I do enjoy how the pitbull phobics here think that they’re winning. NajaNivea has shown, with cites, what their ravings really mean… nothing.
I’ve had dogs that were the same way. My male doesn’t like being confined at all, my female would let you (and does let me) dangle her by her feet upside down, and carry her around in a comforter like a sack of potatoes.
My point was misstated, it shouldn’t be within each dog, but each dog breed.
In my experience, after being attacked by a dog (not just bitten, a dog can bite and not “attack,”), most people go into shock. The reason for this is that when attack, dogs (of any breed) don’t just bite. They bite and then shake, which causes an extreme loss of blood.
I’ve, in fact, been bitten by a dog in the past as well. I didn’t go into shock. On the other hand, I’ve also worn a bite suit and had a trained and untrained Rot “attack” me, and had I not been wearing the bite suit I would’ve gone into shock because of what he did after he bit. He shook his entire body in a rotating manner that would’ve resulted in a LOT of blood loss
I’ll take what I can get, at this point. 
Are you really so disconnected from reality? The posts have been linked here plenty enough times that everyone can see for themselves how your involvement in that thread ended. You gave up after I “ridiculously misread” that shyster dog bite attorney’s citation of a tabloid editor’s unpublished, non-peer-reviewed media survey. Yes, I* do* see the error of my ways now. How could I ever have gone so far astray?
Pardon me whilst I weep and gnash my teeth for all these misguided notions I may have to discard in the face of your stunningly compelling, delicately nuanced arguments, and your clinching, CDC- and AVMA- supported factual citations.
I hope you’ll also pardon me for not being surprised if, in two years, you’re *still *showing up every time the name “pit bull” appears in a thread title to tell us how “game bred” pit dogs are “insane” and are far more likely to attack, and to fatally attack children than any other breed (and of course, since you can’t tell from the outside, you’ll just be sure to sweep your precious baby out of harm’s way every time someone with a canine that even *vaguely *resembles one of “those dogs” is anywhere nearby. No prejudice, though. Just delicately nuanced caution. You know, *those *dogs.).
An **actual farmer **weighing in here.
I raise pastured poultry here in Texas and we were invaded by feral hogs this summer.
We started sleeping in the fields to assess the number of hogs that we had to deal with and to shoot as many as possible. At one count, we had a herd of over 25 foraging hogs on any given night-sows, piglets and at least one boar.
My dogs slept in the house because 1) they’re geriatric and 2) neither bred nor trained to hunt).
It was almost impossible to shoot them in the field-wild hogs are very smart. We only took two that way. I refuse to use foot traps or poison in my fields-I don’t mind feeding the fox or the bobcat a chicken or two every once in a while. I see that as the nature tax. But a herd of hogs could wipe me out in a night.
Finally another farmer brought over three traps and we got 15 on one night alone.
However, trapping them gets more difficult after you’ve caught the first wave-you normally have to move the traps (and trust me, those suckers are heavy) and wait for at least a week.
When it came time to move the hogs into smaller transportable cages (we eat them), two men worked the hogs while a third stood right next to the cage with a double barrel shotgun.
Yes, they are that dangerous, even the little one.
We could have chosen to pay to have the pigs hunted with dogs but we didn’t-this time at least.
As other posters have stated, wild hogs are devastating to farmers and really dangerous and I wouldn’t hesitate to hire hunters if it became necessary.
To equate hog hunting to pit bull fighting ala Vicks is truly absurd.
Plus the folks I know that do hunt with dogs are far more likely to use Blue Lacy’s than pits
Thanks for saying what I was thinking in a much better way than I could.
Or, put more plainly, do your own fucking research Flying Dutchman.
If you think NajaNivea is lying or incorrect, do some homework to refute the assertions.
Thanks for your input, jlzania. If you ever run into such an issue again, please feel free to PM me and maybe we can rid you of a few piggies.
And here again I’d like to take a moment to point out that these ignorant fuckwads couldn’t tell a pit bull from a hundred other breeds if it bit them on the ass.
(Literally or proverbially.)
Point to one falsehood or stereotype I’ve made, you oozing necrotic vulva, or end your embarrasment by silence. If you’re contending that APBT do not show a tenendacy to dog-aggression, then even your fellow apologists part with you there - fucking vacuous sack of rot.
To reiterate: several people who tried arguing with her in ATMB gave up on realizing what a moron she is. Because we gave her the last word, she interpreted that as victory. The GD thread had only one person trying to argue with her genuinely–CannyDan. (Well, I think there may have been others, but I agree that none of them were persuasive). If you haven’t read the ATMB thread, and especially if you haven’t followed her cites to see how they don’t actually say what she claims they said, you’re addressing only the tail end of the argument.
Yup, and the CDC and AVMA sure don’t actually say what the CDC or AVMA says, either! They’re all part of a nefarious Pit Bull Cover Up Cabal, you know. Illuminati. The ASPCA, American Academy of Pediatrics, and American Society of Plastic Surgeons, are all in on it, too. ** gonzomax**, CannyDan and LHOD say so. <nod>
The only reason they all say things like:
and
…is because they’re just playing political games, and are all collectively involved in an elaborate cover-up ruse to avoid angering the Pit Bull lobby. They don’t really believe it. Secretly they believe that savage pit bull maulings represent a statistical “supernova”, they just don’t want to tell us. We know, 'cause that tabloid editor said so. It’s true! Just ask Canny Dan!
hahahahaha, I noticed something in the item you quoted … Boston Terriers. Really? People equate a little Boston Terrier with Mastiffs, Bull Terriers, and maybe even Rotties???
Wow. Savage maulings and merciless attacks by Bostons? That is both sad and funny. What’s going to be next? Killer Chihuauhas? :eek:
I can no longer continue with this pitting.
I’ve always enjoyed watching man and dog working together. Especially border collies herding sheep.
Now I find a yearning within me to imagine the chase and capture of a wild boar. Man and two types of specialized dogs with their own inate talents working together for the bacon.
I do so without any lust for seeing blood or cruelty.
.
I can see the same apply to others that are actually involved in the sport.
I accept the neccessity of the method to control the wild hog population
Admittedly , I care as much for a boar as I do for a rat. Do the dogs get hurt?Probably, Sometimes. But like human fighters and football players, they wouldn’t have it any other way.
I’m not apologizing though. There’s been just too much bullshit “debating”.
Not surprisingly, dogsbite.org doesn’t mention any possibility of mistaken identity.
Which isn’t true either. There is no breed of dog on earth where “within each and every dog there is an equal potential for maiming and killing”. There are breeds that are more likely to have less bite inhibition than average, but that doesn’t mean that each member of that breed has the potential to maim or kill.
And none of this even touches on how the dog was raised/trained. Except for dogs that have extremely high bite inhibition, any dog can be put in a position to bite. Just as almost any human can be put in a position to attack.
I think you should just give up at this point since you don’t appear to know anything other than urban myths about dogs and/or “pits”. The only dogs that will bite and shake are the terriers and mixes of terriers, which is how they killed the vermin they were bred to get rid of. Breeds bred as guard dogs tend to bite and hold, sporting breeds tend to bite and back off (when they bite, since most are bred for high bite inhibition), toy dogs seem to vary their approach. And even if it were true that all dogs bite and shake, there are many many breeds that are too small and/or lack jaw strength and/or lack muzzle length to do much damage to a person.
Actually, it does right at the top of the page - “30 U.S. fatal dog attacks occurred in 2006. Pit bull type dogs were responsible for 53%. Pit bulls make up approximately 5% of the U.S. dog population.”
Pit bull “type” dogs encompasses a huge range of breeds and mixes. Of course, since that site is highly biased, I imagine they don’t even know that “pit bull type dogs” means almost nothing.
I meant the Pedro Rios case specifically, which should have been obvious by the direct link.
If I reared a dog from a pup, even with the minimal interaction between owner and dog found in some of these packs, I’d feel bad if Bowser got gutted by a boar. The way it works is that Bowser should stand back, barking like an idiot*, until he feels confident, then he gives it a tentative go until repulsed. In theory, the older dogs demonstrate the methods and, if Bowser screws up, he will either taste the sharpness of a boar’s tusk or his mentor’s canines. It’s how they learn. I can see the value of throwing newbie Pitbulls against a hog rather than expensive Blue Ticks or Red Bones**, but they all have to learn.
-
- Dogs LOVE to bark like idiots, whether against a tough prey animal or the vacuum cleaner. Might as well put the instinct to work.
** - Good Lord, those are gorgeous breeds! Pitbulls? For cognescenti only.
If it had worked. Anyway, I looked at that case I don’t see any differences in it than the others listed on that page that were similar.
First of all, it sounds like you’re saying that there’s no such thing as an unfair fight. If ten guys decide to beat up one guy, that’s fair and the fact that the victim isn’t more popular is his problem.
Besides, animals don’t generally like to pick fights with massively superior opponents. Hunters are bringing the fight to the animals, so the hunter should restrict himself to using only brute force and weaponry commensurate to the animal’s natural defences. Anything else is pussy, particularly hunting with firearms.
Yes, I’m a strict vegan.
I should add that if, however, the animal or animals in question pose a danger to humans who aren’t looking for trouble (if, for instance, some crocodiles make their way into a town and start attacking people) then it is justifiable to take whatever measures are necessary to drive them back. I value animals a lot, but I still value people more.