Do you think all Pit-Bulls are bad?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANpMApPnWCM


shutdafuckup/kthxbai

 

As stated earlier, it's all about the owner...anyways, the dogs that people should fear are wolf hybrids. Those motherfuckers are very unpredictable. My idiot buddy had three and over an eight year period I think those dogs killed about 20 dogs and cats.

 

Because if their opinion were toward another person for the same reason, they would be branded a racist.

There are bad domesticated animals and bad humans. Both are a product of their upbringing. Breed or race makes little difference.

 

How are you going to say it's all about the owner, then condemn another breed as bad?


On a different note, I have a bullet for every person that does something like this.
Warning, will cause extreme anger, followed by joy for the dog.

 

The behavior of a pitbull is attributed to the owner. The wolf-hybrid behavior is extremely unpredictable due to its breeding. I should have elaborated more on that...sorry.

 

True true.
The issue is the degree of domestication.
Pits have been human companions for centuries. Same with Rott, Shepard, Doberman, etc....

Breeds that are more recently domesticated (wolf hybrids) are much more touchy. Not that they can't be raised to be good companions, but their wild side is not buried under centuries of breeding.

Same goes for cats. Lions, tigers, and other wild cats are not good house cats.

 

I don't think that all of them are mean. I just don't trust them, but then again, I don't really trust anyone, or anything.

 

I actually trust most pits more than I trust most humans.
Pits don't hide behind false exteriors. If you have reason to fear one, you see it in their eyes. Hard to get that read on humans, though pits don't seem to have a problem reading humans.

 

I am sure that I will get some bad responses, but hey,...Well, I just don't care. lol.

I actually take exception to the "It's the owner's fault" for every dog attack or bad dog. People, these are DOGS. They are animals, regardless of how much you love them. Just like we are animals. you can raise a child in a loving family home, but that does not mean that they will never grow up and kill someone. You can raise a dog in the most loving home, iwth the best social skills, and ANY dog...let me say this again A.N.Y. dog can attack if the situation makes them feel threatened.

That being said, I think a large part of the bad reputation for the "PitBull" is that as everyone knows, they are a very powerful dog, and the wrong type of people like to breed them for aggression. One of the most common methods was "inbreeding" by breeding sibling puppies together. This tended to create a more aggressive dog.

Yes, a dog will do better in a loving, caring home. we all know that, but NOBODY should EVER trust ANY dog, regardless of breed, to be alone with a young child. A friend of mine in Florida was a paramedic and he said he has seen cases of dog bites from just about every breed imaginable. So why does the media zero in on Pitbulls, Dobermans, Rottweilers, and German Shep? Because a larger dog causes more damage than a smaller dog. That is simple fact. Bigger jaws, bigger teeth....bigger bite, more damage.

Up until a few years ago, I used to work with my stepfather as a breeder of Dobermans, and later, Rottweilers. Always AKC litters, with long, champion bloodlines. Anyone who TRULY knows Rottweilers will know the Von Killion family of Rotties. I was fortunate enough to get a runt from the litter. Maxamillion was expected to not make it through the night when he was born, but the "parents" told me he would always force his way in to find a nip.

As he grew, we took great care in showing him love, and understanding. He was a sweetheart, and loved his "family". I always made sure to remind him who was Alpha though. Max would let my youngest daughter ride him like a horse. She was 3 years old and would grab him by the ears and hold on tight while he walked in circles in the living room. When she got too rough, like biting his ear, he would drop onto his stomach and roll to the side until she couldn't hold on. He NEVER showed aggression towards the family, though he was very protective of the girls.

BUT, I also never left either of my daughters alone in the room with him. No matter how sweet and wonderful of a dog he was, I would never leave my child alone with a dog. Any dog.

Man Max was my boy! He was a BIG one also. At 2 years he had an 18 inch wide chest, and weighed in at 190 lbs. I had several people think he was actually a mix (Thinking he was part Mastiff by his size) He was a big boy! But nope, he was pure Von Killion Rottie! Unfortunately I lost him to a rattle snake. NOTHING came into that yard without his say so. He has killed DOZENS of opossums and racoons. Funny thing was even at his huge size, he was TERRIFIED of my wife's 2 pound Chihuahua! I miss my Max.

What I think is funny is the popular misconception that the Rottie is bred as a protection or "guard" dog. This is actually far from the truth. Believe it or not, the Rottie is a heard animal. That is right...they were bred to be SHEEP dogs. The fact that they are very loyal, and protective of the pack is what brought them out to be used in a way the breed is actually not meant for.

I am sorry, but if you look up the facts, not the media surveys, but the actual FACTS, The Rottweiler is actually one of the most loyal, loving dogs, that is NOT "Predisposed" to human aggression. Far from it actually.

 

I dont get where you are going with this one? It shows pitbull terriers are the deadliest dog?

That would be, attacks, child victims, adult victims, deaths, and maimings. Those deaths are 131 higher than the next closest one and 1504 more attacks. According to this pitbulls account for more than 55% of all attacks and 44% of deaths.


And before anyone gets mad I also think its the owners fault more than anything.

 

I agree with you.

I think its completely the owners fault.

 

So you post the wrong website, completely disproving your point, and try to spin it?

Like I said, I have no doubt you will find a handful of sites showing pitbulls as not the most dangerous, but the ones that do will greatly outnumber them. I bet if I looked hard enough I could find statistics showing the Chevy Colorado being more dependable then tacomas. Doesn't change anything.

Serious, look at the link you wrongfully posted, look at the numbers. Look at the span between pitbulls and the number 2 dog. Look at all the websites listing pits as #1, then the couple listing them as not #1.
If you can seriously sit there and believe what you're typing then it's pointless to continue with you.

If nine people call it a duck, and one calls it a cat. Chances are the one is wrong.

 

Did you even read these before posting them?
The first one is using statistics from 2001. Also, it is posted by a pit bull rescue. Wonder if they're bias?

Second one is simply stating that the dog were not able to be scientifically identified as 100% full blood, or that breed. I quote, "cannot be documented or otherwise considered reasonable (through pedigree, DNA or otherwise)." If someone was attacked and the dog ran off, or the dog doesn't have papers, etc.... then it can't be identified.

Third is comical. I read the study they "quoted" that statement about German Shepards from. The study isn't even from America. Even more, no where in the entire study does it state German Shepards are five times more likely to bite then pitbulls. It states German Shepards are five times more likely to bite then Labs. In fact, no where in the entire article does it list pit bulls in any of there statistics. Only place it list pitbulls is where it states that they considered "fighting dogs" and are subject to legal regulations.

So out of four links, (counting the one you deleted b/c it was harmful to your point) only one has data (outdated) that states pitbulls aren't the number 1. And, it was posted by a pitbull rescue.

You sure convinced me with all your data.

 

Just double checked the first one to see if they linked any data to back up their numbers. Of course they didn't.
One thing I did find comical is the numbers themselves.
From 1965-2001:
Registered Population
Approx. 240,000 Chow Chow
Approx. 800,000 German Shepherd
Approx. 960,000 Rottweiler
Approx. 128,000 Great Dane
Approx. 114,000 Doberman
Approx. 72,000 St. Bernard
Approx. 5,000,000 Pit Bulls

So from 1965-2001, there have only been 800,000 German Shepherds registered, and 5 million pit bulls? Seriously going to try and pass that as true numbers?

 

I was just simply saying the numbers don't lie. The proof is out there.
You posted numbers/statistics that were completely skewed that benefit your view. The true numbers are out there, and tell the story.

Well yea, if you boil it down to the very bottom, you can say it's the owner's fault for not restraining the dog 24/7 when it's around people or animals. If they did that though, the animal would never leave a secured box, and never have human contact.

Yea, it could be just acting how it thinks it should, but that doesn't mean it was the right choice. I believe dogs do know the difference in right and wrong. It can be taught, but also it's something they inherently have. You can teach a dog not to pee on the couch b/c it is wrong. You can teach a dog not to do anything b/c it is wrong. Problem is, once they kill/maul a kid, it's a mute point to tell them it's wrong. That's where the issue with pit bulls comes from. Seems like more of them, then other types of dogs, don't inherently know not to attack that kid whenever it feels the need to.

 

I think pit bulls and parolees is a good show, and shows the breed pretty good. yes some of the dogs are bad, but see what they come from and how the dogs acts when it’s environment changes for the better.

 

I didn't say "OK", because every link you posted was BS. First one has completely BS numbers. Second one is pointless as it doesn't state any specific dog breed. Third one isn't an American study, doesn't mention pitbulls at all in the study, then further more goes on to state that they are regulated in that area due to being considered a "fighting dog". It most definitely doesn't state what you quoted. Fourth one went exactly with my point as to pit bulls having the highest attack rate.

None of the links you posted are even possible of saying "OK" to, as none of them prove the point you are trying to make.

 

Like you said, most animals attack for a reason. What would be a good reason of a pitbull mauling an infant? I doubt that baby took its food, encroached on its mating area, or threatened it in any way. Maybe the fact that pit bulls, more so then other breeds, lack the inherent sense that killing that kid is a bad thing. I'm sure other breeds have their black sheep that have done it, but pit bulls have much more. Or, most pit bull owners have a baby doll, and through vigorous training and multiple bacon strips, they have trained the dog not to attack a baby. The ones who haven't are the ones we read about.

 

Again, another link that serves no purpose. There are zero statistics in that article about pit bull attacks. All it does it talk about how pit bulls can be good pets. I never said that they couldn't be, so not sure why you feel you needed to post that.

 

No, I think you misinterpreted what I initially said. I never said pit bulls were bad. What I said is that it can't be "all the owner's fault" due to the number of pitbulls and attacks by them. (More or less). The fact that every type of dog has an owner, yet pitbulls which aren't the most populated dog, has a severely higher attack rate then every other breed. So that must mean that there is something within the breed contributing to it. I never said that bad owners don't make bad dogs. I also never said that pit bulls were bad pets.
I for one really like pitbulls. I think they are beautiful dogs. I had a female blue pit puppy (6-12 months) that I found and took care of for a week or so while I tracked down the owner. Sweetest dog you could ask for. She listed, was very affectionate, and loved to jump up in the bed at night and sleep just at your feet. Not on your feet like the asshole small dogs, turning your bed into a sauna. Was a sad day when I did find the owner.
Still doesn't change the numbers, and that there is something that causes some of these guys to do what they do beside an owner's personality.
Would I own one, sure. Would I own one with a baby, probably not. Would I own one with a 10 year old, most definitely, and I would sleep peacefully knowing that nobody unwanted was going to make it through the front door unscathed while I wasn't home.