Monday, August 16, 2010
Phillips The Problem of Pit Bulls
Posted by Betsy Phillips on Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 6:33 AM
- Local dog pouts because It's not fair that she doesn't have a jaw like a crocodile, or maybe because she's about to have a bath. Hard saying.
The whole thing is strange — from Graves' made-up facts about pit bulls to his strange ideas about breed purity. And then there's the way in which he talks about pit bulls so obsessively, like they're monsters, dragons in need of slaying. But most of all, I keep thinking about how he's almost saying something important — or more to the point, that he keeps tripping over something important, but is so fixated on pit bulls he can't even see that what he's writing suggests a more complicated truth.
There's a lot about the piece that's just internally inconsistent. You can't suggest that the problem of pit bulls is a new one, belonging somehow to "this generation," and then complain in the next sentence about a mauling that occurred 20 years ago. Is this a new problem or not?
But that's a simple enough mistake. I sometimes think of things that happened when I was 16 as if they were recent. I'm more concerned about the parts that are bizarrely inconsistent internally.
On the one hand, Graves says, "The average pit bull you see on the streets of Memphis is a mongrel product of interbreeding since the early 20th century between bull dogs and a variety of terrier types." Got that? "A mongrel product of interbreeding." Then, on the other hand, he says, "As I've described, pit bulls are genetically unlike other dogs and are far more dangerous than all but a few other breeds."
Well, you can't have it both ways. Either a dog is a product of 100 years of breeding with other types of dogs, or it's a dog genetically unlike other dogs. Which is it?
There's a lot he appears to be just making up out of whole cloth. "Their crocodile-like jaws can easily crush a leg bone, a skull or a person's neck. Their teeth are long and sharp enough to fillet elephant hide, much less a human's." I don't know if this means Graves has never seen a crocodile before or a pit bull, but it's got to be one or the other. And an elephant's skin is an inch thick. A pit bull doesn't actually have teeth long enough to fillet elephant hide. Again, if Graves has ever actually seen a pit bull, I think he'd know this.
But here's what I keep thinking about. A pit bull is just a dog. And like any other dog, a pit bull is as good or as bad as the person who puts time into it makes it.
But doesn't Graves make it sound like a bad-ass monster?
That's what I've been thinking about. The pit bull "problem," such as it is, is three-fold. They may be equal parts, they may not be. I tend to think that they are not, that the dog is a part of the problem, but a small part. After all, a pit bull, for better and for worse, is just a 50-pound terrier. Every quality that your cute little terrier has — yes, the one that nips at the neighbors or takes after the neighbor's dogs or snuggles with you on the couch — the pit bull has as well, but at a size that can do real damage. The same instincts that make rat terriers great rat killers or fox terriers great at cornering a fox are the same instincts a pit bull has brought to bear on larger targets.
But just as most fox terriers go their whole lives without ever hunting and bringing down a fox, or how most rat-terrier owners have never seen their terrier kill a rat, most pit bull owners never see their dog take down another dog (or a wild boar, another use they're put to in Tennessee).
Instinct isn't everything. Dogs are flexible and eager to please, which makes them trainable and teachable.
Pit bulls are not monsters.
But when Graves talks about them like they are, doesn't it kind of make you want one? I mean, just for a second, don't you feel the tug of that fantasy — how it would make you, by association, a bad-ass, if you could own that bad-ass dog? You don't have to admit out loud that you had that fleeting thought.
The important thing, I think, is to recognize that it's there in order to recognize how diatribes like Graves' work. He claims to be writing against the dogs because they're so dangerous, but he's making them sound appealing by making them sound so bad-ass and unique.
And then, by reinforcing the idea that they're so dangerous and their behavior is so unpredictable and that all human interventions to the contrary are destined to fail, he's basically reinforcing the belief that there's no sense in bothering to train them. After all, they're untrainable monsters.
If that doesn't help to continue to set up the situations he rails against, I honestly don't know what does.
But the third part of the problem — and probably the largest — is that, by and large, our pit bull problem is a symptom of a deep crisis of masculinity. There's something deeply wrong with a kind of masculinity that proves itself by raising up an animal for the purpose of using it to torture and kill other animals while it is in the process of being slowly tortured and killed itself.
What we want in healthy masculinity is for men to protect things that are weaker, to guide their own aggression into positive results for the community and to guide the aggression of the beings in their care into positive outcomes.
How a man treats his dogs tells you a lot about how he understands himself and how he understands his relationship to the community. The best possible thing you can say about dog fighters is that, at some level, they see themselves as being in the same boat as the dogs — good only for fighting and fucking and dying when they're no good for either. And if that's the best thing you can say, that's a tragedy.
But here's the truth. Until you fix what is wrong with the people who own and breed pit bulls for fighting, it doesn't matter what you do to the dogs. Ban the dogs, ban guns, ban "bling," ban baggy pants. Ban everything and ban some more.
And we are still going to have a lot of men in our state who are violently disaffected from society.
Are we ever going to start working on that problem? Or do we just consider them to be — well, untrainable monsters?
Comments (39)
Showing 1-39 of 39
I don't know whose dog that is in the picture but it could easily be my dog's sibling.
Have you ever met an owner who was in denial? I have. "No, no, THIS is a Staffordshire Terrier, not a pit bull. Pit Bulls breathe fire right?"
like
dislike
I do believe that pit bulls can be very loving if treated well. My pit bull Taylor has been a wonderful companion to me in my older years and a blessing to have. She is kind and gentle and very loving. Pit bulls are dogs and like any animal, treated with love and care will produce a very loving dog.
Burrito, that's my Sadie Wigglebottom! She rarely pouts like that, but I always laugh so hard when she does.
The funniest thing to me is that I've had people insist she is a boxer. I can say "No, she's a pit bull. No, she's an American Staffordshire. No, she's a scary demon dog who will rip your face off!!!" and they're still like, "No, I know a boxer when I see it." I don't know if they think she's a toy boxer or what.
Pit bulls can be very good pets, if you know what you're getting into and you give them the time and training and positive reinforcement they need. That's true of any dog, but it's crucial with a big dog.
"But when Graves talks about them like they are (monsters), doesn't it kind of make you want one? I mean, just for a second, don't you feel the tug of that fantasy — how it would make you, by association, a bad-ass, if you could own that bad-ass dog?
The important thing, I think, is to recognize that it's there in order to recognize how diatribes like Graves' work. He claims to be writing against the dogs because they're so dangerous, but he's making them sound appealing by making them sound so bad-ass and unique."
No, I do not feel, even just for a second, the "tug of that fantasy" about how owning such a bad-ass dog would by association make me a bad-ass. The same obviously can't be said for you. Apparently you hear the description of a monsterous, killing animal (even if you allegedly disagree with the description) and you think, "Wow. Cool."
And the fact that you think Graves portrayal of them is "making them sound appealing by making them sound so bad-ass and unique" seems to be a good indication of why you own one. You apparently like the fantasy that you're a bad-ass. Maybe that will be a comfort to you if your bad-ass dog mauls someone. Though I suppose your cute little photo of him (even if it does show off his bad-ass chains) is supposed to make us think that's impossible.
Frank,
Reading comprehension: catch the fever. The caption clearly states that dog you speak of is female.
I've been working with these 'bad-ass' animals for many years, and you know what? I DO feel like a bad-ass. Why? Because I've trained and owned some of the smartest, most athletically gifted, attentive and eager to please canines to ever walk the earth. And it's not always an easy job. The pit bull is not for everyone.
The badassery of pit bulls has nothing do with causing harm to others. (You could run someone down with your muscle car, but that would make you a psychopathic killer, not a bad-ass.) And I myself have been mauled by a pit bull. He bit clean through my face and I nearly lost an eye. I don't blame the dog. It's a fucking dog and you can't rehab all of them. I learned alot from that experience and continued to be a advocate. Because I am a bad-ass.
So I'm sorry that you are not a badass, and I'll think of you when I get together with my bad-ass friends at our bad-ass cookouts (really I won't.) It TAKES a badass to properly handle these animals, because they are not for everyone. Fighting a dog is not badass. Mishandling a dog and allowing it to cause harm to a person is not badass. Putting in the time and effort to properly maintain a dog, any dog, is bad-ass.
I totally agree with Graves. At the end of the day, animals are animals. No matter how much you train them or how sweet they can sometimes be.....they are animals. And that animal instinct can kick in at any time. His point is that pit bulls have the ability to kill (and do at times!) - No, it is not their fault they are so strong and have that instinct to grab on with their jaws and not let go. But why would anyone want to risk that happening to their own families, friends, neigbors or other pets? There are so many other breeds out there - that pose a much less risk. I sure can't remember a story of a Golden Retriever or Lab walking down the road and attacking a walker till their death can you?
LHR, the problem with what you're saying is that it's a widely known practice for pounds to mis-identify dogs they're putting down for attacking people as pit bulls so as to not make other breeds harder to adopt out. And it works the other way, too. For fun some time, just look at the puppies the Tennessean features in their adoption program and see how many of those lab mixes don't strike you as not looking very lab-like at all.
So, the chances of you hearing a story about a Golden Retriever or a lab mauling someone are pretty slim, but that's not to say that it doesn't happen. Just say that the chances of you hearing about it are pretty slim. And Goldens used to be considered incredibly good family dogs. But due to poor breeding that focuses more on looks than personality, they are getting a reputation for being bad child-biters.
Frank, yes, please, try harder to miss my point.
You may feel Frank missed the point ... not sure why, but, whatever ... still, he DOES have a point.
You wrote "But when Graves talks about them like they are (monsters), doesn't it kind of make you want one? I mean, just for a second, don't you feel the tug of that fantasy — how it would make you, by association, a bad-ass, if you could own that bad-ass dog?"
My immediate answer to that question is, "No."
Let's take pit bulls out of the discussion and replace "pit bull" with "heffalump" in the referenced article. Regardless of how much truth/untruth is in the article, you assume that everyone would react the same way that you did to a description of a dangerous animal. You assumed that we all would be attracted, however fleetingly, to the idea of owning such a creature. That is not true -- my reaction is, "How awful! Who would ever want to own such a thing?" I have no desire to appear to be bad-ass, either directly or by association with a bad-ass killer heffalump. If you feel that attraction, well, OK, but some of us don't.
I am sure some do remember the SCENE blog several years ago about these vicious creatures, there must have been 200 posts.
There are plenty of links:
In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers:
"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996...
Google and find any number of articles for and against. The Center For Disease Control has a well known article published in 2000; not kind to pit bull owners.
With as many breeds, mixed and otherwise, available why would any reasonable person take the chance of owning a pit bull or other dangerous breed. Maybe the CDC and others are wrong, but this is a chance one does not have to take.
Ugh, the pit bull argument enrages me. I totally agree with you, Betsy. Dogs are a product of their upbringing. I have known many sweet pit bulls that are kind to their owners, other people, and other dogs. The fact that our dog parks in Nashville have a no pit bull rule is outrageous. Dogs a lot larger and stronger are allowed in. When the rule is broken, I always try to get my dog to play with the lonely pit bull at the park so everyone can see that if the owner brought the dog to the dog park, he/she believes the animal won't do any harm.
Part of a reason pit bulls are dumped is because of their reputation. Then no one will adopt them because of their reputation except for people that want to exploit their physical power and intimidate others. It's a cycle... one that can only be broken if respectable animal shelters start accepting pit bulls for outside adoption.
Unfortunately, Betsy, I don't believe most (yes most) pit bull owners are as caring as you and other posters here and actually own pit bulls because of their badass reputation.
Obviously Graves, as well as many others in society, have their mind made up that pit bulls are evil. That is so close minded. Do the research people..ALL of the research. It's about the way they are raised! NOT the breed! GET EDUCATED ON THE MATTER!!
Yes, okay, Emmett, but then that brings us back to the main point of my post, which I am happy to talk about--there is something wrong with people who want to breed and own dogs in order to torture them to death and to use them to torture other animals to death.
What can we do about that?
Because the things we get all hepped up about trying--banning this, banning that, banning the other thing--they don't seem to be working.
Do we have some ideas about how to raise up folks who don't see torturing animals to death as good fun?
I get that it's easier to talk about banning pit bulls, but it misses my main point.
Common sense should rule. Considering the large nunber of serious writings about these animals, their dangerous behavior and the possible genetic causes for such viciousness then there is no reason to own a pit bull. What if your pit bull, or Rottweiler for that matter, did attack, maul or worse, someone? Could you ever forgive yourself, knowing full well many argue these dogs are inherently vicious. And, you are quite familiar with that claim. If you own one you should get rid of it.
john - that's an argument against owning any dog. It's a risk, yes. But a small one. I'd say no more likely then one's child throwing a rock at another's head.
Betsy, just think of it this way. It is just not very smart to own a dog like this. You may be right but what if you are wrong, just once even?
Cars are really dangerous John, what if you hit that old lady crossing the street- JUST ONCE?!
Have you ever seen a Japanese Akita? Now there's a scary dog. Way more dangerous that a pit. The reason pits are promoted for fighting is not their so-called 'genetic' disposition, (It's so cute when people without any science background try to play along) and it's not their so called brute strength (once again, look up the Akita), it's their pain tolerance.
The pit's "gameness" mean that it will continue to do what its master is telling it to do, regardless of pain, until it literally drops dead.
Contrary to popular belief, pits don't love to fight. One thing they DO love to do is pull things. There are weight-pulling contests all over the country.
The pit bull was NOT originally bred for fighting, it was bred for something called "Bull Baiting."
The nickname of this dog during the last century was "Nanny Dog" because they would literally watch over peoples' babies at picnics while they went for a stroll. Remember Little Rascals?
Also, the pit bull was our national mascot in WWI, not the eagle. He was selected to embody stubbornness and loyalty.
I can sit here and shred your argument all day long, John. Why not go piss in someone else's Wheaties?
Well said, JA.
Bad-Ass Betsy, try harder to miss MY point. Or continue to ignore it so you don't have to defend your silly "my pit bull is bad-ass and that makes ME bad-ass!" position, whichever you'd like.
My apologies to your dog for the gender mistake. But I bet that bitch is so bad-ass she doesn't even care.
This is from San Francisco so it must be true:
Carl Friedman, director of San Francisco's Animal Care and Control, said that although he does not want to condemn an entire breed, local and national statistics support taking steps to regulate pit bulls, such as mandatory neutering.
"When you have a mauling where a 12-year-old child is killed and when 50 to 60 percent of our hearings for vicious and dangerous animals are for pit bulls, you don't have to be a brain surgeon to see we have a problem with pit bulls," Friedman said.
Numbers like that can be found in publications from the CDC, AMA and Ameican Academy of Pediatrics. Google it, the numbers are pretty scary.
burrito said, "...the pit bull was our national mascot in WWI..."
Source?
Sergeant Stubby was said to be half English Bulldog and half Pit Bull. Others said full blooded English Bulldog.
The Marines' Devil Dog "Jiggs" was an English Bulldog and retired a Sergeant Major.
Frank, you miss my point--I don't think owning my dog makes me a bad-ass. I know she spends 20 hours a day farting and snoring and unless there's been some change in societal feelings about the toughness of farting and snoring, I know, first hand, that owning her doesn't make me any tougher than I was before she came to live with me.
Here's the thing. I know you know what I'm saying. You're a smart guy. So why do we have to pretend like you're raising some real objection, when, really, you're just trying to show the world how smugly self-righteous you are?
But, anyway, what I'm trying to say is that it is a very human reaction to hear about how "bad or terrible" something is and to think, even briefly, that it would prove something about your worth if you could own and control something "bad or terrible." Writing diatribes full of made-up assertions designed to make pit bulls seems as terrible as possible doesn't universally dissuade people from owning them.
In fact, it makes them more attractive to some people.
As I said in my post.
As I also said in my post, continuing to further the false idea that they are untrainable monsters gives inexperienced owners the idea that they shouldn't bother to train them or to expect anything else out of them but monstrous behavior.
That's clearly false.
But again, I'll just note how interesting it is that everyone wants to talk about dogs and no one wants to talk about the people who breed and own them to torture and kill them.
Is it really easier to believe that everyone who owns a pit bull is a good-hearted person with no ill intentions; they've just been handed a ticking time bomb than it is to believe that there are a lot of jackasses who have something wrong with them and the first clear warning you might get as a society is that they breed and own animals for the express purpose of torturing and killing them?
Why is it easy enough for us to recognize that the kid who stomps a cat in an alley is fucked up and might grow up to kill people, but when it comes to pit bulls, people are invested in it being a problem with the dog?
I find that curious.
Having owned, raised, trained many dogs in my long life, I must agree with some of the negative comments about pit bulls made in the Commercial Appeal. As I agree with some of the comments made here. Dogs are dogs. They are not little humans. They are of different breeds which have different characteristics. Those characteristics are innate, they are not the fault of or the credit of the owners. Perhaps you could blame the breeders, but certainly not the dog owners, who may or may not be competent to deal with the dog they have on their hands. Pit bulls are, in my experience, as loving, as amiable, as trainable as other dogs. They sometimes do not, as strongly as other breeds, bond with humans. They will, generally, have a powerful instinct to fight other dogs. This is innate, this is NOT solely the result of training. And pound for pound, they are about the strongest dogs I have ever encountered. Which makes them extremely difficult for a weak or undominant owner to deal with. I have seen little old eighty pound grandmotherly types being dragged around by pit bulls on leash who would have been totally incapable of stopping that dog from attacking anyone, had it been so inclined.
Read about the attack on the neighbor by the large fighting breed dogs in San Francisco. Those people were nuts who took great pride in the aggressiveness of their animals, as a great many pit bull dog owners do as well. Until then, since we can't put down bad owners, perhaps we should deal firmly with their weapons of choice.
Statistics: in 2009 there were 30 fatalities from dog bites in the USA - from all types of dogs. Compare that to, in 2005, 1,181 women were murdered by an intimate partner. That's an average of three women every day. Of all the women murdered in the U.S., about one-third were killed by an intimate partner. I don't have the statistics for how many children are killed every day by parents but, for children between the age of 5 and 14, murder by a parent (more often the father) is the 3rd leading cause of death in the USA. In 2009 there were 16,204 murders in the USA. Why are people so worried about dogs? There's a much worse monster out there.
Bad-Ass Betsy, here's my pretend, smug, self-righteous point: If you think Graves gruesome description of pit bulls makes them sound appealing and bad-ass, you need to have your damn head examined.
Here's how it is: You love your pit bull. You take care of it and spend massive amounts of time with it loving it and showering it with doggie blessings. Your pit bull is an angel, wouldn't hurt a flea if it bit him/her.
Your neighbor, on the other hand, has nine pit bulls that he keeps on chains and only throws a handful of feed to when they bark loud enough. They wear the grass down and pant in the heat all summer and could be understood for hating people, since a person is what keeps them in such a condition.
Now go back 200 +/- years. What were pits bred for? Great danes are big and don't cause the damage that pit bulls do. Saint Bernards and Mastiffs aren't known for mauling folks. Greyhounds don't go insane and harm people.
I think we should have pit bull licenses, so that wonderful pit bull owners who take care of their dogs well can have them, and the white trash that keep them on chains will sadly miss out.
As the famous dog trainer Barbara Woodhouse liked to say: "There are no bad dogs, only bad owners."
Walkies!!!!
"I think we should have pit bull licenses, so that wonderful pit bull owners who take care of their dogs well can have them, and the white trash that keep them on chains will sadly miss out."
No. The trash should themselves be chained up outside in August for a week.
"Saint Bernards and Mastiffs aren't known for mauling folks."
Huh? The mastiff was bred specifically as a guard dog and to fight other dogs, bears, bulls, etc. They used to be known as savage, slavering beasts. The fact that we now think of them as large family pets results from changes in our thinking about them (and therefore in the way we train them).
Whereas pitbulls used to be considered so child-friendly that one of them still is the logo for Buster Brown shoes. Buster Brown and his dog Tige, an American Pitbull Terrier, were all over the place during my childhood. Again, the way they're trained comes from the way we think about them; a couple of decades ago people thought they looked mean and decided to treat them that way.
And while different breeds of dog once had vastly different temperaments, these days even pure-bred animals are converging in character to a family-pet norm, and mixed-breed dogs are even less unique.
Pit bulls and Rots are involved in more "attacks" because of the types of people who are attracted to them. I've had a pitbull before and she was the most caring and calm dog I've ever had. Yet my mexican thug neighbor when i lived in Cali pitbull almost ripped my throat out when i was 10 yrs old standing on the 8 ft fence and she jumped up and tore the collar off my shirt. It's all about upbringing. German shepherds are involved in more bites than any other dog breed every year, but you don't hear about them being vicious because we have a different perception of them. Like now my siberian husky i have could easily tear my face off if she wanted, but she wont because shes just a big baby because she was raised right and with care.
Forget that I am a proud companion to two shelter dogs that might be commonly known to the public at large as “pit bulls”, for whatever that means. Forget that my husband and I are both college graduates and each have a “white collar” job and do not consider ourselves to be badass, for whatever that means. Forget that we are stepping up to try to help deal with this annihilation of companion animals simply due to overpopulation. Forget that our animal companions are trained, socialized, exercised rigorously, leashed at all times except in our yard with a six-foot, privacy fence, are never out of our sights for even one second around anyone and are proper canine members of society…for whatever that all means.
People judge these dogs using the same ridiculous guidelines that journalists and the media alike all use to write articles about them…anything to “stir up” drama and sensation. The facts are that ANY “large” dog is capable of inflicting the same bite and amount of damage that a “pit bull” does, we just don’t hear about it even nearly as much as we do about pit bulls. Dogs of ALL breeds, sizes and genders bite people…OFTEN. It’s just not shoved down our throats when no one has gone to the hospital for it. Let’s not forget about the recipient of the very first face transplant, in France. Her lab ate her face off! It is a horrible, horrible thing that happened but nonetheless it happened. Did the entire world go about banning labs? No. As another astute reply to the pit bull haters points out, people are WAY more likely to be injured or killed by a member of their own human family than they are a “pit bull” but do we ban other family members? Or how about banning people in general? Of course we don’t. Why? Because that’s ROTFLOL, laughable.
So, who is to blame for any companion animal’s misbehavior? It is solely a human’s fault...EVERY SINGLE TIME! But of course that’s easy to say but WHY is it his/her fault? Whatever animal inflicts damage should likely not even be alive to have done so. THAT is why it is a human’s fault. It’s a fact that a questionable human created the animal and now it and the rest of the world has to suffer for one person’s decision to allow the animal to be born. These animals, any animals, do not choose for themselves to exist. Do you REALLY think that a companion animal WANTS to be born, possibly loved, and then rejected for whatever reason only to end up in a shelter? How about those animals that are abused and tortured or forced to fight? Do you really think that they want to be victims? Do you really think they give a rat’s tail about how “badass” people think they are? They just want to be loved. It’s PEOPLE who bred companion animals with the desire to be loved and then when the animal doesn’t read a human’s mind, follow exactly what humans deem are the “rules” (or sometimes fighting guidelines) and do exactly what a human wants it to, it’s tortured, killed or placed in a shelter. The animal is the real victim here…not the humans. Where’s the justice there? When do people have to pay for the cruelties to animals all over the world? Almost never. And when they do, it’s a meager fine or slap on the wrist.
You want the humans to pay for damage done by their animal companions. Fine, but that is merely one symptom to a worldwide epidemic. Where are the STIFF fines and penalties for all of the negligent people who decided to get two of their animals together because they “like the looks of them” and breed them? Where are the jail sentences for ANY person who allows his/her unneutered animals to roam the planet and create animal overpopulation? Where are all of the journalists, haters and media types when millions of animal companions are left in shelters to die because they got too big, or the family’s kids are allergic, or the animal messes up the house, or lost a dogfight, or the humans are moving, blah, blah, blah [insert stupid reason du jour for giving up on them]? Where is the proper blame for a human who allows an animal, ANY ANIMAL, alone with a child for any period of time? Where is the uproar when a human ties an animal in the yard, who is only crying for attention, and then the animal is too noisy? Or how about when an animal escapes out of its yard because no human is there to watch it? By all means, let’s penalize an ENTIRE breed of ONE type of animal because humans are the idiots who have failed them.
So, you haters out there, instead of pontificating about the evils of animals who are merely doing whatever their humans or society has bred them to do, allowed them to do or didn’t stop them from doing, how about you start thinking about ways to be part of a worldwide solution. How about getting up off of your high horses, your busted-up soapboxes and out of your own egocentric heads and actually HELP with this problem instead of merely whining about the evils of it? But of course you don’t want to do that because that’s not your problem, is it? Of COURSE it is. WE are the reason this is all happening. WE are the ones to blame…ALL of us.
So, get your facts straight and start talking to others about how about how more people should adopt animals and put time into their proper guidance because otherwise, ignorant people will breed them for negative characteristics, how animals should be spayed and neutered so their numbers stop increasing, how animals should be continually and properly exercised or occupied, how animals [like any family member] should be taught rules and boundaries, how humans should get up off their azzes and make time for their animals and not leave them to get bored and develop bad habits, how animals are living creatures not merely possessions that you acquire for status reasons or for monetary gain, and about how animals do not fail us but rather about how WE fail THEM. Stop blaming the dogs and get your butts out there to get PEOPLE to take responsibility for what has happened here! Then and only then will all of this BS cease to exist.
Consider also, this article on the subject.
http://www.petside.com/petsideblog/2008/02…
Kudo's to Barbara Woodhouse and Kosh 111. In my opinion a dog is only as bad and aggressive as it is trained to be. I've known quite a few Pitties and they are very playful and loveable. I am 67 year old semi invalid who owns two delightful doxies (wiener dogs) and yellow lab mix. My doxie , Sophie, is very protective, all 11 pounds of her! She's never attacked anyone but her bark tells them to stay back and she stands by my side or sits in my lap. The other two dogs are very calm and loving with everyone. So can a Pitt Bull be if trained right and shown a lot of love and attention. The problem is not the dog but the owner.
There is TV show on Animal Planet - The Pitt Boss. Shorty and his crew of three are all little people and their job is to find foster for Pitts. You should watch it!
I wonder how many people would change their arguments if we changed 'pit bulls' to 'guns.'
From the perspective of someone who sides more with the rights of individuals and less with the rights of society, I agree with Betsy that it is no one's business what breed of dog she owns as long as she treats it properly and maintains control of it.
I just wonder how many of the people who agree with her about this being an issue of personal responsibility also favor government efforts to regulate or even eliminate things like guns because of the danger they pose to others. One suspects that there is a bit of 'protect my freedom but tell them what to do' going on here.
thank you gimmeabreak!! I couldn't have said it better myself. I notice that most people have STILL missed the point of the article, instead they continue to rant on and on about the breed. So the problem will continue to grow. Ever heard the saying "its just a dumb dog"..... in this instance the problem is the "dumb humans".
So, I take it no one on this board thinks it remotely possible the pit bull could be genetically agressive and dangerous even when raised by kind and loving masters. I have tried to at least get some of you to think about it, but it seems that is not to be.
To John...ANY dog could be "genetically agressive [sic] and dangerous". There are genetically aggressive beagles out there. There are genetically aggressive German Shepherds. Are you going to ban those too? Not ALL pit bulls are genetically aggressive. Not all beagles or German Shepherds are genetically aggressive. Not all people are genetically aggressive. Should we kill all genetically aggressive people?
MY point is that aggressive animals get bred by stupid people and then everyone else has to try to remedy the situation when it turns out badly for the breeders or recipients of the dog...ANY dog. It is HUMAN error and stupidity that has caused ALL of these problems.
In my experience, I do not put my dogs into situations where I think they will be harmed or possibly cause harm. I know everyone SAYS they do this and I know not everyone does that but it's also my point that NO ONE should be allowed to breed or even have ANY animal unless they are prepared to take FULL and complete responsibility. That's where fines and such come in. BUT it is also my point that whatever animal is charged with "aggression" should likely not have been alive to have aggression and that is where whoever allowed the dog to be alive should have FULL responsibility. Now that's not always possible but in the end, it's not the dog's fault.
You can't have it both ways. You can't support a society who has allowed the overbreeding and overpopulation of animals and then get mad at or hold the animals responsible when something adverse happens as a result of someone adopting it from euthanization due to overpopulation.
commentator, are you insane?
"They sometimes do not, as strongly as other breeds, bond with humans."
Pit bulls are the most pathetic, overly sensitive, people-pleasing, attention-whoring, hang-on-your-every-word fuzz buckets on the planet. Every pit bull I've ever met will follow ppl around like it's their mission in life, sticking their noses into everything people are doing, and wail like banshees when they aren't in on the fun. Their requirement for human interaction borders on crippling separation anxiety.
I keep seeing people give the example that you don't hear of Retreivers or Labs attacking people. Anyone remember hearing about that woman in France that received the first face transplant back in 2005 after being mauled by a dog? I'm betting there's alot of people that automatically picture a pit bull because that's how we've been trained by the media. Truth is, that dog was a Lab.
