Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The OT' started by Blurayfan, Dec 29, 2011.
I support banning pit bull dogs.
I agree wholeheartedly! I own a pit bull mix and she is one of the smartest, most well behaved and submissive dog I have ever owned. It is the dog, not the breed and the owners have a lot of influence as to the dogs demeanor.
This is a common misconception that is often stated as fact. No dog, pit bull or not can "lock" their jaws. It is physically impossible!
I think it is more the type of people that want pit bulls. They don't want them to have a pet, they want them to be able to tell their friends that they have a pit bull. And they treat them accordingly. Does this apply to every pit bull owner, no. But it does apply to many. These type of people should not be allowed to own any dog.
Do I think if I raised a pit bull from a puppy that it would be mean and viscous, no way. I don't treat my pets that way. But then again, I have enough respect for my neighbors to not chose a breed that could make them uncomfortable. (There was a family who had one and it was the talk of the neighborhood until they moved.)
As for temperament, we had a cat that we rescued. He was very sweet and part of our family for 16 years. But as sweet as he was 99.9% of the time, he had been abused by his previous owner and if you made the mistake of touching him wrong, you got bitten. It was just who he was. So even the best tempered animal can flip on occasion.
And I support the banning of irresponsible pet owners, regardless of the species or breed they may own.
There, problem solved.
Can I get an amen bruddah? :lol:
Don "watch out, I've got a pit bull and I know how to use it. Ready, aim, wiggle and lick" Bolton
I like your idea a lot more. :lol:
Cool! That'd go well with the parenting ban I put into effect years ago. No one seems to follow it, though.
This is a difficult topic and one that brings out a lot of emotion on both sides of the fence (pun intended). The biggest difference between pit bull attacks and those of other dogs is it seems that when they do attack they do A LOT of damage, including deaths as we know. For this reason people are (rightfully so) more frightened by a Pit Bull or Rottweiler than labs or small dogs. Our two Maltese will bark their heads off at you (until you pet them) but no one except for an infant has any rational fear of them because they can barely break your skin much less do any serious damage.
But, in the end I'm mostly against a ban on them just as I'm against a ban on guns. It's the owner's fault when something goes wrong, not the dog / gun, at least in the vast majority of situations. That being said, I don't think I'd be any more comfortable with my child (if I had one) playing with a pit bull that doesn't have years of experience around children with absolutely no aggressiveness being shown than I would with them playing with a hand gun. The problem is that if something does go wrong, it's going to be a very serious situation!
I've seen labs mentioned on here a couple of times and that surprises me because of all the dog breads I've ever personally been exposed to they are the most non-aggressive ones. I've seen children poke them in the eyes, pull on their ears, smack them in the head, sit on them. etc. and the lab would just lay there and take it. After a while they may tire of it and slowly get up and saunter out of the room or area where the children are, but that's it.
This isn't fact, it's a myth.
Comparing dogs to guns really doesn't work...
A gun sitting on a table does not kill people without human intervention... A dog might, though... And while we are right to blame humans more than dogs... The facts are that some breeds of dogs have been bred to enhance some violent tendencies more than others. Not the fault of the dog, but you cannot just undo those generations of breeding overnight.
It depends on the type of lab.
Okay; maybe the wrong terminolgy was used to describe their tendancy to "lock on" as indicated here:
There is no evidence for the existence of a physiological "locking mechanism" in the teeth or jaw structure of normal pit bull-type dogs, although a dog's jaws can be locked in a closed position by surgically correctable jaw abnormalities. Despite the lack of a physiological "jaw locking" mechanism, pit bull-type dogs often exhibit "bite, hold, and shake" behavior and refuse to release when biting; methods to force pit bull-type dogs to release their grip include breaking an ammonia ampule and holding it up to the dog's nose, or using a "break stick" to lever the dog's jaws open if it bites a person or animal.
The wrong animal is force to get a license.
Obviously it's not a perfect comparison but I could say that someone who tampered with a gun, such as filing down the sear to reduce trigger pull break force, and did a very poor job of it could result in unintentional discharge that very well could injure / kill a person. This could be equated to an irresponisble / abusive dog owner.
Like I said, it's not a perfect comparison but both involve personal liberties that, when abused, can cause injury / death to others. Both also have very strong opinions on both sides of the issue. I do completely with your statement about some breeds being more prone to violent tendencies than others due to centuries of breeding by man.
I've had many dogs that aren't Pits do the same thing with chew toys like those ropes. A pit is like any other TRAINED dog and will release if it's taught to do so.
There are a couple of facts that are driving this. One of the largest is the number of lawsuits involving Pit Bulls. Compared to other breeds Pit Bulls are by far the leader.
As far as the bite statistics are concerned...no matter how you interpret the numbers, with exception of Rottweilers, Pit Bull’s numbers are orders of magnitude higher than the other dogs. Even if you try to account for the non-reported bites of the other breads it’s highly improbably you could close that gap. Not matter how you shake it out the number of incidences involving Pit Bulls are massively higher than other breeds.
Between the number lawsuits and bite statistics it’s no wonder we’ve come to this point.
That said, my brother has a Pit Bull. She’s a happy friendly dog, great with the kids, and has never bitten anyone. I trust her as much as any dog...keeping in mind they are animals. I’m just sayin’
I mostly blame the media for the bad reps certain breeds get. In the 60s German Shepherds were labled by the media as "police dogs". During the 70s Dobermans were labled as "attack dogs". And in the 80s they labled Pit Bulls as "vicious killers". I have owned dogs all my life (German Shepherd, Doberman, Pit Bull x3, and mutts). Any breed is capable of harming humans but I can honestly say you have a greater risk of being bitten by a Chiauawa or Toy Poodle then the afore mentioned. May I remind everyone that Petey of the Little Rascals was a Pit Bull and he worked with children for years. Perhaps we would be better suited with Human Control Wardens instead of Animal Control Wardens.
Hear all the time. Just like you hear it about the neighbor who turned out to be a serial killer.
From an article The Breeds most likely to kill
The article also stated