Pit Bull #1 public enemy ?

[Hammer 4]

I 've owned dogs since I was one year old, been a dog fancier all my life, I 've owned, bred and shown dogs for nearly a decade, I 'm a veterinarian, been practicing for more than 20 years, I agree, there will be in any breed some bad apples just like with people, ask me how many times I 've been bit by a Pit, a dobie, a rottie in those 20 years ? ---> 0, ask me how many times I 've been bit by poodles, cockers, chihuahuas ? ---> so many times that I can 't remember.

Heck one of the worst bites I 've had was given to me by a Shi Tzu which to make it worse, was my own dog, man, that lil sucker really had bad temper.

Thanks Raul..I think people tend to see the smaller dogs as non aggressive due to their size, and those folks tend to see the larger breeds as "guard" type dogs. IMHO, APBT's are among the sweetest dogs on earth, it's a shame that the ghetto types breed them for all the wrong reasons, plus there's thousands of pitties in shelters that die every week.. :'(

[Raul]

Yes it 's sad, what bugs me is the outlawing of a breed when instead of outlawing it more severe punishments should be enforced on bad owners.

As I said, I 've been a dog fancier all my life, I 've bred dogs and showed them, I 've onwed many breeds; I have a soft spot for rotties and I 've owned them, one of my favorite ones was a huge female named Mombi ( aka La Gorda ), and she was in behavior how a Rottie should be, the most loving with the family members the most fierce with strangers ( she 's been gone for seven years and still people avoid passing in front of my house ), if you own a breed, you have to know the breed, I know Rotties can be dangerous to the point of being lethal, I 'd be stupid and irresponsible if I allow the dog to be able to access strangers at it 's will, I 've heard and read horror stories about rottweilers attacking people but who 's to blame, the owner or the animal ? my finger points out to the owner, how many times my rotties have hurt someone ? ---> 0, in all my years of owning rotties and in all their long lives never my rotties have hurt anyone, and we are talking rotties not pit bulls which were not breed to hurt people but bred to fight other dogs ( pits should not be trained to be guard dogs, that kind of training creates a psicological conflict between the inbred character of the animal vs what it 's been shown or asked him to do ). So back to my rotties, I 'm going to have visits ? heck I don 't even have to put them in their crate, I just point at it and there they go, somebody is going to do repairs ? rotties ---> into their crate. But If I leave home rotties are out there doing what they are supposed to do, watching over my house and family and if you happen to pass the limit just pray I arrive in time to control them.

[MMan16]

Most of these jokers with "pits" dont even own REAL APBTs. They are crossbread retards. Dogs from lines like "Razors edge" are so stupid looking! And its not a pit!

real APBT http://www.kodak.com/US/images/en/corp/1000words/tyroneb/Asia_best-of-show.jpg

What most people think of when they hear pitbull.

http://www.muglestonspitbullfarm.com/071505/pitbulls170.jpg

I agree to a point. The top dog is indeed an American Pitbull Terrier. The bottom one is a American Staffordshire Terrier, or Amstaff.

I've owned and shown Amstaffs and by looking at it that isn't one. All those dogs from that farm are registered to the UKC not AKC and are listed as APBT not Amstaffs which is an AKC register

[northern basser]

The Pit Bulls bad reputation over the years has in turn attracted bad people to own them. "tough guys", gangbangers..... This just makes the reputation worse.

Yes they were bred to fight, other dogs, not people. Being mauled by any dog is a tragedy to say the least. Other breeds have been bred to take down humans. I won't say which cause I'm not going to start a big war here.

Breeding out bad and unwanted traits is a must in every breed. Just as being a responsible owner of any breed.

Like Raul said, some little dogs are terrible for being biters. The thing is a little dog is easy to overpower. A Pit, German Shepherd, or a Rott are not. People w/ strong powerful dogs have to take all the precautions necessary to insure others safety. Good kennels that the dogs can't get out of if the owner is not present.

The little dogs I pictured earlier are bred to aggressively go after game. They will chase and not back down to raccoon, fox, ground hogs, nutrea rats and even badger. If you saw them hunt you might not think they were nice(to humans). They are the most friendliest dogs around. You can't get them to leave you alone and they'll lick you to death. So, like said in a earlier post, you can't stereotype a certain breed. However its good to be knowledgeable about different breeds and what their characteristics are.

[B-Dozer]

The Pit Bulls bad reputation over the years has in turn attracted bad people to own them. "tough guys", gangbangers..... This just makes the reputation worse.

Yes they were bred to fight, other dogs, not people. Being mauled by any dog is tragedy to say the least. Other breeds have been bred to take down humans. I won't say which cause I'm not going to start a big war here.

Breeding out bad and unwanted traits is a must in every breed. Just as being a responsible owner of any breed.

Like Raul said, some little dogs are terrible for being biters. The thing is a little dog is easy to overpower. A Pit, German Shepherd, or a Rott are not. People w/ strong powerful dogs have to take all the precautions necessary to insure others safety. Good kennels that the dogs can't get out of if the owner is not present.

The little dogs I pictured earlier are bred to aggressively go after game. They will chase and not back down to raccoon, fox, ground hogs, nutrea rats and even badger. If you saw them hunt you might not think they were nice(to humans). They are the most friendliest dogs around. You can't get them to leave you alone and they'll lick you to death. So, like said in a earlier post, you can't stereotype a certain breed. However its good to be knowledgeable about different breeds and what their characteristics are.

well said 

[CanalStalkin]

Most of these jokers with "pits" dont even own REAL APBTs. They are crossbread retards. Dogs from lines like "Razors edge" are so stupid looking! And its not a pit!

real APBT http://www.kodak.com/US/images/en/corp/1000words/tyroneb/Asia_best-of-show.jpg

What most people think of when they hear pitbull.

http://www.muglestonspitbullfarm.com/071505/pitbulls170.jpg

I agree to a point. The top dog is indeed an American Pitbull Terrier. The bottom one is a American Staffordshire Terrier, or Amstaff.

I've owned and shown Amstaffs and by looking at it that isn't one. All those dogs from that farm are registered to the UKC not AKC and are listed as APBT not Amstaffs which is an AKC register

X2 I have an Amstaff and that isnt one. Alot of the "gotti" and "razors edge" so called pitbulls are mix of a lot of different dogs.

[grimlin]

It depends on the person.I've only heard one horror story involving a pit bull that turned on a very good owner.The Pit actually killed it's owner.For whatever reason it turned.

Out of that one story I know hundreds more who owned Pits never got bit and always hear they are very gentle.It's just the reputation that they build very quickly.Unforutaely most of the time you see thugs walking those dogs training them like that.

I love Rottweiler myself another dog that gets a nasty reputation.....I have a few favor breeds of dogs.

I've gotten bitten by poodles and chihuahuas....Nasty little dogs if you asked me...the smaller the dog the nastier the attitude they can have.I also had a cockapoo growing up and he was very,very friendly,but get on his wrong side and that dog would snip and growl.

[Captain Obvious]

For those of you who think that pits being bred to fight as a kind of secondary fact read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

I don't  care how many great pits there are no matter who owns them their roots are in fighting.

Sorry you can complain about stupid people owning them all you want but you can't change their nature in a few years.

Throw in the fact that they are still being bred to be pure fighters and you've got a loosing battle with pits.

Just my $.02

Capt.O

[jeb2]

Almost every pit bull mauling story starts with "He never attacked anyone before. He's a sweet dog.". The problem with pit bull breeds, IMO, is that when they snap, they maul. Most dogs just nip or bite once and they're done. A pit will usually keep going until it's forcefully pulled off or the victim is dead.

[B-Dozer]

For those of you who think that pits being bred to fight as a kind of secondary fact read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

I don't care how many great pits there are no matter who owns them their roots are in fighting.

Sorry you can complain about stupid people owning them all you want but you can't change their nature in a few years.

Throw in the fact that they are still being bred to be pure fighters and you've got a loosing battle with pits.

Just my $.02

Capt.O

Using that theory, people have been bred to fight. People have been fighting and killing one another since they have been around haven't they?

I prefer to go by my own experiences, have you ever owned a pit, or just read about them?

[Micro]

Whether a Pit Bull is more vicisious than a Lab is rather irrelevant.  The notion that it is is the issue.  The simple fact is is that you are more likely to be sued if your Pit Bull bites a kid than if your Lab does.  I've seen it.  It's true. 

The other issue is that some states have taken away some protection from Pit Bull owners that owners of other breeds enjoy.

For instance:  Virginia has a "One Bite" rule.  That essentially means that if your dog bites someone, and you had no notice that the dog would do such a thing, that it had never acted in an aggressive manner in the past, then you can't be held liable for the injuries it inflicts.  That's a ONE TIME protection, under the presumption that once a dog does bite, you are now on notice that the dog can and will bite, you will be held liable if it does it again.

HOWEVER, the one bite rule doesn't always apply to dogs Virginia says are known to have a "vicisous propensity."  Virginia essentially says you should know right at ownership that your dog can and will bite if it is a dog with an inbred vicious propensity.  At the top of the list is Pit Bull.  The one bite rule doesn't apply to Pit Bulls or other dogs on the list.  When I say always, I'm not sure that the list is hard-and-fast, but I will say juries are far less sympathetic when your Pit Bull, Chow, Akita, Doberman bites someone than if your Collie, Lab and Golden Retriever does. 

[MMan16]

For those of you who think that pits being bred to fight as a kind of secondary fact read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

I don't care how many great pits there are no matter who owns them their roots are in fighting.

Sorry you can complain about stupid people owning them all you want but you can't change their nature in a few years.

Throw in the fact that they are still being bred to be pure fighters and you've got a loosing battle with pits.

Just my $.02

Capt.O

First I don't think anyone is really disputing the fact that pitbulls were bred mainly for fighting but not all were. Also, there are many other breeds that have fighting in one way or the other in there background (bull baiting, bear baiting,and dog fighting). And a lot of these dogs have a common lineage and were bred to there modern day breed.

Secondly, It hasn't been a few years since they were fought legally. Fights were banned in NY in the 1860's and the rest shortly there after. So the dogs that are being fought today are being fought by criminals and indeed by bad owners unless you think criminals are good respectful owners.

Pitbulls are definitely not getting a fair shake but to ban them is outright ridiculous. If you use that logic everything that could have harmful outcomes would be banned. So unless you think guns, knifes, baseball bats, cars, and cellphones should be banned I would see no reason to ban any dog. That being said I am strongly for enforcing dog laws. And not because of the dogs but because of the people who own the dogs. Kind of like an unfit parent doesn't deserve a kid certain people don't deserve dogs.

Just my $.02

[Captain Obvious]

Fights were banned in NY in the 1860's

Dog fighting is still a big deal even if its underground. I know of guys who's dog farms make Vicks spread look small. And if you think all dogs are miss treated your wrong, the best dog fighters treat their dogs like royalty.

guns, knifes, baseball bats, cars, and cellphones should be banned

How can you even compare these to pit bulls? When was the last time a knife just got up and attacked you? A pit bull is a living breathing animal with a mind of its own.

Using that theory, people have been bred to fight. People have been fighting and killing one another since they have been around haven't they?

I prefer to go by my own experiences, have you ever owned a pit, or just read about them?

Comparing people to dogs is not even possible, its like comparing apples to rocks can't be done.

And no I have never owned a pit, but I have friends and family that have owned them and I have taken care of those dogs countless times. I still don't trust them. 

   

[MMan16]

Just because you know people that are still fighting them does not make it legal. My point was It's not legal so the people doing it are essentially criminals being that its is a criminal act. Also, I don't ever remember saying that the prize dogs were mistreated i'm sure the get fed well but to think there treated like royalty is a big mistake. I don't think royalty ever had to fight in some cases to the death to be treated with respect. What happens to a dog after it loses a couple times? how do they get treated then?

I compared the potential for harm to someone. Not the actual dog to a knife. I understand a dog has a mind and a knife doesn't. Humans also have minds, They also snap and injure/kill people and they do it with weapons which is why I used knife for an example.

You need to realize people have trained these dogs to fight. So its the persons fault for example vick and his dogs. Those dogs could have been loving loyal pets just like my dogs have been but because of vick they were trained to fight. The dog doesn't have a say in the matter.

Also its comforting to know you know guys who fight dogs still. I'm sure these dogs are a great influence on why you feel the way you do about them. Real good examples of the breed.

[Captain Obvious]

Just because you know people that are still fighting them does not make it legal.

Never said it was legal I was just stating a fact that just because it was banned didn't mean that it had stopped or become less common. 

but to think there treated like royalty is a big mistake. I don't think royalty ever had to fight in some cases to the death to be treated with respect. What happens to a dog after it loses a couple times? how do they get treated then?

When I say treated like royalty I mean that they are treated very well. As a matter of fact a lot of dog fighters love their dogs like guys who own pit bulls on this forum. I'm not saying that anyone here fights dogs I'm just saying that these guys love pit bulls too. Yes a lot of dogs are killed after a loss but many are saved to become..... PETS!!

And guess what happens when they become pets? They have puppies which are sold to people.

Yes I know these dogs can be nice but I've also seen people who have tamed wolves and mountain lions and made them into "pets". 

What I'm saying is no matter how hard you try you can not tame out a pit bulls nature.

Yes they can be nice pets I've seen it, but the chance for them to attack will always be there because when all is said and done its in their nature.

[B-Dozer]

You say you can't compare dogs to people, yet you say breeding violent dogs causes violent puppies, right? Why wouldn't you think the children of violent people would be born violent?

If we were to ban all the potentially dangerous things, Pits would be so far down the list you couldn't even find them.

Start with alcohol,guns,cars, etc.

You stated you cannot tame out a Pits violent nature, that will surprise the many Pit owners who have gentle, non violent Pits.

If you don't like them that's your choice. But you shouldn't deny the people who keep their pets under control w/o incident.

Prejudice is the lack of knowledge and experience of a subject.

Volunteer at a rescue or AC, you might change your mind.

[Nibbles]

Because the human brain works very differently from the canine brain. You can teach a child the reasoning behind why violence is wrong. You can only teach a dog that bad things will happen to it if it decides to display violent/aggressive behaviors. Also, because human rights and animal rights are not equal, we cannot restrict violent people from having children because that would begin to look like eugenics.

We are not advocating the banning of all dangerous things. The issue with pit bulls is that they are autonomous beings with minds of their own. A knife cannot just decide to get up and stab someone. Also, if a knife is used to harm or kill someone, we hold the wielder of the knife liable for criminal charges. I don't think the owner of a pit bull can be charged with murder if their dog decides to suddenly go on a rampage and tears someone's throat out.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who can bury landmines in their yards and post up signs saying "warning: landmines" and manage them in a way that would prevent anyone from getting hurt. Doesn't mean we allow them to do it.

[B-Dozer]

No you are not banning all things, just a selected one.

prejudice= ignorance

If there was a crackdown on dogfighting and puppy mills that would go a long way to end the problem.

Don't blame all, for the actions of so few

[Nibbles]

No you are not banning all things, just a selected one.

prejudice= ignorance

If there was a crackdown on dogfighting and puppy mills that would go a long way to end the problem.

Don't blame all, for the actions of so few

Yes, we are indeed banning select things out of all things. I personally don't think that it's the best thing to do, but I can understand the reasoning behind some of the rhetoric.

If we are debating why some people would advocate to ban a specific breed of dog and not other dangerous items like guns or knives, it is because pit bulls are autonomous whereas guns and knives are not. If the law were changed so that all dog owners would be held personally responsible for all damages caused by their dogs (ex. dog kills person, owner charged with murder), I'd have no problem comparing pit bulls with guns and knives and advocating deregulation. The problem is that owners can in fact hide behind the fact that they cannot feasibly account for every single action their pit bulls make. That's why they can only be held liable for negligence (unless in some extreme circumstances, such as the owner sic'ing the dog on someone) in most cases. I think it would be unfair to deregulate pit bulls completely while still allowing owners to get away with a negligence charge at the most. That's pretty much having it both ways.

I'm not disputing the fact that a crackdown on dogfighting and puppy mills will go a long way towards ending the problem. The issue is that such operations take time, and the perceived consensus is that we have the "problem" on our hands now.

[B-Dozer]

In a civil suit the dog owner WOULD be held responsible. There are also leash laws, if your dog caused injury and you allowed them to roam, you will be held liable. The law applies to every breed. A better law would require people to spay/neuter their pet (unless you meet breeding requirements) to limit the number of dogs available to be used for fighting or bait. A pit with a responsible owner is very unlikely to cause a problem. Any dog with a knucklehead for an owner WILL be a problem. I have brought our shelter Pits to Schools, Scout meetings etc. to educate youths about proper pet care and have never had a problem. I have owned 4 Pits, fostered way too many and have never had a problem. Just like booze in the wrong hands is trouble, yet alcohol is legal. Volunteer at a shelter or AC, you might see a different side.

[MMan16]

Because the human brain works very differently from the canine brain. You can teach a child the reasoning behind why violence is wrong. You can only teach a dog that bad things will happen to it if it decides to display violent/aggressive behaviors. Also, because human rights and animal rights are not equal, we cannot restrict violent people from having children because that would begin to look like eugenics.

We are not advocating the banning of all dangerous things. The issue with pit bulls is that they are autonomous beings with minds of their own. A knife cannot just decide to get up and stab someone. Also, if a knife is used to harm or kill someone, we hold the wielder of the knife liable for criminal charges. I don't think the owner of a pit bull can be charged with murder if their dog decides to suddenly go on a rampage and tears someone's throat out.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who can bury landmines in their yards and post up signs saying "warning: landmines" and manage them in a way that would prevent anyone from getting hurt. Doesn't mean we allow them to do it.

When I used a knife as an example it was because of the danger level associated with knifes, guns, etc. in the possession of the wrong person dog and brainless knife can be dangerous just the same. It had nothing to do with a knife sprouting legs and evolving to the point it had a brain and killed someone. You want to say a dog has a brain and is capable of thought all the more reason they can be taught to be "MANS BEST FRIEND" and that goes for any breed. The problem lies with dogs being taught by people to do the wrong thing. Because we are the ones when all is said and done that taught these dogs. 

[B-Dozer]

Because the human brain works very differently from the canine brain. You can teach a child the reasoning behind why violence is wrong. You can only teach a dog that bad things will happen to it if it decides to display violent/aggressive behaviors. Also, because human rights and animal rights are not equal, we cannot restrict violent people from having children because that would begin to look like eugenics.

We are not advocating the banning of all dangerous things. The issue with pit bulls is that they are autonomous beings with minds of their own. A knife cannot just decide to get up and stab someone. Also, if a knife is used to harm or kill someone, we hold the wielder of the knife liable for criminal charges. I don't think the owner of a pit bull can be charged with murder if their dog decides to suddenly go on a rampage and tears someone's throat out.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who can bury landmines in their yards and post up signs saying "warning: landmines" and manage them in a way that would prevent anyone from getting hurt. Doesn't mean we allow them to do it.

When I used a knife as an example it was because of the danger level associated with knifes, guns, etc. in the possession of the wrong person dog and brainless knife can be dangerous just the same. It had nothing to do with a knife sprouting legs and evolving to the point it had a brain and killed someone. You want to say a dog has a brain and is capable of thought all the more reason they can be taught to be "MANS BEST FRIEND" and that goes for any breed. The problem lies with dogs being taught by people to do the wrong thing. Because we are the ones when all is said and done that taught these dogs.

x2

[MMan16]

Just because you know people that are still fighting them does not make it legal.

Never said it was legal I was just stating a fact that just because it was banned didn't mean that it had stopped or become less common.

My original point is that it has been banned for approximately 150yrs. Which is a big step in the problem. Don't you think these guys that fight dogs will find another dog when you ban pits. I'm sure they could figure it out.

but to think there treated like royalty is a big mistake. I don't think royalty ever had to fight in some cases to the death to be treated with respect. What happens to a dog after it loses a couple times? how do they get treated then?

When I say treated like royalty I mean that they are treated very well. As a matter of fact a lot of dog fighters love their dogs like guys who own pit bulls on this forum. I'm not saying that anyone here fights dogs I'm just saying that these guys love pit bulls too. Yes a lot of dogs are killed after a loss but many are saved to become..... PETS!!

Really I got to be honest I don't know anyone that says "I LOVE MY DOG" and the goes out and lets it fight with another dog knowing it could seriously get injured.

And guess what happens when they become pets? They have puppies which are sold to people.

Yes I know these dogs can be nice but I've also seen people who have tamed wolves and mountain lions and made them into "pets".

What I'm saying is no matter how hard you try you can not tame out a pit bulls nature.

Yes they can be nice pets I've seen it, but the chance for them to attack will always be there because when all is said and done its in their nature.

So let me get this straight because many many years ago a dog was trained to fight there's no un-training that. That's interesting because if you train them to fight why cant you train them not to. I mean everyones big point is that they have a BRAIN right?

[jamarkwe]

Neither side will ever agree on this topic....I have heard/read the same ol' song and dance my whole life

We all just have to sit back, love our pitt bulls, and ignore all the hate...

[jamarkwe]