Another family friendly pit bull story

[manifold]

Here's an idea. Why don't one of you pit bull lovers call Vicks and ask him why he used pits for dog fights and not golden retrievers?

I bet he's got all kinds of insight to give you.

Ravi wins!!

 

[Anguille]

This is a great article from the Louisiana SPCA, everyone should read this.

Pit bull attack stats may surprise you

Thanks. This article doesn't mention the ratio of attacks to number of pit bulls versus other breeds but it is a good article. But it does demonstrate that people are irrationally when considering what dangers their children are actually up against.

"Pit bull attack stats may surprise you

Thursday, July 07, 2005


Last week, I received a phone call from someone wanting to know the truth behind pit bull statistics. And, on June 12, in a letter to the editor, a reader wrote about his fear of pit bulls. He said, "These dogs have killed more than 100 individuals in the past five years. If an automobile had a defect that killed 100 people, there would be a public outcry."

After you start looking a little deeper, the numbers tell a different tale. According to "Fatal Dog Attacks, the Stories Behind the Statistics," by Karen Delise there were 431 deaths because of dog attacks in the years from 1965 to 2001. Children 12 younger were the victims in 79 percent of the fatal attacks.

In 37 years, 342 children were killed by dogs, an average of about nine children a year. Shockingly, approximately three children are killed each day, or 1,100 per year, by their parents. Delise notes that "A child in the United States is over 100 times more likely to be killed by his or her parent or caretaker than by a dog."

Even more surprising is that approximately 50 infants die each year from broken baby cribs, and 250 newborns die at the hands of their parents or guardians. In comparison, two infants, on average, die a year from dog attacks.

Pit bull and pit mixes account for 21 percent of all human fatalities, while mixed breed dogs account for 16 percent and other nonspecified breeds, 15 percent. Delise's study demonstrates that the breed of dog should not be the sole factor by which an attack is judged. Other factors include inherited and learned behaviors, genetics, breeding, temperament, surgical sterilization, environmental stresses, owner responsibility, victim behavior, size and age, timing, and the physical condition and the size of dog.

Of the 28 dogs responsible for a fatal attack between 2000 and 2001, 26 were males and two were females. Of the 26 males, 21 were sexually intact; the reproductive status of the remaining five male dogs could not be determined. The male dog that killed the 12-year-old boy in San Francisco on June 3 was protecting his female dog in heat.

An owner's understanding of dogs, supervision of dogs and children, sterilization and chaining as a primary means of confinement all can play roles in attacks. Whether dogs were obtained for protection, guarding, fighting, are newly acquired or not properly introduced to newborns are among other issues.

In the end, many factors contribute to dog attacks. A popular slogan seems to capture the sentiment perfectly, "Judge the Deed Not the Breed."

 

[Anguille]

Did you not make some statement earlier on this thread comparing breed specific laws with racism?

Not at all. I've got no problem with whacking them, training them, letting the bad breeds die out.

About racism, I did. I have never said animals should have all the same rights as humans.

Dog breeding has done more harm than good. It should be much more strictly regulated.
For example, people who breed Tea Cup Chihuahua's should be put out of business.

 

[AllieBaba]

Ok, I'm not someone who doesn't like Rotties or Pits. I've owned Rottweilers and my son has an immense pit. I'm not trying to villify them and I'm certainly not for banning any animal.

But I'm telling you straight up, I've handled dangerous animals all my life, and it is IDIOTIC to insist that dogs such as Rottweilers, Pit Bulls, even German Shepherds are "just as safe" as any other dog. They aren't just as safe. They are potentially deadly, and they have been bred to be aggressive.

Horses are bred for personality characteristics, so are dogs, and it irks me when morons insist that this breeding has no effect whatsoever on an animal's behavior, and vicious animals are always solely the result of bad handling.

It's not true. You can take your kids and wave them around in front of pits and rotts and leave them alone in bedrooms and allow the dogs out when there are strange and unpredictable kids racing around the neighborhood; you can blame the kids when they get killed if you like. But you know and I know these animals are potentially deadly, and you're an asshole if you are willing to put children at risk just because you have some stupid agenda.

In one study sponsored by the US Governement Centers For Disease Control it was reported that 32% of all dog related killings of human beings in the United States are caused by Pit Bulls , yet Pit Bulls constitute only 2% of all dogs. 70% of those mauling deaths were of children.
According to a federal government study conducted by the CDC 20 years attacks by pit bulls accounted for one third of the fatal dog attacks in the United States. This study also cited the disproportionate threat these dogs pose to children. Children under the age of 14 accounted for 42 percent of all dog bite injuries. Most of the mauled victims are between the ages of five and nine.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf

 

[Ravi]

The only difference between a pit bull and several other large breeds is the capacity for greater injury than is possible with smaller dogs. This does not in any way indicate that dogs with larger jaws are predisposed to ripping kid's faces off.

So, if the dogs with larger jaws are different than other breeds, then why aren't we allowed to treat them differently?

 

[Ravi]

Ravi wins!!

Every once in awhile I have a flash of brilliance.

 

[Anguille]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, because it was only jaw size that they were bred for, no behavioral traits were considered whatsover. Got it.

I went through this way back in the thread. Dogs have existed for eons, way before any breeding ever began.

The vast majority of pit bulls are bred as family pets.

Get a grip, no pun ..., you're becoming the pit bull of fear tactics.

 

[Ravi]

About racism, I did. I have never said animals should have all the same rights as humans.

Dog breeding has done more harm than good. It should be much more strictly regulated.
For example, people who breed Tea Cup Chihuahua's should be put out of business.

Okay, my bad.

 

[Shogun]

Ravi wins!!

yea.. she wins the sockpuppet award for deepest hand up mani's ass..

 

[Ravi]

btw, Soggy, if you ring the bell and the dog is full because you've already let him eat as much as he wants to eat, he'll just look at you like you're crazy and not salivate.

Ditto if he's sick.



No love for the bell,

 

[Anguille]

Ok, I'm not someone who doesn't like Rotties or Pits. I've owned Rottweilers and my son has an immense pit. I'm not trying to villify them and I'm certainly not for banning any animal.

But I'm telling you straight up, I've handled dangerous animals all my life, and it is IDIOTIC to insist that dogs such as Rottweilers, Pit Bulls, even German Shepherds are "just as safe" as any other dog. They aren't just as safe. They are potentially deadly, and they have been bred to be aggressive.

Horses are bred for personality characteristics, so are dogs, and it irks me when morons insist that this breeding has no effect whatsoever on an animal's behavior, and vicious animals are always solely the result of bad handling.

It's not true. You can take your kids and wave them around in front of pits and rotts and leave them alone in bedrooms and allow the dogs out when there are strange and unpredictable kids racing around the neighborhood; you can blame the kids when they get killed if you like. But you know and I know these animals are potentially deadly, and you're an asshole if you are willing to put children at risk just because you have some stupid agenda.

In one study sponsored by the US Governement Centers For Disease Control it was reported that 32% of all dog related killings of human beings in the United States are caused by Pit Bulls , yet Pit Bulls constitute only 2% of all dogs. 70% of those mauling deaths were of children.
According to a federal government study conducted by the CDC 20 years attacks by pit bulls accounted for one third of the fatal dog attacks in the United States. This study also cited the disproportionate threat these dogs pose to children. Children under the age of 14 accounted for 42 percent of all dog bite injuries. Most of the mauled victims are between the ages of five and nine.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf

Yes and if you actually read that article you will see where the CDC is opposed to breed specific laws.

 

[Shogun]

Every once in awhile I have a flash of brilliance.

that "flash" is the onset of your stroke, Ravikins.. I suggest you run to the hospital.

 

[AllieBaba]

Yes and if you actually read that article you will see where the CDC is opposed to breed specific laws.

No, I read that. There are too many things to consider to get a real clear picture. But the stats still speak for themselves.

 

[manifold]

Yes and if you actually read that article you will see where the CDC is opposed to breed specific laws.

I am too.

I just can't believe you and Soggy would be so pig headed as to claim that an untrained golden is just as risky as an untrained pit bull. That's just plain retarded.

 

[Anguille]

Yes, but you are claiming that breed specific laws would lead people to leave other dogs alone with small children.

I never clained that but if people are so dumb as to think breed specific laws serve any practical purpose then they may be as dumb as to think that the laws indicate pit bulls are the only type dog to be cautious about.

 

[Shogun]

btw, Soggy, if you ring the bell and the dog is full because you've already let him eat as much as he wants to eat, he'll just look at you like you're crazy and not salivate.

Ditto if he's sick.



No love for the bell,

uh, the conditioned response still occurs. A full dog wont eat? Are you kidding me? Youll run out of bacon before you run out of a dog who wont eat the bacon.

Your observation techniques of guinnea pigs will impress the phsych community, yo. I sure can see you name right up there with pavlov and skinner!

 

[Anguille]

Here's an idea. Why don't one of you pit bull lovers call Vicks and ask him why he used pits for dog fights and not golden retrievers?

I bet he's got all kinds of insight to give you.

Jaws. looks and culture, Duh!!

You think goldens don't fight?

 

[Shogun]

I am too.

I just can't believe you and Soggy would be so pig headed as to claim that an untrained golden is just as risky as an untrained pit bull. That's just plain retarded.

You have examples of either untrained pits or retrievers? Gosh, I can't wait to see THAT!

Hey, don't let that keep you from wholesale assumptions though!

 

[jschuck12001]

Here is my killer pitbull cuddling with my 7 pound cat max.

 

[manifold]

I am too.

I just can't believe you and Soggy would be so pig headed as to claim that an untrained golden is just as risky as an untrained pit bull. That's just plain retarded.

Correction:

I can believe (and even expect ) it from Soggy. But not you Ang. You usually seem quite reasonable.