be uninformed and afraid.

[rcrush]

5. My friend owns 3 very large pit bulls

They are the nicest dogs I've ever met. My neighbors Little bull terrier is a fucking asshole and I hate that dog. The pit bulls are just big babies though.

[smalll]

106. That's what the always say about the latest pitbull that rips the face off some baby --

"Oh, it was the nicest dog I'd ever met! A big baby! Such a sweetie! Why, he's never ripped off the face of some tiny human ever before in his entire LIFE! Cut him some slack! :eyes:

[depakid]

120. Rather like this one: Family Pit Bull Kills 11-Month Old Child in Eastpointe

An uncle of the Eastpointe boy who was mauled to death Wednesday by the family pit bull urged parents to "get rid" of pit bulls so they or their children don’t become the next victim of a fatal attack. "There’s no good to come out of these dogs," Terrence Lovejoy said today during a news conference at the Eastpointe police station. Like many other victims, he also added, " does not have to happen to anyone else."

Lovejoy’s 11-month old nephew was mauled by the 5-year old pit bull, whom Lovejoy’s brother raised from birth, at the family’s home. Lovejoy said his brother and sister-in-law, who are in their 40s according to police, have been married about 17 years, and had tried for years to have a child. He said, "God blessed" them with a son. They were preparing for his first birthday party on May 3. Lovejoy described the attack in the following way:

The dog "didn’t growl, didn’t bark," just walked over and grabbed the child, who was standing on a bed.

The boy’s father used a handgun to shoot and kill the dog. The gun the father used -- a .45-caliber -- was registered and he had a permit to carry a concealed weapon, according to police. He fired eight shots at the dog. Lovejoy said the dog was kept in the house and was familiar with the couple and the child. He called the incident "a sneak attack the dog did on my nephew." Sadly, Lovejoy's description could not be more vivid or accurate.

No Warning -- Just Attack

Documented evidence shows that due to selective breeding practices, pit bulls attack "unpredictably" and often fail to communicate intention prior to an attack. Specifically, there may be no growl, bark or direct stare -- just attack. Please read page 133,http://www.scribd.com/doc/7774858/Lockwood-Ethology-Dog-Aggression">"The Ethology and Epidemiology of Canine Aggression," by Randall Lockwood. This evidence was used to uphold the City of Denver's pit bull ban and likely other pit bull ordinances.

More: http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2009/04/2009-fatality-family-pit-bull-kills-1.html

A 2009 preventable fatality.

[TexasObserver]

126. So much for "it's always some bad owner's fault."

Dangerous animals sometimes kill other small animals just because that's who they are.

[depakid]

128. It never ceases to amaze me how some can't accept the simplest of concepts

even when the evidence is right before their own eyes.

Something that actually has ceased to amaze me though is the lengths people will go to rationalize ill founded and demonstrably incorrect beliefs.

[TexasObserver]

130. "He's never done anything like this before!"

That is the comment said by many a dog's owner after it has attacked and maimed or killed someone else's pet, someone else's kid, or someone else.

[depakid]

143. And as has been mentioned in many of the cases reported in the Portland area

The dog owners seemed to neighbors like ordinary folks- and often they sincerely had no idea that their pet would go off like that.

It's had a bearing in terms of who gets prosecuted criminally, of course- and who "only" gets an impressive judgment lodged against them (if they're fortunate, their insurer picks up the tab- up to policy limits that is).

[TexasObserver]

146. Until we start charging dog owners criminally, we won't be able to stop this carnage.

A person who owns an animal with dangerous propensities should be strictly liable for the damage such animal inflicts, and be criminally liable if the animal gets out and hurts someone, or gets away from them, or hurts any invitee to the owner's home.

[depakid]

148. I'm not entirely comfortable with removing the scienter in some of these cases

especially without some sort of explicit notice (a licensing scheme like the one I mentioned below might include such notice).

My preference is New South Wales' approach (and believe you me- you can and will be prosecuted if your animal goes on a rampage- though it's not nearly as strict as the Gold Coast's laws up in Queensland).

Declare the breed (and similar fighting breeds) inherently dangerous (with all of the requirements that entails) and disallow further breeding. Unfortunately, it's not an easy statute to implement and enforce- much less implement and enforce fairly.

[DrDan]

166. exactly - and here is one further case from just a few days ago

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[uppityperson]

132. You mean like this...?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7113041&mesg_id=7113864

Or do you mean the "logic" behind all of us agreeing that any dog can bite, then some going the extra step and saying let's look at a dog bite and then try to ban that breed, whatever a "breed" may be?

[meow2u3]

214. Sometimes the problem lies with the individual dog

My sister, who has always cared for dogs nobody else wanted, had to have her German Shepherd put down because an unprovoked attack on one of her other dogs. It turned out that the Shepherd was born with a brain tumor due to inbreeding (the parents were brother and sister) which turned out to cause the aggressive behavior.

My sister got injured breaking up the dog fight; needless to say, she had to spend her entire savings and maxed out her credit card to treat the attacked dog and put the Shepherd to sleep. I'm worried about her losing her life if she keeps taking in inbred dogs with aggression issues. I'm afraid she'll end up another statistic.

[LWolf]

171. Cite your source for that quote, please. nt

[smalll]

107. That's what they always say about the latest pitbull that rips the face off some baby --

"Oh, it was the nicest dog I'd ever met! A big baby! Such a sweetie! Why, he's never ripped off the face of some tiny human ever before in his entire LIFE! Cut him some slack!"

:eyes:

[uppityperson]

112. That wasn't particularly worth repeating. Or editing. nt

[DrDan]

167. here's another - just a couple of days ago

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[DrDan]

165. I am sure this family felt the same way a week ago

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[dana_b]

6. thank you

for posting this. So many choose to ignore facts.

[EFerrari]

7. I have a really bad pitbull phobia. But that's my problem, not theirs

and I try not to vote my damn phobias.

[Greyhound]

96. Thank you very much. You, as always, demonstrate the good sense to

recognize and accept what is. We have developed this penchant for legislating based on the most extreme, and therefore rare, cases.

[rwheeler31]

8. Sorry these dogs are trained to be violent.

I would never allow my kids to be outside if there is a pit bull loose.

[baldguy]

15. The vast majority are trained to be pets, and are not violent.

ANY dog can be trained to attack. But the biggest danger by far are those dogs which are NOT traind at all - without regard to the breed.

[imdjh]

25. Any protection breed walking loose is a concern, and I'm a Rottie person.

I would pull the kids in if I saw a strange Rottie in the yard, and mine was a big sweetheart, and guard dog. However, I would go out in the yard with a leash and try to get the loose dog under control, because of my fear that someone else would shoot it, or that it would make a mistake. These dogs are not typically used to being off leash and running around loose, so they are in a dangerous circumstance too.

[imdjh]

28. BTW, if you go to the big dog park, all of these breeds will surprise you. I play with a Presa...

...Canario now and then at the dog park. She's a little nuts, but at the dog park she's cautiously OK? I wouldn't nap on the couch with her.

[GOPisEvil]

36. I don't think you should allow your kids to be outside with ANY dog loose.

But, if it makes you happy to single out a specific breed, then by all means do so.

[smalll]

80. Even more, they are BRED to be violent --

Pitbulls exist because of BREEDING of dogs to be as powerful and as lethal and as homicidal as possible. That's what breeeding is -- selecting for certain traits. Do we have every right to ban certain "breeds?" Do we have every reason to?

Hell yes!

[baldguy]

89. The vast majority are BRED to be pets, and are not violent.

[TexasObserver]

129. Thanks for your sane approach and courage to speak it.

We know that dog owners are not going to suddenly as a group become really responsible. The most responsible dog owner in the world cannot affect the neighbor who is not, and cannot be with their dog 24/7. If a big, dangerous dog gets out, they may or may not attack others. Their owner doesn't know until it happens.

Many dog owners simply do not understand that their dogs are not Disney characters. Some are designed to be physically imposing, and to be capable of inflicting major damage in a short, quick attack.

"He's never done that before" is the universal comment after dog bites. Yeah, no kidding.

[EndersDame]

181. Who does the training?

[marketcrazy1]

10. I know of several

pit bulls and rottweilers and they are all big sloppy sweethearts!! it`s not the breeding it`s the training and upbringing that makes dogs mean........ all of the dog owners i know have sweet pets whether they be pits,rotts,Shepperds or what have you.

[noamnety]

11. I looked to see if I could find any news stories about deadly attacks by basset hounds.

Here's what a search on "deadly attack basset hound" turned up:

"They said while the owner of a pit bull was walking the dog through the Franklin neighborhood, the pit bull broke its leash and went after a 2-year-old child that was playing in a yard.

Neighbor Jolita Nemeth said the basset hound, Elvis, got between the child and the pit bull and saved the child’s life.

“Elvis the dog was just an old basset hound that was minding his own business in his own yard. The pit bull had drug Elvis down to the ditch and was mauling him,” Nemeth said.

Elvis was killed in the attack. Neighbors said they tried to beat the pit bull away."

[baldguy]

16. Because virtualy any dog involved in an attack that has four legs is described as a "Pit Bull".

Unless you can produce AKC papers to prove it, they probably aren't.

[noamnety]

20. The pit bull's owner was walking it, and it broke its leash.

I'm not sure why you would assume the facts are wrong in the absence of reading the article itself. There wasn't any reason other than your own apparently very strong bias to assume it's not a pit bull even though the newspaper identifies it as a pit bull.

http://www.wsmv.com/news/13237957/detail.html

[baldguy]

30. As I suspected, the elderly neighbor was the expert witness consulted for the breed identification.

The fact is, for most people a Pit Bull isn't a breed, it's a job description. Any dog that looks like it could hold it's own in a fight is, by their definition, a "Pit Bull Dog". Unfortunately, the real world gets in the way of convenient ignorance.

An American Pit Bull Terrier is a specific AKC registered breed. Anything that isn't AKC certified probably IS NOT a Pit Bull, any more than it's a Bull Dog or a Bull Terrier, or any other traditional fighting dog. All these breeds go into the breeding of illegal "pit bulls".



Here's a fun game:

FIND THE PITBULL

Only one of the pictures below features the real American PitBull Terrier. Take the test to see if you can find it. To find the breed of a dog, click on image. Note there are no mixes or rescue dogs of unknown background who's breed could be debated. All dogs have been picked from breeders' websites and should be good representatives of their breed.

When you are done, ask your family and friends to take to test and watch the results. For many people, a Pit Bull is a a big headed dog, or a dog with cropped ears. For some it's a brindle dog, a big, stocky dog, or one with an eye patch.

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

[uppityperson]

49. "even though the newspaper identifies it as a pit bull"Therein lies a BIG problem, here's some picts

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7105867&mesg_id=7111297
What do these dogs have in common?
* They were all involved in a fatal attack on a human between the years 2002 and 2008
* They were all reported in the media to be “pit bulls”
* They are all counted equally as pit bulls by those tallying fatalities by breed


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=389&topic_id=7113041&mesg_id=7113167
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest

There are two ways editorial judgment of audience interest can influence reporting about dogs and dog attacks.

Over-reporting because of breed
Sensationalized reporting

Media Bias in Reporting Dog Attacks: June 2006

Attacks by non-pit bull dogs are rarely taken up by national or international news outlets.
• A three-year-old Virginia boy was admitted to the hospital with “extensive injuries”. The child was attacked by a dog described as a Golden Retriever mix. The wounds to the child required 300 stitches. The child was further described as requiring additional surgeries to “functionally repair muscles, nerves and work on scars”. This incident was reported in only two local newspapers.

• A 3-year-old girl was admitted to Children’s Hospital in Denver with serious lacerations to her face and head. The hospital declined to release the child’s name or information on her condition. She had been attacked at her home by a dog believed to be a Labrador Retriever. This attack was reported four times and only in Colorado outlets.

• An Indiana woman was attacked and knocked to the ground by a dog identified as a German Shepherd. The dog she was walking, a small Sheltie mix was also attacked. Neighbors responded and managed to restrain the German Shepherd, but not before the woman was bitten twice in the face. Her small dog was so gravely injured that it was euthanized. This incident was reported in only one local newspaper.

• An 11-year-old California girl was bitten in the leg and received “serious, but not life-threatening injuries”, when she was attacked by two pit bulls. Her injuries required hospitalization. This incident was reported in over ninety national and international newspapers. Forbes, FOX News, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and dozens of other major news organizations headlined this “Pit Bull Attack”.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7105867&mesg_id=7110905
* On day one, a Labrador mix attacked an elderly man, sending him to the hospital. News stories of his attack appeared in one article in the local paper.

* On day two, a mixed–breed dog fatally injured a child. The local paper ran two stories.

* On day three, a mixed–breed dog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital. One article ran in the local paper.

* On day four, two pit bulls that broke off their chains attacked a woman trying to protect her small dog. She was hospitalized. Her dog was uninjured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on the major cable news networks.

It is not a stretch to see how such news coverage could influence calls for breed bans from the frightened public and its legislators.

[RebelOne]

162. The media always jumps on stories about pit bull or Rottweiler attacks.

When do you ever read that a cocker spaniel or a Chihuahua made a vicious attack. I have a Chihuahua and a Rottweiler. My Rottie is a big baby and a sweet dog. My Chihuahua is a holy terror.

[lukasahero]

237. It used to be Shepherds and Dobies

It's the media's demon du jour.

[depakid]

26. Some facts about pit bulls:

When British noblemen of the early 1800s began mating English bulldogs with terriers to produce a pit-fighting breed of indefatigable savagery, they were not trying to create the perfect family pet. Yet the “bull-and-terrier” dogs that once tore each other’s throats out for the entertainment of the 19th-century gentry have, against all odds, produced an extended family of bull-breeds that now rank among the most popular dogs of the 21st century.

There is little resemblance between the British bull terrier, with its stumpy legs and distinctive, egg-shaped head, and the much taller American pit bull terrier, just as there’s a marked difference between the compact British Staffordshire bull terrier – the Staffie – and its larger and more powerful American counterpart.

With their hulking physique and reputation for unpredictable violence – not to mention their popularity among drug-dealers – bull-breed dogs have become the Public Enemy No.1 of the canine world. Last month a pit bull rampaged through a Melbourne suburb, killing a cat and a shitzu-maltese dog, savaging two other dogs, terrifying two young girls and latching its jaws around the forearm of the dead shitzu’s owner, who fought the animal for 15 minutes before paramedics gave it a lethal injection. A day after the attack, Victorian Premier John Brumby announced a renewed crackdown on dangerous dogs, while the president of the RSPCA in Victoria, Dr Hugh Wirth, called for the mass extermination of all American pit bulls.

...temperament is embedded in different breeds via generations of selective mating. That is why Australian heelers, raised for the dangerous task of herding cattle, have a hair-trigger perception of threat that makes them more prone to biting than, say, a retriever, whose gentle disposition and soft mouths were prized when it came to retrieving downed game birds for hunters.

“When we get to the American pit bull terrier,” says Wirth, “you have here a dog deliberately bred for fighting. Now, dog fighting is a very vicious sport; someone is always going to die. And these dogs know what to do: they know to be on tiptoes; they know to aim their huge bulk at the shoulder of the opposition, to force it to collapse on its back; and once the opponent is down, with one swift turn of 180 degrees, they are on the neck and ripping it apart.”

[Name removed]

31. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[baldguy]

34. Links?

Sounds lie the standard ignorant-media-induced hysteria.

[flvegan]

38. Oh, watch out.

He'll start telling you about the mecca of forward thinking, New South Wales and their ban. Then he'll talk about the CDC report which the CDC itself laughs at. Might even toss out the Merritt Clifton report which has been debunked so many times, it's a fairy tale.

Then it'll be about Portland's media induced hysterics.

Get your waders on...

[baldguy]

52. Thats covered in page 4-5 of my first link.

http://www.edba.org.au/PAPER%20FOR%20UAM%20CALOUNDRA%20-%20LINDA%20WATSON-1.pdf

"There are numerous reports on dog bites in Australia. NSW government reports (NSW DLG) on dog attacks over the years 1996 to 2001 have reported the number of breeds involved as, 28 in 1996, 34 in 1997, 22 in six months of 1998, 18 in 1999, 29 in 2000 and 15 in four months of 2001. More specifically a report on dog bites released in 2001 revealed that there were 213 dog attacks in NSW from January to December 2000 and of these 41% were deemed to be crossbreeds. Where breed was identified, the predominant breeds involved were German Shepherds (13%), Bull Terrier types (13%), Rottweilers (11%), Cattle dog types (7%) and Maltese Terriers (3%). Bull terrier types included American Pit Bull Terrier, Bull Terrier, Pit Bull Terrier and Staffordshire Bull Terrier. No explanation or definition was provided for the breed description Pit Bull Terrier as compared to American Pit Bull Terrier. Cattle dog types included Heeler, Cattle dog and Kelpie."

This clearly indicates that "Pit Bull Type" dogs (which encompass four different breeds) is NOT the most common type of dog involved in dog attacks in NSW.

[depakid]

86. Here's a hint for you: it's not the bite- but the severity of injuries

and frequency of appalling attacks.

[baldguy]

117. Pages 6-7

Do attacks from some breeds result in more severe injuries? A review (Hockey, 2003) cited two reports to answer this question. One relied on unvalidated media reports of dog attacks and found that more than half of the 278 reports involved Pit Bulls (Lockwood et al, 1987). The review found that comparison of this report with other contemporary studies indicated a reporting bias towards attacks involving this type of dog. The review also noted that another bias inherent in this study was that the injury severity was not validated and, in light of the hysteria surrounding this breed, media reports may have tended to overstate the severity of the injuries where Pit Bulls were involved. Also media reports may be more likely to wrongly identify the breed as a Pit Bull where the injuries are more severe. These biases were recognised by the authors. Of the 143 Pit Bull attacks 38.5% were regarded as serious (requiring medical attention) compared to 26.7% where other breeds were involved. This result was not statistically significant. {Because the designation of "Pit Bull" in the report covers four or more distinct breeds and related crosses.} The authors also found that the common theme in virtually all attacks reviewed was that the owner had not taken appropriate steps to prevent the dog from becoming a problem and that irresponsible owners are not a problem unique to one particular breed. Consequently they recommend that dog control legislation must emphasise responsible ownership.

Read it again.

[depakid]

124. 38.5% were regarded as serious (requiring medical attention) !

compared to 26.7% FOR ALL OTHER BREEDS.

Apparently you lack the ability to analyze your own citations!

Here's another hint- it most assuredly does not support the point you're trying (and failing) to make.

:crazy:

[uppityperson]

131. This result was not statistically significant. {Because the designation of "Pit Bull" in the report

This result was not statistically significant. {Because the designation of "Pit Bull" in the report covers four or more distinct breeds and related crosses.}

Not statistically significant since "PitBull" covered 4+ breeds. So, 26.7% for an other breed, and 38.5 for the combination of 4+ breeds.

Seems to support the point.

[depakid]

141. Actually, your point re: the 4 related breeds strengthens the argument against these types of animal

A much more telling set of numbers would of course be a comparison of Pit bull type animals with other popular aggressive dogs bred for aggression that cause serious injury and death- Rotweilers and Dobermans, for example.

[uppityperson]

151. #'s for a group of 4 is > #s for a group of 1, therefore any 1 of that group of 4 is > than that

single one? No, a much more accurate set of numbers would be having each of those 4+ having their own numbers rather than being grouped together.

Your "logic" is astounding. Are you Scicilian by any chance?

[depakid]

317. WTF are you talking about?

One set of 4 is considerably higher that the set of EVERYTHING ELSE.

Which means that set of 4 is BAD NEWS.

QED.

[uppityperson]

401. Read it again. Others are single, "pit bull" is a grouping of 4. Read it again

I am done with you since you cannot seem to understand the basics of what they write and only want to argue.

[uppityperson]

39. Without a source, those are not any "facts" but an opion.

Link?

[SidDithers]

41. Did you forget to link to the article that is from?...

or did you write it yourself?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/the-pit-bull-is-the-usual-suspect/story-e6frg8h6-1225804507090

Sid

[depakid]

48. You know, people do get involved in other things and forget to add the link every now and again

:eyes:

[SidDithers]

51. That's why I asked if you had forgotten...nt

Sid

[TexasObserver]

68. Yes, it is a breed created to fight to the death, and achieve it quickly.

Thanks for an accurate version of this dog's history.

[baldguy]

77. Accurate - if you ignore about 400 yrs of breeding history.

The Romans used the ancestors of the Mastiff (Molossers) as attack dogs in warfare. Should we ban their other descendants too? The St Bernard and the Labrador Retriever?

[PeaceNikki]

156. Statistical validity is not the media's job.

News outlets are in the business of reporting singular events. They do not select stories for publication on the basis of random sampling techniques. Editors promote stories they believe to be of interest to their audience. Most incidents involving dogs, good, bad, or indifferent, are not reported at all. Severe attacks by dogs are, happily, exceedingly rare.

For the stories they do choose to cover, based upon their own estimate of its newsworthiness, journalists have no control over how their reporting will be used – or misused — by others.

Reporters are not specialists. They may report as fact what are really opinions, or cite official statements and/or published studies that experts have called into serious question. Stories completed against deadline pressures may contain errors that the outlet will only correct if later developments generate an interest in a follow up. Reporters will neglect critical factors that contributed to a serious incident involving a dog and assign unjustified significance to a dog’s breed description, while, at the same time printing inaccurate breed identification of dogs which are never corrected later.

Attacks by non-pit bull dogs are rarely taken up by national or international news outlets.

• A three-year-old Virginia boy was admitted to the hospital with “extensive injuries”. The child was attacked by a dog described as a Golden Retriever mix. The wounds to the child required 300 stitches. The child was further described as requiring additional surgeries to “functionally repair muscles, nerves and work on scars”. This incident was reported in only two local newspapers.

• A 3-year-old girl was admitted to Children’s Hospital in Denver with serious lacerations to her face and head. The hospital declined to release the child’s name or information on her condition. She had been attacked at her home by a dog believed to be a Labrador Retriever. This attack was reported four times and only in Colorado outlets.

• An Indiana woman was attacked and knocked to the ground by a dog identified as a German Shepherd. The dog she was walking, a small Sheltie mix was also attacked. Neighbors responded and managed to restrain the German Shepherd, but not before the woman was bitten twice in the face. Her small dog was so gravely injured that it was euthanized. This incident was reported in only one local newspaper.

• An 11-year-old California girl was bitten in the leg and received “serious, but not life-threatening injuries”, when she was attacked by two pit bulls. Her injuries required hospitalization. This incident was reported in over ninety national and international newspapers. Forbes, FOX News, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and dozens of other major news organizations headlined this “Pit Bull Attack”.

More here: http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest/

[doc03]

12. My brother has a Pit Bull and it is a sweetheart n/t

[cowcommander]

13. Would be nice if we could just ban irresponsible pet owners instead

[Jamastiene]

150. + 1000000

...and train people how to act around dogs of any kind.

[Gman]

14. My guess is that Pits are probably the most inbred dogs around right now

since they Pits have become the dog of choice for gangbangers. They know nothing about dogs to begin with, much less anything about breeding, if the owners even cared. Drive through any flea market nowadays and there's someone selling Pit puppies for $100 - $150. They're selling very inferior dogs who become very dangerous dogs because they're genetically messed up.

So ban Pits. The only good one I know of is a dead one. Make it open season on 'em.

[baldguy]

18. So, a few dogs cause problems when they get inbred & abused - genocide is a solution?

Especially when such measures DO NOT WORK?

Did you even read the OP?

[Gman]

176. Yep

the world will be a better place.

[baldguy]

193. Then, we should get rid of Chows, Labs, Rottis, Huskys & Poodles too.

Family dog kills 2-week-old Mesa infant
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/136286
Chow

Puppy kills 2-month-old boy
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2008/07/puppy-kills-2-m.html
Black Lab

Kids' cries woke mom of boy, 3, killed by dogs' bites
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=a79e501c-14a2-4964-aa02-f9a5ab25d2a5
Rottweiler

Coroner rules death of baby killed by dog was accident
http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/sep/24/coroner-rules-death-of-baby-killed-by-dog-was/
Husky

Lawsuit filed in poodle attack
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_396850.html

[flvegan]

19. So, based on your "guess" we should execute them all?

How brilliant. Glad you're in no position to do shit about following up on that.

[imdjh]

29. Yeah, but the homeowners insurance folks are making trouble.

[TexasObserver]

72. Gun ownership is a right, and we regulate their ownership much more closely.

[Orrex]

21. I think that all pit bulls should be fused into a single, huge pit bull

[The Straight Story]

22. We need to ban pitbulls, guns, and pitbulls with guns - then utopia will be here....

except for damned smokers and breast feeding in public, still have to work on those.

[baldguy]

35. How about guns that shoot Pit Bulls?

Personally, I think a gun that shoots little yappy dogs with needle-sharp teeth would be more effective though.

[camio]

23. Thank you! People are so woefully ignorant.

It is the OWNERS - not the breed.

ANY DOG can be trained to be vicious. It infuriates me, the level of ignorance about this breed. Unscrupulous assholes that want to train a vicious animal choose pit bulls because of their physical traits. They are not 'inherently evil", or whatever other equally stupid claim people spout.

I've had three rescued pits - all of which were oversized drooling kittens.

[sweetroxie]

24. Pit Bulls have gotten a really unfair rap

They are deeply loyal, intelligent, goofy and very reliable family dogs. I personally don't like the way they look. Too macho looking for me. But I think they are very fine animals. Now, a lot of the people who chose them... that's another story. My dog is part pit and it's a wonderful part.

[shaayecanaan]

27. I had a pit bull terrier as a pig dog...

and they make brilliant pig dogs, let me tell you. They are aggressive and utterly fearless. I have seen pit bulls latch onto the face of huge boars five times their size without hesitation. If I had a wild pig charging me down and only a dog between us I would want that dog to be a pit bull.

But would I want that same dog to be at home with my 3-year old nephew? No I sure as hell wouldnt, for the same reason. These are big dogs and completely unsuitable for suburban backyards in the first place. And they were originally bred to terrorise bulls (hence the name) by grabbing onto their face. They are bred to be aggressive - that's their job.

I have a beagle for a family dog. I believe beagles have been the cause of two (2) human deaths, one of which involved a toddler choking to death because he put the leash around his own neck. He's a beautiful dog, absolutely placid, like beagles tend to be. I would have no problem leaving him alone with children. He'd be completely useless against a wild pig, but then again, that's why they have different dogs for different jobs.

[Strelnikov_]

32. But they are "just oversized drooling kittens"

just "goofy and very reliable family dogs"

just "big babies",

just "big sloppy sweethearts".

Yorkies and Silky Terriers are the real threat.






You heard it here.

[baldguy]

43. My mother had a Silky

9 lbs, looked exactly like your first pic. She never trained the thing.

It killed a cat, attacked & severely injured a darling 40-lb Akita next door & bit my niece before we convinced mom to get rid of the little fucker.

[TicketyBoo]

175. Yep, you heard it hear.

Silkies are the real threat.

[baldguy]

194. Givin no training - yes.

Just as with ANY dog.

[baldguy]

37. "There is no documented case that a single, spayed/neutered American Pit Bull Terrier,..."

"...maintained exclusively as a household pet, has been involved in a fatality in the United States."

Did you even read the OP?

[shaayecanaan]

63. Fair few weasel words there...

no documented

(ie, there may have been anecdotal reports)

that a single

(ie, not multiple)

spayed/neutered American Pit Bull Terrier

(ahah, so we get onto breeding. If a half Staffordshire bull terrier/ half pit bull dog mauls someone, Staffy admirers will blame the half of the dog that was pit bull and the Pit Bull admirers will blame the Staffy half)

been involved in a fatality

(the vast majority of maulings, however, are not fatal)

maintained exclusively as a household pet

so a dog that is intended to be a pet as well as a guard dog doesnt count?

[baldguy]

71. Anecdotal reports are worthless, because 90% of the time the breed is misidentified.

Unless the animal is ACK registered, there's no proof of what breed it is.


"Aggression is a normal canine behaviour and can be shown by any dog of any breed or type."

"To reduce the incidence of dog aggression, all dogs should be socialised, obedience trained, understood and managed competently by their owners."


The primary determinant of dog behavior is the amount & type of TRAINING the owner has engaged in with the dog - NOT THE BREED.

[Better Today]

74. Exactly what I was seeing. The report has everything so qualified as to not

resemble much of the reality of many family pitbulls.

[baldguy]

92. And most news reports on the issue are so broad as to be meaningless.

Unfortunately, ill-informed govt agencies & legislatures are using the meaningless news reports to craft policies & laws instead of actual science. Of course, when they do so the policies & laws fail to do what they intend.

[depakid]

81. I guess peer reviewed research doesn't count in fatalities and maulings

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/breeds-causing-DBRFs.pdf

nor do the MWR's

ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Publications/mmwr/wk/mm4621.pdf

As to family pets:

Constables: Woman attacked by family pit bull

by khou.com staff

Posted on November 20, 2009 at 10:39 AM

HOUSTON—A woman was severely injured Thursday night when she was attacked by her pit bull. It happened around 8 p.m. at a home at Park York and Mason Road in west Harris County.

Precinct 5 constables said the woman’s husband heard a commotion in another room, and when he went to investigate, he found his wife on the floor. The family’s pit bull was on top of her.

Constables said the man moved the dog and called 911.

The woman was taken via Life Flight to Memorial Hermann. Constables said she suffered trauma to her head and face.

(note: that would be disfigurement, not death- but I think we can agree it's not a good result of a bad decision to acquire the breed)

http://www.khou.com/home/Constables-Woman-attacked-by-family-pit-bull-70625402.html

[flvegan]

95. Peer reviewed?

Even the report publishers scoff at those now. The CDC has rescinded every last bit of opinion on breed because the data was shit.

10 year old debunked "data"...how pathetic.

[Better Today]

111. A link to "CDC has rescinded every last bit of opinion"

Not that I don't trust you, I just don't trust anyone who throws out unsubstantiated claims till they are substantiated.

[flvegan]

135. Not a problem.

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Dog-Bites/dogbite-factsheet.html

"There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill."

[depakid]

136. That's a criticism of study methodology (data gathering)

and in no way refutes the proposition- shown elsewhere through a variety of evidence- some of which your own proponents cite demonstrating that pit bulls cause a disproportionate number of maulings- which maulings have a disproportion level of severity (or lethality).

[PeaceNikki]

158. They admit to using "media accounts". That alone tells us this report is

nothing more than a waste of paper. The media is certainly NOT a place to gather information for a statistical study. There are many incidents that are reported as X then turn out to be Y. Many cases of mistaken breed identity or out right lies.

On the CDC report they have broken it down into a couple of sections, Purebred and Crossbred. Under Purebred they list "Pit bull-type" dog, this is NOT a Purebred dog. They use that very same header under Crossbred which invalidates this report.

Furthmore, this report was a collaboration of the CDC and the AVMA both of which are against breed specific legislation!

Other risk factors included dogs who roamed the neighborhood or dogs who were tethered. In other words, it appeared that the negligence of human guardians was a higher risk factor than the breed of the dog. "Breed-specific legislation is not the way to tackle the issue of dog bites,” said Dr. Julie Gilchrist of the CDC Injury Center in Atlanta, Georgia. “Instead, we should look at the people with those dogs responsible for the bites.” (Pit Bulls in the City, Indy Tails July 2005)

[JoeyT]

160. If the methodology is faulty the conclusion fails.

If you let me get away with bad enough methodology I can "prove" that oranges or dragons attacked and killed more people last year than lions. The methodology *is* the study.

The reason the numbers are inflated for pit bull injury severity is because most dog bites above a certain severity are automatically classified as "pit bulls" by reactionaries, even if no one knows what the breed is. There have been Chow Chows called "pit bulls" for chrissake.

[TZ]

274. Correct. A study with flawed methodology stinks of a political agenda.

I've been around enough scientists to have seen that PERSONALLY.

[CBR]

238. If the problem is data gathering/methodology... then the problem

is the entire report. The basis of research is the data and the methods by which is was collected and analyzed.

[baldguy]

266. And ill-conceived "reports' like this are used to push through equally ill-conceived BSL bans.

[depakid]

324. Your argument: since perfect and infallibly discrete data doesn't exist- we can't even acknoledge

an obvious and deadly problem- and that, therefore- we are paralyzed and cannot act to alleviate or ameliorate the harms that problem causes.

That's about the dumbest thing I ever heard- and it shows that you have no experience whatsoever in science, management or public policy.

We deal with problems based on less than perfect information all the time! I wish every decision colleagues and myself had to make lived up to the gold standard- but it doesn't- and in most cases, we're successful nonetheless in getting things done and improving the situation (even when- and its often the case public policy, we have to "muddle through.")

You just don't like it in this case because it interferes with your agenda.

[Midlodemocrat]

33. You bastard!!! I

can't very well be all self righteous about pit bulls if you spout facts, man!!!!!

[GOPisEvil]

40. I love how Petey attacked and killed all the Little Rascals.

Petey was an American Staffordshire Terrier, you know.

[meow2u3]

213. AKC American Staffordshire Terrier vs. UKC American Pit Bull Terrier specs

UKC Pittie link
http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/AmericanPitBullTerrierRevisedNovember12008

AKC AmStaff links
http://www.akc.org/breeds/american_staffordshire_terrier/
http://www.akc.org/breeds/american_staffordshire_terrier/history.cfm
http://www.akc.org/breeds/american_staffordshire_terrier/photos.cfm

[Irishonly]

44. The ankle biters are the mean ones around here

There are some very irresponsible and stupid dog owners where I live. They think it's funny when the ankle biters charge a big dog who is on a leash. We have two German Shepherd mixes and one pure bred. They are well behaved and are my babies. People are scared of them until they get to know them.

[SeattleGirl]

45. One of my sisters had a pit bull who was one of the most gentle

dogs I've ever been around.

When my nephew was born, Tessla stood guard near his crib; I think she wanted to make sure he was safe. When he got older, Tessla would be laying on the floor, and my nephew would sit on her back, and she never growled at him, never snapped at him, ever.

She was a good, gentle dog, and everyone loved the stuffing out of her until the day she died.

Thank you for this post, baldguy.

Too many people operate out of fear, not facts.

[astonamous]

46. Just spent the day visiting L.A. city shelters...so many Pit Bulls. I love them!

http://system.gocampaign.com/netisd_org/images/image.asp?id=542427

"If you think I am just a dog then you are just an asshole"

http://www.pryorsplanet.com/0/3680/0/1101

[depakid]

53. Hope you enjoy lawsuits, too

because dog bite lawsuits are a growing industry.

(edited to add link)

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

[baldguy]

57. Which feeds the misinformed hype.

[depakid]

73. You're promoting an inherently dangerous breed- and every senseble objective person knows it

So increasingly do insurers- and lawmakers.

Tell you what, if I were an underwriter- and a potential insured had a pit bull, I would either:

A. decline to issue a policy; or

B. Charge a hefty surcharge.

And if you were renting and I were a landlord- I wouldn't rent to you due to my liability exposure- even if you secured a policy of some sort that might cover the potentially extensive damages.

And that's what I'd advise my clients, too if asked.

[uppityperson]

75. There's probably a reason you aren't an underwriter or landlord.

By the way, what makes a "breed"?

[depakid]

93. Wouldn't want to be an underwriter- boring as hell- but I've reported to many

and dealt professionally with more landlords than I care to remember. Got to the point where we had a saying: landlords and tennants deserve each other. Cynical, I guess- but then law is an even more cynical profession than public health (though I know an epidemiologist or two who might disagree).

[uppityperson]

109. Being in public health, I think law is more cynical. But then I'm not a lawyer

[depakid]

115. Working on women's and family health policy issues during the Bush Administration

might change your assessment.

Or just try posting about how important it is for all women of childbearing age to take folic acid right here on DU. See where that gets you.

A nice breastfeeding thread, perhaps? LOL.

See, e.g. http://womenshealthnews.blogspot.com/2006/07/babytalk-magazine-cover-controversy.html

[uppityperson]

118. I have worked on that, and many other things. We are cynical, but still think

lawyers as a whole are at least equally cynical. Though I find it odd that I agree with you, then you post something telling me it might change my agreement? Odd.

[depakid]

123. Just subtlety

Lawyers tell clients to NOT do x -yet many client (and some invariably) do x anyway.

Similar deal with public health- except when attempting to set and implement health policy you have whole hosts of people doing- or advocating that people do x (not infrequently for bizarre or inexplicable reasons).

[baldguy]

99. Are you a dog expert?

If you're not (as I suspect) then you're not qualified to judge the potential liability of any dog. You do your clients a disservice by making decisions outside your area of expertise.

[depakid]

104. I know how to distinguish credible material and analyze matters like this objectively

using both law and science- though in this case, all it really takes is common sense.

And I know a little about human nature- and understand how Ms. Depa would react if all of a sudden there were piles on piles of viscous border collies mauling people all across America and Australia.

[baldguy]

122. Apparently not, since your keep referring to the CDC report that's been discredited & withdrawn.

[depakid]

134. Errr- no, it hasn't been withdrawn

It's still right there on the CDC's site.

What has been done is a criticism of the methodology- specifically, flaws in the data recording process. That's A LOT different than saying it somehow proves the converse as some of you "enthusiasts" are attempting to do.

[baldguy]

217. The CDC's Dog Bite Fact Sheet (rev Apr 1, 2008) disgrees with you

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Dog-Bites/dogbite-factsheet.html

"There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed {involved in dog bites}, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill."

The reason for this is that the original report (that you are so obsessive about, and which has been repeatedly refuted here) did not rely on empirical evidence to determine the breed.

Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998
http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/images/dogbreeds-a.pdf

"We collected data from The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)and media accounts related to dog bite attacks and fatalities, using methods from previous studies."

The problem is that the Humane Society doesn't compile such data, and media reports have been proven to be wildly inaccurate - dogs ranging in size & appearance from Jack Russells to Labrador Retrievers to Chow Chows to Bulldogs have ALL been referred to as "Pit Bulls" by inexpert, uninformative and misleading news reports.

[depakid]

245. How many times are you going to use that same rationalization?

I'm not "obsessed" with that particular study- you and whatever advocacy groups you deal with are.

It's just one piece of evidence in a MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE that you and others refuse to accept because you either love your dog or have a fixation with the breed.

The bottom line of course is that the majority of folks are sensible and objective enough to recognize the the obvious- and as the maulings continue, community after community and then states will have had enough. They will follow Britain and Australia's lead and restrict and ban the breed.

And communities and households- everyone- including you, will be safer for it.

[baldguy]

271. And how many times will you use the same biased, misleading & discredited hearsay?

Your MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE is nothing more than a few stray pebbles on a beach with thousands bits of evidence which contradicts it.

The fact is strict BSL laws are doomed to fail - and are failing - because they TARGET THE WRONG THING. It assumes that getting rid of one breed is a panacea for all the dog aggression issues that come up. BUT IT IGNORES THE FACT that all dogs bite. BUT IT IGNORES THE FACT that all dogs can kill. AND IT IGNORES THE FACT THAT THEY DO!

The problem isn't any one breed - the problem is the neglectful & abusive owners that get a hold of ANY BREED & turn dogs into asocial misfits.

[depakid]

365. You can fuss and holler all you want- make all sorts of ridiculous claims

Fact is, communities and states are getting fed up with dangerous dogs like pit bulls that repeatedly- and often without provocation cause serious injuries and fatalities.

The "all dogs bite" argument doesn't fly as more and more people see more and more results of pit bull attacks.

Indeed, in addition to breed specific legislation- which helps to deal with the supply side- given that this is America- as Texas Observer points out, you're also likely going to see major criminal sanctions on the demand side of the equation.

Serious time for serious injuries- quite possibly with a very low standard of "fault."

Dog gets out- mauls someone in the neighborhood- prison.

Dog mauls someone in the house- prison.

[baldguy]

371. So, the CDC, the Humane Society, the AVA, every reputable peer-reviewed study

the SPCA, literally thousands of accurate news reports, the experience of thousands of professional dog trainers, hundreds of dog shelters and my personal experience mean absolutely NOTHING?

Man, ignorant prejudice is a powerful thing.

[PeaceNikki]

372. Here are some ACTUAL studies on the effectiveness of BSL

From the ASPCA: http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/breed-specific-legislation.html

Are Breed-Specific Laws Effective?

There is no evidence that breed-specific laws—which are costly and difficult to enforce—make communities safer for people or companion animals. For example, Prince George’s County, MD, spends more than $250,000 annually to enforce its ban on pit bulls. In 2003, a study conducted by the county on the ban’s effectiveness noted that “public safety is not improved as a result of ,” and that “there is no transgression committed by owner or animal that is not covered by another, non-breed specific portion of the Animal Control Code (i.e., vicious animal, nuisance animal, leash laws).”
Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) decided not to support BSL. The CDC cited, among other problems, the inaccuracy of dog bite data and the difficulty in identifying dog breeds (especially true of mixed-breed dogs). The CDC also noted the likelihood that as certain breeds are regulated, those who exploit dogs by making them aggressive will replace them with other, unregulated breeds.

What’s Wrong with Breed-Specific Laws?

BSL carries a host of negative and wholly unintended consequences:
Dogs go into hiding
Rather than give up their beloved pets, owners of highly regulated or banned breeds often attempt to avoid detection of their “outlaw” dogs by restricting outdoor exercise and socialization and forgoing licensing, microchipping and proper veterinary care, including spay/neuter surgery and essential vaccinations. Such actions have implications both for public safety and the health of these dogs.

Good owners and dogs are punished
BSL also causes hardship to responsible owners of entirely friendly, properly supervised and well-socialized dogs who happen to fall within the regulated breed. Although these dog owners have done nothing to endanger the public, they are required to comply with local breed bans and regulations unless they are able to mount successful (and often costly) legal challenges.

They impart a false sense of security
Breed-specific laws have a tendency to compromise rather than enhance public safety. When limited animal control resources are used to regulate or ban a certain breed of dog, without regard to behavior, the focus is shifted away from routine, effective enforcement of laws that have the best chance of making our communities safer: dog license laws, leash laws, animal fighting laws, anti-tethering laws, laws facilitating spaying and neutering and laws that require all owners to control their dogs, regardless of breed.

What’s the Alternative to Breed-Specific Laws?

In the aforementioned study, the CDC noted that many other factors beyond breed may affect a dog’s tendency toward aggression—things such as heredity, sex, early experience, reproductive status, socialization and training. These last two concerns are well-founded, given that:

More than 70 percent of all dog bite cases involve unneutered male dogs.
An unneutered male dog is 2.6 times more likely to bite than is a neutered dog.
A chained or tethered dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than a dog who is not chained or tethered.
97 percent of dogs involved in fatal dog attacks in 2006 were not spayed/neutered:
78 percent were maintained not as pets, but rather for guarding, image enhancement, fighting or breeding.
84 percent were maintained by reckless owners—these dogs were abused or neglected, not humanely controlled or contained, or allowed to interact with children unsupervised.
Recognizing that the problem of dangerous dogs requires serious attention, the ASPCA seeks effective enforcement of breed-neutral laws that hold dog owners accountable for the actions of their animals.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Michigan State University College of Law: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/aruslweiss2001.htm
Conclusion

Breed-specific legislation is not an effective approach for regulating dogs' behavior in communities. Although such bans might comfort individuals who have had unpleasant experiences with particular breeds or have heard of attacks by specific dog breeds in the media, the bans do not act to effectively regulate the behavior of any breed or of dogs and their owners collectively. The bans carry with them too much potential for arbitrary or improper enforcement: inaccurate breed identification by officials, difficulty enforcing breed bans against mixed-breed dogs, animal control, and court system overload, and the potential for not identifying a genuinely "dangerous dog" as such because it doesn't fall into the specified breed categories. Unfortunately, large breeds of dogs such as Dobermans, German Shepherd Dogs, and Pit Bulls are popularly believed to be dangerous, and therefore may be judged more severely by judges than smaller, "cuddlier" breeds.59

Government officials at the local and state level should focus on the problem itself - dangerous canine behavior - and concentrate their efforts on dogs' and owners' conduct. In doing so, officials can maintain a safe community for both dog owners and other residents.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the American Bar Association: http://www.abanet.org/genpractice/magazine/2009/jul_aug/pitbull.html
Is BSL Effective?
Extensive studies of the effectiveness of BSL in reducing the number of persons harmed by dog attacks were done in Spain and Great Britain. Both studies concluded that their “dangerous animals acts,” which included pit bull bans, had no effect at all on stopping dog attacks. The Spanish study further found that the breeds most responsible for bites—both before and after the breed bans—were those breeds not covered by it, primarily German Shepherds and mixed breeds.

One of the few known instances in which a breed ban’s effectiveness was examined and reported on in the United States occurred in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where a task force was formed in 2003 to look at the effectiveness of its pit bull ban. The task force concluded that the public’s safety had not improved as a result of the ban, despite the fact that the county had spent more than $250,000 per year to round up and destroy banned dogs. Finding that other, non–breed–specific laws already on the books covered vicious animal, nuisance, leash, and other public health and safety concerns, the task force recommended repealing the ban.

In a different study looking at dog bite data, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Humane Society of the United States, and the American Veterinary Medical Association together produced a report titled “Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the US between 1979 and 1998,” which appeared in the September 15, 2000, issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Among its findings, the study reported that during this 20–year period, more than 25 breeds of dogs were involved in 238 human fatalities. Pit bull–type dogs caused 66 of the fatalities, which averages out to just over three fatal attacks per year, and Rottweilers were cited as causing 39 of the fatalities. The rest were caused by other purebreds and mixed breeds. At the time the report was released, Dr. Gail C. Golab, one of the study’s co–authors, was quoted as saying, “Since 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds—including Dachshunds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and a Yorkshire Terrier—have been responsible for fatal attacks on people.”

The authors noted that the data in the report cannot be used to infer any breed–specific risk for dog bite fatalities, such as for pit bull–type dogs or Rottweilers, because to obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the total numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States, and that information is unavailable.

A 2008 report on media bias by the National Canine Research Council (available on their website at http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest) compared the type of media coverage given for dog attacks that occurred during a four–day period in August 2007 with intriguing results:

On day one, a Labrador mix attacked an elderly man, sending him to the hospital. News stories of his attack appeared in one article in the local paper.

On day two, a mixed–breed dog fatally injured a child. The local paper ran two stories.

On day three, a mixed–breed dog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital. One article ran in the local paper.

On day four, two pit bulls that broke off their chains attacked a woman trying to protect her small dog. She was hospitalized. Her dog was uninjured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on the major cable news networks.

It is not a stretch to see how such news coverage could influence calls for breed bans from the frightened public and its legislators.

[depakid]

385. You can cite all of the sophistry that you like- pit bulls are on the way out

because of their lethality- not because there are "more bites."

Moreover- as I noted above- you're likely going to end up with harsh criminal laws on the demand side in America- because that's what American policy makers prefer.

This in addition to increased civil penalties,

These will apply to all dog owners- and they'll have people like you to thank for it.

[PeaceNikki]

386. Melodramatically overreact much?

For someone who likes to scream about "facts" you sure like to ignore them.

[depakid]

392. Just letting you know what's going to happen

and noting that your compilations aren't looking at the heart of the matter- which is potential for and degree of serious bodily harm and lethality. Implementation and enforcement of any regulation brings about a host of problems- not the least of which is dealing with sorting out the breed(s).

Each new pit bull mauling brings us closer to that day in community after community.

[PeaceNikki]

393. It's official.

You are a FUCKING moran

[PeaceNikki]

396. Serious questions.

What do you think should happen to the "pit bulls" who are in happy homes and have never "snapped" if BSL is enacted?

Should the dogs be collected and destroyed? Collected and neglected like they do in Europe?

Should therapy dogs like Leo be taken by the city/state/feds and put down because he's a vicious ticking time-bomb? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25214356/

Which of the roughly 20 breeds that are called "pit bulls" would your ideal legislation apply to? All? Some? What about mixed bloodlines?

[PeaceNikki]

390. So.. you think that he American Bar, The ASPCA, MSU's college of Law and an independant researcher

are being deceptive in their reports? Wasn't it you who thought it ridiculous to accuse the media of a bias?

Really? :\

[depakid]

397. I think your study doesn't adress the issue

and that you would know that if your abilities were anything beyond copy & paste.

Also, I'll take the word of the RSPCA Australia and Britain on the matter of pit bulls- as their statements about the breed an its nature are in accordance with reality of what we see almost every day.

But anyway- this has gotten to be beating a dead horse. You will lose this policy battle over time- the only question is, how many more kids, elderly and others have to be killed and maimed for life until enough's enough.

[dropkickpa]

409. www.dogbitelaw.com can't POSSIBLY be biased in any way

that would be unpossible!! :eyes:

[treygoba66]

50. my empirical evidence...

I bicycle as my main form of transportation. I've seen two people get bitten by dogs whilst riding. Both were from pit bulls.
I've encountered literally thousands of dogs while riding my bike, mostly out in the countryside. The only close calls I've had were from pit bulls. In fact, I was chased and cornered yesterday by a pit bull while riding home. I threw rocks at it until it backed off. Other dogs come out and bark. The pits seem fearless. I'm just saying...
btw- My wife and I owned a pit/blue heeler mix for 14 years (just died last summer). Sweetest dog ever.

[baldguy]

56. And just how did you identify these dogs?

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

[Strelnikov_]

61. ..

Chased by pit bulls twice, two different incidents, during one bike ride a couple of weeks ago.

In the first incident, dog just kept coming, outran it at distance.

In the second incident, owner was walking one of two extremely large dogs unleashed along multi-use trail, against rules of course. Dog saw me approaching and took off toward me from about two blocks away. By reversing direction and kicking it I again outran the dog.

I was lucky in both events that distance and grade were on my side.

Then again, they are just "oversized drooling kittens" that come at you like a heat seeking missile.

Thank God they were not a Yorkies or Silky Terriers. I probably wouldn't be here.

[uppityperson]

64. And just how did YOU identify these dogs?

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

[Strelnikov_]

66. They looked just like this dog.

[baldguy]

82. And this one

And this one


And this one


And this one





Now do it without cheating.
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Findthebull/findpitbull_v4.html

[Strelnikov_]

83. No. They looked like this one. n/t

[uppityperson]

90. They came with labels? Wow!

[Strelnikov_]

94. I don't understand your comment. n/t

[uppityperson]

98. Look at your post "they look like this"

It is a dog with a label under it. I didn't know people actually labeled their dogs so others would know what breed they were. Seems like a good idea.

[Strelnikov_]

105. No idea if people label their dogs as to breed. Spray paint?

The lineup photographs in the link are labeled. Here is a photograph without a label.

The dogs that tried to attack me looked a lot more like the first photo, except that they did not have any labels, like the photo below.

[kirby]

54. My sister...

owned a pit bull (and its offspring). After several years, the mother pit bull attacked its offspring nearly killing it. It tooks hundreds of stitches to save the youngest pit bull. The mother was put to sleep. Both were 'family dogs'. The attack was really out of the blue and surprising.

[baldguy]

60. And what sort of training did your sister engage in with the mother dog?

And the sad fact is that ANY new mother dog is liable to injure or eat their offspring. Sad, but true. Breed has nothing to do with it.

[TicketyBoo]

177. But the poster did not say

that this was a "new mother dog."

After several years, the mother pit bull attacked its offspring nearly killing it.

[baldguy]

192. And what training occured?

A lot of things were not said.

[kirby]

201. That I do not know...

My guess would be minimal training, but I am not certain.

[baldguy]

211. Every dog needs to be trained by it's owner. Period. No exceptions.

Otherwise tragedies are certain to occur. THE BREED OF THE DOG MAKES NO DIFFERENCE.

[TicketyBoo]

404. Well, I would say that my

2.5 to 6 pound Pomeranians are probably an exception.

We do good to get them to go outdoors to do their business.

They are lovely little dogs, trained or not.

[PeaceNikki]

407. Not even Pomeranians are an exception. Complacency and a false sense of security with any breed can

kill. Proper training and supervision with ANY breed is required.

http://www.igorilla.com/gorilla/animal/2001/pomeranian.html

Pomeranian Kills 6-Week-Old Girl
September 21, 2001

LOS ANGELES (AP) - A small Pomeranian dog killed a 6-week-old baby while the infant's caretaker briefly left the child unattended to warm a bottle of milk, authorities said.

The relative, who was caring for the infant girl, found her head buried in the dog's mouth Saturday night, sheriff's Deputy Cruz Solis said. The girl died of head trauma at an area hospital, he said.

The baby's name was withheld because her parents were out of the country and had not been notified, Solis said.

The relative has not been charged. Animal control officers took the dog.

Pomeranians are a breed of miniature canines that have a foxlike face, pointy ears and long, fluffy hair. The deputy said Pomeranian attacks are rare.

``Obviously it doesn't take much to kill a 6-week old baby but it's not something that happens with that breed,'' Solis said.

[TicketyBoo]

416. All Pomeranians are not created equal.

My parents had one that weighed 30 pounds. While still a "small dog" by some standards, he was not like our tiny ones we have now.

[kirby]

212. Maybe a PET LICENSE should be required...

For all breeds. For an owner to get a pet license they need to take a class, like drivers ed. On the other hand, have you seen how some people drive?

[baldguy]

225. I wouldn't be opposed to that.

Some people shouldn't allowed anywhere near a dog.

[TicketyBoo]

405. They used to require a license here

for each and every dog. But it was really just a tax. You had to show proof of a rabies vaccination. That was the extent of the "license" requirement.

You were charged more for this license for an unspayed female than for other dogs.

[TexasObserver]

79. Thanks for telling of an incident of an unprovoked attack by a family "pet."

When an animal with lethal capabilities kills, it's not unexpected. It's nature doing what nature does. What's unnatural is expecting it to never do that, no matter the circumstances.

[uppityperson]

88. What's unnatural is expecting it to always do that, no matter the circumstances.

I do not see ANYONE saying any type, size, fur, constitution of dog is incapable of ever becoming violent. I do however see people saying they will enough of the time that every dog of that type, size, constitution should be killed.

[hfojvt]

145. I used to own a collie-lab and one of her sons by a beagle

More than a couple of times, for no reason I could discern, they got into it to the point where I separated them. Neither was hurt, but the incidents seemed like semi-serious fights that I did not allow to proceed. It probably was the son initiating it though since he was the one who was not neutered, He also had an incident with his dad at his dads home. After they had played for an hour or so, dad tried to mount him, and he sorta went berserk, spun around and knocked his dad over and was on top of him snarling before I pulled him off. Again, though, nobody was hurt.

[Better Today]

58. "There is no documented case that a single, spayed/neutered American Pit Bull Terrier,..."

So what I gather, and have heard often in these pitbull attacks on people is that is usually is not a "SINGLE" pitbull, but in a group of two or more, usually ones that live together. In reading the responses here in I notice too that many responses comment on multiple pit bulls being owned, which seems to be often the norm.

I wouldn't say that breed specific legislation is a good idea, but to claim that pitbulls are of no more concern than a beagle or a bassett is wrong in my opinion. They are right up there with Dobermans, German Shepherds, Chows, Akitas, Wolf hybrid and Huskies, etc. I am pointing out many large dogs, though I would never think to be concerned by say a St. Bernard or a NewFoundland since they don't seem to have reputations of the others.

I have always owned German Shepherd or Wolf Hybrids, so I know a bit of what I'm speaking, but I never own two at once, second and third dogs are always a significantly different personality breed and size to help balance the large dog who, though a family dog, is in fact here for protection purposes. My large dogs are not guard trained, but they are not allowed to socialize with strangers or visitors quite like we allow the smaller dogs to do. Only if someone is to be a really regular visitor or is to have unsupervised access to the house/yard have any of the large dogs been introduced properly. We've never had a problem, but I would be a fool to believe that my large dogs aren't potential issues to the safety of those around us, or to dissuade anyone from having a healthy fear of them and all dogs breeds that have histories of causing injuries.

[uppityperson]

62. StBernard stalked me once, scared the crap out of me

The people who had him finally saw me sidling along the garage looking terrified and yelled "freeze!" which I did. They came out and got the growling drooling beast on a thick leash and muzzle. They told me he was a "problem" and didn't know how he got outside alone. They were giving him a last chance before having him put down.

[Better Today]

69. I have no doubt there are exceptions to all preconceptions, my bad. Generally

I would not consider being afraid of a St. Bernard, but certainly one has to look at the individual animal as well.

[uppityperson]

70. I was a kid, thought StBernards were Rescue dogs, safe ones, this one

scared me worse than any bear has. And yes, I lived in bear country for many yrs.

[baldguy]

65. Learn the difference between a "family" dog and a "resident" dog.

Such attacks are attributable to "resident" dogs OF ANY BREED which are usually kept outside, away from humans, and have never been socialized.

[Better Today]

67. No, there are many family dogs living indoors with the family, that are not single

nor spayed or neutered.

It specifically says, no incidents with single, spayed/neutered, family dogs. . . there are a few qualifications there, not just "family".

[baldguy]

85. Look at the sentance immediatly before the one you've cherry-picked.

"Attacks by family dogs of any breed or type are extremely rare, and should not to be confused with incidents involving resident dogs. Resident dogs are maintained outside the home (on chains, in kennels, or in yards) and/or are obtained for negative functions (guarding, fighting, protection, indiscriminate/irresponsible breeding). Resident dogs cannot be expected to exhibit the same behaviors as family dogs which have been afforded the opportunity to interact with humans on a daily basis and in positive and humane ways."

[DrDan]

170. results from a "positive and humane" upbringing

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[baldguy]

185. No toddler should be left alone with ANY dog, EVER.

Family dog kills 2-week-old Mesa infant
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/136286
Chow

Puppy kills 2-month-old boy
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2008/07/puppy-kills-2-m.html
Black Lab

Kids' cries woke mom of boy, 3, killed by dogs' bites
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=a79e501c-14a2-4964-aa02-f9a5ab25d2a5
Rottweiler

Coroner rules death of baby killed by dog was accident
http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/sep/24/coroner-rules-death-of-baby-killed-by-dog-was/
Husky

edit: Here's another one.
Lawsuit filed in poodle attack
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_396850.html

[DrDan]

223. particularly this breed

[baldguy]

228. Particularly ANY breed.

Would it surprise you to learn that humans kill more humans each year than dogs do?

[DrDan]

236. why would that surprise me

[baldguy]

242. Well, you're not calling for the mass sterilization & elimination of any groups of people

Even though they're far more dangerous than any dog, by any measure you'd care to make.

[DrDan]

252. I am not calling for mass sterilization and elimination of dogs in general

just those that pose a significant risk - those that have proven themselves.

[baldguy]

273. What dogs? Molossers? Terriers? Mastiffs?

You can't ban a dog which you can't identify properly.

[TexasObserver]

87. I applaud you for the wise course you've chosen with your animals.

If we could depend on all big dog owners being so wise, we'd be a lot safer.

[baldguy]

108. I guess your myopathy is only limited to Pit Bulls, huh?

http://www.wolfpark.org/wolfdogs/Poster_intro.html
http://leerburg.com/wolf2.htm
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2000/10/22/loc_wolf_hybrid_kills.html
http://www.dogexpert.com/Wolf%20Hybrids/Wolf%20hybrid%20article.html
http://www.braintreevt.com/dogordinance.htm
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Articles/OtherBreedBites/2009/January/Wolf%20hybrd%20huskt%200109.pdf
http://injurylaw.grossmanjustice.com/2009/11/articles/dog-bites-animal-attacks/wolf-hybrid-dogs-loving-pets-or-threats-to-kids/
http://www.postindependent.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040505/VALLEYNEWS/40504007
http://www.2keller.com/library/dangerous-dog-alert-wolf-hybrids-more-likely-to-bite.cfm

Do any of these sound familiar?

[uppityperson]

113. Sure. doncha know, wolf hyrbrids are a WiseChoie of Pet, much more so than

an OMGPITBULL!!!11111
Thank you, sincerely, thank you.

[Better Today]

116. Thank you for your applause, I do try to be an excellent, careful owner for

the sake of persons and my dogs as well. I just don't think denying the probabilities and possibilities is the best way to be prepared for the best overall outcomes. One reason I've never ever owned a pure bred german shepherd or wolf. I like some of the qualities there, but insist it is half bred with a milder large dog. . . to date the other halfs have been golden retrievers and border collies. Beautiful and well balanced family guard-like dogs.

[TexasObserver]

125. You're very wise to group the big animal with more family friendly dogs.

Like humans, they're capable of being influenced by the tenor of the group they're in.

Pure bred animals are pure bred because there is an economic incentive. Buyers tend to want the pure bred over the mixed breed. Because they are so highly inbred, many breeds have natural problems, both mental and physical. Cross breeding makes for a much sounder animal, often bringing the best of both breeds.

[Skittles]

76. all the pit bulls I've ever known have been overly-loving

severe danger of being licked to death, for sure

[Greyhound]

91. K&R. Here's an interesting site for the terminally frightened.

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html">Find the Pitbull.

[uppityperson]

97. And another..., and another.

http://www.forpitssake.org/
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/articles/sarpits.html

[travelingtypist]

110. Picture > 1000 words

[baldguy]

119. +1000

[depakid]

140. They sure are: (warning- very graphic)

------------



------------

This one from medscape's emergency medicine section's a real beauty, too:

[TexasObserver]

142. That post should be required viewing for pit bull advocates.

[depakid]

147. I've seen even worse ones than that...

Back in the day, we had to watch graphic films of accidents as part of required driver training.

Could be an approach some jurisdiction could try would be a mandatory licensing scheme whereby people had to take a Saturday course that included a section on the potential consequences of their choice to own an inherently dangerous breed.

[JoeyT]

161. Again, no proof of the breed.

Shame there aren't pictures on this: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_396850.html
Since some people apparently enjoy getting themselves worked into a lather over pictures of injured kids. Clearly it was bred to be an aggressive attack dog! Ban poodles!

[baldguy]

179. Any large dog is capable of doing the same type of damage.

Yet, nobody calls to eliminate all St Bernards or German Shepherds when they kill people.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

121. All I can tell you is that I have the most adorable, 8# Shitzu

That will rip the head off of any pit bull in the neighborhood if she gets scared enough while my grandson has the nicest, most loving Pit Bull whose sole function in life is to earn petting from anyone who will offer it.

My Shitzu will eat that pit bull in a heartbeat but they would both be happier if you just pet them.

Dogs are amazing.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

133. Great post. Kick and Rec.

[depakid]

137. You gotta love the story upthread re: Dad who used his gun on the pit bull that killed his baby

That one and others like it are must sees for the gungeon.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

144. Seriously go see a doctor.

[Prophet 451]

138. Can we ban Jack Russels?

Specifically, the one that belongs to my neighbour and yaps all day and night?

[jasperilla]

139. Right on

Thanks for your post. We have raised Rottweilers for many years. Same kinda prejudice. They are intelligent and loving creatures. We recently lost our 13 year old Shepherd mix so our male rottie needs a companion, we are planning to rescue a female pit bull and have started the process. There are so many lovely dogs who need homes.

[Jamastiene]

149. You know what causes MOST dogs to attack most of the time?

Some asshole is usually teasing and torturing the dog. Of course, if you treat a dog like shit, it will cause a dog to attack.

Usually, the scenario goes like this: People don't train their holy menacing terrors (aka children) to respect animals AT ALL. They turn those hellions (aka children) loose on the neighborhood. Those children see a dog and start jumping at the dog and poking sticks at the dog and downright torturing the dog. The dog takes it as long as it can then the holy menacing terror starts really hurting the dog. THEN the dog nips at them and they don't stop. They continue to harass the dog. That's when the dog has to defend itself.

Next thing you know, it's on the news that the general consensus is that dog was somehow at fault. After that, the dog is put down, all because people are too fucking stupid to train their hellions to have a little respect for another living thing.

Sorry, the holy terrors known as children needed better training from their parents not to torture animals but didn't get it. Now, they are scarred for life. It's the parents' fault, not the animal in that scenario.

Otherwise, there are simple steps you can take to calm even the most territorial or agitated dog. Been there, done that. I was taught at an early age how to respect animals and calm them down if they are agitated. Hint: poking sticks, throwing rocks, shouting, kicking, hitting, and jumping at the dog are NOT the way to do it.

People are so fucking goddamn stupid. Why do the rest of us have to wait until these idiots evolve?

[TexasObserver]

152. Yes - a natural propensity to attack, bad owners, and the opportunity to attack.

[baldguy]

189. And every dog has a "natural propensity to attack"

They're CARNIVORES. In the natural world THEY ATTACK & KILL to survive. The breed makes no difference.

[DrDan]

168. this darned 18-month old little girl should have known better

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[PeaceNikki]

169. Oooo, you should totally spam this thread with that link!! That would be cool.

Oh wait, I see you're on it! :thumbsup:

[DrDan]

172. just want to make sure EVERYONE knows what happened to this little girl

in the company of these wonderful pets

[baldguy]

197. The breed makes no difference.

Family dog kills 2-week-old Mesa infant
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/136286
Chow

Puppy kills 2-month-old boy
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2008/07/puppy-kills-2-m.html
Black Lab

Kids' cries woke mom of boy, 3, killed by dogs' bites
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=a79e501c-14a2-4964-aa02-f9a5ab25d2a5
Rottweiler

Coroner rules death of baby killed by dog was accident
http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/sep/24/coroner-rules-death-of-baby-killed-by-dog-was/
Husky

Lawsuit filed in poodle attack
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_396850.html

[DrDan]

222. sure it does - if not, why are the majority of these attacks attributable to pit bulls

[baldguy]

226. If the animal has four legs and a tail, the media attributes it to a pit bull.

[DrDan]

259. isn't that just a little bit of a stretch . . .

of course, it is one of the primary comments in defense of these vicious animals.

[baldguy]

275. Not really. How many "news" reports do you see about all those 90-lb Pit Bulls running around?

[DrDan]

280. I honestly cannot remember any that described a breed and it's weight

I cannot deny them - I just don't remember ever hearing any.

[PeaceNikki]

279. No. Not a stretch.

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/breed-identification/


As much as you'd like to make the PB a boogie-monster, you're wrong.

But you keep on trying with your over-hyped, reactionary, illogical scare-tactics.

[DrDan]

288. read the subject line - "if an animal has four legs and a tail" - the media attributes it to a

pit bull.

So you really do not think that is a bit of an overstatement?

be honest now.

[baldguy]

318. Just as coloring every "Pit Bull type" dog a man-eating monster is.

[DrDan]

322. you are starting to lose it my friend

we are never going to agree . . . I am done

[baldguy]

334. You don't like one generalization, but you're perfectly happy promoting another.

Of course, both are incorrect - especially since they're the same one.

[Jamastiene]

249. It's the parents' responsibility to watch their kids until the kids

are old enough to watch out for themselves some. They should, in the meantime, be training the kid how to act around animals and how to treat animals. It's the parents' fault for not teaching their children and/or watching their children more closely.

One breed of dog is not responsible for all dog attacks. Period. I don't care how many medical photos you trot out over and over again.

[PeaceNikki]

251. The constant propogation of media hype, irrational fear and the need to make a "boogie man"

is mind-boggling.

I don't get it. It's such a Republican tactic.

[Jamastiene]

265. When I was grooming dogs, it was the cocker spaniels who went nuts

from time to time. Also, the short nosed little dogs (regardless of breed) would get grumpy too from time to time. Even they were manageable with a little education on how dogs see the world and how packs work. Everyone who will be around dogs should learn those few basic techniques. It doesn't hurt the dogs. It makes it safer for them, especially if you need to use scissors or other sharp instruments to cut their hair or toenails.

The local city police dogs (German Shepherds) were great too. None of them ever attached themselves to my arm or bit me or anything. They were in bad shape as far as their coats having a lot of undercoat that needed to be combed out. As much time as it took, and as much tugging I had to do to get the undercoat out, they never tried to bite me. They knew I was trying to help them.

The pit bulls, rotties, and chows were easy to work with. I never had any of those actually bite me. They were nice dogs.

Aside from breeds, a poodle/pit bull mix I once had was great. He was one of the sweetest dogs ever. Sunday Girl was just a little tiny kitten when he was fully grown. Every time a thunderstorm came, he would pick her up by her head and take her under the couch to keep her safe. He as scared of storms. She is too. He sensed that and protected her.

His mother was the same way: very docile and sweet.

The bottom line is this:
It's not the breed. It's the circumstances, the environment and whether or not people know how to act around a dog. Considering that dogs do exist en masse around our society, EVERYONE should take a basic course on how dogs think and how the pack works. It's very simple once you learn it. A lot less attacks would happen if people learned a little bit. I don't get this aversion to learning some people have.

[DrDan]

254. oops - dupe

[DrDan]

255. yep - as I said - that 18-month old should have known better

her own darned fault . . .

[baldguy]

261. No dog should be left unattended with a toddler or an infant. Ever. No exceptions.

What is it that you can't understand about that?

[DrDan]

263. why do you assume I do not understand that

why are you making this personal

[DrDan]

267. oh yeah - there was this mentioned from the article

"everyone, including Sir Muggsey, was in the living room setting up Christmas decoration. Sir Muggsey snapped, she said. The dog jumped on the couch and began attack Sadie."

hmmmmmm - the child was not alone with the vicious dog.

[baldguy]

277. I keep bringing it up because you obviously don't understand it.

In the story - everyone was setting up Christmas decorations - and apparently ignoring both the dog & the baby. Real responsible people there.

[DrDan]

282. well - I have never seen a dog leashed inside a house

and it sound like that would be the only thing that would have prevented this tragedy

[PeaceNikki]

284. No. You're 100% wrong Training and proper supervision.

Those things would have prevented it.

[DrDan]

289. and you know of course that this dog was improperly trained

exactly what in the article leads you to that conclusion. In fact - it appears just the opposite from what I read. Sounds like this was a family dog from birth.

[PeaceNikki]

292. Umm... anyone with an IQ larger than the temperature in Wisconsin today can deduct that.

Family dog or not, you need to properly train and, most importantly, properly supervised.

[DrDan]

297. please tell me what you see in the article that I am missing that

implies either improper training or improper supervision.

[PeaceNikki]

298. It would not have happened if the child was properly supervised and the dog properly trained.

[DrDan]

299. please tell me EXACTLY how this dog was improperly trained or improperly supervised

I see a family dog - sleeping with the owner - in the same room with other family members when it snapped.

Please tell me where the improper training or supervision occurs.

[PeaceNikki]

300. It would not have happened if the child was properly supervised and the dog properly trained.

[DrDan]

302. exactly as I thought . . . there is NOTHING pointing to improper traininig or supervision

rest my case

[baldguy]

360. The dog was "the baby" of the house.

It slept in the same bed with the owners. When the child showed up, it's position in the pack was suddenly threatened. The dog was never properly disciplined, because if it had this tragedy wouldn't have happened.

Given the same circumstances, any dog would be liable to behave exactly the same way - regardless of the breed.


For a long time my sister owned a Blue Heeler - generally very loyal; very protective of it's family. He was her baby - slept in the bed, rode on her lap in the car, cuddled with her watching TV.

Then my sister got pregnant & gave birth to a little girl. She was VERY careful when she introduced the baby to the dog the first time, cooing to the baby, then praising & petting the dog, back & forth until the dog was settled in & comfortable with it. At least until the INEVITABLE confrontation when the dog tried to re-assert it's position: The baby cried & moved unexpectedly. The dog growled & bared it's teeth, and my sister picked the dog up and threw it against the wall. Then she picked up the baby & left the room, closing the door behind her. After about half an hour, she had put the baby in her crib and gone down to release the dog. Otherwise, she ignored the dog for the rest of the day.

The next day she tried again. Holding the baby, invite the dog over, coo & pet, coo & pet. If the dog showed any signs of aggression, it gets punished immediately. Very quickly, he understands that he's now one rung down in the pack hierarchy.

Today my niece is 10, and that dog would kill anyone who tried to harm her.

[EndersDame]

183. I agree I was at the dog park and this mom let her little brat kick dogs!

She even kicked Tea Tea a rescue pit mix ! Tea Tea did not respond and obviously had more training that kid! What is weird is the kids wanted to pet Tea Tea's Owner's other dogs (Oreo - a collie mix and Missy a Great Pyranese (sp) mix)but Tea Tea was the sweetest by far

[Jamastiene]

250. That kid is cruising for a serious bruising.

If the parents don't teach it not to kick dogs soon, it is going to kick the wrong dog some day. Either the dog is going to finally reach a point where it has had enough, or someone like me will be the owner of the dog. That kid would KNOW to stay the fuck away from me and my dog. I wouldn't let it kick my dog. The parents of the little shit would hear from me too.

[TwilightGardener]

187. Sometimes it's the kids' fault, sometimes the dog just gets worked up

for whatever reason. My son was bitten in the face this weekend by a bulldog--he was horsing around with his friends and landed on the ground, and the dog got excited, ran over and snapped in his face. He had a small puncture wound that is healing well, but I'm still trying to get proof of rabies vaccination from the owner of the dog, and she isn't calling me back...x(

[TexasObserver]

191. Please call Animal Control and report the dog.

It may have bitten others. It will certainly do so again.

You need to know if the dog has rabies, and animal control can help you accomplish that. The owner of the dog will probably deny anything happened. Get those charged with the duty to catch and deal with bad dogs to deal with this owner. They'll go get the dog and hold it for observation and/or testing.

[TwilightGardener]

248. Well, got a call back, she says the dog was vaccinated

just over a year ago in October, and it was his second shot, to her memory--I have no reason to doubt that, and our sons are friends, so I'm gonna let it go. From what my kid told me, the dogs (there were several) just got all hyper because the crowd of kids had been running around and goofing off, and he feels the dog got him out of overplayfulness rather than viciousness. I have dogs, I know they sometimes get mouthy when excited--ESPECIALLY when humans are on the ground. I know by law I'm supposed to report it and they will quarantine the dog, but I don't think it's necessary.

[baldguy]

199. Owner's responsability. They should have the vacc tag on the dog & proof of vacc readily available.

If they don't have the info their vet does.

[Chemisse]

155. I am quite nervous about pit bulls

But I have no wish to ban them.

However, owners need to be held criminally responsible for attacks due to their carelessness or mistreatment.

[baldguy]

188. +1000

When a Pit Bull - or ANY dog - attacks a human being IT'S THE FAULT OF THE OWNER! Not the fault of some unrelated Pit Bull living 20 miles away.

[Chemisse]

362. It seems most of the pit bull stories you hear

Involve a dog that is outside in a pen or tied up, and some small child manages to get close to it.

Too often dogs that are outside are out for the duration, a dismal life indeed, and indicative of uncaring or inattentive owners.

[Echo In Light]

157. Some of the owners of such dogs have them as an aesthetic extension of their macho assholery

... and I mean large, scary looking dogs in general, too, not just PBs. I've nothing against them, but the affectations of some of their owners tends to help paint the picture unfairly w/a broad brush.

I knew of an old PB that was a stray at this farm where numerous local metal bands would play/party yrs ago, and so far as I knew, as scary looking as she was, she never attacked anyone...and she was routinely in situations where she'd be around more than one hundred + people at a time.

On the other hand, I've also known people who swear their huge, terrifying dog was a pussycat, and would never hurt anyone, yet did. Unless the dog is specifically well trained for security situations, I tend to cast their need along the same lines as all of those who buy a huge pickup/vehicle, yet never really have any need to haul anything in it.

(yes, my wife and I are cat people :))

[TexasObserver]

256. True. And that applies to women, as well as men, owners.

We all know that many, many pit bull owners - probably most - get the dogs because it makes the owner feel stronger and more powerful. These dogs look better and have more sense than half their owners. Who hasn't seen some jerk in public with his pit bull - at the beach, at the lake, at the park? While men seem to do it more than women, there are plenty of women who are similarly afflicted. It's an accessory, same as when Paris Hilton trots around with her two pound ankle biter.

[PeaceNikki]

159. We need to NOT use emotion to influence public policy

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

178. Quiet, You!

It's fun gettin' everybody all riled up, dontcha know! Demagoguery rules!

[DrDan]

163. yeah - no ticking time bomb here - great family dogs - "signal like other dogs"

just a couple of days ago - go tell this 18-month old or her family what great dogs they are

***************************

". . . Sir Muggsey snapped, she said. The dog jumped on the couch and began attack Sadie.

"He freaked out," Keesling said. "He just ran over and grabbed the baby and we had to kick him to let go of her."

Keesling said she still has no idea why a dog she raised from birth, along side Sadie, attacked"

****************************


http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[baldguy]

200. The breed makes no difference.

Family dog kills 2-week-old Mesa infant
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/136286
Chow

Puppy kills 2-month-old boy
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2008/07/puppy-kills-2-m.html
Black Lab

Kids' cries woke mom of boy, 3, killed by dogs' bites
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=a79e501c-14a2-4964-aa02-f9a5ab25d2a5
Rottweiler

Coroner rules death of baby killed by dog was accident
http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/sep/24/coroner-rules-death-of-baby-killed-by-dog-was/
Husky

Lawsuit filed in poodle attack
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_396850.html

[DrDan]

224. of course it does - and the public is becoming more aware with each vicious attack

[baldguy]

230. Unbiased studies prove otherwise.

CDC: "There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill."

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Dog-Bites/dogbite-factsheet.html

Anyone who insists that Pit Bulls are any more dangerous than any other dog is talking out of their ass. Dogs who are not trained properly are dangerous - regardless of the breed.

[DrDan]

235. go tell it to this 18-month old

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[LWolf]

173. I don't believe that at all.

But then, I've known some pits.

Currently, my neighbor's pit is an escape artist. She's here just as often as she's home. She really wants in the house with the rest of us, but doesn't breach the doggy door. Instead, she hangs out in the yard waiting for us. My dog will play with her. She doesn't touch the chickens free-ranging around the place or chase the sheep or horses. She just hangs out hoping for some play time.

[baldguy]

202. The owner needs to control the dog.

[LWolf]

417. That would be nice.

The dog, being a confirmed escape artist, is at my owner's because it's a rural neighborhood. I have a total of 3 neighbors on a private road that dead ends against miles of public land. Nobody is on our dirt road that doesn't live there, and nobody has kids living here. They took the dog, which belongs to their daughter, because they didn't want the dog roaming a neighborhood in town.

Their place is fenced; the dog is a master at squeezing through small spaces and digging. I found her in one of my pastures one morning. I have no idea how she got there; MY dog can't get in. She forgot, too, and was frantically waiting by the gate for me to let her out. Their own dog, a lab, never gets out.

I don't mind her visits. If she were aggressive in any way, bothering the chickens, horses, sheep, my dog or cat, I would have some words with the neighbor. She's not, though, so it hasn't been necessary.

[EndersDame]

184. I will say it most pit bulls I know are friendly than most small dogs

especially chihuahuas(you want to talk about viscous dogs!) I have a Min Pin/Terrier Mix and she is great but not nearly as affectionate as Tea Tea a pit mix who is a regular at the dog park I go to. Tea Tea is a total sweetie and is very loving. Tea Tea and my pup (15 lbs) have played and wrestled with out incident. There have been lab pups and puggles though that have played way to rough though and I had to pull my baby out of the mix

[Jamastiene]

309. Small dogs can be dangerous to larger dogs too.

When small dogs bite, they can bite faster than most large dogs. In the time it takes a large dog to bite, a small dog can bite several times. Smaller dogs' teeth are sharper too. Also, if, and when (it does happen), small dogs go for the soft underbelly areas (which they are known to do) where all the vital organs are, they can do some real damage and kill whatever they attack. I always say never underestimate a small dog. They have the "little big man" syndrome and use it every chance they get. They can be pretty ferocious sometimes.

[Dappleganger]

186. Man effed up the canine gene pool...

take a look at golden retrievers, which was once considered to be a reliably gentle breed but now even they cannot be depended on as such.

Bad genes can cancel out even great upbringing and training, unfortunately.

[baldguy]

203. Also unfortunately, bad upbringing can subvert the breeding of ANY dog.

The most dangerous animal is the person who neglects or abuses his dog.

[Blasphemer]

207. That is my only concern with any dog

I really believe that these sudden and inexplicable dog attacks are related to breeding (whether intentional or non-intentional). I think rather than banning by breed, they should work on genetic testing to see if there is indeed a identifiable link.

[cark]

190. If they only attacked their owner....

Then I would have no problem with them. The fact is they usually attack someone else. There is no good reason to choose a this breed of dog, period. The reason people want them is because they think that owning dangerous animals is cool and somehow that makes them badasses. That is my experience with the people that I know that own them. I feel that people with this attitude also are not the most responsible people either. I don't want to be around them and I certain don't trust them around my kids. JMO

[TexasObserver]

198. Don't forget that some of the strongest "advocates" are often puppy mill breeders.

Anyone who breeds their animals and sells the puppies or breedings is someone who has an economic incentive to defend the animals no matter how bad the animals are.

For every responsible pit bull owner, how many irresponsible owners are there? 10? 100?

We need to stop the breeding of pit bulls entirely - put this horrible puppy mill industry out of business.

I applaud you for being worried about your kids. Would we let our child go to the home of someone who left a loaded .45 auto pistol laying around where the kids play? Would we let the child play with the gun? Of course not. A responsible parent would NEVER allow their child around a pit bull they do not personally know very well, and even then, it's a risk not worth taking. It's seldom the dog owner who gets eaten alive. That would be great, but unfortunately, these dogs usually attack a stranger, a child, an old person, or someone else that it doesn't consider above it in the "pack" led by its owner.

[baldguy]

205. It's a fashion among SOME to have a badass dog.

Right now, it's the Pit Bull. Soon, it'll be the Rhodesian Ridgeback. Before it was the Doberman and the Rottweiler.

This group of people has ALWAYS been a minority. The great majority of these dogs are bred & trained to be members of a human family & live in human society, and are exceptionally successful in that role.

That being said, the owners should be REQUIRED - morally, legally and financially - to be responsible for the actions of their animals.

[cark]

269. Worthless Breeds

There is no reason to have one of these type of dogs unless you are a drug lord. The only reason is because you think it is cool to have a 'tough' dog. It is pathetic and juvenile IMO and says a lot about the type of people that wants own them. It is not worth the risk to your neighbors. Like I said before, if they only attacked their owner, then have as many as you want, but if my neighbor had one I would be concerned and irritated constantly worrying about my kids. Get a golden retriever. They are nicer and better looking and less likely to rip the arms off of some innocent child.

[baldguy]

303. Damn those worthless dogs!

Pit Bull Saved The Lives Of 30 People, 29 Dogs, 13 Horses, And A Cat
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/extraordinary_animals/89234

Hero dog bitten defending little Ebony
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/hero-dog-bitten-defending-little-ebony/story-e6frf7kx-1111115627487

Hero pit bull finds newborn
http://www.all-creatures.org/adow/art-heropit.html

Pit bull mix honored as hero
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/features/mutts/blog/2008/01/pit_bull_mixed_honored_as_hero.html

Pit bull dies saving 2 women from cobra
http://dogsinthenews.com/stories/070301a.php

Hero pooch saves 7-year-old Queens girl
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/07/08/2007-07-08_hero_pooch_saves_7yearold_queens_girl.html

Pit bull credited for saving family from armed intruders
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Articles/HeroicPitties/Weezie.pdf

Kool K-9 Popsicle retires
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/CustomsToday/2002/October/k9.xml

Juice is the family star. (Saved a sleeping couple from a burning house.)
http://www.purina.ca/about/halloffame/inductee/2004/juice.aspx

Dog notifies owner about his mother's heart attack
http://www.purina.ca/about/halloffame/inductee/2001/lilly.aspx

Dog wakes owner who succumbed to carbon monoxide.
http://www.purina.ca/about/halloffame/inductee/1999/cesar.aspx

Dog saves owner after she collapses from a spider bite.
http://www.purina.ca/about/halloffame/inductee/1999/norton.aspx

Hero Pitbull Thwarts Abduction Attempt
http://fortheloveofthedogblog.com/news-updates/hero-pitbull-thwarts-abduction-attempt-video

Pit bull takes bullets for owner
http://www.ohmidog.com/2008/12/11/pit-bull-takes-bullets-for-owner/

[Jamastiene]

312. You say that like you think a golden retriever would never attack anyone.

I have some news for you. They will.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

206. Sometimes they get their owner too.

At the risk of getting involved in one of these threads....

I don't know how anyone can deny these are dangerous animals. The people that compare these dogs to other "ankle-biter" breeds are assholes. To compare frequency of minor to moderately severe bites/maulings of other dogs with the ABILITY and PROPENSITY of PITS to attack and kill ADULT human beings is ridiculous and leads me to believe we are not talking to rational human beings. The freeperish denial of reality is astounding when it comes from DUers - "How do you know they were Pits? Maybe they just LOOKED like Pits" - is ridiculous on its face since often times the identification comes from owners.

http://www.news4jax.com/news/14250768/detail.html

Middleburg Woman Killed By Her Pit Bulls

"We have two full-blooded red-nosed pits and they just attacked our mom. We can't get to my mom and my brother just went out there and they attacked him too. They don't need to get out of the ambulance or the dogs will try to get them, too."

[PeaceNikki]

208. hmm "freeperish denial", "assholes"?

Yeah, keep using the media stories of sensationalism to hype up the irrational fear. I don't get this place. Collectively DU doesn't trust the media, but on this topic they choose to use it for statistical analysis. It makes no sense.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7113041&mesg_id=7114386

. Statistical validity is not the media's job.

News outlets are in the business of reporting singular events. They do not select stories for publication on the basis of random sampling techniques. Editors promote stories they believe to be of interest to their audience. Most incidents involving dogs, good, bad, or indifferent, are not reported at all. Severe attacks by dogs are, happily, exceedingly rare.

For the stories they do choose to cover, based upon their own estimate of its newsworthiness, journalists have no control over how their reporting will be used – or misused — by others.

Reporters are not specialists. They may report as fact what are really opinions, or cite official statements and/or published studies that experts have called into serious question. Stories completed against deadline pressures may contain errors that the outlet will only correct if later developments generate an interest in a follow up. Reporters will neglect critical factors that contributed to a serious incident involving a dog and assign unjustified significance to a dog’s breed description, while, at the same time printing inaccurate breed identification of dogs which are never corrected later.

Attacks by non-pit bull dogs are rarely taken up by national or international news outlets.

• A three-year-old Virginia boy was admitted to the hospital with “extensive injuries”. The child was attacked by a dog described as a Golden Retriever mix. The wounds to the child required 300 stitches. The child was further described as requiring additional surgeries to “functionally repair muscles, nerves and work on scars”. This incident was reported in only two local newspapers.

• A 3-year-old girl was admitted to Children’s Hospital in Denver with serious lacerations to her face and head. The hospital declined to release the child’s name or information on her condition. She had been attacked at her home by a dog believed to be a Labrador Retriever. This attack was reported four times and only in Colorado outlets.

• An Indiana woman was attacked and knocked to the ground by a dog identified as a German Shepherd. The dog she was walking, a small Sheltie mix was also attacked. Neighbors responded and managed to restrain the German Shepherd, but not before the woman was bitten twice in the face. Her small dog was so gravely injured that it was euthanized. This incident was reported in only one local newspaper.

• An 11-year-old California girl was bitten in the leg and received “serious, but not life-threatening injuries”, when she was attacked by two pit bulls. Her injuries required hospitalization. This incident was reported in over ninety national and international newspapers. Forbes, FOX News, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and dozens of other major news organizations headlined this “Pit Bull Attack”.


More here: http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest/

[baldguy]

209. The breed makes no difference.

Family dog kills 2-week-old Mesa infant
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/136286
Chow

Puppy kills 2-month-old boy
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2008/07/puppy-kills-2-m.html
Black Lab

Kids' cries woke mom of boy, 3, killed by dogs' bites
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=a79e501c-14a2-4964-aa02-f9a5ab25d2a5
Rottweiler

Coroner rules death of baby killed by dog was accident
http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/sep/24/coroner-rules-death-of-baby-killed-by-dog-was/
Husky

Lawsuit filed in poodle attack
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_396850.html

[Hassin Bin Sober]

215. Now show me some stories of those breeds taking down and killing an adult. That's my point.

Here' a 21 year old:

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2007/Nov/16/parents-of-victim-want-charges-in-dog-attack/

The parents of Jennifer Lowe, who was fatally mauled by pit bulls at a trailer in West Knox County earlier this week, said they disagree with the preliminary decision of prosecutors to not seek criminal charges against her housemate, Charles Smallwood, who owned the dogs

Here's a 20 year old. This is a nice one. They killed everything they could sink their teeth in:

http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=89552&catid=188

LEESBURG, Va. (WUSA) -- Authorities believe two American Pit Bull Terriers mauled a 20-year-old man to death in his own home.

http://www.greeleytribune.com/article/20090507/NEWS/905069886/1002/NONE&parentprofile=1001

A Greeley man was treated at the hospital Tuesday night after he was attacked by his own pit bull.

The name of the man hasn’t been released by police, but Sgt. Steve Holman said the man was taken to North Colorado Medical Center by his friends. He was treated for numerous cuts and bites on his forearms and hands.

60 year old victim:

http://cbs2.com/local/Pit.Bull.Dog.2.891650.html

Pit Bulls Attack, Kill 60-Year-Old Rubidoux ManRUBIDOUX (AP) ― Click to enlarge1 of 1
A man was mauled to death by his family's two pets, a pair of pit bull-terriers.

A Riverside County man has been mauled to death by two pit bulls.

Sheriff's Sgt. Dennis Gutierrez says the 60-year-old man was taking a smoking break in the backyard of the Rubidoux home where he lived when a male and a female pit bull attacked him shortly after noon Friday.

[PeaceNikki]

216. Yeah, keep using the media stories of sensationalism to hype up the irrational fear.

I don't get this place. Collectively DU doesn't trust the media, but on this topic they choose to use it for statistical analysis. It makes no sense.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

. Statistical validity is not the media's job.

News outlets are in the business of reporting singular events. They do not select stories for publication on the basis of random sampling techniques. Editors promote stories they believe to be of interest to their audience. Most incidents involving dogs, good, bad, or indifferent, are not reported at all. Severe attacks by dogs are, happily, exceedingly rare.

For the stories they do choose to cover, based upon their own estimate of its newsworthiness, journalists have no control over how their reporting will be used – or misused — by others.

Reporters are not specialists. They may report as fact what are really opinions, or cite official statements and/or published studies that experts have called into serious question. Stories completed against deadline pressures may contain errors that the outlet will only correct if later developments generate an interest in a follow up. Reporters will neglect critical factors that contributed to a serious incident involving a dog and assign unjustified significance to a dog’s breed description, while, at the same time printing inaccurate breed identification of dogs which are never corrected later.

Attacks by non-pit bull dogs are rarely taken up by national or international news outlets.

• A three-year-old Virginia boy was admitted to the hospital with “extensive injuries”. The child was attacked by a dog described as a Golden Retriever mix. The wounds to the child required 300 stitches. The child was further described as requiring additional surgeries to “functionally repair muscles, nerves and work on scars”. This incident was reported in only two local newspapers.

• A 3-year-old girl was admitted to Children’s Hospital in Denver with serious lacerations to her face and head. The hospital declined to release the child’s name or information on her condition. She had been attacked at her home by a dog believed to be a Labrador Retriever. This attack was reported four times and only in Colorado outlets.

• An Indiana woman was attacked and knocked to the ground by a dog identified as a German Shepherd. The dog she was walking, a small Sheltie mix was also attacked. Neighbors responded and managed to restrain the German Shepherd, but not before the woman was bitten twice in the face. Her small dog was so gravely injured that it was euthanized. This incident was reported in only one local newspaper.

• An 11-year-old California girl was bitten in the leg and received “serious, but not life-threatening injuries”, when she was attacked by two pit bulls. Her injuries required hospitalization. This incident was reported in over ninety national and international newspapers. Forbes, FOX News, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and dozens of other major news organizations headlined this “Pit Bull Attack”.


More here: http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest

[Hassin Bin Sober]

218. That's such a crock of shit. I'm talking about fatalities of, specifically, adults.

Are you saying there is some vast media conspiracy by the papers to hush ADULT killings by other breeds? That's non-sense. Any killing by a dog will be BIG news. Time after time after time, it's PITS that attack and kill outside parameters you see in other fatalities such as small children or pack attacks.

[PeaceNikki]

219. Um... no, it's a fact.

Do some research:
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/breed-identification/

It's not a "vast media conspiracy by the papers to hush" anything. It's ENTERTAINMENT, embellishment and sensationalism.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

220. Then you should be able to produce SEVERAL links to stories about ..

... Yorkies, Beagles, Rat Terriers, and other breeds mentioned in this thread turning on AND KILLING their adult owners and other adults (absent pack behavior).

Unless you re willing to say:

The killing of ANY human being by ANY breed is story not likely to make the news/papers unless it involves a PIT.

If you are not willing to make that assertion, put up or shut up.

[PeaceNikki]

229. Shut up??

..|..

[depakid]

240. Basically- yeah- you're promoting dangerous and sometimes deadlyy brhavior

using every rationalization and denialist game in the book- including blaming "the media."

[Name removed]

241. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[baldguy]

243. What? It's *almost* noon on the West Coast.

[depakid]

246. I don't feel the need to insult folks- just counteract those advocating dangerous practices

the harm others repeatedly.

[PeaceNikki]

247. Yes, you've been a real peach.

MMmmm hmm.

How is asking if you're drunk after you posted a completely incoherent grammatically atrocious reply insulting?

[baldguy]

227. Uninformed media hype

Joe Namath's yellow Labrador declared dangerous
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iyUGkc86YYS0UYzuOO_mDYbhPzgwD9BUA26G2

Man charged in dog attack incident
http://www.thereporteronline.com/articles/2009/11/25/news/srv0000006916142.txt
German Shepherd

Surviving vicious dog attack, Jim Stewart starts long recovery
http://www.hudsonstarobserver.com/event/article/id/36736/
Bull Dog

Dog in attack classified as ‘vicious’
http://www.projo.com/ri/barrington/content/barrington_bad_dog_11-10-09_SLGD6Q9_v8.39876c7.html
Greyhound

Vicious dog owner jailed
http://www.bdpost.co.uk/content/barkinganddagenham/post/news/story.aspx?brand=BDPOnline&category=news&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newsbdp&itemid=WeED25%20Nov%202009%2017%3A20%3A13%3A767
Akita

Teen Recovering After Vicious Dog Attack
http://www.wftv.com/countybycounty/21603892/detail.html
Rottweiler

Dog Kills Another After Routine Walk
http://www.kpho.com/news/21713393/detail.html
Rottweiler

Animal expert: dog attack was Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony's fault
http://www.examiner.com/x-1994-LA-Celebrity-Headlines-Examiner~y2009m11d20-Animal-expert-dog-attack-was-Jennifer-Lopez-and-Marc-Anthonys-fault
German Shepherd

KILLED BY HIS OWN DOG
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/138487/Killed-by-his-own-dog
Doberman mix

Dad died after pet dog's bite
http://www.strathspey-herald.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/4835/Dad_died_after_pet_dog_s_bite.html
Doberman mix

Girl's arm may be amputated after dog attack
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/975633/girls-arm-may-be-amputated-after-dog-attack
Mastiff-Great Dane cross

Loose dog bites man twice
http://nnsl.com/northern-news-services/stories/papers/nov18_09dg.html
German Shepherd

Off-duty officer shoots dog
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/strange/strange_cnn_iowa_Off_duty_officer_shoots_dog_200911031323
Black Lab


Australian man describes terrifying ordeal after vicious kangaroo attack
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/6635510/Australian-man-describes-terrifying-ordeal-after-vicious-kangaroo-attack.html
Should they get rid of all the kangaroos, now?

[PeaceNikki]

231. I don't get this place. Collectively DU doesn't trust the media, but on this topic they choose to

use it for statistical analysis. It makes no sense.

[depakid]

257. Because you don't understand- and refuse to accept how the media works

It's been explained to you.

The "lead it bleeds" media will report ANY nasty blood and gore story. That's their stock in trade.

FACT is that pit bulls cause more of these tragedies than any other breed- which is why you hear about them most often, though you WILL find other breeds. Such as the pit bull rotweiler cross that just attacked its owner:

A Rockville police officer fatally shot a 120-pound Rottweiler-pit bull mix early Sunday after the dog attacked its owner, eluded officers for hours and ignored electrical shocks from a Taser, officials said.

The owner, a 38-year-old man, had surgery Saturday night for injuries that included puncture wounds to his chest and thigh, police said. He was in good condition Sunday at Suburban Hospital.

An officer fired two bullets from his handgun, both of which hit the dog, at 1 a.m. Sunday.

"We tried everything," said Rockville Police Chief Terry N. Treschuk, describing hours spent in the house trying to calm and capture the dog, named Jesus (pronounced Hay-SOOS). "We just had to make a decision and bring this to an end."

Police were called to the house, in the 5800 block of Ridgeway Avenue in the city's Twinbrook area, at 6:20 p.m. Saturday. Montgomery County police officers were the first to arrive. They found the owner with wounds to his chest, thigh, arms, feet and at least one hand, officials said. Three children were also in the house but were not hurt, police said.

Police said the dog had apparently become agitated when the owner closed his bedroom door to keep him out. Officers tried for hours to capture the dog, which had broken out of a room where it had been contained. It jumped on window sills and barked repeatedly. The owner had asked police to capture the dog and have him euthanized.

At one point, four officers were in the house while others set up a perimeter outside in case Jesus escaped. They used a "capture pole," but it didn't work. They considered sedatives or tranquilizers but couldn't find any.

Police fired three to four projectiles from a Taser, which typically drops people. "It didn't faze the dog at all," the chief said. "We took the last option."

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/29/AR2009112901359.html

[PeaceNikki]

272. You keep pointing to individual stories. That's not statistical data.

The media are not experts and you keep on posting as if they are.

Whatever. Discussing this with you has proven to be an exercise in futility. As Anthrax would say, talking to you is like clapping with one hand.

Good day.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

233. LOL. I wonder how much more of my time I should waste on your bullshit links.

So far, the two deaths you linked to were of THE SAME man who died from infection due to an accidental nip while playing fetch with his dog.

Three more, SO FAR, are of dog on dog attacks. I'm going to stop reading at this point.

Are you one of those people who don't read your own links or assume the other DUer will not read them?

If you have to bullshit to make your point that should tell you A LOT about your argument. I'll leave it at that.


edit to add: The J Lopez link refers to a "head butt and knock down" of a woman ... not any kind of bite. Pathetic.

[baldguy]

239. They're the same kind of media reports as those refering to "Pit Bulls"

Except the the dog is clearly identified as something else. If they had been anything that looked remotely like a Molosser-type dog, they'd all have been nationally broadcast as the standard, over-hyped, hysterical "LOOK OUT!! DANGER!!! DANGER!!! VICIOUS, BLOODTHIRSTY, CRAZED PIT-BULL!!!!!" stories.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

244. You are not making any sense at this point.

I'm referring to killings of adult HUMANS by dogs. You post bullshit that has nothing to do with what I originally posted in this sub-thread and I called you on it.

Ironically, you post NEWS REPORTS about OTHER BREEDS biting people while complaining how only pit-bulls get a bad rap in the media.


Again, show me news reports of ADULT HUMANS killed (in non pack behavior) by the other breeds the pit defenders like to equate pits with in these discussions.

[baldguy]

305. If you deny the plain evidence laid in front of you, you're hopeless.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

388. LOL. We agree on that.

[meow2u3]

196. 1 out of every 3 dogs in the shelter I volunteer in is a Pit Bull

The Pitties are indeed high-energy dogs because they're terriers. But most of them, properly socialized, are friendly, playful dogs who want to jump on everyone they encounter.
Based on my experience, just about every single Pit Bull jumps up onto me as if I were their mother :D

Yesterday, I took one Pit Bull out to show a wannabe adopter and it turned out the dog was more attached to me than to her. I think pits are too high-energy for my lifestyle--or do those dogs sense something in me I deny, namely, my need for exercise? It's not the dogs, but the irresponsible, sociopathic owners, who make pitties aggressive. They're not born that way.

[DrDan]

258. one more case of these playful little guys and their high-energy fun

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

not so much fun for the 18-month old, however.

[baldguy]

307. Yep, its tragic when dog owners don't supervise their dog properly.

It's got nothing to do with the breed, however.

[DrDan]

313. the dog was raised from birth - slept with the owner

the family was together decorating for Christmas - and the dog snapped and attacked the little girl.

Where was the improper supervision?

[baldguy]

337. Treated like a baby - and got jealous when a new baby showed up.

The fact is DOGS ARE NOT BABIES - and any animal put in the same situation is liable to behave EXACTLY the same way.

[DrDan]

345. the new baby was 18 months old

doesn't hold water

[baldguy]

391. You think any dog should just "know" not to defend its position in the pack

Just because the newcomer is another human? Are you insane?

Dog training isn't a passive activity. It never "just happens" - it's a deliberate process that the owner must engage in with the dog. If you make the assumption that the dog will know where it belongs when the structure of it's family changes without any action on your part - you're going to get burned BADLY. And unfortunately the individuals that pay for that awful mistake are usually the most vulnerable.

AND THE BREED DOESN'T MATTER!

See post #360
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7113041&mesg_id=7118853


I hope to God you never own a dog.

[Bryn]

204. I think they're beautiful dogs

I'd love to have one (reddish). They should not be banned. Bad owners/breeders should be banned!

A good responsible owner makes a good dog. This goes for a good breeder, too.

I have a purebred beauceron (French herding dog). She's 95 lbs and is very sweet.

[BeachBaby]

221. All someone has to do is volunteer in an animal shelter, if they really want to be informed.

I spent three summers employed, and 8 years as a once-a-week volunteer, for animal shelters. In that time I oversaw thousands of dogs, most of which were stray pitbulls/pitbull mixes. Some were receptive to me, some seemed ready to kill me. But none of them actually came after me.

I've also dealt with German Shepherds. And got bitten in the neck. GSDs are my favorite breed, even to this day.

I've been bitten twice by Rottweilers - once in the wrist, another on my hand.

I've been cornered by a Neopolitan Mastiff. I thought my time was up.

Did I mention that I've never been attacked, cornered or bitten by a pitbull?

People need to stop allowing the media to determine their opinions of breeds. If they were to actually go out there and see for themselves, they would see that "bite cases" and "mauling cases" are in no way limited to pitbulls. And I would wager to guess that if pitbulls were a beautiful animal - by society's standards, like a Newfoundland or Golden Retriever - people wouldn't be so quick to destroy them.

[DrDan]

262. tell this 18-month old about their beauty

http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[TZ]

278. Why don't you tell my younger sister

About it who was mauled in the face by THE FAMILY POODLE!
Poodles are waaaaay more likely to bite than any other dog. And they can do quite a bit of damage. Stop cherry picking your data. There are as more breeds that are as aggressive and can cause problems than the pit bull. Hell my sisters border terriers were bred to rip animals to pieces! They've been known to attack cats. But that doesn't mean they can't be fine around kids. (and despite your attitude small dogs CAN DO significant damage to a person if they want to.)

[DrDan]

286. of course they can . . . and I surely feel sorry for your younger sister

Sorry, but I shall to choose whatever data I consider important to the debate at hand. And I happen to think this vicious attack on this 18-month old child is relevant. I do not disagree that small dogs can be dangerous - don't believe I have stated anything like that. I happen to believe that this breed is vicious, and a danger to the public.

[PeaceNikki]

281. You should post that as a reply to EVERY comment on this thread.

Neigh... every comment on all of DU.

THEN you'd be cool.

[DrDan]

291. why are you trying to make this personal????????????????

[PeaceNikki]

293. Why do you feel it necessary to propogate irrational fear?????????????

A PB is neither a breed nor a magical boogie-man(dog). Your constant need to be a fear-monger on this topic is creepy.

[DrDan]

295. I think all of denial I see in this thread is creepy

[PeaceNikki]

296. You're fear-mongering.

Irrational, illogical fear-mongering.

[DrDan]

301. and I see the denial as irrational and illogical . . . .and creepy

[baldguy]

342. To believe one breed of dog possesses all of the negative traits associated with the species

And absolutely none of the positive ones in spite of the voluminous evidence to the contrary - ain't just a river in Egypt.

[DrDan]

347. you are now starting to make up stuff

did I ever say they possessed ALL the negative traits and NONE of the positive ones?

Did I ever say that?

Please show me where.

[baldguy]

373. Are you kidding? That's the ENTIRE idea that Pit Bull bans are based upon.

"They have no redeeming qualities," "They're vicious killers," "They're worthless," "They kill babies," and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on....

And TOTALLY ignores the fact that Pit Bulls don't exhibit any behavior outside the normal range, frequency and intensity of any other canines.

In short, BSL fails because it targets the wrong thing. It punishes the dog - and dogs unrelated - when the owner is responsible.

[DrDan]

374. your denial of facts is so obvious - like the RWers, you will continue to

defend these vicious animals - regardless of facts.

[PeaceNikki]

377. Facts.

From the ASPCA: http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/breed-specific-legislation.html

Are Breed-Specific Laws Effective?

There is no evidence that breed-specific laws—which are costly and difficult to enforce—make communities safer for people or companion animals. For example, Prince George’s County, MD, spends more than $250,000 annually to enforce its ban on pit bulls. In 2003, a study conducted by the county on the ban’s effectiveness noted that “public safety is not improved as a result of ,” and that “there is no transgression committed by owner or animal that is not covered by another, non-breed specific portion of the Animal Control Code (i.e., vicious animal, nuisance animal, leash laws).”
Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) decided not to support BSL. The CDC cited, among other problems, the inaccuracy of dog bite data and the difficulty in identifying dog breeds (especially true of mixed-breed dogs). The CDC also noted the likelihood that as certain breeds are regulated, those who exploit dogs by making them aggressive will replace them with other, unregulated breeds.

What’s Wrong with Breed-Specific Laws?

BSL carries a host of negative and wholly unintended consequences:
Dogs go into hiding
Rather than give up their beloved pets, owners of highly regulated or banned breeds often attempt to avoid detection of their “outlaw” dogs by restricting outdoor exercise and socialization and forgoing licensing, microchipping and proper veterinary care, including spay/neuter surgery and essential vaccinations. Such actions have implications both for public safety and the health of these dogs.

Good owners and dogs are punished
BSL also causes hardship to responsible owners of entirely friendly, properly supervised and well-socialized dogs who happen to fall within the regulated breed. Although these dog owners have done nothing to endanger the public, they are required to comply with local breed bans and regulations unless they are able to mount successful (and often costly) legal challenges.

They impart a false sense of security
Breed-specific laws have a tendency to compromise rather than enhance public safety. When limited animal control resources are used to regulate or ban a certain breed of dog, without regard to behavior, the focus is shifted away from routine, effective enforcement of laws that have the best chance of making our communities safer: dog license laws, leash laws, animal fighting laws, anti-tethering laws, laws facilitating spaying and neutering and laws that require all owners to control their dogs, regardless of breed.

What’s the Alternative to Breed-Specific Laws?

In the aforementioned study, the CDC noted that many other factors beyond breed may affect a dog’s tendency toward aggression—things such as heredity, sex, early experience, reproductive status, socialization and training. These last two concerns are well-founded, given that:

More than 70 percent of all dog bite cases involve unneutered male dogs.
An unneutered male dog is 2.6 times more likely to bite than is a neutered dog.
A chained or tethered dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than a dog who is not chained or tethered.
97 percent of dogs involved in fatal dog attacks in 2006 were not spayed/neutered:
78 percent were maintained not as pets, but rather for guarding, image enhancement, fighting or breeding.
84 percent were maintained by reckless owners—these dogs were abused or neglected, not humanely controlled or contained, or allowed to interact with children unsupervised.
Recognizing that the problem of dangerous dogs requires serious attention, the ASPCA seeks effective enforcement of breed-neutral laws that hold dog owners accountable for the actions of their animals.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Michigan State University College of Law: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/aruslweiss2001.htm
Conclusion

Breed-specific legislation is not an effective approach for regulating dogs' behavior in communities. Although such bans might comfort individuals who have had unpleasant experiences with particular breeds or have heard of attacks by specific dog breeds in the media, the bans do not act to effectively regulate the behavior of any breed or of dogs and their owners collectively. The bans carry with them too much potential for arbitrary or improper enforcement: inaccurate breed identification by officials, difficulty enforcing breed bans against mixed-breed dogs, animal control, and court system overload, and the potential for not identifying a genuinely "dangerous dog" as such because it doesn't fall into the specified breed categories. Unfortunately, large breeds of dogs such as Dobermans, German Shepherd Dogs, and Pit Bulls are popularly believed to be dangerous, and therefore may be judged more severely by judges than smaller, "cuddlier" breeds.59

Government officials at the local and state level should focus on the problem itself - dangerous canine behavior - and concentrate their efforts on dogs' and owners' conduct. In doing so, officials can maintain a safe community for both dog owners and other residents.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the American Bar Association: http://www.abanet.org/genpractice/magazine/2009/jul_aug/pitbull.html
Is BSL Effective?
Extensive studies of the effectiveness of BSL in reducing the number of persons harmed by dog attacks were done in Spain and Great Britain. Both studies concluded that their “dangerous animals acts,” which included pit bull bans, had no effect at all on stopping dog attacks. The Spanish study further found that the breeds most responsible for bites—both before and after the breed bans—were those breeds not covered by it, primarily German Shepherds and mixed breeds.

One of the few known instances in which a breed ban’s effectiveness was examined and reported on in the United States occurred in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where a task force was formed in 2003 to look at the effectiveness of its pit bull ban. The task force concluded that the public’s safety had not improved as a result of the ban, despite the fact that the county had spent more than $250,000 per year to round up and destroy banned dogs. Finding that other, non–breed–specific laws already on the books covered vicious animal, nuisance, leash, and other public health and safety concerns, the task force recommended repealing the ban.

In a different study looking at dog bite data, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Humane Society of the United States, and the American Veterinary Medical Association together produced a report titled “Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the US between 1979 and 1998,” which appeared in the September 15, 2000, issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Among its findings, the study reported that during this 20–year period, more than 25 breeds of dogs were involved in 238 human fatalities. Pit bull–type dogs caused 66 of the fatalities, which averages out to just over three fatal attacks per year, and Rottweilers were cited as causing 39 of the fatalities. The rest were caused by other purebreds and mixed breeds. At the time the report was released, Dr. Gail C. Golab, one of the study’s co–authors, was quoted as saying, “Since 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds—including Dachshunds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and a Yorkshire Terrier—have been responsible for fatal attacks on people.”

The authors noted that the data in the report cannot be used to infer any breed–specific risk for dog bite fatalities, such as for pit bull–type dogs or Rottweilers, because to obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the total numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States, and that information is unavailable.

A 2008 report on media bias by the National Canine Research Council (available on their website at http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest) compared the type of media coverage given for dog attacks that occurred during a four–day period in August 2007 with intriguing results:

On day one, a Labrador mix attacked an elderly man, sending him to the hospital. News stories of his attack appeared in one article in the local paper.

On day two, a mixed–breed dog fatally injured a child. The local paper ran two stories.

On day three, a mixed–breed dog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital. One article ran in the local paper.

On day four, two pit bulls that broke off their chains attacked a woman trying to protect her small dog. She was hospitalized. Her dog was uninjured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on the major cable news networks.

It is not a stretch to see how such news coverage could influence calls for breed bans from the frightened public and its legislators.

[baldguy]

379. The facts don't support BSL laws.

If speeding in a car is a problem do we make red cars illegal? It's obvious they go faster - because they're RED, obviously! And when that doesn't work, would we outlaw yellow ones? The black cars? And then, after tons of study - because focusing on the color doesn't work - we outlaw big "dangerous" engines. Then manual transmissions, ten turbocharging & fuel injection. None of which would work.

If speeding is a problem, the stop & cite people who go fast!


Outlawing Pit Bulls because some dogs are aggressive is like outlawing red cars because some cars speed. For both problems, the issue is really with the owner.

[DrDan]

414. your analogy is ludicrous

to compare a red car and a yellow car for speed is just ridiculous.

How about comparing a Porsche to a Camry in terms of speed. They are both cars - both have engines, transmissions, 4 wheels etc. Is one faster than the other? That is a more appropriate comparison. And guess what - it matters little about the driver.

[BeachBaby]

327. The page was unavailable. Is it safe to assume it was pics of a PB attack on a baby?

Believe me - I've seen those same pics, if not other PB bite cases. What's your point?

Here we have the results of a GSD attack on a human:



How about a Rottweiler attack?



How about those loveable yellow labs that are arguably the ultimate family dog?



By your metric, I suppose, we should just ban/destroy dogs.

[DrDan]

329. I never said that - why make up crap

pit bulls have earned their reputation. They are vicious.

[BeachBaby]

332. Really? REALLY???? Do you really want to go there?

Okay.

America's prisons have recently released their latest "numbers". Turns out that there are 6 blacks to every 1 white person incarcerated in the prison system.

By your twisted logic, all blacks are dangerous.

[DrDan]

333. show me where I said to ban all dogs

[BeachBaby]

336. Look at your last post. You said that pit bulls have earned their reputation

because of the number of cases in which they are involved. Stop backpedaling, please.

[DrDan]

344. yes they have - now show me where I said to ban all dogs

[BeachBaby]

349. Uh - who accused you of saying that?

You think that pitbulls earned their reputation for biting. I argue that GSDs and Rotties and Labs have also earned that reputation. So, since pretty much all breeds of dog have at one time or another, bitten human beings, we should just get rid of em all, right?

[DrDan]

351. you

"By your metric, I suppose, we should just ban/destroy dogs."

[BeachBaby]

353. I guess you don't understand the expression "by your metric".

[DrDan]

355. I certainly do - and speaking of backpedalling - I guess we are seeing a bit of it now

in two different posts, you have now accused me of wanting to ban ALL dogs.

I am through - you cannot even admit to the content of your own posts.

[BeachBaby]

357. Get back to me after you've learned some reading comprehension skills. Kthxbai.

[DrDan]

352. did I ever say get rid of all dogs?

why do keep wanting to attribute that to me?

[baldguy]

369. You want to get rid of one race of dogs - the Pit Bull

In spite of the fact that there are several races of dog described by the ignorant & lazy news media as "Pit Bulls" without regard to the actual race.

By the same logic - YOUR logic - blacks have "earned their reputation. They are vicious." Why not ban them too?

Because (with apologies to reasonable people for needing to spell it out so plainly for our less well-intentioned posters) reasonable people who aren't blinded by ill-informed bigotry (and without any coercion, either) realize that 99.9999% of people with African descent are valuable members of our society, and deserve the same rights & privileges of everyone else. .

Just like reasonable people who aren't blinded by ill-informed bigotry realize that 99.9999% of Pit Bulls are also valuable members of our society, and deserve the same treatment as every other canine citizen

[bamacrat]

253. I had two pitbulls and they were the best dogs ever. Very protective.

I fought with them and wrestled with them pulled on their skin and ears got in their face and got nothing in return but licks. Banning breeds is wrong. Little dogs are more vicious than large ones they just cant do as much damage. In my experience Rotweilers are more aggressive and temperamental than pits but they can still be very loving dogs. Pits are smart and loyal beautiful dogs, if people didnt fight them they wouldnt have this stigma. THey are incredibly strong dogs but no more dangerous than a German Shepard or a lab.

[DrDan]

260. yep - here is proof of their gentle temperamant

cute little guy raised from birth by the family . . .


http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11582905

[ceile]

264. Is that the 3rd or 4th time you've posted that link?

:eyes:

[DrDan]

268. I think EVERYONE should be aware of the vicious attack on this 18-month old

it was just a couple days ago.

The dog was raised by this family - a family pet - slept in the same bed as the owner

"everyone, including Sir Muggsey, was in the living room setting up Christmas decoration. Sir Muggsey snapped, she said. The dog jumped on the couch and began attack Sadie."

[TZ]

283. I think everyone should be aware of the family poodle

that almost scared my sister for life from its attack. Any dog, given the right oportunity and enough issues can be dangerous. Hell CATS have put people in the hospital. Your argument that pits have a special ability to be extra dangerous is complete and utter bullshit.

[DrDan]

285. oh really - so all dogs have the same strength as a pit bull

is that really your claim? Do you stand by that?

[Jamastiene]

306. It's not only about strength. n/t

[DrDan]

311. of course it is not ONLY strength

the post claimed there was nothing special about pit bulls - that they are no different than any other breed. I would suggest that is BS. They are much stronger than most other breeds.

[Jamastiene]

314. Bullshit.

You are still claiming that just because a dog may be strong, may attack someone someday, may not be your idea of a "good dog" it should be banned. That is not logical. Your criteria would lead to the killing of all dogs as you go down the list. That is complete and utter bullshit.

[DrDan]

320. so - these dogs are not stronger than most other breeds?

Is that your claim as well?

That was the context of my response.

[baldguy]

364. This is Wendy.

She is not a Pit Bull.

[PeaceNikki]

366. There are a TON of breeds stronger than any pit.

The "pit bull", just so you know, is not a breed. There are about 20 breeds that are called or mistaken as "pit bulls".

American Pit Bull Terrier
American Stafforshire Terrier
Staffordshire Bull Terrier
Perro de Presa Canario
Cane Corso
Dogo Argentino
Alano Espanol
Japanese Tosa
Dogue de Bordeaux
Cordoba Fighting Dog
Bull Terrier
Antebellum Bulldog
Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldog
American Bulldog
Boxer
Valley Bulldog
Olde English Bulldogge
Renascence Bulldogge
Banter Bulldogge

Should we ban them all? Some subset? What about mixed bloodlines?

[lukasahero]

389. Dude, seriously, have you ever SEEN a Mastiff?

How about a Rottweiler? Seriously, you think a 40 lbs pit is one of the strongest breeds? Yes, it's muscular. But if you'd ever met a Mastiff, a Rottie, a Japanese Tosa, an Akita, a Rhodesian Ridgeback, an Anatolian Shepherd Dog, an African Boerboel or any number of other strong working breeds you'd be embarrassed to think Pitties are stronger than most other breeds. They are strong. So are many other breeds. You really should do some research on dog breeds.

[baldguy]

395. A mastiff? Isn't that some sort of big rock or something?

[DrDan]

402. I have

Pit Bulls were breed from Staffordshire Bull Terriers & Bull Mastiffs - Not to guard, or hunt, but to viciously rip other dogs to death in pits while their bloodthirsty owners cheered.
“They can literally sever limbs,” the RSPCAs, Paul Edwards said.
Unlike German Shepherds, which lock their jaws, Pit Bulls move their back molars once they have bitten. Their lower jaw scissors back & forth to sever flesh from the bone.
They are not large dogs, but they have an enormous power-to-weight ratio. Their jaw strength is far greater than any other dog.
A Rottweiler will exert 800 pounds-per-square-inch jaw pressure and a Bull Terrier will exert 1200psi. A Pit Bull will exert more than 2000 psi.
You can have savage Labradors and savage Chihuahuas, but none of them has the potential to maim & kill that a pit bull does.
42% of all dog related deaths in the US are from Pit Bulls - & they constitute 1% of all dogs. 70% of those deaths were children.
A Rotty or Doberman are savage because they are
territorial - they will defend their space. A Pit Bull is not savage in that sense-just unpredictable.
But underlying this ferocity is an overwhelming loyalty to their owners. Dog breeders & Trainers claim

http://www.edba.org.au/courier.html

[baldguy]

410. Every one of those assertions is false. THEY ARE LIES.

And every one has been refuted in this thread. Repeatedly. The fact that you've posted it so late in the discussion shows you haven't been paying attention, and certainly didn't read the OP.


"Pit Bulls were breed from Staffordshire Bull Terriers & Bull Mastiffs - Not to guard, or hunt, but to viciously rip other dogs to death in pits while their bloodthirsty owners cheered."

Actually, that's exactly backwards. The Staffe was developed from the original "pit bull" line. There are several breeds which descended from the original "pit bulls", since it was a job description, not a breed - just like every other working dog. And breeders selected animals based on their ability to do that job. The idea of "breed" came later. As time went on, certain traits were desired & retained in one line and not others, so true breeds were developed: Bull dogs & Terriers first, then the Old English Bull Dog, then the Bull Terrier, the today's English Bull Terrier & Staffordshire Bull Terrier from which the American Staffordshire Terrier and the American Pit Bull Terrier were developed.

They were developed to fight, sure. Just as German Shepherds were developed to herd sheep. small Terriers were developed to kill mice & rats, and Bull Dogs were developed to kill bulls for sport. But they ALL - WITHOUT EXCEPTION - were developed with desire to please their human masters and to live in human society. Most people who own German Shepherds don't herd sheep, they have the dog as a family member & companion. Most people who have small Terriers don't let them chase & kill rats, they have the dog as a family member & companion. Most people who have Bull Dogs don't engage in bull-baiting with the dog, they have the dog as a family member & companion.

And most people who have dogs which are descended from the original "pit bulls" don't engage in dog fighting, they have the dog as a family member & companion.


"“They can literally sever limbs,” the RSPCAs, Paul Edwards said."

Any medium-to-large dog can do the same. THEY'RE CARNIVORES. The root-stock dogs came from needed to be able to stalk, attack & kill much larger animals than humans: deer, elk, moose etc are all much stronger, faster & larger than humans. If they can sever the limbs of a moose, they can do it to people. Any medium-to-large dog can do the same.

"Unlike German Shepherds, which lock their jaws, Pit Bulls move their back molars once they have bitten. Their lower jaw scissors back & forth to sever flesh from the bone."

No dog can "lock" it's jaw. No dog can move their back molars independently from the rest of the jaw. No dog has a "scissor" action in their jaw. Such a statement shows a gross ignorance of dogs. Anatomically & mechanically, the jaws of Pit Bulls - and German Shepherds, for that matter - are no different from any other dog.

"They are not large dogs, but they have an enormous power-to-weight ratio. Their jaw strength is far greater than any other dog.
A Rottweiler will exert 800 pounds-per-square-inch jaw pressure and a Bull Terrier will exert 1200psi. A Pit Bull will exert more than 2000 psi."

All Terriers are very powerful with relatively small size. That's a breed characteristic. But the Pit Bull's strength isn't any greater than other working dogs of a similar size. And neither is their bite strength outside the normal range of other dogs.

"You can have savage Labradors and savage Chihuahuas, but none of them has the potential to maim & kill that a pit bull does."

All dogs have exactly the same potential to maim & kill - in proportion to their size & weight - as every other dog. A 40-lb Lab is just as dangerous as a 40-lb Pit Bull. What makes them safe to bring into our homes & sleep with our children is training & love we give to them.

"42% of all dog related deaths in the US are from Pit Bulls - & they constitute 1% of all dogs. 70% of those deaths were children."

The "Pit Bulls" in those statistics are from news reports where the breed was assumed. Ans as we have shown, such reports are not reliable. According to the CDC: "There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill." It also says:Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites." That's right: 16 fatalities out of 4.7 mill incidents (reported) out of 310 mill people. You're more likely to be killed by your spouse than your dog, even if you have a pack of Pit Bulls living with you.

"A Rotty or Doberman are savage because they are territorial - they will defend their space. A Pit Bull is not savage in that sense-just unpredictable. But underlying this ferocity is an overwhelming loyalty to their owners."

All dogs are territorial. They will all defend their space. They all will also defend their family. And dogs are only "unpredictable" to those who ignores the behavior the dog exists. If you have a problem trailing one dog, you'll have a problem with others dogs. BUT IT'S YOUR PROBLEM.

[PeaceNikki]

411. He quoted a 13 year old article

If you explore the site he cited, you will also see this:

http://www.edba.org.au/media.html

Whilst ONE dog has been attacking, let's say it IS an APBT ,at the same time, thousands of the very same breed are at home being good dogs! Like Steve Irwin’s one, yes, the crocodile hunter, and Brad Pitt’s pit!! When Victorian attack statistics appeared in the HeraldSun, they showed 21 attacks by Pit bulls, out of 683 total for 20 breeds identified, when dog population was 900,000----at the same time as the new Bill to curtail “pitbulls” was reported in full. It takes very few brains to work out there were huge gaps in the logic and credibility here—what about all the other 19 breeds of which 12 had bitten more than the banned breed?? How exactly would this STOP dog attacks and make the community safe?

But our journalist did not ask that, people writing to the editor did, later!

False facts are also perpetuated .How many times has it been written Pit bulls have killed 4 persons, in Australia, the truth is NONE of those killer dogs were pitbulls—the university research uncovered the truth.
When did the media ever retract a wrong statement?
Or enlarge the details when they did not condemn the dog breed? Last year's attack in SA by a “Rottweiler” was a by a crossbreed rescued dog with a poor recent history and it was found to have a biro embedded in its ear—an Adelaide paper refused to print that detail however.

A Victorian lad badly injured by a family of “crossbreeds turned pitbulls” when he fell from the fence, had been warned not to tease them, neighbours knew this and his parents had been told, this fact made no newspaper.

Even with a statement of crossbreeding signed by the SPCA officer that destroyed the dog responsible, the Toowoomba death of Mrs Barbara Stringer is still reported as death by a pitbull.

Early stories of pitbulls carried the old myths of scissor jaws , psi of bite and unreliability—none of which have ever been shown scientifically and all of which have been debunked scientifically! But still, to whip up the feelings, newspapers repeat and ……
Stop a second and think—how could thousands of any breed of dogs so vicious, so outrageously strong and unreliable have existed in the community for over 20 yr. and suddenly they are everywhere biting and attacking to the degree we must condemn every one?
The facts do not add up—the APBT has consistently performed as a breed within the top 5 in the respected American Temperament Test, and has outperformed the beloved Labrador! When was this ever freely reported?

The original fight bred dogs had to be trustworthy with humans to be handled by a number of men and this is the characteristic of these bull and terrier breeds that is forgotten or deliberately omitted when breed bans are the cry.

[PeaceNikki]

412. HA!! HA!! HA!! Keep exploring that site and you will see that WHOLE article refuted with facts

Point by point. It was posted to demonstrate the rampant ignorance.

G'head... look:
http://www.edba.org.au/responsetocouriermail.html

[lukasahero]

415. Nice find

Would be nice if the people posting the lies at least did a little research before posting them - maybe even on the very site where they're getting their lies.

[baldguy]

308. And everyone should be aware that its the worst kind of disingenuousness

To use one family's tragedy to support your own narrow-minded prejudice.

[DrDan]

316. WHAT?????

That post was unbelievable.

So . . . you think that it is improper to bring up these attacks . . . as they are "disengenuous"??????

In debating this vicious breed, attacks on individuals are off-limits?


Good Lord . . .

[baldguy]

350. It's simply ghoulish to post it repeatedly.

Especially when it promotes a lie.

[DrDan]

354. yeah - that little girl did not really get bitten

she is just making it up.

We all know that these dogs are not capable of this violence, don't we. This whole story is just a lie.

the little devil . . . trying to demonize these angels

[PeaceNikki]

356. Nobody ever said that pit bulls are not capable of violence.

But that they are no more inherently violent than any other dog. And they aren't the vicious monsters you keep trying to portray them as. They are dogs and biologically no different than other dogs. With proper education, training and supervision they are wonderful pets. And without proper training and supervision, ANY dog of ANY breed can do real damage. The biggest problem with your fear mongering and demands for BSL is that is fails to address the real problems. Spreading fear and disinformation is harmful to all because it creates a false sense of security with non-pit breeds.

Since you like anecdotes, a friend of mine was horrifically mauled by his own black lab. It attacked his face and he needed hundreds of stitches and 9 surgeries. The determination of cause was inbreeding. Puppy mills and inbreeding cause hormonal imbalances and create unstable dogs with unstable temperaments. Bad breeding practices occur in every breed.

You know how many news outlets reported my friend's story? Zero. You don't hear about most attacks because nobody wants to hear about your loving beautiful black lab doing such an awful thing. But it happens. A lot.

[DrDan]

358. your continued claim of "fear mongering" is really quite funny

I did not start this thread. I simply posted an actual event - however, as the original OPer suggested, that is disingenuous as one should not use actual events in promoting a side of an argument.

[PeaceNikki]

359. A single event is not scientific proof that they are "vicious animals".

In fact, 10 stories of "pit-bull attacks" in the media isn't either. Or 100. Or 1000.

Statistical validity is not the media's job. News outlets are in the business of reporting singular events. They do not select stories for publication on the basis of random sampling techniques. Editors promote stories they believe to be of interest to their audience. Most incidents involving dogs, good, bad, or indifferent, are not reported at all. Severe attacks by dogs are, happily, exceedingly rare.

For the stories they do choose to cover, based upon their own estimate of its newsworthiness, journalists have no control over how their reporting will be used – or misused — by others.

Reporters are not specialists. They may report as fact what are really opinions, or cite official statements and/or published studies that experts have called into serious question. Stories completed against deadline pressures may contain errors that the outlet will only correct if later developments generate an interest in a follow up. Reporters will neglect critical factors that contributed to a serious incident involving a dog and assign unjustified significance to a dog’s breed description, while, at the same time printing inaccurate breed identification of dogs which are never corrected later.

[DrDan]

376. nor will all the anecdotal evidence attempting to "prove" how harmless these

vicious animals are.

"I had one - he was a sweetie" - how many time has that been posted in this thread. Proves absolutely NOTHING.

Fact - these dogs are vicious and capable of painful, massive injuries and death.

[PeaceNikki]

378. Facts about BSL

From the ASPCA: http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/breed-specific-legislation.html

Are Breed-Specific Laws Effective?

There is no evidence that breed-specific laws—which are costly and difficult to enforce—make communities safer for people or companion animals. For example, Prince George’s County, MD, spends more than $250,000 annually to enforce its ban on pit bulls. In 2003, a study conducted by the county on the ban’s effectiveness noted that “public safety is not improved as a result of ,” and that “there is no transgression committed by owner or animal that is not covered by another, non-breed specific portion of the Animal Control Code (i.e., vicious animal, nuisance animal, leash laws).”
Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) decided not to support BSL. The CDC cited, among other problems, the inaccuracy of dog bite data and the difficulty in identifying dog breeds (especially true of mixed-breed dogs). The CDC also noted the likelihood that as certain breeds are regulated, those who exploit dogs by making them aggressive will replace them with other, unregulated breeds.

What’s Wrong with Breed-Specific Laws?

BSL carries a host of negative and wholly unintended consequences:
Dogs go into hiding
Rather than give up their beloved pets, owners of highly regulated or banned breeds often attempt to avoid detection of their “outlaw” dogs by restricting outdoor exercise and socialization and forgoing licensing, microchipping and proper veterinary care, including spay/neuter surgery and essential vaccinations. Such actions have implications both for public safety and the health of these dogs.

Good owners and dogs are punished
BSL also causes hardship to responsible owners of entirely friendly, properly supervised and well-socialized dogs who happen to fall within the regulated breed. Although these dog owners have done nothing to endanger the public, they are required to comply with local breed bans and regulations unless they are able to mount successful (and often costly) legal challenges.

They impart a false sense of security
Breed-specific laws have a tendency to compromise rather than enhance public safety. When limited animal control resources are used to regulate or ban a certain breed of dog, without regard to behavior, the focus is shifted away from routine, effective enforcement of laws that have the best chance of making our communities safer: dog license laws, leash laws, animal fighting laws, anti-tethering laws, laws facilitating spaying and neutering and laws that require all owners to control their dogs, regardless of breed.

What’s the Alternative to Breed-Specific Laws?

In the aforementioned study, the CDC noted that many other factors beyond breed may affect a dog’s tendency toward aggression—things such as heredity, sex, early experience, reproductive status, socialization and training. These last two concerns are well-founded, given that:

More than 70 percent of all dog bite cases involve unneutered male dogs.
An unneutered male dog is 2.6 times more likely to bite than is a neutered dog.
A chained or tethered dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than a dog who is not chained or tethered.
97 percent of dogs involved in fatal dog attacks in 2006 were not spayed/neutered:
78 percent were maintained not as pets, but rather for guarding, image enhancement, fighting or breeding.
84 percent were maintained by reckless owners—these dogs were abused or neglected, not humanely controlled or contained, or allowed to interact with children unsupervised.
Recognizing that the problem of dangerous dogs requires serious attention, the ASPCA seeks effective enforcement of breed-neutral laws that hold dog owners accountable for the actions of their animals.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Michigan State University College of Law: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/aruslweiss2001.htm
Conclusion

Breed-specific legislation is not an effective approach for regulating dogs' behavior in communities. Although such bans might comfort individuals who have had unpleasant experiences with particular breeds or have heard of attacks by specific dog breeds in the media, the bans do not act to effectively regulate the behavior of any breed or of dogs and their owners collectively. The bans carry with them too much potential for arbitrary or improper enforcement: inaccurate breed identification by officials, difficulty enforcing breed bans against mixed-breed dogs, animal control, and court system overload, and the potential for not identifying a genuinely "dangerous dog" as such because it doesn't fall into the specified breed categories. Unfortunately, large breeds of dogs such as Dobermans, German Shepherd Dogs, and Pit Bulls are popularly believed to be dangerous, and therefore may be judged more severely by judges than smaller, "cuddlier" breeds.59

Government officials at the local and state level should focus on the problem itself - dangerous canine behavior - and concentrate their efforts on dogs' and owners' conduct. In doing so, officials can maintain a safe community for both dog owners and other residents.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the American Bar Association: http://www.abanet.org/genpractice/magazine/2009/jul_aug/pitbull.html
Is BSL Effective?
Extensive studies of the effectiveness of BSL in reducing the number of persons harmed by dog attacks were done in Spain and Great Britain. Both studies concluded that their “dangerous animals acts,” which included pit bull bans, had no effect at all on stopping dog attacks. The Spanish study further found that the breeds most responsible for bites—both before and after the breed bans—were those breeds not covered by it, primarily German Shepherds and mixed breeds.

One of the few known instances in which a breed ban’s effectiveness was examined and reported on in the United States occurred in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where a task force was formed in 2003 to look at the effectiveness of its pit bull ban. The task force concluded that the public’s safety had not improved as a result of the ban, despite the fact that the county had spent more than $250,000 per year to round up and destroy banned dogs. Finding that other, non–breed–specific laws already on the books covered vicious animal, nuisance, leash, and other public health and safety concerns, the task force recommended repealing the ban.

In a different study looking at dog bite data, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Humane Society of the United States, and the American Veterinary Medical Association together produced a report titled “Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the US between 1979 and 1998,” which appeared in the September 15, 2000, issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Among its findings, the study reported that during this 20–year period, more than 25 breeds of dogs were involved in 238 human fatalities. Pit bull–type dogs caused 66 of the fatalities, which averages out to just over three fatal attacks per year, and Rottweilers were cited as causing 39 of the fatalities. The rest were caused by other purebreds and mixed breeds. At the time the report was released, Dr. Gail C. Golab, one of the study’s co–authors, was quoted as saying, “Since 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds—including Dachshunds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and a Yorkshire Terrier—have been responsible for fatal attacks on people.”

The authors noted that the data in the report cannot be used to infer any breed–specific risk for dog bite fatalities, such as for pit bull–type dogs or Rottweilers, because to obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the total numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States, and that information is unavailable.

A 2008 report on media bias by the National Canine Research Council (available on their website at http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest) compared the type of media coverage given for dog attacks that occurred during a four–day period in August 2007 with intriguing results:

On day one, a Labrador mix attacked an elderly man, sending him to the hospital. News stories of his attack appeared in one article in the local paper.

On day two, a mixed–breed dog fatally injured a child. The local paper ran two stories.

On day three, a mixed–breed dog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital. One article ran in the local paper.

On day four, two pit bulls that broke off their chains attacked a woman trying to protect her small dog. She was hospitalized. Her dog was uninjured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on the major cable news networks.

It is not a stretch to see how such news coverage could influence calls for breed bans from the frightened public and its legislators.

---------------------------

Found another: http://www.slideshare.net/michellebutcher/bsl-research-report Go to page 22/23 for the "Conclusion" of this research paper. Interesting.

[bamacrat]

287. How about cats, they kill babies too.

All dogs can attack. Banning a breed is wrong.

[DrDan]

290. banning this breed is not wrong - imo

[PeaceNikki]

294. Opinions are like assholes.

[depakid]

304. Only if one doesn't like them

and doesn't give a rats ass about who is harmed as a consequence of the policies they advocate.

In the end though you'll see that this will go down like drunk driving laws. No big deal in the 70's. Increasing awareness of the problem and focus on the victims in the 80's -followed by tougher and tougher laws and onerous insurance requirements.

Eventually, communities and states will adopt legislation like Oregon proposed and like Britain and Australia have had the foresight to enact and implement. And when that happens- once people in communities and states say enough is enough, they'll look to the places where such policies have already been implemented, and learn from their successes and mistakes.

[PeaceNikki]

315. Yes, the world will be filled with rainbows and unicorns and lillipops.

I dream of the day when knee-jerk, irrational legislation ends all harm in the world.

Dream a little dream with me depa.

[depakid]

328. One thing it won't be in Australia- is full of pitbulls

They're on track for extinction on the continent. Along with other fighting dogs. Thanks to this last mauling in Victoria- the process may actually be speeding up. Authorities (as on the Gold Coast in Queensland) may be less inclined to consider the owners' feelings than they are in New South Wales.

They're about to redouble efforts in Britain, to btw:

Mauling death house known to police

(UKPA) – 3 hours ago

Police knew of concerns about dogs in a house where a four-year-old boy was mauled to death. John-Paul Massey suffered fatal injuries when he was savaged by the family pet in the early hours of Monday.



The animal, described by neighbours as a pitbull type, also savaged his grandmother, Helen Foulkes, as she tried to protect the youngster who she was baby-sitting at her home in Liverpool.

Mrs Foulkes, 63, who suffered dog bites to her legs and body, has since been discharged from hospital and is expected to make a full recovery. Merseyside Police said an investigation is under way into the ownership of the dog and whether it was an illegal breed.

The force also revealed a complaint was made by a city housing officer last February about dog breeding at the home in Ash Grove, Wavertree. But a police call centre operator told the caller it was "not a police matter" and the complaint was never followed up.

Chief Superintendent Steve Ashton, area commander for South Liverpool, said the response was "incorrect" and a separate investigation will take place to find out why specialist "dangerous dog squad" officers did not visit the house. Mr Ashton said: "We didn't respond. The operator decided it was not a police matter, which was incorrect.

"Had the correct procedures been followed a qualified officer would have gone to the house and looked into the matter."

Merseyside Police has destroyed 339 dogs of illegal breeds since the death of five-year-old Ellie Lawrenson on New Year's Day 2007. Ellie was also being minded by her grandmother when she suffered dozens of bites from her uncle's pitbull terrier Reuben.

More: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5grQN8980tGxX-5zV4kfL8H126Ldg

[PeaceNikki]

335. Point me to a single study that shows BSL is effective.

You keep using sensationalized media accounts that are not data.

[depakid]

361. You remind me of people who refuse to solve all sorts of problems

anything from health care to financial regulation.

Deny there's a problem- once it becomes OBVIOUS and undeniable- claim the proposed solutions won't work. Therefore try nothing at all and make CERTAIN things get worse and worse.

People like that are prolific in America- and it's why your nation is sliding into third world status.

As for studies- they will be done over time. And they will show the effects of getting dangerous breeds out of locales and then states.

Make no mistake- these policies are a trend- one which continues to gain momentum, as more and more people (and the media and isurers) come to realize that there's no need to expose families and communities to this preventable risk of serious harm.

[PeaceNikki]

363. Seriously, point me to any study that shows BSL is effective.

You can't because it's not. It doesn't address the problem. The problem is not the breed. The problem is the people handling the dogs (or not).

I do believe in solving the problem, you and I just vehemently disagree on what the problem is. If pit-bulls are all removed from the face of the earth, another dog will take it's place as the PB has taken the place of other breeds. It used to be the Doberman that was demonized.

You seriously think dog attacks will magically end if pits are eradicated? How rational is that?

[PeaceNikki]

370. Here are some studies on BSL

From the ASPCA: http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/breed-specific-legislation.html

Are Breed-Specific Laws Effective?

There is no evidence that breed-specific laws—which are costly and difficult to enforce—make communities safer for people or companion animals. For example, Prince George’s County, MD, spends more than $250,000 annually to enforce its ban on pit bulls. In 2003, a study conducted by the county on the ban’s effectiveness noted that “public safety is not improved as a result of ,” and that “there is no transgression committed by owner or animal that is not covered by another, non-breed specific portion of the Animal Control Code (i.e., vicious animal, nuisance animal, leash laws).”
Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) decided not to support BSL. The CDC cited, among other problems, the inaccuracy of dog bite data and the difficulty in identifying dog breeds (especially true of mixed-breed dogs). The CDC also noted the likelihood that as certain breeds are regulated, those who exploit dogs by making them aggressive will replace them with other, unregulated breeds.

What’s Wrong with Breed-Specific Laws?

BSL carries a host of negative and wholly unintended consequences:
Dogs go into hiding
Rather than give up their beloved pets, owners of highly regulated or banned breeds often attempt to avoid detection of their “outlaw” dogs by restricting outdoor exercise and socialization and forgoing licensing, microchipping and proper veterinary care, including spay/neuter surgery and essential vaccinations. Such actions have implications both for public safety and the health of these dogs.

Good owners and dogs are punished
BSL also causes hardship to responsible owners of entirely friendly, properly supervised and well-socialized dogs who happen to fall within the regulated breed. Although these dog owners have done nothing to endanger the public, they are required to comply with local breed bans and regulations unless they are able to mount successful (and often costly) legal challenges.

They impart a false sense of security
Breed-specific laws have a tendency to compromise rather than enhance public safety. When limited animal control resources are used to regulate or ban a certain breed of dog, without regard to behavior, the focus is shifted away from routine, effective enforcement of laws that have the best chance of making our communities safer: dog license laws, leash laws, animal fighting laws, anti-tethering laws, laws facilitating spaying and neutering and laws that require all owners to control their dogs, regardless of breed.

What’s the Alternative to Breed-Specific Laws?

In the aforementioned study, the CDC noted that many other factors beyond breed may affect a dog’s tendency toward aggression—things such as heredity, sex, early experience, reproductive status, socialization and training. These last two concerns are well-founded, given that:

More than 70 percent of all dog bite cases involve unneutered male dogs.
An unneutered male dog is 2.6 times more likely to bite than is a neutered dog.
A chained or tethered dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than a dog who is not chained or tethered.
97 percent of dogs involved in fatal dog attacks in 2006 were not spayed/neutered:
78 percent were maintained not as pets, but rather for guarding, image enhancement, fighting or breeding.
84 percent were maintained by reckless owners—these dogs were abused or neglected, not humanely controlled or contained, or allowed to interact with children unsupervised.
Recognizing that the problem of dangerous dogs requires serious attention, the ASPCA seeks effective enforcement of breed-neutral laws that hold dog owners accountable for the actions of their animals.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Michigan State University College of Law: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/aruslweiss2001.htm
Conclusion

Breed-specific legislation is not an effective approach for regulating dogs' behavior in communities. Although such bans might comfort individuals who have had unpleasant experiences with particular breeds or have heard of attacks by specific dog breeds in the media, the bans do not act to effectively regulate the behavior of any breed or of dogs and their owners collectively. The bans carry with them too much potential for arbitrary or improper enforcement: inaccurate breed identification by officials, difficulty enforcing breed bans against mixed-breed dogs, animal control, and court system overload, and the potential for not identifying a genuinely "dangerous dog" as such because it doesn't fall into the specified breed categories. Unfortunately, large breeds of dogs such as Dobermans, German Shepherd Dogs, and Pit Bulls are popularly believed to be dangerous, and therefore may be judged more severely by judges than smaller, "cuddlier" breeds.59

Government officials at the local and state level should focus on the problem itself - dangerous canine behavior - and concentrate their efforts on dogs' and owners' conduct. In doing so, officials can maintain a safe community for both dog owners and other residents.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the American Bar Association: http://www.abanet.org/genpractice/magazine/2009/jul_aug/pitbull.html
Is BSL Effective?
Extensive studies of the effectiveness of BSL in reducing the number of persons harmed by dog attacks were done in Spain and Great Britain. Both studies concluded that their “dangerous animals acts,” which included pit bull bans, had no effect at all on stopping dog attacks. The Spanish study further found that the breeds most responsible for bites—both before and after the breed bans—were those breeds not covered by it, primarily German Shepherds and mixed breeds.

One of the few known instances in which a breed ban’s effectiveness was examined and reported on in the United States occurred in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where a task force was formed in 2003 to look at the effectiveness of its pit bull ban. The task force concluded that the public’s safety had not improved as a result of the ban, despite the fact that the county had spent more than $250,000 per year to round up and destroy banned dogs. Finding that other, non–breed–specific laws already on the books covered vicious animal, nuisance, leash, and other public health and safety concerns, the task force recommended repealing the ban.

In a different study looking at dog bite data, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Humane Society of the United States, and the American Veterinary Medical Association together produced a report titled “Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the US between 1979 and 1998,” which appeared in the September 15, 2000, issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Among its findings, the study reported that during this 20–year period, more than 25 breeds of dogs were involved in 238 human fatalities. Pit bull–type dogs caused 66 of the fatalities, which averages out to just over three fatal attacks per year, and Rottweilers were cited as causing 39 of the fatalities. The rest were caused by other purebreds and mixed breeds. At the time the report was released, Dr. Gail C. Golab, one of the study’s co–authors, was quoted as saying, “Since 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds—including Dachshunds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and a Yorkshire Terrier—have been responsible for fatal attacks on people.”

The authors noted that the data in the report cannot be used to infer any breed–specific risk for dog bite fatalities, such as for pit bull–type dogs or Rottweilers, because to obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the total numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States, and that information is unavailable.

A 2008 report on media bias by the National Canine Research Council (available on their website at http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest) compared the type of media coverage given for dog attacks that occurred during a four–day period in August 2007 with intriguing results:

On day one, a Labrador mix attacked an elderly man, sending him to the hospital. News stories of his attack appeared in one article in the local paper.

On day two, a mixed–breed dog fatally injured a child. The local paper ran two stories.

On day three, a mixed–breed dog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital. One article ran in the local paper.

On day four, two pit bulls that broke off their chains attacked a woman trying to protect her small dog. She was hospitalized. Her dog was uninjured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on the major cable news networks.

It is not a stretch to see how such news coverage could influence calls for breed bans from the frightened public and its legislators.

[PeaceNikki]

319. Also. Point me to a single study that shows BSL is effective.

Just one.

g'head.

[TZ]

321. Dude. They've banned Pit Bulls

in the county next to me. IT DOES NOT WORK! Dogs are still biting people. Ijit
http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=2608
Not only are these bans stupid there really is no real way to enforce them and a HUGE waste of money considering how many other ISSUES this particular county has. In other words, there's a drug problem in this county and the police should take time from that to enforce a dog ban? Please.

[depakid]

325. Eventually, as policies are adopted uniformly, enforced and awareness is increased

You will see a decrease (or a less than expected increase on the projected trend line) in maimings and fatalities.

That's how policy works as it's implemented over time. You can see it in all sorts of areas.

[baldguy]

380. The bans in Australia began in 1995. They have proven ineffective.

Dog attacks continue, and uninformed hysteria's solution is to widen the ban.

[depakid]

381. You'll just pull anything out of your ass, won't you?

[PeaceNikki]

382. Point me to a single study that shows BSL is effective. G'head.

Oh wait, it's NOT afterall.

From the ASPCA: http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/breed-specific-legislation.html

Are Breed-Specific Laws Effective?

There is no evidence that breed-specific laws—which are costly and difficult to enforce—make communities safer for people or companion animals. For example, Prince George’s County, MD, spends more than $250,000 annually to enforce its ban on pit bulls. In 2003, a study conducted by the county on the ban’s effectiveness noted that “public safety is not improved as a result of ,” and that “there is no transgression committed by owner or animal that is not covered by another, non-breed specific portion of the Animal Control Code (i.e., vicious animal, nuisance animal, leash laws).”
Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) decided not to support BSL. The CDC cited, among other problems, the inaccuracy of dog bite data and the difficulty in identifying dog breeds (especially true of mixed-breed dogs). The CDC also noted the likelihood that as certain breeds are regulated, those who exploit dogs by making them aggressive will replace them with other, unregulated breeds.

What’s Wrong with Breed-Specific Laws?

BSL carries a host of negative and wholly unintended consequences:
Dogs go into hiding
Rather than give up their beloved pets, owners of highly regulated or banned breeds often attempt to avoid detection of their “outlaw” dogs by restricting outdoor exercise and socialization and forgoing licensing, microchipping and proper veterinary care, including spay/neuter surgery and essential vaccinations. Such actions have implications both for public safety and the health of these dogs.

Good owners and dogs are punished
BSL also causes hardship to responsible owners of entirely friendly, properly supervised and well-socialized dogs who happen to fall within the regulated breed. Although these dog owners have done nothing to endanger the public, they are required to comply with local breed bans and regulations unless they are able to mount successful (and often costly) legal challenges.

They impart a false sense of security
Breed-specific laws have a tendency to compromise rather than enhance public safety. When limited animal control resources are used to regulate or ban a certain breed of dog, without regard to behavior, the focus is shifted away from routine, effective enforcement of laws that have the best chance of making our communities safer: dog license laws, leash laws, animal fighting laws, anti-tethering laws, laws facilitating spaying and neutering and laws that require all owners to control their dogs, regardless of breed.

What’s the Alternative to Breed-Specific Laws?

In the aforementioned study, the CDC noted that many other factors beyond breed may affect a dog’s tendency toward aggression—things such as heredity, sex, early experience, reproductive status, socialization and training. These last two concerns are well-founded, given that:

More than 70 percent of all dog bite cases involve unneutered male dogs.
An unneutered male dog is 2.6 times more likely to bite than is a neutered dog.
A chained or tethered dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than a dog who is not chained or tethered.
97 percent of dogs involved in fatal dog attacks in 2006 were not spayed/neutered:
78 percent were maintained not as pets, but rather for guarding, image enhancement, fighting or breeding.
84 percent were maintained by reckless owners—these dogs were abused or neglected, not humanely controlled or contained, or allowed to interact with children unsupervised.
Recognizing that the problem of dangerous dogs requires serious attention, the ASPCA seeks effective enforcement of breed-neutral laws that hold dog owners accountable for the actions of their animals.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Michigan State University College of Law: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/aruslweiss2001.htm
Conclusion

Breed-specific legislation is not an effective approach for regulating dogs' behavior in communities. Although such bans might comfort individuals who have had unpleasant experiences with particular breeds or have heard of attacks by specific dog breeds in the media, the bans do not act to effectively regulate the behavior of any breed or of dogs and their owners collectively. The bans carry with them too much potential for arbitrary or improper enforcement: inaccurate breed identification by officials, difficulty enforcing breed bans against mixed-breed dogs, animal control, and court system overload, and the potential for not identifying a genuinely "dangerous dog" as such because it doesn't fall into the specified breed categories. Unfortunately, large breeds of dogs such as Dobermans, German Shepherd Dogs, and Pit Bulls are popularly believed to be dangerous, and therefore may be judged more severely by judges than smaller, "cuddlier" breeds.59

Government officials at the local and state level should focus on the problem itself - dangerous canine behavior - and concentrate their efforts on dogs' and owners' conduct. In doing so, officials can maintain a safe community for both dog owners and other residents.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the American Bar Association: http://www.abanet.org/genpractice/magazine/2009/jul_aug/pitbull.html
Is BSL Effective?
Extensive studies of the effectiveness of BSL in reducing the number of persons harmed by dog attacks were done in Spain and Great Britain. Both studies concluded that their “dangerous animals acts,” which included pit bull bans, had no effect at all on stopping dog attacks. The Spanish study further found that the breeds most responsible for bites—both before and after the breed bans—were those breeds not covered by it, primarily German Shepherds and mixed breeds.

One of the few known instances in which a breed ban’s effectiveness was examined and reported on in the United States occurred in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where a task force was formed in 2003 to look at the effectiveness of its pit bull ban. The task force concluded that the public’s safety had not improved as a result of the ban, despite the fact that the county had spent more than $250,000 per year to round up and destroy banned dogs. Finding that other, non–breed–specific laws already on the books covered vicious animal, nuisance, leash, and other public health and safety concerns, the task force recommended repealing the ban.

In a different study looking at dog bite data, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Humane Society of the United States, and the American Veterinary Medical Association together produced a report titled “Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the US between 1979 and 1998,” which appeared in the September 15, 2000, issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Among its findings, the study reported that during this 20–year period, more than 25 breeds of dogs were involved in 238 human fatalities. Pit bull–type dogs caused 66 of the fatalities, which averages out to just over three fatal attacks per year, and Rottweilers were cited as causing 39 of the fatalities. The rest were caused by other purebreds and mixed breeds. At the time the report was released, Dr. Gail C. Golab, one of the study’s co–authors, was quoted as saying, “Since 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds—including Dachshunds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and a Yorkshire Terrier—have been responsible for fatal attacks on people.”

The authors noted that the data in the report cannot be used to infer any breed–specific risk for dog bite fatalities, such as for pit bull–type dogs or Rottweilers, because to obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the total numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States, and that information is unavailable.

A 2008 report on media bias by the National Canine Research Council (available on their website at http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest) compared the type of media coverage given for dog attacks that occurred during a four–day period in August 2007 with intriguing results:

On day one, a Labrador mix attacked an elderly man, sending him to the hospital. News stories of his attack appeared in one article in the local paper.

On day two, a mixed–breed dog fatally injured a child. The local paper ran two stories.

On day three, a mixed–breed dog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital. One article ran in the local paper.

On day four, two pit bulls that broke off their chains attacked a woman trying to protect her small dog. She was hospitalized. Her dog was uninjured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on the major cable news networks.

It is not a stretch to see how such news coverage could influence calls for breed bans from the frightened public and its legislators.

---------------------------

Found another: http://www.slideshare.net/michellebutcher/bsl-research-report Go to page 22/23 for the "Conclusion" of this research paper. Interesting.

[baldguy]

384. No, it's called compiling relevant documents and *READING*.

You should try it sometime.

Admittedly, it can be difficult - wading through & identifying stuff from people who are biased, uninformed or just crazy - but it can be done with a little dedication and reason.

[depakid]

387. It's called confirmation bias and an inability to think objectively

The Australian laws are just being implemented- and over time you will see results.

You know why? Because unlike Americans- and agenda driven obsessives- they're can do problem solving people. They did it with firearms- no more mass shootings since- and they'll do it with maurading breeds like pitbulls too.

[baldguy]

394. So, the SPCA, Michigan State University, the ABA, the National Canine Research Council,

The American Kennel Club, the CDC, the AVA, the Humane Society and dozens of peer-reviewed reports - In short, precisely ALL of the people who know the relevant law, medicine & canine behavior – they ALL are "biased & have an inability to think"?

Because they all disagree with you, you know.

[TwilightGardener]

323. Cats kill babies?

[bamacrat]

399. Yeah if they sleep in the crib with them sometimes they will lay on the babies face....

and smother it.

[TwilightGardener]

413. Old wives' tale.

[Vickers]

276. I wonder if a Toy Fox Terrier has ever killed anyone?

:shrug:

[baldguy]

326. Again, it's tragic - and thankfully rare - but it does happen.

Kentucky infant died of suffocation, blood loss in dog attack
http://www.herald-dispatch.com/homepage/x607061059
Jack Russell Terrier

Labrador puppy kills infant
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080729/BLOG34/708681632?Title=Labrador-puppy-kills-infant


Stories like this don't get national attention because they aren't "notorious" Pit Bulls.

[Vickers]

330. Not a Jack Russell, a Toy Fox Terrier.

They are about 1/3 the size of a JRT, and aren't nearly as *ahem* animated. I do know that JRTs can be a handful (I ruled them out of dog selection).

I'm genuinely curious, and not just implying that small dogs can't hurt somebody. I tried searching, but can't find any news stories.

[baldguy]

346. My mothers 9-lb Silky attacked & killed a 15-lb cat

and severely injured a 40-lb Akita. Dogs that size a certainly capable.

[Johonny]

310. This sounds like any pro hand gun post

Guns don't kill people, people with guns do. Yeah pit bulls are "safe" IF properly trained, if there not better have your hand gun on yah.

[baldguy]

338. Yorkies are "safe" - *IF* properly trained.

It's not the breed at fault, it's the owner.

[MrScorpio]

331. I've had a Pomeranian attack me once

And I've been licked to death by a Rottie

I say, outlaw the Pommies!

[flvegan]

339. This thread gets more and more entertaining.

[BeachBaby]

343. Epic, even.

[janx]

348. Yeap.

I wondered when you'd show up again... :hi: :rofl:

[dana_b]

368. I can't believe it's still going on!

I think I posted two days ago?

Or was that another pitbull thread from two weeks ago? hmmmm...

[AllieB]

367. My neighbor has the sweetest pitbull.

He is afraid of loud noises and cats. This type of legislation is ridiculous.

[PeaceNikki]

375. My Am Staff is also afraid of loud noises and my 2 cats.

She also doesn't know how to bark. She's a terrible guard dog but the best snuggler.

[janx]

383. My next door neighbor had one of those...

;-) Hers was white (looked a lot like Petey from the Little Rascals), and I adored him!

[roody]

398. This is what I do to Pit bulls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ExfKbSogg4

[yellowwood]

403. Yes

Yes

[DailyGrind51]

406. Pit bulls are used as psychiatric service dogs to assist severe depressives.

[chrisa]

408. Fear-driven bans are always a bad idea.