Videos like these make me very sad. I wish youtube would take this off.
Pitbull’s are such a brutal breed. Yeah right!
October Girl, you are an ignorant piece of garbage.
I could go on and on about the crap you posted but as I sat here and mulled over my response to you I decided you weren’t worth the time and energy.
However, I do feel strongly enough about the subject to tell you to take your crap somewhere else.
If you said this shit to my face I would hand you the verbal beating of a lifetime.
[quote]Digital Chainsaw wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Pit bulls are genetically wired to kill other dogs.
And genome testing has concluded this, or is it just scientific-sounding hyperbole?
First, the pit bull is quicker to anger than most dogs,
This was concluded how?
probably due to the breed’s unusually high level of the neurotransmitter L-tyrosine. Second, pit bulls are frighteningly tenacious; their attacks frequently last for 15 minutes or longer, and nothing?hoses, violent blows or kicks?can easily stop them. That’s because of the third behavioral anomaly: the breed’s remarkable insensitivity to pain. Most dogs beaten in a fight will submit the next time they see the victor. Not a defeated pit bull, who will tear into his onetime vanquisher. This, too, has to do with brain chemistry. The body releases endorphins as a natural painkiller. Pit bulls seem extra-sensitive to endorphins and may generate higher levels of the chemical than other dogs. Endorphins are also addictive: “The dogs may be junkies, seeking pain so they can get the endorphin buzz they crave,” The Economist suggests.
Oh, well, if a magazine dealing with economics suggested it…
Finally, most dogs warn you before they attack, growling or barking to tell you how angry they are?“so they don’t have to fight,” ASPCA advisor and animal geneticist Stephen Zawistowski stresses. Not the pit bull, which attacks without warning.
In all cases, all the time. Right. I’m sure all other breeds are completely devoid of this behavior.
Most dogs, too, will bow to signal that they want to frolic. Again, not the pit bull, which may follow an apparently playful bow with a lethal assault. In short, contrary to the writings of Vicki Hearne, a well-known essayist on animals who?in a bizarre but emotionally charged confusion?equates breed-specific laws against pit bulls as a kind of “racist propaganda,” the pit bull is a breed apart
To learn more, read Attorney Kenneth Phillips’ 10-point plan for Preventing Dog Bites.
The breeds most likely to kill
In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers:
“Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996…[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities.” (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)
I find it interesting that in the above statis-schtick that there is no mention of a total number of dog attacks over the same time period vs. fatal dog attacks.
I’m just guessing, but I’m pretty sure one would find that they do not attack humans more than any other breed (in fact, some of the literature I’ve read says significantly less).
As for why they are responsible for the majority of fatalities, uh, gee, that couldn’t possibly be because they are stronger, more robust breeds than most other dogs, could it?
Factor in the propensity for such dogs to be trained to attack by their owners (as the article points out) as opposed to other large breeds like German Shepherds or Great Danes, and the statistic isn’t unreasonable at all.
The “study” also fails to mention any victim statistics as well. How many were young children/toddlers/infants/elderly/disabled persons incapable of defending themselves from even a mildly aggressive attack?
They cite Vicki Hearne’s rebuttal of anti-pitbull laws as “bizarre but emotionally charged confusion”. Maybe, maybe not, but it couldn’t be any worse than the slanted statistics and highly flawed junk science presented in this “study”.
The Clifton study of attacks from 1982 through 2006 produced similar results. According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.)
Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds.
Where have I heard this before?
The most horrifying example of the lack of breed predictability is the October 2000 death of a 6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family’s Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a dangerous breed. Note, however, that they were bred to be watchdogs! The baby’s uncle left the infant and the dog on a bed while the uncle prepared her bottle in the kitchen. Upon his return, the dog was mauling the baby, who died shortly afterwards. (“Baby Girl Killed by Family Dog,” Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9, 2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5.)
Umm, so, what the fuck? Now a lack of breed predictability is being cited? Doesn’t this counter act what just went before it?
In Canine homicides and the dog bite epidemic: do not confuse them, it has been pointed out that the dog bite epidemic as a whole involves all dogs and all dog owners, not just the breeds most likely to kill.
In all fairness, therefore, it must be noted that:
Any dog, treated harshly or trained to attack, may bite a person. Any dog can be turned into a dangerous dog. The owner or handler most often is responsible for making a dog into something dangerous.
An irresponsible owner or dog handler might create a situation that places another person in danger by a dog, without the dog itself being dangerous, as in the case of the Pomeranian that killed the infant (see above).
Any individual dog may be a good, loving pet, even though its breed is considered to be potentially dangerous. A responsible owner can win the love and respect of a dog, no matter its breed. One cannot look at an individual dog, recognize its breed, and then state whether or not it is going to attack.
Right, the last sentence says it all and pretty much renders the preceding “studies” inert.[/quote]
Your response really seems as if you didn’t even bother to read the article or the link before you responded.
What a shame.
If you had clicked the link you would have seen in the articles it does list dog bites, the breed, the areas, the age groups, all that info.
So yes, the answers and the research is there.
But I realize some people already have their minds made and don’t need any other information.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
I do know that the majority of owners for that breed, mixed breed, assumed to be aggressive dog, are the type of owners that want that dog to be mean and want them to attack.
And how do you know this? Another study?
That’s my dog, Ace. He’s an American Pitbull Terrier. I got him because I wanted an athletic, very intelligent, agile, and loyal dog. My choice had nothing to do with aggression or attacking. He’s never even nipped or growled at anyone yet.
I can understand the fear and distrust of that breed if irresponsible owners are training attack dogs using that type of dog.
I know the majority of Ferrari owners speed and consistently break the speed limit as well as other driving laws. I can definitely understand the fear and mistrust if one sees a Ferrari driving down the street. These cars should be outlawed.[/quote]
was the car analogy supposed to be a good argument?
Maybe I am reading you wrong, I don’t think so.
I typed that I see where it is the fault of the owners.
You made an example of cars… that are not sentient, do not have teeth although they may cause an injuy, no ferrari owner is training his car to attack anyone coming into his driveway.
Do you not even want to consider the other side that maybe there is a reason people fear the dogs?
[quote]apwsearch wrote:
October Girl, you are an ignorant piece of garbage.
I could go on and on about the crap you posted but as I sat here and mulled over my response to you I decided you weren’t worth the time and energy.
However, I do feel strongly enough about the subject to tell you to take your crap somewhere else.
If you said this shit to my face I would hand you the verbal beating of a lifetime.[/quote]
yah… I can tell your verbal skills would really have put a scare into me.
Now go recoup your much needed energies and mourn the time you spent responding to my crap.
This is the type of response that just turns these threads into flame wars.
Don’t be an idiot. If you have a good argument, then present it. You look stupid for just personally insulting me.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
was the car analogy supposed to be a good argument?
Maybe I am reading you wrong, I don’t think so.
I typed that I see where it is the fault of the owners.
You made an example of cars… that are not sentient, do not have teeth although they may cause an injuy, no ferrari owner is training his car to attack anyone coming into his driveway.
Do you not even want to consider the other side that maybe there is a reason people fear the dogs?
[/quote]
Yea, but there are Ferrari owners who are misusing their Ferrari and costing innocent people their lives. Same can be said about any other car, and the same can be said about any other breed of dog.
The owner should be held 100% responsible for the misuse of the vehicle, or dog, or whatever else a grown adult can misuse.
Ignorance to how to train a dog isn’t an excuse either. Like the other guy said, there are plenty of ankle bitters who would be a serious threat to people if they weren’t less than 2 feet wide and 1 foot tall. Their attitudes are also the result of their owner either spoiling them, or just generally not understanding how to train/socialize them.
How about not coming onto a thread that was supposed to be supportive of a breed and be a dumbass. You are listed as a paralegal. I am owner and CEO of three seperate companies. You need to reconsider the bulk of your response.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
October Girl, you are an ignorant piece of garbage.
I could go on and on about the crap you posted but as I sat here and mulled over my response to you I decided you weren’t worth the time and energy.
However, I do feel strongly enough about the subject to tell you to take your crap somewhere else.
If you said this shit to my face I would hand you the verbal beating of a lifetime.
yah… I can tell your verbal skills would really have put a scare into me.
Now go recoup your much needed energies and mourn the time you spent responding to my crap.
This is the type of response that just turns these threads into flame wars.
Don’t be an idiot. If you have a good argument, then present it. You look stupid for just personally insulting me.
[/quote]
[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
was the car analogy supposed to be a good argument?
Maybe I am reading you wrong, I don’t think so.
I typed that I see where it is the fault of the owners.
You made an example of cars… that are not sentient, do not have teeth although they may cause an injuy, no ferrari owner is training his car to attack anyone coming into his driveway.
Do you not even want to consider the other side that maybe there is a reason people fear the dogs?
Yea, but there are Ferrari owners who are misusing their Ferrari and costing innocent people their lives. Same can be said about any other car, and the same can be said about any other breed of dog.
The owner should be held 100% responsible for the misuse of the vehicle, or dog, or whatever else a grown adult can misuse.
Ignorance to how to train a dog isn’t an excuse either. Like the other guy said, there are plenty of ankle bitters who would be a serious threat to people if they weren’t less than 2 feet wide and 1 foot tall. Their attitudes are also the result of their owner either spoiling them, or just generally not understanding how to train/socialize them.[/quote]
A car is not going to get loose of its yard and go on a DELIBERATE rampage.
I agree that a lot of the fear is due to the owners. But I disagree that this is ignorance on their part. I think that many of them get these dogs to make them attack dogs. They buy them with that intent.
That is part of the problem. They didn’t pick these dogs because they had nothing to base their choice on. The dogs are massive muscle machines. The better for attack.
I do believe that there are many pitbulls that probably have wonderful temperaments.
Owners are held accountable after the occurence. But just as a Ferrari owner pays more for insurance, why shouldn’t the owner of a dog that can cause more harm?
And the statistics do show these dogs are involved in more attacks than other breeds. I concede, this is probably due more to the owners, BUT again, these are the ones that wanted the dogs to attack in the first place. Which is why it is reasonable to fear the dogs. Too many owners make them attack dogs.
I don’t think anyone has said that NO OTHER dogs have ever bitten anyone.
[quote]apwsearch wrote:
How about not coming onto a thread that was supposed to be supportive of a breed and be a dumbass. You are listed as a paralegal. I am owner and CEO of three seperate companies. You need to reconsider the bulk of your response.
OctoberGirl wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
October Girl, you are an ignorant piece of garbage.
I could go on and on about the crap you posted but as I sat here and mulled over my response to you I decided you weren’t worth the time and energy.
However, I do feel strongly enough about the subject to tell you to take your crap somewhere else.
If you said this shit to my face I would hand you the verbal beating of a lifetime.
yah… I can tell your verbal skills would really have put a scare into me.
Now go recoup your much needed energies and mourn the time you spent responding to my crap.
This is the type of response that just turns these threads into flame wars.
Don’t be an idiot. If you have a good argument, then present it. You look stupid for just personally insulting me.
[/quote]
Still expending your energy and wasting your time huh?
Still the personal insults.
You don’t dictate how a thread goes.
I am sure your parents are proud of you being a CEO of three companies. Too bad they are probably embarassed over your behaviors.
If you just want to flame me, get off the thread and PM me. Stop taking the thread off the course of the subject and making it an attack on me.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Owners are held accountable after the occurence. But just as a Ferrari owner pays more for insurance, why shouldn’t the owner of a dog that can cause more harm?
[/quote]
This just shows even more of your ignorance. Pitbull owners DO pay more for insurance. And mostly because of people like you that just, through no line of rational thought, fear the dog.
Do you know how much extra I do to own my dog? Did you know I had to get extra insurance to own my my dog? DId you know I had to go through a background check? Did you know my landlord had to be contacted prior to the purchase? Did you know I have to take mandatory training/obedience classes?
Do Ferrari owners have to take special driving courses to learn how to handle their vehicle? Other than higher insurance, there is nothing different between buying a Ford Focus and a Ferrari, but there is a world of difference between buying a labrador and a pitbull.
And are you going to just ignore my first question to you? You said this:
[quote]I do know that the majority of owners for that breed, mixed breed, assumed to be aggressive dog, are the type of owners that want that dog to be mean and want them to attack.[/quote] How do you know this? Have you meet “the majority of owners for that breed”?
Maybe it’s time to stop running your mouth about stuff you know nothing about.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Stop taking the thread off the course of the subject and making it an attack on me.[/quote]
Take your own advice and leave. You’re the only one spouting nonsense.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
A car is not going to get loose of its yard and go on a DELIBERATE rampage.
I agree that a lot of the fear is due to the owners. But I disagree that this is ignorance on their part. I think that many of them get these dogs to make them attack dogs. They buy them with that intent.
That is part of the problem. They didn’t pick these dogs because they had nothing to base their choice on. The dogs are massive muscle machines. The better for attack.
I do believe that there are many pitbulls that probably have wonderful temperaments.
Owners are held accountable after the occurence. But just as a Ferrari owner pays more for insurance, why shouldn’t the owner of a dog that can cause more harm?
And the statistics do show these dogs are involved in more attacks than other breeds. I concede, this is probably due more to the owners, BUT again, these are the ones that wanted the dogs to attack in the first place. Which is why it is reasonable to fear the dogs. Too many owners make them attack dogs.
I don’t think anyone has said that NO OTHER dogs have ever bitten anyone.
[/quote]
I’m not saying that all of the owners are ignorant to their behavior, just that many are. If they’re not ignorant to how to train them, and they buy the dogs for only to attack people or other animals, then I think the owner is a criminal who should be locked up.
I’ve read many different statistics that contradict others (which we should all know about being in a bodybuilding/supplement website) and the statistics I’ve read have shown that Golden Retrievers were the #1 bitting dog, and Pit Bulls were lower on the list.
The stats that another poster put up on here shows Pit Bulls and Golden Retrievers close to the same %.
It’s hard to tell which statistic is correct.
I’ve seen many different breeds of dog act violently and seem uncontrollable. Again, I think it is mostly to do with how it was (or wasn’t) trained.
I think we hear about Pit Bulls more often because the scumbags who abuse dogs for dog fights, or to fill their insecurity choose them because they look tougher.
It’s like the nature Vs. nurture debate in “bad” kids. A child may have a tendency to act out more than another child, but that doesn’t mean they both can’t be raised right and grow up well-behaved.
[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
A car is not going to get loose of its yard and go on a DELIBERATE rampage.
I agree that a lot of the fear is due to the owners. But I disagree that this is ignorance on their part. I think that many of them get these dogs to make them attack dogs. They buy them with that intent.
That is part of the problem. They didn’t pick these dogs because they had nothing to base their choice on. The dogs are massive muscle machines. The better for attack.
I do believe that there are many pitbulls that probably have wonderful temperaments.
Owners are held accountable after the occurence. But just as a Ferrari owner pays more for insurance, why shouldn’t the owner of a dog that can cause more harm?
And the statistics do show these dogs are involved in more attacks than other breeds. I concede, this is probably due more to the owners, BUT again, these are the ones that wanted the dogs to attack in the first place. Which is why it is reasonable to fear the dogs. Too many owners make them attack dogs.
I don’t think anyone has said that NO OTHER dogs have ever bitten anyone.
I’m not saying that all of the owners are ignorant to their behavior, just that many are. If they’re not ignorant to how to train them, and they buy the dogs for only to attack people or other animals, then I think the owner is a criminal who should be locked up.
I’ve read many different statistics that contradict others (which we should all know about being in a bodybuilding/supplement website) and the statistics I’ve read have shown that Golden Retrievers were the #1 bitting dog, and Pit Bulls were lower on the list.
The stats that another poster put up on here shows Pit Bulls and Golden Retrievers close to the same %.
It’s hard to tell which statistic is correct.
I’ve seen many different breeds of dog act violently and seem uncontrollable. Again, I think it is mostly to do with how it was (or wasn’t) trained.
I think we hear about Pit Bulls more often because the scumbags who abuse dogs for dog fights, or to fill their insecurity choose them because they look tougher.
It’s like the nature Vs. nurture debate in “bad” kids. A child may have a tendency to act out more than another child, but that doesn’t mean they both can’t be raised right and grow up well-behaved.[/quote]
I think a lot of it is Nature vs. Nurture.
Which is what I have been saying. There is a large element that want the dogs as attack dogs and so they train them to be viscious.
There is also a reason they choose the dogs.
Malonetd:
Be outraged it wont change the facts. I don’t know where you live that you had to jump through those hoops but, good I am glad you did. That makes you a good and responsible owner. I would bet your dog won’t get loose and attack someone.
This is from the link.
“Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity
to be listed, pit bull terriers are noteworthy for attacking adults almost
as frequently as children. This is a very rare pattern: children are
normally at greatest risk from dogbite because they play with dogs more
often, have less experience in reading dog behavior, are more likely to
engage in activity that alarms or stimulates a dog, and are less able to
defend themselves when a dog becomes aggressive. Pit bulls seem to differ
behaviorally from other dogs in having far less inhibition about attacking
people who are larger than they are. They are also notorious for attacking
seemingly without warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking
pit bulls’ tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized. Thus
the adult victim of a pit bull attack may have had little or no opportunity
to read the warning signals that would avert an attack from any other dog.”
And I so agree with you that there is a world of difference between a labrador and a pitbull. I do and would own a labrador.
As for the statistics… I posted the link. So go read and learn.
And as for not posting to this thread because YOU and others don’t agree with what I post, don’t post it on a public forum then. If people don’t play the way you want are you going to take your ball and go home?
I have attempted to explain why there is a fear of these dogs. Explain that due to many bad owners who have trained these dogs, there is now a fear of those dogs.
And those of you who don’t agree and have attacked me, refuse to even acknowledge there is merit to what I posted.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
How about not coming onto a thread that was supposed to be supportive of a breed and be a dumbass. You are listed as a paralegal. I am owner and CEO of three seperate companies. You need to reconsider the bulk of your response.
OctoberGirl wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
October Girl, you are an ignorant piece of garbage.
I could go on and on about the crap you posted but as I sat here and mulled over my response to you I decided you weren’t worth the time and energy.
However, I do feel strongly enough about the subject to tell you to take your crap somewhere else.
If you said this shit to my face I would hand you the verbal beating of a lifetime.
yah… I can tell your verbal skills would really have put a scare into me.
Now go recoup your much needed energies and mourn the time you spent responding to my crap.
This is the type of response that just turns these threads into flame wars.
Don’t be an idiot. If you have a good argument, then present it. You look stupid for just personally insulting me.
Still expending your energy and wasting your time huh?
Still the personal insults.
You don’t dictate how a thread goes.
I am sure your parents are proud of you being a CEO of three companies. Too bad they are probably embarassed over your behaviors.
If you just want to flame me, get off the thread and PM me. Stop taking the thread off the course of the subject and making it an attack on me.
[/quote]
Listen.
You are the professional equivalent of little man’s syndrome.
For me to argue with you would be akin to me taking on one of my administrative assistants. You are a secretary (paralegal) who wishes she were an attorney (CEO).
My point is you are obviously good at research (details), but are lacking in practical application.
I suspect you had an assignment which lead you to conduct research parallel to your post.
That’s OK. However, don’t come on this forum and try to make a play at anything beyond a superficial level of knowledge because your post clearly proves otherwise.
Tell you what. Just admit you made a stupid fucking post and go away.
Per my recollection, this is the first time our paths have crossed and will likely be the last.
You are not all that memorable, anyway. I suspect I will have forgotten about this by tomorrow am.
[quote]apwsearch wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
How about not coming onto a thread that was supposed to be supportive of a breed and be a dumbass. You are listed as a paralegal. I am owner and CEO of three seperate companies. You need to reconsider the bulk of your response.
OctoberGirl wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
October Girl, you are an ignorant piece of garbage.
I could go on and on about the crap you posted but as I sat here and mulled over my response to you I decided you weren’t worth the time and energy.
However, I do feel strongly enough about the subject to tell you to take your crap somewhere else.
If you said this shit to my face I would hand you the verbal beating of a lifetime.
yah… I can tell your verbal skills would really have put a scare into me.
Now go recoup your much needed energies and mourn the time you spent responding to my crap.
This is the type of response that just turns these threads into flame wars.
Don’t be an idiot. If you have a good argument, then present it. You look stupid for just personally insulting me.
Still expending your energy and wasting your time huh?
Still the personal insults.
You don’t dictate how a thread goes.
I am sure your parents are proud of you being a CEO of three companies. Too bad they are probably embarassed over your behaviors.
If you just want to flame me, get off the thread and PM me. Stop taking the thread off the course of the subject and making it an attack on me.
Listen.
You are the professional equivalent of little man’s syndrome.
For me to argue with you would be akin to me taking on one of my administrative assistants. You are a secretary (paralegal) who wishes she were an attorney (CEO).
My point is you are obviously good at research (details), but are lacking in practical application.
I suspect you had an assignment which lead you to conduct research parallel to your post.
That’s OK. However, don’t come on this forum and try to make a play at anything beyond a superficial level of knowledge because your post clearly proves otherwise.
Tell you what. Just admit you made a stupid fucking post and go away.
Per my recollection, this is the first time our paths have crossed and will likely be the last.
You are not all that memorable, anyway. I suspect I will have forgotten about this by tomorrow am.
[/quote]
I am not the one toting out my c.v. I have a good job, I do a good job. My job is not my life…
I made a post, and a good one, supporting a differing opinion. I presented an explanation for the fear.
Get over yourself.
For someone who keeps saying what a waste of time I am, you spend a lot of time on me. You protest way too much.
Personally I don’t mind debating with the opposite opinion about the video.
I posted the video because I support it’s cause (even donating to their website to help keep it running).
I posted without commenting on it in the first post, or in the title because I wanted more than just their supporters to watch the video.
OctoberGirl, as far as your comment “As for the statistics… I posted the link. So go read and learn.” I don’t know if it was directed toward me or not, but my point in my other post was that statistics of any kind (for and against my opinion) are pretty unreliable. I’m not saying your stats are wrong, but I’m also not agreeing that they are right.
I used to have a great website in my favorites about different breeds of dogs, and what should be in place for each breed so one would know if it requires a certain amount of space, or exercise, or even behavioral training in order to responsibly own it. I’d post it but I deleted it once I knew I wasn’t going to be able to own a dog again for a few years (due to current living conditions).
So, I don’t completely disagree that a particular breed may be more aggressive than others; I just don’t agree that there is any dog out there that can’t be trained to be loyal and non-threatening unless it has some kind of mental disease, even if it has already been exposed to a violent life.
I have also read The Call of the Wild and now I know exactly what goes on inside a dog’s head. (jk)
[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
Personally I don’t mind debating with the opposite opinion about the video.
I posted the video because I support it’s cause (even donating to their website to help keep it running).
I posted without commenting on it in the first post, or in the title because I wanted more than just their supporters to watch the video.
OctoberGirl, as far as your comment “As for the statistics… I posted the link. So go read and learn.” I don’t know if it was directed toward me or not, but my point in my other post was that statistics of any kind (for and against my opinion) are pretty unreliable. I’m not saying your stats are wrong, but I’m also not agreeing that they are right.
I used to have a great website in my favorites about different breeds of dogs, and what should be in place for each breed so one would know if it requires a certain amount of space, or exercise, or even behavioral training in order to responsibly own it. I’d post it but I deleted it once I knew I wasn’t going to be able to own a dog again for a few years (due to current living conditions).
So, I don’t completely disagree that a particular breed may be more aggressive than others; I just don’t agree that there is any dog out there that can’t be trained to be loyal and non-threatening unless it has some kind of mental disease, even if it has already been exposed to a violent life.
I have also read The Call of the Wild and now I know exactly what goes on inside a dog’s head. (jk)[/quote]
It wasn’t directed to you SWR, the comment about the link.
I agree with you about Nature vs. Nurture.
I do think there is a propensity in dogs and dog owners that can be exploited.
I never posted that I thought the dogs should be rounded up and put through a wood chipper. I never posted whether I was for or against the ban.
Some folks just got their dicks caught in a doorjam. It’s their way, or the wrong way.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Malonetd:
Be outraged it wont change the facts. [/quote]
I never said I was outraged. I don’t know where you got that from.
[quote]
I don’t know where you live[/quote] It says right under my screen name.[quote] that you had to jump through those hoops but, good I am glad you did. That makes you a good and responsible owner. I would bet your dog won’t get loose and attack someone.[/quote] My dog won’t attack someone because I AM a responsible owner. However, the extra work I did to get my dog didn’t make me a responsible owner; I already was one. Also, I didn’t mind the extra effort to own my dog. In fact, I think every would-be dog owner should go through it. From poodles to sheepdogs, all dog owners should be forced to know how to handle their dog. No lone breed should be singled out.
[quote]
This is from the link.[/quote]
Perhaps you should explore other avenues of information. You shouldn’t rely on one source of information to form an opinion.
[quote]
“Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity
to be listed, pit bull terriers are noteworthy for attacking adults almost
as frequently as children. This is a very rare pattern: children are
normally at greatest risk from dogbite because they play with dogs more
often, have less experience in reading dog behavior, are more likely to
engage in activity that alarms or stimulates a dog, and are less able to
defend themselves when a dog becomes aggressive. Pit bulls seem to differ
behaviorally from other dogs in having far less inhibition about attacking
people who are larger than they are. They are also notorious for attacking
seemingly without warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking
pit bulls’ tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized. Thus
the adult victim of a pit bull attack may have had little or no opportunity
to read the warning signals that would avert an attack from any other dog.”
And I so agree with you that there is a world of difference between a labrador and a pitbull. I do and would own a labrador.
As for the statistics… I posted the link. So go read and learn.[/quote]You posted stats from one source. I’m sure there are contradicting stats somewhere else. I could point you to a number of websites that have opposing stats, but I’m sure you’re not interested.
[quote]
And as for not posting to this thread because YOU and others don’t agree with what I post, don’t post it on a public forum then. If people don’t play the way you want are you going to take your ball and go home?[/quote]It’s almost funny. Of all the garbage you post, this is where you lose the most credibility with me. First you tell apwseach to stop posting here because you accuse him of derailing the thread, then when I point out that you are actually in the minority in this thread, you suddenly change positions and remind me that this is a “public forum.” Which is it? Make up your mind.
[quote]
I have attempted to explain why there is a fear of these dogs. Explain that due to many bad owners who have trained these dogs, there is now a fear of those dogs.[/quote]
There’s no need to explain the given. We already know there’s a fear and why the fear is there. If that was your sole purpose, you didn’t need to post blatantly biased information.
I don’t agree, but I understand there is fear. I’m not arguing that. You, however, are failing to recognize ny other position. I’m wondering, with you strong holding on this position, do you have personal experience with an attack? I really can’t see why you would feel this way otherwise.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Malonetd:
Be outraged it wont change the facts.
I never said I was outraged. I don’t know where you got that from.[/quote]
you came across as outraged. Did you read what you typed, telling me to stop posting? Not exactly a dispassionate rsponse.
Wisconsin is a big state, unless you mean that the entire state of Wisconsin has this code enforcement policy?
[/quote]that you had to jump through those hoops but, good I am glad you did. That makes you a good and responsible owner. I would bet your dog won’t get loose and attack someone. My dog won’t attack someone because I AM a responsible owner. However, the extra work I did to get my dog didn’t make me a responsible owner; I already was one. Also, I didn’t mind the extra effort to own my dog. In fact, I think every would-be dog owner should go through it. From poodles to sheepdogs, all dog owners should be forced to know how to handle their dog. No lone breed should be singled out.[/quote]
Why not if the majority of attacks are from that breed? And I only cited one link, that doesn’t mean that is the only link with information.
[quote]This is from the link.
Perhaps you should explore other avenues of information. You shouldn’t rely on one source of information to form an opinion.[/quote]
I didn’t, but that is good advice.
[quote]“Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity
to be listed, pit bull terriers are noteworthy for attacking adults almost
as frequently as children. This is a very rare pattern: children are
normally at greatest risk from dogbite because they play with dogs more
often, have less experience in reading dog behavior, are more likely to
engage in activity that alarms or stimulates a dog, and are less able to
defend themselves when a dog becomes aggressive. Pit bulls seem to differ
behaviorally from other dogs in having far less inhibition about attacking
people who are larger than they are. They are also notorious for attacking
seemingly without warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking
pit bulls’ tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized. Thus
the adult victim of a pit bull attack may have had little or no opportunity
to read the warning signals that would avert an attack from any other dog.”
And I so agree with you that there is a world of difference between a labrador and a pitbull. I do and would own a labrador.
As for the statistics… I posted the link. So go read and learn.You posted stats from one source. I’m sure there are contradicting stats somewhere else. I could point you to a number of websites that have opposing stats, but I’m sure you’re not interested.[/quote]
I did read other links, but even still, pitbulls and pitbull mixes still ranked right up there. I would bet “pitbull-lovers.com” would probably have completely different statistics.
[quote]And as for not posting to this thread because YOU and others don’t agree with what I post, don’t post it on a public forum then. If people don’t play the way you want are you going to take your ball and go home?
It’s almost funny. Of all the garbage you post, this is where you lose the most credibility with me. First you tell apwseach to stop posting here because you accuse him of derailing the thread, then when I point out that you are actually in the minority in this thread, you suddenly change positions and remind me that this is a “public forum.” Which is it? Make up your mind.[/quote]
No, don’t twist my post. I said I had every right to post here. I also said that my post was on topic. Was his? What does being in a minority but on topic have to do with things?
My mind never changed. You are grasping at straws there.
[quote]I have attempted to explain why there is a fear of these dogs. Explain that due to many bad owners who have trained these dogs, there is now a fear of those dogs.
There’s no need to explain the given. We already know there’s a fear and why the fear is there. If that was your sole purpose, you didn’t need to post blatantly biased information.[/quote]
Why wouldn’t there be a need to fully develop the subject matter? What made the information biased? These were not stats that I made up.
[quote]And those of you who don’t agree and have attacked me, refuse to even acknowledge there is merit to what I posted.
I don’t agree, but I understand there is fear. I’m not arguing that. You, however, are failing to recognize ny other position. I’m wondering, with you strong holding on this position, do you have personal experience with an attack? I really can’t see why you would feel this way otherwise.[/quote]
What did I fail to recognize? I did state that I do not deny there are more than likely good pitbulls out there. I just didn’t parrot that all pitbulls are good and are being misunderstood.
What do you think my opinion is? I have stated it.
I do appreciate that you didn’t call me a bitch, ignorant or a piece of crap.
I’ve never owned a pit (I like mutts)but I’ve known several people who do.
They are good damn dogs. The video almost made me cry
This country is going down hill.
Dog Control is as wicked and misguided as Gun Control.
It’s propagated by the same stupid, evil people.