Pit bulls attack 57-year-old Redding man in wheelchair

“Your post #139 “For the record, if you had actually bothered to read the study, it did not state that the dogs had “a more severe bite” than pit bulls.”

Your Post #113 “Pit bulls ranked 7th in severity of bites, below lhasa apsos, dalmatians, and dachshunds. “

The problem is, I bothered to read your post #113 and for a moment I trusted you to be accurate. WHAT was I thinking?”>>>>>>>>

You are confused. You read it, yet you did not understand it. No one thinks a small dog’s bite is more severe than a larger dog’s bite. What I said, and I will repeat for you and space it out so you can read it more slowly, is that in the study, bites from lhasa apsos ranked higher in severity, not that they are more severe.

It is likely that the reason for this is because there were more single bite incidents with pit bulls compared to full-on attacks, but there may have been a few particularly bad attacks from lhasa apsos that raised their severity level. It doesn’t mean their bite is worse, or that they are vicious. It means that based on the information they had, the bites that were reported were worse. It still doesn’t mean that they ARE worse. Do you understand what I am trying to say?

“But pit bulls are known to jump and grab the face of standing, seated adults (still requires jumping) and all to often they remove the lower lip of their victim and I read many accounts where the pit removed the entire face or the entire scalp of the victim.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

There is no evidence that they attack people’s faces more often than other breeds. Just because those sites show multiple instances of this doesn’t mean those are the only ones happening. The world’s first successful face transplant patient was attacked by a black lab. This isn’t the only instance, but it is certainly the most documented one NOT coming from a pit bull.

Consider this: you use media reports describing the gory details of pit bull attacks, which reinforces your belief that they are dangerous. You see lots of news stories on pit bull attacks, but hardly ever see them involving other breeds of dog. You equate this to being an accurate representation of the reality of the situation. More reported pit bull attacks in your mind equals more pit bull attacks period. Going just by news stories, it appears that pit bulls attack frequently and cause fatalities more than once a month.

Looking at news reports from other breeds, because there are hardly ever any reported attacks from them, you would think they aren’t attacking people as much. A little more than once a month, however, there is a reported fatality caused by a non-pit bull-type dog. If you were to base your information only on the media reports, you could ascertain that pit bull attacks cause less damage, because there are lots of attacks being reported compared to fatalities, but ONLY fatalities are being reported with other breeds, showing that they appear to kill 100% of the times that they attack. Of course, this is also incorrect, but it shows you how easy it is to become misinformed by looking at only one aspect of the problem. If you look at the circumstances surrounding each reported attack, pit bull or not, there are certain matching details that become apparent, and breed bans do nothing to address this. Irresponsible ownership is listed by the CDC and AVMA as more important than breed in dog attacks, as it is a factor that traverses the limitations of breed and size. This is why we still have fatalities coming from “friendly” dogs and very small dogs on a frequent basis.

“you feel we the public should accept the blood shed, the facial reconstructions, the limb amputations caused by unprovoked pit bull attacks so that you can feel superior and special. Of all the dog breeds in the US, pit bull lovers insist we all pay the price for their preference for an animal bred specifically to kill without warning. “>>>>>>>>>

NOPE. I feel that the best way to address the issue of attacks and fatalities by dogs is to require the OWNERS of the dogs to care for them responsibly, which is incidentally the same solution that the CDC and AVMA offer! It’s no mistake that Calgary, a place that has NO BSL, has seen a dramatic reduction in dog attacks since they implemented responsible ownership laws, a feat that your BSL areas cannot lay claim to! All they ever say is that the attacks from pit bulls decline, but they fail to mention that their overall attacks stay the same!

So, it’s ok for people to get attacked by dogs as long as they don’t look scary? Are the 19 people who were attacked by dogs last year any less dead because the dogs weren’t pit bulls? How do you think they felt as they were slipping away? Do you think they were feeling good, not scared? Do you think that witnesses to these attacks would describe them as being any less horrific?

As for your study involving pit bull owners, I don’t doubt that is the case for many of them. One of the biggest reasons certain breeds have had this problem over the decades we have been collecting information is because of the type of people that own them and what they get them for. You are proving my point by even including that study.

The problem is that just like gun owners, there are good and bad dog owners, and no responsible person wants their rights taken away because other people don’t do the right thing. Plus, it doesn’t work. Guns were taken away in the UK (big surprise), and their crime rates have not declined, just like their dog attack rates didn’t when they banned certain breeds. Now, in the UK, only criminals have banned dogs (making the situation worse), and crimes involving knives and blunt objects increased, leaving the total the same.

There’s a reason why most dog attacks aren’t in the best areas, and there’s a reason why so many involve dogs running loose (many of which have already been reported to animal control). These dogs are owned by irresponsible people who got them for the wrong reason in the first place. You hardly ever hear about a serious dog attack coming from a nice area, where the dogs are inside with the family and socialized/trained properly. The responsible owners try their best to do right by their pets, and because of that, the dogs aren’t sitting in the yard for hours on end figuring out how to escape out of boredom.

I am not a criminal. I have never even had a speeding ticket. I am college-educated, a home owner, a WOMAN, and I got into the breed AFTER being on the other side of the fight and realizing that I was mistaken. I did not come to this side on a whim. I researched the heck out of it because I didn’t think it was possible that I had been so completely fooled by media stories and myths. I tried really hard to find anything that could be considered irrefutable proof that pit bulls were inherently dangerous, or even more dangerous than other breeds. However, I am a studious individual. I do not skim, and I like getting information from both sides to really understand what I am learning.

After reading all that I could, I started volunteering at shelters (at the time I was considering becoming a veterinarian and I wanted as much exposure as possible), only to find that 1)the majority of dogs there were pit bulls or mixes thereof and 2)the majority of those were lovely dogs (although there were some with high degrees of dog aggression- the worst case was at a vet clinic I worked at and was not from pit bulls, but a pair of airedales that were hellbent on fence fighting and would redirect if touched) and 3)most people coming in didn’t know they were pit bulls unless the ears were cropped.

“Obviously there are some dogs of any breed that do not behave in the stereotypical manner of the breed. But the bred-for traits of fighting dogs like pit bulls emerge way too often and account for way to many deaths and maulings.”>>>>>

This is a misconception many have because they see nothing but pit bull attacks on the news, and they read that pit bulls account for a large percentage of fatalities (without reading the entire study that number came from). Just looking at those two details would make it appear that the dogs “go off” more than others.

However, if you can’t compare the number of attacks to the population, you really can’t say that more of them attack than other breeds, or that there is evidence that their “nature” comes out in the majorty. The problem is that no one has a concrete answer for the number of pit bulls, but there are estimates. Based on the combination of shelter numbers, registration numbers, and popular culture, the breed is estimated to be around 10 million strong. With California euthanizing 1 million of these dogs a year, it’s safe to say that the breed is extremely popular right now. Let’s say there are only half that many pit bulls. There are only 25 to 35 deaths a year from all dog breeds combined, so round up and take that 35 (just to be sure) out of 5 million, and you have 0.000007% of the population of pit bulls taking lives. That seems like an awfully tiny number of dogs to represent a majority, and it also seems like a small enough number to be considered by rational people to be rare, out of the norm, negligible.

If we pass responsible dog ownership laws, attacks by all dogs will decrease, and the people who were already doing the right thing won’t have to make any changes. It will force those in society that feel their laziness or machismo is more important than public safety to alter their behavior or get rid of their dogs. It may even improve the overall health and behavior of this country’s pets, making them much less likely to end up in shelters. It’s not the perfect solution, but it’s the only one that has worked anywhere, and there’s no harm in getting people to do what they should have been doing all along. Banning dogs eliminates the good dogs owned by responsible people, leaving ONLY the problem dogs owned by people who feel they are above the law. That’s why the UK’s ban has been a failure, and why Calgary’s legislation has been a success.

I have morals, compassion, and a conscience so I don’t agree with you or the way you propagandize: you want what you want and you don’t care who you have to lie to and con in order to get it.
When I post unacceptable levels of pit bull carnage documented per year, pit bull shootings per year - you really feel it’s acceptable to change the subject to the ‘severity’ of llasa apsos bites. All those deaths, maimings by pit bulls and you really, after reading a trash study have concluded that
“It doesn’t mean their bite is worse, or that they are vicious. It means that based on the information they had, the bites that were reported were worse. It still doesn’t mean that they ARE worse. Do you understand what I am trying to say?”
You don’t understand the study. You make up possible explanations for invalid study conclusions and yet THIS is the study you use to refute the documented names, dates, geographic locations, videos, photos, and details of pit bull victims and the need the police have to shoot these animals at a rate of about 1 per day to halt even more attacks and fatalities?
Can you understand that if a study claims that ‘bites that were reported’ for llasa apsos were worse than those reported for pit bulls - the study is hopelessly biased and worthless? That the amputations and ‘missing faces’ not to mention deaths caused by pit bulls were not adequately reported to the study? And that biased in adequate data created a biased inadequate study?

“It is likely that the reason for this is because there were more single bite incidents with pit bulls compared to full-on attacks, but there may have been a few particularly bad attacks from lhasa apsos that raised their severity level. It doesn’t mean their bite is worse, or that they are vicious. It means that based on the information they had, the bites that were reported were worse. It still doesn’t mean that they ARE worse. Do you understand what I am trying to say?”
Yes, I understand that you are talking in circles to avoid having to admit directly that the study was worthless in that it had such poor data it’s conclusions were irretrievable flawed. I understand. But why have you insisted on the importance and validity of a flawed study to refute the body count of pit bulls? Clear answers are hard for you so let me answer on your behalf - when people talk about pit bulls, you change the subject and wave worthless studies as proof of something that you don’t think should be taken at face value or that have any real meaning because the data was probably incomplete and the study was biased.
Unfortunately, your sorry excuse for the data doesn’t match incident reports - pit bulls engage in full on attacks more than single bites because that’s how they’ve been bred, in fact it’s a trait pit bull owners are proud of; the dog never gives up or backs down if it is displaying the ‘best’ traits of the breed. On the other hand, other dog breeds bite and retreat to defend area, defend themselves, defend people, panic and run versus pit bulls who attack without warning and without provocation.
I am basing my opinions on the names, dates, geographic locations and details of pit bull attacks documenting the fact that pits kill one person on average every 22 days and are shot by police at a rate of one per day - so of course your comments about my basing my opinions on gory videos is as usual, false. But I have watched many many gory videos by now, read many many accounts of the attacks, read many websites, several legal challenges etc. This is how I know when you are lying.
You and other pit lovers like to claim that the media has a conspiracy to only show pit bull attacks and not other dogs. Any severe dog attack stands a good chance of making the news (if it bleeds, it leads). There is no conspiracy. The reason why pit bulls are reported more often is the body count and carnage these dogs cause. People expect pit bulls to act like other dogs and when they don’t - they experience shock and trauma during the dog attacks. People expect dogs to attack for a reason but pits don’t need a reason. So the accounts and videos are shocked people saying “I don’t know, we were watching TV and he jumped up and grabbed my face and the fight was on.” Aside from rabid animals, other dogs bark to warn, nip to warn, and then attack to clear an escape path. Pit bulls are bred not to give any warning of impending attack and then to keep attacking until they ‘win’. (Oh other fighting dogs that share ancestry with pits also cause devastating damage.) People are genuinely shocked that a 40 pound pit can and will strip calf muscles and arteries out of a human leg in an unprovoked attack.
People expect blood with a dog bite and maybe a few bites with maybe a bad tear in extreme cases. People are not prepared for the damage that pit bulls cause - it’s not dog like. The pit causes ‘shark’ like damage by removing chunks of flesh and bleeding to death is a real possibility with pits. Medical personal, sheriff’s officers and family members are traumatized by the very sight of pit bull damage. Victims are too often faced with years of surgery and disfiguring injuries. A sheriff with a few decades in law enforcement struggled to speak when trying to describe the worst scene he’d ever witnessed in 35 years of law enforcement when a pit owner was killed in her back yard and largely stripped of flesh. I came across stats somewhere saying pits attack their own owners at a rate of something like 13 percent as opposed to other dog breeds that attack their owners at a rate of 2 percent. The whole idea of raising a puppy with your family and having it turn on you one day is so shocking to the populace that the news reports it in stunned tones. People expect dog bites to cause real damage but amputations and gory chunks of face missing are common to pits so they make the news. Humans are traumatized by the animal that ‘can’t be stopped’. Most people expect that hitting a dog as hard as you can with a tire iron will stop it from attacking and are utterly shocked when hammers, baseball bats, boards to the head don’t stop pits because, they are bred to be ‘impervious’ to pain. So the news that ‘I hit it with my fist and it let go’ is not surprising and is less reported but the news that ‘hitting it with a tire iron didn’t slow it down, it continued to kill the child no matter what we tried to do!’ makes the news.
The scene of a normal dog bite might having someone lying on the lawn, someone helping the victim (possibly applying pressure to the wound) and someone standing over them with a cell phone.

The scene of a pit bull attack may include multiple victims, people on stretchers, ambulances, and police hunting the dog with a gun before it maims anyone else. The news media reports the shocking, unprovoked, high casualty assault that could not be stopped with normal means and ranged over a wide terrain for several minutes with the dog attacking other people trying to assist as opposed to the collie who bit the kid who stood on her tail. I was attacked by a doberman once. The dog and its family were sitting watching TV when I knocked on the door. One of the family called out ‘come in’. I opened the door and the police dog/doberman went for my throat. The dog did not understand the English phrase permitting me to enter the room and he was defending his family. I have no unusual fear of dobermans, I believe the dogs actions are understandable. Time and time again, as I read pit attack accounts - there’s no cause. The dog runs through the neighborhood until it finds someone to attack or the family pit bull suddenly attacks its owner. I watched a few videos where the dog is filmed attacking someone and if that person escapes the dog runs to the next nearest person and attacks - people find this behavior....odd. And it makes the news.
Obviously - pit bull attacks are reported because they are shocking, cause more damage, are often unexplainable as to cause, are more likely to involve the dog attacking it’s owner, may require gun shots, and certainly are responsible for more deaths, dismemberment, and lifetime injuries.
Pits attacking the face is common if you read through the accounts of pit assaults by by state or attacks by year.
There’s no excuse for this animal being defended as a family pet or service dog - but you try anyway. Fortunately websites have begun documenting this information so it’s harder for you to deny the damage these dogs have always caused and continue to cause. I think you are living in the past where you chide people “Who are you gonna believe, me or your lyin’ eyes!” because those websites weren’t around until recently. As the documentation is recorded and shared, the breed (and a few other fighting relatives) is increasingly banned, people are required to carry adequate insurance etc. and if there weren’t BSL in the US, the death toll would be even higher. Just imagine if the police weren’t shooting a pit per day - how many more maimings and killings per year? People like you then find the next most aggressive dog breed they can find in order to make themselves feel like ‘superior’ dog owners, no matter how many innocent people in our society must suffer for your need for attention.

“You don’t understand the study. You make up possible explanations for invalid study conclusions and yet THIS is the study you use to refute the documented names, dates, geographic locations, videos, photos, and details of pit bull victims and the need the police have to shoot these animals at a rate of about 1 per day to halt even more attacks and fatalities?”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I understand the study just fine. It was a study based on numbers throughout the state. Perhaps there are more lhasas there than pit bulls, considering there is a long-standing breed ban in several cities there. I have no idea why other smaller breeds had more severe bites other than they were allowed to based on the victim’s assumption that small dogs are safe.

As for your comment regarding using this study to argue with you about your documented names, bla bla bla, you are wrong. I used the JAVMA study for that, which you didn’t even acknowledge! In fact, there have been several questions posed to you that you have been dodging, instead focusing on lhasa apsos as if that little tidbit will make it all go away.

The study in Colorado (yes, with the lhasas) was to show you that even in places where bans are used, dog attacks are still happening, and some other breeds are causing more damage there, even though only one breed is regulated. I have repeatedly told you that your list means nothing if you aren’t willing to examine all attacks. You want to cherry pick them, leaving out serious attacks and fatalities that aren’t caused by pit bulls. That’s a pretty bad case of tunnel vision, and it’s clear that you can’t be rational about it if you aren’t even willing to read about other dog attacks. That’s called willful ignorance, and it has no place in serious discussion.

As for my questions you have successfully dodged several times now, I will simply refer back to them until you either answer them or come up with something else. I am getting tired of repeating myself to you.

“Can you understand that if a study claims that ‘bites that were reported’ for llasa apsos were worse than those reported for pit bulls - the study is hopelessly biased and worthless? That the amputations and ‘missing faces’ not to mention deaths caused by pit bulls were not adequately reported to the study? And that biased in adequate data created a biased inadequate study?”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This study was a compilation of attacks reported by animal control and public health records for a single state, not for the entire country. Although several hundred thousand attacks were listed, the information was coming from a place with long-standing breed bans. It only makes sense that in a place with less of a breed of dog that more of another will stand out. Attacks don’t just go away because pit bulls do, and that was the whole point. As for the injuries and deaths caused by pit bulls, there haven’t been that many in this state, much like Ontario (incidentally also has a ban), where there has only ever been a single fatality from a pit bull in the last 45 years, but lots from other breeds (mostly sled-type dogs).

“Clear answers are hard for you so let me answer on your behalf - when people talk about pit bulls, you change the subject and wave worthless studies as proof of something that you don’t think should be taken at face value or that have any real meaning because the data was probably incomplete and the study was biased.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

How have I changed the subject? And since you didn’t bother to even glance at the study, who are you to judge it at all? Just because you don’t agree with the findings or think it’s impossible that such events transpired doesn’t make them false. Speaking of changing the subject, when are you going to answer my questions that I have been posting? When are you going to address the JAVMA information I posted? You seem much better at changing the subject than I do, and you seem to be stuck on this lhasa thing, which is getting pretty redundant.

“Unfortunately, your sorry excuse for the data doesn’t match incident reports - pit bulls engage in full on attacks more than single bites because that’s how they’ve been bred, in fact it’s a trait pit bull owners are proud of; the dog never gives up or backs down if it is displaying the ‘best’ traits of the breed. On the other hand, other dog breeds bite and retreat to defend area, defend themselves, defend people, panic and run versus pit bulls who attack without warning and without provocation.”>>>>>>>>

Where is the source for this information? Are you basing this on your list of names, dates, bla bla bla? Aren’t you forgetting that the list you have is woefully incomplete and biased? If you are only looking at attacks from one breed of dog, you can’t possibly hope to know what is going on with the rest. I am sure the 19 people that died last year from “friendly” dogs would be glad to know you dismissed their tragedies so completely. Oh, I forgot, those dogs bit and retreated, right?

“You and other pit lovers like to claim that the media has a conspiracy to only show pit bull attacks and not other dogs. Any severe dog attack stands a good chance of making the news (if it bleeds, it leads). There is no conspiracy.”>>>>>>>

Wow, so I guess public health reports are lying too then? I am not making this up! You seem to have forgotten that according to unbiased reports every city has, there are 2 THOUSAND people in the hospital TODAY from dog attacks. Where are the two thousand news stories? Where is my news story? I was attacked by a PACK of dogs, and I bled more than I could spare, so tell me, why do you think my story was refused? I can tell you what they told me, which is the same thing the JAVMA study lists as the reason they don’t have an accurate list of attacks: it wasn’t newsworthy.

The media is not purposely hiding certain stories. It is not a conspiracy, and I never said it was. They are a business. They want to make profits, and they know what gets the most money. Just look at all the dog attack stories posted on this site. Look at the number of replies in pit bull attack stories compared to other breeds. Even on Youtube, the amount of views for anything labeled “pit bull attack” outnumbers most other types of attacks by thousands of views.

“Aside from rabid animals, other dogs bark to warn, nip to warn, and then attack to clear an escape path.”>>>>>>>>

Again, where do you get your information? No one above the age of five would ever be bitten if this were true. You don’t know dog behavior. There are lots of signs dogs give that people never even notice, which is why most of them are bitten. It is true that certain dogs have a higher bite threshold than others, but this is not a breed thing, and has much more to do with bite inhibition it is supposed to learn from the dam during the first 8 weeks of life (then the dog’s owner takes over, reinforcing it so the dog knows its limits).

Most people who are bitten by dogs are not going to embarrass themselves by saying they noticed the dog was uncomfortable with something they were doing, or the dog was acting strangely but they did nothing about it. People are not that quick to admit responsibility. This is the age of lawsuits for spilled coffee and parents blaming drivers when their toddler is hit in the street. Personal accountability is not nearly as convenient as removing blame. Add to that the fact that many dog attacks happen off property (loose dogs) or with chained dogs (no socialization), which do not point to beloved family pets, but objects that wore out their novelty and are now a burden which can be let loose or locked away and forgotten about.

“The pit causes ‘shark’ like damage by removing chunks of flesh and bleeding to death is a real possibility with pits.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You have said this over and over, yet you do not show which “expert” has shared this gem. Any dog that kills someone obviously had enough strength to do some damage, and people die every single month from dogs that aren’t pit bulls. Not every bite is equal. Some pit bull bites don’t even break the skin, and some small dog bites are horrific. I know of several stories that I can find for you on this very site involving pit bull attacks where not a single person was bitten or scratched.

“I came across stats somewhere saying pits attack their own owners at a rate of something like 13 percent as opposed to other dog breeds that attack their owners at a rate of 2 percent.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

How many of these attacks are from dogs inside with the family? How many are breeding pairs, dams with pups, or chained dogs? How many lab owners do you know of that put a tow chain around the dog’s neck and leave it in the yard to go insane?

“The whole idea of raising a puppy with your family and having it turn on you one day is so shocking to the populace that the news reports it in stunned tones.”>>>>>>

That IS the idea, isn’t it? To raise a dog inside with the family where it belongs. That is something sadly lacking in a large percentage of dog attack cases. Most of them are reported outside, and of the ones inside, many involve breeding pairs of dogs or very small children left alone with them, all of which point directly to the owners. Dogs cannot raise themselves, and leaving a dog in the yard its whole life is asking for trouble.

The news reports everything in “tones” because that is what they are taught to do. Geez, tell me you have really never heard of this? Look it up! Women newscasters often have vocal issues after just a few months or years of doing the news. They go through vocal training, and are encouraged to report using a low, authoratative voice. Haven’t you ever noticed how they speak differently than you would in normal conversation, or that many times they will use incomplete or broken sentences? It isn’t a mistake. There is a science behind this business, and they are very good at it. This is why so many people regard the news as a public service, when in actuality it is simply a very cleverly-disguised business. If it wasn’t, the vast majority of news companies would not be owned by only 5 corporations.

“Fortunately websites have begun documenting this information so it’s harder for you to deny the damage these dogs have always caused and continue to cause. I think you are living in the past where you chide people “Who are you gonna believe, me or your lyin’ eyes!” because those websites weren’t around until recently”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This information has been documented for decades. The only difference now is that the internet has made it more accessible for all, which I believe is a good thing. There are some great websites around that show ALL dog attacks, including every detail regarding the situation, from the reproductive status of the dog to where it spent most of its time to the people involved to the history with animal control, all the way up to the income level of the area. So yeah, I agree, it’s great that people are documenting these attacks. Hopefully, when people start to see that the pattern causing dog attacks goes far beyond breed, we can stop this silly bickering and get some laws passed that will actually make us safer instead of making us feel that way.

Your incoherent application of biased studies is the best you could do to refute the obvious danger that pit bulls pose? That’s it? A study performed in a state that has BSL and you are still claiming that llasa apsos have more severe bites???? THIS is perfect - right up there with you denying that pictures of pure bred pit bull sold by purebred pit bull breeders are actually pit bulls at all. Liar.
I have been wading knee deep through your lies - strangely, I don’t allow you to direct how I spend my time or determine how much effort to expend on your arguments that are preposterous.
The reason I focus on llasa apsos is you dodge so much, pour so much assertion and spin into each post that I have to pick out something concrete like pics of pit bulls over 80lbs, documented pit bull casualties, or your absurd introduction of the topic of llasa apsos into a topic about pit bull fatalities to prove that you are lying. Once I proved you were lying, you lost your credibility. Now, once you catch a liar lying, they want to dispense with that topic and start with a fresh batch of credibility so it’s a good idea to show liars that their credibility going forward remains damaged goods. I can see why you don’t like it.
In your last two posts you have been practicing cya on that worthless study you’ve been citing about llasa’s - notice I never wasted my time reading it and now that you have demonstrated that it’s irrelevant to this topic because it was a survey in a state with pit bull bans (hey what a nice way to misrepresent pit bull bites!)? Given that you defended that study and taunted me about reading it and now you are taunting me about some other survey - gee I guess you can just a) tell me what to read and order me to respond to it and then b) abandon the study and change the topic. See you complained that I didn’t read the prior worthless study and kept saying ‘if you’d only read it’ and as you now discount the study yourself - you’re telling me I have to read the next study! THIS is why pit bull lovers are liars. Oh not all of them - but DOGSBITE.ORG did advise that pit bull nutters will employ the tactics you have employed...gee they are right again!
“I have repeatedly told you that your list means nothing if you aren’t willing to examine all attacks. ‘
Yes and as soon as you gain control of reality, that will really mean something!
“It only makes sense that in a place with less of a breed of dog that more of another will stand out.” THIS is why you wasted all that time on that worthless study? Did pit nutters really feel the need to prove that dog bites don’t drop to zero when the most damaging breed is banned? Poodles still bite? Uh huh...but poodles aren’t responsible for over half of the fatalities. And as I have said on other posts - I agree with nations that ban pits and pit related fighting breeds. Banning pits only allows people like you to seek out other vicious dogs who, while not as bad as pits, exhibit an unacceptable level of the behavior (fighting and killing) for which they were bred.

“That’s called willful ignorance, and it has no place in serious discussion.’
No, of course you’re wrong. That is the desperate plea of the pit nutter. You falsely claim that the dog with the most fatalities, amputations and severe maulings must not be focused on because that is what gets BSL passed. I’ve read court summaries of cases including one in CO where expert testimony identified ways in which pits were different from other dogs, exhibited more severe bites similar to that of a shark etc. The document identified the pit bulls true kill/maim status and the BSL was passed and remains in force. Other states that have to go back to court over and over to protect the public fall to nutter tactics like ‘you must consider all breeds’ and the tactic of making it a civil rights issue ‘soon, all dogs will be banned!!!! Next is the right to bear arms!’
You seem to want to hide pit bulls at the bottom of a pile of other dogs. Pit bull nutters freely mis identify their dogs so I can see why you want to make sure other dogs are included (well that’s one reason). Any breed exhibiting the unusual combination of capacity for unprovoked murder and mayhem as the pit has demonstrated should be banned. That can mean a breed that kills a disproportionate number of individuals in comparison with it’s presence in the population. (that would take care of other fighting breeds)
That same value could apply to breeds that require excess amounts of police shootings and costs to insurance companies. NO, llasa’s won’t be caught in that group. Not all dogs would be banned.

“Your incoherent application of biased studies is the best you could do to refute the obvious danger that pit bulls pose?”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Nope, and I have already given you quotes directly from the JAVMA study showing not only that THEY AGREE IT’S THE OWNER, not the breed. You have repeatedly ignored this, claiming my studies are biased. Prove it. The JAVMA is a well-respected Veterinary journal, not some fly-by-night web designer’s opinionated pay-to-play blog.

“THIS is perfect - right up there with you denying that pictures of pure bred pit bull sold by purebred pit bull breeders are actually pit bulls at all.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Right. So, it doesn’t matter that the AKC, UKC, and ADBA, the registries that establish and maintain standards for all breeds involved, disagree with you, because the pictures on the website look like pit bulls to you, and the breeders say they are, so everyone else is lying? You need to get a grip. You are out of touch with reality if you think any rational person would believe some slimy breeder over the very organizations that created the standards for the breed. That is absurd.

“Now, once you catch a liar lying, they want to dispense with that topic and start with a fresh batch of credibility so it’s a good idea to show liars that their credibility going forward remains damaged goods. I can see why you don’t like it.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Hmmm....seems an awful lot like how I view the site you defend. Yet you are willing to overlook the bias and lies being published there that have been common knowledge to those of us involved in this issue for years because it doesn’t suit your interests to change your opinion now. You are in too deep, so you are going to continue to support a site that has proven time and time again to be slanderous, deceitful, hateful, and greedy.

“and as you now discount the study yourself “>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ha! That’s a riot. I don’t discount it. You have horrible reading comprehension. I simply tried to break it down in a way you would understand. If you don’t want to read it, then don’t, but don’t expect anyone to believe a word you say about it if you haven’t even bothered to check the authors, the way they collected their information, or the results. That’s like being a movie critic that only reads what someone else wrote about the back of the DVD! I wouldn’t have to keep bringing it up that you didn’t read it if you had read A SINGLE STUDY in its entirety. I know you haven’t, and it’s painfully apparent that you are willing to get your facts second hand from whoever already agrees with you.

“Did pit nutters really feel the need to prove that dog bites don’t drop to zero when the most damaging breed is banned? Poodles still bite? Uh huh...but poodles aren’t responsible for over half of the fatalities”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Before pit bulls were popular, people were still dying at the same average rate each year, so what are you on about?

After pit bulls were banned in Ontario, not only did the overall number of attacks NOT decrease, but deaths haven’t either, so no, bites don’t drop to zero, unless you only count pit bull bites. Canada has only about 4 million dogs, but every year on average there are two deaths. Most of these deaths have been children, and most of the dogs involved have been packs of sled-type dogs. There has only been 1 fatality from a pit bull in Canada in the past 45 years. Sled dogs rank number one for fatalities there, and this is no surprise considering their popularity.

“That can mean a breed that kills a disproportionate number of individuals in comparison with it’s presence in the population. (that would take care of other fighting breeds)”>>>>>>>>>>

Compared to their population, the percentage of pit bulls that have taken lives is a ridiculously small 0.000007%, so you should stop lying now. The dogs that take lives are such a small minority that you can’t seriously expect anyone to believe they’re all killers if MILLIONS of them have been living in this country for decades without incident. So what, you have a bunch of names, dates, and times. So do I. My list is full of people who are no less dead or maimed than yours, so what does that prove? We can both copy and paste.

True aspects of the breed, true fatalities documented along with amputations, shootings, maulings. These are indisputable evidence. Hold these facts up to percentage of population occupied by pits and you see the shocking fact that pits attack their owners more often then other breeds do, escape confinement more often than other breeds, kill more often than other breeds, are shot more often than other breeds. These are the REAL costs to humanity and that’s why you continue to turn to other sources that can be manipulated. You do know that AKC organizations are essentially social organizations that establish what amounts to a ‘stamp of approval’ on a breed? Right? They are not arbiters of the truth - they establish conventions for the breed (their preferences) and that is one complaint about the AKC and other organizations. They don’t have to acknowledge your 100% purebred dog if they don’t want to. They can ‘approve’ or register dogs that lovers of the breed consider ‘over bred’ and of poor quality. The AKC can do what it wants and means little unless one is trying to establish pedigree and then you have to play by their rules. The bloody history of the breed is well known and the AKC no doubt does not believe breeding larger and larger specimens is going to help the dog’s reputation. The AKC can define minimum and maximum weight classes and simply refuse to register purebreds that are under or over it’s definitions. True of eye color etc - they can refuse to register dogs with traits they wish to discourage or selectively register dogs with traits that they wish to encourage. That’s really all it means - did you not know this?
There are pit nutters in all levels of our society just as there are criminals in all levels of society...hey...what a coincidence.
For example, I recently read a licensed veterinarians blog where she admits that in order to defeat the dog ban, she will falsely register her pit bull as a service dog like everyone else! That way she ‘gets’ to take her pit bull in clothing stores etc. when other people can’t because she’s faking it. She did this to defeat the ban because she objected to it. She was busted when someone reading her blog reported her and she had to move to keep her pit.
The New York Humane Society was having a hard time placing pit bulls because the population had heard from family, friends, police accounts etc. what this dog may do to people without warning. So, the New York Humane Society renamed them ‘New Yorkies’ so unsuspecting people would start adopting them. It worked! Until the ‘New Yorkies’ which were actually pit bulls started killing neighborhood cats. I read another document by the head of a humane society wherein she (a licensed veterinarian) said alot of the stuff that you do because she knows what a political issue it is and what kind of grief the PC crowd will give her. So first it was the old ‘if these animals are treated well they are gentle’ but when it got down to how these animals must be handled, she stressed that while any large or noticeably aggressive dog requires two staff to handle it (at one time), the need for 2 handlers is ESPECIALLY important for pit bulls. Yup - she knows what the dog does to people and she’s not risking her staff but she will spout the correct PC.
Humane societies in many areas value dogs over people, cats over people etc. When the ban in, Ontario I think, used the unusual approach of putting banned pits down at the start of the ban (not just people having them illegally), many Humane Societies spoke of the ‘holocaust’ which, I think is a disservice to the Jews.
Oh and there’s the 6 page document by a woman who wrote a detailed account of her exacting attempt to do everything exactly correct to ensure that her newly adopted pit bull would be gentle (60 days of precise pit approved training) only to have the dog spontaneously attack her other dog and bite her husband. Heartbroken, she gave the dog back to the Humane Society with a request that it be euthanized because she had, even with the help of a hired expert and online advice, realized that no amount of training was going to stop the dog from being violent and that it would attack again. So what did the Humane Society do with the dog’s documented aggression and the owner’s request that it be euthanized? They put a pit bull known to be vicious up for adoption stressing that the animal is gentle and intentionally hiding the fact that it had attacked a family pet and had aggression problems. See - some other unsuspecting family will inherit this vicious animal.

Often, Humane Societies typically believe that dogs have more rights than humans and they spread the pit nutter propaganda eagerly.
So the fact that some vets and other professionals AGREE that pit bulls are New Yorkies or that they ‘agree’ that a dog bred for hundreds of years to be the ultimate gladiator is not aggressive via genetics - means nothing. It’s propaganda. I read on DogsBite.org that propagandists who lobby for pit bulls often go on websites and falsely claim to be vet techs with years of experience. As I have gone to many many websites by now, I see that alot. They lie too and say it is the person not the breed.

To get the truth about pit bulls, you have to go to the people who finally have to pay for the damage these animals do. Like insurance companies, victims, victims families, police departments who must allocate approximately one service call per day just to shoot attacking pit bulls and whose officers are often attacked, bystanders and neighbors who live in fear of the neighborhood pit bulls. It takes quite a toll on emergency personnel. I read a heart breaking account of 3 family pit bulls attacking and maiming 4 people. The boy received the worst injuries - so much flesh missing he had to be airlifted and barely survived. The ER team treated him and when he was wheeled out of the room - they all went into a hospital bay and wept. The plastic surgeon went home and told his children to never ever trust/pet a pit bull. He’d seen dog bites before but pit bulls shock the hardened professionals. ER people see alot of victims but over and over, sheriff’s officers, EMT’s, ER staff, plastic surgeons etc. are all truly aghast because the injuries caused by pit bulls are disproportionate to anything they had anticipated a dog being capable of doing. It doesn’t have to be a big pit bull either - even a 40lb pit can do astounding damage to life and limb. That’s why the judge in the Denver ban noted that the injuries caused by pit bulls are likened to shark attacks.
So your ad hominem attacks on website owners who honestly document verifiable killings/maulings/pit shootings are yet another way you embarrass yourself.

Man that sounds like a close call for that kid!!!! Many accounts of horrible killings/maulings come as a result of a dog repeatedly ramming a fence, jumping a fence, breaking off the muzzle it’s wearing, breaking its chain, breaking its collar. A few accounts say that pit bulls have broken through a glass door or window to get to someone they have decided to attack. Several accounts talk of the dogs obsessively digging up fences for hours in order to attack. I can’t imagine WHAT it would be like to come up on a scene like that.
One person was saved when a passing car stopped and the driver yelled to the victim to climb on the roof of the car. However, I watched a thirteen year old boy jump (video on youtube) onto the roof of a parked car only to be followed onto the roof by the pits! That kid only got away by jumping a very tall fence.
I read up on ‘how to kill a pit bull’ if you are unarmed. Don’t think a kid could use it but after reading about people hitting them with bricks, boards, tire irons, baseball bats and that not deterring them at all motivated me.
For anyone interested who may still be reading this dead old thread, the basics are :

1. Accept that you are about to be bitten - hand to hand combat with a pit will include this.

2. Defend yourself with your non dominant arm (right handed people offer their left arm as defense) If possible, wrap SOMETHING around that arm if you can.

3. The dog will usually latch onto that arm and not let go - thrashing his head to dig his teeth into your flesh. Right handed people reach across to the dog’s right front paw (like you are shaking hands with him). Pull that paw to your right and then up (rotate the dog onto his back). Do that repeatedly until you get a chance to

4. Drop your body weight onto the dog. Their chests can be collapsed. It’s a design weakness. ‘Course now that they are breeding these things up to 142 lbs that isn’t always going to work - especially for children and other slight statured people. While doing this you must watch your face - they really grab your jaw and shake and won’t let go until your face gives way. So if you have to reach down to get that paw - you may have to make sure your attacked arm is holding the dog enough off of the ground that he can’t get enough leverage to jump (make him stand on tippy toes or airborne hanging off your arm when you reach for that paw)

5. At any time you may also grab a handful of his collar if he is wearing one and twist to choke of his air. The whole time, it is likely the dog still has your arm. The author recommended maintaining a choke twist on the collar even after the dog appears to be dead for at least another 30 seconds longer because they really will get right up and resume attack.

6. Gouge his eyes out - and the author said ALL THE WAY OUT -gone. This might ‘help’ those of slight stature as it doesn’t require body mass and objects like sticks or pens can be used.

The author advises against trying to defend yourself by kicking at the dog. One video I saw was a cop who successfully kicked a pit bull off before the dog grabbed him. Most pits won’t retreat as that one did and the cop looked to be a very tall, big man. The author of the ‘how to kill’ instructions notes that the dogs start ‘bleeding you’ right away by stripping chunks of flesh off your legs and kicking rarely or doesn’t work so he recommends the method(s) I listed above. Many attacks unfortunately result in the victim fighting at full force initially but then fainting or growing weaker with shock, trauma, and blood loss so you really don’t have a moment to spare. I have read so many accounts of the dog’s ability to ignore severe pain while attacking you that I believe it is probably necessary to skip kicking - I’ve read one victim account that said “I kept kicking the dog in the stomach so hard (it was latched onto the front of her) that his feet were coming off the ground but it did absolutely no good.
Man - just how many people have to live in terror because some people need to feel ‘special’? Does a kid like the one you described have to live in fear that one day - the fence will ‘give way’. And you ‘watch your back’ in your own back yard when you take your dog out because hoods who can’t legally own a gun can legally own lethal dogs?? And you were wise enough to marry a smart women to look out for ya when dealing with those ‘responsible pit owners’ you have living next to ya!
People say pepper spray and mace doesn’t work on these dogs. Actually I watched a video of Russian cops intentionally running over an attacking pit with a jeep and the dog ran off! Shooting often requires multiple shots as many accounts (including when the police shoot these things) indicate that they can ‘shake off a few bullets’ for awhile.

Compared to their population, an infinitesimally small percentage take lives. Their extreme popularity has a lot to do with the news reports you are seeing, not the breed itself, as is evidenced by the fact that before pit bulls, several other breeds had the same issue.

As for the AKC and other registering bodies, if it weren’t for them we would have lots of dogs being called lots of things. The reason people use them to identify breeds through standards is so that they maintain their integrity. Otherwise, we would have teacup labs and giant chihuahuas, and what would be the point? The standards are there for a reason. If they weren’t, there would be no point to keeping working lines, or any dogs with a purpose. And you are correct, they don’t have to acknowledge any dog if they don’t want to, but they DO for those breeders that are keeping the breed within standard, which is what they should be doing.

“So, the New York Humane Society renamed them ‘New Yorkies’ so unsuspecting people would start adopting them. It worked! Until the ‘New Yorkies’ which were actually pit bulls started killing neighborhood cats.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Because their owners were letting them run loose apparently. What is the point of this? Lots of dogs of all breeds kill cats. That’s a dog thing, and has more to do with introduction at an early age than breed.

“Oh and there’s the 6 page document by a woman who wrote a detailed account of her exacting attempt to do everything exactly correct to ensure that her newly adopted pit bull would be gentle (60 days of precise pit approved training) only to have the dog spontaneously attack her other dog and bite her husband.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Didn’t you say before that she acknowledged she was having issues with the dog, and they escalated to this point? Didn’t she see a trainer in the first place because she was having problems? Apparently, she didn’t do EVERYTHING she was supposed to, because if she had, she would have read up on the breed before getting one, and she would know that certain dogs don’t like other dogs, no matter what. If she had read up about the breed and dog behavior, she would have realized that not every dog is going to like other dogs. Not only did she not do what she was supposed to, but she blamed the breed for her ignorance. That is a perfect example of someone not taking responsibility. If she spent so much time working on a dog she already thought was slipping, she is part of the problem. There are several breeds of dogs that have varying degrees of dog aggression, and terriers are one of them. She didn’t know this, or she didn’t care and thought she could manage it, and she was wrong.

As for your silly website stating this and that, have you bothered to check and see if any of it can be verified? You seem awfully willing to trust someone who you don’t even know, and I think it’s because she supports what you already believe. If you had spent just ten minutes looking at the studies listed on that very site to see if their results match what they say, you would see that you are simply drinking their kool aid. Go ahead, keep on reading what you want and ignoring everything else.

Your google searches and names, dates, bla bla bla are not evidence of anything but your ability to search for news stories. Since you haven’t bothered to read any of the studies, even the ones your precious website has listed, you can’t expect anyone to take anything you say as truth. You are parroting information, ignoring important questions, and refusing to read anything that might go against your views, no matter how reputable the source. Over the years, I have read everything on both sides. I was on the other side when I started. I would say that in this instance, you are being willfully ignorant. You can call me names all you want and insist that I am lying, but the fact is that you have literally zero information I haven’t already read, you have no argument I haven’t already shown to be false through reputable studies, and you have made yourself look childish by the “see, she said you would say this” line that just makes it that much more saddening.

Add to this your refusal to even address the questions I have posed to you or the studies I have shown you, and you are the one embarrassing yourself. Why not answer even a single question I have asked? Is it because you don’t have the answer? Is that why you insist on going back to the same tired quotes?

Let me ask again, because you might have overlooked them before:

If public health records are showing two thousand hospitalizations a day in this country, and media reports are showing only one or two (mostly involving pit bulls, but not all involving injuries), why do you think the other one thousand, nine hundred ninety eight aren’t getting aired? It can’t be because they are less severe. I have seen reports listed on this site involving zero injuries. So, why is this happening?

Why is it that out of around 10 million pit bulls, you focus on the 0.00007% minority to make judgment on the entire breed?

Why is it that since we have been collecting dog bite fatality information, the average number of fatalities has only risen slightly (in direct relation to the increase in populations of dogs and people) over the years? Why is it that in areas where pit bulls are banned, the death toll stays the same, just as the bite rate does?

Why is it that of all the places that have addressed the dog bite issue with legislation, the only one successful in reducing the OVERALL number of serious attacks has used responsible dog ownership laws instead of breed specific laws?

You have contributed nothing of value to this discussion. The sum of all your posts are empty distortions and lies.

I no longer believe you are capable of posting anything worth attempting to respond to so I anticipate that this will be my last post. If you manage to come up with something that isn’t biased propaganda, distortions, or lies, I will respond again.

But as pit bulls killed 52 people during the three years of 2006-2008 (more than any other breed and even though they are 5% or less of the dog population) and police had to shoot about 1 pit bull per day just to stop the number of fatalities from being higher, I don’t expect you to come up with anything worthwhile.
http://www.dogsbite.org/newsroom-release-dog-bite-fatality-study-042209.htm

All of your posts are about burying these numbers.

I knew you would ask your pit forum friends to help you devise responses (and so some of your posts are written with sections containing different writing styles and tactics) but even taken together - you people have failed to present anything persuasive or valid because there is no valid way to refute the documented carnage.

PEOPLE WHO PAY THE COSTS FOR THIS VIOLENT BREED:

Home owners insurance companies usually have a disclaimer refusing coverage to pit bulls and a few other fighting dog breeds because these breeds cause the most death and mauling. So victims end up paying or going bankrupt trying and we all pay more for medical insurance to cover the disproportionate pit bull carnage.

Police have to shoot about 1 pit bull per day to halt more fatalities and maimings. That’s one call per day just for shooting, what about other pit bull related calls Police respond to in order to report deaths and maimings and sightings and owners who threaten to sic their dogs on people they don’t like? Officers and animal control staff are also attacked.

The pit bull fatalities and families of fatalities and maulings pay forever.

Neighborhoods where people are correctly afraid to walk outside or let their children play in their own yards because of pit bulls.

Bystanders, physicians, and first responders who are traumatized by the disproportionate carnage when trying to assist victims of pit bulls.

Pet owners whose cats and dogs are spontaneously maimed (vet bills and trauma) and killed by pit bulls.

Service dog organizations who’s reputations suffer as pit bulls are inappropriately passed off as service dogs in truly evil PR ploy.

The court system.

THOSE WHO SUPPORT THESE DOGS:
Pit bull dog men who raise and fight pit bulls and feed breeding stock into the general population by selling them or dropping them off in shelters

Ideologically biased veterinary, breed registries, Humane Societies who are organized to support the rights of animals against the rights of people and who therefore propagandize and lie about pit bulls and their crossbreeds. (demonstrated in my prior post to you)

Cold, selfish people who refuse to own any of the over 100 other non fighting dog breeds because they ‘need’ to feel important and special by owning a dog specifically bred to kill. Lecturing us with false information about pit bulls actually feeds their disproportionately large ego.

A small number of innocent people who mean well and genuinely fell for the pro pit propaganda.

In Summary:
There’s a reason that pit bulls are the dog most often surrendered to Humane Societies and euthanized (more than a million per year)and the breed that kills/maims the most. It is the result of hundreds of years of selectively breeding the most vicious, deadly dog possible.

The people who pay most often pay the greatest costs should be the ones to control vicious dog species like pit bulls. Pit supporters and pit bull owners seldom ever pay even a ‘infinitesimally small percentage’ of the devastating costs.
_______________________________________________
Here’s the analysis of your most recent post that I began to write before I acknowledged that you will never be honest about this topic and so that’s all I’ll ever do is spend time analyzing your spin if I continued to respond.

Compared to their population, an infinitesimally small percentage take lives (AND THEY KILL MORE PEOPLE THAN EVERY OTHER BREED SO YOU CHOSE THE ‘BUT MOST DON’T KILL’ SPIN - IT IS THE BEST YOU COULD COME UP WITH). Their extreme popularity has a lot to do with the news reports you are seeing (YES- THE NEWS REPORTS DETAILING AMPUTATION INJURIES, RIPPED SCALPS, CHEWED OFF HUMAN FACES, MAIMED AND KILLED FAMILY MEMBERS HAS INDEED MADE THIS BREED MORE POPULAR WITH SELFISH MEMBERS OF OUR SOCIETY), not the breed itself (BUT NO OTHER BREED KILLS/MAIMS ITS OWNERS OR FAMILY MEMBERS WITH SHOCKING FREQUENCY OR CAUSES THE MOST POLICE SHOOTINGS FOR MEDIA TO REPORT. THATS WHY LLASA APSOS DO NOT MAKE THE NEWS), as is evidenced by the fact that before pit bulls, several other breeds had the same issue (YOU MUST BE REFERING TO THE OTHER NAMES THAT ARE USED TO CONCEAL THE PIT BULL BREED CARNAGE BECAUSE PIT BULLS AND A FEW OF IT’S FIGHTING LINEAGE RELATIVES ARE THE ONLY ONES BRED TO BE EAGER AND CAPABLE OF PIT BULL TYPE BLOODSHED. SORRY BUT BEAGLES AND DACHSHUNDS JUST AREN’T UP TO THE TASK).

As for the AKC and other registering bodies, if it weren’t for them we would have lots of dogs being called lots of things.(A PUREBRED PIT BULL IS STILL A PURE BRED PIT BULL NO MATTER WHAT YOU OR THE AKC SAYS.)

“You have contributed nothing of value to this discussion. The sum of all your posts are empty distortions and lies.”>>>

Right. So, the studies coming from unbiased, professional sources are worth nothing because they disagree with your opinion, and I’m a liar because I choose to provide proof of my claims with said studies. I must have forgotten that the JAVMA and CDC are considered worthless to society.

“But as pit bulls killed 52 people during the three years of 2006-2008 (more than any other breed and even though they are 5% or less of the dog population)”>>>>>>

There is NO WAY that pit bulls are less than 5% if they outnumber EVERY OTHER BREED in shelters. They are more numerous than labs in many areas, and most people involved in shelters and breeding would put them at over half the population of medium to large breed dogs. You need to stop fudging the numbers or relying on others for your information, because this is patently false.

“All of your posts are about burying these numbers.”>>>>

Nope, in fact I have explained time and time again about the numbers not going up since pit bulls have become popular, and YOU have chosen to ignore these statements! The studies I put up DIRECTLY RELATE to this issue. You keep “overlooking” my facts.

“I knew you would ask your pit forum friends to help you devise responses (and so some of your posts are written with sections containing different writing styles and tactics) but even taken together -”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This is laughable. I don’t need help from “forum friends”. You are delusional. I have been studying this issue for over a decade. If anything, people ask me for the information, not the other way around. My writing style changes with my mood and level of energy, nothing more. I have not taken a single word from another source without acknowledging it.

“you people have failed to present anything persuasive or valid because there is no valid way to refute the documented carnage”>>>>>>>>>>>>

You are living in denial. I have posted SEVERAL studies that fly in the face of your claims, yet you continually fail to answer to them. You have yet to offer anything other than anecdotes and rhetoric. Your “carnage” is no different than what happened to all victims of other dog attacks you completely ignore. Tell me, when pit bulls are gone, will you focus on the real problem, or will you be happy because children are getting killed by “friendly” dogs?

As for your “answers” to my questions:

Pit bull-type dogs may take more lives than other breeds, but that’s because there are more of them (in the wrong hands). You don’t see people buying labs and chaining them up, or encouraging aggressive behavior in other friendly breeds, yet every year, several breeds take human lives. How do you explain this? What is it about the genetics of these dogs that caused them to behave so violently?

And yes, you HAVE to look at the percentage taking lives compared to the total population of that breed. Comparing it to other breeds means nothing unless you have the populations of each to compare those to, as well as the circumstances surrounding the care of the dog and the attack. If you don’t examine these things, you will (and have) come up with a solution that only addresses a single aspect of the problem. Fixing just one part of many in a leaky faucet may stop the water from coming out in one spot, but the water will come out more forcefully somewhere else. It’s not logical to assume that getting rid of a breed of dog will solve the problem when it has been proven to be a multi-issue situation.

“YOU MUST BE REFERING TO THE OTHER NAMES THAT ARE USED TO CONCEAL THE PIT BULL BREED CARNAGE BECAUSE PIT BULLS AND A FEW OF IT’S FIGHTING LINEAGE RELATIVES ARE THE ONLY ONES BRED TO BE EAGER AND CAPABLE OF PIT BULL TYPE BLOODSHED. SORRY BUT BEAGLES AND DACHSHUNDS JUST AREN’T UP TO THE TASK).”>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Are you telling me that pit bulls dressed up as other breeds to kill people, or are you telling me that someone lied along the way, naming other breeds for each and every death when they should all be pit bulls? Are you on medication? You cannot possibly be serious.

And also, a purebred dog is only purebred in the eyes of the registering body that approves the standard for it. Otherwise, anyone could have any type of dog and claim it’s pure based on their feelings. There are standards that have to be met, regardless of how bad you want raisingcain dogs to be pit bulls. They aren’t, and you can’t bend the rules to follow your crooked logic.

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.