|
|
|
|
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/9/2008 12:23:54 AM | I hate to take this position, because I do very well understand a dog-owner's love for his/her pet. I am very much an animal lover and even a former breeder. But not Pit Bulls! That just isn't the same thing. Pit Bulls are known for a tendency to "snap", losing all judgment and awareness, referred to as an "blind-frenzy-attack" devoid of any other influences, including who you are! During this, they are essentially insane. That does well for pit-fighting, but not well in or around the home.
What exactly is the unusual attraction PitBull owners have for this dangerous breed in particular? That answer to that has escaped me for years. Some here who have indicated they've broken up dog-fights involving these animals are quite frankly very lucky to be alive! Doing so is a last resort, because they often turn on the interference.
It's a fighting dog that was bred specifically (by human hand) for Pit-Fighting, which is highly illegal and unethical, just to begin with.. I don't personally see anything attractive about them, but that aside, they are not particularly good in family environments, having attacked numerous children and even toddlers, on many occasions, not to mention adults. The statement "I had no idea this could happen. This is the sweetest dog I have ever known. Never mean, aggressive or fierce. How could it have attacked my own child??", are infamous last words in many many PitBull households. There is no common logic about who or what they are likely to attack, including in some cases their owners, and/or their owners' family members.
I did a study on this at one point. They do NOT equate to other large dogs. They have a jaw power in the range of 1,000 PSI, which is almost double that of most breeds, and a third more vise-like than even a Rottweiler, which ranges a jaw-power of approximately 700 PSI.. They are inclined to be exceptionally aggressive, albeit often erratic. Some experts suggest they are mentally unstable due to cross-breeding to achieve that end-result. They kill people frequently! In a incredibly heinous way. There is evidence of this all over the Internet. More so than any other breed.
If you are under attack by a single PitBull or more, loose in your neighborhood, you are not likely to suffer merely a painful injury, and a trip to the ER, or even be potentially disfigured for life, you are more likely to DIE! As is your child. Because they are fundamentally killing machines, whether previously demonstrated to date, or not. Naturally is has to do with how they are raised to an extent, but it also has a lot to do with basic breeding, and we, as owners, can't control that.
Owning these dogs is not unlike playing Russian Roulette. You can never be sure about them. It is highly recommended to never leave one alone with children, despite how sweet some owners feel their own Pit Bull seems to be. Don't gamble with the lives of others in and around your home, including children..
Yes, while I hate to feel that way, crystal clear evidence dictates that banning of this breed is in order, and if exposed to a Pit Bull, please do yourself a favor, and do the much-needed research. Don't take it for granted that nothing could ever happen. Because it does. Frequently! However no one expects it.
-Suth'nBoy
| |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/9/2008 1:18:55 AM | What in the *censored* is "civic thinkers"? ;)
IMHO, Pits are like any other dangerous animal, they should be cared for and supervised strictly and should not be pets of morons who do not know how or do not care to control them.
interesting timing for this thread. My dog just got attacked by one a few hours ago. I'm waiting on a couple of neighbours to call me back on this one because I'm pretty sure it's the same one that's been called in twice before around here for attacking other dogs. Nice looking dog though. but the owners a dweeb.
Im so sorry to hear that Sly! Wish I could sick my poodle on the beast!
All's I can say is that the "dweeb" in question had better be glad he doesnt reside in Texas, lest his pooch be "accidentally" ran over by a bunch of "good ol' country boys"
Any attack like the one's mentioned here is not acceptable, as a responsible dog owner. If you cannot train and control your dog, and you can't keep him on a leash when outside, then society cannot be placed at risk.
It's too bad that the dog has to pay for that irresponsibility, but if the situation isn't corrected there will be other innocents placed at risk - dogs and humans alike.
That's not acceptable, if you are a responsible dog owner. It just makes all dog owners look bad, because of a few idiots.
Yeah, what Monty said. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/9/2008 7:00:26 AM |
I don't support a ban. Any dog can turn into a monster, in the wrong hands. Do we ban Rottweillers next ?
If it were up to me, yeah, and just for drooling.
12 years ago when I lived in Toronto a pit bull killled and half ate a 19 yr old kid that lived across the street from me. I'd talked to this kid a few times and helped him fix his bike once.
Something changes you when you know somebody that's been killed and eatan by a pit bull.
Yeah there's lots of good pit bulls. But there's lots of other kinds of dogs too.
You can't get a 50 pound cat, say a serval, easily. Maybe it should be equally hard to be able to keep animals of similar lethality? | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/9/2008 9:22:26 PM | Sly,
Glad she's okay. She might be a bit shied off for awhile of dogs running up to her. Take care around that..she might have a 'fear reaction'.
Suthinboy...I'm with you on what you say regarding the bloodlust pitbulls feel when they're in attack mode. Seen it happen and I'll never trust them.
rsx...Yeah, I imagine something would change. Poor kid. Jesus. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/10/2008 6:47:09 AM | Nor I Paragonia.. And under the circumstances you described, it's fortunate that you, yourself, are still with us.  It could have turned out much worse.
Allow me to restate the infamous last words of many Pit Bull owners as something to chew on, because this is so commonly stated almost verbatim, in the aftermath of a vicious attack:
"I had no idea this could happen. This is the sweetest dog I have ever known. Never mean, aggressive or fierce. How could it have attacked my own child??"
Since this was never answered, let me just ask it again..
What exactly is the unusual attraction Pit Bull owners have for this dangerous breed in particular? Why, in choosing a pet, are some of us inexplicably drawn to the most potentially dangerous dog alive?
-Suth'nBoy
| |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/10/2008 11:05:09 AM | | While it's true that its possible to raise a pitbull that is disciplined it's also blindingly obvious that the breed is more prone to going randomly berserker than some others. And unlike most other breeds, the pitbull is a monster and routinely maims and/or kills people when it snaps. Ban the breed. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/10/2008 2:54:32 PM | | Unless it becomes socially acceptable to use lethal force on a human being doing nothing more than roaming the street "looking suspicious," the lethal force against stray pitbulls line of thinking is pretty illogical given that FAR more people die violently at the hands of other people than at the bite of pitbulls. I mean, numbers don't lie, which one REALLY poses the greatest threat to you statistically? | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/10/2008 6:13:16 PM |
the lethal force against stray pitbulls line of thinking is pretty illogical given that FAR more people die violently at the hands of other people than at the bite of pitbulls. I mean, numbers don't lie I agree. The numbers don't lie, but how many humans are there on the planet, and how many pitbulls are there? Ya need to redo the math ACURATELY. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/10/2008 7:47:47 PM | OddAndy
Unless it becomes socially acceptable to use lethal force on a human being doing nothing more than roaming the street "looking suspicious," the lethal force against stray pitbulls line of thinking is pretty illogical
Your argument has firm legs IF everyone agrees that animals should be given the same liberties as people. I disagree that everyone will side with that notion.
In addition I disagree that animals should be given the same liberties as people.
I wouldn't give a pitbull a voter’s ballot, nor a license to drive.
We have expectations of fellow people which dogs cannot live up to: Sanitation and Sexual Conduct; being two quirky examples.
In return I feel that when it comes to a child getting bit in the face, Habeas Corpus should not be a liberty we grant to animals either. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/10/2008 8:30:24 PM |
Unless it becomes socially acceptable to use lethal force on a human being doing nothing more than roaming the street "looking suspicious," the lethal force against stray pitbulls line of thinking is pretty illogical given that FAR more people die violently at the hands of other people than at the bite of pitbulls.
Well besides the obvious difference of rights between men and dogs, I would advocate castration for all living pit bulls, not death. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/11/2008 5:16:56 AM |
What exactly is the unusual attraction Pit Bull owners have for this dangerous breed in particular?
Why, in choosing a pet, are some of us inexplicably drawn to the most potentially dangerous dog alive?
Because they also happen to be the most obedient, loyal, and people friendly breed out there. If they are raised right, they will never attack a human. This is the only dog breed to have human aggression bred out of it. However, they are naturally dog and animal aggressive and must be socialized with other dogs to prevent an unprovoked attack.
I think a ban on a specific breed is just "feel good" type of law, that dosn't really address the real problem, irresponsible animal owners. | |
|
| |
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/11/2008 3:28:51 PM |
I agree. The numbers don't lie, but how many humans are there on the planet, and how many pitbulls are there? Ya need to redo the math ACURATELY.
Since we're only talking about pit bulls and not all dogs in general, I think a more accurate comparison would be the per capita number of suspicious-looking people on the street (compared to the total # of people on the planet) vs the per capita number of pitbulls compared to all other dogs.
Are the #'s similar? I have no earthly idea. I still maintain my point, though. Some people are talking about shooting a dog simply because it's a stray pitbull, not because it's exhibited any signs of aggression. IOW, killing something based merely upon an as-yet (at the time of the killing) unfounded, unsubstantiated fear of what it MAY be or MAY do, which is no different than killing a human being (or for that matter, taken any action) based merely upon maybes and could-bes.
I've seen french poodles bite people. How bout I shoot any french poodle I see walking down the street on the basis that it COULD attack me? Heck, it MIGHT even have rabies. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/11/2008 6:43:05 PM |
I've seen french poodles bite people. How bout I shoot any french poodle I see walking down the street on the basis that it COULD attack me? Heck, it MIGHT even have rabies.
When French poodles produce a known violent streak and become as physically destructive as pit bulls your analogy might have legs to stand on. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/11/2008 7:24:49 PM | OddAndy
Some people are talking about shooting a dog simply because it's a stray pitbull, not because it's exhibited any signs of aggression. IOW, killing something based merely upon an as-yet (at the time of the killing) unfounded, unsubstantiated fear of what it MAY be or MAY do, which is no different than killing a human being (or for that matter, taken any action) based merely upon maybes and could-bes.
Your statement above is untrue in this context. There are facts that prove that pittbull dogs are capable of terrorizing the community thus the fear of a Stray pitbull is not unfounded.
Also, your statistical queery of >>per capita suspicious-looking people to all people
vs. per capita Stray pitbulls to All dogs << works best if you substitute Suspicious looking person with the term "Blood thirsty, indiscriminating Zombie" (Cause seriously, that's the only way you can actually compare a subset of humans to this subset of dogs)
I'll kill a zombie regardless. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/11/2008 10:51:02 PM |
Can you back that up?
"American Pit Bull Terrier's would fight other dogs within inches of people (their handlers) and they would even be picked up by their handlers during the heat of battle. If any of these dogs showed any aggression towards either handler, the dog would automatically be declared the loser and the fight would be ended immediately. This led to a very stable breed of dogs that simply and rarely would even consider biting a person for any reason at all. The American Pit Bull Terrier is not the type of dog that just "snaps", they are thoughtful decendants of fighting dogs whom under any situation have the calm, cool, and thoughtfulness of a dog sitting on a couch."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Pit_Bull_Terrier
A quality that was never bred into them was human aggression. Human “aggressive” (aggression may not be the most appropriate term, it is more likely that these dogs simply had a lower bite threshold) dogs were undesirable as these dogs required extensive handling prior and during their fights - most of theses dogs were also family pets so no human “aggression” was ever tolerated. Dogs that exhibited human “aggression” were typically killed, meaning that only human friendly lines were perpetuated and desired.
http://dogs.about.com/cs/breedprofiles/a/pitbull_history.htm
What may be surprising to those who are unfamiliar with the breed is that a sound pit bull will never show aggression towards a human. A trait bred into them for many generations, pit bulls have a strong bite inhibition with humans. Even when in extreme pain or discomfort, sound pit bulls will not show aggression. Unprovoked aggression is a sure sign of a dangerous dog and should never be tolerated in a pit bull (or any dog for that matter).
http://baddogs.libertyhumane.org/breed-info/
What is not common knowledge is that in the days of organized dogfighting, the handlers of the combatants were habitually IN THE PITBULL with the dogs for the duration of the fight. They were required to pick up and separate the dogs several times while the dogs were in full fight frenzy. Before the fight, the handlers were required to wash each other's dogs, and after the fight, the badly injured dogs were often treated at ringside by strangers. Any dog that attacked or bit a handler (even if it was the other dog's handler) or anyone else at any time was culled, often on the spot, and would never have been bred.
http://www.pitbull-apbt.com/pitbull_temperament.php | |
|
| |
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/12/2008 8:02:22 AM | Nice job of picking out only the good details in the wikipedia article alone. Dunno about the rest and couldn't care. This same article has no shortage of dark clouds either by the way, AND WARNINGS, and even tells of the places that have ALREADY passed legislation dealing with the problem.
Quest for unskewed opinions in cyber-world | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/12/2008 8:20:19 AM | When French poodles produce a known violent streak and become as physically destructive as pit bulls your analogy might have legs to stand on.
Objectively, quantitatively speaking, just how physically destructive are pit bulls (the breed as a whole) compared to other breeds of dogs? I don't think anyone on the "shoot the stray pit bulls" bandwagon can honestly answer that question.
And the analogy is still logical. You don't shoot something based on what you're afraid it might do (even if it exhibits no outward signs of doing that) simply because you heard that other creatures of the same breed/species have committed the act you fear falling victim to. Again, we're not talking about shooting pit bulls behaving in a threatening manner, we're talking about shooting any pitbull that is "obviously a stray."
Lots of stray dogs are rabid, and thus violent. So why can't I shoot a stray french poodle? | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/12/2008 9:08:12 AM | Because a stray poodle wouldn't, doesn't have the ability to take you down, keep you down all the while squeezing your larynx in a death grip. Until you die.
That's why.
Look. For all the unbelievers on here...You just need to see a pitbull attack once to have your mind changed. Right now, you are arguing from a theoretical point of view that they are kind, loving creatures. Some might be. But once you see an attack, your view and belief will be irrevocably changed.
Once you see an attack, you will never trust the ability of an owner to control the dog when they are in their blood lust. You understand that the owner can't control them. You will never ever want to leave it to chance that an owner is doing the right thing and guiding the dog every step of the way....making them model citizens of the dog world.
One attack...and you will understand. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/12/2008 9:17:00 AM | Well, unfortunately the facts are out there, in glaring numbers. There's a lot of sympathy posting here for the breed, which unfortunately isn't a result of knowing the facts in-depth. If we really want to know the level of the threat, it is imperative to research it at some length. And as a breeder and an animal advocate, I have done so.
It is not a "stable breed", which is a large part of the problem. It is a fighting, killing breed that was mis-engineered by human hand to have only one purpose. That is killing and maiming whatever is in front of it, when in a confrontational situation. And one can never tell when the animal perceives a situation to be confrontational. When we consider the real danger involved, that is that their bite is twice as severe as almost any other breed, even including poundage at 1,000PSI average, let alone the "berserk", "frenzy" factor, that has to be considered. As well as the large number of human deaths, and maimings that result from Pit Bull attacks each year. And the numbers are indeed astounding.
When the authorities are aware of a bomb in a public place, and it potentially exploding and harming many in the process, do we merely suggest it be left alone until it has actually done it's damage? Because there's a chance it may not explode? Of course not. We anticipate and neutarlize the threat, and so we should.
There are many dangerous human beings to be sure. But we cannot eliminate those. So I suggest that comparison has little merit. We live in a dangerous world to be sure. But adding more to it merely because of less than comparable statistics, isn't very advisable. Certainly more humans cause far more damage than Pit Bulls do. But that is not a threat we can eliminate, beyond what we already try to do..
Keep in mind too. Man created this problem, by engineering this breed as a fighting/kill-crazed machine. And for all the wrong reasons. Illegal and unethical reasons. So this is a human problem, not an animal problem. This isn't a natural breed. It isn't the fault of the dogs themselves. It IS the fault of those human beings (illegal dog-fighters) who created this problem for financial gain, and those who naively perpetuate it without realizing the level of the threat involved..
So eliminating this breed is merely resolving one of our own failures. But for human intervention the breed would not exist. However sadly, typically Pit Bull owners don't WANT to know the facts, until a disaster has already occurred, perhaps even within their own family.
Re: The altogether too common "famous last words" posted previously.
-Suth'nBoy
| |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/12/2008 9:58:25 AM | Because a stray poodle wouldn't, doesn't have the ability to take you down, keep you down all the while squeezing your larynx in a death grip. Until you die.
OK, so I can shoot a stray Great Dane? Or a stray Doberman or Rott Weiler? How 'bout a stray Collie, or Labrador Retriever? How 'bout a stray human being? All of the above have the same ability. And what about a puppy pit that's not big enough to do that? Can it still be shot if it's "obviously a stray?"
You guys are all speaking from fear and prejudice. Yes, pit's have a nasty reputation, can be abnormally violent, and can kill you. I don't dispute any of that. I have a real problem, though with the previously suggested idea of shooting one that's NOT behaving in a threatening manner merely because it's "obviously a stray."
When the authorities are aware of a bomb in a public place, and it potentially exploding and harming many in the process, do we merely suggest it be left alone until it has actually done it's damage? Because there's a chance it may not explode? Of course not. We anticipate and neutarlize the threat, and so we should.
That's not at all a logical analogy: It is known that a bomb WILL explode and kill. It it NOT known that a pit bull that just happens to be a stray WILL act violently toward anyone.
There are many dangerous human beings to be sure. But we cannot eliminate those. So I suggest that comparison has little merit.
Ahh, but we can eliminate ALL pit bulls (even non-violent ones, and they do exist, believe it or not, folks,) right?
So eliminating this breed is merely resolving one of our own failures. But for human intervention the breed would not exist.
You honestly believe that this particular breed of dog was "created" by man and not nature? What other species have we created? Now I'm intrigued.
| |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/12/2008 11:17:14 AM |
OK, so I can shoot a stray Great Dane? Or a stray Doberman or Rott Weiler? How 'bout a stray Collie, or Labrador Retriever?
You're really underestimating what monsters Pit Bulls are, much stronger than any of those breeds. | |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/12/2008 11:31:20 AM | It is known that a bomb WILL explode and kill
No, of course it isn't. We'd have no way to know that. You act on the possibilities. On the level of threat. And you don't take a lot of chances with a dangerous threat to life and limb. Pit Bulls are the same. If you took a day to really dig up the facts on this issue, you would be very surprised at what you'd find. But if you don't want to know, then you aren't going to find out. It's that simple.
And yes, they are the creation of man. 100%. We bred them from other breeds to get the most vicious, strong, killer animals we possibly could, in canine form, purely for an "exciting" (albeit illegal and heinous), dog-fighting event in the pits that a lot of people would bet on. That has nothing to do with why there are any other breeds. The fact is, that's the only reason Pit Bulls exist. It was a very intentional creation of man. Only it's now turned around to bite us. (no pun intended).
-Suth'nBoy 
| |
|
| Attention Civic Thinkers: *PITBULLS*
Posted: 3/12/2008 11:47:36 AM | Odd Andy...
Those breeds you mentioned do not have the same propensity of unprovoked attacking that pitbulls have. Suthn boy is correct in saying pitbulls were bred/created primarily for fighting. Aggression is part of their temperment. Period. | |
|
|
| Page 2 of 6
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
|
Home
login 
