Should Pitt Bulls be banned?

woodoo

Should Pitt Bulls and associated breeds that they have the same power and physical stature be banned. IMO their capacity for damage is a real worry and is the main issue i have with these dogs. All breeds can attack but when a Pitt Bull attacks the end result can be much much more severe.

See the following piece on the dangers posed by these dogs. http://www.terrierman.com/mortality-mauling-vicious-dogs.pdf

Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).

In the US over a 3-year period from January 2006 to March 30, 2009, a total of 98 dog bite fatalities involving 179 dogs occurred; 60% of the deaths were caused by pit bulls, and 76% were caused by pit bulls and Rottweilers. A total of 113 pit bulls were involved in these deaths, and they accounted for 63% of the dogs involved in fatal attacks.

Pit bulls responsible for 65% of all fatal attacks in 2008
6 of 7 fatal dog bites in Texas in 2007 were inflicted by pit bulls
94% of attacks on children by pit bulls were unprovoked
81% of attacks that occurred off the owner’s property involved pit bulls
One person is killed by a pit bull every 14 days
One body part is severed and lost every 5.4 days as a result of pit bull attacks
2 persons are injured by pit bulls every day
1.5 pit bulls are shot to death every day

Dravokivich

"Pit bull types" the breeds are rarely verified.

Lawrence1895

woodoo wrote: »

Should Pitt Bulls and associated breeds that they have the same power and physical stature be banned. IMO their capacity for damage is a real worry and is the main issue i have with these dogs. All breeds can attack but when a Pitt Bull attacks the end result can be much much more severe.

See the following piece on the dangers posed by these dogs. http://www.terrierman.com/mortality-mauling-vicious-dogs.pdf

Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).

In the US over a 3-year period from January 2006 to March 30, 2009, a total of 98 dog bite fatalities involving 179 dogs occurred; 60% of the deaths were caused by pit bulls, and 76% were caused by pit bulls and Rottweilers. A total of 113 pit bulls were involved in these deaths, and they accounted for 63% of the dogs involved in fatal attacks.

Pit bulls responsible for 65% of all fatal attacks in 2008
6 of 7 fatal dog bites in Texas in 2007 were inflicted by pit bulls
94% of attacks on children by pit bulls were unprovoked
81% of attacks that occurred off the owner’s property involved pit bulls
One person is killed by a pit bull every 14 days
One body part is severed and lost every 5.4 days as a result of pit bull attacks
2 persons are injured by pit bulls every day
1.5 pit bulls are shot to death every day

No, but the owner, who makes the animal vicious

BNMC

Yeah, his music is shite.

The Backwards Man

Irresponsible owners should be banned. I'll probably get hounded for this but I firmly believe people that live in built up areas should not own dogs, I also believe that working dogs, such as huskies, bloodhounds, german sheperds, collies, labradors, yes labradors, should not be kept as pets. They are working dogs folks, like it or lump it.

digital ninja

its not really the dogs fault if their brought up like that by scumbags.

Mint Aero

Yearh! and gingers too

Aongus Von Bismarck

Yes, they should be banned. The only people who own them do so for image reasons.

Its a dangerous dog and people should only be given a licence for one in exceptional circumstances.

woodoo

Lars1916 wrote: »

No, but the owner, who makes the animal vicious

As stated by author, “Temperament is not the issue, nor is it even relevant. What is relevant is actuarial risk. If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a Pit Bull Terrier has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed, and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dog and their victims are paying the price.”

The inbred tenacity of pit bulls, the unrelenting manner in which they initiate and continue their attacks, and the damage they cause are the result of both genetics and environment. Therefore, this breed of dog is inherently dangerous.

SEPT 23 1989

they should not be kept as pets around children

dharma200

no.... yawn.... I own three pit bulls. the american stats you are quoting are complete tripe. there are extreme anti pit bull groups that are always looking for members, they are sort of like the christian right except its pit bulls they are against.
thanks for the 6 year old stats though... very informative.
I would also suggest that the lineage of said pit bull dogs be looked at, and you might find that unfortunately millions upon millions of dogs have pit bull strain, there is no such thing as a pure breed pit bull, and the propaganda out there about their so called never ending bite, their fondness for eating children and their super human doggy strength...
There is countless reasons why pit bulls should not be banned, purely because about half a percent of intelligent humans know what a pit bull is, intact the term pit bull cross is one you find in the press, purely because every bull breed it one. so, ermmm..... no..... would love to see the most recent stats anyway, in ireland of how many children have been eaten by pit bulls in the last year..... there has however been some very sad cases of babies being killed by other breeds in the uk recently.... i should think that leaving your child with any dog on its own is almost criminal.
I hate stupid questions.

x Purple Pawprints x

No, they shouldn't. The idiots that have them and train them this way should be.

jane82

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Irresponsible owners should be banned. I'll probably get hounded for this but I firmly believe people that live in built up areas should not own dogs, I also believe that working dogs, such as huskies, bloodhounds, german sheperds, collies, labradors, yes labradors, should not be kept as pets. They are working dogs folks, like it or lump it.

im with ye on this but I can already see torches on the way.

Mickey H

Pit Bulls should not be banned. Owners need to learn how to look after them properly. Same with GSDs, Dobermans, etc. I don't believe any of these are necessarily dangerous in the right hands.

Molester Stallone

Yes, without doubt, PittBull should be banned, fckin 'Tonka tonk, badonka donk" baldy prìck should be neutered & then banned

woodoo

dharma200 wrote: »

no.... yawn.... I own three pit bulls. the american stats you are quoting are complete tripe. there are extreme anti pit bull groups that are always looking for members, they are sort of like the christian right except its pit bulls they are against.
thanks for the 6 year old stats though... very informative.
I would also suggest that the lineage of said pit bull dogs be looked at, and you might find that unfortunately millions upon millions of dogs have pit bull strain, there is no such thing as a pure breed pit bull, and the propaganda out there about their so called never ending bite, their fondness for eating children and their super human doggy strength...
There is countless reasons why pit bulls should not be banned, purely because about half a percent of intelligent humans know what a pit bull is, intact the term pit bull cross is one you find in the press, purely because every bull breed it one. so, ermmm..... no..... would love to see the most recent stats anyway, in ireland of how many children have been eaten by pit bulls in the last year..... there has however been some very sad cases of babies being killed by other breeds in the uk recently.... i should think that leaving your child with any dog on its own is almost criminal.
I hate stupid questions.

It is far from a stupid question. You haven't even addressed their capacity for damage. Just google some of the photos of people that have been attacked by pitt bull and pitt bull type dogs. Most other dogs can't inflict the sort of damage a pitt bull can to an adult.

dharma200

no thanks. I have extensive first hand knowledge of the breed, i suggest you try googling any breed of dog for same said images if thats what you are into.

razorblunt

Mr. 305?

foxy06

I'll get slaughtered for saying this but there is no way in hell I would have a pit bull in my house near my kids. Yes there are certain owners that make their dogs vicious but then you hear of responsible owners with pit bulls that just 'turned'. Like another poster said, pit bulls have the ability to kill or maim very quickly. Yes I do think they should be banned

suicide_circus

but then what will the cool and deadly hard men keep as pets?

dharma200

“A study performed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States, analyzed dog bite statistics from the last 20 years and found that the statistics don’t show that any breeds are inherently more dangerous than others. The study showed that the most popular large breed dogs at any one time were consistently on the list of breeds that bit fatally. There were a high number of fatal bites from Doberman pinschers in the 1970s, for example, because Dobermans were very popular at that time and there were more Dobermans around, and because Dobermans’ size makes their bites more dangerous. The number of fatal bites from pit bulls rose in the 1980s for the same reason, and the number of bites from Rottweilers in the 1990s. The study also noted that there are no reliable statistics for nonfatal dog bites, so there is no way to know how often smaller breeds are biting.”

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

It feels kinda like the gun debate, dogs don't injure people, irresponsible owners of dogs injure people. I think they should be tightly regulated. Outright banning isn't really the answer, but allowing any auld scumbag have access to particularly strong and potentially vicious breeds of dogs because their dick isn't big enough is simply not a good idea.

Green farmer

I don't think they should be banned, but it should be made law to have your potentially dangerous animal microchipped, and if that animal does damage to anybody, then the owner should be made personally liable for any damage caused. Promote responsible, sensible ownership .

marc96

So I guess we should ban people from owning jack Russells as one of them killed a baby in the uk last year!!!!i dnt own a pit bull but wouldn't be worried about them as a breed,id be concerned on how they are brought up by their owners.i own a staffie who harmless and doesn't even know how to bark or bite but that is how he was raised.

Can't blame the breed only the owner

mistress_gi

I own a large bull breed dog and can honestly say I have no issues with him whatsoever. So he is a big chicken and is scared of the wind and is allergic to mice, he does look vicious though! Why did I get a bull breed, because he is a bullbreed, black and massive and he spent close to 6 months in kennels before we adopted him, before them he was surrendered to the pound before then , I don't know.
Every dog deserves a good life, We decided to give this a guy a chance. I do not regret adopting him but I also get very discriminated against. People discriminate against me because we decided to adopt this vicious machine and against him because he is a bullbreed, big and black.
The reality is that I have no issue leaving my dog with children, he would run before doing anything at all. However, I would never do this because I am a responsible owner.
Deed before breed is what I believe in!
Just so you know what I am talking about, here is my dog:

https://www.dropbox.com/sc/gblhskfc17kinkg/ah9GfG-1xe

SEPT 23 1989

marc96 wrote: »

So I guess we should ban people from owning jack Russells

I agree with you ban these horrible little b@stards

Ziegfeldgirl27

First of all let me say that I do not believe any dog to be "dangerous". Only the people who own them are dangerous and irresponsible.

I do not believe that dogs just "turn". You have to ask yourself in all these unfortunate tragedies involving children being killed, what was actually going on before the dog attacked.

Never leave a dog unsupervised with children, whether it is a chihuahua or a pit bull. I have a lhasa apso myself and as soon as we have young visitors, I put her outside.

Can you imagine sound of a child squealing or crying magnified 50 times louder? Wouldn't that drive you insane?

foxy06

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

It feels kinda like the gun debate, dogs don't injure people, irresponsible owners of dogs injure people. I think they should be tightly regulated. Outright banning isn't really the answer, but allowing any auld scumbag have access to particularly strong and potentially vicious breeds of dogs because their dick isn't big enough is simply not a good idea.

Bollix. Guns cant go off without someone pulling the trigger. Dogs of responsible owners can turn without an owner making them

ahnowbrowncow

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

It feels kinda like the gun debate,dogs don't injure people, irresponsible owners of dogs injure people. I think they should be tightly regulated. Outright banning isn't really the answer, but allowing any auld scumbag have access to particularly strong and potentially vicious breeds of dogs because their dick isn't big enough is simply not a good idea.

You're comparing a dog to a gun? That's ridiculous tbh.

marc96

Smile

foxy06

Green farmer wrote: »

I don't think they should be banned, but it should be made law to have your potentially dangerous animal microchipped, and if that animal does damage to anybody, then the owner should be made personally liable for any damage caused. Promote responsible, sensible ownership .

not much good if you are a parent and your child is dead after a pit bull attack. owner being liable isn't much good then

SPS1

I really hate this opinionated bias & rhetoric, that their PB dog is perfectly safe & just cause a certain breed has killed. Does that mean its breed should be banned also?

The simple fact is, dogs are domesticated animals that have certain genetic differences for their purposes of hunting/guarding etc which is clearly visible by different breeds facial structure & size.
Some dogs can do much more harm than others & the breeds have varying levels of associated intelligence/agression.

Pitbulls are much more prone to aggressive tendencies & have the size + jaw structure to do serious harm to humans. Dogs can snap at times, nearly every owner who had to put down their dog for attacking will have said "but my dog was so calm & friendly, I trained it".
Your pitbull is no exception.

Temptamperu

9 times out of ten if a dog bites you your asking for it.

Riddle101

No they shouldn't be banned. But I do think there should be something like a pet inspector type of a person, who checks up on people with pets every once in a while to evaluate the pet. Basically just see how it's doing, if it's being cared for and treated right etc. The amount of animal abuse I read about makes me think, there needs to be something in place to protect pets. But it could also work for checking up on people with dogs to see how their behavior is. But that's just me.

foxy06

Temptamperu wrote: »

9 times out of ten if a dog bites you your asking for it.

and that one other time?

sopretty

woodoo wrote: »

Should Pitt Bulls and associated breeds that they have the same power and physical stature be banned. IMO their capacity for damage is a real worry and is the main issue i have with these dogs. All breeds can attack but when a Pitt Bull attacks the end result can be much much more severe.

See the following piece on the dangers posed by these dogs. http://www.terrierman.com/mortality-mauling-vicious-dogs.pdf

Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).

In the US over a 3-year period from January 2006 to March 30, 2009, a total of 98 dog bite fatalities involving 179 dogs occurred; 60% of the deaths were caused by pit bulls, and 76% were caused by pit bulls and Rottweilers. A total of 113 pit bulls were involved in these deaths, and they accounted for 63% of the dogs involved in fatal attacks.

Pit bulls responsible for 65% of all fatal attacks in 2008
6 of 7 fatal dog bites in Texas in 2007 were inflicted by pit bulls
94% of attacks on children by pit bulls were unprovoked
81% of attacks that occurred off the owner’s property involved pit bulls
One person is killed by a pit bull every 14 days
One body part is severed and lost every 5.4 days as a result of pit bull attacks
2 persons are injured by pit bulls every day
1.5 pit bulls are shot to death every day

Have not read one reply, but to me yes, they should be banned

sopretty

Riddle101 wrote: »

No they shouldn't be banned. But I do think there should be something like a pet inspector type of a person, who checks up on people with pets every once in a while to evaluate the pet. Basically just see how it's doing, if it's being cared for and treated right etc. The amount of animal abuse I read about makes me think, there needs to be something in place to protect pets. But it could also work for checking up on people with dogs to see how their behavior is. But that's just me.

We don't even do that for children! Get with reality.

Ms2011

foxy06 wrote: »

I'll get slaughtered for saying this but there is no way in hell I would have a pit bull in my house near my kids. Yes there are certain owners that make their dogs vicious but then you hear of responsible owners with pit bulls that just 'turned'. Like another poster said, pit bulls have the ability to kill or maim very quickly. Yes I do think they should be banned

With the exception of dogs with brain defects (pretty rare) a dog doesn't just turn. More commonly the dog is screaming (with body language) that it is uncomfortable with a situation but it's owner is either oblivious or completely ignores these subtle signs & signals giving the dog no option to react with a bite.

mitosis

Because you can't ban or control irresponsible owners, yes, they and similar should be banned.

dark crystal

Temptamperu wrote: »

9 times out of ten if a dog bites you your asking for it.

Yeah, Those pesky children, taunting dogs into killing them. Stupid postmen delivering the mail, annoying the poor innocent creatures.

The fact people still blame victims instead of the animal leads me to believe this debate will never go anywhere. Always the same in these type of discussions.

mitosis

mistress_gi wrote: »

I own a large bull breed dog and can honestly say I have no issues with him whatsoever. So he is a big chicken and is scared of the wind and is allergic to mice, he does look vicious though! Why did I get a bull breed, because he is a bullbreed, black and massive and he spent close to 6 months in kennels before we adopted him, before them he was surrendered to the pound before then , I don't know.
Every dog deserves a good life, We decided to give this a guy a chance. I do not regret adopting him but I also get very discriminated against. People discriminate against me because we decided to adopt this vicious machine and against him because he is a bullbreed, big and black.
The reality is that I have no issue leaving my dog with children, he would run before doing anything at all. However, I would never do this because I am a responsible owner.
Deed before breed is what I believe in!
Just so you know what I am talking about, here is my dog:

https://www.dropbox.com/sc/gblhskfc17kinkg/ah9GfG-1xe

The problem is that almost word for word this is what the owners say after their dog has attacked and injured someone.

Oranage2

People say it's the owner not the breed.

It's true in a way, but dogs have traits, Collies like to heard, terriers like to hunt, but mention Pitt bulls like to fight and you're instantly dismissed.

American Pitt bull terriers have massive Jaw strength as well as inch plus long teeth, I don't think they make ideal pets.

ahnowbrowncow

Temptamperu wrote: »

9 times out of ten if a dog bites you your asking for it.

I'm going to ask for some evidence to support this claim.

You wouldn't make such a statement without some facts to back it up, would you?

mistress_gi

mitosis wrote: »

The problem is that almost word for word this is what the owners say after their dog has attacked and injured someone.

I believe you forgot to highlight the rest of the sentence!!!!

darced

This post has been deleted.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

woodoo wrote: »

Should Pitt Bulls and associated breeds that they have the same power and physical stature be banned. IMO their capacity for damage is a real worry and is the main issue i have with these dogs. All breeds can attack but when a Pitt Bull attacks the end result can be much much more severe.

See the following piece on the dangers posed by these dogs. http://www.terrierman.com/mortality-mauling-vicious-dogs.pdf

Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).

In the US over a 3-year period from January 2006 to March 30, 2009, a total of 98 dog bite fatalities involving 179 dogs occurred; 60% of the deaths were caused by pit bulls, and 76% were caused by pit bulls and Rottweilers. A total of 113 pit bulls were involved in these deaths, and they accounted for 63% of the dogs involved in fatal attacks.

Pit bulls responsible for 65% of all fatal attacks in 2008
6 of 7 fatal dog bites in Texas in 2007 were inflicted by pit bulls
94% of attacks on children by pit bulls were unprovoked
81% of attacks that occurred off the owner’s property involved pit bulls
One person is killed by a pit bull every 14 days
One body part is severed and lost every 5.4 days as a result of pit bull attacks
2 persons are injured by pit bulls every day
1.5 pit bulls are shot to death every day

No. They should not be banned.


They should all be shot...........on sight!

woodoo

Another issue i have but i suppose the owners are to blame here. Is when they are out unmuzzled and they attack some other dog out being walked. I have seen it a few times and the pitt bull types never come off worse.

If they aren't to be banned then they should be muzzled when in public.

Temptamperu

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

I'm going to ask for some evidence to support this claim.

You wouldn't make such a statement without some facts to back it up, would you?

Basically, ive had dogs in my life and that's my experience.

BillyMitchel

As someone that's been around bull breeds for 20 + years (Bull Terriers, Pit Bulls and Staffordshire) and now an owner of a 125lb Dogo Argentino I'm sick to death of this useless argument. A ban does nothing. All dogs can attack and if people really think that the pit bull is potentially the most dangerous dog out there these days, then they do not have a clue.

All we have to do is look to the UK that banning a breed does nothing, zero, zilch, sweet fock all. There's now more PB types there than ever before.

Holland have reversed their banning law and other countries will follow suit. It does not work.

I do believe that maybe a special licence or some kind of exam done by the IKC for certain breeds would help the situation. I do think these breeds are great but in the right hands. Idiots are everywhere though. Laws are never enforced here when it comes to dogs in Ireland.

People refuse to take personal responsibility and ultimately accidents happen and the dog gets blamed.

OP other breeds have killed people the last few weeks. Why aren't you calling on a ban for those breeds?

Something does need to be done but its not a ban.

I really could go on all night.

Dyr

Certain types of viscious cars should be banned, far too many deaths on the road

marc96

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

No. They should not be banned.


They should all be shot...........on sight!

Maybe u should be shot on sight