For all the Pitt Bulls

skittishkitten

It is sad that this great breed has earned such a horrible reputation. I have had the honor of owning two of this terrific breed and been friends with several others . I have always maintained that their temperment is based on how they are raised and treated . The Pitt Bulls I have known been loving and gentle creatures, all they want is a good home with someone to love them . There are bad eggs in any breed, but I have seen other breeds with more vicious tendencies than the Pitt Bull.

The link below is in defense of the Pitt Bull, I have asked permission from the moderators to post it since it has some graphic images of Pitts that have been gravely injured from the sport of fighting them and abuse. But there are also other images of the lucky ones that have found great homes. The song that accompanies is very fitting. I'm not sure that I would let children watch it because of the graphic nature of some of the pictures. It is not for the weak stomached. I was so touched when I watched it I cried.

Some of this is graphic, but sadly true. Also, if
your at work - the lyrics to the song are explicit.
http://www.deviantart.com/view/11454716/



.

Hellrazer

***PRE-EMPTIVE WARNING****ANYONE WHO POSTS ANY OFF-TOPIC,JOKING COMMENTS ETC ON THIS THREAD IS BANNED FOR LIFE.

I watched that video from start to finish and Christ theres some terrible animal abuse pictures in there.
Scary thing is that its happening in this country every weekend.Pitbull fights go on here as casually as horse racing.Its a disgrace!!!
Richie

meepmeep

I'm not gonna watch it coz that stuff really upsets me.

Some evil people out there. I saw a documentary recently where they were following someone who captured bears for fights. Clipped his claws off and pulled his teeth out and then sent him into an "arena" where wild dogs ripped him apart. He couldn't even fight back, the poor thing. I was bawling

PeadarofAodh

I'm just wondering: is pitbull fighting legal in any states in America or in Europe?

Really hate seeing any animal being mistreated in that manner- what can be fun about watching it!? :mad:

Blub2k4

skittishkitten wrote:

It is sad that this great breed has earned such a horrible reputation. I have had the honor of owning two of this terrific breed and been friends with several others . I have always maintained that their temperment is based on how they are raised and treated . The Pitt Bulls I have known been loving and gentle creatures, all they want is a good home with someone to love them . There are bad eggs in any breed, but I have seen other breeds with more vicious tendencies than the Pitt Bull.

The link below is in defense of the Pitt Bull, I have asked permission from the moderators to post it since it has some graphic images of Pitts that have been gravely injured from the sport of fighting them and abuse. But there are also other images of the lucky ones that have found great homes. The song that accompanies is very fitting. I'm not sure that I would let children watch it because of the graphic nature of some of the pictures. It is not for the weak stomached. I was so touched when I watched it I cried.

Some of this is graphic, but sadly true. Also, if
your at work - the lyrics to the song are explicit.
http://www.deviantart.com/view/11454716/



.

Pit bulls were selectively bred for fighting bulls, is that correct?
If so then surely there are if nothing else latent genetics which predisposes them to be brutal, I do appreciate that for the traits to establish themselves that there is an amount of nurture involved but how much "nature" is involved too? I am interested in hearing from someone who has to do with pitbulls.

Hellrazer

Blub2k4 wrote:

Pit bulls were selectively bred for fighting bulls, is that correct?
If so then surely there are if nothing else latent genetics which predisposes them to be brutal, I do appreciate that for the traits to establish themselves that there is an amount of nurture involved but how much "nature" is involved too? I am interested in hearing from someone who has to do with pitbulls.

Im not sure that I agree 100% with the above.I dont think in the beginning that they were ORIGINALLY bred for fighting bulls more likely they were selected from different breeds because they were good at it.The breeders then selectively bred the more aggressive ones and the breed became known for this aggression.
I know two breeders of pitbulls in the UK who selectively breed for good temperament and their dogs are the calmest dogs you could meet.Our kids pull out of the dogs,jump on them and never once have I seen the slightest hint of aggression.
So I dont think its genetics.More likely the idiots who breed these dogs for aggression and then they`re usually the first who complain when someone is mauled by their dog.
Blame the breeders and not the dogs "latent genetics".
Richie

Blub2k4

thanks for that, anyone else got an opinion on this.

MogwaiFearSatan

From what I’ve been told Pit Bulls/ Staffordshire terriers where originally bread as guard dogs used to protect the women & children in castles/ farms while the master was away. Because of this, and their good nature with children they originally had the nickname of nursemaid dogs.
I’m an owner myself and considering that my own dog was initially rescued from a Kildare breeder with a history of dog fighting it’s a credit to her breed how gentle with children she is and how passive she now is in the face of aggression from other dogs. These breeds are loyal, friendly and above all safe when raised in a normal environment, unfortunately they attract a lot of bad owners.

As for being bread for fighting bulls, well frankly that sounds like a load of bull. Most of these breeds have the story that they where bread for bull baiting but the sport was never that popular in the countries where the breeds started. In fact the only breed of this type that I’m aware of that is really used for hunting is the Dogo Argentino (like a Staff but as big as a Boxer) and that’s Boar hunting.

At the end of the day regardless of what their initial design was these dogs, and all their similar breeds, nowadays enjoy a reputation of being excellent family pets. hopefully dog fighting (as with all cruel sports) its something we’ll eventually see the end of and with its demise we’ll see the demise of the unfounded bad reputation these animals have, after all its humans who make these dogs fight not their genes.

Dyr

I grew up in an area where there was quite a few pit-bulls in 80s-90s. Mostly scumbags and drug dealers who wanted them for image and/or fighting. The guy who lived on my landing had two he used to fight, you'd see them every now and then with their faces black and scabby from fights.

Im sure with proper handling they can be good pets. But I totally agree with Blub2k4, I have a problem with people who tell you that pit-bulls are only dangerous if the owners make them dangerous. They omit to mention that breeders were making em that way for a century, they're a fighting breed. Its not just the potential stupidity of the dogs owner you have to worry about, its the very raison d'etre of the breed as well.

Thats why they are so potentially dangerous to other dogs.

Ive been on the wrong end of a pitbull more than once, mostly an idiot neighbour who let his out and it attacked my old shepard, its no fun. Regardless of how much pro pit people say that they're luvvely fuzzy animals who attend church regularly i dont trust em. the breed was made to excel at fighting, and they will do that.

oh yeah, i think they're ugly buggers too

Blub2k4

Bambi wrote:

But I totally agree with Blub2k4, I have a problem with people who tell you that pit-bulls are only dangerous if the owners make them dangerous. They omit to mention that breeders were making em that way for a century, they're a fighting breed. Its not just the potential stupidity of the dogs owner you have to worry about, its the very raison d'etre of the breed as well.

My point is not to vilify the animal, I am not anti the breed, I am curious.
I do have a problem with people denying that the lines were bred as fighters, they do get a good rep from anyone who has one, so breeders/owners cant be discounted as telling the truth, in their experience.
Reading up on them on the web you will find mostly positive reports on the pure bred American Pit bull, it seems that mix breeding and misnomering of mongrels can be the case sometimes.
I have rats myself and spend my time quashing supposed facts about rats, most peoples first reaction is disgust when I tell them.

<edit> I am curious about the "nurture vs nature" aspect.

MogwaiFearSatan

Any dog that is mistreated and trained to fight will fight. Theses breeds where breed to hunt, just like spinals, but have been hijacked by the cruel element of our society.. Believe me, if there was money to be made from cocker spaniel fighting then you can be sure spaniels would, by now have a bad rep.
Your own German Shepard is a strong and powerful animal (hence it’s a favourite police dog) but is not seen by the general public as a dangerous dog. Your dog, like every other dog brought up in a normal friendly environment, turned out to be I’m sure a very gentle & loving animal but none the less is still a large strong dog with a mouthful of teeth.
There are thousands of GS (trained as guard dogs) dogs out there that you couldn’t get within shouting distance of without the dog straining on its lead looking to rip your head off but there are also millions that allow children to climb all over them. Dogs, like humans are victims of there environments and upbringing, unfortunately certain breeds are the focus of some very cruel upbringings.
I’m only speaking from my own personnel experience (as you are regarding the nature of your own dog and your neighbours) and from what I’ve seen public opinion is wrong about these beasts. A roommate of mine in the states kept an American pit-bull and so did several of his friends, these dogs played with each other, and with others on the park without any sign of aggression or viciousness, I never once saw this dog in anything even near a fight. My own dog, when I got her first would strain on the lead and growl at any other dog but within 5 -6 months these actions disappeared. Now she shows no aggression to other dogs, even when it’s shown to her. I can let her off her lead up at bull wall where she happily plays with other dogs. During the summer on the canal she was attacked by a pair of boxers and still didn’t show any teeth.
Imagine if your scumbag neighbour had the GS and you had the terrier, I can bet you the scenario would have still been his dog attacking yours.

ionapaul

Blub2k4, I think you are dead on about genetics playing a part, large or otherwise, in a dog's temperment. If aggressive has been selectively bred into a specific breed, then yes, it is more than likely that a typical dog if this breed will be more aggressive than the average dog. Obviously with 'fighting dogs', the vast majority of overly-aggressive dogs are ones that have been 'trained' (can you call it that? seems insulting to genuine dog trainers, mistreated may be a better description) to be so aggressive.
I do know if I had a small child I would prefer a dog bred for playfulness and to be docile near him/her, rather than a dog bred to kill other dogs/animals, just in case...

Hellrazer

ionapaul wrote:

I do know if I had a small child I would prefer a dog bred for playfulness and to be docile near him/her, rather than a dog bred to kill other dogs/animals, just in case...

Theres more Labradors,Golden retreivers etc that I know are more aggressive(and have bitten more people) than Pitbulls,Doberman,Rottweilers.
The former dogs have been bred for being "people dogs" and the latter for security work,fighting etc.
Suppose what Im trying to say is that no dog is 100% trustworthy but also that its more to do with environmental factors rather than genetics.
An aggressive Labrador is just as aggressive as an aggressive Pitbull.IMHO its down to discipline.
I have 2 dogs here-A Lab and a Samoyed.Both these dogs have two kids that roll around the floor with them,pull their tails,try to use them like a horse and neither has shown any sign of aggression towards anyone.But I would still not leave either dog alone in a room with the kids although the dogs in my opinion are 100% trustworthy.
My next dog will be a Pitbull or Rottweiler because I believe that these dogs although they are supposed to be aggressive--the ones I know personally are big babies and its all down to the training that they got as puppies.
Richie.

Dyr

MogwaiFearSatan wrote:

Any dog that is mistreated and trained to fight will fight.

Thats very true. Its also true, but would you accept that any breed that has been bred to fight will do just that too?

My basic point is that the APBT is a product of the dog fighting culture that existed back then, as a breed its a fighter. Thats why said scumbags use them rather than shepards or rotties etc.
Maybe thats changing as people bred them more as pets but those traits and attributes remain. Regardless of how friendly some of em are, I dont think you can deny that as a breed they're dog aggresive.

Also as a result of their origin they are massively powerful and tenacious so when things go wrong its disasterous. The same is true of many large powerful dogs, such as german sheperds. They have the attributes and the potential to do serious damage, even with the best of upbringings. AFAIR The existing muzzle laws in this country came about as a result of attacks on children by both GS's and APBTs. Maybe labs bite more stastically, but how many people are killed or maimed by labrador maulings?

Regardless of how good MY shepherds were i never kidded myself that they came from a breed that wasnt potentially dangerous toward other dogs and people. And i tried to treat them as such

the bottom line when dealing with any type of dog is that you should respect the potential of the breed or it might cost you dearly. How many have we heard the "I cant believe my fido did a thing like that" when someones "big softie dog" goes postal or runs under a car??

Hellrazer wrote:

Theres more Labradors,Golden retreivers etc that I know are more aggressive(and have bitten more people) than Pitbulls,Doberman,Rottweilers.
The former dogs have been bred for being "people dogs" and the latter for security work,fighting etc.
Suppose what Im trying to say is that no dog is 100% trustworthy but also that its more to do with environmental factors rather than genetics.
An aggressive Labrador is just as aggressive as an aggressive Pitbull.IMHO its down to discipline.

Do you think breeding doesnt play a major part in a dogs temperment then?? if so why were all these breeds created? Absolutely, no dog is 100% but once it goes bad genetics is gonna be the difference between getting your ankle nipped or badly mauled.

Having said that training, of course, plays a huge role in the end result but I can tell you though now an aggressive labrador and an aggressive pit are two whole different things. Have you ever had a pit charge at you?? you ever had to clamp ones head between your knees to stop it ripping your dogs leg off? ever had one latch on and through your boot just en route to your dog?? I have and i can tell you your statement is dangerously naive, give me an angrly lab any day

Pits might be great dogs, but If you dont respect that breed for what it is do yourself and your neighbours a favour and stick with the samoyed. Plus they're waaaay prettier than pits

skittishkitten

I concede to the fact that in the wrong hands the Pitt Bull Terrier can be a dangerous animal, as can any powerful breed. But look at the element of the human population that has these undesireable members of the Pitt Bull breed. They are people that are not desireable in our own human society. The Pitt Bull was admitted to the American Kennel in 1936 which means that there are caring and loving people out there that have been selectively breeding Pitt Bulls for gentless and trustworthyness while seeking to maintain the physical stature of the breed for almost a century. Yet you never hear about those dogs , why is that ? Because they are gentle loving creatures that do no harm. They, however, are "represented" in the public eye by their more dangerous and illbred "cousins" that are raised and owned by the unsavory element of our own society. By claiming that ALL Pitt Bull Terriers are aggressive and untrustworthy is doing the breed a disservice, when in fact it is only a minority of the breed that have deserved this reputation.

I have owned 2 Pitt Bulls for over a span of 20 years. My dogs have as yet to bite or maul a human or another animal. They are loving and gentle animals. They have been attacked by other dogs and have refused to fight. I also live 30 miles out in the country and my nearest neighbor is 2 miles away. I have two prisons with 60 miles from me, one on each side. It is not uncommon for a prisoner to make an escape and I feel safer with my "dangerous" breed there to bark and deter anyone if such a person should make it to my house and seek to enter it. My own Shasta is now 13 years young and entering into senility. I dread the day that I shall loose her.

Bambi you yourself said that the only members of the Pitt Bull breed that you have met have been owned by this same unsavory element that were using them as statis symbols ( I have the biggest meanest dog type ) and the drug dealers seeking to protect their illegal products. It is no wonder you have a prejudiced opinion on the breed. But not all Pitt Bulls are like this, perhaps its time you met the more friendly side of the family.

You have stated twice now that you feel the breed to be ugly. However I can say the same with the GS . I have been involved in showing for many years. The Shepards I have encountered are bred to such an extreme they are virtually cripples, each and every pup has to be check for hip dysplasia and VERY few of them ever receive a good or excellent rating. To me this is a horribly disfigured dog. However I am sure there are some out there that are not bred to this extreme that I would find attractive.

I, myself, find the Pitt Bull breed a highly attractive animal. Did you look at MogwaiFearSatan's girl and see the smile on her face and the joy in her eyes? She is a very lovely girl indeed. I would post pics of my own Pitts however my scanner is broke and I am unable to scan them in.

When will it ever be time to forgive them their past and look at the strides that they have made in the present day ? To judge a breed because what HAD been and what a few unsavory elements are using them for now is unjust. I'm not saying that EVERYONE should run out and own a Pitt Bull, the breed is definitely not for everyone. But to condemn the breed as a whole because of a few breaks my heart.

Dyr

I'll take this one point at a time

Core argument:

1)The pit bull as a breed was created to fight other dogs in dogfights. They are descended from english bull terriers who were bred to fight dogs and bears etc

You accept that?

If you accept that then this whole "guns dont kill people, people kill people" style logic doesn't apply. Pits arent just a victim of peoples bloodthirst for dogfighting. They are a product of it. They have an unfortunate reputation because of what they are (or were) not what bad owners turned them into. Yes pits have an undeserved rep and they've suffered from witch hunting terribly for it, but you seem to deny is that there is, or ever was, any inkling of validity in that reputation.

Side notes

a) im joking about their ugliness, the more "staffy" looking ones are really nice IMO. as you said its personal taste. i dont like whats become of the GS and agree completely with you on that. Which i why i don't have one these days

"Bambi you yourself said that the only members of the Pitt Bull breed that you have met have been owned by this same unsavory element that were using them as statis symbols ( I have the biggest meanest dog type ) and the drug dealers seeking to protect their illegal products"

errmm i dont think i said that, as I type theres a pit bull three gardens down from me and one another four gardens down from that. The second one is a great family dog, I've known him since he was a puppy. Still wouldnt trust him anywhere near my shiba. And the one i had all the trouble with was just kept as a pet by an idiot, it was a BIG one too :eek:

halfhead

MogwaiFearSatan, off topic nice looking dog

Nala

MogwaiFearSatan wrote:

Believe me, if there was money to be made from cocker spaniel fighting then you can be sure spaniels would, by now have a bad rep.
Your own German Shepard is a strong and powerful animal (hence it’s a favourite police dog) but is not seen by the general public as a dangerous dog. .

It's funny you should mention the cocker spaniel and the GS. A few weeks ago I stopped to pet what looked like a friendly cocker spaniel, and she nearly took the hand off me. Five minutes down the road was a big GS letting kids pet him. They probably had very different upbringings considering they reacted so differently to a stranger. Which to me proves that nurture plays a big factor. Most people I know would be afraid of a GS but never a cocker spaniel.

tovalee

This is such a hard topic for me. I recently did a research paper on the laws regarding vicious dogs in my state(ohio). I interviewed dog wardens and they almost always said the same thing: the dogs most likely to bite were the smaller ones, in particular, cocker spaniels seemed to be prone to nipping. BUT that when a pitt does bite, its usually much more serious because of the nature of the dog to be stubborn and once riled up ,they wont normally back down.
dog fighting is illegal here, but of course it does go on. and if a dog is a loser, the owners have a tendency to torture then dump them rather than feed a loser. hence you have injured,mistreated,usually malnourished but very powerful dogs wandering loose. An incident that comes ot mind immediately is in columbus about 2 years ago, an older woman was getting out of her car, 2 pitts grabbed her leg and started shaking it, she was able to get them off her and get back in the car, but her leg had to be amputated from the knee down.

I own a large GS and a lab. im not afraid of big dogs. it may not be the dogs fault,but I am afraid of pitt bulls.

karlin

Some statistics:

The dogs most likely to bite

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.) The experience of the author of Dog Bite Law confirms that the dogs on the CDC list are the most frequent attackers of human beings.

snip

There is an 8 out of 10 chance that a biting dog is male. (Humane Society of the United States.)

Although pit bull mixes and Rottweillers are most likely to kill and seriously maim, fatal attacks since 1975 have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds.

snip

Studies of dog bite injuries have reported that:

The median age of patients bitten was 15 years, with children, especially boys aged 5 to 9 years, having the highest incidence rate
The odds that a bite victim will be a child are 3.2 to 1. (CDC.)
Children seen in emergency departments were more likely than older persons to be bitten on the face, neck, and head. 77% of injuries to children under 10 years old are facial.
Severe injuries occur almost exclusively in children less than 10 years of age.
The majority of dog attacks (61%) happen at home or in a familiar place.
The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim's family or a friend.
When a child less than 4 years old is the victim, the family dog was the attacker half the time (47%), and the attack almost always happened in the family home (90%).

From: http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

See also this: http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/danger.htm#Banning%20certain%20breeds%20of%20dogs

Also:

4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs every year.
Children make up 60% of dog bite victims.
About half of all children in the U.S. will be bitten by a dog by the 12th grade.
Nearly 20 people die a year from dog bites in the U.S.
Every 40 seconds someone in the U.S. seeks medical care because of a dog bite.
70% of dog bites occur when the dog is on the owner's property.

While any dog can bite, the top biting breeds include: Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Huskies, Doberman Pinschers, Chow Chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas.

From http://www.plasticsurgery.org/public_education/Dog-Bite-Awareness.cfm

Also, this is interesting as a way of forcing owners to restrict dogs (esp. requirement to carry insurance):

Tom Skeldon, dog warden of Lucas County in Ohio, said genetics play a big role in how a dog acts.

"Why do golden retrievers retrieve? Why do Border collies herd? Why do pit bulls grab things, hang on, and not let go?" he asked. "That's all a product of genetics. Can it be enhanced with some training? Absolutely. But the genetics have to be there to do that." In 1987 Ohio passed a state law that automatically deems all pit bulls as vicious.

The law does not ban the breed. Instead it requires they be kept properly confined, such as behind a locked fence or inside a house. When in public, pit bulls and their mixes must be kept on a six-foot (two-meter) leash and handled by someone of suitable age, showing proper discretion. Owners must also carry U.S. $100,000 liability insurance.

Skeldon says the law is controversial because it works.

"Ohio's vicious and dangerous dog law is good," he said. "It allows dog wardens, animal control officers, or police officers to not be impotent when it comes to removing obvious public safety threats, in the form of dogs, from neighborhoods."

In 1993 Skeldon said his agency picked up 50 pit bulls. Last year that number rose to 690.

The increase is mainly due to the narcotics trade, he said. When Skeldon goes on police raids, he said they frequently encounter pit bulls used by drug dealers for protection, or dog fighting.

Breeding pit bulls is also profitable. He said puppies sell for U.S. $250 to $500 each and backyard breeders are not removing dogs from their stock that show human aggression.

From: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/06/0617_040617_dogbans.html

Seraphina

certainly the dogs are bred for strength for fighting etc, but that doesn't mean they're all jumping to fight. do all of you spouting on about genetics actually know anything about it? what is passed on by genetics is impossible to determine when it comes to personality traits. you cant say its in their nature because you just dont know that.
yes, for years they were trained to fight and trained to be agressive. but just caused you're a trained boxer or dancer or gymnast doesn't mean your child is going to be one.
physical traits are passed on, but traits like agressiveness you cant be sure off. the problem is, like was mentioned, many of the dogs are mistreated or not trained/handled properly.
and all the stats on fatalities from pit bull bites etc is fine, but you've got to realise that smaller dogs will often be alot more agressive, yet do alot less damage. because the dog is bred for strength and fighting, its obviously going to hurt a person more than a cocker spaniel or another small breed. the dog responsible for the fatality may have been provoked, or trained that way, you just cant tell.
statistics aren't all they're cracked up to be.
anyway, my point, dont tar them all with the same brush, it is my belief that nuture would definately play a larger role with things like personality traits, agressiveness etc, because really, how these things may or may not be passed on is still a grey area in science.
but like i said. they're animals, and they can be unpredictable.

karlin

OK, genetics and history lessons:

1) Actually, yes, some of us spouting on about genetics know a fair amount, both at the scientific level and in relation to dog breeding...

The reason no one pays to see cocker spaniel fights is because they do not have the aggressiveness bred into them which is needed to make for a good fight. The reason they are snappish now is because the breed overall (like many others) has been badly damaged by backyard breeders and puppy farms who breed indiscriminately, which causes temperament to become uncertain (hence the famous 'cascade of rage' to which cockers are now susceptible). Same thing has happened to dalmations, cairns, GSDs, poodles among others -- any dog that becomes 'popular' and thus profitable to bad breeders.

A key reason bull breeds are particularly gentle with the people who own them (including children) is that this is an important trait if you are to control a fighting dog and not be hurt yourself. They were bred for centuries to bond very closely with their family. This isn't an indication that the dog is not aggressive but rather a pointer to the heritage of its breeding as a fighting dog.

2) as to whether they were ever used to fight bulls? Of course they were! And bears as well, and each other, and badgers, and so on. Bull and bear baiting were extremely popular entertainments in the UK from the Middle Ages onwards, until the 19th century when laws began to be passed against such things. It was also popular with the Romans, Greeks and so on. There are thousands of historical references to such activities as well as illustrations. You can see some of them, and read more form where this comes from on this huge website on bulldogs ( http://www.bulldoginformation.com/bull-baiting.html ):

"...dogs were selected and bred for courage, power and ferocity... it is evident that dog owners were following a program of breeding based on the individual specimen, which had to have a fierce, vicious and tenacious personality, rather than on the basis of edigree bloodlines."

And see:
http://www.oakengates.com/history/bull%20baiting.htm
http://54.1911encyclopedia.org/B/BE/BEAR_BAITING_and_BULL_BAITING.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/education/beyond/factsheets/makhist/makhist4_prog2b.shtml
http://www.angelfire.com/biz6/dogholocaust/gladiator.html

There's no doubt that poor breeding and raising the dogs to be excessively aggressive has damaged the breed and its profile. Nonetheless this is a breed that always has the propensity to be aggressive and, as breeder sites themselves widely acknowledge, makes it a dog than cannot always be trusted around other dogs unless very well socialised as a puppy.

Personally, I like staffies etc but would not trust any bull breed off lead around my own dogs (I work with rescue groups and these dogs routinely cannot be put in with other dogs, making them very hard to rehome. They are easily the dogs most likely to be pts at pounds. A shame more people with an interest in them don't get involved with rescue as I'd say up to a dozen are destroyed every month in Ashton pound in Dublin alone).

Dyr

As a point of interest while over in england i saw a painting of staffy type dogs fighting a lion in a cage during the victorian ( i think) era, seems it was the first lion bred in england and they decided to fight it a few times for publicity

Salubri

Benjamin D'Israeli said there are 3 types of lies. Lies, Da*n lies and statistics.
This does not mean that stats and quotes are not truthful - more that they can be used to paint a different picture by selective use.

More people die from being bitten by Pit Bulls : This does not mean that more people are bitten or even that 10% of people bitten are bitten by pit bulls... All that it means is that Pit Bulls are physically more dangerous than spaniels for example. If 99 people are bitten by spaniels and one is bitten by a PB, you are likely to find that the one bitten by the PB is the only one to die.
The question is not which animal is more dangerous - but which animal is more inclined to violent attacks. A PB which has always been well treated and cared for will not necessarily be disposed to violent attacks. It will in fact possibly be calmer and more reliable animal as PBs are by nature confident and hard to frighten. Spaniels on the other hand are by nature a more nervous or 'neurotic' animal and any animal expert will tell you that the majority of animal attacks are caused by situations where there is a perceived threat. Threat to members of its "family" or territory are more likely to provoke a calm PB than agression toward itself. Personally however I regard putting oneself into a position where one is likely to frighten or threaten any dog as foolish and deserving of whatever violence occurs. Similarly, if a dog is not controlled and trained not to show agression to other dogs, one should expect the dog to get savaged as soon as it mees a more dominant animal.

Martial Arts Instructors are more dangerous than soft spoken mild mannered accountants (excuse stereotypes but that's just what people are doing to the dogs) this does not mean that they have a higher propensity for violence!
The same goes for dogs and cats. When did you last hear of a cat savaging someone to death? At the same time would it be fair to say that cats are less dangerous and therefore more suitable to have around children? No - of course not - a child is more likely to hurt a cat by accident and thus get a fairly nasty wound in response as cats are not tolerant of mistreatment.

Golden Retrievers and Labradors are quite dangerous dogs. A Lab can and will fight off a Rottweiler if it percieves danger to its owner or anyone "in its care". If one was to provoke a Lab into attacking (and this would be difficult unless the animal is habitually mistreated or trained for dog fighting) there would be quite a good chance of severe injury or death. Usually the only time this happens is if the Lab's owner is attacked. These dogs have been bred in part for their protectiveness and loyalty in the same way that PBs and other animals were.

The big problem is with Pure Breeds who are so inbred as to be inherantly neurotic or agressive and un-sound. There is as much chance of getting a nasty Peking-ese as there is of getting a nasty PB - it's just that the risk inherent in such misfortune is much less.

Victor

Aren't pitbulls different from other dogs in that their bite is overlapped (and more dangerous) like human teeth and unlike most other animals.

camarobill

has anyone got or had an american pit bull terrier,thanks

pitty lover

i have 2 pittys myself and a 5 month old baby i would trust them with my life they are great dogs but at the end of the day they are just animals they are not a fault for there wrongs it is the owners this **** really boils my blood!!!:( a lab could do the same damage to a small child as a pit but no one cares about that if you go onto the irish times and look up lab attacks on children you will see yourself (im not trying to blacken labs im just making a point) and as for the sad videos i cant watch them either they break my heart but on a happy note on you tube there is a gas video look it up it is "pitbull with chicks" that brings a smile to my face

Magenta

pitty lover wrote: »

i have 2 pittys myself and a 5 month old baby i would trust them with my life they are great dogs but at the end of the day they are just animals they are not a fault for there wrongs it is the owners this **** really boils my blood!!!:( a lab could do the same damage to a small child as a pit but no one cares about that if you go onto the irish times and look up lab attacks on children you will see yourself (im not trying to blacken labs im just making a point) and as for the sad videos i cant watch them either they break my heart but on a happy note on you tube there is a gas video look it up it is "pitbull with chicks" that brings a smile to my face

This thread is 4 years old!!!!!!!!!

cloudy day

There's is no argument that can be made about the breeding of these dog's really. They were originally, as i believe, the English bull terrier x Staffordshire and both breeds were created for fighting, bull, bear, boars, badgers.

The very things that make them dangerous in society if something goes wrong. They do not give up. They are massive powerhouses, do not get frightened or intimidated when in a frenzy and if there is more than one your going to end up a mess.

There are plenty of articles and news stories of attacks by these dogs on people and even death as a result.

It's not for individuals to be able to know which is the darling pet and which is the one taught aggression and fighting from puppy hood.

I know the same can be said for other breeds but it the very things that go into the whole package with these dogs that make's people wary, maybe even frightened.

Whether or not it's not the "breeds" fault is irrelevant, sorry, they were bred to be this way.

pitty lover

no argument there but they werent just bread for fighting they are able to do pretty much anything i use mine as therapy dogs they are very versatile they get used as gun dogs sniffer dogs etc but im sure you all ready no that

oh apologies dident cop it was so old

cloudy day

pitty lover wrote: »

no argument there but they werent just bread for fighting they are able to do pretty much anything i use mine as therapy dogs they are very versatile they get used as gun dogs sniffer dogs etc but im sure you all ready no that

oh apologies dident cop it was so old

I've nothing against pit's and I love the bull breeds. It's just unfortunate there have been so many cases of bad press against them. As you say they can be used for a multitude of tasks and on the whole they are good family pets.

When we were kids our friends had a staff, loads of people did, He used to jump and grab a branch swing and be hanging out of it for ages, and on the rare occasion he fought with other dog's, well there was no stopping it. Jaws would have to be prised apart.

I know most are having the aggression bred out of them. And there are responsible owners. I was just watching the pets on you tube and it's quite sad to think a lot of them are being destroyed due to ignorance.

arybvtcw0eolkf

cloudy day wrote: »

on the rare occasion he fought with other dog's, well there was no stopping it. Jaws would have to be prised apart.

Prised apart, why is that?.

.

bushy...

Saanvi Eager Gunrunning wrote: »

Prised apart, why is that?.

.

In that story - muppet owner ?

They're among the best dogs ever

cloudy day

bushy... wrote: »

In that story - muppet owner ?

They're among the best dogs ever

Is that your attitude. Muppet owner. well that's a great defence for these dogs that we are being told are kind gentle sweet pets that wouldn't hurt a thing !

So these dogs do need specialist handling,training etc, and if that's the case they can hardly be classed as suitable family pets if your attitude is someone who owns one is a muppet !!!

Staff's have changed in appearance greatly over the last 30 yrs. Today they appear more square headed. They were very common and loads of people had them, as family pets. NOT fighting dogs and not trained for fighting or physical comp's.

Ye guys being the experts I'm sure you've heard of the term lock-jaw with staffs and boxers. Staffs have such a huge muscle mass either side of their mouth. This is where they get the ability to bite and hold and shake, is it not.

They can jump and hold on to pretty much anything in mid air and just swing there shaking off it.

Occasionally, as can happen with all dogs, there would be a fight and staffs would not let go. Therefore the jaws would have to be prised apart to get them off.

Seen footage of Pitts do the same to people when they have attacked them.

arybvtcw0eolkf

cloudy day wrote: »

Is that your attitude. Muppet owner. well that's a great defence for these dogs that we are being told are kind gentle sweet pets that wouldn't hurt a thing !

So these dogs do need specialist handling,training etc, and if that's the case they can hardly be classed as suitable family pets if your attitude is someone who owns one is a muppet !!!

Staff's have changed in appearance greatly over the last 30 yrs. Today they appear more square headed. They were very common and loads of people had them, as family pets. NOT fighting dogs and not trained for fighting or physical comp's.

Ye guys being the experts I'm sure you've heard of the term lock-jaw with staffs and boxers. Staffs have such a huge muscle mass either side of their mouth. This is where they get the ability to bite and hold and shake, is it not.

They can jump and hold on to pretty much anything in mid air and just swing there shaking off it.

Occasionally, as can happen with all dogs, there would be a fight and staffs would not let go. Therefore the jaws would have to be prised apart to get them off.

Seen footage of Pitts do the same to people when they have attacked them.

Apart from your word on this, you have evidence you can provide us with - re. this "lock jaw" mechanism etc?.

.

cloudy day

Makikoma

What is it that's bugging you about this lock jaw thing then. Have you never heard the term.

MogwaiFearSatan

cloudy day wrote: »

Makikoma

What is it that's bugging you about this lock jaw thing then. Have you never The use of lock jaw to refer to pit bulls is a misnomer and its the incorrect use of it that frustrates owners so much. Yes the dogs can hang from a tree and support their own body weight by their mouths, all dogs can. Everything dog has the more or less same bite strength ratio compared to their size & weight.
For you to suggest that only terrier dogs have this ability shows little forethought in your comments and lack of knowledge on the subject of dogs.

<snip>
Dr. I Lehr Brisbin of the University of Georgia states, "To the best of our knowledge, there are no published scientific studies that would allow any meaningful comparison to be made of the biting power of various breeds of dogs. There are, moreover, compelling technical reasons why such data describing biting power in terms of 'pounds per square inch' can never be collected in a meaningful way. All figures describing biting power in such terms can be traced to either unfounded rumor or, in some cases, to newspaper articles with no foundation in factual data." Furthermore, Dr. Brisbin states, "The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of pit bulls show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of 'locking mechanism' unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier."
</snip>

cloudy day

MogwaiFearSatan wrote: »

cloudy day wrote: »

Makikoma

What is it that's bugging you about this lock jaw thing then. Have you never The use of lock jaw to refer to pit bulls is a misnomer and its the incorrect use of it that frustrates owners so much. Yes the dogs can hang from a tree and support their own body weight by their mouths, all dogs can. Everything dog has the more or less same bite strength ratio compared to their size & weight.
For you to suggest that only terrier dogs have this ability shows little forethought in your comments and lack of knowledge on the subject of dogs.

<snip>
Dr. I Lehr Brisbin of the University of Georgia states, "To the best of our knowledge, there are no published scientific studies that would allow any meaningful comparison to be made of the biting power of various breeds of dogs. There are, moreover, compelling technical reasons why such data describing biting power in terms of 'pounds per square inch' can never be collected in a meaningful way. All figures describing biting power in such terms can be traced to either unfounded rumor or, in some cases, to newspaper articles with no foundation in factual data." Furthermore, Dr. Brisbin states, "The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of pit bulls show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of 'locking mechanism' unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier."
</snip>

If you read through the threads, I made the comment in reference to Staffordshire Bull Terriers.

As that was the common term in the day as a description of the staffs in relation to their design, that is grab, lock, hold and shake. It is their immense jaw power that enables them to do this. This is specifically why they were designed. That is why there were called Bull terriers. Correct ?

Terriers is a term which includes a multitude of breeds

Based on public opinion it would seem it is exactly their size, weight and power they posess that gives them a bad name, combined with the fact they have been bred to be used as fighting dogs and the reported attacks on people.

However as I have stated I do not own or "train" Pitbulls, and I'm not given to spending hours searching for scientific data to give support to either side of the arguement.

It's a public discussion forum where everyone can discuss given topics on dogs.

pitty lover

wow this old topic got fairly heated but something really pissed me off there there is NO SUCH THING AS LOCKJAW that is just plain ignorance saying such a thing!!! its **** like that, that makes people more afraid because not everyone is educated well enough on "bull breeds" to no this and will just assume they are monsters so if you dont no dont say anything same applies to peopl with negative comments keep them to yourself there is no need to be rude or mean, your most likely talking about someones pet!!!

cloudy day

pitty lover wrote: »

wow this old topic got fairly heated but something really pissed me off there there is NO SUCH THING AS LOCKJAW that is just plain ignorance saying such a thing!!! its **** like that, that makes people more afraid because not everyone is educated well enough on "bull breeds" to no this and will just assume they are monsters so if you dont no dont say anything same applies to peopl with negative comments keep them to yourself there is no need to be rude or mean, your most likely talking about someones pet!!!

Rude !!! I think you will find your comments ar just that. If you re-read the thread you will see the referance was made in relation to laymen's term about staffs and lock jaws. Nobody mentioned the dogs being regarded as monsters, that was your phrase. Maybe you have never seen a staff beating up on a dog and holding on for all it's worth and wagging it's and nothing was gonna get that staff off only prising its jaws apart forcibly to release it.

Nobody is labelling pitbulls as monsters, only the people who have treated them badly and used them for fighting have been classed as monsters.

bushy...

cloudy day wrote: »

Maybe you have never seen a staff beating up on a dog and holding on for all it's worth and wagging it's and nothing was gonna get that staff off

cloudy day wrote: »

prising its jaws apart forcibly to release it.

Question : How did you( or someone) prise the dogs jaws apart ?

cloudy day

The men used what I think was a bit of stick or something like it, hard to remember.

olaola

So great infact that my dog was attacked by one last night. Took two grown men to pull it off my dog.

So last night we informed ourselves that the way to remove an attacking dog is to grab it by its hind legs (like a wheelbarrow) and turn it in a circular motion while walking backwards so it cannot turn around and bite you.

pitty lover

right whatever and i wouldent call them monsters but the general public who dont understand the breed and only see the bad will thats my point and sorry i did miss that bit about the "lockjaw" i think it is an awfaull word but if a dog is socilized properly the owner should not need a "pry stick" or "break stick" as i hav heard them called and also the law states that all restricted breeds must be muzzeled and on a 2 foot lead at all times in a public place so the owner is at fault there and that should not have happened

Whispered

We re-introduced my dog to the little girl my mam minds over the weekend. He had been out playing for hours with my dads dog so was wrecked, had had a drink and was in his "resting" mode, had his halti collar on etc so we were careful. He is a boisterous junior and as tall as her so we had to be very careful. Not because I think he is in anyway bad but a sudden move could knock her over.

I have to say I was so so impressed. She was nervous but dying to "pat him", she told him to sit, and he was happy to do it He was ever so calm with her. Not his usual jumpy wirey self. He was well aware she's a baby and he needed to be gentle. It was lovely to see a dog who is essentially a pup, have so much awareness. I know it's sort of OT considering he's not a PB but he is a bull breed x.

Black Swan

Many So Cal communities have banned pitt bull ownership in their cities. When one attacks someone, they get a lot of bad press, whereas when another breed without a pitt bull rep attacks someone, it often goes unnoticed. Do pitt bulls deserve this attention? Some think so, others not.

bushy...

cloudy day wrote: »

The men used what I think was a bit of stick or something like it, hard to remember.

You need to be careful when two dogs start a fight and you go to break them up , both can turn suddenly turn on you.
You pointed out what they can do , you'd end up in bits.

cloudy day

pitty lover wrote: »

right whatever and i wouldent call them monsters but the general public who dont understand the breed and only see the bad will thats my point and sorry i did miss that bit about the "lockjaw" i think it is an awfaull word but if a dog is socilized properly the owner should not need a "pry stick" or "break stick" as i hav heard them called and also the law states that all restricted breeds must be muzzeled and on a 2 foot lead at all times in a public place so the owner is at fault there and that should not have happened

I totally agree with you Pitty, they are totally mis-understood dogs and have been victims of being owned and raised by the wrong people.As has happened with so many of the large breeds. I love all the bull breeds.

cloudy day

bushy... wrote: »

You need to be careful when two dogs start a fight and you go to break them up , both can turn suddenly turn on you.
You pointed out what they can do , you'd end up in bits.

I was only a kid at the time. This was a family dog and in his 15 yrs never ever once attacked or was nasty to a human. This is a general rule with them, they never had a bad rep for attacking people which seems is down to good old proper breeding practices and there are some good internet sites where you can read up on their history (all the Bull breeds)

It's far more dangerous to get involved in a conventional dog fight as they are all over the shop in a frenzy.

pitty lover

thats lovely yea i do believe sometimes that they no when they really have to be good and take it handy, you would swear tia was made of springs sometimes but around my baby she is so calm

bushy...

cloudy day wrote: »

I was only a kid at the time. This was a family dog and in his 15 yrs never ever once attacked or was nasty to a human. This is a general rule with them, they never had a bad rep for attacking people which seems is down to good old proper breeding practices and there are some good internet sites where you can read up on their history (all the Bull breeds)

It's far more dangerous to get involved in a conventional dog fight as they are all over the shop in a frenzy.

Always seems to be the way , those who can - don't

( meant in the dogs who are skillful fighters - don't often)