posted on April 22, 2002 02:52:39 PM new
For about the 10th time this year in South Florida a Pit Bull has attacked and seriously injured someone. A lady holding her Pomeranian was severely injured trying to protect her dog from attack. Eventually she was hurt so badly that she dropped the dog which was immediately killed. There are two problems here. First, the penalties for letting dogs off leashes or out of yards are far too lenient. Second, with hundreds of breeds to choose from, the personal liberties argument is not nearly as important as banning this vicious breed(and others) from all urban and suburban regions as soon as possible. The owner, as is always the case, was incredulous as to his sweet, beloved pet attacking anyone. Pits are already banned in Miami-Dade county and attempts are being made to ban them in Broward(Ft. Lauderdale) as well.
posted on April 22, 2002 05:43:10 PM new
Hi stusi! Although I don't know enough about pit bulls, I really wonder if the fault lies in the animal. You see stories on TV of the attacks, and the owners are usually mental hospital escapee types. If these dogs are cared for properly, I'm sure they can be as loving as the next, unless the breed has some kind of gene defect. (???)
posted on April 22, 2002 06:01:13 PM new
It's a tough problem because some pit bulls are dangerous and some are not. Maybe it would be a good idea to require owners of these dogs to license their dogs with a requirement that they have to be professionally trained. Since dogs bred to fight are so strong, a leash is generally useless.
I've read that most bites occurr within the dog's home.
posted on April 22, 2002 06:07:38 PM new
kraft- Many breeds of dogs are being inbred for killer qualities of size, strength and aggressiveness. This not only makes the offspring meaner but leads to genetic brain defects of intelligence and personality. You now have stupid killer dogs. Do you think feeding and petting these dogs will change that? This inbreeding is rampant with Pit bulls, Rottweilers, Boxers, Dalmatians, Shepherds and many others which are aggressive to begin with. Can (mental)"hospital escapee types" be counted on to properly raise a dog? How many more unprovoked deadly attacks on people and pets will have to take place before the message is gotten by all? Several of these breeds should be banned or at least restricted to rural areas or locked behind a tall chain link fence with very high fines(thousands) for violators. Some actually let these dogs loose- it's mind-boggling.
posted on April 22, 2002 06:32:17 PM new
In the Bay Area there have been three dog attacks in the last week, and at least one fatality. The fatal mauling was a "family dog." These dogs need to be removed, banned and/or put down.
Yesterday I was flying a kite with my kids and two ladies came by with huge rots. My kids weigh about 50 lbs., the dogs looked nearly 200 lbs.
As I stepped between the dogs and my kids (who were moving in to pet the dogs), one lady says, "Don't worry, he's friendly." Yeah, right. I could have killed that dog just for looking at my kid.
posted on April 22, 2002 06:37:26 PM new
The only ban that would make any sense and work to protect the public they will never do - and that is to make it a special permit and training to own a dog over a certain WEIGHT.
Any breed can turn on a person and attack. People irrationaly insist that their dogs have human traits that no animal has and unhappily some people lack. Love - compassion. You will never convince someone to restrict them when they regard tham as members of the family equal or superior to their children.
posted on April 22, 2002 06:44:14 PM new
gravid- Pit bulls don't weigh much compared to many other breeds! They, however, should be at the top of the list. So far as convincing someone to restrict their breed I would not be so concerned. It is not an individual decision but a governmental one.
posted on April 22, 2002 08:56:46 PM new
Many of these breeds are attack trained in a different way and by less qualified individuals than Police dogs-sheps and dobies, both of which are far more intelligent than pits and rotties. Dobies by the way are unusual in that they are naturally sweet but since they are so powerful they are often trained as watch dogs. Sheps are intelligent but they tend to be biters.
posted on April 22, 2002 10:04:53 PM new
It's not so much about the training of any individual dog. Some breeds have been bred to select their aggressive and innate fighting ability for centuries, and no one can train it out of one of them. So take a dog who's the product of generations of having been bred for exactly those characteristics which cause it to attack and/or react to a perceived attack in certain ways it will do so without any conscious awareness that it is doing so.
Think of a race of people in which the weak, slow, or timid examples have been rejected while the aggressive quick, and ferocious examples have been combined over generations to produce even more aggression and innate fighting ability. It would be possible to produce a race of super athletes, or super killers, or whichever combination is preferred.
While there have been proposals and even attempts to do just such breeding in humans, the general society has discouraged the practice and will go to any length if necessary to contain it. No such controls have been emplaced when it is dogs that are the object and so the experimentation is done and the breeding practices are accepted in much of the world. The unpleasant result is obvious.
These animals should not be allowed to exist in our society. For as long as they are these episodes will continue and no amount of training or doggie psychiatry will change that one lick.
posted on April 23, 2002 02:42:58 PM new
Breeding has a lot to do with it. Years ago, Dobermans were in such high depend that breeders without any scruples were breeding their dogs with no respect to the dogs background. Hence, you had Dobermans with quite a few personality quirks, the demand died down and the overbreeding stopped. I have seen some very sweet mild mannered pit bulls and some I wouldn't turn my back on. But, I have seen the same with other breed of dogs. Many people forget what the dog was originally bred for. The doberman was actually bred by a man named Doberman. He was basically a slumlord and he wanted a dog for protection when collecting the rent. A friend of mine that breeds Rotties, has very good tempered dogs. But, she stresses that they are dogs, that they need to be shown who is boss. The basic principle of dogs, is that they basically look to the owner as the head of the pack and expect you to act accordingly. I have met some dachshunds that are downright mean. Raising a dog is not dissimilar to raising a child. They need rules and parameters set around their behavior.
posted on April 23, 2002 02:59:02 PM new
doxdogy- Being shown who the boss is surely is of limited value in preventing an inbred or otherwise stupid dog from attacking another dog or person. That's like saying that in the split second that you see your dog attacking that your command will sink in fast enough to prevent any damage. Sweet personalities sometimes change with age as there are many cases of Rotties, Pits and other breeds turning on their owners. Your friend who breeds Rotties may be surprised to find out what kind of training they ultimately get.
posted on April 23, 2002 03:47:34 PM new
I don't believe that Rottweilers have the deep-set inbred aggresive traits that the Staffordshire Terrier does. They're a sort of johnie come lately, a result of style. Generally they are quite intelligent and are used as guard, not attack dogs, and come from a line of shepherd's protectors as do the Mastiff, the St. Bernard, and all of those other large breeds. The pits have that wonderful locking jaw (not wonderful) which gives them an advantage in any dogfight, as does their low stature and great front shoulder strength. They are made to go in low for the throat and lock onto it until life ceases in opponents. That sort of superiority was recognized and development through selective breeding has carried on through hundreds of dog generations. They are made for killing and that's all that their instincts know to do. Dogs are estimated to operate normally on 70% instinct with the remainder their recent inputs. People get them for that reason. No matter how many people will give testimony to their wonderful pet qualities the lie in their statements is made obvious by their own tender facades and by the gross ugliness of their dogs. Why else would anyone chose a dog that looks like the bleeding scabs on a sick and rotting dead pig's butt?
posted on April 23, 2002 04:51:00 PM new
krs- As usual I agree with you for the most part. However, I would correct you to say that "NORMAL dogs operate normally on 70% instinct"etc. Those that are just less intelligent breeds or are brain-damaged genetically or from blows to the head have limited learning ability and tend to operate almost 100% from instinct. They can, however, be made more agressive quite easily.
posted on April 24, 2002 10:41:11 AM new
I knew an old fellow who went down to get his paper and mail and turned around to find that his neighbors mixed breed that was mean as a rattlesnake had jumped the fence and was between him and the house. They were out in the rural area so there was nowhere to retreat to. The dog was very menacing and the fellow defended hinself with the only thing he had - his rolled up newspaper. When this big nasty dog saw the rolled up newspaper raise as a club it's tail dropped and it was scared to death! Shut right up and retreated!
His theory after thinking on it was that the dog still remembered being smacked with a rolled up newspaper as a puppy being trained and if he had had a garden rake or a baseball bat that probably would not have meant a thing to the dog, but it sure remembered what a rolled up paper was for. Just a theory but it made sense to me.
posted on April 24, 2002 11:44:20 AM new
It makes sense to me too, particularly so now that newspapers have been common for over 100 years and have by now become a part of the everydog collective consciousness much the same as fire is a warning of danger in all cases and small fires have become indicators of the presence of man.
There is a dilution of these instinctual reactions in both cases however. In the case of fire, the presence of that warning will also bring the remembrance of treats past such as bits of handed out pieces of cooked meats or for the more lively and aggressive dog larger bits in the form of whole raw steaks and in the case of newspapers there is the coupled remembrance of generations of rewards for having successfully completed a proper fetch.
The degree in which these affects hold sway over the behavior of any dog is dependent upon the entirety of it's interaction with other species, particularly man. This is the substance of the law which posits that you cannot teach an old dog new tricks which should more accurately be expressed as you cannot teach an old bad dog new good tricks.
posted on April 24, 2002 01:50:11 PM new
Why is it that when we take a wild animal and "domesticate" it we automatically assume that they are rendered harmless, unless humans make them mean?
It is true that dog owners and owners of other vicious animals; or animals that can become vicious, are all too often left off the hook when it comes to responsibility for an attack by their "harmless" pet. For example, how many kids are permanently injured and torn to pieces each year in America by these so-called "pets"? I guess if the owners were torn to pieces as punishment, fewer people would be irresponsible about their animals.
posted on April 24, 2002 02:36:52 PM new
Went to the Pound (my son is a DOG "lover", he's got it Bad) to see what they had over the Weekend. Pretty Depressing, of about 15 dogs "available" 12-13 are what I considered Large dogs (over 50 lb). They were mostly a "Pit" mix, I found it incredible how much of an influence this breed has had on the dog world. It really stunned me. Something needs to be done with this overbreeding, What I'm not sure. Most people (NOT everyone) that own them seem to Have a screw loose in my opinion and go for a Dog that tends to also. Needless to say I adopted nothing, but in a couple of months will try again..
[ edited by docpjw on Apr 24, 2002 02:38 PM ]
[ edited by docpjw on Apr 24, 2002 02:39 PM ]
posted on May 5, 2002 03:18:35 PM new
There is actually a group-the National Temperament Testing Organization- that claims to have "tested" thousands of dogs as to their temperament. It is strange that an organization such as this actually exists as people do not have to be told that Retrievers or Spaniels are generally good natured. After carefully reading their website info and corresponding with them, it seems that they are at the very least being manipulated by the breeders. They acknowledge using the breeder's input as to the dog's temperament to actually affect their findings "up to 20%"! How many breeders are going to call their dogs aggressive or dangerous? The cross-sections of dogs given to them to test are obviously not those inbred and starved for aggression as is the case with many of those that attack people and other dogs unprovoked. This reeks of a cigarette industry type sponsored study.
posted on May 5, 2002 04:59:10 PM new
Here we go again ban this ban that, Stusi How many dogs have you worked with and other than hype, read to you by 27 yr old blondes with 38 ddd reading a telepromter that was edited by leftists and faggots what research or life experience puts you in the position to restrict someone elses freedom ? in this society other than Menomenee falls Wisconsin, dogs are considered to be property. The problem with those pits I have seen that were bad was definitly the fact that when the last major wart eneded we threw the baby out with the bathwater. Rather than pass a lot of idiotic laws to be enforced by over worked police and managed by pimping beaurocrats and parasitic lawyers. Why not steralize the crimminal element. so in a few generations a lot of this will go away.
posted on May 5, 2002 06:18:25 PM new
I have owned many dogs, worked in many animal hospitals, and was friends with a guy who had the largest guard dog contract with NYC. I have personally witnessed numerous dog attacks and here in South Florida there have been countless unprovoked attacks by Pit Bulls and Rotties. It is not exactly a totalitarian act to ban two or three out of hundreds of breeds. If you lived in or near a major city you would be well aware of the inbreeding and starving of these breeds to create aggressiveness. As everyone knows, part of the problem is that these dogs are too strong to fight off an attack by them. I suppose you think banning machine guns for private use is an attack on your civil liberties.
posted on May 5, 2002 08:22:51 PM new
First off there was an attack here in a rural area where a 10year old girl was visiting a home inside and was killed by 6 rotts. they adults were somewheres else at the time. the attack was in response to the visiting girl telling one of the rotts to get off the table. when the idiots got home they sent the female idiot to go get the girls parents apparently the idiots could afford to feed at least 6 rotts but could not afford a telephone. when the female idiot picked up the father to come get his daughter she did not inform him that the klittle girl was laying dead with a jacket thrown over her in theior kitchen. ther hopeless idiot did not make an attempt to locate a telephone to call paramedics either. meanwhile back at the raunch the female idiot arrives with the father who sees the male idiot there with a beer something else they could afford besides a telephone the male idiot says to the father gee I guess I'm going back to jail. the father then collects the body of his daughter and calls police from some other location. Now then Stusi I am not trying to be mean to you or flane you so pay careful attention to what I am saying. Had these 2 idiots not been allowed to own rotts or pitts because of a ban on 2 or 3 breeds they would have had 1. a pet bear 2.cougar 3.wolf 4.wolf hybrid 5.pit viper 6.black mamba 7. a daughter married to a crip or someother asinine thing. The problem is the God dam Judge who in his infinite wisdom did not properly deal with the stupid sons of bitches the first second or third or fourth time he had his useless hands on them. Nothing will be done to his black robed ass either. The problem is the highly paid caseowrkers at the ss dept who were blind to the living conditions of the little girl who lived there. You simply cannot believe the amount of buck passing going on around here over this and this is not an isolated incident either. Much like the ass who was jeffery Dahmer's probation officer still has a job was not fired and we pay for this type of irreponsible activity. The system does not function get it. its broken. It may be beyond repair. The 2 cops who gave a little naked anally bleeding screaming for help asian kid back to Jeff dahmer GOT THEIR JOBS BACK WITH THE UNIONS HELP. Now then In asnwer to your remark about machine guns. First off in terms of a nation the worst violation of the law is treason not murder or rape but the attack against the institution itself. Now then during the revolutionary war we had a sizeable group of citizens who not only did nothing to aid in the effort to resist the oppression of the royal crown but in fact took up arms in its defense, against their fellow citizens. Once the war was won NO where did the constitution say that they could not bear arms. It specifically said the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The fact is that the original document did not even disarm crimminals at all. When the debate occurred over arms Benjamin franklin said Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb sitting down to decide what is for dinner, Liberty is 2 wolves and a heavily armed lamb sitting down. The fact is that the British troops went to lexington and to Concord to seize the personal weapons of the persons living there which included in the case of Lexington a cannon with shot which was equal to anything the crown had had at the time. Considering the Nuclear weapons, Nerve gases, Biologocal weapons, lazers and tazers and all the rest the governments of the world now have a machine gun or two in the hands of law abiding citizens would not hurt anything, in case you have not noticed the crimminals for the most part already have them. Now then that said I work with animals and for years was a liscensed USDA Broker. I have worked for the dept of natural respources and I have with my own hands not for pay planted hundreds of trees on public land. I do see the agression you talk about in the rotts and pits especially in rots where more than one is invloved. In Huskies I saw 2 out of thousands that were mean one had been ''electronically trained'' to be a guard dog. I shot the dam thing after it did a bite when I talked with the former owner the ass said to me well it's bitten 8 or 9 people but if I had known your were going to shoot it i would have kept it. (with a newborn in the home) No law would have dealt with this man's stupidity someone out of 8 or 9 people should have acted to jail this insensative son of a #*!@ or better yet electronically trained and neutered him. The point is say you outlawed these breeds, then then would simply do something else, and yes I think it should be arrest on site for any uncovered unsecured load on a truck. I have had several windshields broken in this fashion, and there have been horrible deaths in this state from debris laying around. Which brings up another point the irresponsible decision the leave dead animals lay allover the place by our D(eer) N(aturally) R(otting)Now after a few years of this hopelessly stupid practice we have a major outbreak of disease here right at the time we have a politically correct but hopelessly incompetant person running the agency. reminds me of the old Dirty Hary remark about paying a hell of price to be fashionable. (did I give awaymty age Bonilar?)
posted on May 6, 2002 09:52:10 AM new
auroranorth- You bring up an interesting subject regarding the shooting of that dog. If I happened to be armed(?) at the time of an attack by any dog on myself or another(that includes a pet) and I could not stop the attack before serious injury was imminent, I would not hesitate to shoot. It has gotten to the point down here that if I saw a Pit Bull or Rottie coming towards me I would draw on it and shoot if it came within a few feet. Wouldn't it be better to ban them than to have people firing at these dogs in the street? They ARE being bred for aggressiveness!!!
posted on May 6, 2002 12:29:32 PM new
To show the politically correct unreality that has fogged everything here in Michigan they changed the law a few years ago to specifically make it illegal to shoot at a pack of dogs running deer down. Seems thjat infringes on the rights of any owners of the dogs running in a pack. You are supposed to hike out of the woods call a DNR officer and expect him to go marching off into the woods to find this pack and deer and view the situation himself being a professional and all. Just a layman without a degree can't tell if a pack of dogs is chasing down a deer with some bad intent after all.
posted on May 6, 2002 12:36:42 PM new
gravid- That is crazy! It's like the animal control agency here saying that even though my neighbor's dog has attacked and seriously injured three other dogs, that they will not act unless they witness the attack. By the time they arrive the attack is over.
posted on May 6, 2002 03:56:04 PM new
I part with you both here, one of the greatest dangers to my right to keep and bear arms is the iq 60 type who misuse firearms in rural areas,Obvioulsly if your being attacked or your family or any person a firearm should be used to stop the attack, but way to many jack pine savages seem to take it in their heads to plug everything in site propane tanks cattle horses road signs their own ass, there is a backward rural mentality that says if a dog runs deer some idiot can kill it.thats a lot of &%$%# and usually an excuse for some jerkwad to hurt someones pet. personally the bambi crowd can have the bill the next time someone I know ruins their vehicle of these stupid beasts, if there was any sense to hunting season instead of the dnr telling hunters to stay away from the road and such when hunting , we would have semi trucks with battering rams drive at 1 to 3am at 90 to clear the roads of the deer to stupid not to run in front of vehicles. Now come on Gravid you live in Michigan, if your in the woods armed during hunting season you know damm well that the entire area becomes a mini police state and you dont have to go far to find a warden From the Deer Naturally Rotting dept. I am strongly against hurting someones pet unless they are life threatening and I damm well dont mena bambi either. the point is we have enough laws what we dont have is responsible people running the place
posted on May 9, 2002 07:06:37 AM new
Just a little 1st hand experience. My sons (I have 3) got a Pit Bull Pup in Nov. of 2000. This was a beautiful animal, Brindle Colored. He was loved, well trained and obedient. He attached himself to my youngest son (12 at the time), he played with and slept with the dog. They were inseperable. In July of 2001 (the dog was 9 mos. old) our family was sitting together watching the TV, the dog got up and attacked my yougest son. There was no indication, no prior aggressive behavior. In this attack the dog bit my son's left cheek off and swallowed it. We had to retreive the chhek from the stomach of the dog, however the tissue was destryed in the dogs stomach. Needless to say, my son has just had his 3rd surgery, with more to come. The left side of his face is being completely rebuilt.
Our house looked like a CSI crime scene, the blood was even on the ceiling. with 5 people in the room there was no chance to stop the attack it happened to quick.
Being in a very rual area my husband took the dog behind the barn and shot him.
When the boys got the puppy my husband called 2 Vets about the breed. He was told that they were great family dogs, just to be carefull around other animals. My husband has beagles and we had to keep them seperated.
The Pit Bull breed should be outlawed and made extinct in my opinion. There is a genetic flaw in this breed.
We will never have any type of dog other than a Beagle. These are most loyal and loving dogs we have ever had.
I had a similar experience but not as severe as yours. My Rottweiler had a habit of eating rocks...even ate a couple of D batteries. Whenever I was there and this happened, I would just run my hand through his mouth and remove these tidbits.
But one day, when he was still a puppy, he found an old chicken bone in the road. When I tried to remove that, this "friendly" dog became the most ferocious animal that I have ever witnessed. My thumb which was hanging by a piece of skin needed fifteen stiches and eventually a plastic surgeon.
Dogs that are bred to kill should never be a "pet". Like you, the vet had assured us that our dog was a good natured, fine animal. Actually, he was a lethal weapon...
an accident waiting to happen.
