Watching a train wreck in slo-mo
- Thread starter casablanca1
- Start date
I agree, when it's a small child it doesn't matter, either can do damage. I was gearing my question more towards adults.
I'm really sorry if I seemed to be attacking you, that wasn't my intent. It never is, lol. Bah, I just don't know how to put my opinion on this into words. Sorry though, for the misunderstanding.
I'm really sorry if I seemed to be attacking you, that wasn't my intent. It never is, lol. Bah, I just don't know how to put my opinion on this into words. Sorry though, for the misunderstanding.
I'll admit I never saw the post you quoted either. That merits some bite statistics. I thought it was just to a post that stated that a pit bull had attacked the OP's dog before. So I apologize for that.
Let's all learn to read the whole threads from now on.
I'm really sorry about my mistake, though I do think that some of what was said should be taken to heart. I truly say it to try to help you with your fight. If I were in your shoes, I'd want to reach as many people as possible.
Let's all learn to read the whole threads from now on.
I'm really sorry about my mistake, though I do think that some of what was said should be taken to heart. I truly say it to try to help you with your fight. If I were in your shoes, I'd want to reach as many people as possible.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2006
- Messages
- 1,083
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
Well, I didn't read through all the "statistics" .. all that copy and paste is just irritating to me. I've seen it before and since that's the way some people battle any insult toward pitbulls, I'm sure I'll see it again.
It's completely illogical to use that kind of information to defend and/or promote ANY breed. You can't justify something by saying "but LOOOOK .. others are WOOORSE!!". That's like trying to justify hitting someone with a baseball bat by saying "well, other people use a metal pipe and THAT's worse!". It's completely flawed logic and in this situation all it does it antagonize people.
I have to admit that the way some pitbull owners act whenever their breed is even suggested as aggressive irritates me. I sometimes wonder if those are the type of people who are attracted to the breed .. and if so, it may very well reflect on the breed! Geez, people, you should be encouraging and not get nasty! You want people to AGREE, not get angry or irritated! Making enemies doesn't help your cause one little bit.
Back to the original post that started this thread .. she first talked about her dog being attacked by the neighbor dog and then said these irresponsible people got another dog of the same breed and that (I don't remember the exact wording) this dog was going to be a problem too in part because of what it was. Then people got upset because they thought their beloved pits were being bad-mouthed.
IF she was talking about a pit, let's take a step back here and look at this logically. Even the pitbull people admit that the pitbull has a tendency toward dog aggression. She was talking about her DOG getting attacked - I didn't see anything in that original post that said anything about humans being bit (so all those long copied and pasted "statistics" were completely out of place). If the dog is a pitbull, and the neighbors are irresponsible, then YES ... she has all the right in the world to think that the dog - in part because of WHAT IT IS - will also be dog aggressive! I didn't see anything in what she said that deserved the nastiness that followed.
Personally I don't like dog aggressive dogs. I think in this day and age NO dog should be bred that shows dog aggression. I know that goes against the whole "let's retain the breed characteristics of the original dogs" for some breeds, but the reality is that dog aggressiveness is an unwanted characteristic for the vast majority of dogs. I think that if pitbull owners want their breed accepted in today's world, they need to work toward producing less dog aggression overall in the breed. I've said this before, yes .. and I'll probably say it again.
I have chows and German shepherds and both of those make it on BSL lists. I work hard to socialize and train mine to be accepting of humans and dogs and I would never breed a dog that didn't have an exemplary temperament toward both. To me, this is my responsibility. If we produce dogs that are not inherently aggressive toward other dogs, then it's less likely they will become dog aggressive even if they end up with owners who are not stellar. Will it stop all dog aggression? No, of course not. But it's a step in the right direction.
If I had an irresponsible neighbor who had previously had a dog aggressive dog, and they got a new dog that happened to be a pitbull - I would surely be worried about potential danger to my dogs. Unfortunately that's just plain realistic.
Melanie and the gang in Alaska
It's completely illogical to use that kind of information to defend and/or promote ANY breed. You can't justify something by saying "but LOOOOK .. others are WOOORSE!!". That's like trying to justify hitting someone with a baseball bat by saying "well, other people use a metal pipe and THAT's worse!". It's completely flawed logic and in this situation all it does it antagonize people.
I have to admit that the way some pitbull owners act whenever their breed is even suggested as aggressive irritates me. I sometimes wonder if those are the type of people who are attracted to the breed .. and if so, it may very well reflect on the breed! Geez, people, you should be encouraging and not get nasty! You want people to AGREE, not get angry or irritated! Making enemies doesn't help your cause one little bit.
Back to the original post that started this thread .. she first talked about her dog being attacked by the neighbor dog and then said these irresponsible people got another dog of the same breed and that (I don't remember the exact wording) this dog was going to be a problem too in part because of what it was. Then people got upset because they thought their beloved pits were being bad-mouthed.
IF she was talking about a pit, let's take a step back here and look at this logically. Even the pitbull people admit that the pitbull has a tendency toward dog aggression. She was talking about her DOG getting attacked - I didn't see anything in that original post that said anything about humans being bit (so all those long copied and pasted "statistics" were completely out of place). If the dog is a pitbull, and the neighbors are irresponsible, then YES ... she has all the right in the world to think that the dog - in part because of WHAT IT IS - will also be dog aggressive! I didn't see anything in what she said that deserved the nastiness that followed.
Personally I don't like dog aggressive dogs. I think in this day and age NO dog should be bred that shows dog aggression. I know that goes against the whole "let's retain the breed characteristics of the original dogs" for some breeds, but the reality is that dog aggressiveness is an unwanted characteristic for the vast majority of dogs. I think that if pitbull owners want their breed accepted in today's world, they need to work toward producing less dog aggression overall in the breed. I've said this before, yes .. and I'll probably say it again.
I have chows and German shepherds and both of those make it on BSL lists. I work hard to socialize and train mine to be accepting of humans and dogs and I would never breed a dog that didn't have an exemplary temperament toward both. To me, this is my responsibility. If we produce dogs that are not inherently aggressive toward other dogs, then it's less likely they will become dog aggressive even if they end up with owners who are not stellar. Will it stop all dog aggression? No, of course not. But it's a step in the right direction.
If I had an irresponsible neighbor who had previously had a dog aggressive dog, and they got a new dog that happened to be a pitbull - I would surely be worried about potential danger to my dogs. Unfortunately that's just plain realistic.
Melanie and the gang in Alaska
I don't think it depends on the breed, but it depends on how you rais your dog. (Unless its a shelter dog) If you always keep your dog chained up in the back yard with no social train or anything, it can get aggresive, regardless of which breed it is. If you train your dog right, theres a greater chance it won't get aggresive.
After reading this thread and others like it; this is how I view things
The three main points that keep being made and will never change
1. Pit Bulls are dangerous and can't be trusted I don't care what you say and it really bothers me when you question my premise.
2. Pit Bulls are great, please let me explain why they are and it humans at fault. I refuse to listen to someone attack my loved one.
3. Hey watch it, I feel uncomfortable when you mention other breeds....you are getting too close to home.
Every anti-pit bull thread gets strung out and ends up in these 3 camps.
Just an observation.
The three main points that keep being made and will never change
1. Pit Bulls are dangerous and can't be trusted I don't care what you say and it really bothers me when you question my premise.
2. Pit Bulls are great, please let me explain why they are and it humans at fault. I refuse to listen to someone attack my loved one.
3. Hey watch it, I feel uncomfortable when you mention other breeds....you are getting too close to home.
Every anti-pit bull thread gets strung out and ends up in these 3 camps.
Just an observation.
I tried so hard to stay out of this thread. But it keeps getting more and more unbelieveable. Good lord, everyone! Think!!
First of all, what is so wrong with Casa saying this?
For all you pit bull people out there, what do you say is the NUMBER 1 reason for pit bull attacks? IRRESPONSIBLE OWNERS! So Casa points out a pit bull with an irresponsible owner--proven irresponsible, since their last pit bull was raised in such a way that it became aggressive, and allowed to freely roam around--and says this dog will probably turn out the same way. And people throw a fit!
WTH??? Why in the heck are you arguing about that? Casa's logic is following the same reasoning as most of us who love bully breeds and are anti-BSL: irresponsible owners + pit bulls = disaster. And given that owner's track record, I think Casa is absolutely right.
As to the reference of a particular breed being more likely to become aggressive....what is wrong with that? Those disagreeing may want to take a look back to the breed forum.
Newbies come to the forum and ask "Is a rottweiler/dobie/GSD/fila/pit bull/malinois/etc. right for me?". And what does everybody say? It's usually posted that the breed in question needs training (perhaps with a professional), a heavy amount of socialization, and experienced owners. That is needed to avoid problems: either dominancy issues, dog aggression, human aggression, overly-defensive behavior (such as "guarding" you from your best friend), or just plain snarky attitudes. I certainly don't see those threads written about cavaliers or golden retrievers!
So we stress the vital importance of extensive training and socialization of certain breeds in some threads. Then, in another, we advocate "Oh, that's unfair! This breed isn't any more likely to be aggressive/defensive than any other breed."
HUH??
Isn't that two completely contrary viewpoints? Make up your mind and stick with it!
First of all, what is so wrong with Casa saying this?
For all you pit bull people out there, what do you say is the NUMBER 1 reason for pit bull attacks? IRRESPONSIBLE OWNERS! So Casa points out a pit bull with an irresponsible owner--proven irresponsible, since their last pit bull was raised in such a way that it became aggressive, and allowed to freely roam around--and says this dog will probably turn out the same way. And people throw a fit!
WTH??? Why in the heck are you arguing about that? Casa's logic is following the same reasoning as most of us who love bully breeds and are anti-BSL: irresponsible owners + pit bulls = disaster. And given that owner's track record, I think Casa is absolutely right.
As to the reference of a particular breed being more likely to become aggressive....what is wrong with that? Those disagreeing may want to take a look back to the breed forum.
Newbies come to the forum and ask "Is a rottweiler/dobie/GSD/fila/pit bull/malinois/etc. right for me?". And what does everybody say? It's usually posted that the breed in question needs training (perhaps with a professional), a heavy amount of socialization, and experienced owners. That is needed to avoid problems: either dominancy issues, dog aggression, human aggression, overly-defensive behavior (such as "guarding" you from your best friend), or just plain snarky attitudes. I certainly don't see those threads written about cavaliers or golden retrievers!
So we stress the vital importance of extensive training and socialization of certain breeds in some threads. Then, in another, we advocate "Oh, that's unfair! This breed isn't any more likely to be aggressive/defensive than any other breed."
HUH??
Isn't that two completely contrary viewpoints? Make up your mind and stick with it!
Last edited:
If you read my first post completely (sorry, I know it was long), it makes a ton of difference.
On Chaz, we stress the importance of training, experienced owners and intense socialization with certain breeds: pitties, rotties, dobermans, LGDs, mastiffs, malinois, etc. That is because these breeds have natural tendancies that make them more likely to develop aggression problems...be it towards people or other animals.
Therefore, I don't think it's unfair to assume that a certain breed with an irresponsible owner is more likely to turn out with aggression problems.
On Chaz, we stress the importance of training, experienced owners and intense socialization with certain breeds: pitties, rotties, dobermans, LGDs, mastiffs, malinois, etc. That is because these breeds have natural tendancies that make them more likely to develop aggression problems...be it towards people or other animals.
Therefore, I don't think it's unfair to assume that a certain breed with an irresponsible owner is more likely to turn out with aggression problems.
Well...
A) Bahamutt said the dog is in FACT not a pitbull.
and B)
I might say something along those lines when talking about train wrecks I see in progress.
For example:
My cousin and his wife go through the dogs like crazy. Recently they had a miniature schnauzer that they didn't train. It peed on the carpet and nipped at the kids. So they got rid of it. And then they went out and bought ANOTHER miniature schnauzer puppy. Guess what it did without training? It peed on the carpet and nipped at the children. They got rid of it too.
THAT's how I read Casa's original post. If the people had this problem before with a dog of this breed (whatever breed it actually is, pitbull or not) and they treat this new one the same way, how on Earth do they expect the results to be different?
A) Bahamutt said the dog is in FACT not a pitbull.
and B)
I might say something along those lines when talking about train wrecks I see in progress.
For example:
My cousin and his wife go through the dogs like crazy. Recently they had a miniature schnauzer that they didn't train. It peed on the carpet and nipped at the kids. So they got rid of it. And then they went out and bought ANOTHER miniature schnauzer puppy. Guess what it did without training? It peed on the carpet and nipped at the children. They got rid of it too.
THAT's how I read Casa's original post. If the people had this problem before with a dog of this breed (whatever breed it actually is, pitbull or not) and they treat this new one the same way, how on Earth do they expect the results to be different?
Does any one think the reason pit bull attacks seem to outnumber others so vastly is because of population? I mean to say that on my block there are about 6 pitties 2 labs 1 weenie dog 2 chi and a hound. Thier numbers may be a factor nobody seems to examine. What would happen if there was a change and the numbers of german shepherds or something else like that were to increase to levels that pitbulls have ?
Fruit bat, I'm sure that has a LOT to do with it.
The majority of pit type dogs simply aren't registered with any sort of a kennel club, so I think people don't realize just how popular they are. Sometimes people see AKC as the be all end all of dog registries, and just assume "oh, Labs are really the most popular dog in America," without thinking of every dog out there that ISN'T or CAN'T be registered by AKC.
Then add to your problem the fact that almost NO ONE out there can correctly identify an American Pit Bull Terrier, from a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, A Bull Terrier (Standard or Miniature), an American Staffordshire Bull Terrier, an American Bulldog, and any number of mixes out there that LOOK like they might be pitbulls, and the breed is REALLY in a heap of trouble.
And unfortunately, the minute aggression is involved, or someone gets bit by a dog, that person is probably a zillion times more likely to label said dog as being a pit bull- regardless of what the dog is. Someone mentioned earlier the news reports that talked about vicious pit bull attacks, with an accompanying photo of what was CLEARLY a purebred Labrador Retriever. I've seen those too. The general public is all too willing to jump on the band wagon of "pitbulls are dangerous," but they don't want to see "America's Favorite Dog" get dragged through the mud.
That's why these breed bans are so stupid. There just aren't that many people out there that can positively ID nearly ANY breed of dog, let alone be able to separate the breeds that all seem to have a vague resemblance to APBTs. I've seen grown men point at a BOXER and say, "oh look, there's one of those pit bulls."
HUH?
Proof positive that these breed specific bans are ABSOLUTE BS.
The majority of pit type dogs simply aren't registered with any sort of a kennel club, so I think people don't realize just how popular they are. Sometimes people see AKC as the be all end all of dog registries, and just assume "oh, Labs are really the most popular dog in America," without thinking of every dog out there that ISN'T or CAN'T be registered by AKC.
Then add to your problem the fact that almost NO ONE out there can correctly identify an American Pit Bull Terrier, from a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, A Bull Terrier (Standard or Miniature), an American Staffordshire Bull Terrier, an American Bulldog, and any number of mixes out there that LOOK like they might be pitbulls, and the breed is REALLY in a heap of trouble.
And unfortunately, the minute aggression is involved, or someone gets bit by a dog, that person is probably a zillion times more likely to label said dog as being a pit bull- regardless of what the dog is. Someone mentioned earlier the news reports that talked about vicious pit bull attacks, with an accompanying photo of what was CLEARLY a purebred Labrador Retriever. I've seen those too. The general public is all too willing to jump on the band wagon of "pitbulls are dangerous," but they don't want to see "America's Favorite Dog" get dragged through the mud.
That's why these breed bans are so stupid. There just aren't that many people out there that can positively ID nearly ANY breed of dog, let alone be able to separate the breeds that all seem to have a vague resemblance to APBTs. I've seen grown men point at a BOXER and say, "oh look, there's one of those pit bulls."
HUH?
Proof positive that these breed specific bans are ABSOLUTE BS.
The owners of the dog who attempted to slaughter my dog at my feet a few years ago have got themselves another dog. The vicious one died (supposedly; I wouldn't put it past them to have 'rehomed' the dog to get away from all the trouble it caused) but now they've replaced her. And I'm just bemused. I knew they'd get another dog. They're trash, completely irresponsible, and they didn't suffer any consequences from their behavior the first time around. So why not buy another of the exact same breed? After all my fruitless efforts to get someone in the local police or courts to take some action against them, I'm beyond indignation or anger. I'm just hoping that when this dog does go off (because it will, because of what it is and who it's owned by), it hurts someone who deserves it, like one of those cops who ASSURED me that the owner was a great gal, a town matron who lavished care on her dog. I hope this dog gelds someone.
Anyone else have the dubious pleasure of watching a train wreck from conception?
After all my fruitless efforts to get someone in the local police or courts to take some action against them, I'm beyond indignation or anger. I'm just hoping that when this dog does go off (because it will, because of what it is and who it's owned by), it hurts someone who deserves it, like one of those cops who ASSURED me that the owner was a great gal, a town matron who lavished care on her dog. I hope this dog gelds someone.Anyone else have the dubious pleasure of watching a train wreck from conception?
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2006
- Messages
- 1,083
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
Interesting .. I didn't see an "attitude" there anymore than I see an attitude in various posts throughout the forum where someone has a dog get attacked/hurt and they make a disparaging comment against the human who owns it. We DO get emotional about our dogs and none of us would want to have to live next to an irresponsible person with a dog-aggressive dog.
While she didn't specify someone in the "gelding" comment, she had just said that "WHEN" this dog goes off that she hopes it hurts someone who deserves it .. and to me that meant someone who was in part responsible for the situation (either former or current). That's hugely different than just wanting the dog to hurt ANYONE.
People have made a tremendous amount of assumptions from something very basic, I think.
Melanie and the gang in Alaska
While she didn't specify someone in the "gelding" comment, she had just said that "WHEN" this dog goes off that she hopes it hurts someone who deserves it .. and to me that meant someone who was in part responsible for the situation (either former or current). That's hugely different than just wanting the dog to hurt ANYONE.
People have made a tremendous amount of assumptions from something very basic, I think.
Melanie and the gang in Alaska