Pit bulls are safe around children!

[ninja007]

How many times are we going to see these stories of people being mauled by pit bulls? You always hear the same thing from pit bull enthusiasts, "it depends on how they are raised. My pit bull is as gentle as can be!". Its funny how the owners of the pit bulls that attack people always say "I cant believe it, my pit bulls played with my children." Well guess what, this kid was around these pit bulls before without incident, then suddenly one day these "peaceful" dogs killed a child and mauled his pregnant mother.

These dogs are ticking time bombs, therefore they aren't fit for domestication. They should be outlawed!


Police identify boy, 4, killed in dog attack

The vast majority of pit bulls are harmless, and will not bite children.

the vast majority of muslims wont cut your head off. Problem is WHEN they bite- they maim or kill, unlike 99% of other dogs.

 

[ChrisL]

I don't think the government should be able to tell us what kind of pets it's okay for us to have, when it comes to dogs and cats. No, banning a specific breed of dog because it MAY attack a person is stupid. Any dog MAY attack a person. All animals are unpredictable. There was a time not too long ago, I believe, when Dobermans had the SAME reputation.

 

[ChrisL]

If a person wants to get a pit bull, then that should be that person's decision. If they get attacked later, then that is also their problem.

When it comes to children, you shouldn't leave your small children alone with ANY dogs. Even if a dog does not attack a child, accidents happen. I remember reading a story about a child who was playing outside with the dog, and the dog was running around and got the child wrapped up in the leash and the child ended up being strangled to death by the dog's lease, and it was completely unintentional on the part of the dog.

Don't leave your small children alone with any animals. That is probably the best advice.

 

[Bfgrn]

I don't think the government should be able to tell us what kind of pets it's okay for us to have, when it comes to dogs and cats. No, banning a specific breed of dog because it MAY attack a person is stupid. Any dog MAY attack a person. All animals are unpredictable. There was a time not too long ago, I believe, when Dobermans had the SAME reputation.

“We compared data for patients attacked by
pit bull-type dogs to those attacked by other breeds and
found patients attacked by pit bulls had more severe injuries,
higher hospital charges and
a higher risk of death.”

John K. Bini and Stephen M. Cohn, San Antonio, TX.
Trauma surgeons, physicians.


3000 % - Pit bulls and Rottweilers do three times more killing and maiming than all other dogs combined, meaning that their actuarial risk is approximately 3000% higher than that of the average dog. Source.


2,500 – More than 2,500 times higher risk of killing than Labradors. Source.

789% – Over the past decade, there was an increase of 789% in the number of life-threatening pit bull attacks (attacks on children were up 876%; attacks on adults were up 490%; fatalities were up 388%; and maimings were up 1269%.). Source.

 

[ChrisL]

I don't think the government should be able to tell us what kind of pets it's okay for us to have, when it comes to dogs and cats. No, banning a specific breed of dog because it MAY attack a person is stupid. Any dog MAY attack a person. All animals are unpredictable. There was a time not too long ago, I believe, when Dobermans had the SAME reputation.

“We compared data for patients attacked by
pit bull-type dogs to those attacked by other breeds and
found patients attacked by pit bulls had more severe injuries,
higher hospital charges and
a higher risk of death.”

John K. Bini and Stephen M. Cohn, San Antonio, TX.
Trauma surgeons, physicians.

Yes? And? The reason they cause more damage is because they have more pounds per square inch bite force than most other dogs. So yes, if you are attacked by such a dog, then you are going to sustain more serious injuries. Is that a reason to BAN the breed? I mean, if they were such a HUGE problem, then MOST pit bulls would be attacking people, but it's a relatively small percentage on the whole that actually ever attack a person. The fact of the matter is that most of these dogs never attack anyone.

 

[Bfgrn]

Yes? And? The reason they cause more damage is because they have more pounds per square inch bite force than most other dogs. So yes, if you are attacked by such a dog, then you are going to sustain more serious injuries. Is that a reason to BAN the breed? I mean, if they were such a HUGE problem, then MOST pit bulls would be attacking people, but it's a relatively small percentage on the whole that actually ever attack a person. The fact of the matter is that most of these dogs never attack anyone.

14 – Every fourteen days, someone in the U.S. is killed by a pit bull.

5.4 – Every 5.4. days, a body part is severed and lost in a pit bull attack . Source.

So as we've seen in the last 7 days, it is DEADLY for a 65 year old man to take a stroll, and a man walking to church should expect to be maimed...

And FALSE...

Which Dog Breed Has the Strongest Jaw


Pit Bull
The Pitbull has become a breed synonymous with strong jaws, biting and danger. While this dog does not have the highest bite force of the dogs National Geographic tested, it is one of the top four. The Pitbull bite was measured at 235 pounds of pressure. It is the most highly recognized breed for jaw and bite strength.

German Shepherd
Although the German Shepherd was originally bred as a herding dog, it has been used as a guard and police dog with good reason. This is a powerful and intelligent breed. The German Shepherd's bite measured 238 bite force, just slightly above the Pitbull.

Rottweiler
The Rottweiler, or Rottie as it is often called, has a huge head and large jaws. This breed bit with 328 pounds of pressure. The Rottweiler is considered the second most dangerous breed of dog; the Pitbull is number one.

Doberman
The Doberman is a highly energetic dog that can be very aggressive. The bite force is reputed to be 600 pounds of pressure; however that seems to be largely unsubstantiated.

Mastiff
Many breeders say that the Mastiff has the strongest jaw. Reportedly, the Mastiff has a bite force of 552 pounds. If true, this would make it stronger than any other domesticated dog on record.

 

[ChrisL]

Yes? And? The reason they cause more damage is because they have more pounds per square inch bite force than most other dogs. So yes, if you are attacked by such a dog, then you are going to sustain more serious injuries. Is that a reason to BAN the breed? I mean, if they were such a HUGE problem, then MOST pit bulls would be attacking people, but it's a relatively small percentage on the whole that actually ever attack a person. The fact of the matter is that most of these dogs never attack anyone.

14 – Every fourteen days, someone in the U.S. is killed by a pit bull.

5.4 – Every 5.4. days, a body part is severed and lost in a pit bull attack . Source.

So as we've seen in the last 7 days, it is DEADLY for a 65 year old man to take a stroll, and a man walking to church should expect to be maimed...

Did you think I wouldn't click on your link?

"Fortunately, fatal dog attacks are rare, but there seems to be a distinct relationship between the severity and lethality of an attack and the breed responsible," they wrote in an article published in the April issue of the medical journal Annals of Surgery. "These breeds should be regulated in the same way in which other dangerous species, such as leopards, are regulated."

Advocates, dog owners and some experts disagree. They argue passionately against singling out pit bulls, saying the problem is one of irresponsible owners, not an irredeemable breed. People often confuse pit bulls - a generic term for various bull terrier breeds and mixes - with other kinds of dogs, making statistics suspect, they say.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And . . .

Expert: Study flawed
The study began two years ago when a series of attacks in the area led to renewed calls for regulating pit bulls. Lawmakers in Austin considered bills permitting local bans on specific breeds, which now are forbidden under state law. None passed.

The study's authors argue that pit bulls deserve the special attention they get. Pit bulls, originally bred as fighting dogs, have different attack patterns than other breeds, they say - attacking indiscriminately, without warning and, often, with little interest in stopping.

"There are going to be outspoken opponents of breed legislation, who say: 'My pit bulls lie with my baby and play with my rabbit.' And that's fine," said Dr. John Bini, now chief of surgery at Wilford Hall Medical Center, who led the study while serving a fellowship at University Hospital. "I just think we're seeing something here, and I think it does warrant a discussion as to whether this is a risk that a community wants to take."

 

[ChrisL]

Another thing that you can't ignore is that this particular breed is going to be more vulnerable to mistreatment and abuse. This is the type of dog that may be attractive to a certain type of person who wants to use that dog to his/her own advantage. Some might train them to defend property, some might train them to actually BE attack dogs. This is the type of dog that would be attractive to people who are doing "illegal" activities, like gang members. Of course, they want the toughest "baddest" dog on the block.

 

[Bfgrn]

Yes? And? The reason they cause more damage is because they have more pounds per square inch bite force than most other dogs. So yes, if you are attacked by such a dog, then you are going to sustain more serious injuries. Is that a reason to BAN the breed? I mean, if they were such a HUGE problem, then MOST pit bulls would be attacking people, but it's a relatively small percentage on the whole that actually ever attack a person. The fact of the matter is that most of these dogs never attack anyone.

14 – Every fourteen days, someone in the U.S. is killed by a pit bull.

5.4 – Every 5.4. days, a body part is severed and lost in a pit bull attack . Source.

So as we've seen in the last 7 days, it is DEADLY for a 65 year old man to take a stroll, and a man walking to church should expect to be maimed...

Did you think I wouldn't click on your link?

"Fortunately, fatal dog attacks are rare, but there seems to be a distinct relationship between the severity and lethality of an attack and the breed responsible," they wrote in an article published in the April issue of the medical journal Annals of Surgery. "These breeds should be regulated in the same way in which other dangerous species, such as leopards, are regulated."

Advocates, dog owners and some experts disagree. They argue passionately against singling out pit bulls, saying the problem is one of irresponsible owners, not an irredeemable breed. People often confuse pit bulls - a generic term for various bull terrier breeds and mixes - with other kinds of dogs, making statistics suspect, they say.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And . . .

Expert: Study flawed
The study began two years ago when a series of attacks in the area led to renewed calls for regulating pit bulls. Lawmakers in Austin considered bills permitting local bans on specific breeds, which now are forbidden under state law. None passed.

The study's authors argue that pit bulls deserve the special attention they get. Pit bulls, originally bred as fighting dogs, have different attack patterns than other breeds, they say - attacking indiscriminately, without warning and, often, with little interest in stopping.

"There are going to be outspoken opponents of breed legislation, who say: 'My pit bulls lie with my baby and play with my rabbit.' And that's fine," said Dr. John Bini, now chief of surgery at Wilford Hall Medical Center, who led the study while serving a fellowship at University Hospital. "I just think we're seeing something here, and I think it does warrant a discussion as to whether this is a risk that a community wants to take."

SOOO...you clicked on the link and OMITTED what you didn't want to hear...

SAN ANTONIO — Weary of mending the mauled victims of dog attacks, doctors and nurses looked back at 15 years of serious bite injuries treated at a San Antonio hospital and produced a study likely to offer new ammunition for those looking to ban or regulate pit bulls.

University Hospital found that attacks by pit bulls were more likely to kill people than those by other breeds. In fact, all three deaths seen at the hospital during the period - two children and a 90-year-old man - were from pit bull attacks, records showed. A fourth fatality, a 64-year-old Von Ormy man killed by a pit bull, wasn't seen by the hospital, death records show.

In addition, they found that pit bulls caused more serious injuries - injuries more likely to put their victims in the hospital. Once admitted, those victims had higher medical costs.

Or the actual study...

http://www.terrierman.com/mortality-mauling-vicious-dogs.pdf
TABLE 3.
Characteristics of Pit Bulls
Fatal Pit Bull Attacks Nationally

• Pit bulls attack indiscriminately
• Responsible for 65% of all fatal attacks in 2008
• 6 of 7 fatal dog bites in Texas in 2007 were inflicted by pit bulls
• 94% of attacks on children by pit bulls were unprovoked
• 81% of attacks that occurred off the owner’s property involved pit bulls
• One person is killed by a pit bull every 14 days
• One body part is severed and lost every 5.4 days as a result of pit bull attacks
• 2 persons are injured by pit bulls every day
• 1.5 pit bulls are shot to death every day

 

[Bfgrn]

Another thing that you can't ignore is that this particular breed is going to be more vulnerable to mistreatment and abuse. This is the type of dog that may be attractive to a certain type of person who wants to use that dog to his/her own advantage. Some might train them to defend property, some might train them to actually BE attack dogs. This is the type of dog that would be attractive to people who are doing "illegal" activities, like gang members. Of course, they want the toughest "baddest" dog on the block.

Oh, so we must coddle and cater to criminals?

 

[Iceweasel]

American Pit Bull Terrier
American Staffordshire Terrier
Staffordshire Bull Terrier
American Bull Dog
Bull Terrier

All Pit Bulls, I didn't think this was up for debate. Who doesn't call them Pit Bulls?

You're a prolific retard but a retard none the less. I have a Amstaff, she isn't a Pitbull to anyone except people who don't know what they are talking about. No vet has called her such. Run your keyboard less and learn more. It may be hard for you but the longest journey begins with a single step.

 

[Iceweasel]

SOOO...you clicked on the link and OMITTED what you didn't want to hear...

SAN ANTONIO — Weary of mending the mauled victims of dog attacks, doctors and nurses looked back at 15 years of serious bite injuries treated at a San Antonio hospital and produced a study likely to offer new ammunition for those looking to ban or regulate pit bulls.

University Hospital found that attacks by pit bulls were more likely to kill people than those by other breeds. In fact, all three deaths seen at the hospital during the period - two children and a 90-year-old man - were from pit bull attacks, records showed. A fourth fatality, a 64-year-old Von Ormy man killed by a pit bull, wasn't seen by the hospital, death records show.

4 deaths in 15 years in the size of San Antonio? Plus there's no context. Were these crackhead dogs that got loose? If Pits are banned and negligent owners go for another strong breed will the outcome be different?

 

[pwjohn]

Near as I can tell, American bull dogs are far more dangerous than pit bulls, and that's a fact.
Part of the problem with pitbulls though is their large numbers, and it's not always the fighting dog that's the problem. Quite a few of them were quite simply raised all wrong by uncaring pet owners who failed to properly socialize their pet. Instead the poor dog is chained to a stake in the backyard right up until they turn on the owner, and that's when the owner turns it lose on the neighborhood every bit as dangerous as the fighting dog...

And then you have the pitbulls that were raised right, and still just as troubled as the pitbull that was chained to a stake all its life..Those are the ones you really need to watch out for because the owners will often times ignore all the warning signs right up until they are forced to utter the words we all too often hear on the evening news."The dog must have snapped because he was a perfect little angel right up until he ripped that poor kids head off."

 

[Bfgrn]

SOOO...you clicked on the link and OMITTED what you didn't want to hear...

SAN ANTONIO — Weary of mending the mauled victims of dog attacks, doctors and nurses looked back at 15 years of serious bite injuries treated at a San Antonio hospital and produced a study likely to offer new ammunition for those looking to ban or regulate pit bulls.

University Hospital found that attacks by pit bulls were more likely to kill people than those by other breeds. In fact, all three deaths seen at the hospital during the period - two children and a 90-year-old man - were from pit bull attacks, records showed. A fourth fatality, a 64-year-old Von Ormy man killed by a pit bull, wasn't seen by the hospital, death records show.

4 deaths in 15 years in the size of San Antonio? Plus there's no context. Were these crackhead dogs that got loose? If Pits are banned and negligent owners go for another strong breed will the outcome be different?

CONTEXT...

U.S. Dog Bite Fatalities - Dog Bite Statistics - DogsBite.org

 

[Iceweasel]

SOOO...you clicked on the link and OMITTED what you didn't want to hear...

SAN ANTONIO — Weary of mending the mauled victims of dog attacks, doctors and nurses looked back at 15 years of serious bite injuries treated at a San Antonio hospital and produced a study likely to offer new ammunition for those looking to ban or regulate pit bulls.

University Hospital found that attacks by pit bulls were more likely to kill people than those by other breeds. In fact, all three deaths seen at the hospital during the period - two children and a 90-year-old man - were from pit bull attacks, records showed. A fourth fatality, a 64-year-old Von Ormy man killed by a pit bull, wasn't seen by the hospital, death records show.

4 deaths in 15 years in the size of San Antonio? Plus there's no context. Were these crackhead dogs that got loose? If Pits are banned and negligent owners go for another strong breed will the outcome be different?

CONTEXT...

U.S. Dog Bite Fatalities - Dog Bite Statistics - DogsBite.org

There's just a lazylink. No context. Fail.

 

[koshergrl]

Chasing livestock is what dogs are doing when they're running unsupervised in cattle and sheep country. And I also provided the law from yet another state that said ppl could shoot dogs at large. I've no doubt you misinterpreted what I said, as well as what the laws state. I appreciate your confusion. But as I've said, your inability to grasp concepts doesn't make me wrong.

Got it, dogs only run when chasing cattle. I guess that makes the decision to shoot them trouble free. That's ridiculous.

it is ridiculous. Why on earth did you say it?

That seeing a running dog is reason enough to shoot it.

In some places it is. But that's not what you said. You said I said any dog running is chasing livestock.

Sweet heart, this is getting old. Where you live it's not enough of a reason. I don't remember if you ever demonstrated that is the case in another state. Just do the dogs where you live a favor, don't shoot them simply for running. I'm kind of done with this.

That made zero sense and as per usual has nothing to do with anything. Certainly it has nothing to do with anything I said.

 

[koshergrl]

Based on hysterical reporting from idiot reporters who write stories long on sensationalism, and short on fact. Plus they rarely report non pit attacks.

There is a good reason "they rarely report non pit attacks"...

Most non pit bull attacks do not end up with someone being maimed, losing a limb or ending up in the morgue.


Banning pit bulls saves lives and protects the innocent

Most dogs bite and retreat, but pit bulls have a hold-and-shake bite style, and tenaciously refuse to stop an attack once begun.

Often a pit bull releases its grip only when dead — the trait dog fighters describe as being "dead game."

Ban opponents often blame dismembering and fatal attacks on environmental factors, such as neglect. That, unfortunately, is the plight of too many dogs of all breeds, not just those who kill and maim.

Opponents also fail to distinguish dog-bite-injury severity. They argue that bans "do not reduce all dog bites." Of the 4.7 million Americans bitten by dogs each year, 9,500 require hospitalization for severe dog-bite injuries. The most extreme injury level, mauling injury, requires life-saving procedures at trauma centers.

The purpose of a pit bull ban is to eradicate mauling injuries and deaths inflicted by pit bulls, the breed involved in more than half of all severe and mauling attacks.

Since 1986, 18 appellate decisions have upheld lower-court findings that pit bulls are more dangerous than other dog breeds.

Since 1988, four peer-reviewed studies published in leading medical journals have reviewed the severity of pit bull injury. "Mortality, Mauling and Maiming by Vicious Dogs," published in the Annals of Surgery in 2011, concluded the following:

"Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the U.S. mortality rates related to dog bites."

The Front Burner: Should pit bulls be banned?

Bullshit. All this conjecture is funny and comes down to one thing...you are scared of dogs. That's fine...don't have pits and don't stroll around the inner city and your chance if being attacked by Americas dog is exactly zero. Or better yet...move to Russia, where the likelihood if being killed by a pit remains zero, but the chance that you'll be torn apart by a pack frolicking is about 1 in 3.

 

[koshergrl]

SOOO...you clicked on the link and OMITTED what you didn't want to hear...

SAN ANTONIO — Weary of mending the mauled victims of dog attacks, doctors and nurses looked back at 15 years of serious bite injuries treated at a San Antonio hospital and produced a study likely to offer new ammunition for those looking to ban or regulate pit bulls.

University Hospital found that attacks by pit bulls were more likely to kill people than those by other breeds. In fact, all three deaths seen at the hospital during the period - two children and a 90-year-old man - were from pit bull attacks, records showed. A fourth fatality, a 64-year-old Von Ormy man killed by a pit bull, wasn't seen by the hospital, death records show.

4 deaths in 15 years in the size of San Antonio? Plus there's no context. Were these crackhead dogs that got loose? If Pits are banned and negligent owners go for another strong breed will the outcome be different?

CONTEXT...

U.S. Dog Bite Fatalities - Dog Bite Statistics - DogsBite.org

There's just a lazylink. No context. Fail.

All this spew is just garbage. Haters hate...they hate people and apparently they hate dogs as well. They're cowardly and nuts.

 

[Bfgrn]

CONTEXT...

2015 dog bite fatalities ::
It often takes several weeks to identify fatal dog attack parameters.1 This is why recent dog bite fatalities may not appear on this page. In the interim, please visit the DogsBite.org blog.

 

[koshergrl]

Oh look, propaganda.