Tuesday, April 12, 2011

The Experts

Cowardice asks the question, "Is it safe?" Expediency asks the question, "Is it politic?" And Vanity asks the question, "Is it popular?" But Conscience asks the question "Is it right?" And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right.MARTIN LUTHER KING


Behaviorists/veterinarians

RANDALL LOCKWOOD, PhD

HUGH WIRTH, veterinarian



NICHOLAS DODMAN, BVMS, ACVB, ACVA

on the MA muzzling law
After a spate of attacks by pit bulls this summer, Massachusetts lawmakers passed legislation requiring the dogs to be muzzled in public. Some pit bull owners protested, but a Tufts expert says the law may be a good idea. Breeds like pit bulls and Rottweilers, says animal behavior expert Nick Dodman, are hardwired for aggression.

“Some of these dogs are as dangerous as a loaded handgun,” Dodman– director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at TuftsSchool of Veterinary Medicine – said in an interview with The Boston Globe Magazine.

Genetics play a big role.

“No doubt about it, pit bulls are genetically predisposed toward aggression,” he told the magazine. “Justas certain breeds of dogs were bred to herd, certain were bred to hunt, certain to point, and others to swim.”

While most pet owners accept that their dogs have certain genetic behavioral characteristics, there is still resistance to the idea that some dogs are more dangerous than others.

“Everybody accepts [genetic behaviors like herding or hunting] until you throw in the word ‘aggression’ and things like a full, crushing bite, which some breeds were specifically bred for in the past.”

Statistics on dog attacks reinforce the link between certain dogs and dangerous behavior.

“It’s like a scene from “Casablanca” when they say, ‘Roundup the usual suspects,’” Dodman told the Globe.“It’s always German shepherds, chow, husky, pit bull.The numbers do the talking.”

He added that pit bulls and Rottweilers alone account for more than 50 percent of the fatal dog attacks every year. Despite the danger, the owners of these dogs often fail to take proper precautions.

“A lot of owners of aggressive breeds are suffering from denial and ignorance, because no one wants to be fingered as having that kind of dog,” Dodman said.


“Genetics does play a role and people who think it doesn’t are kidding themselves,” says Dodman. “The pit bull is notorious for a very hard bite. They are always No. 1 in the lethal dog bite parade. The dog was bred for pit fighting. It was bred to never give up, to bite and hang on.”



KATHERINE HOUPT, VMD, PhD, DACVB



BONNIE V. BEAVER, BS, DVM, MS, DACVB, Professor and Chief of Medicine, Department of Small Animal Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Texas A&M University
Executive Director, American College of Veterinary Behaviorists



The AVMA warns veterinarians to be careful about supplying behavioural evaluations of dogs for insurance purposes.

"It's risky for veterinarians," said Dr. Beaver, explaining that there are many situations in which a dog may behave aggressively, and temperament tests can't rule out the possibility of aggression. "You don't have temperament tests that can identify all possibilities."




BENJAMIN HART, professor emeritus at the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine and animal behaviorist
"It's quite common for a pit bull to show no signs of aggression. People will call it a nice dog, a sweet dog, even the neighbors - and then all of a sudden something triggers the dog, and it attacks a human in a characteristic way of biting and hanging on until a lot of damage is done."
"It's very poor policy to allow any child around a pit bull, in my mind, let alone climb on a dog."


KATHRYN HAWKINS, DVM
After seeing another dog die from a pit bull attack, I feel compelled to write. The opinion that pit bulls are "mean because of the way they are raised" is often not the case. A Both of the dogs I took care of that died were attacked unprovoked by pit bulls that were in families that raised them responsibly. Just as a retriever is bred to hunt birds -- an instinct you can't stop -- many pit bulls have a genetic tendency to attack other animals. When they do, they are extremely powerful and don't quit. I have never been bitten or growled at by a pit bull -- they are very friendly. But when the instinct to attack another animal occurs, they cause serious damage, or death. They don't bite people any more often than other breeds but when they do, it's bad. The aggressiveness toward other animals and damage they do is not because of "the way they are raised" -- it is usually due to a genetic instinct not in the control of the owner.



ARTHUR HERM, veterinarian, animal control
He said he disagrees with those people who believe they can train aggressiveness out of dogs, and added he believes aggressiveness is “inherent” and “genetic” in all dogs while pit bulls “seem to have more of that.”



MICHAEL W. FOX, veterinarian, animal behaviorist



SHERYL BLAIR, Tufts Veterinary School symposium - Animal Aggression: Dog Bites and the Pit Bull Terrier
The injuries these dogs inflict are more serious than other breeds because they go for the deep musculature and don't release; they hold and shake.
GARY WILKES, animal behaviorist
No other breed in America is currently bred for fighting, in such great numbers as the American Pit Bull Terrier. No other breed has instinctive behaviors that are so consistently catastrophic when they occur, regardless of how rarely they happen. The reality is that every English Pointer has the ability to point a bird. Every Cattle Dog has the ability to bite the heel of a cow and every Beagle has the ability to make an obnoxious bugling noise when it scents a rabbit or sees a cat walking on the back fence. Realistically, if your English Pointer suddenly and unpredictably points at a bird in the park, nobody cares. If my Heeler nips your ankle, I’m going to take care of your injuries and probably be fined for the incident. If your Beagle bugles too much, you’ll get a ticket for a noise violation. If your Pit Bull does what it’s bred to do...well, you fill in the blank.



ALEXANDRA SEMYONOVA, animal behaviorist



JOHN FAUL, animal behaviorist


Surgeons
DAVID A. BILLMIRE, MD, professor and director of the Division of Craniofacial and Pediatric Plastic Surgery at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center "As one who, for the last 30 years, has been on the receiving end of the dog-bite injuries that pass through the Children's Hospital Emergency Room, as well as on the staff at the Shriners Hospitals for Children where we see the late effects of these injuries from across the nation, I can categorically tell you that the problems associated with dog bites are indeed breed-specific." "Starting about 25 years ago, my colleagues and I started to see disturbingly different types of injuries. Instead of a warning bite, we saw wounds where the flesh was torn from the victim. There were multiple bite wounds covering many different anatomical sites. The attacks were generally unprovoked, persistent and often involved more than one dog. In every instance the dog involved was a pit bull or a pit bull mix." "...[H]ow many mauled children do we have to see before we realize the folly of allowing these dogs to exist?" "There are plenty of breeds available that peacefully coexist with human society. There is no need for pit bulls."



MARK WULKAN, MD, surgeon at Children's Healthcare of Atlanta
"There is a difference with the pit bulls. In the last two years we've seen 56 dog injuries that were so severe the patient had to be admitted to the hospital so this doesn't count just a little bite and then goes to the emergency room. Of those 56, 21 were pit bulls. And then when we look at our date even further, of the kids that were most severely injured, those that were in the hospital for more than 8 days or had life threatening injuries, 100% of those were pit bulls."






JOHN BINI, MD, chief of surgery at Wilford Hall Medical Center



MORTALITY, MAULING, AND MAIMING BY VICIOUS DOGS, April 2011 Annals of Surgery



DAVID E. BLOCKER, BS, MD, Dog Bite Rates and Biting Dog Breeds in Texas, 1995-1997




PETER ANTEVY, pediatric E.R. physician, Joe DiMaggio Children's Hospital
Dr Antvey sees at least five dog-bite victims a month in his emergency room. Unfortunately, he said, "the biggest offender is the pit bull."



MELISSA ARCA, MD
The reality is that any dog can bite, and statistically speaking, a child is most likely to be bitten by the family dog or a dog that they know. When you're talking about bite severity resulting in life-threatening and even fatal injuries, pit bulls and Rottweilers are the main culprits.

Experience absolutely colors our perception, and in this case I can't help but be affected by what I've seen. I will never forget a young child I treated in the ER during my pediatric residency. She suffered severe facial lacerations and tears to her face after a pit bull attack in her local park.




HORSWELL BB, CHAHINE CJ, oral surgeons
Dog bites of the facial region are increasing in children according to the Center for Disease Control. To evaluate the epidemiology of such injuries in our medical provider region, we undertook a retrospective review of those children treated for facial, head and neck dog bite wounds at a level 1 trauma center. Most dog bites occurred in or near the home by an animal known to the child/family. Most injuries were soft tissue related, however more severe bites and injuries were observed in attacks from the pit-bull and Rottweiler breeds. Younger (under five years) children sustained more of the injuries requiring medical treatment. Injury Severity Scales were determined as well as victim and payer mix demographics, type and characteristics of injury, and complications from the attack.



Dr RICHARD SATTIN, chief of unintentional-injuries section of the Centers of Disease Control
We're trying to focus public attention on this greatly underestimated public hazard.

In 1979, pit bulls accounted for 20 percent of fatal attacks by dogs. That figure had risen to 62 percent by 1988.


Nobody knows the dog population of the United States or the exact breakdown by breed.
We do not believe that pit bulls represent anywhere near 42% percent of dogs in the United States. Therefor, we believe that the pit bull excess in deaths is real and growing.



ROBERT D. NEWMAN, M.D.
As a pediatrician I was disturbed to read Vicki Hearne's assertion that there are no bad breeds, just bad dogs (Op-Ed, April 15). There is ample evidence to suggest that certain breeds of dogs are more dangerous to children than others.
From 1979 to 1994, there were 177 known dog-bite-related fatalities in the United States. Of these fatalities, 66 percent were caused by five breeds: pit bull, Rottweiler, shepherd, husky and malamute. If you include crosses among these five breeds, that number rises to 82 percent. Other breeds, like Labrador retrievers and golden retrievers were not implicated in a single fatality during this same period.
I laud the American Kennel Club's attempt to include information about dog breeds considered ''not good with children'' in the coming edition of ''The Complete Dog Book,'' and lament the fact that the book is being recalled at the request of some breeders.
Seattle, April 16, 1998



Dr. EDGAR JOGANIK (after trying to reattach scalp and ear to a pit bull victim)
Pit bull attacks are typically the most severe, and in about one-third of all attacks, the animals are family pets or belong to close friends.
That should be the message, that these dogs should not be around children, adults are just as likely to be victims.
Everyone should be extremely cautious.




DR. MICHAEL FEALY
When a Pit Bull is involved the bites are worse. When they bite, they bite and lock and they don't let go... they bite lock and they rip and they don't let go.



DR. CHRISTOPHER DEMAS
Bites from pit bulls inflict much more damage, multiple deep bites and ripping of flesh and are unlike any other domestic animal I've encountered. Their bites are devastating - close to what a wildcat or shark would do.



DR. AMY WANDEL, plastic surgeon
I see just as many dog bites from dogs that are not pit bulls as bites from pit bulls. The big difference is pit bulls are known to grab onto something and keep holding so their damage they create is worse than other breeds.



ANDREW FENTON, M.D.
As a practicing emergency physician, I have witnessed countless dog bites. Invariably, the most vicious and brutal attacks I have seen have been from the pit bull breed. Many of the victims have been children. In a recent study from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, pit bull attacks accounted for more ER visits than all other breeds combined.

In young children, the most common part of the body injured was the face. Numerous studies have proven that the number-one cause of dog bite fatalities is the pit bull breed. I am certain that many attacks are due to owner negligence, but the fact remains that many were unpredictable and were perpetrated by formerly "loving and loyal" pets.

Dr. Chagnon has every right to leave our town as she claims she will if pit bulls are banned, just like every one of her patients has the right not to attend her clinic where she brings her pit bulls. I applaud Mayor Pro Tem Joanne Sanders for bringing this issue to the forefront. In the interest of public safety, I recommend we enforce a spay/neuter requirement on pit bulls while reviewing and revamping all of our policies relating to animal bites.




DR. PATRICK BYRNE, Johns Hopkins Hospital
I can't think of a single injury of this nature that was incurred by any other species other than a pit bull or a rottweiler.



JUGPAL S. ARNEJA, MD, FRCSC, KARA PAPPAS, B.S., WILLIAM HUETTNER, M.D., ARLENE A. ROZZELLE, M.D., GURBALBIR SINGH, M.D., FRCSC
A ten-year, two-institution review of pediatric dog attacks: Advocating for a nationwide prohibition of dangerous dogs
PURPOSE:
Affectionately referred to as ‘man’s best friend’, dog attacks in the pediatric population often test this analogy. Pediatric dog attacks are a significant public health issue that negatively affects the psychological well-being of a child. We performed analysis of our cumulative two-institution pediatric dog attack data, present representative cases and offer evidence to support a nationwide prohibition of dangerous dogs.
METHODS:
A retrospective review was performed at two urban Children’s hospitals from 1996-2005 of all dog attacks presenting to the plastic surgery service. Charts were reviewed with analysis of patient demographics, injury site, operative intervention, and dog-specific data.
RESULTS:
109 patients were included for review, with 83% of attacks occurring in the facial region. Mean age was 3.9 years (range 2-18 years). 67% of attacks involved multiple anatomic sites, 95% required surgical intervention with 30% requiring a skin graft or flap reconstruction. 88% of dogs were known to the victim, 46% of attacks were provoked, 73% of dogs were euthanized and 57% of dogs were deemed to be of a dangerous breed (Pit Bill or Rottweiler). Mean hospital duration was 4.7 days and 27% required additional reconstructive plastic surgery. Figures below illustrate a representative case of a 4-year old female attacked by her aunt's dog, resulting in a complete nasal amputation, preoperatively (upper), at time of forehead flap reconstruction (middle), and five years post-operatively (lower), with an acceptable functional and aesthetic reconstruction.
CONCLUSION:
Dog attacks in the pediatric population produce significant costs including physical morbidity, psychological disability, and financial strains. A majority of attacks were by a known dog, in the facial region, by dogs which we define as of a dangerous breed. Much of the injury patterns are unique to children and these injuries and associated costs can be significantly diminished, as the problem is often preventable. Our cases present the ‘tip of the iceberg’ as our cases only represented consultations directed to Plastic Surgery. The Province of Ontario, Canada has banned Pit Bulls since 2004, as have several American cities. We describe the scope of the problem, preventative guidelines, and outline why organizational advocacy in plastic surgery should be directed towards a national prohibition of dangerous dogs.




M. A. DEWAN, EDWARD J. WLADIS, Ophthalmic Plastic Surgery, Lions Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Albany Medical College, Slingerlands, NY
Periorbital trauma from pit bull terrier attacks.
PURPOSE
To report the nature of periorbital trauma after pit bull attacks. While these attacks have been well-characterized in the popular media, no case series has documented the ophthalmic manifestations of this trauma.
METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed all cases of pit bull terrier attacks that presented to the oculoplastic and orbital surgery service at Albany Medical Center between 2008 and 2011. The age, gender, extent of the injuries, care provided, follow up interval, and complication rate were evaluated for each patient.
RESULTS
Seven patients were identified, with a mean age of 17.2 years. Six of the seven patients were in the pediatric age group. All patients suffered eyelid lacerations, and only one patient had additional injuries. Four patients (57.2%) suffered a canalicular laceration. Despite the lack of post-operative oral antibiotic use, no patient developed a wound infection.
CONCLUSIONS
In the ophthalmic setting, pit bull terrier attacks most frequently involve children and result in eyelid lacerations. Canalicular injuries are common after these attacks.




ALAN BECK, Sc.D


MERRITT CLIFTON, journalist, Animal People editor
There are very few people, if any, who have written more on behalf of dogs over the past 40-odd years than I have, or spent more time down the back alleys of the developing world observing dogs in the habitats in which normal dogs came to co-evolve with humans. But appreciation of the ecological roles of street dogs & coyotes, exposing dog-eating and puppy mills, opposition to indiscriminate lethal animal control, introduction of high-volume low-cost spay/neuter and anti-rabies vaccination, introduction of online adoption promotion, encouraging the formation of thousands of new humane societies worldwide, etc., are not to be confused with pit bull advocacy. Pit bull advocacy is not defending dogs; it is defending the serial killers of the dog world, who kill, injure, and give bad reputations to all the rest. Indeed, pit bull advocacy, because it erodes public trust in dogs and people who care about dogs, stands a good chance of superseding rabies as the single greatest threat to the health, well-being, and human appreciation of all dogs worldwide.



STANLEY COREN, PhD
"A dog's breed tells us a lot about that dog's genetic heritage and makeup. Genetics is a strong determinant of personality. In the absence of any other information, we can make a reasonable prediction about how the dog will behave based upon its breed." p 84

"When we crossbreed, we lose some of that predictability, since which genes will be passed on by each parent and how they will combine is a matter of chance. Fortunately, there is some data to suggest that we can still make predispositions without knowing much about its parentage. John Paul Scott and John L Fuller carried out a series of selective breeding experiments at the Jackson Laboratories in Bar Harbor, Maine. By happy chance, their results revealed a simple rule that seems to work. Their general conclusion was that a mixed breed dog is most likely to act like the breed that it most looks like." p 77

Dog trainers/animal control

TARYN BLYTH, Dog Trainer
  1. No one is saying that a lot of Pit Bulls can’t be “successfully” socialised with other dogs. Many socialised from puppyhood are very friendly and outgoing with other dogs. The problem arises if and when fighting behaviour is triggered. Even if the Pit Bull does not start the fight, getting into conflict with another animal will often trigger their “grab, shake and kill” response.
  2. “Normal” dogs engage in “ritualised” forms of aggression when they come into conflict. This involves lots of noise, but no real damage. However, when Pit Bulls fight they engage the shake-bite/kill-bite part of the predatory sequence with often fatal or near fatal results. There is seldom time to intervene to rescue the other dog before serious damage is done.
  3. When Pit Bulls engage in a fight, far from this inducing an aversive state of mind (most dogs are in a defensive, survival mode during fights), opioids and dopamine are released in their brains making them feel really good - this feeling is so pleasurable that they will often seek out this behaviour again. In the same way that a border collie is built to feel really good when herding sheep, Pit Bulls are built to feel really good when fighting.
  4. Due to the opioid release during fights, Pit Bulls do not feel pain and so fight on regardless of injury - trying to stop a fight is incredibly difficult.
  5. When “normal” dogs fight, they usually respond to appeasement behaviour from their “opponent” i.e. as fighting is not designed to kill, but to resolve conflict without serious harm, one dog may “give in” and display behaviour which will cause the other dog to back off. Pit Bulls do not respond to appeasement behaviour during fights as this would have been counterproductive in the fighting pits and has been bred out of them.
  6. In my experience Pit Bulls have a very low reactivity threshold - this means that stimuli at low intensities which would be ignored by other dogs are often triggers for aggressive behaviour in the breed. They also have very high arousal levels - they become physiologically aroused very quickly and to extreme levels.
One of the huge problems is actually the fact that the breed is extremely friendly and when well-socialised they are usually quite tolerant and very sweet. What people don’t realise is that the danger does not lie in the fearful, defensive under-socialised Pit Bull (as is so often the case with other breeds), it lies in the dog who will be triggered not into defensive behaviour, but into a predatory/fighting behaviour which is enjoyable and carried out in a happy state of mind - therefore a happy, outgoing dog is in this case no guarantee that one will not have a problem. In fact, due to the sociable nature of the dogs and apparent easy-going temperament, Pit Bulls are often put into situations which they are not equipped to handle - this is how so many tragedies occur.

TRISH KING, Director, Behavior & Training Dept. Marin Humane Society

The fourth undesirable characteristic - arousal or excitement - is actually the most problematic. Many bully dogs cannot seem to calm themselves down once they get excited. And once they get excited all their behaviors are exacerbated. Thus, if a dog is over-confident and has a tendency to body slam or mount, he or she will really crash into the other dog or person when he's aroused, sometimes inadvertently causing injury. He may begin to play-bite, and then bite harder and harder and harder. When you try to stop the behavior, the dog often becomes even more "aggressive." In this way, play can turn into aggression fairly quickly. Research on the brain has shown that excited play has exactly the same chemistry as extreme anger. This allows a play behavior to switch quickly into aggression. And, once the dog has become aggressive a few times, the switch is much easier.



DIANE JESSUP, pit bull expert, breeder, former ACO
"Jessup, the animal control officer in Olympia, uses two pit bulls to train police and animal control officers on surviving dogs attacks.
Unlike dogs who are nippers and rippers, her pit bulls are typically "grippers" who bite down and hang onto their victims."


Jessup believes that much of dog behavior comes from their genes. “I truly believe that a dog is about 90% genetics,” says Jessup.
on protection sports
This difference in “sheepdog versus bulldog” mentality in a trainer is best understood when training the "out!” or release command. It is common practice for those training shepherds and sheepdog types to use force such as hard leash corrections or electric shock to get the dog to release the sleeve. Sadly, I had one young man come to me because a club trainer was slugging his little Am Staff bitch in the nose, till she bled, trying to get her to release the sleeve. She would not! And of course she would not! She was a good little bulldog, hanging on for dear life, just as her bull and bear baiting ancestors of old did. She was a super little gripping dog, who took the pain she experienced as just “part of the job” once her owner set her upon the sleeve. And this is the response from well bred pit bulldogs—to ignore pain while gripping. It is, after all, what they are bred for! Give me a bulldog like her, rather than one which will allow itself to be yanked off the sleeve due to pain.



MICHAEL BURNS, Los Angeles Animal Control Lt.
You have a dog that has aggressive tendencies enhanced through constant and incestuous breeding. If there are some recessive genes on the aggressive or psychotic side, they will make themselves manifest.

They are different. There's an absence of the normal sounds a dog makes when it attacks. It's almost a workmanlike way they hold on in an attack. It's a persistence I haven't seen in any other breed.




KURT LAPHAM, a field investigator for the West Coast Regional office of the Humane Society
Most breeds do not multiple-bite. A pit bull attack is like a shark attack: He keeps coming back.



DAVID GENDREGSKE, Clare County MI Animal Control Director
“In my opinion they appeal to the most irresponsible pet owners and to younger people,” he said. “The younger people have no jobs to support the animal, or they have to move where animals aren’t allowed and (the dogs) end up here.” Certain people like pit bulls because they are intimidating, he said. “They want to scare people. It’s an intimidation thing. They’re number one with those being incarcerated. If there’s a dog left behind (when someone is sentenced to jail or prison), it’s always a pit bull,” he said. He cited the time a pit bull got out of a car and attacked a horse. He was pulled off, but he went back and grabbed the throat. He was pulled off again and again and went back after different parts of the horse. “What kind of a dog but a pit bull would do that?” he asked. “All dogs can bite but not with that ferocity. “ Some people will say that how a pit bull acts and reacts is dependent upon how the dog is raised, he said. “But he was raised to kill for centuries,” he said. “You can’t breed it out in one generation.” If the popularity of pit bulls is a fad, it’s a long term one, he said. “I keep seeing more and more pit bulls,” he said. “It’s getting worse.” Pit bulls, he said, are not good as a working dog, except for perhaps wild boar hunting. “And they’re not one of the smarter breeds,” he said, despite other’s beliefs that they are intelligent.



KEVIN COUTTS, Head Dog Ranger, Rotura, New Zealand
There was concern among dog authorities about American pitbulls being allowed into New Zealand as they were dangerous, unpredictable animals, Mr Coutts said.

"A lot of people in this town get them because they are a staunch dog and they will fight. They are perceived as vicious ... It's frustrating they were ever allowed in the country ... we can't go back now though," Mr Coutts said.


COUTTS' comment on a pit car mauling
This sort of thing happens when people own this breed of dog and then don't look after them.



GARRETT RUSSO, dog trainer
I estimate Medical & Veterinary bills related to injuries caused by pit bulls in the Tompkins Square dog run in 2011, $140,000.00. Estimated Medical (human) & Veterinary (canine) bills from all other breeds and mixed breeds combined during the same period, $5,000.00. (Estimate gathered from reports to by owners to the dog park association.)



VICTORIA STILWELL, celebrity dog trainer
Presas are not to be fooled with, they're dangerous. You've got a fighting breed here. You've got a dog that was bred for fighting. You've got one of the most difficult breeds to handle.



CESAR MILAN, celebrity dog trainer
"Yeah, but this is a different breed...the power that comes behind bull dog, pit bull, presa canario, the fighting breed - They have an extra boost, they can go into a zone, they don't feel the pain anymore. He is using the bulldog in him, which is way too powerful, so we have to 'make him dog' (I guess as in a "regular" dog) so we can actually create the limits. So if you are trying to create submission in a fighting breed, it's not going to happen. They would rather die than surrender.". If you add pain, it only infuriates them..to them pain is that adrenaline rush, they are looking forward to that, they are addicted to it... That's why they are such great fighters." Cesar goes on to say..."Especially with fighting breeds, you're going to have these explosions over and over because there's no limits in their brain."



STEVE DUNO, dog trainer, pit bull owner
"The dogs that participated in these attacks weren't Pekingese. You don't have herds of Pekingese roaming the city attacking people. When someone says all breeds are created equal, well then they're denying the definition of what a breed is. Breed serves a particular purpose."

"I like them. They're eager. They're athletic. They're aesthetically pleasing. But even if they're bred perfectly, they can be problematic, particularly with other dogs."

"When you combine the breed specific behaviors ... with owners who either don't give a rip, or with owners who (have) too much dog, you have a problem."



JEAN DONALDSON, dog trainer



ARLENE STERLING, Newaygo County, MI Chief Animal Control Officer






JIM CROSBY, pit bull hired gun




Insurance industry

PILAR WAGNAR, Allstate spokeswoman, Clearwater, FL



Lawyers/Judges

THOMAS J. MOYER, Chief Justice, Ohio Supreme Court 1987-2010
"The trial court cited the substantial evidence supporting its conclusion that pit bulls, compared to other breeds, cause a disproportionate amount of danger to people. The chief dog warden of Lucas County testified that: (1) when pit bulls attack, they are more likely to inflict severe damage to their victim than other breeds of dogs; (2) pit bulls have killed more Ohioans than any other breed of dog; (3) Toledo police officers fire their weapons in the line of duty at pit bulls more often than they fire weapons at people and all other breeds of dogs combined; (4) pit bulls are frequently shot during drug raids because pit bulls are encountered more frequently in drug raids than any other dog breed.... The evidence presented in the trial court supports the conclusion that pit bulls pose a serious danger to the safety of citizens. The state and the city have a legitimate interest in protecting citizens from the danger posed by this breed of domestic dogs."



WILLIAM M HOEVELER, US DISTRICT JUDGE, ADOA v Dade County, Florida
Despite plaintiffs' contention that there is no such animal as a pit bull, plaintiffs' own experts have written articles about their pedigreed dogs referring to them by the common nickname of pit bull. At trial, these experts identified photographs of dogs as pit bulls, rather than delineating the dogs into any one of the three breeds recognized by the kennel clubs. Moreover, veterinarians commonly identify dogs as pit bulls -- rather than one of the three recognized breeds -- by their physical characteristics. Two veterinarians, testifying for the defendants, stated that they are often called upon to identify a dog's breed because it is an integral part of the animal's health record. This they do by reference to standard physical characteristics. Generally, these veterinarians testified, owners themselves know what breed their dog is.

There was ample testimony that most people know what breed their dogs are. Although the plaintiffs and their experts claim that the ordinance does not give them enough guidance to enable owners to determine whether their dogs fall within its scope, the evidence established that the plaintiffs themselves often use the term "pit bull" as a shorthand method of referring to their dogs. Numerous magazine and newspaper articles, including articles in dog fancier magazines, refer to pit bull dogs. Veterinarians typically refer to the three recognized breeds and mixed breeds with conforming characteristics as pit bulls. In addition, the veterinarians who testified stated that most of their clients know the breeds of their dogs.



DON BAUERMEISTER, Council Bluffs, IA prosecutor



BOB JOHNSTONE, Cincinnati, OH city attorney



KORY NELSON, Denver, CO City Attorney
The most significant point about the justification for bans or restrictions of pit bulls is that these are not dependent upon a claim that every pit bull has a higher than average propensity for attacking humans. The justification is based on the clear evidence that, as a group, pit bulls, compared to other breeds, generally have a higher propensity to exhibit unique behavioral traits during an attack. These behaviors havea higher likelihood of causing more severe injuries or death. The Colorado Dog Fanciers trial court made this clear, stating that, while it could not be proven that pit bulls bite more than other dogs, there was “credible evidence that Pit Bull dog attacks are more severe and more likely to result in fatalities.” The court, in great detail, noted fourteen separate areas of differences, including: strength, manageability and temperament, unpredictability of aggression, tenacity, pain tolerance and manner of attack.

A municipality that is experiencing a problem with pit bull attacks needs to consider for itself the best course of action to protect its citizens, especially those most likely to be unable to defend themselves from the tenacious and sustained attack of a pit bull, who will likely bite, hold, and tear at its victim despite efforts to stop it. However, given the clear rational evidence, breed-specific legislation is still a legally viable option.There is no new evidence that undermines the holdings of Colorado Dog Fanciers, only new relevant evidence that adds additional support for BSL, as the differential treatment of pit bulls is based upon logical, rational evidence from the scientific field of ethology.



KENNETH PHILLIPS, Attorney for dog bite victims dogbitelaw.com
In 2013, there have been 18 canine homicides of which 17 were committed by pit bulls or pit bull mixes. Our dogs are not killing us. Pit bulls are killing us. And although pit bulls attack and kill strangers like Claudia Gallardo, 38 (killed by a pit bull in the front yard of its owner's house in Stockton, California) and Pamela Devitt, 63 (killed by 4 pit bulls running at large as she took a walk in Antelope Valley, California), the usual victims are our children, parents and guests.

I have come to believe that the modern pit bull should not be thought of as a dog at all. A dog is man’s best friend, but this is an animal that will kill the man, his wife, his children, his parents and the guests in his home. Clearly this is not man’s best friend; clearly it is not a “dog” in the sense that we think of a dog. Charles Manson was anatomically a man, sociologically a neighbor, and legally a citizen, but he is spending his life behind bars because he was a deranged individual who orchestrated mayhem and murder. Just because pit bulls look like dogs, they do not have to be thought of like we think about dogs such as golden retrievers and Yorkshire terriers.

In almost all homicides carried out by pit bulls, the owners and neighbors express shock and disbelief because the animal never gave a sign that it wanted to kill anyone. But to me, this is like a drunk driver expressing shock and disbelief that his car could kill. In both types of cases, a person made a choice to do something incredibly reckless, either by getting drunk or by getting the animal that makes headlines because of the frequency and brutality of its killing. We need to stop people from doing these reckless things.

Lawmakers have to stop listening to the nonsense about breed specific laws which is spouted by the owners of bully dogs like pit bulls. Since 2006 there have been 3 psychological studies which focused on the personality and behavioral traits of the owners of pit bulls and other high-risk breeds of dog. A study published in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence showed a link between ownership of high-risk dog breeds and deviant behaviors, crimes against children and domestic violence. Another study concluded that "vicious dog ownership may be a simple marker of broader social deviance." A third study established that the owners of high-risk breeds of dog displayed more antisocial thinking styles, have an arrest history significantly higher than owners of other dogs, and engage in fighting to a significantly greater degree than other dog owners. They also had higher levels of overall criminal thinking patterns to go with the actual criminal behavior. These people, who are fixated on the animals that kill, maim and terrorize, are not the people that a lawmaker needs in his camp. Reasonable people want fair laws that provide a solution to the obvious problems caused by pit bulls.


Pit Bull breeders, owners, fanciers, experts

DIANE JESSUP, Washington pit bull owner and expert



JOHN ROCKHOLT, South Carolina dogman


MARK PAULHUS, HSUS southeast regional coordinator


KATE RINDY, co-author Pit Bulls Are Different, former HSUS employee and assistant to Randall Lockwood, former executive director of Santa Fe Animal Shelter & Humane Society




PEGGY E. WARFLE, Manager Wake Society to Prevent Cruelty to Animal Shelters, Raleigh, NC.





DAVID PREMACK, PhD



this list will be continually updated

130 comments:

Anonymous said...

FAMOUS PIT NUTTERS IN HISTORY:

February 8, 1910: First African American Heavy Weight Boxing Champion Jack Johnson is incarcerated in Detroit after his "Prize Bulldog" nearly chews the arm off a Detroit citizen. He vows that he will spend all he is worth to save the dog's life.

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=FA0B10FE3F5417738DDDA00894DA405B808DF1D3

Johnson is occasionally cited by the Pit Breeding lobby as a "Famous American who owned Pit Bulls".

You can't make this stuff up!

Sputnik2009 said...

Two much more recent pit nutters:

1) Jean Donaldson, who to this day anti-scientifically states at every opportunity that -- unlike border collies, pointers, etc -- there is nothing genetic in the killing behavior of fighting / baiting breed dogs.

2) Ian Dunbar consistently states that he just loves pit bulls because they smile at him so much and have never bitten him. Never mind who or what else they savage.

See also DogBites.org re Science Whores.

NoMoreBullS said...

"carefully designed to not like strangers"
That's the breeders propaganda. Fact is that these dogs love to eat their owners and his family just as much as they love to eat strangers.

LOL @ PHOOLS and A-HOLES said...

NoMoreBullS: can i take it you dont "RespectAbull" ? "my dog is so harmless but you better respect him" "my dog is so sweet but he would defend me to the death" and finally "my dog never starts a fight, he finishes them"

Anonymous said...

Contrast all of this to pit nutters' ideas of "experts", usually vet techs, self-educated dog "trainers", and just long-term pit owners.

I've owned cars for 25 years, computers for 29, and a swimming pool for 18. According to nutter logic, that makes me a master mechanic, a programmer, and a landscape architect. Want to hire me to work on your car's computer system? How about let me install an in-ground swimming pool for you? Come on! What could possibly go wrong?

craven desires said...

awesome comment anon 10:01.

i would add dog groomers to your short list of experts :)

snack sized dog said...

Unfortunately, some of these experts despite what their years of experience told them now advocate for pit bulls, putting fighting dogs from dog fighting busts in your neighbors' homes because he is now reaping benefits from the pit bull lobby.

Randy Lockwood is one of the worst. I haven't read jean Donaldson, but have been told she understands genetics when dealing with any other kind of dog, but when she looks at a pit bull, her brain falls out. either that or she's reaping some benefit from the pit bull lobby...

Ian Dunbar makes his living medicating dogs with behavior problems so he's beholden to Big Pharm and to the pit bull lobby, so there's no way in hell he'd want to ban pit bulls - they're his bread and butter. In fact he needs more fucked up pit bulls in peoples' homes.

Shortly after his arrival, Dr. Dodman became interested in behavioral pharmacology and the field of animal behavior. After spending several years in this area of research, he founded the Animal Behavior Clinic at Tufts - one of the first of its kind - in 1986.


It is strange how a number of these experts suddenly morons when they meet the pit bull lobby...

craven desires said...

oops, you meant to write nicholas dodman but wrote ian dunbar.

both grating on the nerves, easy to confuse.

are they morons or vain cowards?

facebook launched a nasty campaign against hugh wirth a year ago. i think a lot of these "experts" prefer to be popular at any cost. i am waiting to see if wirth buckles.

i prefer to be unpopular with my integrity intact.

craven desires said...

i need to figure out how to make active links in my comments.

snack sized dog said...

Ah yes, craven, thank you! dammit, I should make an effort to keep them straight, though, because they each have their own special lying and shilling niche.

I think they're vain and greedy. And morons if they think this is a sustainable farce.

The more successful they are, the more maulings there will be and the more people who will know someone who knows someone killed by a neighbor's pit bull that was rescued from the fighting ring thanks to a Randy Lockwood, was trained by a Jean Donaldson and medicated by a Nicholas Dodman.

snack sized dog said...

craven, its in your email!

Anonymous said...

Yes, anon 10:01s comment is spot on and I've been thinking about what makes an expert an expert - and its basically peer review of the person's work, not a review of the person. You don't graduate to permanent expert status

The most famous and extreme example is Linus Pauling who won the nobel prize for quantum chemistry - so, he'd be considered an expert in that and he was also incredibly intelligent. But he was also called a quack for his work and study on vitamin C.

So, i guess even if you can effectively use breeding techniques to produce some of the best herding dogs around, that doesn't mean you aren't a quack when you opine about fighting dogs.

DubV said...

"I've been a vet tech for 5 years"

Translates into "I have a two year associates degree. I am around many animals all day in an environment foreign to them, and usually their owner is present."

Sorry to any vet techs, but this seems a haven job for animal nutters. You get to be around animals all day but don't need the mental chops to get into and graduate from veterinary school.

craven desires said...

you are reading my mind dubv. vet tech suzanne phillips inspired this blog post.

craven desires said...

this is a test

Jake said...

Hey, it's a clicky link! Test successful!

Anonymous said...

You bash 'experts' that defend certain breeds of dogs, yet you act as if you are better qualified to 'pass judgment' on these dogs.

Do you take any other information into account, other than the dogs' breed? The full situation, the owners history, how the dog was raised, the extreme discrimination in our society towards breeds?

You all also bring up that genetics are the huge aspect of 'fighting' dogs. Everything isn't just nature, it's nuture, too. Sure, they pick what they believe to be the most muscular dog type, but aggression isn't genetic - it's taught. (And as a side note, if, and I use that loosely because it'll never happen, you 'nutters' somehow successfully destroy thousands of innocent dog lives, wouldn't Dog Fighters just get a new breed? Yes, they would, then what? You'll try to destroy those dogs, too?)

And while you're bringing up all this news about Pit Bulls, what about non-PitBull attacks? I know Chihuahua's aren't all that friendly, and Golden Retrievers have reports about having bit someone, too. But is the news going to report it the masses? Of course not. That's not exactly exciting news.

Research a bit more on both sides, then toss about your bigotry. Oh, and Dogsbite.org - wasn't that made by a lady who was bitten by a PitBull? And she's now promoting to eradicate them? Mmm, nothing like a biased genocide.

Sorry, for the long comment, I was just researching Pit Bulls for a report I'm doing (about dog breed discrimination no less!) and stumbled upon this. Enjoy being prejudice. :)

Jake said...

The smug yet sadly illogical arguments, the combative, accusative tone and the silly non-sequiturs suggest to me that a familiar nemesis has just paid us another visit. I think Craven knows who it is too.

Anonymous said...

Aggression isn't genetic? BWAHAHAHAHAHA! I'm sorry. I honestly couldn't read another word you wrote after that. Do you also still believe the world is flat and 6,000 years old and the moon landing was staged?

If so, hire me to install your in-ground pool. I'll do it for $5,000, a special deal just for you.

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:50 - you're an idiot.

I'm a life long APBT owner. My dogs were bred down from dogs designed to destroy their opponent on the carpet, and take a beating or their death while doing it. To say their behavior isn't HARDWIRED into their genetics shows you are one of those rescue angels or fur mommies that thinks their dogs have more rights than people.

Some might think it's mean I keep my dogs on 20 ft chains behind a privacy fence and 6 ft chain link miles from town where we live. I think it's the right and safe thing to do, since I know what my dogs are capable of. They all get off their chain for a walk once a week, or put on the mill in the hot months for 10 minutes once a week. They get attention from me and my wife every day when we check their feeders and water buckets and clean their spots.

But they don't get out, we don't take them to dog parks, our kid's friends aren't over playing in the dog yard, they don't sleep on the couch, they are never unattended alone. You know why?????? Because they're designed to kill shit and take a licking while doing so.

Anyone who claims otherwise is putting their families and neighbor's pets in danger. You are a fucking idiot and part of the problem with these dogs. They are discriminated against because they ARE a liability. Even the cold dogs we have aren't allowed off their chains to "play." You never know what's going to turn them on. Could be another dog, a fury little creature, a little child screaming and playing, you just don't know. That's why we take the precautions we have and have never had any accidents.

People like you are an accident waiting to happen.

p.s. - to Cravendesires - like stated I am a lifelong APBT owner. I advocate BSL. I don't break the law and follow my state's laws as far as owning this breed (enclosed area with a top, liability insurance for each animal, all vaccinations are up to date, etc etc.). I honestly feel if owners of "real" APBTs were more exposed to your posts that you'd be surprised how many issues we see eye to eye on. After spending a few days looking back through your blog, I'm quickly becoming a fan of what you advocate. I just wanted to let you know that. Keep up the good work putting idiots in the spotlight.

shar pei mix said...

I can predict the final grade for your paper, Anon, if only for the poor use of grammar and spelling alone.

P.S: Is biased genocide equivalent to canine racism?

skeptifem said...

This was extremely helpful!

I wonder if maybe the experts who changed their minds were scared rather than cowardly or bought off? There seems to be a pattern of threats against people who challenge the pit nutters (either legal or physical).

Anonymous said...

Thanks to the anonymous pit owner...I think a lot of us have realized over time that the biggest danger with these dogs is coming from the rescue groups, and "pro-pit" fanatics like Bad Rap and Tia Torres, who have figured out that they can make money promoting these dogs. Get the dogs out of the hands of the bybers and rescue angels, and you will avoid outright bans.


Why don't more of you speak out? Instead you allow weirdos like Donna Reynolds to become the face of breed stewardship...and she's telling all these 19 year old, high school drop out rescue angels that they can "rehabilitate" fight bust dogs and place them into pet homes.

snack sized dog said...

skeptifem,

I think they are all pressured and also offered incentives - sticks and carrots...As craven mentioned they start facebook campaigns, polls, organize letter writing campaigns against people who dare stick to their guns. The leaders flex their muscle by inciting their woo group into action. They do threaten people's livelihoods.

I think the cowards are the ones who are willing to take a stance against BSL while at the same time acknowledging the genetics of pit bull aggression and attack behavior Why did Jean Donaldson come out fiercely against BSL? She must be getting rewarded for that.

Alexandra Semyonova fiercely stands her ground, and so does Gary Wilkes.

Tracy B Ann wrote the examiner.com's most commented article of all time and it was about why she works with pit bulls but believes in BSL. She says outright she is vilified in professional dog training circles. Of course her article is the most commented article because the nutters came out en masse to spew their bile against what she wrote.

Dog trainers only benefit from desperate pit bull owners who have been duped into believing they can train out the aggression and attack behavior they see in their pit bulls. In addition to regular obedience classes, they can offer pit bull puppy socialization classes to help nutters get their tiny puppy to meet that magic number of 100 new people before it's 6 mos old. They can offer special classes for dominance and aggression.

snack sized dog said...

anon APBT owner,

If you are doing what you say you're doing perfectly all the time, then indeed the public is safe from your dogs.

But why do it? Unless you're a dog fighter and making money off the dogs, why keep them out there in the woods, go feed and water them, and walk weekly???

Its a miserable life for the dogs, and what possible point would there be other than to fight them yourself or breed them for fighters?

Anonymous said...

"In my view, the first time a breed kills a child — without extreme provocation — the breed should be eliminated. After all, there is no difficulty producing breeds that do not kill children. Indeed, breeds that do not kill children despite extreme provocation can be readily produced."

Well it looks like we should eradicate Golden Retrievers then. We can all thank Skippy from Freetown, Massachusetts for that.

Hey Jake, isn't your avatar of Hachiko, the famed Akita? And um, weren't Akitas bred for fighting?

Anonymous said...

Snack Sized - I'm preserving generations of my family's dogs. And in generations, our dogs have been kept out of the hands of idiots. They are not involved in accidents or attacks, and they never have or ever will make the news. They are not a threat to anyone or their property. They are my property, and I raise them how I see fit. That translates to keeping them safe from the public and the public safe from them. Like I stated, I abide by all local, state, and federal laws. My yard and home has been visited before by animal control and local law enforcement. No problems there. The vet comes to our home to vaccinate, and all records are kept up to date and readily available. I don't have "dogfighting equipment" as certain folks like to label it. No slatmills, carpet mills, flirtpoles, springpoles, syringes, supplements, etc. I don't even keep break sticks because I know I go through enough preventative maintenance daily and keep them properly so there's never a question of if an accident could happen. Been keeping these dogs since I was a teenager and my father let me start helping with yard upkeep. And I'll keep them until I'm gone. If I haven't willed ownership to someone, the yard gets put to sleep if and when I die. I like to feel I cover my bases and don't leave holes. You'll never have to worry about me or my dogs. But thank you for the concern.

Jake said...

@anon 7:27 -

You are correct, my current avatar image is Hachi - a dog famous not for a mauling but for his loyalty.

Regarding your comment about Akitas and fighting, the Akita is an ancient, naturally occurring breed which happens to possess the strength, size and temperament to be good fighters.

Contrast that with the pit bull, a breed specifically created for the stated objective of killing things. They were specifically selected for aggression, bred to attack other animals on sight, to clamp down and not let go. Forged in the crucible of the pit, so to speak.

Again, it's all relative - "any dog can bite" as the nutters like to say, but look at the fatalities associated with the 2 breeds. The 28 year Meritt study indicates 172 deaths from pit bulls and pit mixes, but only 1 death from Akitas.

In other words, an Akita is not anywhere near as likely to launch a surprise attack as a pit bull is.

DubV said...

Is that perhaps lycan princess spouting nonsense?

"You bash 'experts' that defend certain breeds of dogs, yet you act as if you are better qualified to 'pass judgment' on these dogs."

If the reasoning of "experts" is shown to be faulty, then anyone can expose it and question their "expert" status. The poster does not get that everything in life is not simply an opinion that can be asserted and we are forced to accept the opinion of an authority figure. It doesn't work like that.

This anonymous poster will never realize that they do not make sense. It would be too psychologically damaging for them to realize they are a moron, will live the life of a moron, and die the death of a moron.

DubV said...

"Do you take any other information into account, other than the dogs' breed? The full situation, the owners history, how the dog was raised, the extreme discrimination in our society towards breeds?"

No one doubts that nurture plays a role. However, how overwhelming does the apparent breed effect have to be before you realize that nature (breed) also plays a role?


Craven and the public safety advocates here are fully willing to accept the complexity of any given dog bite situation. I for one accept both nature and nurture as contributions. Do you accept this? If you do, then you by default realize that certain breeds are more dangerous. If the poster fully realizes the complexity of the situation, then they lose the argument. Therefore, you are the one being overly simplistic. What you call taking all these factors into account is: 1. deciding beforehand that breed has no influence and 2. straining to find any reason possible in any situation to disregard the breed effect.

The people who read this blog have seen your arguments hundreds of times. They have also seen your arguments destroyed hundreds of times. We understand both sides of the argument, you do not.

DubV said...

"aggression isn't genetic - it's taught"

Is the poster calling past dogmen idiots?

Only an idiot (or group of collaborating idiots) would have as a goal the creation of a fighting dog and NOT select for at least dog-directed aggression.

The poster likely does not believe that pit bulls were selectively bred for fighting. This is a common misconception among pit nutters for some reason. I guess one of them was smart enough to realize that admitting this would undermine most of their other arguments. So, we get to here fantasies about how pit bulls were bred to protect farmers. In their defense (meaning they are more idiots than liars), they may not understand genetics or domestication well enough to realize what they are saying.

Just because some people were dumb enough to get a pit bull to guard their farm, and this person subsequently had a few pit bull litters, does not mean that their animals were "bred to protect a farm".

DubV said...

From anonymous idiot...

"And while you're bringing up all this news about Pit Bulls, what about non-PitBull attacks? I know Chihuahua's aren't all that friendly, and Golden Retrievers have reports about having bit someone, too. But is the news going to report it the masses? Of course not. That's not exactly exciting news."

In fact, a chihuahua killing someone (especially an adult) would be incredibly sensational news. It would be so unexpected and a rare event that it would be all over the tube.

Do you think at all before you type?

The last commentary will be on your reference to people being "prejudice" (sic, in context) toward dogs and of doggie "bigotry" and "discrimination". You need to realize that dogs are not only NOT people, and so different conceptions apply, but they are NOT EVEN CLOSE to being people.

Just create a few subspaces in your mind. Place in one how you think about non-human animals and the other where you place humans. Of course, ethics and morality in both boxes will have some overlap, but the way you think in this way is incredibly sloppy.

P. said...

So I guess that all the genetic research going on in the world is a waste of time, huh? If genetics didn't matter why have there been medical advances because of the findings of genetics? Just imagine with a little TLC, there would be no diabetics, no bald men, no deformaties and we would all live wonderful healthful lives. Get real, nutters, or the next attack could take you or one of your loved ones. The truth is the truth and denying it won't make it go away. I think these fools actually enjoy the fact that pits are doing what they do. They show no remorse, no sympathy unless, of course, it is one of their own. Learning your lesson the hard way means someone has to pay a high price of losing their life.

And the anon that keeps his dogs chained like he does, that is sick and you need help. Do you do the same for your children? After all, they can grow up to be murderers, why not put them on a chain to make sure the public is safe. What you do is not responsibility, it is disgusting.

Jake said...

@P.

I wouldn't be too hard on anon 5:31 - he's realistic, he understands the breed, and he takes responsibility not to endanger the lives of his neighbors.

What would you have him do, let his pits run free? Take them to the local playground? I don't think so.

If all pit owners were as careful as anon 5:31 the result would be drastically fewer maulings and deaths by pit bull.

Anonymous said...

More to the point, if genetics don't matter then why are Chihuahuas known for aggression? Chihuahuas ARE genetically aggressive but pits aren't? Whatever.

As far as the pit chainer goes, I don't judge how you keep your dogs as long as you keep them away from the rest of the world. I don't, in all honesty, much care if you DO fight them. Years and years of pits attacking and killing other dogs, cats, farm animals, wild animals, and children have really taken away my ability to sympathize with the lot of fighting dogs. However, I too am curious as to the WHY of keeping them? Seems like so much work for so little reward.

mrs.Poodle said...

"And while you're bringing up all this news about Pit Bulls, what about non-PitBull attacks? I know Chihuahua's aren't all that friendly, and Golden Retrievers have reports about having bit someone,"

Why don't you mention Rottweilers Anon 9.50? The no.2 killer dog? Don't want to talk about them? Why do you prefer to talk about chihuahua nips?

Anonymous said...

"While I'm not out actively looking to kill pit bulls, I certainly consider the fighting ability of an Akita to be a plus if it we are ever attacked."

Spoken like a true dog fighter,Jake.

I must apologize to you Jake. I've accused you in the past of having half a brain. I was mistaken.

snack sized dog said...

@anon preservationist apbt keeper

"I'm preserving generations of my family's dogs."
For what are you preserving your dad's line?
Ah, is that like preserving the breed?

Cause I see you being super responsible. and you know as well as I do that the dog fighters kept everything contained from the 40's to the 70's and there were few pit bull attacks then.

But I still don't see the point of preserving a line of dogs for no reason. Going into the woods to feed and water them, walking them once a week...what fun is that? Or do you have a purpose?

What line are they? I bet they're a good one. You know you got to roll them or you can't call them game.

Anonymous said...

"What line are they? I bet they're a good one. You know you got to roll them or you can't call them game."

The only good thing about folks like the annon dog fighter is that they are worth 5 grand if I see them testing their dogs. Other than that they are in the same low life class as haters.

Anonymous said...

Would you be happier if he had a Lab? Your pit would have an easier time killing it, right?

The nerve of you, Jake, having a dog that might be able to give a pit a run for it's money. Don't you know that the only people allowed to have dogs that can kill other dogs are pit owners?

Jake said...

@anon 3:41 - let me see if I can simplify this for you.

If I'm out walking my 10 lb chihuahua and she's attacked by a mutant, she will likely be fatally wounded within the first couple of seconds. So, to be on the safe side, I've got to stop the attack before it begins, meaning I have to be super vigilant at all times, knife at the ready - a bit stressful, truth be told.

Are you with me so far?

Now, if I'm out walking my 100 lb Akita and a loose mutant comes after him, I can wait a few moments and see how things play out. Chances are, I won't have to do a thing.

But on the off chance that things do begin to go badly, I still have the option of intervening to spare my boy any unneeded additional trauma.

Hopefully this brings some clarity to my comment about the Akita's ability to defend itself being a plus. Let me know if I need to clarify things further as I'm always happy to oblige.

snack sized dog said...

Jake,

I don't have much love for akitas - of all the dogs in the world the only dogs that ever attacked my dogs and they were both unprovoked were a pit bull and an akita.

Why would you get a COMPANION animal based on its ability to kick a fighting dog's ass? or stand up to one. You're then stuck with a dog aggressive dog. and face it, most dogs you meet won't be pit bulls.

And akitas are notoriously dominant. I know some people love playing the "i'm superior to a dog" game, but, really, you can't be that kind of person because those kind of people are morons.

Who wants a kind of dog you always have to prove yourself to? I mean really? I never in my life had to prove to my dogs i'm their master. they can go out the door first, they can walk in front of me, I can walk over them without making them move, they never try to put me in my place. I seriously have better things to do than try to maintain alpha status over a fucking dog.

Do you really want to live like that? Thinking, oh, I have to change my behavior to act like a dominant dog (which is a step down from being human, btw)

Why not just be a great human being with great dogs who know how to be your companions and fight like hell to make pit bull owners be responsible?

Jake said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jake said...

@ Snack -

I understand your concern. If I knew for sure that having an Akita will be like that I wouldn't be so keen on the idea.

I love my little doggies, and it wouldn't occur to me to think of them as status symbols. They are more like permanent toddlers who I am obligated to care for (and love doing so)

It's not that I have a need for a tough dog, but at some point I do want a bigger dog, not for an ego boost but for companionship. I'm not really interested in pit bulls because those ugly critters are just too unpredictable for my taste, and it's too much trouble to keep up the whole lion tamer routine.

I like GSDs and Labs, and I could certainly see adopting an animal from one of those breeds but I can't rule out an Akita yet.

After learning about the loyalty of Hachi, the Akita who waited for the rest of his life - about 10 years - for his deceased master to return at the train station, I started researching the breed, and I understand why Akita people love these dogs.

Have I been drinking the kool aid? I don't know, time will tell. Maybe the best compromise, if I do get an Akita, would be to get a female.

snack sized dog said...

Jake,
I know you aren't seeking a status dog or are the kind of person who would want one.

I didn't see the movie about Hachi, but I did read about the dog, and it was certainly an inspiring story of loyalty.

When I see those kinds of movies, though, I basically see them as a story about an incredible individual animal. Usually when people talk about a high degree of loyalty in a dog, they mean the dog is stranger aggressive and highly protective.

Hachi was something above and beyond and unique.

There's also the story of Christian the lion, which makes me get teary every time I read about it or see the youtube videos.

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

(I apologize for the manipulative music, I couldn't find a version without it)

Those stories are incredibly compelling. And individual animals sometimes have a unique and highly developed ability to bond. But, those stories are not about typical animals.

You've been talking about akitas for a while now, and

1. its a bred fighting dog so getting it as a puppy won't change the outcome - maybe ameliorate it, but not change it if its dog aggressive - and you don't want to have to always contain and control bred in fighting impulse.

2. dominance seeking dogs are not fun companion animals unless your idea of fun is seeking dominance over a dog which is pathetic unless you're fully into schutzhund or competitive sports with the dog.

DubV said...

" I seriously have better things to do than try to maintain alpha status over a fucking dog."

This quote from snack is priceless and strikes me as very funny.

I have a 25 lbs mutt. Truth be told, I have not been a great trainer. The same urgency just isn't there when your dog is very sweet and docile and you are 7 times his weight.

craven desires said...

great comments Dubv. i am in complete agreement with them all, including your suspicions that this nutter is lycan princess.

@ the dogman, i really appreciate your honesty about pit bulls.

@ jake, i only know little about akitas (they are more rare than staffy bulls where i live), so i decided to spend a few minutes researching them. i think that you get better, more honest, objective information at rescue sites. here is a good one:
http://www.akitarescue.com/
"With the release of the Richard Gere movie, "Hachiko," too many people may assume all Akitas are of the same temperament. The truth is that Akitas often are that loyal (See Kuma), but they are not a breed for all families and many of them are not good with children. Please, learn more about the breed before you purchase an Akita and then, please, find a reputable breeder. Please avoid buying an Akita in a pet store (read "New Beginnings")."

i currently have a malamute mix. under no circumstances would i ever own another- mix or purebreed. my personality is 100% incompatible with the malamute. perusing the akita facts at the link above, i realized they are malamutes with natural aggressive/protective/guardian traits. my malamute mix wouldn't have lasted if i had to deal with aggression issues on top of his other normal personality traits. my advice is to make sure that your personality is compatible with akitas before you take the plunge and get your info from rescue sites, not breeders or dogbreedinfo.com or their ilk.

DubV said...

I have a simple rule. Never sleep in the same bed with an animal that can easily kill me in my sleep. And I always sleep with my dog. Hence the 25 lbs mutt.

hater and proud of it said...

sorry jake but you were beginning to sound a bit like those fucking nutters and dingbats and ghetto bunnies putting everyone else at risk to save themselves or even just their fucking crap vcr.

Jake said...

@hater - thanks for the concern - but always remember, akitas are not pits.

@DubV - Baby girl at 27 lbs couldn't take me in a fair fight, but if she were to go for my throat while I was asleep, she could conceivably kill me. I'm not worried though, such an action is completely incompatible with her temperament.

@Craven - good info as always, thanks.

@Snack - I will take your advice into account - yes I'd seen the story of Christian the Lion, quite a moving story. But like you say, it doesn't make all lions safe.

gonna get medieval said...

hey shitdog : meet my brace of fighting dogs that never leave my side. colt and spyderko.

Bagheera Kiplingi said...

Just for kicks, I googled "famous akita owners".

Guess what? There is none. I did find a non breed specific famous dog owners list and the only akita owners were Nicole and OJ Simpson.

So then, just for kicks again, I googled "famous rottweiler owners", "german shepherd owners". Nope and nope. Hmmm...

terrified of sm dogs said...

jake: chi's are really wicked i hear. down there with poms and jack ripper terriers and killer dashunds. i heard someone say their chi dominates their huge brindled mastiff, steals the bone right out of his mouth. im not making it up.

Jake said...

@Bagheera -

ISTR that Helen Keller had an Akita, but you're right, there's not a lot of publicity about famous owners of any breeds other than gripping dogs.

@terrified -

Yep, my 10 lb chihuahua girl bullies the others. Being normal dogs, they avoid conflict and put up with her. But seriously, chihuahuas are fragile babies, and need special care and protection. If left with a mutant dog, a chi will sooner or later be killed.

P. said...

Jake, I don't believe in cruelty for any breed and keeping a dog the way this guy is keeping his dogs is the ultimate cruelty to me. Why have a dog if you can't enjoy the company as a companion? That's what dogs were meant to be, a companion, man's best friend. His idea of friendship sucks, plain and simple.

And Jake, what about the little terrier dog in England that stayed at his master's grave and they have a monument to his loyalty? Did you consider getting one of those dogs? There's more to your story about why you have an Akita and I don't think I like it.

Anonymous said...

I'm wondering why everyone seems to think that Jake would be a responsible owner? He has a 26 pound dog and he hates pit bulls. That appears to be the sum total of his qualifications.

Yet he wants an Akita because he watched a movie and he wants a dog to kick pit bulls asses when he goes out walking........That sounds more nutter than responsible.

Jake said...

P.

It's hard to say what's crueler - keeping a fighting dog chained up, or allowing it to kill other animals or people by letting it roam free. It's a tough call either way with fighting dogs, and a decision I wouldn't want to have to make.

I know about Greyfriar's Bobby, and agree he's an inspiring story. I've just never felt much of an attraction to the sort of nondescript shaggy dog I've seen him depicted as, though I certainly have nothing against them.

Finally, I don't have an Akita, I'm considering one. As I mentioned, I want a larger dog at some point, and I feel drawn to GSDs, Labs, and Akitas.

Feel free to be more specific as to what you don't like about my "story". I'm curious about such things, you know.

Jake said...

LOL @ anonymous 9:34 -

I will assume that you are the class clown. Let me clear something up - I don't hate pit bulls. I hate bullies, whether they be 2 legged or 4 legged.

I do consider pit bulls dangerous and unpredictable, and invite you to come out from behind the mask and prove otherwise.

As it happens, I've lived with and cared for big dogs, so you might want to refrain from making silly and pretentious claims about things you're not privy to.

Where's your blog by the way, anonymous? I'd love to see what you have to say :/

Anonymous said...

I saw an interesting episode of Monsterquest awhile back and it showed a vehicle that got chewed up pretty bad. The experts determined that it was a domestic dog. Now, I wonder what dog type has a history of attacking cars?hmmm

Also a lot of cats went missing. I suspect one got into/under the van and the dog went insane trying to get at it, to the point of injuring itself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kr-flH8DzIQ&feature=related

DubV said...

Jake, If I had your choice set I'd go with the lab. They're big enough to withstand some attack and will distract the dog while you intervene. Just carry a gun if you can, but if you can't a good knife and the strong fox labs pepper spray is what I roll with. If the dog is latched on, he gets the knife straight away. The pepper spray would be a longer distant dissuasion device and also useful for an irate nutter who just saw me kill his dog.

Jake said...

@DubV - Good advice - you're right, a lab is strong enough to withstand a mutant attack better than most dogs. While big and strong, they are also sweet and good natured, and one of my favorite breeds for that reason.

I've heard that pepper spray is merely a slight annoyance to an attacking pit bull - is the fox labs brand you mention a different sort of formula?

Dude, I BaggedYourPit said...

Just get the Lab, Jake! Three colors to choose from and "First Choice of Dog Lovers" for a reason! :-)

Anonymous said...

"As it happens, I've lived with and cared for big dogs, so you might want to refrain from making silly and pretentious claims about things you're not privy to."

You people seem to not have any qualms in this area when the shoe is on the other foot.

Anonymous said...

Snack sized - what I do with my property is my concern. If you're concerned about animal welfare, your efforts would be better placed serving against the cattle/swine/poultry industries. Like stated I don't break laws, local, state, or federal (read - dogfighting). You can bait me however you wish with foolish comments like "What line are they? I bet they're a good one. You know you got to roll them or you can't call them game." They are my dogs, you won't read about their lineage on any website or forum. How we keep them is why they've remained intact years later and out of the wrong hands.

Anon 1:11 - thank God for Castle Law and posted no trespassing signs. You come around our way looking to see if we are breaking any laws then your kin will be looking for you. You wouldn't be the first fool to trespass on our property, and won't be the last. I have a history with the sheriff and how we've dealt with trespassers and our actions have stood up in court twice now. One was an employee of the notorious "Norred & Assoc." They found his work ID in his pocket when he was in the ambulance. So like I said, we've been looked at and they moved on, we don't break any laws.

nutter hater said...

anon psycho: so thats why you have a bunch of those asshole dogs tied up their whole lives. i kinda think its people like you who have created the stupid breed. you may not be breaking any laws for now but that may change any time or you could have an accident with your pits and end up in jail or hospital yourself. bet you are from california. once in a while i come across somebody there who really gives me the creeps.

Anon You're A Retard said...

Why do I get the feeling that anon 9:50 might be Lycanprincess, Fuzupf, or Tarantulaguy? All three of them sound like preschool idiots who cannot comprehend the basic concepts.

Either way, I would like to see someone recreate this breed with less aggression to the point that it would be abnormal for them to have it in the first place. The same thing has been done with Dalmatians and German Shepards.
It does not surprise me that other breeders of other breeds are more willing to deal with the problem head on unlike the pit bull breeders who claim "it's all in how you raise them."

Suggested Pit Bull Breeding said...

I would suggest using the Patterdale terrier for the eyes, Labrador for the temperament, and Boxer for the shape. I think something along those lines would produce a breed that looks similar to a pit bull, with out all the bullshit.

If the pit bull community wants to see a change, they will have to inevitably change their standards about almost everything. Including breed function.

Suggested Pit Bull Breeding said...

Patterdale / Boston

I think this dog is a 1st generation cross and already looks pretty similar to a pit bull.

The only problem with this theory is that people may excuse pit bull look alike like this potential cross as part of the pit bull population, skewing the stats. And then breeders might lie and say their pit bulls are "patterboxers" or something along those lines.

If this kind of breeding ever did come into being, it would have to be something that is regulated imo.

Jake said...

anon 4:22 spoke thusly:
"You people seem to not have any qualms in this area when the shoe is on the other foot."

Pray be specific - but do note that a generalization is not the same thing as an assumption.

Akita Agression said...

I don't think there's anything really wrong with Akitas. How they turn out seems to be more heavily related with how you raise them. Although this does not disqualify their dominant behavior. I still think they're a breed that is least likely to maul or kill someone compared to other large fighting breeds. And i think it depends on if you get a top AKC pup or one from a backyard breeder. But they're still not a breed for everyone, and should not really be in a house with smaller pets or children.

Speaking of AKC, does anyone know if AKC staffordshires have better temperaments than their street bred counterparts?

Anonymous said...

"How they turn out seems to be more heavily related with how you raise them."

Now you sound like any other "pit nutter." See how that works? You are looking as dumb as the rest of us.

P. said...

Jake, where did you read that I propose that he let his pits run loose? I say that he doesn't need these pits because he doesn't know what real ownership means, a companion animal. He is nothing more than a cruel animal hoarder. I'm not in favor of him even having dogs because of his version of ownership. You are defending his cruelty it appears to me. Even pits don't deserve this kind of treatment. My stance is he needs to be locked up for what he is and his dogs be taken away to their fate. So knock it off trying to make me look like I want his dogs running the neighborhoods, mauling and killing. I want his dogs taken away from his cruelty and never suggested that he turn them loose. Besides who believes that he is NOT keeping these dogs for reasons that none of us approves of, fighting, breeding to sell to fighters, etc. He's a low life and you need to treat him as such. Stop painting him as a "responsible" owner.

Jake said...

@P. -

I've never advocated cruelty to any animal, and I'm glad to hear that you don't either.

But I think the main stumbling block here is the idea that pit bulls are just like any other dog, which I don't agree with. Over 170 years of breeding for violent aggression, and ruthless culling of those who aren't game enough has real consequences, and the idea that a pit bull can be integrated into family life as if it were a Lab or a Golden Retriever is a dangerous fantasy.

IMHO pit bull owners who really understand pit bulls don't have any illusions about them, don't take them to dog parks, don't leave them alone with family members, and they often have them for one reason.

On the other hand, well meaning but naive people who try to help fighting dogs are fortunate indeed if they do not suffer a horrific mauling of a loved pet, family member of neighbor.

I don't think it's realistic to think of a fighting dog as a family pet, a companion etc.

As for the guy who keeps his pit bulls securely chained, I don't know enough about his situation to judge him. The fact that his neighbors are not at risk from his fighting dogs is commendable however.

scratch said...

I'm with Jake on this one. If the guy keeps his pits securely chained, feeds them regularly, has a working relationship with his local vet, and does not prance around making silly "it's all in how you raise them", "nanny dog" statements, I'm OK with it. The dogs are living as they were bred to live. They are NOT companion animals.

craven desires said...

i find myself in uncharted waters. i agree with the dogman on all points of his last comment. while i am opposed to chaining dogs as a constant form of containment, it is not illegal. and until it is, there is nothing that anyone can do about it. you may have noticed that i have moved away from bashing dog fighters. the proper and humane care of pit bulls has taken a back seat to the increasing mayhem they are creating among the growing pool of innocent victims with the misfortune to be caught in their wake. the most important thing to me: his pits are not creating mayhem. assuming he is telling the truth. he is honest about pits and recognizes the problems with pit nutters, so i am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until he proves otherwise.
anonymous dogman, i especially appreciate your mention of the castle law. i advocate its use regularly, in fact, i have a blog in the works for the near future dedicated to the topic.

thank you for leaving your comments whether or not we disagree on all points, we agree on the important one.

@ the white nutter said...

he may be doing everything right and have the right attitude to safely keep a bunch of those shit dogs but you have to wonder why anyone would do all that. i can almost understand the nutters better. he does finally reveal that his dogs have put people in the hospital but legally so its all right. maybe thats why he does everything right. he likes it as much as his fucking dogs.

snack sized dog said...

I'm not baiting you. I just think you're a liar.

It makes no sense to keep breeding a line you don't roll, because as the son of a dog man you know very well that indiscriminately line breeding will just make a big mess, and your line is gone whether you keep breeding or not.

It makes no sense to trudge out to the woods feed, water, barely exercise, and breed a bunch of dogs that are good for absolutely nothing and you can do nothing with. It would only make sense if you're actually testing, fighting and selling them.

You're either a dog fighter or you're just making shit up.

The only people who know how to keep pit bulls and understand what they are really like are also the ones that are making them and pumping them out into the rest of society to kill our kids with callous disregard.

Jake said...

Snack, I think I understand some of your concerns, but we have to take what we can get.

As for the man being a dog fighter, I'd have to say that's impossible because dog fighting is, like, illegal, right? (wink) enough said.

Sure, you have no use for pit bulls, and I have no use for them, but if the man wants to raise them in the privacy of his own home, I can't tell him not to. If he wanted to raise alligators or hyenas, I'd feel the same way.

If I had my way all pit bulls would be neutered, and the problem would be pretty much gone in about a decade, but I'm not king of the world so that's not likely to happen.

For now I'm willing to accept small victories, like people keeping their pit bulls properly contained.

Anonymous said...

Craven you and your ilk call hog doggers every name in the book yet they actually have a legal use for their dogs.

Now with this thread you've begun sucking dog fighter cocks. One of your muckrackers has said that he wanted a dog just so he could fight off pit bulls. Sounded to me as if he will going out looking for a fight.
I'm having mixed feelings about where all of this is going.

Jake said...

anonymous 3:17 spoke thusly:

"Now with this thread you've begun sucking dog fighter cocks. One of your muckrackers has said that he wanted a dog just so he could fight off pit bulls. Sounded to me as if he will going out looking for a fight."

Fascinating. In response to some grudging acknowledgements that pit bull owners who keep their animals properly restrained are at least doing the right thing in that regard, your response is some sort of bizzare sexual reference.

At any rate, I must be the so-called muckraker you're referring to because I commented on the ability of a breed I'm considering to withstand mutant attacks. Problem is, that's not even remotely related to "wanting a dog just to fight off put bulls".

Really. My defense against mutant attacks is a pair of wicked spyderco knives, one clipped in each pocket - I don't need a dog for that.

At the risk of repeating myself, I've never advocated violence against peaceful pit bulls (heck, I even got sentimental over poor Patrick) and though I've had close encounters with pit bulls while out on walks at night, I've never had to harm one yet (knock on wood) but I've had to prepare for it a couple of times.

If and when one of them attacks me or mine, or an innocent bystander when I'm around, I will induce as much trauma as I can, as quickly as I can, by any means possible - because my immediate goal is to stop the attack on the innocent victim.

That's not "going out looking for a fight", that's just "being prepared" - also known as "common sense" around these parts.

Akita Agression said...

Anon 9:50

No not really. Akitas are obviously different fighting dogs than the pit bull. How many fatalities or maulings from the Akita have matched the pit bull, even by a third? None that I can find. So yes, it would not be crazy to presume that Akitas fall more in "how you raise them" them pit bulls would. I did not say than it was all in how you raised Akitas, but when compared to pit bulls, it is more of a general case than not.

Jake said...

Akita Aggression has a valid point.

No, I'm not negating the influence of genetics, I'm just saying the genetics of the Akita aren't the same as the pit bull.

The Akita is an ancient, natural breed, while the pit bull is a deliberately bred killing machine.

Just look for the Merritt Clifton dog attack study and compare the Akita's single casualty - same as the Pomeranian - with the pit bull's 172 casualties.

Sure, there are aggressive Akitas, but the thing to remember about Akitas, as with dogs in general, is that they don't lie - you tend to know where you stand with them.

But a pit bull, that's a different story. A pit bull will wag his tail, give a playful little bow, and lunge for your throat.

This psychopathic behavior is a result of the normal social interactions being bred out of them - a useful trait for the fighting pit, a disaster in normal settings.

craven desires said...

i don't have a problem with hog hunting. i have a big problem with hog dog hunting. i have said on this blog that i think it is more cruel than dog fighting. i've seen a lot of hog dog hunting videos. the perverts hold up the hog's back legs and laugh while their dogos, ambulls and pits savage the hog's belly and genitals.

it is fascinating though how you conclude that because me and a dogman or me and a dog fighter have a common ground, i have become a dog fighter groupie.

let me spell this out in the most simple words that i can.
re: dog fighting, if you think i am okay with it or i am willing to form an alliance with dog fighters, you are dead wrong. i am more than okay with this crime becoming a capital offense. i am still concerned about the abuse heaped on pit bulls, i am just less concerned than the innocent victims who happen to cross their paths.
i still believe dog fighting should be aggressively investigated and prosecuted.
i am not wasting any more time on this blog covering it, unless maybe craven eddy gets busted again. and i am not wasting any time second guessing whether an anonymous dogman is telling the truth. i have other things to do.

here is another tidbit about myself to rock your world: i do not believe that EVERY person who owns a pit bull is either a dog fighter or a pit nutter. there are responsible pit bull owners. i think they are a minority. i really hate absolute statements.

Anonymous said...

Snack Sized - you are talking about things you obviously know nothing about. Keep rambling on, it's apparent to me you are trolling. I make nothing up, I am just being honest about this breed. It's not for everyone. And most who own it should not. But you keep fighting the good fight, and making it abundantly clear you speak on topics you know nothing about.

Craven Desires - I appreciate your response.

@the great lilly white nutter said...

i think maybe born and bred pitman is baiting you guys.hes saying look i do everthing you guys want, im so perfect even my pitdogs shit doesnt stink,and still you want to take me down.bwahawwahaaababwwa ha, ha ,ha . troll in other words. even if he isnt lying id still take a dim view of a breeder or hoarder who has dogs living on chains just for his own amusement. and somebody whod gloat about his dogs putting people in hospital is borderline nutter material in my book.

DubV said...

The selective breeding of fighting dogs has created a set of conflicting traits: the desire to be social and the desire to fight for no reason. In turn, the only safe way to handle a pit bull simultaneously deprives it of what gives most dogs their quality of life and their owners some enjoyment from them. Dogs social interaction during a good part of their day.

Unborn pit bulls don't care and don't get a vote. The breed was created for a nefarious purpose that is now illegal. If all were fixed, and the breed allowed to naturally disappear over a decade or so, everyone, including future pit bulls (if they are handled safely) would be better off. People would just own dogs that can do anything positive a pit can without the safety issues.

DubV said...

edit: Dogs need....

P. said...

I'd have to agree with you White Nutter. Some comments have given him credibility even. Why does he have these dogs, certainly not for companions, not for enjoyment or maybe for a sick enjoyment. If he is carrying on the line, then that means he is breeding. Where are those puppies going? And are those puppies running in the neighborhoods, mauling and killing? Yep, I think you nailed it.

DubV said...

Jake, the pepper spray is more for the nutters who would intervene. The fox labs is about the strongest their is and mine sprays a long distance stream. So, I'd likely use it on a pit if it were a distance away. Up close I'd be afraid of getting myself and being taken out.

DubV said...

Remember this guy said he grew up around this and is continuing his family's line. So, his view of the human/dog bond is likely very different from most other people. I can see why someone like him could do what he does. Still, I believe it would be relatively easy to construct an argument showing it to be unethical.

wanna be the man said...

how come the police get to blast pitdog and pitman and we good citizenry have to pussyfoot around with pepper spray? what joy to be an (impervious to prosecution )drug squad member,shooting pits on a daily basis. here, even an offduty cop blasted a rez-pit that went for his shepard. of course there probably were no rez-bunnies around to have to shoot as well. life is just not fair anymore.

Akita Agression said...

@ Jake:

I agree. One of the main problems with pit bulls is that the canine etiquette and language has been very perverted and distorted in their breed to the point that they would not make a good dog for even the more experienced owners.
Every Akita I've known has made it blatantly obvious how it felt about me, which gave me good indication if I should approach gently or not at all. While this has been a lot slimmer with pit bulls from my experience.
Pit bulls still give canine communication like any other dog. But the problem is that it's even more subtle it seems, and it can instantly turn to the point that they give a quick gesture and then are on you. They don't give you a message from a safe distance like other breeds do. If they do decide to gesture, it is often within close proximity and they quickly act.

At least, this is my personal experience with pit bulls and akitas.

Responsible Ownership said...

I would love to see a blog of a pit bull owner who does all the right things and supports BSL. I think if more of the good owners spoke out on their views, people would see there is nothing to fear, and that responsibility should be rewarded.

re responsible owner/s said...

words like responsible and ownership are just so much hot air. for me both pitdogs and their owners are suspect no matter what they say or do. the very fact you would want such a ugly and unnatural creature makes me wonder about your sanity and when you say there is nothing to fear then i know you are nuts

Anonymous said...

"Speaking of AKC, does anyone know if AKC staffordshires have better temperaments than their street bred counterparts?"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Akita Fucktard!

The "American Pit Bull Terrier" is hardly a street bred counter part (just ask any dutiful APBT breeder, fancier or even zoophile)! Sadly, a "show" APBT got nailed by a bolt of lightening last week at an American Dog Breeders show in North Carolina. I held a pittie party afterward with lots of doggie treats (like human arms).

Also, akitas are indeed potentially dangerous; their population numbers are just SO unbelievably small (at least in the U.S.) that they don't show up frequently in attacks. Malaysia and other countries don't just ban akitas for the "fuck of it." There's usually a darn good reason, such as disproportionately mauling and killing babies and kids -- minor things of this nature.

Maybe ask gramps to learn more?

Anonymous said...

The Dogmen are too stupid to know that the jig is up...The Pit Fur Mommies are getting legislation passed that Pits from fighting busts can be "rehabilitated" based on the Vick Model.

The key part of these Laws are that Dog Fighters assets can be seized with the loot going to fund Animal Welfare coffers.

Normally protected by Fur Mommies, the Doggers will go from Protected to Hunted status. They'll have far more problems than HSUS and Norred....when the radicalized Fur Mommies smell money abd a shot at a TV show on Ani-maul Planet!

Can't wait to watch!

The era of the great Dog Yard is over. It should have never begun in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Where did I gloat about my dogs putting someone in the hospital? They've never laid a tooth on a person. #8 birdshot put a trespasser in the hospital, not my dogs. But thanks for your concern.

snack sized dog said...

According to you, you tromp back into the woods to feed, water, and pointlessly propagate the last inbred vestiges of pappy's permachained, bloodlusty boner makers and you tell me I'm rambling? No second guessing about it, you're a fighter, liar, and an idiot.

@ WHITE NI--ERS said...

thanx for my concern? ya like i spend a lot of time worrying about people like you.ive got a neighbour like you.loves shotgunning dogs and would probably like to do a person too.big fat fuck who inherited his property and loves to do nasty shit as long as its barely legal.

HAHAHA Biased Anon! said...

@ Anon 12:43

You do know that working breeds and show breeds tend to have different temperaments and skills right? Who's to say that there are not some responsible breeders out there in the AKC world who recognized the problem is the temperament of the dog and that it could be changed if outcrossed? That is what some breeders of GSD have done in order to remove any breed abnormalities or excessive traits.

Also - good to see that the first thing you do is criticize me for asking a question anon. Good show, nice to see you have just as much of a knee jerk reaction to any question that doesn't 100% agree with you.

I did not know Akitas were banned in Malaysia. Thanks for informing me.

I would suggest that if you want people to take your responses seriously, that you respond with a bit more respect.

FYi, I support BSL. Good to see you stereotype me as a nutter or a pit bull advocate because I think that there might be other solutions outside complete bans. Although if an area has a ton of pit problems like Cali, then the best thing to do is probably ban them in certain districts they are the most problematic in. Attain the dogs and humanely put them down depending.

If I'm not mistaken, the problems are ownership, breeding, and regulation. Seems like Boston has had no incidences and they just enforce regulations, not bans.

HAHAHA Biased Anon! said...

Ooooh bravo. You've managed to pull out one Akita among thousands that killed someone. Good to see you're being disproportionate compared to the pit bull problem. Let's compare that to the 5 pit bull fatalities and over 80 maulings shall we? Yes, still seems as though the pit bull is still the big problem dog.

It would be obvious to anyone that the problem isn't so bad because they aren't a popular breed in America as they are in Asiatic countries. But it also helps that you don't see people readily breeding these dogs and fighting them in America. When was the last time an Akita fighting ring was busted in America? Or when was the last time the Akita was bred for gameness in America? I seriously doubt that the Akita is temperamentally as dangerous as the pit bull for those two reasons alone. That and idiots generally do not own these dogs and possibly don't know of their original fighting linage.

Now as said before, Akitas are not for homes with children, and they are not dogs for everyone. In fact, they are a breed for the few. Only those who have years of experience should attain these dogs. The way you formulated your response you've made it clear that you think I support no regulation or ruling over Akitas, or that they are "just like any other dog." That is a load of crock.... no other dog is like "any other dog." Which is why I mentioned time and time again the above points as well as agreed with some of the responses made. They are protective, dominant, can be dog aggressive. Would I get one? No, nor would I get a pit bull.

Not all fighting breeds are the same, or retrieving or coursing. Some breeds are better at it than others. And it is obvious that the pit bull is the gladiator. I doubt people will further pervert the Akita breed due to this. It would be a waste of time and money.

However, I think Akitas should be regulated as well. If I'm not mistaken, The American type has had dog aggression and the protective aspects dulled compared the Japanese version. But they're still not family pets. If you want a guard dog, get an Akita. But many people have not business owning guard dogs either.

If people want a family pet or pet (not a working dog), get a beagle, labrador, poodle, pug, or a mix of any of those. Stay away from Akitas and pit bulls completely.

craven desires said...

@HAHAHA Biased Anon!
i could be wrong but i thought the response from anon 12:43 was directed at jake. and i thought it was a bit harsh but i am sensitive to people's need to vent. i have a hard time keeping track of these conversations when people sign anonymous or change their names with each comment.

as much as i love to be insulted and threatened by the nutters, i am going to have to do something about comments. i can't follow them, it takes too much mental energy and time to try and figure out who is saying what to who. that is time that i could spend more productively, ie muckraking.

mr norred shoot em up dogman, i hope you create an account and continue to comment or you can email me crvndesires@gmail.com

craven desires said...

"Still, I believe it would be relatively easy to construct an argument showing it to be unethical."

yes dubv, i am in complete agreement. i support laws that bans or severely restricts the amount of time a dog can be chained. i support laws that would severely restrict the number of dogs/cats that people can own.

regarding the comments about whether the dogman is lying or telling the truth, i don't know. just because i am not calling him out, doesn't mean that i bought his story or that we are getting together for beers on friday.

given what we know about dog fighters and pit nutters, there is very high probability that he is lying but you can't deny that there is always the possibility that he is telling the truth. my superpowers aren't that refined.

craven desires said...

"I'd have to agree with you White Nutter. Some comments have given him credibility even. Why does he have these dogs, certainly not for companions, not for enjoyment or maybe for a sick enjoyment."

P, i'm not necessarily giving him credibility, i'm also not projecting my philosophy about dogs onto him. it is is unfortunate that people have dogs that live in these deprived states. it is also unfortunate that people dress up their "furkids" and equate dogs to humans. i like to think i have struck a happy medium between these two forms of insanity.

i oppose chaining, i still vehemently oppose fighting. but when it comes to pit bulls, it's not that i don't care about the suffering of pit bulls, it's that i care LESS about their suffering than the suffering of their victims. i am not devoting anymore time to that topic. everyone and their mother has taken up the pit bull cause, so i will focus elsewhere.

P. said...

Craven I wasn't referring to you with that comment. Whenever you think in terms that this person is responsible because he keeps his pits from running the neighbor, then you become an enabler. When you enable this person, then his cruelty to these pits continue. Society is supposed to police itself by letting people such as this know that what they are doing is not acceptable. Chaining these pits just to keep his line going in "honor" of his dad is not acceptable. Cruelty never is acceptable in a civilized society.

Jake said...

"P." spoke thusly:

"Craven I wasn't referring to you with that comment. Whenever you think in terms that this person is responsible because he keeps his pits from running the neighbor, then you become an enabler."

P., I'm guessing you're aiming at me. All I can say to that is that I as an individual can only fight one battle at a time.

In a perfect world there would be no cruelty to any living creature including mutant fighting dogs, and that's a laudable goal - but right here, right now, I'm more concerned with the cruelty inflicted by pit bulls on widows and their poodles, on horses, toddlers and other victims, the obscene cruelty of hog doggers, the victimization of animals who can't fight back.

If we spend all our time majoring in minors, harping on the letter of the law, we won't have any resources left to fight for the more urgent matters.

april 29 said...

Thanks for keeping your focus on the big picture Jake!

Jake said...

Thanks for the keeping list updated craven. Out of all the experts on that roll, Alexandra Semyonova is the one whose opinion I respect the most. She is not so easily corrupted as most of the others, and does not change her opinion in exchange for favors.

vintage said...

Gotta love the way the Nutters weave in and out of the genetic causation factor. There is a reason pups bred from a champion fighting dog command a premium...Genetics!

Why does a papered dog backed by a Registry command a higher selling price? Genetics!

We are told incessantly, "Pits are less like to bite"(a lie)....invoking genetics.

"Dog aggression is not human aggression" invoking Genetics!

"They were known as Nanny Dogs" (Despite 175 American children killed by them), invoking Genetics!

Last year a Fighting dog bust in Texas revealed some of the dogs pups bred from champions commanded prices of up to $20,000, why...Genetics!


Why are Pits now dominating Canine weight Pulling and have driven other breeds out of Dogfighting?...Genetics!

Since 1980, the US has sustained nearly 250 Deaths from Pits and another 86 from Rottweilers....Why? Spay Neuter status!

We do not see Bichon Frises guarding Meth Labs....Why Genetics!

Clearly, they are breeding manbiters and mankillers. Anyone who suggests otherwise needs a good a proper 25 minute Pit mauling.

For the Great Dogman posting...even the Great Colby had a couple a "yard accidents"...one resulting in the death of his nephew.

vintage said...

A couple Snippetts of Truth from unparalleled Pit Expert Diane Jessup:

"It's not sensible to get an animal bred for bringing a 2,000-pound bull to its knees and say I'm going to treat this like a soft-mouth Labrador," says Jessup, the former animal-control officer. She blames novice owners, as much as actual criminals, for bringing the breed into disrepute. "It's a capable animal, and it's got to be treated as such."

When we first got pit bulls in, they were always friendly. They were always nice dogs," says Diane Jessup, a former animal-control officer in Olympia. Jessup has raised many pit bulls and written several books about them. "I will say now, in the last five years, 50 percent of the dogs are fearful, fear-biters with horribly unsound temperaments."

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20060219&slug=pitbull19

vintage said...

Noted Canine Aggression Specialist Jim Crosby before he got hooked up with the Jane Bezerky "Dollars for Maulers" Program...

Enter now the Pit Bull, and other breeds specifically selected by Man to fight each other. These animals have several concerning behavioral difference from most other canines. When they fight, human intervention has selected for animals that do not turn off, and do not stop fighting until one, or both, are dead. There is no surrender for these animals. A fully submissive body posture is no more than another opportunity for them to disembowel their adversary.

As a corollary to this, these dogs seem to have a shorter negotiation sequence. Many times we hear of a Pit Bull or similar dog that “…just went off…” The expected precursors to a full fight seem to be lacking, much like the quick interactions we see with some teens and young adults these days; one insults another, and the first response is to “…pop a cap…” into the offender. Even popular Pit Bull sites on the Internet admit that fights between Pit Bulls can occur with little or no warning."

"...These dogs already have a propensity for tenacity and continued aggression based on years of selective breeding. One than takes and, through fear, mistreatment, or misguided training, positively reinforces the display of aggressive behavior towards humans without the establishment of a clear set of controls. This animal has now learned to manipulate its environment, to its own benefit and sometimes safety, by directing aggressions towards people, with a genetically selected lack of an off button. A bad situation has now become tragically dangerous."

vintage said...

1987 Pit Bulls are Monsters article...

Marc Paulhus, a spokesman in the Tallahassee office of the Humane Society of the United States.

''Most other dogs bite and release, but pit bulls tend to bite and hold and shake and tear,'' Paulhus said.

''That's why pit bulls are responsible for more than their share of fatalities.''



''The number of fatal dog attacks nationwide usually averages around 10 each year,'' said Randall Lockwood, an animal behaviorist at the Humane Society of the United States in Washington, D.C.

IS LOCKWOOD AN IDIOT OR CORRUPT LIAR!!! Either way he can't be involved in the Canine Safety Debate anymore.


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1987-07-01/news/0180100195_1_pit-bulls-fatal-dog-attacks-bull-attack

pittybritty said...

Anom@5:31 you would call this responsible ownership? It seems to me you have a seperate purpose for your animals and not that of a companion. The way you see your "pets", seems you would be better off keeping chained bears on your property, either way its inhumane and cruel treatment for a animal that was made to be "mans bestfriend". Weekly walks? Attention from yourself and wife while you check water bowls and food, is not enough! I don't care what laws you are abiding, a dog of anybreed needs much more interaction and socialization than of what your giving. No wonder you see your DOGS as such beast! They mostlikely are a danger to not only your comunity but potentially to yourself and family. If this is what is considered responsible ownership than its nowonder these DOGS are seen as beast! Because they are treated as such! What exactly is your reasoning around "preserving the family line"? I can think of few reasons that would be of an importance.
I strongly believe your animals should be taken from your property, euthenized and you should be prevented from ever owning another animal. I don't believe, even the "forgiving" Pitbull could come back from such poor treatment and lack of socialization. Shame on you! You are part of the stigma troubling this breed and safety of others!

pittybritty said...

What about the much larger number of "experts",behaviorest,vets,rescue groups, shelters and everyone else who's knowledge is from experience, that are pro pitbull or in other words, do believe its "the way they are raised" factor is much higher than breed? Why are these "experts" accredited but the countless members on the opposing side "have lost their brains"?

In no way do I consider myself an "expert" but I do have a long history and experience with this breed. I am educated on the breeds history and am well aware of what they are capable of. I believe these dogs are not for everyone, but for those who understand them and are capable of handling them, they can be a blessing in many ways.
My father, a military man. A man who was raised with APBT and the "alike" dogs, believes: "there is no greater protection for a family, than a loyal Pitbull in the home". His *opinion* is based on his childhood experiences. Being deployed for months upon months at a time, he worried for his new and growing family while he was away.
On my first birthday, my father brought me (or rather my mother) home a APBT puppy, we named her Lucy. When I was 3 and my mom was pregnant with my baby sister, a man (a released convicted rapist of a man) came in through our bathroom window @around 2am, while my mother and I slept in our shared bed. We awoke to a mans screams, Lucy's barking, growling and every other sound that comes from chaos. My mom grabbed me, left the house, went our neighbors, called 911 and waited. When police arrived in what my mom describes "as a lifetime later", Lucy still had this mother fucker in her "grip", she had been stabbed six times but never stopped fighting. Despite all that was done by vets to try and save OUR HERO, she died a few days later from her wounds. We later found out what this mans intentions were when entering our home.

craven desires said...

but all man biters were culled, weren't they?

pittybritty said...

Craven, you know just as well as I do, a "unprovoked attack" is not even of the same criteria of- attacking intruder, purposely invading the home of a unsuspecting, sleeping woman and child!
Do you not agree?
If my family had owned a LabraDoodle instead, how do you believe my story would have ended?

pittybritty said...

I am truely not trying to attack you or call you out. I am interested in your opinions on such a case. I really want to tell my story, post *horrific night* and my 26yrs experience that results in my views of "responsible ownership". I want to know the opinions and views of my audience. All in all, is it worth it? Will I regret sharing my experience and findings?

snack sized dog said...

So the released convicted rapist knew that your father was gone, but didn't think the pit bull would be a problem? Because they make terrible guard dogs? Because All Manbiters Were Culled?

Matching anecdote - this from the recent news

"Douglas Bowling now faces two felony charges in connection with his three dogs attacking his 14-month-old granddaughter at his home in Portsmouth on Tuesday."

craven desires said...

pittybritty, i am not part of the cult who claims man biters were culled, pit bulls make horrible guard dog and would assist a burglar clean them out.


prediction: the opinions and views of the blog followers will think your story is a complete fabrication.

craven desires said...

as for your labradoodle comment, i all i have to say is "so pit bulls ARE different!"

snack sized dog said...

You seriously believe a labradoodle would not scare your rapist away. Of all criminals, rapists, especially pedophile rapists, are the most cowardly bunch of them all. So yes, especially in this case the mere presence of a dog would have deterred your rapist. It is interesting that you suggest you were preyed upon because the rapist knew your father was away, but didn't seem to notice you had a pit bull.

People who believe that the purpose of a protective dog is to attack maul and kill are idiots. Historically, guard dogs were associated with the military and the rich elites who had a estates and handlers for the dogs. They were usually mastiffs and not regarded as house pets.

Historically, the hoi polloi, such as you and me, had "watch dogs." In the early 20th century, fox terriers were considered good watch dogs for the middle class. The idea of the watch dog was that it would bark, scare the intruders, and alert the owners and possibly the neighbors who got their guns and/or called the police. Fox terriers are mercurial, as are all terriers, so they may well attack an intruder that doesn't retreat, and may well get killed doing so. But they couldn't typically maul an intruder to death. The idea was never to unleash a monster that tore open an intruder so he could bleed out in your living room. The idea was to scare and fend off an intruder.

And yes, a labradoodle can fulfill the duties of a watch dog better than a pit bull.

This really idiotic myth that people need in their suburban homes a monster that will tear apart or bite and hold an intruder in front of their wives and children - but would never attack said wives and children or neighbors or neighbor's pets - is very recent.

If you really want to tell your story. Tell it. Start a blog, even. If everyone already agreed with you, there would be no reason for you to describe your views of responsible ownership, would there. But, you're being very disingenuous if you think Craven Desires the person or Craven Desires the blog is "your" audience and that is a bit puzzling. We all know how you'll be received here.

pittybritty said...

My fathers views, are not of a "guard dog" patrolling or protecting land. His views are that of a loved family dog, loyal and protective of her family and capable of efficiently doing so.
My father was away more than he was ever home. Who knows exactly how the rapist knew that there was no man present in the home. Who knows why he was not worried about the 'family dog'. My memory is not the best of Lucy, but my mom claims Lucy had never shown any aggression prior. Maybe this man figured her as harmless.
For the comment "a Labradoodle would have *scared* this man away", our dog was stabbed repeatedly. This man had no intentions of jumping back out the window and aborting mission. His prior conviction was not for raping a child. This was not a pedophile, this man had nearly beat his victom (woman) to death, repeatedly raped and held this woman in her own home for the next two days, then left her for dead.
I may not have been killed, but I'm not so sure I would want to live through the other.....
My entire life has been spent with these dogs. I have a great love for this breed but I don't consider myself the same as others who claim to have a passion for them. I don't agree with their views and find myself disgusted with the large majority of owners and so called "advocates".

Fabrication? Thats a pretty sick fairytale!

I have been scanning your blogs, for a few days now. It seems even though we may not agree on all aspects of this subject, it appears *most* participants are educated adults. I guess I might of been looking for a good *civilized* debate, but now I'm getting the feeling, I'm not welcome because I don't *hate* this breed?

snack sized dog said...

Craven's prediction is right. I don't believe your story.

If you've been scanning the blog, you know that there's a very low tolerance for BS here.

If you want to argue, there's plenty of people to do that here with, some of them are civilized. Pick a more recent post to argue on and maybe you'll get some responses you'll like.

pittybritty said...

Like I said befor, that's pretty twisted story telling. Your mind might work that way, but mine does not. The proof is there if you choose to dig hard enough. This story was covered by our local paper, we have the *saved* original prints, along with links to the original coverage and case info of this man. He has since been released (again) and was only charged with "Breaking and Entering with intention to harm", he claimed "stabbing the dog was in self-defence". This being somewhat of an "aggressive" site/blog, I would rather not compromize the names and location of my family and I.
Either way, I don't mind if you don't believe me. I wanted to discuss the issues of "todays pitbull", with a rational group. Seeing I don't exactly see eye to eye with other owners,advocates,rescues and of the sort... I may have been wrong in my initial assessment of this blog. My apologies. I apperently will not fit in, seeing I do own and love this breed, even though I have responsibly managed my animals and have had zero "incidents" involving them, to date.

pittybritty said...

We fight the same war, you know.
*Reasonings* may differ, but some are the same.
I believe if anyone is to get anywhere on this troubling subject, listening, empathizing, compromizing and uniting in path of the same goal, is in order.
If your subjective is not, eliminating a entire breed of millions of animals and/or killing the hundreds of thousands that have done nothing to deserve such a fate, then we are very much reaching for the *very same* outcome: That the human being, who *chose* to take responsibility for such a animal, capable of carnage, destruction, violence and the very real potential to take *human* life- be held accountable and *seriously* punished for the actions of their animals, that were inresult of *irresponsible ownership*.
I truely feel, creating so many little battles and enemies when all are reaching for the same goal, is very poor strategy:) We have a much stronger force to: inact change, when working together.
The reasonings for *ones* battle does not matter, as long as the war is won.
It seems, many of CravenDesires specifically dislike pitbulls, owners and supporters, *because of the trauma they have caused and ofcourse that is due to poor ownership and lack of responsibility. You want to see a change, and for good reason. You put forth your time, congregate and fight for cause.
I, love this breed, was raised with these animals, and have responsibly owned this breed my entire life. I hate what irresponsible *people* have *allowed* this animal to do; allowed to hurt and kill, roam free to make decisions they should never of been given.
I also hate what *people* have done *to* this animal, that I know to be the most loyal,loving and trusting and wonderful of them all, when in capable,responsible hands.
All of these battles, come down to one common enemy. The irresponsible pitbull owner,breeder,handler,rescue and every other dumb fucking PITNUTTER!
Discrinimating on a person you know nothing about or what they stand for, is foolish.
We want the same change.
I came here to maybe, debate but also to learn from your views and your side and in hopes of new allies for the same cause.

pittybritty said...

We fight the same war, you know.
*Reasonings* may differ, but some are the same.
I believe if anyone is to get anywhere on this troubling subject, listening, empathizing, compromizing and uniting in path of the same goal, is in order.
If your subjective is not, eliminating a entire breed of millions of animals and/or killing the hundreds of thousands that have done nothing to deserve such a fate, then we are very much reaching for the *very same* outcome: That the human being, who *chose* to take responsibility for such a animal, capable of carnage, destruction, violence and the very real potential to take *human* life- be held accountable and *seriously* punished for the actions of their animals, that were inresult of *irresponsible ownership*.
I truely feel, creating so many little battles and enemies when all are reaching for the same goal, is very poor strategy:) We have a much stronger force to: inact change, when working together.
The reasonings for *ones* battle does not matter, as long as the war is won.
It seems, many of CravenDesires specifically dislike pitbulls, owners and supporters, *because of the trauma they have caused and ofcourse that is due to poor ownership and lack of responsibility. You want to see a change, and for good reason. You put forth your time, congregate and fight for cause.
I, love this breed, was raised with these animals, and have responsibly owned this breed my entire life. I hate what irresponsible *people* have *allowed* this animal to do; allowed to hurt and kill, roam free to make decisions they should never of been given.
I also hate what *people* have done *to* this animal, that I know to be the most loyal,loving and trusting and wonderful of them all, when in capable,responsible hands.
All of these battles, come down to one common enemy. The irresponsible pitbull owner,breeder,handler,rescue and every other dumb fucking PITNUTTER!
Discrinimating on a person you know nothing about or what they stand for, is foolish.
We want the same change.
I came here to maybe, debate but also to learn from your views and your side and in hopes of new allies for the same cause.

craven desires said...

pittybritty, sorry this response is so late. creepy craven actually has a life outside of this blog.

there is MUCH to dislike about pit bulls and their owners, starting with deceitfulness. now that i have gotten that on the table, i do think there are good and responsible owners. you may even be one. but just showing up here and announcing yourself is not proof that you are. gullibility is not one of my traits. i can't tell you how many of you have come on presenting yourselves as experts or responsible only to find they are dog groomers with their first pit bull under 2 years old. or how many of you have come on line presenting yourselves as vets or dog trainers or scarred by poodles. guess what? i often find them. lies lies lies. and i like to expose them.

if pit bulls are going to exist, there should be restrictions on who can own and how they can be owned. first and foremost is liability insurance. felons should be prohibited and the number of pit bulls should be like dogos, RARE.

presenting them as "america's dog" is fucking criminal in my opinion. and these dogs should never leave a shelter outside of a body bag.

vintage said...

ATTN: STATE'S ATTORNEY GENERALs:

Thars Money In them Thar Pit Bulls!...

National "Humane" groups that deceitfully meddle in state public safety matters are sitting on Hundreds of Millions. This is the damage they have caused:

2010 Study: US Dog bite related hospitalizations increase 86.3 percent between 1993 and 2008. MEDICAID and MEDICAIRE pick up nearly 40 percent of the bill

The first CDC DBRF Study from 1977 documented 5 DBRFs in 1974 across a population of 220 Million. By 2011, the US sustains 32 DBRFs across a population of 310 Million. A 445 percent increase


Sue them as you would the Tobacco Lobby! Cha-Ching!

CrashedLife said...

ALL of the resources listed on the side screen, and this blog, are from THE SAME PERSON!! Colleen Lynn!!
Any reader, just look at the bottom copyright or click on the LINKS, they all are from Colleen Lynn or dogsbite.org, which Colleen Lynn started, and continues to maintain!!
Come on people, be self motivated, check the resources!!

Anonymous said...


@CrashedLife

"ALL of the resources listed on the side screen, and this blog, are from THE SAME PERSON!! Colleen Lynn!!"

So what. Doesn't make the facts and statistics on this blog any less credible.

The anti-pit bull movement has taken a stronghold in this country, thanks to blogs like this and dogsbite.org.

But don't take my word for it, Google's ranking proves this. If people weren't reading them, they wouldn't show up on the first or second page.


I have learned why these dogs are so dangerous to the public and to MY dog.

I now won't pass a pit bull on the street if I'm walking my dog.

Truth hurts.