There is a key difference in the way pit bulls bite; they continue to hold on with very powerful jaws and then twist their bodies in a spiral, rip and tear with all their might, trying to remove whatever body part they happen to be chomping on. Other dogs including shepherds and rottweilers either nip and release or bite and hold on but they do not generally twist their heads and entire bodies like alligators trying to tear body parts off a caribou. So whether or not pit bulls are naturally more aggressive than any other breed, all influencing factors like environment and training aside, they are absolutely more likely to cause injuries sufficient to make it to statistics collectors when they do attack.
Yup, there’s no denying that. But, the question is, should a whole breed be punished for the actions of the few that go haywire?
I’m a pitbull fan obviously and biased but I thought it was a decent article. I disagree with his final conclusion, imho incorrect breed identification within such small samples can lead to skewed samples. But I think reasonable people can disagree and Cecil was not unreasonable.
BTW Crazyhorse where did you get the idea that pitbulls shake when somehow other dogs do not? All dogs shake when they bite, the shake helps kill smaller animals. I have not had a dog in my life, from toy poodle to pitbull that did not shake their toys while they are chewing on them.
A pet peeve of mine is people placing supernatural abilities into pitbulls laps, they are dogs same as any other.
A dog does not have a mechanism that locks their jaw.
A dog does not lie. Yeah we actually had a poster that said that pitbulls lie.
A dog does not without warning attack. Usually their are warning signs that owners miss well before an attack.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/07/11/BAG5UDLOAC1.DTL The numbers are there. Pitt bulls attack the most. Of course your dogs would never bite. But 77 % of the serious dog attacks were the first incident for the dog.
I have extensive experience with dogs. I’ve trained big ones and little ones. I’ve seen some beautifully trained ‘pitbulls’ that were wonderful with children.
I’ve talked to people who were out of a clear blue sky attacked by their own dogs(one woman while lying on a couch watching TV)—not by pitbulls, two cases were Cockers. When the non-pit attack, it’s written off as an anomaly and doesn’t reach the news. Pits have bad PR, and unfortunately, they’re also big powerful dogs who can do a lot of damage in a heartbeat. A cocker might give you some deep bites, but they’re not going to crush your hand. Even if Pits are less likely to attack than other breeds, when it happens, it’s gonna hurt.
My own experience was I took in a mutt from the pound, a 3 year old male. He was housebroken, responded well to the voice commands, and hand signals I taught him. Then he started leaping at my face and snapping his jaws in front of me, this escalated to leaping up and snagging my jacket shoulder and collar. I HAVE EXTENSIVE DOG TRAINING EXPERIENCE. I could not break these behaviors. I contacted 3 pros. Each one asked me the same question:
“Is he part Chow?”
My answer, “yes”.
“Get rid of him”.
Which I did. When you’re standing still in the middle of the yard and the dog leaps five feet in the air to snap his jaws an inch in front of your face, it’s not a time to be sentimental.
Okay, please excuse the question, but regarding your username…any relation to the Weatherwaxes of movie and TV fame?
And welcome to the SDMB, Weatherwax! Speaking of Chows, is what I’ve heard true, that they prefer to come up silently behind an intruder then growl to see how high he can jump? Before they kill and eat him, of course. 
So the old wives’ tale about letting sleeping dogs lie is a misnomer?
We have an 11-year-old neutered pit bull/rotty cross. He’s probably the biggest chicken and suckiest dog I’ve ever known. He has never bitten anyone in his life, but we know what dangerous potential he has. While his bark is very deep and loud and he can certainly look intimidating, he’s hardly a good watchdog. If anyone said hello and petted his head, he’d roll over for a tummy rub while they cleaned out the house.
But we are well aware of the risks he presents and we have never left him alone with small children, or with strangers. He barks at the mailman with great passion (he’s never been out when the mail arrives) but he approaches everyone else with a big grin and a happily wagging tail. He’s very sociable and loves being with lots of people because he gets lots of love and attention. We know better than to play with him aggressively or get him riled up. He’s very well behaved and is very good company.
That being said, if he ever attacked anyone he’d be put down immediately. We love him dearly but we’re still careful with him.
I guess if he continues to bash his face into the floor when he sneezes he won’t have many more teeth to worry about, anyways.
So, you’re saying that a pit bull is like an alligator tearing up a caribou?
My pit bull is more like a 70-lb dog licking a child’s face. At least, that’s what he’s been like the ten years I’ve had him in my house.
I’ve seen dog fight videos, and it is really disturbing. Those dogs do tear each other up badly, but I’ve never seen one death roll like an alligator, much less a gator on a caribou. Since alligators live in Florida swamps and carribou live on the Canadian tundra, I’m going to assume that you are correct, and a pit bull death rolling someone is as likely as an alligator attack on a carribou.
Your cite suffers from the same thing I have seen in every other study – the fact that identifying a particular breed of dog is very difficult, and best left to experts. There is absolutely nothing in the article cited that supports your contention that pit bulls attack the most, including the fact that the dog mentioned first was not even identified as a pit bull.
It’s also a bit silly to extrapolate statistics from one city into statistics for an entire nation.
Bill Pickett, the rodeo star, invented the human version. “It was later claimed that Pickett introduced it in the 101 Ranch Wild West Show in 1905. After having grasped the horns of a fleeing long horn steer, Pickett would twist its head skyward and bite its upper lip in order to subdue it, after the fashion of the cowdog breed known as bulldogs, whence the event takes its name.” Wikipedia has it backwards, though–he bit then twisted. The steer dropped like a sack of mud.
Bulldogs were originally bred to latch onto a bovine’s face and subdue it. Their jaws don’t “lock,” but they were selected for biting and holding. (shrug) Breeding will tell.
Kind of a weird distinction to make. “I’d rather be attacked by a trained professional killer than a random road-rage person.”
Truth is, pit bulls that do attack humans – and such evidence as we have supports the obvious common sense conclusion that pit bulls attack humans less frequently than the breeds trained and bred to attack humans – do so for the same reasons any dog attacks a human – which are various.
Sure. German Shepherds are better at fights to the death with humans – they’re larger, somewhat better-protected (pit bulls have no fur worth the name), and more accustoned to hurt a human. Labrador Retreivers are better at fights to the death with ducks. Rat terriers are better at fights to the death with rats. Bassett Hounds are better at fights to the death with badgers. Fox Terriers are better at fights to the death with foxes. Beagles are better at fights to the death with rabbits. Housecats are better at fights to the death with mice.
Pit bulls were (unfortunately) bred to fight dogs. They make good fighting dogs, structurally, and the fighting bloodlines that were kept specifically for that purpose (by now a tiny proportion of overall pit bull population) probably have a higher proportion of dogs psychologically ready to fight other dogs (“hot” as the dogfighters would say). But make no mistake – your dog was bred to fight humans, if need be. See Schutzhund. Many breeds of dogs were bred and trained to fight and kill a particular type of animal. Just because some (uneducated) dog owners are horrifed when Muffy gets attacked by a pit bull doesn’t mean the pit bull is any morally worse than a lab killing my pet bird or a beagle killing my pet rabbit or a terrier killing my pet ferret. You should see the fury farmers have in news articles when a “pit bull” kills a farm animal the farmer himself planned to slaughter – they always assert that anything killing a lamb is a monster that should be put down…then self-righteously go back to their farm and slaughter the spring lambs.
And you better believe that a pit bull can and will distinguish between a human and a dog. We seem prepared to believe that dogs can find tiny parts-per-million traces of contraband and follow a fugitive through the swamps and guide a blind man through New York City; why can’t we admit that a pit bull is well aware of the difference between a human and a chihuahua? “Dog aggression” is very different from human aggression, in the same way that a beagle isn’t going to mistake you for a rabbit and kill you.
Do some people abuse pit bulls, raise them badly, mis-train them, fail to exercise due diligence in managing them, fail to account for possible dog aggression? Sure. We’re much much worse with gun safety/mis-use/aggression, though, and everyone accepts (or has to accept, see the US Suprreme Court) that guns are a universally protected right.
Like many assertions, this one depends on how you qualify it. Pound-for-pound a pit bull is probably more dangerous, and certainly has more pounds (though, as always, not as many as people think – a 65 pound male APBT is freakishly HUGE by the breed standard), but if we think in terms of supervision and trainging, the pit bull may be better-trained at interacting with children than your typical purse dog, and may be better supervised around children. There are recent recorded accounts of small dogs (Jack Russells, for example) killing human infants they were left alone with. Theoretically a chihuahua could do the same; chihuahuas have a reputation for badassery (well, micro-sized badassery) not because they’re inherently evil but because people don’t take it seriously and fail to manage their behaviors.
Sorry - crocodiles then. Both they and some caribou-like animal live in Africa which is where the mental image I have originated. The point was the same, to illustrate their body and head movements while attached by the jaw to someone or something are extremely violent and likely to cause injuries. Pit bulls have a much stronger and more pronounced “shake and tear” instinct than most other breeds of dogs of similar size and strength. Keep in mind I am and have been for almost all my life a terrier lover and grew up with a pit bull that I would have trusted with any small child or other pet. My post that you are questioning basically just said that when a pit bull does attack, whatever the reasons, it is more likely to do significant damage requiring medical attention. When another big dog attacks, even a shepherd or rottweiler, the victim is more likely to walk away with minor injuries that won’t make it to medical statistics or police reports. Thus, I’m on the pit bull’s side! So quit picking my poorly selected analogies apart if you are too! 
Incidentally to other posts I’ve seen on the subject - pit bull’s do have, in a manner of speaking, “locking jaws” - in that they have very strong jaws and the tendency to hang on with all their might once they bite you (along with the ripping and tearing mentioned above, and yes they do spin their entire body in a spiral like a crocodile at times, or if you like perhaps more accurately, like a wild dingo or wolf does at times when trying to dismember it’s dinner).
And I know beyond all doubt that some dogs can chew through chain link fence so I don’t know why Cecil was so quick to discount that one. We have 2 Rottweilers who can, and since they can I’m sure there are Terriers who can too.
WTF? Why do you even have a dog? You just don’t claim you love the dog dearly that you’re so willing to put down immediately. You seem to have forgotten that you’ve **chosen **to house an **animal ** that has limited means of communication and self-preservation tools at its disposal. It’s bark and bite serve those purposes. You don’t disregard its life simply because it used those tools. There’s a big difference between a sick, rabid dog (that is typically humanely destroyed) and a family dog that uses its teeth to tell the brat tugging on its ears for the last 15 minutes to cut it the hell out already. Why on earth would you choose to destroy the latter dog as opposed to finding a more responsible caretaker for it?
Sorry, but this comment just pisses me off. I hate it when people treat dogs and cats like disposable pieces of property. If you can’t handle the responsibilities and ramifications of caring for a living being in your home, you don’t deserve to have a dog. You don’t love the dog any more than you love your TV.
Oh, and…
…if you’re going to say it like it’s fact, you may as well back it up with actual data: cite?
I didn’t think a cite was necessary in this case because it is a trait so commonly seen by both the casual observer and the dog experts out there. Anyone who has ever seen a pit bull play with a chew toy, old tire, piece of rope, or attack another animal or human just one time for a short moment knows exactly the trait that I described. But a simple google search for e.g. “pit bull bite twist shake”, or similar will yield hundreds of various cites, including many videos of said behavior.
Below is one with explanation from http://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pitbull-faq.htm(a site I am not a fan of - but in this case they are using the truth about their ripping/tearing instinct to manipulate public opinion about their overall safety in the community.)
As I said I think they are wonderful dogs and in the right homes make wonderful pets. But they are absolutely more likely to cause serious injury in those times they do attack whatever the reason or provocation. I would never recommend one to first time dog owners, owners of other existing pets, or owners with small children where careful control and watch cannot be kept over both the dog and the children at all times, just for this reason, not because they are more likely to bite than any other dog if handled properly, but because of the potential damage they can do if something goes wrong. For a capable dog owner who understands the breed and accommodates their needs they are one of the most wonderful pets and companions you could ever hope for. For an ignorant, irresponsible, or deliberately abusive owner, they are a walking mass of muscle, bones, and teeth and they know how to use them. A disgruntled pit bull is far more dangerous than a disgruntled dachshund.
It’s the responsible thing to do.
They ARE disposible pieces of property, and if one of my dogs attacked a child I would kill it with my bare hands as an example to the others. To suggest that this vicious creature is just misunderstood and needs a loving home where it will get complete support, even when it has committed the ultimate crime of attacking a higher up member of its pack, shows that you do not understand dog behavior. As the substitute pack leader you cannot permit crap like that or you will lose complete control.
Anyway, if a dog bites a child the authorities will put it down and the owner will get sued to within an inch of her life.
Unless you have a cite for a bite being an automatic death sentence, I’d say you are overstating the case quite a bit.
Of course, it depends on the severity of the attack. While I overstated what the authorities might do, I did not overstate what I would do. Even a playful nip while I’m playing with a dog earns it a quick reminder that I hold the power of life and death over it.
Would you prefer that we keep him around so he can do it again? He’s a big, strong dog with the potential to cause great harm. As I said, he’s lived this long without hurting anyone. If it did happen, I would suspect a psychological cause because it would be very out of character for him. If we couldn’t trust his temperament anymore, what do we do then? You want me to ship him off to you so you can take care of him much better than you think we can?
We “handle the responsibilities” by being present and watchful when there are children or strangers around, and we don’t wind him up by teasing him or playing aggressively, so the “brat tugging on its ears” doesn’t happen. Were you too busy jumping to conclusions to read that part?
I watch TV about an hour a week so your claim that I love my TV more than my dog is laughable. Leave the hyperbole out of it.
While I agree with you that pit bulls are better off with experienced human handlers, you should know that “dogsbite.org” is a pure hate site no more reliable than Stromfront and founded for much the same reasons.
This quote in particular is complete crap:
Many terriers hold on and shake. All bully-breed dogs (bulldogs, pit bulls, and relatives) are classed as “gripdogs” and famous for holding on – that’s one primary reason “bulldog” is a metaphor for determination. Note that bulldogs are not only not pit bulls, but the fact that this trait exists outside the animals classified as pit bulls indicates it’s not a trait specific to pit bulls, doesn’t it? And that’s the point I’m making – other dogs do this as well. Yet only pit bulls get flak for it – a sure sign hysteria supersedes fact.
Pit bull bite wounds are indistinguishable from other dog bites. I’m sure some idiot compared them to shark attacks, because it sells papers. But no scientist did.
Pit bull jaws are strong, but not disproportionately stronger than other dogs known for their bite. Bite force correlates most directly with dog size, not breed.
Another part of the quote that shows unfamiliarity with the actual history: pit bulls were not bred to “hang on and shake” to make dogfighting more interesting. In fact, when the British gov’t banned bull-baiting, and bulldogs were converted to dog-fighting (not banned at the time) it was found that the large, dogged bulldog’s tendency to bite and hang on was, well, boring. The dogs were outcrossed with terriers to make the “bull and terrier” (which became the American Pit Bull Terrier after crossing the Atlantic) specifically because it made them more mobile and athletic and thus more “interesting” to watch as opposed to the older “bite and hang on” behavior inherited from bulldogs. So I don’t deny that pit bulls bite and hang on but it’s well-known that it did not “give better results in the fighting ring” – it’s a holdover from their previous role. A holdover they share with other, equally determined, larger dogs – that are just as dangerous, but NOT banned, because they are not the focus of the hysteria. And because, frankly, bulldogs and other grip dogs aren’t very dangerous after all – neither is the (properly raised) pit bull.