View Single Post
Old 12-28-2010, 10:03 PM   #51
Waldo
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Special Snowflake
Preferred Pronoun?:
she/her
Relationship Status:
Married
 

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wine Country, Oregon
Posts: 470
Thanks: 22
Thanked 792 Times in 238 Posts
Rep Power: 1006288
Waldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST ReputationWaldo Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnackTime View Post
I disagree with a lot of your post but this paragraph stuck in my head. I do not believe that the breed has gotten a bad rap because of the dog fighting industry. I have seen several reports on the news where the family pet (pit bull) attacked a family member and the animal had to be put down. I have been seeing these reports long before the dog fighting rings were being talked about in the media.

I know a lady whose granddaughter had to have 26 surgeries because the family pet attacked her (her and the dog grew up together). The doctors told them that if the dogs jaws would have been locked on the child for a minute longer she would not have survived.
And in report after report dogs are mistakenly labeled pit bulls.

Can you find the pitbull?

In 2008 pitbulls ranked 8th overall for aggressive behavior, and that includes lumping all pits together (there are three distinct "flavors" of pitbull type dogs). Dachshunds ranked first at 1 out of 5 observed dogs trying to bite a human. That's 20%. Pitbulls ranked 7%. Pitbulls and Akitas, which both have "bad boy" reputations ranked high due to their observed aggression toward other dogs, not for aggression toward humans.

Further, it's noted in the study that larger breed dog bites are likely over represented in dog bite statistics because bites from larger dogs are more likely to cause bite victims to seek medical attention and therefore report the bite incident.

Now, damage done by a large dog, particularly one with the physical stature of a Pit or a Rottie, is another thing altogether. The likelihood of a fatal attack coming from a small breed dog is very slim so when one hears of a particularly vicious dog bite/attack it's usually from a large breed such as a Pit or a Rottie. And that propagates the notion that most bites stem from such dogs.

It's really important to understand the difference.

And finally, even with Breed Specific Legislation in locations such as Denver, which bans all Pit Bulls - and put to death hundreds of the dogs, dog bite statistics declined in accordance with dog bite statistics in other cities without BSL. See here for a discussion on the effects of Denver's BSL versus a city such as Oregon, which instituted a "Potentially Dangerous Dog Ordinance" instead. Which do you think has had a dog attack fatality since introducing their legislation?

Pit Bulls are NOT the problem. Irresponsible owners are the problem.
__________________
Perved lately? | My website | NEW: lez.org
Waldo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Waldo For This Useful Post: