Staffordshire Terriers (pitbulls)

[wdcbooks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's funny becasue PBS had a show on last night about the evolution of dogs - pretty interesting since I know very little about dogs.

I believe somewhere in their breeding though the kill gene just got out of control and this animal is a real problem now and needs to be dealt with sytematically.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know dick PBS boy.

As was previously posted, the issue is 90% owner. Yes aggressive pitbulls are inherently more dangerous because they are so powerful but genocide is not the solution.

J

[/ QUOTE ]

You want to explain the excessive attacks by pit bulls by saying "bad owners"? Why would pit bulls have any better or worse owners than German Shepherds or collies? Sorry, but there is too big a percentage of these PBs that are out of control to not think it's the breed. I don't know dogs , but I know logic.

[/ QUOTE ]


More drug dealers drive Cadillac Escalades than Subaru Outbacks. This is because Cadillac Escalades cause people to deal drugs.

Pits have some desirable characteristics for people who want a 'tough' dog. If tastes change the Pit could very easily disappear and then we start to have this same conversation about German Shepherds.

[deadbody]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's funny becasue PBS had a show on last night about the evolution of dogs - pretty interesting since I know very little about dogs.

I believe somewhere in their breeding though the kill gene just got out of control and this animal is a real problem now and needs to be dealt with sytematically.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know dick PBS boy.

As was previously posted, the issue is 90% owner. Yes aggressive pitbulls are inherently more dangerous because they are so powerful but genocide is not the solution.

J

[/ QUOTE ]

You want to exaplin the excessive attacks by pit bulls by saying "bad owners"? Why would pit bulls have any better or worse owners than German Shepherds or collies? Sorry, but there is too big a percentage of these PBs that are out of control to not think it's the breed. I don't know dogs , but I know logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since a larger percentage of pit owners want aggressive anti-social dogs than say golden retriver owners, it makes perfect sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, but why are those owners "bad"? The fact that they are targeting "anti-social" dogs is the point - the dogs are coming designed that way from the start.

[/ QUOTE ]

No the dogs are genetically more predisposed to aggression. That doesn't mean that they wil be aggressive unless the owner teaches them to be that way.

I am predisposed to addiction (most of my family on both sides are either alkys/drug addicts) that doesn't mean I will become an addict, but that it is easier for me to exhibit addictive behaviors, and I am more likely to do so if I was not raised right.

Pits are by nature a more energetic/aggressive dog. A bad owner will train them to act out those tendencies even more so. A good owner will give them love and attention without causing them to be aggressive/dangerous.

FYI I own a doberman/German Shepard mix that is 100lbs of stupid love. He is as sharp as a sack of sand, and thinks he is a lap dog/cat. This is because we did not give him attention when he exhibited negative behavior (growling) but instead praised him for showing positive behaviors. My 19 month old daughter loves him, and pets him every chance she gets, and he loves to walk with my 8 year old son. Dogs, like people, can be predisposed to things, but the learning is what sets them from a predisposition to an actual act. Dogs that bite humans have been trained that it is ok to bite/be aggressive.

[Leaky Eye]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's funny becasue PBS had a show on last night about the evolution of dogs - pretty interesting since I know very little about dogs.

I believe somewhere in their breeding though the kill gene just got out of control and this animal is a real problem now and needs to be dealt with sytematically.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know dick PBS boy.

As was previously posted, the issue is 90% owner. Yes aggressive pitbulls are inherently more dangerous because they are so powerful but genocide is not the solution.

J

[/ QUOTE ]

You want to explain the excessive attacks by pit bulls by saying "bad owners"? Why would pit bulls have any better or worse owners than German Shepherds or collies? Sorry, but there is too big a percentage of these PBs that are out of control to not think it's the breed. I don't know dogs , but I know logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you do know logic. You assume a causal relationship without any evidence for one.

Pit bulls are actually less human aggressive than most breeds. They are also very popular.

[CORed]

Breed bans suck. While labeling a breed of dogs as dangerous is bad enough, where it gets really dicey is that most of these bans try to ban mixed breed dogs that are over a certain percentage of the banned breed (usually pit bulls). How do they know? Actually, with a mixed breed dog from a shelter or whatever, there is no way to know. What it comes down to is if some animal control officer (perhaps responding from a complaint from a neighbor who just plain hates dogs), decides that your dog looks like it's part pit bull, they can confiscate it and kill it, even if it never harmed anybody. A boxer mix can look a lot lie a pit bull mix, and besides, one of the great myths about dogs is that mutts always come from a mixture of breeds. In fact most dogs throughout the world as long as there have been dogs have been random-bred. Some of these dogs were taken and selectively bred to to some kind of work, such as herding sheep, guarding property, pulling carts, dog fights, bull baiting, or whatever, and later were bred for dog shows. Of course dome of these "pure" breeds cross, and some breed back into the mutt population, so a dog of uncertain ancestry might be a cross among purebreds, or might be half purebred and half mutt, or he might just come from a long line of mutts and happen to have some of the characteristics of a "pure" breed.

Deciding that a dog is dangerous, because it looks like it might be a pit bull, or part pit bull, is, IMO not much different from deciding a human being is stupid and dangerous because he has dark skin.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
Other dogs may be more aggressive, but an aggressive pit bull can crush bones. A poodle nipping at strangers doesn't quite have the same effect.

I don't know what to do about it other than continue to punish people who let their animals cause harm/damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any large dog (and some small ones) can crush bones if they want to. Any large dog is physically capable of killing an unarmed human being in short order if it wants to. For that matter, I have a 10 pound terrier mix that I would not want to get into a serious fight with. She is extremely quick, much stronger than you would think, and, while I'm sure I could win the fight, I suspect that I would have to kill her to do it and would take some nasty bites before I did.

Fortunately dogs rarely want to do us harm. Pit bulls are stronger (especially in their jaws) than most dogs their size, but the difference is not as great as the fear-mongers who promote breed bans would have us believe.

[CORed]

Dachshunds were originally bred to go into badger's burrows and kill them. They may look harmless, and I'm sure many generations of breeding for shows and as pets has moderated the killer instinct some, but it's not wise to underestimate them.

[XXXNoahXXX]

BUMP

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...;gonew=1#UNREAD