Hi dawn, No i dont because an Akita, or gsd can do horrific damage! I believe they only get reported and other breeds dont is because of hysterical people and the media hype, at the end of the day it sells newpapers!


Pitbull mauls child would see over Collie Mauls child!

BUT i do agree they can do more damage that SOME other breeds! but i would fancy my chances with an Akita, or Mal or even a GSD

Yes, all breeds have some of these traits in varying degrees but as the Pitbull is considered the premier fighting dog he is of course going to be the ultimate example of the these qualities in concentration. No surprise that this is the breed with the image that most often attracts the wrong sort of owner.

You make it sound like every pitbull that gets loose attacks someone. I have volunteered at animal shelters in the US for years. Pit Bulls running at large get picked up all the time and taken to the shelter without incident. Again, you are taking an isolated number of incidents and generalizing to an entire breed of dog which simply is not fair.

I am still not satisfied with the 2% of breeds explanations. BECAUSE they are lawyers, they know how to twist perfectly innane statistics into meaning something more sinister. Until someone shows me a U.S. Census of dog breeds that I didn't know about, I'm not convinced. I think the stats are skewed and misleading.

I think that in itself identifies where a lot of this anti pit bull public perception arises. Have a look at the pictures that accompany the reports, have a look at the descriptions attached. I do not believe that media coverage constitutes justification for labelling a breed dangerous.

Further to that, do you think Dawn, that as there is a large amount of attacks by pit bulls that are reported by the media, compared to the number of reports on other breeds, that there have been no attacks on humans by other breeds, they simply dont get reported. It is often a case where a pit bull or bull breed cross is involved. What are they crossed with, could they not be labelled ????? cross attacks human?

This has nothing to do with media hype. The statistics on fatalities that I posted above which were compiled with the assistance of the Center for Disease Control they are not the media . The report does contain a ceaveat about 'an accurate determination of the breed involved' and to get a complete accurate picture you would need to have breed-specific population data but this would not be possible because the owners of certain breeds would be less likely than those owning other breeds to register/ license their dogs.

The USA does seem to compile official statistics on reported dog attacks , the CDC study detailing dog bite related fatalities in the US between 1979 and 1998 revealed that almost one third of fatal attacks were caused by Pit Bull Type dogs,this is how PBT are referred too, PBTx Crossbreeds were treated as a separate entity in the statistics. If you add the two together PBT types and PBTxCrossbreeds you come out with an even higher total.

This is not so, all dog bites requiring medical treatment or resulting in fatailities are collated and used in the official statistics in many countries though not in the UK it would seem, we don't officialy have PBTs here anyway so they would not appear.

Just to confirm there are official statistics kept in the USA of dog bites and fatalities see the links in Pods post, and here is another ..
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5226a1.htm

Hi Dawn

This is very much a guess but I'd imagine it's often because the dogs have been kept under duress/stress/have had access to drugs/have been used for fighting/associate being "out" with high adrenalin type situations.

This is only a guess but if we suggest most APBT who do harm, serious harm, are kept by dibious people then it would make sense.

I remember one of the attacks some years back, I think it might even have been the one which led to the DDA although I can't be sure - the dog savaged a child in a play ground.

The dog was owned by a man who fought it, and who trained it exactly there in the playground - who gave it drugs and who was on drugs and dealt them himself. It was thought the dog was on drugs at the time of the attack if I remember well enough.

I'd guess this situation is fairly similar worldwide unfortunately

I doubt that most of these dogs who "snap" ever have any real training, guidance, vet care, kindness, and are exposed even by passive smoking to drugs and all sorts of stress

Just my view...

Wys
x

Just a small mention re dog bite statistics, some in the UK are not real "attacks" but may be like mine, which was a knock from 2 dogs playing which caused an ulcer to form on my calf (still have the scar ) and this was recorded by the doctor as a dog bite

I realise this isn't the same as the ones you mention Mini, as those are actually related to the individual breed and I would say are genuine ...

Wys
x

So minihaha im a bit confused, are you supporting the facts that pitbull are more dangerous than any other breed? Please answer in a yes or no way as im already confused on where you stand? Thank you

in answer to the question set some pages back re: have you ever met a pitbull.

I met one in the states a few years ago - and it was such a lovely dog - reminded me alot of my bruno - really playful, wanted kisses, tummy rubs etc - asnd this was a strangers dog on the beach, that i happened to get talking to.

I dont beleive they are inherently dangerous to HUMANS, i do believe that humans hold the key totheir downfall through the fact that the majority of pitbulls we hear about are owned by the wrong people who dont care about socialisation, and good behaviour.

I know of a friend with a collie whom you literally cant go near as it is permanatly muzzled in the house as it will and has bitten before. The most you will get in my house is licked to death!

Socialisation and good training, nurture etc is the key to any dogs well being and I genuinely dont think that pits are more likely to go "wrong" and "snap" for no reason - however i do beleive that when they do due to the lack of nurture then the outcome is worse due to their jaw/strength etc - JUST like a rottie, boxer, mastiff, GSD, akita etc etc.

You cant take statistics for everything as it entirely depends on where the figures are taken and how they are interpreted.

Pits remind me so much of staffies in many chracteristics there is no way I could class them as dangerous - i believe that staffies/rotties/poodles/labs etc etc are just as capable of "snapping" as any pit.

I would own one in a flash if i could - the difference being that I wouldnt own one now because they are illegal - therefore I would know that it would not be a well bred or well nurtured dog if its been "underground" bred and that is where the problems have been. Its the dregs of society that spoil it for everyone else and have tainted this breed as well as staffies etc as being "badf" and dangerous dogs when in fact its the dregs that own them/fight them/show them off and boast about their "pit" that should be labelled dangerous !

I also find it incredibly sad that in USA many pits that are rescued have to be destroyed as they simply cannot be rehomed ( not to their nature) but the fact that they may fall into fighting hands in certain states as its so popular.

Also is it not staffies that are banned in certain states in Canada - due to insane legislation similar to this country - does that mean they are dangerous too ??