Pit Bulls. Again and Again and Again......

The BBQ Pit
141

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
I don’t know how many different ways, or how times this point has to be made. I don’t know why people like you are blind to a particular point. What no one has established is the distribution of dogs by breed across the spectrum of owners. Poodles/retrievers/collies/setters/spaniels/saint bernards/shephards have fuck-all to do with it unless they are owned by the same folks who own the alleged pit bulls.
[/QUOTE]

Wrong. Various breeds of dogs all have bad owners, yet a golden retriever is not inclined to rip someone’s throat out. I’m curious, how many times would pit bulls demonstrate this behavior for you to acknowledge that the breed itself plays a role? If it happened five times a day would you still be trotting out the “it’s not the dogs, it’s the owners” excuse?

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
Can you stop your knee jerking long enough to condisder that maybe, just maybe, a disproportionate percentage of people who own alleged pit bulls encourage their aggressive behavior, and resist neutering? That in fact it is the environment that creates a bad dog?
[/QUOTE]

Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle. How are you so certain that the people who own these dogs treat their dogs worse than other people? Or that these people have, or had, other dogs, that never made it into a headline of any type? Are you of the mind that the people who make for a bad situation for a pit bull have never owned other dogs?

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
Sure, a territorial, unsocialized, dominant Jack Russell is not as dangerous as a pit bull, but I wouldn’t want my kid around one. But most folks don’t reward Jacks, or poodles, or collies for aggressive behavior.
[/QUOTE]

So, you actually admit that a pit bull is more dangerous than another dog in a similar situation. Good. Progress. Now that next step is to understand that although thousands of people use dynamite every day without incident, we don’t sell dynamite in 7-11s to any shmuck who wants it.

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
It’s the owners. It is not the dogs.
[/QUOTE]

It’s the owners AND the dogs. Denying that fact shows a tremendous, willful desire to ignore reality.

142

Well… all these endearing stories of sweet, lovable pit bulls, and thoughtful caring owners are interesting, but 95%+ of the time I see a person walking a pit bull in public the vibe I get is that they are very pleased with themselves to be showing off their mighty beast, and the danger and power radiated by the latent physical capabilities of the dog are a very important aspect of the reason they choose this specific dog.

143

Jim, is there are dog park near you? That’s been a lifesaver for me because she’s really active.

Oh, I have a Westie. Not a great picture

144

[QUOTE=Gorsnak]
You’re seeing correlation and assuming causation. Yes, pit bulls make up a majority of attacks in headlines. Ignoring the fact that the most common dog bites are actually from yappy little annoying dogs like chihuahuas and the like, the reason pit bulls make up the majority of major maulings is because the assholes who want big aggressive dogs are most likely to get pit bulls. 20 years ago they were most likely to get Dobermans, and 20 years ago it was Dobermans in the news for mauling kids. 40 years ago it was German Shepherds, and it was Shepherds in the news for mauling kids. Are you seeing a pattern here yet?
[/QUOTE]

No, I’m seeing correlation and accepting it as reality. When you combine a certain type of owner and a pit bull you too often get a dead kid and a headline. I acknowledge that the owners play a role. That is why I did not advocate banning the breed (though I wouldn’t mind it if it could be done effectively), but making the prospective owners accept a higher level of responsibility. As to your other point, I do not recall those other dogs making the headlines nearly as often. If you want to argue that pit bulls are no more dangerous than shepards or dobermans, I’d have to ask you for some proof of that. I doubt it is true. If it were, by your and Contrapuntal’s argument, these owners would be as likley to want to own them as a pit bull. And we’d have an equal incidence of those dogs making the headlines.

145

[QUOTE=Caridwen]
Jim, is there are dog park near you? That’s been a lifesaver for me because she’s really active.

Oh, I have a Westie. Not a great picture
http://www.dogster.com/pet_page.php?i=161835&j=t
[/QUOTE]

Ahhh, I like Westies. Westies and Cairn Terriers are my favorite small dogs.

No dog park, but Angus our Border Collie is long gone now and we have been out of that house for 5 years. Becky our shelter rescued Labby mix does well with runs outside in her pen. I fenced off a 35’ x 80’ run for her right out our back door. A few times a week, I get her to the local park, but her only interaction with other dogs is weekly at the dog classes and we are now between classes. I need to schedule her for her intermediate training. She enjoys the classes and does very well in them.

Jim

146

[QUOTE=What Exit?]
According to this Expert:

Pit Bulls are not even top 10.

Psychologist Kathy Coon ranked dog breeds by intelligence in her book The Dog Intelligence Test based on a standardized intelligence test for dogs.
She placed the Border Collie #1.

Dog Intelligence/Temperament© Joy Butler Who’s on first? Yep our buddy the Border Collie.

More links from the top of a simple google search:

Dog breed works hand-in-paw with owners

Jim
[/QUOTE]

Where did they get these dogs for intelligence testing? If they rounded up a group of dogs at an Obedience Trial then I might believe they’d get those results because those are popular breeds for Obedience and they usually are well-trained and come from responsible breeders. However, if you tested the average Lab*, Rottie, Shepherd, Golden or Dobe who comes into the vet clinic I doubt they’d score as high.

Then again we just may see the really stupid ones that eat rocks/rat poison/garbage/chocolate, jump through plate glass, run in front of cars, play with rattlesnakes and lots of other dumb stuff. The smart ones probably don’t need to come see us.
*Many lab owners have admitted that the dogs don’t get their brains until they are about three years old. Before then they are just big and goofy.

147

[QUOTE=Wile E]
Where did they get these dogs for intelligence testing? If they rounded up a group of dogs at an Obedience Trial then I might believe they’d get those results because those are popular breeds for Obedience and they usually are well-trained and come from responsible breeders. However, if you tested the average Lab*, Rottie, Shepherd, Golden or Dobe who comes into the vet clinic I doubt they’d score as high.

Then again we just may see the really stupid ones that eat rocks/rat poison/garbage/chocolate, jump through plate glass, run in front of cars, play with rattlesnakes and lots of other dumb stuff. The smart ones probably don’t need to come see us.
*Many lab owners have admitted that the dogs don’t get their brains until they are about three years old. Before then they are just big and goofy.
[/QUOTE]

Different studies used different methods. At least one of the studies was just a detailed poll of a large group of professional Dog trainers. I think that was the one that rated Pit Bulls 15th. What is interesting is several researchers did their own independent studies and used their own definitions and seemed to come out with similar results to a good poll of professional trainers.

This is about as valid as any “intelligence” ranking is going to be.

It is a lot to look through, but my quick list of cites matches what I have seen since looking into dog breed since 11 years ago. I have talked to vets about it and they tend to support the idea Border Collies and Poodles are the smartest. Labby and Goldens are the best medium to large dogs for kids. Basset Hounds are ideal for people who want a sedate dog and Corgis are good if you want a fairly sedate dog that trains fairly well and is good with kids and cats.

Armed with this information we have had a pound puppy Collie-Terrier mix, a pure-breed Border collie and now Labbie mix. The Collie-Terrier was dumb as rocks, but sweet as could be. When she got run over my a car, I decided I wanted a Border Collie just like the ones I saw working in Scotland and playing when the day was done. We knew they need to run a lot and we had a large property so I thought we were fine. What I did not realize, is they get bored and I knew nothing about training dogs. Angus was a nice pup, but he never listened to my wife and never tired. Without knowing what I was doing, I managed to teach him his borders and he use to run from the back door to his pen 300 feet away on his own. We finally got another dog in September. She is a good dog and this time we are making sure we are all getting trained. She listens well to my wife and I and she listens fairly well to my daughter. She ignores my little boy so far.

I sincerely hope you are correct about the labbies. My pup is under 2 years old. She pretty good, but she likes to jump on people and lick and she likes to pull very hard on the leash unless I correct her constantly. It makes the walks much less enjoyable than they could be.

Jim I think based on 11 years of mild research we were supposed to get a Corgi.

148

[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
Pit Bulls are terriers? That explains a LOT. Terriers are known for being stubborn, independent, and very assertive. Very feisty little creatures. I have a Westie and she’s incredibly smart-and incredibly bad. We just can’t trust her on her own. She’s sweet, but a total handful.
[/QUOTE]
That reminds me of an incident that happened when my spousal unit worked as an emergency vet tech.

The vet was in a bad part of town, saw lots of pits and rotties. They had a pit come in one night, torn to shreds.

You see, he kept getting out of his yard and harassing the fox terriers down the street. This day, he’d gone that one step too far and gone into the yard after them.

They killed him. Seems the fox terriers would grab hold and not let go until they took a chunk with them. (Sound familiar, anyone?) Since the fox terriers were smaller and quicker and worked as a pack, he couldn’t manage to get any of them. They took out enough chunks of that dog that he bled to death on the table.

Yup, terriers are terriers, pit bull terriers included.

[QUOTE=Lute Skywatcher]
I don’t know about genetic tests but there are ways of determining what breeds are in a mix. We adopted a Husky mix when I was a kid; a vet later determined the other breeds involved were a Samoyed and a German shepherd.
[/QUOTE]
Bushwah. Your vet “determined” the other breeds by making an educated guess based on known physical and/or medical characteristics. I can almost always spot a Shepherd cross, because they have certain characteristics that almost always breed true and that I’m familiar with. I can spot 'em even when the dog doesn’t look at all German Shepherd.

149

[QUOTE=Uvula Donor]
Pit bulls bred to fight other dogs are routinely killed for showing any type of human aggression at all. Dogfighters need to be able to reach in and physically separate fighting dogs, and therefore dogs that show agression to humans are put down.
[/QUOTE]

Pits bred to hunt hogs also won’t go after other dogs in the pack or the hunters. Just the hog. But if you don’t train and exercise them, or worse ‘make’ them into mean, scary, watchdogs, then you’re looking for trouble.

150

Well… as predicted, it turns out the owner of the dog in the case the OP described isn’t exactly the sharpest knife in the cutlery drawer.

No surprises that a 23 y/old drug-dealing skinhead from a shitty part of Liverpool isn’t the best person to train / keep a pit bull :rolleyes:

151

[QUOTE=What Exit?]
and Corgis are good if you want a fairly sedate dog that trains fairly well and is good with kids and cats.
[/QUOTE]

That hasn’t been my experience with Corgis. I love them, but in my limited experience I would be careful about Corgis and small kids and cats. Corgis can be very dominant/aggressive toward other animals, and may try to herd or correct kids as well.

They are working dogs, with the attendant pleasures and downfalls of those breeds–easily bored, etc.

152

I’m trying to figure out how a psychologist is an authority on dog intelligence. How are they defining intelligence? Trainability? My old animal ethology professor would be rolling over in his grave.

Not that I don’t love border collies! But we really are a self-important species that gauge how intelligent another species is by their ability to understand us.
>>>
Hi all,

I’m a little late in the pit bull side of the argument- but basically I think we do need to recognize the danger in the type of dog Pit Bulls are- that is their tenacity and capacity to do harm. Many other breeds, in my opinion, fit that description. They also, in my experience managing vet hospitals for over 10 years, are usually very sweet and stable dogs when in the right hands. I believe far more in harsher punishments for owners whose dogs do harm (and believe wholeheartedly that such dogs must be destroyed) but breed bans only punish those who would follow the law and the dogs.

Of course, I have to chime in on the Border Collie intelligence issue as well- as referenced above. I’ve owned and trained working border collies for a long time and while I agree they are highly trainable- they are also extremely clever as well. They are one of the few breeds of dogs that can work out of sight and sound of their handler and complete a very complicated job. The variable of the stock that they work demands that they are intelligent and often jaw dropping adapters/innovators. In most cases, they know more about what they are doing than the person who is handling them. I even know a few that are not very trainable (compared to other Border Collies, probably not too bad compared to other breeds) but are still outstanding workers because of their intelligence and “stock sense”. Their talent is not just in understanding us, but understanding and controlling several types of livestock- ranging from “light”, easily moved types to “heavy” sheep and rank cattle. My dogs must be strong enough to face cattle and then temper that strength to work ewes w/ lambs. That ability can be modified to suit our needs, but it can not be put into a dog that wasn’t born with it.

That being said, I do think the intelligence lists are kinda cute and fun but probably not a good way to pick a dog- good pets are not necessary intelligent and the intelligence of dogs like the Border Collie does not always lend itself to a stable, consistent temperament either. As smart as Border Collies can be, they can be unforgiving when it comes to the time you need to put into them and can be really dumb about some things- they can be very sound sensitive and a few of my dogs, when not working, are a bit flaky. Not to mention that most areas in my house have chew marks or other examples of bored pups “working” on their own.

153

[QUOTE=jsgoddess]
That hasn’t been my experience with Corgis. I love them, but in my limited experience I would be careful about Corgis and small kids and cats. Corgis can be very dominant/aggressive toward other animals, and may try to herd or correct kids as well.

They are working dogs, with the attendant pleasures and downfalls of those breeds–easily bored, etc.
[/QUOTE]

Corgi’s are known for herding kids but not hurting them. Far less than a Border Collie or Aussie Shepard is my understanding. I have heard of all 3 breeds actually doing a great job with keeping toddlers out of danger. I was told a well trained Corgi was usually very good with cats, so I guess it comes down to training, socialization and the humans involved.

We had a problem with our Border Collie actually trying to herd both my wife and the cats. The cats did not take kindly to this and it got rough that Angus only listened to me. For some reason he was great with the baby. Even when she started walking. She use to hang on to him and walk with him in the house. He seemed to enjoy this.

Jim

154

[QUOTE=magellan01]
No, I’m seeing correlation and accepting it as reality. When you combine a certain type of owner and a pit bull you too often get a dead kid and a headline.
[/QUOTE]
When you combine a certain type of owner with ***any dog with ***sufficient physical attributes to harm a human you get a dead kid and a headline. Today’s dog of choice is the pit bull type. Used to be rotties. Before that it was shepherds.

It is species-specific behavior, not breed specific behavior. Any dog is capable of aggression. Yes, golden retreivers. And poodles. And collies.

You give me two puppies. One a pit bull. The other a dog of your choice that as an adult will weigh 60-90 lbs., and I can produce a completely docile, happy, safe pit and a vicious, savage, dangerous other dog virtually every time.

Let me repeat what you seem intent on ignoring. A responsible dog owner A) Spays or neuters the dog. B) Socializes the dog. C) Provides basic obedience training for the dog. D) Maintains control of the dog at all times, or otherwise knows that the dog is controlled. These factors are true for every dog, regardless of breed.

No pit bull raised under the above conditions has ever harmed a human being, and none ever will.

I find it interesting that you insist that breeding is such an important factor, when pits are bred to be non-aggressive toward humans. As much as you may want to, you cannot have it both ways.

155

[QUOTE=e-logic]
Well… as predicted, it turns out the owner of the dog in the case the OP described isn’t exactly the sharpest knife in the cutlery drawer.

No surprises that a 23 y/old drug-dealing skinhead from a shitty part of Liverpool isn’t the best person to train / keep a pit bull :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]

Well, you say that, but if a Scouser is properly handled, trained and socialised from an early age then it can invariably be brought up to be docile, well-mannered and a pleasure to be with. The key is to be firm, fair and consistent, of course; but where there is fault, this lies with the upbringing, not the breed.

156

[QUOTE=Lute Skywatcher]
I don’t know about genetic tests but there are ways of determining what breeds are in a mix. We adopted a Husky mix when I was a kid; a vet later determined the other breeds involved were a Samoyed and a German shepherd.
[/QUOTE]
Breeds are determined by pedigree. Breeds are defined and administered by associations such as the American Kennel Club. If you do not have papers on the dog, it is not a member of the breed. Q.E.D. There is no way that anyone can determine whether a particular dog is a particular breed without examining the pedigree.

157

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
When you combine a certain type of owner with ***any dog with ***sufficient physical attributes to harm a human you get a dead kid and a headline. Today’s dog of choice is the pit bull type. Used to be rotties. Before that it was shepherds.
[/QUOTE]

You might be right about this, nut I am not sure. As I mentioned, if you want to use the shepard/rottweiler defense, you’ll have to provide some statistics. I don’t think they exist. I don’t think that even those dogs, as a rule, can be trained to0 be as vicious as pits, with the same devasting results. I’ll tell you what, let’s put $10,000 on the table. You take 2 to 3 years to train a 70 pound golden to be as viscious as possible and put him in a fight with an average 60-pound pit bull and let’s see who wins.

I noticed how you ignored much of the other points regarding the breeds and ownership by bad owners. Very wise of you.

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
It is species-specific behavior, not breed specific behavior. Any dog is capable of aggression. Yes, golden retreivers. And poodles. And collies.

You give me two puppies. One a pit bull. The other a dog of your choice that as an adult will weigh 60-90 lbs., and I can produce a completely docile, happy, safe pit and a vicious, savage, dangerous other dog virtually every time.
[/QUOTE]

Let’s put this in caps in order to combat willful blindness: WE AGREE THAT PIT BULLS CAN BE RAISED TO BE WARM, SAFE CUDDLEY DOGS. Amazingly, you continue to ignore that pit bulls, when they do become viscious are capable of more mayhem. I invite you to put that $10,000 up and go find yourself a golden to start training.

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
Let me repeat what you seem intent on ignoring. A responsible dog owner A) Spays or neuters the dog. B) Socializes the dog. C) Provides basic obedience training for the dog. D) Maintains control of the dog at all times, or otherwise knows that the dog is controlled. These factors are true for every dog, regardless of breed.

No pit bull raised under the above conditions has ever harmed a human being, and none ever will.
[/QUOTE]

Once again: WE AGREE THAT PIT BULLS CAN BE RAISED TO BE WARM, SAFE CUDDLEY DOGS. What’s the smell? Sounds like charred straw.

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
I find it interesting that you insist that breeding is such an important factor, when pits are bred to be non-aggressive toward humans. As much as you may want to, you cannot have it both ways.
[/QUOTE]

I’m not sure what you mean here. If it’s that we agree that training matters, therefore “it’s not the dogs, it’s the owners”, at the very least you are ignoring real-world physical differences, not to mention baseline personality traits. I invite you, once again, to provide all those headlines of golden retriever horrors, unless your of the mind that every golden is raised be a good owner. Conversely, are you of the opinion that every pit bull that has made it to the headlines was trained to be agressive and viscious? Even when the dog was procured to be a family dog—with small children in the home?

I am amazed that you insist on holding on to this “it’s not the dog, it’s the owner” mantra. Jusrt the fact that you had to qualify your stament above to distinguish “sufficient physical attributes to harm a human” and “as an adult will weigh 60-90 lbs.” indicates you don’t believe that to be true. And that leaves aside musculature, head and mouth size, and baseline personalities differences by breed. If you want to say that given two identical dogs, which would mean two pit bulls, I can subscribe to your mantra. Otherwise, I’ll have to defer to reality.

Now, what to do with that $10,000 that’ll be coming my way…

158

[QUOTE=Malacandra]
Well, you say that, but if a Scouser is properly handled, trained and socialised from an early age then it can invariably be brought up to be docile, well-mannered and a pleasure to be with. The key is to be firm, fair and consistent, of course; but where there is fault, this lies with the upbringing, not the breed.
[/QUOTE]

I might have missed this, but is there anyone in this thread of the mind that pit bulls can’t be raised to be as sweet and lovable as any other dog?

159

[QUOTE=magellan01]
I might have missed this, but is there anyone in this thread of the mind that pit bulls can’t be raised to be as sweet and lovable as any other dog?
[/QUOTE]

Pit bulls, yes. It’s the Scousers I’m not sure about. :smiley:

160

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Amazingly, you continue to ignore that pit bulls, when they do become viscious are capable of more mayhem.
[/QUOTE]

More mayhem than what? They aren’t capable of more mayhem than another dog of the same size and build. That’s the point. Yet other dogs of the same size are not demonized the same way.