Killer Dobermann devours live Ibizan Hound head first!
Posted on 04/26/2011 6:45:43 AM PDT by DCBryan1
I would need scientific evidence to know if a tiger was more dangerous than a lion. Is a pit bull more dangerous than a chihuahua or a Scottie. Of course. Is it more dangerous than a Great Dane raised in the same manner? I don't know.
Isn't it interesting that when I ask for something that will make me sure that a problem exists, the people who claim that problem exists say I don't need it? I should just trust the media and move on, right? The MMR-causes-autism media?
A firecracker may be more liable or just as liable to go off as a stick of dynamite. But one has MUCH more destructive potential.
What I'm asking for is evidence that the pit is either (a) more likely to go off (b) or more dangerous than other breeds its size. In other words, I'm saying "Don't tell me to treat it like dynamite until you show me that it's dynamite and not dowel." And guess what? None of you are showing me it's dynamite, just telling me that it's dynamite because you say it is, or because the MMR-causes-autism media says it is.
Scores better on personality than a beagle is nice - but a beagle going psycho isn't much of a threat to me, while a psycho Pitbull would be.
The reason I used the beagle as an example was to show how stupid the posters premise was, not because I believe roaming packs of beagles are going to kill people. That said...Pits score better than Goldens and Saint Bernards if I recall correctly. How would you do against one of them? I wouldn't want to face a Saint Bernard with anything less than a 12 guage or a .45...if they have the same attack danger as pits, should we euthanize them all?
I would need scientific evidence to know if a tiger was more dangerous than a lion. Is a pit bull more dangerous than a chihuahua or a Scottie. Of course. Is it more dangerous than a Great Dane raised in the same manner? I don't know.
Isn't it interesting that when I ask for something that will make me sure that a problem exists, the people who claim that problem exists say I don't need it? I should just trust the media and move on, right? The MMR-causes-autism media?
A firecracker may be more liable or just as liable to go off as a stick of dynamite. But one has MUCH more destructive potential.
What I'm asking for is evidence that the pit is either (a) more likely to go off (b) or more dangerous than other breeds its size. In other words, I'm saying "Don't tell me to treat it like dynamite until you show me that it's dynamite and not dowel." And guess what? None of you are showing me it's dynamite, just telling me that it's dynamite because you say it is, or because the MMR-causes-autism media says it is.
Scores better on personality than a beagle is nice - but a beagle going psycho isn't much of a threat to me, while a psycho Pitbull would be.
The reason I used the beagle as an example was to show how stupid the poster's premise was, not because I believe roaming packs of beagles are going to kill people. That said...Pits score better than Goldens and Saint Bernards if I recall correctly. How would you do against one of them? I wouldn't want to face a Saint Bernard with anything less than a 12 guage or a .45...if they have the same attack danger as pits, should we euthanize them all?
Again, interesting that you cite a certain type of owner even while insisting the breed is the problem.
Serious question: Which breed will Uncle Leroy have guarding his meth lab next week if we kill every pit bull in the USA?
Now Kenny, you’re going to get me in even more trouble. LOL
#1) Large and/or aggressive breed of dog.
#2) Running loose, often >1 running loose.
#3) Prior reports of aggression and/or running loose.
#4) Unrealistic expectation of gentleness from the dog, often despite #3 above.
The attitude you exhibit, that your pit bull is no more dangerous than any other breed, and that it actually is less likely to bite than a beagle or golden; seems to be fairly common among Pit Bull owners - and it seems to contribute to the frequent owner negligence we see with these dogs.
Killer Dobermann devours live Ibizan Hound head first!
You've also been told, repeatedly, the facts that show there is no problem with this breed. yet you continue to post the same spam crap.
Welcome to Toolville. Population: You.
I went through this in the 70s with my Dobermanns.
Thankfully, they’ve pretty much fallen off the radar as the “punk’s choice” breed.
Mastiffs and all their “spin offs” seem to be the “in
thing”, now.
[and that includes Rotts who were bred from Mastiff stock]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull
Animal control officers across the country have told the ASPCA that when they alert the media to a dog attack, news outlets respond that they have no interest in reporting on the incident unless it involved a pit bull. The ASPCA states that along with over-reporting, false reporting is a major contributor to public perceptions about the breed.[29]
You do understand that if the media wants the public to believe you're bad, they will make sure you get bad press, right? And of course, you wouldn't be someone who would fall for that, would you?
They all have auto-lock jaws.
I think they’re patented or something, sorta like Snap-On tools.
:::rolls eyes:::
It’s stunning what people will believe.
OK, let’s just assume there is any truth to what you said. You say “they”. Do you mean 100% of pit bull dogs? Some other percent? Can you define what you mean by pit bull? They? What exactly do you mean by they?
I’m curious what other advice you get from ganstas! :)
A dog cannot be legally responsible for its actions. The owner is. Yes, many breeds attack humans, but few breeds are as uniquely equipped by physiognomy and temperament to do quite as much damage as is frequently done by "Pit Bull" and similar types.
Do your own research. The insurance industry knows how much they pay out in claims, and can rightly, or wrongly, estimate the cost/risk ratio. Hint: they are never far wrong. Ask your homeowner's agent to get it for you.
You are also faced with a philosophical dilemma that torments ... usually ... those on the Far Left of the political spectrum. The scientific evidence would seem to indicate that there is a genetic component to animal ... and human ... behavior. This in turn leads to the endless "Nature vs Nurture" debate. Those on the Far Left would have us believe that all behavior is learned. It clearly is not. How much is learned, how much is genetic is the question.
Many dogs breeds have been selected for attack traits over many millenia. It should come as no surprise then, that they attack. It is fairly obvious that many of the humans who have a genetic pre-disposition to violence are somehow drawn to to these breeds, the Pit Bull among them. These people are also very apt to be those the least mentally equipped to be responsible for the risk ownership entails.
My personal prejudice: the stupid and the criminal tend to be drawn to the aggressive breeds and encourage the attack trait in their dogs. In fact, "ghetto breeders" delight in crossing Pit Bulls with Rottweilers, Presos, Mastiffs, and culling the litters of those who show milder manners. Do you believe Michael Vick was the only Black or White dog fighter in the country?
Can "Pit Bulls" and other aggressively bred breeds be controlled by responsible owners? Of course. But the more intelligent among us humans will tend to choose a dog breed that is innately easier to manage, and avoid the risks inherent in ownership of a "Pit Bull" or other aggressive breed.
As a former farmer, I have seen what havoc uncontrolled domestic dog packs can wreak. Interestingly, all breeds will be represented in these packs, with "Pit Bulls," Rott weilers" and German shepherds taking the lead! The only wise expedient in the country is "Alaska Rules." A loose big dog in Alaska is a dead dog. They lose children every year to Malemutes and other "Sled Dogs."
I have lost livestock, and whenever possible have dragged the dog owners to court. In fact, they have dragged me to court for shooting their pet. I have not yet lost and have indeed collected substantial damages.
Let me interject yet another personal prejudice: any pet owner who keeps pit bulls, or other aggressive breed in any sort of situation where it is even remotely possible for them to get loose, is a dangerous idiot whom I would not want nor tolerate as a neighbor. In fact, I have just had animal control pick up a neighbor's dog, a "Pit Bull" unfenced, straining on a chain and menacing passing walkers! The dog, or its owner, will have to go.
Here is the latest from the CDC:
The latest CDC "Dog Bite: Fact Sheet" includes a disclaimer regarding this study, saying that
"it does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic. Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites. There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill."[40]
So, shall we kill or otherwise get rid of all of one breed based on a media bias against them?
“Can you cite any scientific evidence that pit bulls are more dangerous than other breeds of dog?”
I haven’t made a scientific study. I own a cairn terrier. Given enough time, he might be able to chew a hole in your sock. Likely, however, he would fall asleep before he accomplishes it.
So I would say that, yes, at least as between two breeds, pit bull vs. cairn terrier, the pit bull is more dangerous. Happy to have others weight in on comparisons to other breeds.
Lots of teeth but few brains. How they beluave, of course, depends on temperement. Fact is lots of dogs gone feral are dangerous, especially in packs. Any large dog with strong jaws is very dangerous. If they are descendents of dogs bred to kill bulls, they are ipso facto dangerous.
There are simply too many of the anecdotal stories and they are simply too gruesome.
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.