652 out of how many? It’s likely that they’ve simply added to the “outlaw allure” of the breed–further establishing it as a status symbol–and backyard breeders will simply become basement breeders. And again, since it’s not the breed but the breeder, if they succeed in reducing the population significantly, there are many other breeds available to step in.
Interesting hypothesis. I’d be interested in the evidence you will use to reach your conclusion.
All due respect, but you seem to be talking pure theory; what seems to make sense inside your own head based on “common sense.”
In reality, packs of escaped pet dogs are a reality in many urban setting. They don’t ravage and terrify entire cities, but it’s not at all unusual for that same “dog running around your neighborhood” never to get picked up, and it will join other such homeless dogs and form, naturally, a pack. When I lived in Rogers Park in Chicago, there was at least one small pack of “alley dogs” that I was pretty familiar with. And if you watch any of those “Animal Police” shows on Animal Planet, you’ll see that small small urban dog packs are hardly an anomaly.
Just like a wild wolf pack, however, they tend to avoid human company, and are pretty shy and retiring. They don’t tend to be marauding packs of vicious monsters.
*** The scene of attack is home or a familiar place.** The majority of dog attacks (61%) happen at home or in a familiar place.
** Dogs bite family and friends.** The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim’s family or a friend.
…
After the United Kingdom banned pit bulls in the 1990s, a study showed that the number of dog bites remained the same even though the number of pit bulls had steeply declined. (Study cited in B. Heady and P. Krause, “Health Benefits and Potential Public Savings Due to Pets: Australian and German Survey Results,” Australian Social Monitor, Vol.2, No.2, May 1999.)*
**eviladam, part 2 ** I wish you guys would stop talking about dog bites and focus on the serious maiming and killing, THAT’s the difference, THAT’s what people are concerned about. I don’t think anyone doubts that the majority of dog bites aren’t being committed by pitbulls or that you have a better chance of being bitten by the golden retriver. HOWEVER…
From your own link:
Have the banning of pitbulls reduced the amount of killings? If so, I don’t see how arguing that dog bites haven’t been reduced helps you.
annually, about 15-20 people are killed by dogs. that is about half the number that drown in buckets every year. don’t even get me started on the hundreds who drown in bathtubs!
i could probably list hundreds of unusual deaths that occur at greater frequency than deaths from dog attacks. fatal dog attacks occur so rarely that any short term statistics are almost meaningless.
and again, all these statistics virtually always tally “pit bull TYPE” into one big, poorly-defined, all-inclusive group.
the people who keep track of dog bites agree that breed-specific legislation is not the answer to dog attacks.
Would you say that the American Pit Bull breed is represented by a smaller number of attacks than any other pit bull “type”?
Cite? By “the people who keep track of dog bites” do you mean the CDC? Could you show me where the CDC has issued a statement that breed specific legislation is not the answer?
Here are some stats looking at dog bite fatalities in 1995-1996.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00047723.htm
That stated, dog-bite-related fatalities (DBRFs) occur from a number of breeds. Rottweilers, German Shephards, Akitas, Chows, and Wolf Hybrids are over represented. I know veterinarians in California who will not see these breeds.
It also should be noted that breeds causing DBRFs vary over time. Years ago, Bloodhounds were a major problem.
Any large breed dog can kill a human, especially a child. If you leave your car sitting on a steep hill without the emergency brake engaged and the car rolls onto a playground, killing a child, I think you would be criminally liable. Allowing a child access to a loaded handgun is criminal. Leaving a child alone with an Akita that outweighs the child should also be a criminal act.
Your point is? We ban medication that’s killed even less people. We have incredible complicated warnings on other medication based solely on the off-chance that some person somewhere is going to have a reaction to it. We ban certain types of gun, even lawns darts http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5053.html “only” 3 kids, because they kill people or have the potential to.
No offense, but it’s cold comfort to some parent who just had his kid chewed to death to point out out many more people drowned in a tub that year and that his kid’s death was a meaningless statistical anomaly. Good luck with that tact.
I’m not for banning the breed, but I won’t ignore that their “type” and rotties are causing over 1/2 the dog deaths. If the argument for banning pitbulls is to reduce bites and dog ‘attacks’, then I think you’re right; it’s a waste of time. If the argument is that banning pitbull “type” dogs will reduce fatalities, you have a harder hill to climb, because whether you admit or not and you don’t seem willing to admit it; those are the ‘types’ of dogs doing the killing. If I ban all pitbull type dogs, I’ll reduce the killing. It may be impossible to do, I will most likely take away a majority of good dogs, but I’m pretty sure if I reduce the amount of pitbull TYPE dogs in the public, the killings will drop, as the dogs aren’t there anymore. Not the dog bites, that won’t change and this isn’t about that Again your own cite separates the two and acknowledges that it might reduce the amount of killings if we remove the breed from general population.
Now you can ignore what your own cite says, that’s your option, but it’s clear they separate dog bites, from dog fatalities and lay the blame for the latter on specific breeds…even if that breed can be vague.
It will be intersting to see what happens in Denver, Colorado where “Pit Bulls” are now illegal and over 300 have been destroyed.
http://www.dvmnewsmagazine.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=188210
this pdf document discusses some the problems of BSL, and designating certain breeds as dangerous by default.
it’s insane to legislate against my well-bred, well-socialized, well-trained, friendly Canine Good Citizen pit bull as a “dangerous dog”, while the thug down the street with the lunging, growling cane corso doesn’t have to worry about a breed ban or legal requirement to muzzle his dog as he walks that aggressive 120 lb monster through the park.
whether a dog is declared “dangerous” should by a case-by-case, individual determination.
i agree that owners of dogs should be criminally liable for the actions of their dogs.
If dog fighting is now illegal, why would we allow those breeds specifically bred for dog fighting, to continue?
Because not everyone uses them for fighting. The question I have is why would anyone take the chance that their dog has enough of the killer breeding to cause a tragedy?
after reading all the responses here, I still don’t believe outlawing a particular breed is the answer. It would be nice if people would just look to other breeds for their family pet, but I doubt that will happen either. The answer isn’t simple, but the punishment for fight dog breeders or dog fight organizers should be LOTS of jail time and anyone owning a dog with multiple attacks on its record should be jailed as well.
i’ve been to several ADBA (American Dog Breeder’s Association-the oldest pit bull registry organization, founded in 1909) shows, and i have noticed a big difference in the personality of the dogs, depending what they look like. the American Pit Bull Terriers that conform to the old standard of the breed tend to be smaller dogs (30- 50 lbs) and are generally very friendly, affectionate and submissive dogs-even with complete strangers. the bigger “pit bulls” which have become popular with the big blocky heads and overly muscular bodies tend to be a lot less friendly and even aggressive. like i said earlier, the average person’s idea of a pit bull is dramatically different from what the original breed was 30-100 years ago, when Helen Keller had a pit bull and Pete the Pup was a popular star.
poor breeding and irresponsible owners have created a large segment of the “pit bull” population that are not dogs that i would trust.
IMO, these bigger dogs have become pit bull “type”, since they no longer conform to the physical or temperament standards of the breed, but pit bull “type” also includes mixed breeds and dogs of unknown breed that kinda look like a “pit bull”.
Although I have not decided where I stand IRT BSL, the article you cite mentions only the difficulties with enacting BSL. Determining what “breed” a given dog hapens to be, 14th ammendment questions, etc and does not go as far as saying that BSL is ineffective.
I would agree. The problem is that dog fighting is thriving in the US. People who are into this “sport” have their own subculture, and they are extremely secretive. I have known some of these people. IME, law enforcement does not choose to put forth the effort to infiltrate these groups when arrests are likely to lead only to confiscation of dogs and fines.
Based on a few of the cites provided here, it doesn’t look like the AKA recognizes the American Pit Bull Terrier. Is that because of the breeding that has changed its look so drastically or because they don’t want to be associated with its reputation? Or something else completely?
Absolutely. I think Kalhoun’s suggestion would go some way toward getting law enforcement interested in breaking up dog fighting rings.
Because pillows can be used for other uses besides smothering someone.
the AKC doesn’t recognize the APBT breed due to it’s reputation as a fighting dog. They compromised and allowed the renamed American Staffordshire Terrier to be registered in the 1930’s. the first AmStaffs were all APBTs, directly from fighting stock. the AKC closed the registration of new AmStaffs in the 50’s or so. they also recognize the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, which is a smaller version that is also directly descended from the APBT.
it is currently a felony in all 50 states to arrange a dog fight, and in almost every state it is a felony to witness one.
ironically, it was a campaign to eliminate dog fighting by the Humane Society that first brought the pit bull to the attention of every idiot scumbag who now suddenly wanted to own this badass fighting dog. prior to the mid-70’s, dog fighting was confined to a small, underground community, and the media campaign to eliminate it introduced a whole generation of human waste to a new, violent form of aminal abuse.
Well, if that’s the case, the fucking police are on the take. The punishment must not be very steep.
Pillows don’t attack and maul on their own.