It is irresponsible to say my wife wouldn't bite anyone. A human is an animal and has animal instincts, which can surface at anytime under the right circumstances. Any human is capable of biting and harming someone, some do more harm than others.

- not quite clear on the concept...

or substitute some other animal for wife/human - horse, cow, etc.

All animals have instinctive behavior. That doesn't mean that a given dog will bite under any circumstances.

Example, Mike Tyson :D

At the dog park one day I was told not to pet the pit puppy. The owner said he wanted him to grow up mean. This is the attitude that makes any dog dangerous.

Jim-killer articles on the second link. Thanks.

Statistics, which I don't have handy, prove you wrong. Every breed of dog will bite, even turn on it's master if the circumstances are right. The issue really is can you ever control all the circumstances all the time?

When I was 10 we had a cocker spaniel. One day when she was sick she bit me when I was trying to feed her. Other than that the most loveable dog a person could own. We kept her because it was my fault for doing something stupid, and really, she was not all that dangerous even when she did bite. I cried for a week after she was hit by a car. We also adopted a boxer when I was 8. I made the mistake of trying to play fetch with a beef rib he was working. No blood drawn but the dog was history by 6:00 pm even though once again I was the idiot for taking the bone away.

The point is that given the right situation a dog, even one you think would never hurt anyone, can become aggressive.

Recently we owned for 2+ years the most awesome GSD. We took him to training classes, did the dog socialization thing, all of it. Then one day he decides the neighbor wiener dog looked tasty. No more GSD. Well there's more to that story. The GSD, Ryker, was extremely loyal to the family, especially our kids. One day my son was playing rough with another kid and Ryker growled at the boy. That was the final straw - even though the dog thought he was doing right by us.

Comparing Blacks to Dogs.

Nice.






For the record, I was attacked by a pitbull when I was about 12. I was waiting for a bus and this thing just ran over to me from the other side of the street, leapt for my jugular (I swerved and instinctively put my arms up) It attached itself to my bicep and would not let go - it just hung there until it's moron owner got it off.

I have hated them since with an absolute passion. If you ask me, they should be painted up like soccer balls and let go in an Argentinian prison soccer ground one by one. "GOAAAAAAAAL!"

re: particular dog
"Statistics, which I don't have handy, prove you wrong."

- Well, no. I'm a professional biologist. If such statistics existed I think I'd have seen the study. What I think you must be thinking of, is some table or other that shows dog bite rates by breed. But that doesn't tell you what a particular dog will do - only that some dogs from the breeds listed will bite, and some breed bite more than others.

So you got bit by a pit many years ago. I got bit by a German Shepherd Dog when I was a kid and don't hate them all now. Don't blame the dog, blame the owner for lacking control over the dog.

These dogs are certainly products of their upbringing. Nothing more. Nothing less. There are many strong willed breeds out there that simply need to be raisd properly.

The problem is that many owners have these dogs as symbols of their manhood, or simply have NO control over them whatsoever. This is a bad thing obviously.

Some of the sweetest dogs I've ever known, from birth to death, have been the so-called dangerous breeds - Rottweilers, Pits, Dobies. One male Dobie I knew ran around all day with THREE tennis balls in his mouth at all times because he always wanted to play "fetch". I was never afraid of that dog and I don't believe he ever knew that he was supposed to be "tough".

I have known many sweet, well-bred PBs. There is one in my building that could not be more affectionate and friendly. The problem is that each breed has its characteristics, and though not all dogs within each breed are the same, too many PBs are badly bred for aggression and fighting toughness only. These dogs within the breed are timebombs, no matter how well they are raised. :cool:

Most people get bit by a dog at some point in their lives. If you get bit by a cocker spaniel, or by a collie, or even a lab - it doesn't make the headline news. If you get bit by a pit bull or one of the other 'agressive breeds', it makes the news and there are calls to have the dog put down. It's all about hype. I'd wager that more dog bites occur from the non agressive breeds than the 'agressive breeds' but these are never reported.

I am not going to deny that a bite from a pit bull could have more severe cocequences than a nip from a poodle.

Exactly. If the dogs are specifically bread for aggressive behavior and/or raised to exhibit aggressive behavior, you've got problems.

The issue here is bad breeders and owners. NOT the breed.

There's a reason why people like me (non-biker/street thug) defend this breed with a passion. They are great dogs!

- Skip

I don't have a dog in this fight <g> as I don't own a dog, but anecdotal stories like, "I knew somebody once that had a pit bull and he was nice" are pretty worthless.

Dogs are animals that under the right circumstances are capable of injuring or killing you. That's just the way it is. A pit bull, or rottweiler, or doberman, et al that have been bred to be especially effective at injuring or killing has to be treated with respect commensurate with their capabilities, I don't care how many babies faces he licks.

Mike

African Americans. And no, I was showing how your a racist by saying "all" pitbulls are violent because one bit you.

A poodle bit me when I was 12ish. Does that mean that all poddle are ferocious. Nope.

Breeds are breeds, to some extent. My GSD is a perfect example. Sweet, loving, submissive dog. Loves our kids, their friends, their friends friends. But, when the kids run, her play exhibits herding behavior. She "knows" not to nip and turn them, but that's obviously learned, and you can see her struggling with it. Same thing with the cat-she knows its part of our family and is cool w/ him, but if he runs at full tilt across the yard, she chases. Prey drive.

I know sweet pits, American bulldogs, Rotties etc etc. However, that doesn't mean you can ignore their potential. That doesn't equate to "why would you ever own one." I wouldn't own a bad one, and anyone who keeps an "agressive dog" or encourages that behavior better deal with it like a loaded firearm. I have tremendous sympathy for those folks that have had an otherwise loving pet involved in a tragic bite incident, but anyone that harbors a dog that is known to be vicious and looses control of that animal resulting in personal injury should be treated in the same manner as a negligent shooter.

Kids are often bit by border collies. Why? Running children or children on bicycles are seen as runaway sheep, if you will, and the herding instinct is incredibly strong. border collies are not recommended for homes with small children for this reason. If a kid is running and the dog gets fired up, the kid freaks out and runs harder, only exacerbating the situation. Older children stop or slow down. The dog nips to bring the escaping sheep back in line.

Unfortunate tendencies, but these dogs were bred to work. Or in our bc's cases, play frisbee. ;)

Pit bulls were bred to be capable of doing a lot of damage in a dog fight. Their a powerful dog.
No, Their jaws don't lock, but when they get hold of something they like to hold on, and have the strength to do a tremendous amount of damage.

Anybody disagree with the above ?

Quote " Describe the breed and what it was bred for.

Let's hear some jaw pressure stats too while were at it compared to other breeds.

And why are they so stocky ?

And do they have jaws that lock ? "

The dogs wer originally bred for farm work. Before firearms when it was time for the farmer to slaughter his bull often the bull refused to co-operate. The "bulldog's" job was to latch on to the bull by the nose and tire him out so the farmer could come out & cut his throat.

All the ridiculous jaw pressure stuff is myth. All large dogs with short snouts have good jaw strength.

Actually they are not that much more stocky than many other breeds.

Locking jaws is probably the most ridculous of all. The jaw mechanism of a bulldog is no different than for any other dog. They dont lock any more than a poodle's.

Unfortunately, it's not hype. at least around here. When a PB attack or bite makes the news, it's usually because of the ferociousness of the attack. The amount of physical damage or death. Especially around kids.

Defend your sweet little dog all you like, because chances are, he is a nice dog. Unfortunately, whether by breeding, or training, the results of a bite or attack are generally tragic.

Notice the vicious attack of the stuffed toy. He has yet to tear up the first one & he knows that the small ones belong to the cat & leaves them alone.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1128691256.jpg

Is your issue with vicious dogs or low lifes that cause dogs to be vicious or bulldogs?

Pit Bulls were bred to fight so they can inflict a lot of damage, more so than a poodle of same weight and height, I believe. They also have a stronger instinct to protect than a lot of breeds. Plus, they have a much stronger will than a lot of breeds so a firm hand and a great deal of dog training knowledge are required to raise these breeds properly. Therefore, the breed should not be raised by the general public, let alone low-lifes.

You might want to look into some fact about bulldogs as opposed to myth. They are way down on the aggression list. Their will is no more or less strong than many other breeds. They do have competetive instincts & prey drive like all dogs. As far as the firm hand, they are the most eager to please breed you will find. As SOON as the dog knows what is expected of him, he will respond.

So let's take your logic to task. If we eliminate these dogs do you think that low-lifes will reform or find another breed to use as a gambling tool or weapon.

Ban the behavior, not the breed.

Why is the term "Pit" attached to this paticular type of Bull dog ?

As you may or may not know, from it's inception tenacity has been one of the breed's hallmarks, as it is with many terriers. Apparently some enterprising humanitarians decided that they could stage fights between these dogs and gamble on the outcome. As these events gained popularity they began to be held in a small "pit." This had been going on for many years and the dog was still referred to as a "bulldog" and held the posotion as the most popular pet in America for many many years.

The term "pit bull" is fairly recent as is the dog's popularity with thug's & low-lifes looking to enhance their image.

As to the earlier comment about them being "butt ugly", beauty is in the eye of the beholder but here is my dog again. Everywhere I take him people stop me to tell me how beautiful he is.http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1128698330.jpg

The major flaw in all of this speculation seems to be most people's (understandable) tendency to personify, or project their human experience into, the nature of animals. How a dog is trained DOES, in fact, shape how it will respond in many situations, i.e., if consistently taught certain behaviors, it is logical that an animal will consistently exhibit those behaviors. However one's analysis is tainted if the response, or anticipated response is taken in light of human logic and perceptions. Where we would expect a certain LOGICAL response to a given stimulus, an animal, no matter how mild-mannered or well trained, will ultimately and involuntarily act (not CHOOSE to act, as a thinking person might - or as we might wish to project on the animal response) according to chemical responses (instinct) over which it has no control or discipline. Instinct will ALWAYS override learned habit, or conditioning. It would be ignorant (and based purely in emotion connected to a personified understanding of a non-person) to try and understand why, in what we might consider a completely non-threatening circumstance, the "loving, caring" family dog ate the face off a well-known family member. Smells, sounds, visual stimuli, et cetera, that we are either unaware of or think nothing of, can (and do) combine in a manner that set chemical processes in motion that for the most part won't be interrupted, and are not the "choice" or deliberate response of the actual animal.

Sharks don't eat surfers because they are mean. When the senses combine it's, black+movement+chemicals in the water signaling flesh present = automatic, involuntary muscle and digestive responses. Not, "yum, time to eat!"

Even by using words such as "raise" when talking about animals indicates our tendency to see them as little dumb people.

With that being the case dogs like the German Shephard, Rottwieler, Doberman & many others have been used for hundreds of years to guard property against 2 & 4 legged marauders. They are used by armies & plice departments world wide for the express purpose of attacking human beings. Your line of reasoning would exhonerate the bulldog as human aggression was avoided in their breeding for years. Human aggression in a dog fighting for it's life in a small closed space with 3 humans didn't work out so well. When is the last time you saw a cop with a bulldog? They aren't used because they are much more reluctant to attack a human than other breeds.

I guess what I was trying to say was that while trends and inbred tendencies DO exist, and while conditioning CAN have SOME effect on how an animal responds, it bugs me when generalizations are made such as a well trained Rott, Pit, poodle, cat or whatever will be dependably loyal and predicably loving. That may be partly true, but the fact of the matter is the same Rott/poodle/whatever that fights off 3 other dogs because they are trying to get at little Junior is just as likely to bite off his owner's bawls because a gnat flew by his ear.

I'm not being concise enough. People should own whatever dog they want - with "violent" tendencies bred in, or "lapdog" temperment. Your choice. But when something unfortunate happens, it is silly to attach human understanding to it as "bad" or "violent". It is neither - it is simply biology.

Violence is a human invention - the willful, calclulated and often malicious implementation of built in defense mechanisms and abilities. That is not how animals committ what we consider "violent" acts.

Goes back to several posts in this thread saying the same thing. Dog owners who say "my dog would never hurt anyone" is ignorant about animal behavior. These are the folks who let their dogs run in public off leash or keep them in yards with inadequate fencing.

Mule your dog is very handsome. Seriously. From the posts you have submitted it sounds like you are a very responsible owner and take the necessary precautions. You have every right to keep that dog as long as it does not step over the line. I as a parent have to assume that most dog owners are not as diligent as you and approach all dog encounters as potentially catastrophic.

I think we were making the same point from two different angles.

Therefore I'll shut up and lurk some more.

Not exactly true, as evidence of unprovoked violence and gang-like actions have been observed in other species.....
Notably apes and Dolphins...

Agreed. The way I expressed it was incorrect. It is our sense of entitlement to individual liberty, emotion, sympathy, etc. that makes "violence" personal or inhumane (fitting) to us. In the animal world it is largely utilitarian.

I'm sure the term go's way back to the 19th century were they were fought in pits. When the breed arrived in America the name " American Pit Bullterrier" was adopted.

Dog fighting is a cruel sport that goes back to ancient Rome between dogs, Tigers / Lions and even Men, i.e. Blood sport.

In England the sport was expanded on, to include the fighting of Bulls. And they developed a little Warrior of their own " the Bull dog "
The dog's nose is pugged so it can breath easily when it has the Bull by the throat.
These dogs were also fought against one another in Pit's to the death of one of the dogs, sometimes both.

As people became more civilized they started outlawing the cruel sport, first was Holland back in 1689. It took England another 150 years to outlaw the sport.
I'm sure there are still matches held in secret much like Cock fights.

In America the breed was expanded on and the name "Pit Bull"
stuck, Short for American Pit Bull terrier. Breeders here increased their weight with a more muscular head.

The breed is still changing from what I see. With some people breeding bigger dogs that look even more capable of their original purpose.
SmileWavy

some more food for thought

follow the link

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

Guys, there's a lot of data available on dog attacks and breeds, and I think it might be worth consulting.

Here is a study of dog breeds involved in fatal attacks. http://www.dogbitelaw.com/breeds-causing-DBRFs.pdf The leading breed by far is the rottweilers, with pit bulls a respectable second, then several breeds (GSD, husky-type, doberman, etc) compete for third.

Here is data on dog bites treated in emergency rooms. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5226a1.htm

I notice that many of the websites on the topic are "partisan", either operated by dog bite lawyers (with an incentive to maximize the problem) or by dog lovers (with an incentive to minimize the problem), so you have to look for the actual statistics gathered by researchers and government agencies, rather than the interpretation given by the partisan websites.

I also realize that just knowing that rottweilers killed 60 people in a given period in the US, while retrievers killed 10 (let's suppose, I don't recall the exact #s) isn't the whole story. You'd also like to know how many rottweilers and retrievers there were in the US. Maybe someone will unearth that data. (But I suspect there's fewer rottweilers than retrievers.)

Anyway, I've just skimmed a few of the reports, and my impression is that pit bulls don't bite people any more other than do other breeds, but they kill people a lot more often. In other words, when a pit bull does go bad, the typical consequences are a lot worse than when a retriever or GSD goes bad.

I don't know whether this is because the pit bull is such a powerfully built dog, or because the dog was originally bred to fight to the death [edit: if that is in fact the case - I see there's some doubt] and still retains that instinct, so that they press home an attack rather than giving one bite.

I know that if someone nearby owned a pit bull, I'd go talk to him/her and make sure that the dog was well trained and well secured. If I had any doubts, I'd ask the local police and animal control to check. If the person took a "none of your business" attitude, I'd escalate until the person either took the necessary steps, left the area, lost his homeowners' coverage or his lease, and/or was positioned so that any serious incident with the dog would cause the owner to be jailed and lose his assets.

The real reason is because of the ancient sport of "Bull Baiting", the name does not derive from fighting other dogs.

http://www.pitbullregistry.com/Pit%20Bull%20History.htm
http://dogs.about.com/cs/breedprofiles/a/pitbull_history.htm



IMO this thread has really exposed the ignorance of many individuals, but I'm also glad to see there are quite a few open minded pelicans out there. As Skipdup Terry, Mule and other owners have pointed out the "terror dog" hype associated with pit bulls are just that, hype, fueled by the media. IMO it's like a Porsche, you won't get it until you own one.
Man is to blame............................for everything. If that fails, well then we can always say it's Bush's fault :D .

Do you have some data on attacks and bites that would improve the image of the pit bull?

Also, Pari, are you sure that the dog wasn't bred to fight other dogs? Because that is the breed history as described in some pit bull enthusiast websites that I'm finding. For example

http://www.badrap.org/rescue/breed.cfm which says that in 1835 bull baiting was outlawed and replaced by dog fighting for which the American Pit Bull Terrier was specifically bred.

Some of this stuff is pretty simple, Don't you think ?

If a potential dog owner did a little research and used sound judgment to choose a breed of dog, like many do, we wouldn't be discussing this.

But a lot of people make choices determined by a rational that is less well founded and selfish.

Sure these dogs for the most part are harmless in most situations, BUT , in that one instance were their inbred capabilities might get a hold of a person or a child for whatever reason is why I can't see the logic in owning one.

The rewards are just not worth the risk to most thinking individuals
Too many other breeds of dogs available that are a safer bet.

I bought a rottie when I was younger. When I lived in my first apartment. The neighbor upstairs from me had one. What a nice dog it was. My dog was great with people but terrible around other dogs. The breed is very loyal and intelligent but I imagine very dangerous if not raised properly. Kato was a 125lb dog, so he was quite a handful. My wife actually refused to walk him though she loved him deerly. My only issue was when I was walking him sometimes and if he saw a another dog before I did he would try to bolt. I would have to basically lift him off the ground by his neck to slow him down. Hanging there you could still see the fire in his eyes. Over the 11 years I had him, that was my only real dislike. Other than that, he was a great, loyal dog.

I now have a Toy Terrior/Beagle mix, this guy is way more a PITA but at least he doesn't scare anyone. . Barks and barks.

David