Quote:
Originally posted by CDSmith
The funny thing is, you're not wrong..... there are a veritable wealth of retards owning pitbulls out there, no question. But I somewhat disagree at the same time, because I can think of numerous articles in the local news over the last 20 years where a dog of a seemingly nice, otherwise normal family, tore up or killed some kid, and invariably it is ALWAYS the same breed coming up over and over again. As well, I know I have read comments from pitbull owners in past articles where they say they had trained the dog to the best of their ability and can't understand how it could have happened. "Always been a family dog" etc
|
keep these things in mind:
The media is far more likely to show up to a "pitbull attack" story than a "labrador bites man" story. It makes a better headline. They're in the ratings business. Fear sells. The modern urban myth of the monsterous 'pitbull' with "locking jaws" (not true, btw)invokes a reaction amoung people unfamiliar with the breed.
When a short-haired dog of unknown origin bites someone, it is often labeled a "pitbull" by people who have abosultely no idea what that means. There are hundreds of dog breeds, and 99% of people cannot accurately identify a "pitbull" from a "american bulldog" from a "dogo argentono" from a "bullmastiff" from a "boxer".
check out this link and tell me if you can:
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
And depite all the over-reporting/mis-reporting, pitbulls still appear low on the bite statistics. So no matter how hard some try to turn them into pariahs, the hard facts prove otherwise.
The reality is, this is just a dog. Dogs are, for the most part, very similar to eachother. IMHO 'breed' is 90% appearance, 10% temperament. The American Pitbull Terrier is a medium sized dog bred originally for (inhumane) sports but NEVER bred to be agressive towards people. Quite the opposite, people had to be able to get into a ring and seperate the dog from what it was fighting safely (without the dog turing on them). This is why it's such a disaster when people try to use them as "gaurd dogs". You're trying to turn a dog that is naturally one of the most people-friendly breeds into an attack dog, going against the temperament it was born with.
re: the situation you cited about familys claiming they did nothing wrong, saw no warning signs, etc. That's just nonsense. A lot of people just shouldn't own dogs. Not because they're bad people but because they're ignorant and have no desire to learn anything about dogs, or train them. They stick a food bowl and bed in the garage, or keep him locked in a crate for 10 hours a day while they're at work. they rub the dogs nose in it when he poops inside, and they tell their kids to just "stay away while he's eating" at the first sign of a dominance struggle. .. It's like giving a car to someone who never learnt how to drive. IMO you should be required to attend classes and/or complete test to get a permit to own a dog.
And of course when that familys dog bites someone, they'll throw up their hands and say "not our fault!". This applies to the situation, not the breed. If the german shepherd attacked someone, they'd claim the same thing.
Quote:
Originally posted by CDSmith
There have been many articles, and the opinion that part of the problem is intrinsic to the breed is quite widespread. That said, I honestly don't know what the answer is. A community will let these attacks go on and on or else they put a complete ban on the breed and heavy fines on owners who violate the ban. I don't see a third choice.
|
The third choice is making getting any dog like getting a car;
mandatory education first.
If you just ban a breed, the same abuse/neglect will just continue with another breed. This is nothing new. Before 'PitBulls' it was Rottweilers. Before that is was Dobermans. Next it may your favorite breed. There's no way to predict what white-trash/ghetto-trash will pick as the next trendy animal to abuse.
