Pit Bull attacks

[eddie]

I like most dogs, but to me pit bulls are worthless. Don't believe they should be wiped off the face of the earth, but see them as more of a danger then a neat pet. You hear of attacks all the time over here, now they are making the news in the UK.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/22/five-police-officers-mauled-dog

[Betonov]

It's not the breed, it's the owner. Always

This was not a routine house call, this was a raid, something the owner eventualy expected and ''trained'' the dog for that day. Plus, local scumbags have a habit of owning strong breeds that are trained to attack strangers

[Schroeder]

I don't think it's the dog but mostly the owner. Pit Bulls are rarely kept as lap dogs but are often trained for aggressiveness.:nope:
Normally trained Pit Bulls have not been known for being overly aggressive AFAIK.

*Edit* Betonov was faster than me...

[BossMark]

I agree with Schroeder and Betonov, blame the owner and not the dog

[mookiemookie]

You hear of attacks all the time because of media hype.

"My kids are around pit bulls every day. In the '70s they blamed Dobermans, in the '80s they blamed German Shepherds, in the '90s they blamed Rottweilers. Now they blame the Pit Bull." - Cesar Millan (The Dog Whisperer)

Dogs are animals. They are only as domesticated as their owners train them to be. If this guy was a scumbag criminal, he was most likely training his dog to be an attack dog. The dog attacked not because of it's breed, but because it was doing what it had been trained to do.

Dogs are like children - they're only going to be as good as the person raising them. To blame it on a breed is only propagating a harmful and ignorant myth.

[Stealhead]

Dogs are like children - they're only going to be as good as the person raising them. To blame it on a breed is only propagating a harmful and ignorant myth.


Bad example sometimes the apple falls far far away from the tree horriable parents can have excellent children and excellent parents can have horrible children.

[kiwi_2005]

You hear of attacks all the time because of media hype.

"My kids are around pit bulls every day. In the '70s they blamed Dobermans, in the '80s they blamed German Shepherds, in the '90s they blamed Rottweilers. Now they blame the Pit Bull." - Cesar Millan (The Dog Whisperer)

Dogs are animals. They are only as domesticated as their owners train them to be. If this guy was a scumbag criminal, he was most likely training his dog to be an attack dog. The dog attacked not because of it's breed, but because it was doing what it had been trained to do.

Dogs are like children - they're only going to be as good as the person raising them. To blame it on a breed is only propagating a harmful and ignorant myth.

+1

Example of a bad trainer: Woman owns two rotties they were her pets since cubs her neighbour said the dogs would now and then nip the owner on the hand or become slightly aggressive towards her and she would do nothing about it as she considered the dogs her children and they would never hurt her. Well they killed her one day in her home ripped her to shreds.

Another recently here a well trained pitbull who is good around kids attacked the neighbours 7 yr old son for no reason. Kid has always been around the dog, never teasing him or anything like that. But out of the blue this family pitbull tried to take the kids face off. Kid survived.

[Jimbuna]

I certainly have more compassion for the dog than the owner, a little suprised it wasn't tasered or as a last resort two officers (one either side) pulling its shoulders apart and ripping open the heart (musn't teach that technique now).

Either way it must have been well out of control to warrant a live round operation.

[Skybird]

Dogs' characters within a given race vary individually. However, inherent tendencies for more calmness or aggressiveness, curiosity of stupditity also vary over races. That's why I have a problem with a generalisation like "its always the owner". The owner always has an influence in the general setting the dog lives in, yes, but still the dog'S individual as well as race-specific temper alike also fall into the formula. And like humans as well, you sometimes can have a black sheep in a dogs' breed as well.

If that black sheep by its breed characteristics than is designed to fight and has the body, the teeth, the muscles and in conflict: the aggressiveness to do that, then you have a problem. A pitbull - is no poodle. A Greyhound is great at running, but not in fighting, like a dog bred for fighting in the fighting pit.

Saying this as somebody who loves dogs and wolves (and cats and horses and animals), and was raised in a household where parents had dogs, and grandfather had a gang of hunting dogs.

So again: the owner always is part of the forumla, yes. But it is not as if the dog's race does mean nothing. Also, due to the intense breeding, certain dog races are known to be more vulnerable to typoical physical diseases and crippling deformations than others - and some races are known to be more vulnerable to neuroticism and aggressiveness than others.

Certain races were bred for man taking pleasure from seeing dogs killing each other in a pit fight. Such acts of abusing our superior status in creation, are a shame for us.

[Ducimus]

It's not the breed, it's the owner.

There may have been a time when that was true, but too many owners have breed them for fighting. Said phrase no longer applies to Pit Bulls in my opinon. I've seen a damn 6-8 month old pup try and attack my 5 year old border collie without any provocation.

edit: and accross the pond from the UK, in todays news here in the US, two Pit bull's, that mauled an 88 year old woman. (http://www.wfsb.com/story/17209056/2-pitbulls-killed-after-attacking-88-year-old-woman-in-waterbury?hpt=us_bn4) The owner, not the breed? Bovine Scats i say.

[August]

Pit bulls used to be known in this country as "Nanny Dogs". A dog breed specifically chosen to be a companion and protector for children. A job they performed very well for over a century.

http://thepoodleanddogblog.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451580669e2014e88ffc280970d-320wi

http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/XmasNightAfter-T4.jpg

Somehow though in the past couple of decades we've gone from that to "needs to be wiped off the face of the earth". What changed? Not the dog.

Skybird has a good point about a Pits damage capability but it must be also noted that the pit doesn't have the strongest bite, or is it the largest in size and it's definitely not the most aggressive dog out there.

It's notoriety seems to be mainly media driven which is a shame.

http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/tumblr_ljm8pzmydq1qj1a0to1_400.jpg

[mookiemookie]

The owner, not the breed? Bovine Scats i say.

Duci, you know I respect you, but on this one, I gotta ask - based on what? Your one encounter with a "pit bull" and reading media hype? Anecdotal evidence is not evidence. I can provide 100 instances where my friends have loving, docile and sweet dogs (lumped into the "pit bull" classification) who wouldn't harm a flea. Well, unless they were scratching at it, but the owners I know would be mortified if their dog had a flea.

[Tribesman]

I blame the parents of the owner.

[Ducimus]

With only ONE exception, every time ive seen a pitt bull, they're always aggressive.

I note, that all the sweet loving photos that August posted are OLD... several decades old. 1920's perhaps? ALOT has happened with dog breeding since then. Pit bulls today are bred for as their name implies, pit fighting.

[August]

With only ONE exception, every time ive seen a pitt bull, they're always aggressive.

I note, that all the sweet loving photos that August posted are OLD... several decades old. 1920's perhaps? ALOT has happened with dog breeding since then. Pit bulls today are bred for as their name implies, pit fighting.


Maybe some are bred for that but not the whole breed and even then pit fighting is against other dogs, not humans. I'd think aggressiveness toward humans would be a detracting trait for a fighting dog, at least for their handlers it would be.

[CaptainMattJ.]

If anything should be wiped off the face of the earth, its parasitic (or otherwise useless) insects like mosquitos, tapeworms, ants (especially red ants), termites, wasps, fleas, mites, and bedbugs.

[Ducimus]

As far as im concerned, Pitt bulls are exactly what people made them to be, because people breed them for specific traits. Those traits just happen to be the most accomidating for Dog fighting rings.

[Skybird]

Statistics in Germany show since years that German shepards are the most "dangerous" dogs. There are more incidents with them than with any other race, also, in a list that was done in 2006 where dog race was calculated (and standardized) versus prevalence, German shepards have the highest risk-index for a bitign attack, followed bei Doberman, Spitz and Pekinese. The two latter are extremely neurotic, I would say. German shepards are over-bred, like several other arces as well, in German shepards it shows in their psyche as well as in certain orthopedic problems.

Although being seen as a typically German dog race, shepards have become rare in Germany, like the other "typically German" dog, too - the Dachshound. We had Dachshounds, amongst others. Very strong and individual characters, I tell you! :lol:

Hybrid dogs and Maltheser dogs rated lowest in the risk index list.