# Deed not Breed....?



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

I keep hearing this over and over again....and I started to think is this really true.

I was of the mindset not so long ago that any type of regulation on ownership of a dog was an outrage. Having been in dogs my whole life, and recently dogsport for the last 6 years I was threatened that my dogs would one day be effected. I heard and spouted all the slogans. Deed, not the breed. Bad owners make bad dogs. That was until I really looked at that and questioned it. Are these dogs really just puppies with a bad rap? Are they just as safe as any other dog? Going from a guy who owned black labs his whole life to a guy who went to Malinois. I have found those slogans to be down right wrong. I do believe the Malinois has a much higher chance of biting than a lab...It's been bred into them for a hundered of years. Most are safe, But I have seen the ones that have crossed the line. I see this trend to be much higher with a Malinois than with the labs I saw. In fact I have seen probably 5x as many labs as I have seen Mals in my life. I have seen 2 real bites from labs in my whole life. I probably see that every summer with the Malinois. Now I do not think the Pitbull is going to pull that trend as high as the Malinois. Simply because the Malinois has been specifically bred to fight with people. Pitbull, fight with other dogs. But I think whenever breed to extreme...which both dogs have been bred to. Maybe not in the same capacity but they both have. I think you get some dogs that are so extreme, they cross a line. I think that it maybe possible though the Pit was intended to fight other dogs...that drive may cross the line in some dogs. And the dog may not care what it's biting. My bitch Malinois will bite the couch if she gets to excited. She will beat up another dog if she gets to amped. Why would this behavior not be possible in another breed bred to an extreme? I think line really gets crossed when just look at the shear power of the dog...thier is no denying when a pit bites...it's gonna be bad. In that case, it surley is the dog.

Now to the owners. I have a sneaking suspicion that most bites from pitbull, are not from dogs owned by thugs...or animal abusers. I am sure the majority of them are not from bad owners. Just ignorant ones. Everyday people who think that thier pitbull is a big cupcake and they get complacent with the dog and bad things happen. Or the dog simply escapes the house. maybe the dog is a little territorial...it after all is a dog. Or the dog is like my dog and gets excited, his/her little doggie brain just pops...one day this happens after the kids leave the gate open and the dog bites the neighbor lady. 

It seems that anyone who is labeled a bad owner is simply someone whom is not as good as the person judging. I have judged people like that. People I know have good intentions but simply are not as involved as I am. 

I understand that people love this breed. And some I think have a good grasp on what's beautiful about them. Many though, I think are just as crazy as the PETA folks. trying to become self-righteous saviors of a dog that has some pressure being put on it. And they will go as far to try and convince people that the dog is no more dangerous than a lab. 

I do not think anyone is saying all Pits are killers....at least I am not. But what everyone of them does have is the power to do extreme damage.

The CDC claims pits make up about 2% of all reported bites...but almost half of all fatalities. Even if it is the owner was not good pet owner. the story would be much different if those people owned let's say....Beagles. 

I agree it maybe the Owners....But it is the dog also. The dog has a set of very special attributes that make it powerful. 

Now I do not agree with breed bans...That's not the answer. I think Education is one big thing in the key to prevention. Having a mandatory powerful breed class for those of us who own these dogs. And now becoming licesened to have them. Because now you have people whom have been told, made aware and can know longer plead ignorance. They are now informed and can be held responsible. The consequences for not having your licesnse....make it stiff. I would happily oblige. I do not think that muzzles, and that jazz are going to fix anything. I think most of these bites are most likely happening because someone obtained a dog and took it's power for granted. I know many will argue this will just put the burden on responsible dog owners...I do not think that's true. I think many people whom think they are responsible dogs owners are not as responsible as they think. 

Go to a dog trial...these are people whom are enthrawled in the dog world. In one day I bet you see at least 2 major infractions of common sense...and a dozen small ones with the way they handle thier dogs.

Again. I fear if we do not offer an alternative to breed bans....we will become victim to them.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

*Now to the owners. I have a sneaking suspicion that most bites from pitbull, are not from dogs owned by thugs...or animal abusers. I am sure the majority of them are not from bad owners. Just ignorant ones...*

James I wouldn't want any part of that bet. Accidents listed as bites must be reported when someone goes to the hospital. If the dog gets a person or another dog proof of rabies shots and a license are but a few of the things that happen. The the animal control folks need to see kennel conditions and the list grows. 

Breed not deed is an important statement. Some would like to say that attack dogs, German Shepherds, are bad. Pit Bulls are bad. Rottweilers are very bad. And dog owners never knew their dog was like "that." I still feel it is the deed and at times the owner and not the dog. I see the dog as being a "product" of poor ownership. Herding dogs have high prey. Dogs that are more defensive stand an fight. Dogs with genetic issue are walking time bombs.

If owners fail to train, like parents who fail to be responsible for the upbringing of their children, whose at fault? Folks will make claims against any breed, like GSDs being man killers or attack dogs. Far from the truth. Education IS important!


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

Maybe we can get some money for education through the stimules bill. About 52 mil would do it.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Owners don't ALWAYS have a whole lot to do with it. 

I was attacked and bitten by an APBT about 3 weeks ago. The first bite was unprovoked. The dog was leashed and sitting at heel with the owner. The dog's action was triggered by me *imitating her body lanugage* while explaining to the owner that she looked like she was about to bite me.

The owners are involved in the local shelter. Nice house in a good neighborhood. Crate trained dogs. Did health testing at the vet and was referred to me for training.

But I still know it is the individual dog, rather than the breed, because of my large experience in the breed, and with my expereince in working with aggressive dogs.

Note to self: Bad owners usually make bad dogs. But good owners can end up with bad dogs too.


----------



## Kay Halvorson (Jan 22, 2009)

I have had three pitbulls. Chalice was a yong pup dumped at a vet hospital. She had issues from the get go. I worked with her. I took her out in public but she thought every person was going to do harm. I had her in 3 different obediece classes this didn't help either. I had to put my grl down before something terrible happened. I wasn't going to let her be a BAD PITBULL headline. Mikado was a pound puppy. He had his CGC wasa registred theraphy dog. He loved all people. He was agreat dog. Unfortunatly he had kidney failure after a long list of health ssues. He was a great APBT and a wonderful ambassador to the breed.

I know have Vendetta. So far the pup is great. She loves going out and meeting people. She is in a puppy class she is learning manners. I hope that everything continues going well. 

It isn't always the dog it isn't always the owner. Some people shouldn't have a certain breed. education is the key.


----------



## kristin tresidder (Oct 23, 2008)

James Downey said:


> Many though, I think are just as crazy as the PETA folks. trying to become self-righteous saviors of a dog that has some pressure being put on it. And they will go as far to try and convince people that the dog is no more dangerous than a lab.


dangerous is a tricky word because it's all about context. dangerous to what? my stafs are no more dangerous to people than my couch is, let alone a 'lab.' my stafs are quite dangerous to labs though. my dutchie poses no danger to any lab that doesn't try to dominate her, but could be quite dangerous to people if i told her to be. so, call me self-righteous if you will, but i think you're dead wrong in that statement. 



James Downey said:


> Now I do not agree with breed bans...That's not the answer. I think Education is one big thing in the key to prevention. Having a mandatory powerful breed class for those of us who own these dogs. And now becoming licesened to have them. Because now you have people whom have been told, made aware and can know longer plead ignorance. They are now informed and can be held responsible. The consequences for not having your licesnse....make it stiff. I would happily oblige. I do not think that muzzles, and that jazz are going to fix anything. I think most of these bites are most likely happening because someone obtained a dog and took it's power for granted. I know many will argue this will just put the burden on responsible dog owners...I do not think that's true. I think many people whom think they are responsible dogs owners are not as responsible as they think.


i do not think mandatory classes for those who have never done anything wrong are called for. it is always people responsible when their dog bites, because no dog "just snaps" and goes on a killing spree - unless it's rabid. there are always "warnings," or "signs" ahead of time. a nasty dog is a nasty dog. however, i could be on board with mandated education & microchipping etc for those whose dogs have actually bitten someone. if there has been no crime, there should be no penalty. 

also - almost every city/county already has mandatory liscencing for dogs of all breeds.


----------



## Polliana Oliveira (Jan 8, 2009)

What I don't understand is, when a little child or a totally innocent person minding their own business gets killed by a pit bull how in your right mind can you empathize with the pit bull? 
"poor pit bull poor pit bull, its going to be put down. its not it's fault." It's not " Poor child bless his/her little soul, how sad." Many pit bull owners/lovers need to get their values straight.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

kristin tresidder said:


> dangerous is a tricky word because it's all about context. dangerous to what? my stafs are no more dangerous to people than my couch is, let alone a 'lab.' my stafs are quite dangerous to labs though. my dutchie poses no danger to any lab that doesn't try to dominate her, but could be quite dangerous to people if i told her to be. so, call me self-righteous if you will, but i think you're dead wrong in that statement.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Were not talking about your staf...were talking about the breed. So, is the breed of pitbulls a safe dog. 

And the classes, are not punishment. they are an alternative to breed bans. 

And i do not disagree that there are not warning signs before agression....but I would believe some owners may not be as intune with a dog as you maybe and miss the signs. Maybe thier love for the dog has the denying the truth.


----------



## kristin tresidder (Oct 23, 2008)

James Downey said:


> Were not talking about your staf...were talking about the breed. So, is the breed of pitbulls a safe dog.



well, i have a bunch of them and have trained/housed/shown many more of them over the years, so it's not just my 'one staf.' i've spent alot of time with pitbulls/stafs from all different walks of life and schools of breeding - from AKC show dogs, to backyard fighting dogs, to real deal game dogs, to UKC show dogs, to weightpull dogs, to BYB bred fat happy pets over the last 10 years. i've met a few that made my hair stand up on the back of my neck - but only a few in all the years that i've sought them out. i will say 'yes' overall, the pitbull/staf is a "safe" breed with people. but again, "safe" is a tricky word - safe in regard to what? they're not "safe" for other dogs as a breed. if you mean, are they unlikely to display aggression towards people as a breed - then my answer is still yes. if your definition of safe = no member of the breed will ever bite anyone, then i would counter that there is no safe breed, period.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Polliana Oliveira said:


> What I don't understand is, when a little child or a totally innocent person minding their own business gets killed by a pit bull how in your right mind can you empathize with the pit bull?
> "poor pit bull poor pit bull, its going to be put down. its not it's fault." It's not " Poor child bless his/her little soul, how sad." Many pit bull owners/lovers need to get their values straight.


Hmmm...

Funny how it isn't usually the case when the details of the case are discovered. There was a pit bite here that nearly spawned BSL. The woman had been taunting the dog over the fence for months. It was never verified whether the woman's injury was caused by a tooth or a claw.

Another local case involved an unsupervised visiting child in the resident dog's house. I am ANGERED by the adult's lack of responsibility that results in an injured child and a dead dog. This was one of the transient family, low-income, low-education type situations.

Another local case was reported on TV as 3 pit bulls biting 2 people. The police report differs - there were 3 loose pits. A cocker spaniel slipped out of the dog. Dog fight ensued between 1 pit and the cocker. A mother and daughter (the cocker's owners) intervened. The mother was bitten by the cocker spaniel (her own dog). One of the pits was shot on site and left to die, the other two were caught and euthanized. It was not the first time the pits had gotten loose.

I'm a mom of a 2-year-old. I'll have a dead dog before I'll have a scratched baby. If there is ever situation where I have to leave the room and there is another person supervising, the dog is on leash and the person is instructed to kill the dog if need be. Maybe this shows the depths of my paranoia after a few years around aggressive dogs - because I'm talking about a CGC, service dog-trained, public access-trained, toddler-proofed, bubble-trained dog with a good temperament. This is the dog and babby together under my supervision: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiDHCUKJEfI

Ya'know what - I'm afraid of dogs! :lol: (Really, I am)


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

James Downey said:


> Were not talking about your staf...were talking about the breed. So, is the breed of pitbulls a safe dog.


There is no safe breed. Every dog has the propensity to bite, which cannot be removed. There are human fatalities attributed to Toy breed dogs. It think that alone says enough.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Anne great video, looks like the dog is more interested in the milk spill than the kiddo. Try useig the Playtex cups with the stopper inside. At least until your little one is aware enough to keep his cup upright. Trust me I run a spotless daycare, I like my furniture clean. LOL 

So this bubble thing is just your kid is in a bubble and the dog shouldn't crowd or burst that bubble?


----------



## Alex Corral (Jul 10, 2007)

I don't think any kind of penalties for breeds will do any good whatsoever. Why should the breed be penalized?? What did they do other than be whelped to be sold, and being choosen to be taken home. Sometimes by good people, sometimes by bad people. 

Penalties for people is where things will change. And enforcement of these penalties is where things will change. If people know that if their dog bites someone without a justified reason (which is a whole other topic), they can possibly lose the right to own another dog for x amount of years, you will be more careful of how your dog behaves. And it should be equal all accross the board. Just because a little dog doesn't do as much damage, is it still ok to let it bite someone? Absolutely not.


----------



## Alex Corral (Jul 10, 2007)

Anne Vaini said:


> I'm a mom of a 2-year-old. I'll have a dead dog before I'll have a scratched baby. If there is ever situation where I have to leave the room and there is another person supervising, the dog is on leash and the person is instructed to kill the dog if need be. Maybe this shows the depths of my paranoia after a few years around aggressive dogs - because I'm talking about a CGC, service dog-trained, public access-trained, toddler-proofed, bubble-trained dog with a good temperament. This is the dog and babby together under my supervision: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiDHCUKJEfI
> 
> Ya'know what - I'm afraid of dogs! :lol: (Really, I am)


I cannot agree with Anne more. I also have a 6 mo old baby boy, his crib is in our room. My Boxer sleeps on her dog bed in our room. Every morning when I leave the room, the dog leaves with me. If I take a shower, the dog is escorted out of the room. No matter how much a PITA it is to make her get up, or how lazy I'm feeling to walk her out the room, or how big a hurry I'm in. NO EXCEPTIONS. My Boxer has a great temperament, a CGC, a BH, and hopefully her CD and TDI soon, but I would never put her or my son in a situation where things could go wrong. If something were to ever happen, the only person responsible would be me and my wife.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Michelle Kehoe said:


> Anne great video, looks like the dog is more interested in the milk spill than the kiddo. Try useig the Playtex cups with the stopper inside. At least until your little one is aware enough to keep his cup upright. Trust me I run a spotless daycare, I like my furniture clean. LOL
> 
> So this bubble thing is just your kid is in a bubble and the dog shouldn't crowd or burst that bubble?


Yup, basically. There is a bubble of space 18"-24" around a baby that the dog can not move into, but the dog must accept the child coming into the dog's space.

I started this training when she was about 4 months old. This is the only thing that trained with compulsion - and hard compulsion too! I started out with doing attention / recall training - recalling her whenever she got too close. I added the negative marker, then enforced it with whatever was handy. One memorable time I beaned her on the top of her head - I think with a remote. I felt rotten, but I have never had to use compulsion on this behavior since. That is the object of compulsion - to never have to use it again.

He doesn't get to carry around a cup usually, I was using it as a training distraction because I know the dog is VERY food-motivated.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Alex Corral said:


> I cannot agree with Anne more. I also have a 6 mo old baby boy, his crib is in our room. My Boxer sleeps on her dog bed in our room. Every morning when I leave the room, the dog leaves with me. If I take a shower, the dog is escorted out of the room. No matter how much a PITA it is to make her get up, or how lazy I'm feeling to walk her out the room, or how big a hurry I'm in. NO EXCEPTIONS. My Boxer has a great temperament, a CGC, a BH, and hopefully her CD and TDI soon, but I would never put her or my son in a situation where things could go wrong. If something were to ever happen, the only person responsible would be me and my wife.


Alex,

I am more paranoid than you! There are a number of infant fatalities from a dog jumping into a crib. Interestingly, these mostly APBT's. (Also interesting is APBT-caused fatalities on children under 1 year is much lower than some other breeds, and much lower than other age groups.)

At that age, I crated the dog (behind a closed door too!) and co-slept with my baby.


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

The biggest issue I see with BSL is that once they gather momentum and get their foot in the door it won’t stop with whatever breed they are targeting, de jour. All of this mandatory spay/neuter, BSL, breeding restrictions and bans fall under the guise of PETA’s mantra of a “No Birth Nation” What a better way to accomplish this that MSN and one breed at a time? 
From PETA’s website:

_Make America a ‘No-Birth’ Nation 
We Can Stop the Killing by Making America a 'No-Birth' Nation 
We can save animals and end these deaths by working to make America a "no-birth" nation today. The only way to stop the suffering of the innocent victims of companion animal overpopulation is to prevent their births through sterilization efforts. The United States will never be a "no-kill" nation unless it becomes a no-birth nation. Why? Every last one of the millions of deaths of animals at shelters and in the streets, alleyways, fields, basements, and back yards that occur every year could be prevented through spaying and neutering. Every single stray cat, every neglected dog, every rabbit kept in a hutch in a drafty garage—came from an animal who wasn't spayed or neutered. Animals must be killed and euthanized by the millions every year because prospective guardians choose to purchase animals from pet shops and breeders and still don't sterilize their dogs and cats.
_ 

This moral righteousness is destructive and divides us all. And you can bet your rear end this is exactly what “they” (the AR-istas) are counting on. How many dog trainer’s can agree on one subject?  Yes, there are problem dog owners and breeds. But these should be judged on a case by case basis, not by enacting more hysterical laws and regulations that are not enforceable. It’s like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound. If a dog (note I didn’t say breed) is dangerous and/or vicious it should be destroyed. Period! One sensational news story and the public outcry dictates a lynch mob mentality. When are people going to stop drinking the Cool-aid and *think* for themselves? 

Such laws are going to punish responsible dog owners…making them the ones to pay for those who will not step up and take responsibility. These are crimes looking for an owner! Until I prove myself guility of something other than being a responsibile dog owner I'm NOT owning anyone else's stupidity! 

H$U$/PETA organizations, neither of which run shelters or rescue dogs , are buying influence in the political arena. In California we, as a grass roots of everyday dog owners, defeated AB 1634 which had BIG money backers !! How? By being outraged enough to say ’enough is enough’. It can be done but it needs the voice of every dog owner/trainer standing up against these types of laws Not a moral superiority that thinks “not my breed”, I can breed dogs because I do the right things, I can get breeding permits, I train/title my dog, etc. The momentum of hysteria/sympathetic driven legislation is difficult to reign in, leaving you scratching your head and wondering “who let the dogs out”. ;-)


----------



## Alex Corral (Jul 10, 2007)

Anne Vaini said:


> Alex,
> 
> I am more paranoid than you! There are a number of infant fatalities from a dog jumping into a crib. Interestingly, these mostly APBT's. (Also interesting is APBT-caused fatalities on children under 1 year is much lower than some other breeds, and much lower than other age groups.)
> 
> At that age, I crated the dog (behind a closed door too!) and co-slept with my baby.


Our son usually co-sleeps with us. He is only in his crib when he is by himself. That is intersting though Anne. Thanks for the info!


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Polliana Oliveira said:


> What I don't understand is, when a little child or a totally innocent person minding their own business gets killed by a pit bull how in your right mind can you empathize with the pit bull?
> "poor pit bull poor pit bull, its going to be put down. its not it's fault." It's not " Poor child bless his/her little soul, how sad." Many pit bull owners/lovers need to get their values straight.


I have never, ever heard this attitude amongst dog savvy people. It's always WHERE WERE THE PARENTS? The dog is not a morally culpable agent. I do feel bad for the dog because it is not their "fault" as they don't have a moral dilemma with acting on instinct or within the environmental sphere they were raised in. It all goes back to the human, unless it is an aberrant medical issue. They were either 1) not trained/socialized correctly or 2) they should never have bred in the first place to create a weak/nervy/fearful temperament. But of course I feel badly for the child as well, as it's the child and dog who suffers.

I don't have an issue with labs or goldens, but those that are in the know about the breed are well aware that because of their over popularity within the last 20 years, they are NOT as universally bombproof as they used to be. I was at the shelter last week meeting with a potential adopter for my foster and as I was talking with the foster coordinator, they walked a lab/golden mix out back to be PTS because of aggression behavior issues. This maintains a list of other dogs that were (reported) to bite or kill humans in the media:

http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Articles/OtherBreedBites/AllDogsBite.htm

Every dog must be treated as individuals. I have more experience with Rotties than pit bulls as I have fostered several purebreds and about half a dozen mixes plus a mix and a purebred I own, but same sort of deal. "My" Rottweiler (still haven't decided 100% that we're going to keep her, we'll see how she does in the nursing home) is probably the least likely to bite out of any of my dogs. She's got a super mild, tolerant temperament. I won't ever get complacent with her, but that's not because she's a Rottweiler, that's because she's an animal and animals by their nature can and will be unpredictable. And like Anne said, just like humans, there are always going to be the case where everything was done as correctly as possible, but the dog, whether it is poor breeding or poor early socialization, is just not going to be safe in society. While your larger dogs can do more damage than smaller dogs just in the way an SUV is going to be more dangerous in a wreck than a little Hundai, even small dogs and puppies can kill. 

http://www.igorilla.com/gorilla/animal/2001/pomeranian.html
http://www.heraldtribune.com/articl...55/BREAKING&title=Labrador_puppy_kills_infant

Anyways, I don't think pit bulls are right for all people any more than Malinois, Jack Russells, Chihuahuas, etc are right for all people. Labs and goldens certainly aren't right for everyone. Some "owners" would probably neglect and undersocialize a pet rock, let alone a dog. :roll:


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Putting the Pit Bull down won't solve the problem of dog bites. How? Can someone tell me what would happen if the Pit Bull were eliminated completely? No more bites???

About 3-4 years ago, 2 Pit Bulls got out of their "detention unit", i.e. cooped up in a flat for days in this country having been imported by someone who had no idea of dogs and attacked a 7-year old Turkish boy who, in panic, raised his arms and screamed. He died of the injuries.

This tragic happening "woke up" politicians, animal welfare, etc. and since then there have been attempts to make the general public feel safe by bringing out this and that law, all to no reall effect.

Sickening for me was to hear how many dog owners, sport and pet, insisted that their dogs would not have killed the child, if they had been let loose. In other words, only something as "bad" as a Pit Bull would do it.
I've only had good experiences with Pit Bulls.

I wouldn't guarantee that if my two GSDS were let loose on a field and a child started screaming in the distance, that these would, at the best, ignore the child, or at the worst, charge over to it and injure it. Maybe they wouldn't but I couldn't guarantee it.

Dog ownership will always bring risks with it. But we can reduce such risks by keeping our dogs under control.


----------



## Courtney Guthrie (Oct 30, 2007)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> I have never, ever heard this attitude amongst dog savvy people. It's always WHERE WERE THE PARENTS? The dog is not a morally culpable agent. I do feel bad for the dog because it is not their "fault" as they don't have a moral dilemma with acting on instinct or within the environmental sphere they were raised in. It all goes back to the human, unless it is an aberrant medical issue. They were either 1) not trained/socialized correctly or 2) they should never have bred in the first place to create a weak/nervy/fearful temperament. But of course I feel badly for the child as well, as it's the child and dog who suffers.
> 
> I don't have an issue with labs or goldens, but those that are in the know about the breed are well aware that because of their over popularity within the last 20 years, they are NOT as universally bombproof as they used to be. I was at the shelter last week meeting with a potential adopter for my foster and as I was talking with the foster coordinator, they walked a lab/golden mix out back to be PTS because of aggression behavior issues. This maintains a list of other dogs that were (reported) to bite or kill humans in the media:
> 
> ...


Well put Maren. 

I have to add that 

IF you are a first time owner the APBT or AST is more than likely NOT for you. 
IF you rent, the APBT/AST is MORE than likely NOT for you. 
IF you have no idea what BSL stands for...The APBT/AST is NOT for you.
IF you can NOT get the dog to OB classes or something active the APBT/AST is MORE than Likely NOT for you. 
IF you want a "Macho" dog to support your non-existent balls the APBT/AST is NOT for you. 
IF you can NOT handle being called names JUST because you own such a horrid animal then the APBT/AST is NOT for you. 


This list could go one forever and ever. I was NOT a first time dog owner when I got Red(I grew up around Rotties and owned a GSD prior as well as having my wolf hybrid.) BUT she made me feel in a LOT of ways that I was a first time owner. She has taught me more than I could ever teach her and I appreciate her for that. 

Society has to face that BAD PEOPLE got ahold of these dogs and used their intense loyalty and drive to create Human Agressive monsters. It was NOT the breed. It was the people. Now, we have to try and defend our breed because people are too ignorant to do a little research and find that this is the ONLY BREED EVER to be bred for their INTENSE FRIENDLINESS TOWARDS PEOPLE and that Dog aggression does NOT mean that they are human aggressive. In fact the old timers culled heavily on the human aggressive pups as they needed to be able to seperate the dogs without getting torn up. Nowadays since the punks got them, they are breeding them to be aggressive towards people. That goes against everything in the breed and thus you get some genetically screwed up dogs. BUT that said.....show me a breed that doesn't HAVE genetically screwed up dogs somewhere in it. 

It is NOT the breed persay, it is the people breeding "bad" dogs. 

BSL will NOT solve anything except that the Responsible owners won't own them, only the irresponsible ones that could give 2 shits less about them. 

Courtney


----------



## Polliana Oliveira (Jan 8, 2009)

I see I'm being miss understood. I am saying people are more interested in the dog then human life. If i owned a pit (or any dog) and it attacked my child or someone else's I would not have to worry about it being put down because it would already be dead. If my neighbor said her pit killed her child I would not be empathizing for the dog I would be crying for the child. I love dogs and maybe I'm not as dog savvy as others on this site, but I know who comes first in my mind


----------



## Courtney Guthrie (Oct 30, 2007)

You keep talking about Pit Bulls biting kids and babies. You do realize that these BITES are USAULLY COMPLETELY the FAULT OF THE PARENT AND OWNER of the DOG? 

It's a sad thing for the child and a sad thing for the dog as they are the innocents in it all. BUT the parents/owners are the ones that should be paying with their lives NOT the dog(in most cases not all.) 

That's MY opinion. I can say that my dog would be dead if she bit a CHILD. 

Courtney


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Polliana Oliveira said:


> I see I'm being miss understood. I am saying people are more interested in the dog then human life. If i owned a pit (or any dog) and it attacked my child or someone else's I would not have to worry about it being put down because it would already be dead. If my neighbor said her pit killed her child I would not be empathizing for the dog I would be crying for the child. I love dogs and maybe I'm not as dog savvy as others on this site, but I know who comes first in my mind


That's like punishing the gun for the gun user's actions. :-k Now, I'm not saying that dogs that kill or badly injure humans shouldn't be put down, but the dog doesn't decide right from wrong. I would be empathizing for both, because something terribly wrong must have happened. It's a tragedy on both sides and I don't hold animal life above those of humans. Well, maybe a select few humans. :roll:


----------



## Chris Holderman (Nov 12, 2008)

how many trys for you to find the true APBT?
Pet Pitbull - Find the Pit Bull


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Chris Holderman said:


>


If I remember correctly toilets and houseplants each kill more people per year than pit bulls.


----------



## Courtney Guthrie (Oct 30, 2007)

I've heard that as well Anne. 

I agree with Maren. If someone were to get in an DUI accident and kill someone, would you blow their car up or would it be their fault??? The way you are saying it, it would be the car's fault. 

Courtney


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> That's like punishing the gun for the gun user's actions. :-k ../quote]
> 
> And then the tree huggers want to restrict K-9 ownership and blame the breed. Some want to blame alcohol makers for DUIs. Others want the gun makers thrown in jail...
> 
> IF a dog bites someone and is to be put down, and IF that dog were registered with say the AKC, would they also bring a law suit against the AKC stating this dog and this registry were to blame? Would the city, state, or county that registers and issues a dog license have to share the "blame?" :-k ](*,)


----------



## Polliana Oliveira (Jan 8, 2009)

ok ok I'll shut up. you guys make entirely too good of points for me to keep up!


----------



## Amber Gentry (Dec 15, 2008)

> Now I do not agree with breed bans...That's not the answer. I think Education is one big thing in the key to prevention. Having a mandatory powerful breed class for those of us who own these dogs. And now becoming licesened to have them. Because now you have people whom have been told, made aware and can know longer plead ignorance. They are now informed and can be held responsible. The consequences for not having your licesnse....make it stiff. I would happily oblige. I do not think that muzzles, and that jazz are going to fix anything. I think most of these bites are most likely happening because someone obtained a dog and took it's power for granted. I know many will argue this will just put the burden on responsible dog owners...I do not think that's true. I think many people whom think they are responsible dogs owners are not as responsible as they think.


 I really don't think classes would work. Sometimes you just can't fix stupid. I helped out on the range for a place that taught concealed carry classes, the ones you gotta take to get your license... you would be amazed at how many idiots injured themselves with their own guns, it was an everyday routine. And they still let all those dimwits pass.

I have large powerful dogs, I don't want to go to a class or have to get a license/permit. I am a bit of an extremist sometimes, but I don't think I should even be required to have a permit for my gun, much less my dog. Gun control doesn't work, been proven. I don't think stupid dog owner control will either.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Polliana Oliveira said:


> ok ok I'll shut up. you guys make entirely too good of points for me to keep up!


No worries, Polliana!  It's easy to start thinking like that, especially if you get around God awful websites like dogsbite.org or whatever (who censor all comments to their blog), but the thing to remember is that the dog is not a morally culpable agent. It's just acting by instinct within the paradigms it was raised with. The owner however is a morally culpable agent and I don't think anyone would advocate strict enforcement and punishment for owners of proven dangerous dogs.


----------



## Mo Earle (Mar 1, 2008)

_"I really don't think classes would work."

_I 100% agree- even if they were mandatory-only responsible owners would go...so the problem people would STILL be creating the problem- and who is to say, the owner that does attend the mandatory class would comprehended anything??? 

I do think it* is the Deed and not the Breed*- I have seen some nasty chihuahuas and yorkies..they just can't do the damage,so they are laughed at-and the owners encourage their bad disposition by just picking them up....the bigger breeds are more powerful, do more damage-but all dogs have the propensity to bite. It simply comes back to the owners.
I have accepted some liability by having dogs I allow to participate in bite work-but I also take the responsibility of fencing my yard, having toppers on my kennels, teaching obedience, and being responsible when they are out of their kennel area- etc
(although I feel the dogs I have spent training for bite work, wether sport or ppd, I feel they are more predictable than the dogs that are not trained for bite work-but that is a whole other discussion)
Besides putting down one of my dogs if they hurt a child, I would have to look at myself-and see what I did wrong to contribute to this . good discussion.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> The owner however is a morally culpable agent and I don't think anyone would advocate strict enforcement and punishment for owners of proven dangerous dogs.


Sorry, should have read: would NOT advocate strict enforcement and punishment...


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

One of my daughters has owned a Rotty, a Pit and a Chi dog.
Guess which is the only one to have bitten a kid. 
Not very hard is it!? :grin:


----------



## Alex Corral (Jul 10, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> One of my daughters has owned a Rotty, a Pit and a Chi dog.
> Guess which is the only one to have bitten a kid.
> Not very hard is it!? :grin:


For Thanksgiving last year, I had my siblings over - and all their dogs. My Boxer, a Pit-mix, Rottie and English Bulldog, and a Chi. All the dogs get along well and were able to be together in the patio room except for one, which was a nasty lil DA POS and had to be crated from the rest. Guess which one too.... :twisted:


----------



## brad robert (Nov 26, 2008)

Chris Holderman said:


> how many trys for you to find the true APBT?
> Pet Pitbull - Find the Pit Bull


More people need to see that add to put it into perspective


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Well either Chevys or Fords are responsible for more accidents than any other manufactured car....I say let em go under. Probably all driven by bad drivers! No wait! one ran a stop sign, the other was totally innocent.

Since people attack and kill people....we should all be banned from existence. Yes, even the innocent ones just in case they may lose it some day. 

A gun is used in a crime....ban them all! Is it the gun or the person with the gun at fault?

There are an enormous number of dogs in the world. On a percentage basis, how many dogs bite people? I believe most fatalities by dogs are, by a great margin, done by multiple dogs. Kind of a gang mentality in people.
What are the odds you are going to be bitten by a dog, on any given day. It is probably less than anyone getting in a car and being involved in an accident but I don't see anyone not wanting to drive. No matter how unfortunate, shit happens every day and there is no way of controlling it. It is called life. I am done.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

You guys make some very convincing and valid points. And I am in agreement, and researched the stats posted and found them to be accurate. So, I am a believer. And I do believe there is a problem that is exgerrated by media and other sources. 

But....even those these stats and rationale make sense. Why are they still falling on deaf ears. And the tactic of defending breeds that are promoted as dangerous is not really working. So do we keep on the same road, and keep challenging the legislation put before us. Or do we come up with a less conflictive plan?


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Part of the problem is that your average person, who may not even care much for dogs, sees pit bulls being chained or dumped in a backyard and barking threateningly because it is never interacted with or being walked sometimes on chains by people who dress, act, and talk trashy. White trash, black trash, Hispanic trash, doesn't matter. It's a status symbol. They just don't see the service pit bulls or the therapy pit bulls or narcotics detection pit bulls or even just the well trained, loving pet pit bulls (or Rottweilers or Dobermans or whatever). They just see out of control, poorly mannered dogs with no training that intentionally or unintentionally intimidate people, who then read the headlines and think, "My God, these animals are like walking weapons! Ban them, because we don't want _people like that_ around here!" 

Portrayal in the news media is bad, but the recent blockbusters don't help either. There's a pit bull who goes after the protagonist in No Country For Old Men (which I don't believe was like that in the book and using pit bulls to guard drug money was not correct for the time period). There's multiple Rottweilers who go after Batman in The Dark Knight. That's what they're up against. I think the good work that the groups like Bad Rap have done with the Vick dogs has done wonders. But just your average suburban household with a well behaved dog is just not as sexy, and somehow a pit bull who chases chickens makes national news when a mixed breed dog killing a child fades within weeks.

My biggest problem with pit bull owners is that they are their own worst enemy sometimes. My parents are from Omaha, so I was watching the BSL issue introduced with much interest. They finally decide that all pit bulls have to be muzzled in public and be walked with at least two forms of restraint (like a collar plus a harness). And what happens? There's yet another attack by some clueless idiot. It's like, HELLO, get your animals under control, for God's sake! ](*,) The responsible owners need to step up, get their dogs the CGC, TT, whatever, and have their dogs being well behaved and friendly and UNDER CONTROL in public. Not bringing them to dog parks where they'll get into fights, not letting them roam around, not letting them be out of control in public. Pit bull and Rottweiler owners are held to a higher standard. Fair? No. Realistic? Yes. If people can't handle that, perhaps they should switch to another breed where it's cute and socially acceptable for the dog to be out of control. This is a PDF put out by A Rotta Love Rottweiler and pit bull rescue, which I found most helpful:

http://www.arottalove.org/docs/bsl_communication_tips.pdf


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Don Turnipseed said:


> On a percentage basis, how many dogs bite people? I believe most fatalities by dogs are, by a great margin, done by multiple dogs.


This is not right. Check out the book "Fatal Dog Attacks" for the statistics *and the stories* on this. The VAST majority of human fatalities cause by dog attacks are single dogs, and overwhelmingly are dogs that are either a family/resident dog or a neighbor's dog (dogs that are fmailiar with the victim).


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> This is a PDF put out by A Rotta Love Rottweiler and pit bull rescue, which I found most helpful:
> 
> http://www.arottalove.org/docs/bsl_communication_tips.pdf


I love A Rotta Love. They're the BEST!


----------



## Alex Corral (Jul 10, 2007)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> My biggest problem with pit bull owners is that they are their own worst enemy sometimes.


This is so true. So many times, when you hear many PB or similar owners, they speak the way they are stereotyped, or have named their dog a controversial name. A few mos ago, at a family party, my 16 yr old cousin walked in with a 8 week old PB pup. He named the pup _Yayo_ ](*,). I wanted to jump out of my skin. I wanted to go off on why that was so wrong, but I don't see him often and he would've just thought I was an A-hole. Instead I told him to start training him as young as possible and to call me if he ever needed help. Never heard from him.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

James Downey said:


> But....even those these stats and rationale make sense. Why are they still falling on deaf ears. And the tactic of defending breeds that are promoted as dangerous is not really working. So do we keep on the same road, and keep challenging the legislation put before us. Or do we come up with a less conflictive plan?


 James deafness has a DIRECT relationship with seeing. I'm not listening because my mind is made up, and I'm not going to see the facts or position. If you look for something hard enough, you will find it. If the facts and figures are mixed "just right," you can make a case for or against anything. 

Some breeds are more prone for certain behaviors, like dog aggression. If you are armed with that knowledge, how can you have failure IF you are a responsible owner? Notice I have said RESPONSIBLE owner. Too often dog behaviors or misbehaviors are from owners who just don't care. Doesn't matter the venue, it's all about ME!

Until folks stick together, showcase working dogs in positive and meaningful lights, the PETA peeps and others will use it for their own"good." BSL is just the tip of the issue when city and state officials "see" the evil in a four-legged critter...with bite training.

Fail to be vocal, fail your dog, any breed!!!​


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

There are breed bans in quite a few countries in Europe. GB, Germany, etc. Some counties here have their separate bans. Put a breed on a list and the list can grow and grow.

In actual fact, there should be no more dog bites in those countries but is it so??

Statistics show a pretty unreal picture and cannot be trusted in my mind.

James, you say "The tactic of defending breeds promoted as dangerous is not really working"..............

The tactic of banning breeds is not really working either.

Howard, well put. 

If you know your dog has "potential" to be dangerous, you keep it under control. And let's face it, what dog hasn't, more or less? Pity we can't ban those dog owners who think, whatever the breed, "he wouldn't harm a soul". I've never thought this about any of my dogs and I never will, not until the last breath of life has left them.


----------



## Mike Jones (Jan 22, 2009)

Dogs and humans need proper training in order to understand proper behavior. We force our children to school but we don't force dog owners to have their dogs go to obedience and socialization class. I think class is important but only the right type with the right type of parameter. Violators should be punished in some way. Of course there will be many that will not get their dogs trained and accidents will continue to happen but it is the first step in people understand dog behavior and dog ownership responsibility.

Owning a dog is like owning a car you have to do more that ass and gas, it needs real maintenance if you expect years of good performance. You cannot just feed a dog and tie him to a tree or throw him in the backyard they need real training from a pup throughout its adult life. 

I agree with many of the posts here, why would anyone leave there small child alone unsupervised with a dog of any breed. I grew up with dogs all of my life an done thing that I was told was when the baby was around, put the dog up and that was a poodle. Dogs carry bacteria and a scratch on a baby can be detrimental to its health even if it is just an accident and not a sign of aggression. People must learn that dogs use their teeth as their hands and in a pack they punish undesired behavior by nudging and nipping. So, why would someone leave a small child to be raised by a dog? ](*,) #-o


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Howard, How do we insure people are responsible with thier dogs? Would that be done by Fighting to the Death? Just Curious. Because since your not backing down...I am wondering how that's going to cross-over. 

There is nothing wrong with my eyes and ears...I think there maybe something arye with your comprehension of what was written. 

You stated the problem is irresponsible owners...then you stated the answer is banning together...I am failing to see your thinking. You state the problem is the owners....but your tactic is fight the legislation. Sounds like your going to be fighting forever. That is unless your fate becomes like those Countries in Europe who's good fight did not work so well. 

And this was not a working dog thread. And my dog show well thank you.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Doesn't matter if it is show or working, it was an OPEN statement and not intended to be a shot at you. If you took it that way...wrong answer! K-9 BSL or other laws limits our rights to be owners. A long fight, yes but one I'm willing to do. Education is the key. You will never make all folks responsible and a few will screw it up for the masses. Why have locks on doors? Slows down the bad guy but the honest person will not mess with it.

*How do we insure people are responsible with thier dogs?* The same statment can be made about cars, child support, paying taxes or any other area...it will never happen. Something back in our history called "free will."


----------

