Pit Bull Video

Every story has two sides but my personal experiences tell me that Octobergirl is closer to the real truth. Here’s why.

In my 46 years I have never owned a pit. However, I have known enough extended family, friends and neighbors who owned them to be able to make a reasonable assessment of why the breed is favored in my little part of the country.

In every case, my extended family, friends and neighbors purchased the breed for use as a hog dog or for personal protection as opposed to their “sweet” personality.

Bottom line: aggressive/protective behavior was the primary requirement.

As a six year old riding my bicycle home from school a neighborhood pit (hog dog) got out of his pen and chased me about a 200 yards before biting me. I am convinced that my ability to remain on my bicycle and the dog being exhausted from the sprint kept me from being mauled that day. The owner was smart enough to gather up the dog and kill him before my dad got home.

Years later, my five year old son was mauled by two pits who got out of a fenced yard and chased him down in our subdivision. He was playing with friends in an adjacent yard when the dogs got out and attacked him. Only the quick thinking of a neighbor saved my son’s life that day. Eyewitnesses said the dogs’ owner sat on the porch and watched the attack without taking any action.

My son was hospitalized for 8 days and endured 3 surgeries. He will require additional reconstructive surgery after he finishes growing. On the bright side a few months later he became the richest kid in his 1st grade class.

As for the dogs? They were quarantined by the county and observed for rabies symptoms before being destroyed 10 days later.

In recent years I have been approached by a couple of well-meaning neighbors informing me of their intent to purchase a pit as a family pet. I thanked them for their consideration and told them of my experiences with the breed.

I finished by politely but firmly telling them that if they purchased the dog and it ever got out of the fenced yard or even growled in the direction of me or any other kid within my eyesight I would immediately execute the dog with a 12 gauge shotgun, no questions asked.

In each case the neighbor made the responsible decision not to purchase the dog after deciding he could not guarantee the protection of himself, other neighbors and his dog.

BTW, both of my dog bite experiences resulted from irresponsible owners. If you want to own a pit then do whatever is necessary to protect your dog beforehand. If you fail in this endeavor then you won’t be able to protect your dog from people like me afterwards.

Check out pbrc.net for good info on pit bulls and the like.

[quote]Nick H wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
http://www.49abcnews.com/news/2006/jul/27/women_dies_pitbull_attack/

because pitbulls don’t attack people?

the statement, “Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.” What was that supposed to prove? The cavalier attitude of pitbull owners?

I hope all pitbull owners are responsible but not all of them are.

What kind of owner are you?

Let’s try something a little more recent:

http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=86572

.[/quote]

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2007/jan/11/pit-bull-attacks-mother-daughter/

Do we want to keep posting links of attacks or does someone have a solution?

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
makkun wrote:
bushidobadboy,

Thank you for your honest account. Good post.

bushidobadboy wrote:
[…]Anyway, the other aspect of Thorns character that is mildly concerning is that if I discipline him physically, he will growl at me. This worried me the first time, but now I respect it for what it is, ie “I’ve got my pride, and you are knocking it” Kind of thing.

Now I guess you are a big man and you would be able to handle your dog. But what I know from maintaining discipline with dogs (a branch of my family used to breed Giant Schnautzers - great for a kid who was afraid of dogs…), I would fear this as a challenge to your leadership.

May I ask, have you ever seen a professional regarding this? I know this can be a scary thing to do (I do understand that there is a lot of uninformed fear about dogs like yours), but I would guess in the interest of your dog it might be really good to address the growling issue.

Makkun

Well the first time that Thorn growled at me, I was shocked at what I percieved to be a major challenge to my role as Alpha Male. I reacted in a fairly typical way, by giving him an asswhuppin with my hands (and the odd kick if I remember correctly :frowning: ). Anyway, it had little effect on him - he is after all bred to have a high tolerance to physical pain.

However, when I then tied him to the tree in the garden, and left him alone, and socially excluded for 20 minutes, what a difference! When I let him off the lead, he was the most submissive, and eager-to-please dog you’ve ever seen.

This ties in with what we know about dogs and their social structure I suppose. They are sociable animals, and being cut from the pack and ignored is something that they HATE. Hence the ingratiating behaviour, when he was accepted back into the ‘pack’.

The problem comes I suppose when dogs feel like they have no pack due to indifference or active neglect from their owners. Some of them then start to develop a dangerous ‘lone wolf’ mentality. Others simply crave contact and become brokenhearted when they don’t get any.

My point is, that if you are the owner of a ‘strong’ dog, ie one that has his pride and spirit, and if you feel secure in your place as head of the pack, then the odd growl is nothing to be scared of IMO. I actually kind of respect Thorn more, because even though he knows and accepts that I am the ‘top boy’, he will only take so much ‘abuse’ from me before letting me know his displeasure. Also, to be fair, his level of punishment acceptance seems to fit the crime quite well too. He only really growls at me on those occassions where I have been (in retrospect) a little heavy handed.

Really though, we use the isolation method of punishment over the physical, and that seems to work extremely well.

bushy[/quote]

Like I said, I’m not in the position to tell you the right thing to do. But I’m pretty sure your methods are not right.

1st, I’m a dog lover. Second, I am wary of certain breeds which seem to be a little mroe prone to violence. Personally, i would never own a rottweiler, pit bull type, or some others known to be tempermental.

I have owned an irish setter, newfoundland, schnauzer, airdale, old english sheep dog, and a mixed breed. These have all been raised in a loving home by people who understand dogs. My dad could have been the dog whisperer before that guy on tv.

I’ve had two run ins with “violent” dogs. a rottweiler and a pit bull. In both cases the owners are what most would agree are idiots or scumbags. Now I’ve had many positive interactions with these same breeds when owned by responsible people.

Personally, except in the case of a newfoundland, one of the most gentle dogs out, I don’t like a dog I can’t handle in what I call the worst case scenario that I never thought would happen. I’m not for banning these dogs, but the owners must be extra careful with them.

As an example why the owners must assume the responsibility, when
I was attacked by the rottweiler while walking my newfoundland, the dog’s owner was shocked that I pulled out a police model spyderco knife to defend myself. the dog immediately stopped it’s aggression when the knife was stuck just in it’s nose to draw a little blood.

The owner thought I was crazy even though she was letting a 120+ rottweiler run around unchained in an area where kids were playing and people walk.

Of course this woman was arrested for drugs shortly after that and was evicted.
What happens if a middle aged woman or child is attacked by this dog? A person who doesn’t have the means to defend theirself? I don’t agree with a breed ban, but you could see why some would want that.

And as stated, these broke ass derelicts won’t have the necessary home owners or renters insurance to pay your kids medical bills. I normally don’t like adding laws, but a decent compromise might be the requirement to have a certain level of insurance, or you forfeit your doh and are hit with a fine.

I’m personally required to carry 1,000,000/3,000,000 levels of college for my office. Requiring a certain level of insurance might help weed out the nit wit factor to some degree.

[quote]Nick H wrote:
I wonder how many people that believe genetics make the animal would also argue that black people are genetically inclined to commit crime. I mean the statistics show that African-Americans have a higher per capita crime rate that other races in the USA. It has nothing to do with culture or environment, right?[/quote]

But do you really care about the owners or criminal’s sob story if you are someone you love is attacked?

Personally, if the owner of a dog doesn’t have the resources to pay for their mistake, it falls on someone else. Your health insurance, your resources, etc.

Dogs have a little less free will in my opinion, than a person. A person is responsible for their actions, while the owner is for a dog.

I personally wouldn’t risk having a dog know to be on the dangerous side. I won’t ban you from having it, but I would kill it if it attacked myself or a loved one, or sue the owner for damages if there was an injury.

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
SBT wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:

I don’t have to have met the majority of owners. That is just a ridiculous statement, “have you met the majority of owners.” I have read the statistics, I have researched cases. I can’t do that just on a whim and my opinion or imagination.

Sorry, but no, it’s not. Not when you open with claiming that the majority of owners want these dogs for attack purposes. Unless you can proove such an outlandlish claim, please back off from the judgement, okay? You don’t know me nor my dog.

Helen Keller had an American Pit Bull Terrier. I just know they must have terrorized the neighborhood, right?

Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.

And by attack some small children, I mean watch basketball on the couch.

http://www.49abcnews.com/news/2006/jul/27/women_dies_pitbull_attack/

because pitbulls don’t attack people?

the statement, “Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.” What was that supposed to prove? The cavalier attitude of pitbull owners?

I hope all pitbull owners are responsible but not all of them are.

What kind of owner are you?

[/quote]

I said it since I apparently have my Staffie because I want her to attack people. I mean, you said it and you must know me better than I do, right?

You’re damn right I’m a responsible owner. My dog has attended and passed obedience classes and when we have more time she will get her canine good citizen award.

I’m proud of my dog and I purposefully take her to new environments all of the time so she can convince people like you that they aren’t monsters. She’s the friendliest dog you will ever meet; she’ll see a person 3 blocks away and get excited because she thinks she’s getting a belly rub.

Oh, and did you know that Staffordshire Bull Terriers are called “Nanny dogs” in England? Yeah, these little buggers love kids, imagine that.

And why are we limiting responsible owners to just pitbulls? The only two dogs I’ve ever seen attack were a Yorkie and a Scottish Terrier. Both of them came after my dog and I know you won’t believe this, but she didn’t bite back!. Here’s to hoping you believe me.

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

The car analogy is stupid. I have explained it wont get loose and go on a rampage. [/quote]

And neither will a dog if the owner properly cares for and secures it.

Get it? Owner care and responsibility are the common factors here.

[quote]The other problem with legislation is laws are for the law-abiding. The type of people who want this dog to be an attack dog, for dog fights, to scare people, to protect drugs, are the same type of people who won’t conform to the law. So this does take a lot of the effectiveness out of the law.

I don’t know what the solution is. I like that Malonted had to go through some hoops but again, would people who regularly break the law do that?

So what is the solution?

[/quote]

To answer this you have to buy into the notion that there is a problem.

What is the solution to the auto accident “problem”? Banning the makes/models that are involved in the most fatal crashes regardless of their mechanical soundness?

As long as there are dogs, people will get bitten. As long as there are rotten assholes who train dogs to fight/kill, there will be fatal dog attacks.

As long as there are automobiles, there will be car crashes. As long as there are reckless/irresponsible drivers, there will be fatal car crashes.

And so on, and so on…

Tragedies happen everyday; it’s sad, but that’s life in the big city. Thinking that every possible problem one might encounter calls for a proactive, legislative “solution” is naivety at best and borderline fascism at worst.

[quote]DM246 wrote:

BTW, both of my dog bite experiences resulted from irresponsible owners. If you want to own a pit then do whatever is necessary to protect your dog beforehand. If you fail in this endeavor then you won’t be able to protect your dog from people like me afterwards.
[/quote]

First of all, sorry to hear about your past experiences.

But you are right, these instances were the result of irresonsible owners. So why am I, as a resonsible owner, facing the fact that some day, someone is likely to come take my dog?

I’m all for licensing, tests, classes, whatever it takes to keep my right as a resonsible dog owner to have my beloved Staffie.

I hate irresponsible owners… of any pet.

As my favorite saying goes, “Ban stupid people, not dogs.”

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
CBassBeer wrote:
Sorry but I disagree. It sounds like you’re trying to do the right thing. However, if your dog is agressive towards other dogs and towards you, it is misbehaving, and that’s a result of YOU making mistakes. This can be corrected - see a good dog trainer and let them help you.
I can’t say that I’m doing everything perfectly. My girlfriend works as a dog trainer on the side, and she’s constantly pointing out all the mistaked I’m making.

You might be right, but that wasn’t my point. The point being that certain breeds have various inherent traits, which in certain lights may be undesirable. It may be possible, with sufficient conditioning and reinforcement, to practically eliminate these negative traints from his day-to-day behaviour. Nevertheless, the fact remains that they are inherent to the breed. To say that breed like staffies, bullies, rotties etc do not have inbred behavioural problems that may come out with less than perfect training, is a little naive IMO. But you are right in that Thorn could be slightly more well-mannered. [/quote]

Just wanted to say thanks for being a responsible owner. You know your dog.

If I remember right, you posted a pic of him not too long ago. Good lookin’ guy!

[quote]SBT wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
SBT wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:

I don’t have to have met the majority of owners. That is just a ridiculous statement, “have you met the majority of owners.” I have read the statistics, I have researched cases. I can’t do that just on a whim and my opinion or imagination.

Sorry, but no, it’s not. Not when you open with claiming that the majority of owners want these dogs for attack purposes. Unless you can proove such an outlandlish claim, please back off from the judgement, okay? You don’t know me nor my dog.

Helen Keller had an American Pit Bull Terrier. I just know they must have terrorized the neighborhood, right?

Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.

And by attack some small children, I mean watch basketball on the couch.

http://www.49abcnews.com/news/2006/jul/27/women_dies_pitbull_attack/

because pitbulls don’t attack people?

the statement, “Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.” What was that supposed to prove? The cavalier attitude of pitbull owners?

I hope all pitbull owners are responsible but not all of them are.

What kind of owner are you?

I said it since I apparently have my Staffie because I want her to attack people. I mean, you said it and you must know me better than I do, right?

You’re damn right I’m a responsible owner. My dog has attended and passed obedience classes and when we have more time she will get her canine good citizen award.

I’m proud of my dog and I purposefully take her to new environments all of the time so she can convince people like you that they aren’t monsters. She’s the friendliest dog you will ever meet; she’ll see a person 3 blocks away and get excited because she thinks she’s getting a belly rub.

Oh, and did you know that Staffordshire Bull Terriers are called “Nanny dogs” in England? Yeah, these little buggers love kids, imagine that.

And why are we limiting responsible owners to just pitbulls? The only two dogs I’ve ever seen attack were a Yorkie and a Scottish Terrier. Both of them came after my dog and I know you won’t believe this, but she didn’t bite back!. Here’s to hoping you believe me.[/quote]

If you are the type of owner who bought your dog to be an attack dog then yes I do mean you. Then you are part of the problem.

Oh your poor hero dog to not defend itself. Obviously the entire breed is just maligned completely unjustly. Thanks for the anecdote.

Bad owners have bad pets.

[quote]Digital Chainsaw wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:

The car analogy is stupid. I have explained it wont get loose and go on a rampage.

And neither will a dog if the owner properly cares for and secures it.

Get it? Owner care and responsibility are the common factors here.

The other problem with legislation is laws are for the law-abiding. The type of people who want this dog to be an attack dog, for dog fights, to scare people, to protect drugs, are the same type of people who won’t conform to the law. So this does take a lot of the effectiveness out of the law.

I don’t know what the solution is. I like that Malonted had to go through some hoops but again, would people who regularly break the law do that?

So what is the solution?

To answer this you have to buy into the notion that there is a problem.

What is the solution to the auto accident “problem”? Banning the makes/models that are involved in the most fatal crashes regardless of their mechanical soundness?

As long as there are dogs, people will get bitten. As long as there are rotten assholes who train dogs to fight/kill, there will be fatal dog attacks.

As long as there are automobiles, there will be car crashes. As long as there are reckless/irresponsible drivers, there will be fatal car crashes.

And so on, and so on…

Tragedies happen everyday; it’s sad, but that’s life in the big city. Thinking that every possible problem one might encounter calls for a proactive, legislative “solution” is naivety at best and borderline fascism at worst.[/quote]

The car cannot get out on its own. Get over that analogy because it does not work.

The rest of your post was very well reasoned and I could understand your point.

We have laws that protect us. Some unnecessary, some necessary. Some people do think speed laws are unnecessary. Is that fascist?

I don’t think we are going to agree but I better understand your position.

I still don’t see how you have offered a solution for the propensity of people to get these dogs for their aggressiveness.

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
SBT wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
SBT wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:

I don’t have to have met the majority of owners. That is just a ridiculous statement, “have you met the majority of owners.” I have read the statistics, I have researched cases. I can’t do that just on a whim and my opinion or imagination.

Sorry, but no, it’s not. Not when you open with claiming that the majority of owners want these dogs for attack purposes. Unless you can proove such an outlandlish claim, please back off from the judgement, okay? You don’t know me nor my dog.

Helen Keller had an American Pit Bull Terrier. I just know they must have terrorized the neighborhood, right?

Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.

And by attack some small children, I mean watch basketball on the couch.

http://www.49abcnews.com/news/2006/jul/27/women_dies_pitbull_attack/

because pitbulls don’t attack people?

the statement, “Anyways, my girl and I are off to attack some small children.” What was that supposed to prove? The cavalier attitude of pitbull owners?

I hope all pitbull owners are responsible but not all of them are.

What kind of owner are you?

I said it since I apparently have my Staffie because I want her to attack people. I mean, you said it and you must know me better than I do, right?

You’re damn right I’m a responsible owner. My dog has attended and passed obedience classes and when we have more time she will get her canine good citizen award.

I’m proud of my dog and I purposefully take her to new environments all of the time so she can convince people like you that they aren’t monsters. She’s the friendliest dog you will ever meet; she’ll see a person 3 blocks away and get excited because she thinks she’s getting a belly rub.

Oh, and did you know that Staffordshire Bull Terriers are called “Nanny dogs” in England? Yeah, these little buggers love kids, imagine that.

And why are we limiting responsible owners to just pitbulls? The only two dogs I’ve ever seen attack were a Yorkie and a Scottish Terrier. Both of them came after my dog and I know you won’t believe this, but she didn’t bite back!. Here’s to hoping you believe me.

If you are the type of owner who bought your dog to be an attack dog then yes I do mean you. Then you are part of the problem.

Oh your poor hero dog to not defend itself. Obviously the entire breed is just maligned completely unjustly. Thanks for the anecdote.

Bad owners have bad pets.

[/quote]

I bought my dog because I like it. What a fucking novel concept! So no, I didn’t get her to be an attack dog (that disgusts me).

I show you an example of a well behaved dog and you blow it off. I’m done because I knew you wouldn’t give two shits and will continue to believe they are all evil.

[quote]Brett Tucek wrote:
I was going to post a general reply, but I couldn’t have put it better than Digital.[/quote]

Yup, let’s ban cars!

Psst guys, let’s get in on the covered wagon business before it booms.

[quote]SBT wrote:
I bought my dog because I like it. What a fucking novel concept! So no, I didn’t get her to be an attack dog (that disgusts me).

I show you an example of a well behaved dog and you blow it off. I’m done because I knew you wouldn’t give two shits and will continue to believe they are all evil.

[/quote]

Then you aren’t part of the problem.

You say I won’t see your side of things (although I have, continously) what about you?

Anyone that has a reservation about those dogs is ignorant and a wimp right? That seems to be your attitude.

[quote]SBT wrote:

First of all, sorry to hear about your past experiences.

But you are right, these instances were the result of irresonsible owners. So why am I, as a resonsible owner, facing the fact that some day, someone is likely to come take my dog?

I’m all for licensing, tests, classes, whatever it takes to keep my right as a resonsible dog owner to have my beloved Staffie.

I hate irresponsible owners… of any pet.

As my favorite saying goes, “Ban stupid people, not dogs.”[/quote]

I liken the dog issue to the gun control issue.

When a child gets shot/killed by a unsecured gun the media immediately cries for gun control legislation. Same happens when a Pit or Rottweiler attacks someone.

I am a gun owner and I am no more in favor of taking your dog via legislation than I am for legislated gun control.

I am also for responsible ownership. Fears about certain breeds (and guns)will dissipate when irresponsible ownership is eliminated. That may ultimately be a bridge too far.

My shotgun is only a danger to a would be criminal who attempts to enter my home uninvited. For him/her my Winchester will be the instrument of his/her execution. That doesn’t always comfort other parents who fear the presence of a gun in a home.

In both of my bad experiences the dogs were used primarily for utilitarian purposes so I applaud your love for your dog. Loving a pet reduces the potential for irresponsible behavior.

Irresponsible use of a firearm results in life changing civil and criminal consequences for the owner. I accept this as fact and mitigate the personal risk by being a responsible gun owner. Dog owners must do the same.

I am so sick and tired of governments trying to tell people what they can do. They try and tell you what you can put in your body, what you can do with your money, and even what type of pet you can own. And people just take it nowadays, because they are all fat and apathetic, they have their bread and circuses so they are happy, they will never rise up and say when enough is enough. If governments had tried this shit 500 years ago it would have been violent.

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Digital Chainsaw wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:

The car analogy is stupid. I have explained it wont get loose and go on a rampage.

And neither will a dog if the owner properly cares for and secures it.

Get it? Owner care and responsibility are the common factors here.

The other problem with legislation is laws are for the law-abiding. The type of people who want this dog to be an attack dog, for dog fights, to scare people, to protect drugs, are the same type of people who won’t conform to the law. So this does take a lot of the effectiveness out of the law.

I don’t know what the solution is. I like that Malonted had to go through some hoops but again, would people who regularly break the law do that?

So what is the solution?

To answer this you have to buy into the notion that there is a problem.

What is the solution to the auto accident “problem”? Banning the makes/models that are involved in the most fatal crashes regardless of their mechanical soundness?

As long as there are dogs, people will get bitten. As long as there are rotten assholes who train dogs to fight/kill, there will be fatal dog attacks.

As long as there are automobiles, there will be car crashes. As long as there are reckless/irresponsible drivers, there will be fatal car crashes.

And so on, and so on…

Tragedies happen everyday; it’s sad, but that’s life in the big city. Thinking that every possible problem one might encounter calls for a proactive, legislative “solution” is naivety at best and borderline fascism at worst.

The car cannot get out on its own. Get over that analogy because it does not work.

The rest of your post was very well reasoned and I could understand your point.

We have laws that protect us. Some unnecessary, some necessary. Some people do think speed laws are unnecessary. Is that fascist?

I don’t think we are going to agree but I better understand your position.

I still don’t see how you have offered a solution for the propensity of people to get these dogs for their aggressiveness.

[/quote]

Sigh

I give up.

I breed pits. Razors-edge bully’s, to be exact. I’ve been around sheep dogs,labs,masstifs,collies,dachsunds, and damn near any other breed you can think of and I can say this with certainty:

There isn’t a more friendly,loyal,loving dog than a pit.They’re a little mischievous, but it’s in a playful way.They’re also alpha dogs, but you show them that YOU’RE the boss, and not the other way around and everything will be ok. I spend a good portion of my time defending the breed when people find out what I do, but when I introduce my dogs to them, after the initial shock of the dogs muscularity they realize that I breed giant teddy bears.