Pitt Bulls - the most dangerous dog breed for children

/\ Unfortunately it is not a just few dumb owners, there are a lot of them out there and they need to be shot. The breed is built for herding large cattle and are pure muscle, so the idiots try to use this to their advantage for dog fighting or just pure aggression. The owners are the dangerous ones, not the dogs (initially at least).

 

Sorry for your loss. They are literally a part of the family.

Good looking dog.

When were they used for herding cattle? At one time they were used to hold the cattle by the snout while the humans would brand them.
This breed comes with DA that is not something you can remove from the dog. You can learn to control it but its there. They have been bred for the [] since the 1800's. To prove that its not people that make these dogs fight cut a few loose in a fenced in yard for a few minutes and then tell me who made them do it. I do agree that the owners are dangerous to my dogs and this breed but you have to know where it came from in order to better raise and control them.

 

sorry...but pitbull terriers are responsible for far more attacks than any other breed with Rotts coming in a distant second.

1982-2009

Pittbull Terrier: 1451 attacks causing bodily harm
628 attacks on children
499 attacks on adults
153 deaths
777 maimings


Rottweiler: 447 attacks causing bodily harm
257 attacks on children
115 attacks on adults
67 deaths
244 maimings

German
Shephard: 79 attacks causing bodily harm
52 attacks on children
20 attacks on adults
9 deaths
50 maimings

keep whatever breed you like...but be responsible about it. a friend of mine's two cute and docile pitts (they were not raised as fighting or guard dogs) got out of their yard last year and killed two of his neighbor's dogs on their own property and bit a man before one was shot and the other apprehended by dog warden. he didnt have insurance on them...so he is fooked now. i agree any dog can be aggressive or dangerous...but moreso when they have been bred in for it. it would take just as many generations to breed out the traits as it did to breed them in IMO.

pittbulls seem to be fine around their masters and family, but when unsupervised the violent traits come out.

im not baggin on anyone's dogs...just know that if you have a Pitt, it's the most likely breed to lose it's shit and hurt/kill someone.

 

just curious, where did you find those stats?

 

@ LUK8272

Sorry on the incorrect terminology on the breed purpose, it’s been a while since I have looked at the breed specifics, but I was trying to emphasize your point! Yes every dog and breed has certain inherent natures, with the pitts being rather aggressive, but it is on the owners to teach them how to harness their aggression. Looks like everyone on here has done that, but there are many more people out there that have purposely taught them the wrong way to use their aggression.

 

Someone did a study on this...

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, has conducted an unusually detailed study of dog bites from 1982 to the present. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.) The Clifton study shows the number of serious canine-inflicted injuries by breed. The author's observations about the breeds and generally how to deal with the dangerous dog problem are enlightening.

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.

Clifton states:

If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed--and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.

Clifton's opinions are as interesting as his statistics. For example, he says, "Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all."

If those numbers weren't so high, I'd tend to agree that it's the shitty owners who are to blame. But more than likely, the fight/ kill instinct is a hell of a lot stronger in PB's that most other dogs. Apparently, once their button is pushed, they'll lay into you and not stop until they're finished. And with their powerful jaws, there's not a lot you can do to stop them before they cause serious injury.

For those with PB's make sure you read and understand the part in the article where he states "In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question."

 

The issue with that is what people are calling pit bulls. Only one dog is a Pit Bull that is the American Pit Bull Terrier. However their are 7 different dogs that fit the term Pit Bull as used by most. It would be like saying hunting dog, there are many.

Where did you get that info?

 

Sorry if that came across wrong with it being the internet and all. I was simply asking? I am always open to learn. I just added what I knew into my post. I agree with what you said and have just said also.

 

It can't be the true American Pit Bull Terriers "fight kill instinct" because when they were [] dogs the human had to jump in and pick up his dog while it was in the heat of battle therefore no HA was tolerated, and only a bit of redirect was acceptable.
Now for kids being injured here is what I think. These dogs play rough and if a child has their hands to close to the toy then they may accidentally be bit. By no means is that an attack. These studies would have to give a brief description of each event, and thats just not going to happen. For all the negative specs you can find I can post some showing the dogs in a different light.

 

I have 3 pits living in my house (roommates dogs), and I must say they all, since puppies have had a tendency to be aggressive. However, they are also very loving and affectionate dogs, that like to sit on your lap and want your attention as much as they can get it. They also do their job of guarding the house very well. My Black lab though will also get aggressive if the other dogs push him far enough (He puts all three in their place), and he definitly does not like sketchy looking people. But Training is the Main thing that makes a dog safe or not. A dog (especially breeds with bad stereotypes) should be well trained, and always under control.

 

Cool, no problem. I don't own one, but I do hate how they get a bad rep because of lack of training. By all means my Jack Russell has a different rep than a pitt, but they still get a bad rep for being little terrors because of lack of training. My dog actually used to best friends with a great pitt until we moved.

 

I'm not a dog fan, nor animal person, but years ago I had a friend that had a pit and loved him. He and his wife had a baby, I asked when are you getting rid of your dog, he said he wasn't. No kidding, like three weeks later he came to work and said he gave his dog away because he snipped at the baby. I feel it's not worth the risk to have a large dog, especially a pit, rott, pincher, german shepard or maybe any dog around small kids. Because loving dogs is great, but just think if your dog bit your child and mamed or killed him/her, is owning a dog worth that? I don't think so, IMO.

 

here:

http://www.dogsbite.org/index.php

 

About Canine Temperament

<B>Because of breed-specific dog legislation and negative publicity associated with many breeds of dogs, temperament testing has assumed an important role for today's dog fancier. The ATTS Temperament Test provides breeders a means for evaluating temperament and gives pet owners insight into their dog's behavior. It can have an impact on breeding programs and in educating owners about their dog's behavioral strengths and weaknesses as well as providing a positive influence on dog legislation.
What is temperament?

W. Handel, German Police Dog Trainer, in his article, "The Psychological Basis of Temperament Testing," defines temperament as:

"the sum total of all inborn and acquired physical and mental traits and talents which determines, forms and regulates behavior in the environment"
​

The ATTS test focuses on and measures different aspects of temperament such as stability, shyness, aggressiveness, and friendliness as well as the dog's instinct for protectiveness towards its handler and/or self-preservation in the face of a threat. The test is designed for the betterment of all breeds of dogs and takes into consideration each breed's inherent tendencies.
The test simulates a casual walk through the park or neighborhood where everyday life situations are encountered. During this walk, the dog experiences visual, auditory and tactile stimuli. Neutral, friendly and threatening situations are encountered, calling into play the dog's ability to distinguish between non-threatening situations and those calling for watchful and protective reactions.

The pecentage is passing.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]86.0%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]AMERICAN STAFFORDSHIRE TERRIER [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]83.9%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]AKITA[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]75.3%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]AUSTRALIAN SHEPHERD[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]81.5%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]BEAGLE[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]80.3%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]BLOODHOUND[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]71.9%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]BOSTON TERRIER[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]84.6%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]BOXER[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]84.0%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]BULL TERRIER[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]90.4%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]BULLDOG [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]70.1%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]CHIHUAHUA[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]71.1%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]COCKER SPANIEL[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]81.9%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]COLLIE [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]79.7%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]DACHSHUND [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]68.8%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]84.2%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]GOLDEN RETRIEVER [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]84.6%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]MINIATURE POODLE 7[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]7.9%[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]POMERANIAN [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Geneva]75.8%[/FONT]

 

http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-fatalities-2010.htm

http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-fatalities-2009.htm

http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-statistics-fatalities.htm

 

That site will not hold up in a court of law. Atts will. If I am not mistaken Dogsbite.org was started by a college and their info is flawed on many Those descriptions leave out alot and their first flaw is stating the breed of the dog, Pit Bull in not a breed. Every breed has a standard and if the dog described doesn't fit the standard then it isn't that breed. There fore the people claiming the 100lb pit bull attacked has a major issue with the dog they accuse. I have articles from news papers which state that the Pit Bull mauled the old man but after the investigation it was a Boxer. DogsBite.org collects their info from the media.

 

You just asked for a brief description of individual attacks.

 

I know, I didn't explain enough. But the info also has to come from a credible source. Along with the description of the attack I would like to see a pic and or description of the dog.
Thanks for posting those though.

Call almost any pound and see what they have calls about the most. It will be a lose pit bull, but then ask them what the dog actually was and you will be surprised.
Here where I live the only dog to be responsible for the death of a human is a Daschund.

 

Exactly!! Doesn't matter what the breed!!

 

Here's a good site... http://www.dogbitelaw.com/index.html

The site says "It is ranked first by Google and Yahoo, and is linked to or cited as authority by law review articles, legal publications, books about dog law, and over 2,500 other websites, including the United States Department of Agriculture."

The author of this web site is Attorney Kenneth Phillips. A lawyer for 34 years, he is regarded as the nation's leading authority in dog bite law.

Also found on that site (regarding court rulings on Pit Bulls):

Court decisions have included a wide variety of negative findings and remarks about pit bulls:

"The extreme dangerousness of this breed, as it has evolved today, is well recognized." Matthews v. Amberwood Associates Limited Partnership Inc., 351 Md. 544, 719 A.2d 119 (Md. 10/07/1998)
The pit bull is "a breed of dog that has achieved a remarkable notoriety for aggressiveness." Gentle v. Pine Valley Apartments, 631 So.2d 928, 932 (Ala. 1994).
"Pit bulls as a breed are known to be extremely aggressive and have been bred as attack animals." Giaculli v. Bright, 584 So.2d 187, 189 (Fla. App. 1991).
"Pit bulls bit[e] to kill without signal." Starkey v. Township of Chester, 628 F. Supp. 196, 197 (E.D. Pa. 1986).
"The Pit Bull's massive canine jaws can crush a victim with up to two thousand pounds (2,000) of pressure per square inch - three times that of a German Shepard or Doberman Pinscher." State v. Peters, 534 So.2d 760, 764 (Fla. App. 1988), review denied, 542 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 1989).
"[P]it bull dogs represent a unique public health hazard . . . [possessing] both the capacity for extraordinarily savage behavior . . . [a] capacity for uniquely vicious attacks . . . coupled with an unpredictable nature" and that "[o]f the 32 known human deaths in the United States due to dog attacks . . . [in the period between July 1983 and April 1989], 23 were caused by attacks by pit bull dogs". Hearn v. City of Overland Park, 244 Kan. 638, 650, 647, 772 P.2d 758, 768, 765, cert. denied 493 U.S. 976, 110 S.Ct. 500, 107 L.Ed.2d 503 (1989).