Posted on 02/24/2010 9:25:11 AM PST by Chet 99
Actually he doesn't. It makes perfect sense to him; thus showing just how perverse the dog lovers' mentality is.
Indeed. I used to actually enjoy posting here.
Thought that this thread was right up your alley since you seem to think that pit bulls are the same as golden retrievers in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
You are right, I wasn’t thinking. How about this? You argument is as stupid as the anti-gunners who think that all gun owners are potential murderers.
I agree. We didn’t have dogs when our kids were babies and got our first Sheltie when youngest was 4 or 5 yrs old. You just never know, the dog (any breed) might be jealous or something of the new kid in town. Better safe than sorry and like my Momma always told me an ounce of prevention . . .
All gun owners are potential murderers. Comes with being human. All gun owners are potential heroes too.
*actually this is hard to disagree with if you consider the owner to be at fault for being a big enough fool to harbor one of these vicious things.
Better, but still totally lame.
>>>The vast majority owned by responsible owners are gentle, loving dogs<<<
I STRONGLY disagree with this statement. A very large percentage are owned by irresponsible low-lifes or out and out thugs. These types are drawn to the breed because of its power or because it is a thug status symbol.
Another large percentage are owned by decent folks, who would do fine with a Beagle or Golder Retriever, but are by no means assertive enough, responsible enough, and experienced enough to handle an animal, which despite its many great qualities, is potentially, extremely dangerous.
I have little doubt you are a responsible owner who can handle your dog(s). But, that would put you in the minority of Pitbull owners, not the majority.
Owning a gun has nothing to do with it, then.
Me too - seems like eight or ten times a week.
No more lame than thinking that all pit bulls are killers.
Perhaps. Pit bulls are generally not the dog of choice among families.
LOL little princess!
"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities." (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)
The Clifton study of attacks from 1982 through 2006 produced similar results. According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.)
Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds.
The most horrifying example of the lack of breed predictability is the October 2000 death of a 6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family's Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a dangerous breed. Note, however, that they were bred to be watchdogs! The baby's uncle left the infant and the dog on a bed while the uncle prepared her bottle in the kitchen. Upon his return, the dog was mauling the baby, who died shortly afterwards. ("Baby Girl Killed by Family Dog," Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9, 2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5.)
In Canine homicides and the dog bite epidemic: do not confuse them, it has been pointed out that the dog bite epidemic as a whole involves all dogs and all dog owners, not just the breeds most likely to kill.
In all fairness, therefore, it must be noted that:
Any dog, treated harshly or trained to attack, may bite a person. Any dog can be turned into a dangerous dog. The owner or handler most often is responsible for making a dog into something dangerous.
An irresponsible owner or dog handler might create a situation that places another person in danger by a dog, without the dog itself being dangerous, as in the case of the Pomeranian that killed the infant (see above). Any individual dog may be a good, loving pet, even though its breed is considered to be potentially dangerous. A responsible owner can win the love and respect of a dog, no matter its breed. One cannot look at an individual dog, recognize its breed, and then state whether or not it is going to attack.
OMG! Who would allow any dog alone with a newborn?
I don't think all pit bulls are killers, nor did I ever say that. What I think is that there is a MUCH higher probablilty that a pit bull will turn out to be a "killer" or will attack and injure someone than most other breeds. Kind of like playing russian roulette with 5 cylinders loaded rather than one. And I believe that I said that people who take on this risk because they just have to have a pit bull when there are many less agressive breeds are being foolish.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.