Can we stop pretending that a pit-bull couldn’t kill me just as easily, if not easier, than a poodle?
Pit-bull, American bull-dog, the little powerful ones and the big powerful ones, that are hard to control if they aren’t trained correctly - we all know what we’re referring to … and yes, an ill-trained standard poodle that wants my jugular would be no walk in the park, but lets live in reality land; an untrained 35 pound pit-bull is more dangerous than an ill-trained 50 pound standard poodle.
Nobody’s pretending anything, as far as I can tell. We’re just pointing out that you don’t know dick about dogs, and that your opinion on the matter should be totally disregarded.
Oh, lick my doggie balls.
All I’ve said about dogs in this thread is that all of them are liable to attack if they are ill-trained. And big, powerful ones will kill you. You’re the one coming in here going on about - gee whiz, why would any body be afraid of a tiny little 35 pound pit bull that isn’t even as big as a poodle.
But what’s the point of this? Sure, my 12 pound pug probably can’t kill a man, no matter how mad it gets. So? What does this have to do with pitbulls in particular? There are many, many dogs much larger than pitbulls, and who could kill a person; nobody’s outraged about them.
I said nothing of the sort. Not only are you absurdly ignorant on the subject, but you have trouble following discussions.
We’ve got a winner in this one.
My contention is that pitbulls, rottweillers, fighting breeds, are harder to train, not that they are predisposed to kill.
There are what I’ll politely term “misconceptions” in this thread.
For starters, those of you who have participated in previous pit bull threads are recycling already-disproved claims. That’s not really Dope-worthy posting.
On to a very few specifics:
True or not, that’s not scientifically supportable. Science merely points out that bite force is apparently related to the size of the dog, not the breed.
Uh, that’s manifestly not true. Here’s an excellent source: National Canine Research Council on Media Reporting
2008 Media Bias Report (Warning: PDF)
2007 Media Bias Report (Warning: PDF)
Strawman?
The opposite is true. Pit bulls were not bred for aggression toward humans. They were partly bred for dog aggression at one point in their history, but that’s no more likely to make them attack you than breeding for rabbit aggression is likely to make a beagle attack you. We (as a society) believe dogs can track a human by a scent that’s days old, and the law recognizes they can identify parts-per-million of drug and bomb chemicals – trust me, society, and the law, a dog can tell the difference between you and what he was bred to attack.
Furthermore, Michael Vick’s Bad Newz Kennels operation is a case in point. The legal statement of facts he agreed to does not state the total number of dogs, but based on other comments in the case it’s very reasonable to estimate 70 pit bulls at least went through his training program – training them to fight (other dogs). These were dogs hand-picked to be scary aggressive (toward dogs), and brutalized by experts to make them fight.
Only ONE of those 70-odd dogs ever won a fight in the ring. Only FIVE would even enter the ring. AFTER training.
I know plenty about dogs, including how to train them, and the pitfalls (no pun intended) of ill-trained ones. I’ve said nothing in this thread for or against pitbulls and yet all I get by stating why they should be very well trained is … “duh, like you know shit about dogs, look at me, I have Labrodor in my user name.”
Doesn’t impress me.
1)You’ve said nothing even remotely close to that so far in this thread.
I pointed out that you don’t know shit about dogs because you clearly demonstrated that you don’t know shit about dogs. My user name never entered into it.
Joke, based on all the other threads we’ve had on the subject. if you keep your killer poodle away, I promise never to do it again, o.k.?
Yes, I did:
I may not have used those exact words, but for fucksakes, what did you think I meant when I mentioned the “ill-trained” part?
Granted - I’ve never trained a fighting breed. However, given the nature of breeds, some are more easily trained than others. I would put powerful breeds - pitbulls, rotties, whatever - in a more guarded arena when it comes to training, because they are powerful. It’s an added feature thay you have to be aware of - that you don’t in training chihuahua (also hard to train, but not as powerful/dangerous).
I’m not saying that I don’t trust pitbulls because they are pitbulls. I don’t trust dogs, unless I know they are well trained.
This is fucking ridiculous. In your world, “ill-trained pit bulls are dangerous” is the same as “pit bulls are harder to train”?
What the fuck?
It has now, mister! What kind of tricks are you playing at, huh? HUH?!
Oh, the first part of your user name. :smack:
…
Okay, show of hands. Skald shows up at your doorstep and offers you whatever it is that he’s offering this week. Whatever it is, you take him up on it–so quickly you didn’t see the catch.
The catch: in order to claim your Skalderal, you’ve got to spend five minutes in a cage with either an average, pretty pissed off standard poodle or an average, pretty pissed off honest-to-goodness pit bull. Assume they’re pissed at you and aim to do something about it. Which do you choose?
I daresay most people would prefer to be poodled rather than pitted. Is it being suggested that because there is a lack of hard scientific evidence (hello Mythbusters?), it really is a toss-up between which cage you’d pick?
Listen, Cesar Milan, I’m not rising to the bait. I understand you have some sort of hard-on for pitbulls but I’ve not said anything in this thread that doesn’t meet facts in the general.
Large powerful breeds: They are large and powerful and should be trained, and it’s probably more difficult that training one than a kick-me dog. End of fucking story.
Now go on about how I wouldn’t even recognize a dog without a picture. I’m sick of your sanctimonious bullshit.
Where have you seen a hard-on for put bulls in my posts? Pointing out your glaring errors, unsupported claims, and inconsistent message isn’t the same as claiming I’m Cesar Milan.
No shit? It’s a good thing that I specifically referred to standard poodles then. And the fact that the size and aggression of a standard poodle was previously mentioned should have made Jack Batty choose a smaller breed to make his bullshit claim on. And since Jack is basing his “ability to train” solely on the size of a dog and its predisposition to aggression, then a fucking standard poodle would be worse than a pitbull.
Of course, that’s compete bullshit, because Jack’s baseline argument is complete bullshit.
The following statement isn’t based on anything other than your ability to take a shit and smear it on your computer screen:
I am Jack’s baseline argument.
Obviously Labradors, poodles etc. fatally attack people on a regular basis and are just as prone to be involved in fatal attacks as pit bulls.
The proof is that you don’t hear about such incidents in the media, because they’re prejudiced against pit bulls.
Case closed.