I swear, these pitbull threads are just as bad as gun threads. God forbid someone says something that isn’t in the most glowing terms about them and you turn into a fantatic or an idiot of some sort.
Fine and dandy. Tell you what. I’ll continue being wary of dogs that are ill-trained, and being more wary of larger dogs that are ill-trained, and the rest of you can walk up to all the strange rottweillers, pitbulls, german shephards and dobermans you please and pet them on their sweet little, would never harm a fly, heads.
Oh spare us the poor misunderstood Jack story - you fucking sound like BigT. Next time try to not veer off of safe generalizations, because it’s clear this might not be an area you know all that much about. You were right on the money when you were saying things like “All dogs are liable to attack” and “most dogs in this country, regardless of breed, aren’t trained particularly well”. Those are absolutely true. But claiming one breed is harder to train than another breed based solely on their size? That’s a baseless statement, and became even more absurd when you used the poor example of a poodle, the standard size of which is larger than a pit.
Actually, when one does research on fatal dog attacks as reported by medical examiners - no press involved - dogs described as pit bulls are still hugely over represented. It is not just some reporter’s bias.
What’s odd to me is that nobody believes dogs bred for any other purpose can be trained out of that behavior or that how they are brought up as puppies influences that behavior.
Nobody believes that you can stop a Labrador Retriever from chasing and bringing back a ball if you just train it right, or you can stop a terrier from, well…being a terrier through training. Nobody thinks that a sight hound won’t chase after a running rabbit if it’s never exposed to rabbits as a puppy.
Yet with dogs that have been selectively bred to attack other dogs and be aggressive - it’s all about poor owners and training.
Know what else you’ll find out? The average emergency room nurse isn’t all that capable of knowing the difference between a pit bull dog bite, a doberman dog bit, a dachschund dog bite or a collie dog bite. Know why? Because at that point it doesn’t make a damned bit of difference, and they just put down whatever the patient reports the dog was.
Know what breed people typically default to after encountering an aggressive dog?
If that’s the impression I gave, it was misconstrued. What you say, is true; I am wary of all ill-trained dogs. But I give a wider berth to bigger dogs that look like they could bite my head off without slowing down.
I dont think anyone in this thread has claimed that pits are not more likely to have dog aggression issues. They were bred to fight other dogs however you are conflating dog agression with human aggression in your post.
In 2011. there were 22 fatalities from pit bull attacks. To put this in perspective, there were 26 fatalities from being struck by lightning in the same period.
Take home message: You are more likely to be killed by lightning than by a pit bull.
I’ve got a nasty little Westie (who, despite constant training, continues to be dominate and stubborn) for you, if you wish. She probably wouldn’t hurt you, but she can be viscious when she wants. You want a dog that’s really hard to train? Get a Westie.
No, tall trees and towers etc are more likely to invite attack from the sky. That can only mean one thing… Airdales and Skye terriers
Sigh. I go away for who knows how long, and the same ignorant fools are spewing the same uninformed deliberately ignorant horse shit. I haven’t missed a damn thing.
I’d love to see some evidence of that - other than pit bull apologists making it up because it sounds good.
11%, 13%, and 12% of the time in 2007,2008, and 2009, they “defaulted” to Rottweiler. In 2008 they defaulted to Husky 13% of the time. (According to the web site DogsBite.org).
In several different surveys, dogs described as pit bulls are responsible for about 50-60% of the fatal bites. But lots of other breeds - common and not - are also listed. Rottweiler is usually second, with about 25% of the fatalities. All other breeds (including Boxers and English bulldogs) make up the other 25%.
When you look at whether the number of fatal dog attacks is what is expected due to how popular the breed is - most breeds fall in line. This means that Airedale Terriers make up 0.3% of the dog population and also inflict 0.3% of the fatal bites. Ditto Basenjis at 0.1 and 0.2.
Dogs that have higher than expected rates are “the usual suspects” - pit bulls, Rottweiler, German Shepard, Huskies, Malamutes, Chows, Dobermans, Akitas, and - oddly - St. Bernards.
Dogs that have lower than expected rates are the Retrievers, mixed breeds, dachshunds and Bulldogs.
Well, for us folks, out n about walking, jogging, running, and biking, being attacked by unleashed dogs/pit bulls(because they are vicious, tend to not let go & known to kill) is a constant and real threat.
Such threats are a concern enough that we need to have strategies as to how to deal with them when they occasionally occur. So when you hear another news about a pit bull attack, that caused critical injury to one of us, we all need to reflect again, and again, and again, until we are all satisfied that we’ve thoroughly “reflected” about it until next time however near that may be.
Perhaps someday there will be a surefire solution to the problem but I don’t see it: How about mandatory electronic neck collars that stops pit bulls and other “vicious dogs”, say, that activates when they get near a runner? But then buglers and bad guys would get the transponders as well… sooo… yeh… guess not.
You want a dog that’s really hard to train? Get a Westie.