Nothing. Just like laws banning specific breeds of dog. The laws didn’t make people better. They just made it harder for people to be bad.
You’ve got to be kidding me .
For someone who’s been making a big deal about reputable cites, You sure picked a doosy.
Since you didn’t catch the author’s obvious incompetency , let me explain.
The author concludes from the study that 2 out of 1000 reported dog bites is likely to result in a fatality. That’s like 1 out of 500.
Yet the study reports only 1 fatility in a total sample of 5711 reported dog bites.
The conclusion erred by a factor of one order of magnitude !!!
But what really gets me is the fact that of the 16 “severe” dog bite incidents your beloved pit bull is featured along with dalmations and cocker spaniels and no other breed. Where’s the German Shepherd ? Where’s the Rottweiller.
I just don’t believe it.
You know what would convince me that a cocker spaniel could do great damage?
A news report. A Cocker Spaniel killing someone would make front page news. Find one and I’ll back right off.
I tend to side with gonzomax on this one, Freudian Slit and nivea. A standard poodle might attack under the "right"circumstances, but they still ** cannot** inflict the kind of damage that pitbulls are capable of inflicting.
I disagree with you on this one, NajaNivea. Comparing pitbulls and pitbull attacks with that of other dogs is ludicrous, imho. It’s agreed that any dog can inflict a certain amount of damage if and when they bite, but even rottweilers and German Shepherds aren’t capable of doing the kind of damage that pitbulls inflict.
Please visit the American Temperament Test Society at atts.com for a full range of data on all AKC recognized breeds. Samples sizes of the different breeds vary.
American Pit Bull Terriers have a ‘pass rate’ (which means the dog is determined to be tempermentally sound, no danger to humans and suitable for breeding or adoption) of 85%, higher than the average pass rate of all breeds of 81%.
Please provide any evidence at all for believing this (I know you can’t). I am prepared to admit, if real evidence is ever available, that pit bulls bite more than other breeds. And it does seem evident that bull breeds are responsible for a majority of the small number of yearly dog fatalities. But this persisting belief that their jaws are ‘special’, ‘bear traps’ or ‘lock in’ is just… silly. So silly that I am embarrassed for those of you who keep bringing it up (maybe I should be embarrassed myself for being such a dog and genetics nerd that I know this is impossible).
The only studies that have been done so far show that the larger the dog, the harder to bite, the more damage inflicted. Breed has nothing to do with it.
I feed my dogs wholly on raw animal parts, and believe me, this is obvious if you watch dogs of different sizes eating whole raw bones. My best friend’s 40-lb pit can’t get though bones half the size my 80-lb German Shepherd/Lab can. And what better test is there than who can decimate a goat’s thigh bone and tear off the biggest mouthfuls of muscle?
Third page,last entry on the table. The table also lists a West Highland Terrier, a 15-20lb dog, along with a collie, lab, and seven of gonzomax’s “bred for docile temperaments” St. Bernards. Also cited: first paragraph, right-hand column, page 4:
How about a Pomeranian? Are they dangerous?
Again… who cited poodles, here?
Personal experience every single incident(6) were pits. TV and internet ,all of them. It is not a fabrication, pits are the ,most dangerous dogs in the world. It does not mean every single one of them will kill someone. But the ratio is far ,far higher than any other breed. that is just the way it is.
None of my dogs have ever bitten anybody. I guess by your logic that means dogs don’t bite.
I’m sorry you’ve had such 6 bad personal experiences with pits.
6 times isn’t very many in the big scheme of things, though. I’ve experienced and witnessed more incidents that I could ever count or remember in the last 15 years. Based on all these experiences, I have learned to be extremely cautious around Toy Poodles. Nasty little things. My dogs and I have been snarled at, snapped at, and bitten more times than I can count.
I think both of us are reasonable to be cautious. But I don’t see how your personal experiences mean pit bull hysteria isn’t partially or wholly fabricated.
I asked for a news report.
Its possible to die from a single Chihuahua bite if it results in a heart attack.
Had a Cocker. More of a Field Spaniel, down to the Roman nose. Closest came to a dog I trusted, but he made bites that required stitches on a couple occasions. The dog I trusted. My children, not using any of the three methods I taught them to break up dog fights (hose, broom, and kicks), stuck their hands in when the two dogs were arguing over a rawhide chip, I did not trust. Yes, my children [del]are idiots[/del] learn by doing.
“Artistic license”?
How many times do I have to post this before you read it?
"There are several reasons why it is not possible to calculate a bite rate for a breed or to compare rates between breeds."
Are you going to tell me you’re “smarter” than the AVMA, too? That these words are just fanciful poetic license?
Specific refutations by the AVMA and supported by the CDC:
-Trouble with identification. Mixed-breed dogs are commonly described as purebred, random-source dogs of unknown parentage are frequently assumed to be whatever their phenotype most resembles. Many dogs are sold as purebreds which are not. Many breeds and mixes resemble other breeds and mixes. Clifton’s numbers are taken from the worst possible source in this regard, and with no possibility for independent verification or review of his source material.
-Lack of canine census means no way to determine what percentage of “pit bulls” are involved in fatal attacks. Ten pit bulls out of ten million dogs presents a different picture of risk versus, say, two huskies out of half a million dogs. We have *no way to know. * Both organizations state this repeatedly, and both cite this as a specific reason why breed-tallies cannot be used conclusively to determine a dog breed’s relative risk. You keep ignoring or dismissing this as though somehow you are able to make a conclusive determination that the CDC cannot. I find this mind-boggling on the moon-hoax level.
If there are ten or a hundred or a thousand times the number of pit bulls in the US than there are, say, Chows, then gross stats showing an “Everest peak” and a “supernova” sized risk are to be expected… as the AVMA very clearly states. Sure we can make some generalizations about “high-drive working breeds” and actuarial risk, but we cannot derive breed-specific conclusions because of incomplete data. That you believe you can, where the CDC cannot, is astounding to me.
Furthermore, you have not in any way addressed the issue with media bias surrounding demon-dog-of-the-moment, another issue the AVMA cites as being “of concern” when it comes to fostering misleading “dangerous breed” perceptions.
Maybe you missed the twelve dozen posts where I discussed high-drive working breeds and breed characteristics which may make a dog more “dangerous”…?
Your dogged insistence on reading an argument I’m not making is… kinda bizarre.
It appears we pretty much agree on the final conclusion, except that part about the CDC and AVMA which both state quite clearly that due to lack of usefully complete census information, gross statistics aren’t terribly helpful, and that demonization of one breed is a uselessly over-simplistic view on the matter. You keep saying you’re against BSL and agree that this is a complex issue, yet you’re awfully insistent in a belief that these statistics tell you something that the CDC specifically states *cannot be ascertained from the current data. *
A poodle of any kind or size eating one’s foot? Sorry, I don’t buy it.
And… how is a news report more reliable than a peer-reviewed study?
Clifton mentions that cocker, too. Also, a Poodle, two Beagles, a Border Collie, three Dalmatians (plus one mix), two Dauchshunds, six Golden Retrievers, two Jack Russells, thirty nineLabs and Lab mixes, one Pug, three Springer Spaniels, and two Wheaten Terriers.
I’d show you those news reports, except Clifton doesn’t provide them.
How about that news report on the pomeranian? Did the baby have a heart attack?
You know, honestly, this is pure and total ignorance, in the truest sense of the word. You have no idea what a Catahoula Cur or American Bulldog is capable of in terms of bite power. These dogs are made to control 500lb wild goddamn boar with daggers for tusks. I have *seen it. * I’ve seen photos of a 350lb wild boar with a cracked skull from a catch dog’s bite. You really, truly, honestly have *no idea. *
Can you give me any even… remotely plausible explanation for why a 35-45lb dog with the same physique, skull and jaw structure, same musculature, and same breeding background for battle-to-the-death would be phenomenally more powerful than any of the dogs whose photos I linked to, which are twice the size?
That news report shows exactly why I want a news report on the alleged nefarious cocker spaniel instigated fatality. I want to know the context.
I can assure you that it has long been known to never allow your baby to be left unattended by the family dog. No matter how friendly the family dog is. No matter what the breed is. No matter how good a dog owner the owner is.
This pomeranian induced infanticide is completely irrelevant when comparing breeds .
This makes no sense whatsoever. How, again, does pollution have any remote connection to the topic at hand? And why are you dodging the question about laws put in place to regulate the behavior of drivers on the road, as an alternative (and highly effective) method of increasing traffic safety over banning hot-rod sports cars from the highways?
And… are you really going to tell me you believe breed specific legislation to be a remotely effective method of curbing dangerous dog incidents? I mean, I’m just asking, for clarification, before I bother to cite the data on this topic.
So now you’re excusing this infantacide because the owner was negligent? Like the baby didn’t die, the dog didn’t cause “severe damage”? You asked for one example of proof that a small, companion breed dog was capable of causing death. I provided it.
The funny thing is, I agree with you. Owner-negligence is at fault 100% of the time. The only difference between you and me is I don’t dismiss death caused by PC breeds as being irrelevant just because the dog is cute and cuddly.
What about a boerboel eating a kid’s foot? They’re actually one of the dogs in the pictures which you assured me were “incapable” of causing the kind of damage you imagine only pit bulls to be capable of.