Dirty Liars Exposed: Bulladelphia

Pit bull advocates are known to lie through their teeth with no sense of shame or guilt. This lying contributes to the pit bull problem; unsuspecting owners get a "nice" pit bull, only to later be killed by their own dog.

I found a site that is no different - it is full of blatant lies. What I wonder is why people believe this bullshit even when faced with the facts. Here's a breakdown on a couple of the lies on bulladelphia.org.

Lie #1: "No spayed/neutered, indoor pit bull has ever killed a person."


It doesn't take much digging around to find cases of loved, spayed/neutered indoor pit bulls killing people. Like Tina Marie Canterbury.

October 2, 2007 | Middleburg, FL
Tina Marie Canterbury, 42-years old, was killed by her two red-nosed pit bulls. She had raised both dogs, Rebel and Thor, since they were pups. Both had been neutered and lived indoors. According to her cousin, Bill Canterbuy, the dogs often slept with her at night. Tina had been taking out the trash when the dogs attacked. Her son attempted to rescue her and was also bitten. Authorities eventually shot and killed both dogs. Animal Crimes Detective Annie Henderson said,"This was a responsible owner. These animals never had any history of any type of aggression."

Dirty lie exposed.

Lie #2:
"According to studies by the CDC, a person is more likely to be killed…
- by a family member
- by a falling coconut
- in a bedroom slipper-related accident
- choking on a marble
- drowning in a 5-gallon bucket
- getting struck by lightning
…than by a pit bull."

These "studies" were never performed. I emailed the website and asked them politely if they could send me a direct link to the source of the material, but all they could provide was the front page. How do I know these studies weren't performed? Besides n extensive search of the CDC's website, I took the liberty to ask the CDC whether or not the studies were conducted. Their response when asked if the scenarios listed by bulladelphia.org really are more likely to kill a person than a pit bull:

"NCHS [CDC's National Center for Health Statistics] does not collect data to confirm the statistical claim you are referring to."

Translation: They doesn't perform that kind of study. If they don't perform those studies, there is no way that bulladelphia.org could have acquired that information from the CDC. However, in the same email response was this, that contradicts bulladelphia.org's claims:

"A CDC study on fatal dog bites found that at least 25 breeds of dogs were involved in 238 human deaths over 20 years. Rottweiler and pit bull-type dogs were involved in more than half of the deaths."

I also found a report conducted by the CDC on breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998, which also contradicts bulladelphia.org's claims:

"...the data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF [dog bite related fatalities] in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities."

That's right. Breed-specific problem.

It's worth noting that for falling coconuts to be more likely to kill somebody than a pit bull, a falling coconut would have to kill a U.S. citizen every 21 days. I don't know about you, but where I live in the Midwestern U.S., there are more pit bulls than palm trees.

Case closed. Again, pit bull advocates are quite often liars, because to justify keeping a pit bull, one must tell blatant, dirty lies. Pit bull advocates also choose to ignore the facts because it will go against their twisted worldviews. Why do they not feel guilty?

Oh, I almost forgot. Here's the story behind the "coconuts kill more people than X" myth. It started with sharks, and it was recycled for pit bulls. Whatever you plug the myth into, it's false.

pit bull propaganda machine is cranking 'em out

pit bull positive writes:

"You people are morons do the math lets just say theres roughly 38,000 "pit bulls" in the United States ok and theres 38 "fatal attacks" thats a whopping 1%. More people are killed by falling coconuts per year than there are killed by "pit bulls". More crazy people with far too much time on there hands who only want to create hysteria and be part of the problem instead of working towards a solution. Brilliant work here!"

more crazy pit nutters with more crazy lies. earlier today it was the small dog syndrome, now it is falling coconuts.

Dr. Peter Barss wrote a Nobel Prize winning article for the Journal of Trauma entitled "Injuries Due to Falling Coconuts." The article reported on nine injuries in Papua New Guinea due to falling coconuts, none fatal. Several victims suffered fractured skulls, were rendered comatose, etc.

Barss provides an anecdotal account of one such death and in a separate paper estimates that over a four-year period five deaths in his hospital's service area were related to coconut palm trees (including climbers falling out of them). A recent report (Mulford et al, "Coconut Palm-Related Injuries in the Pacific Islands," ANZ Journal of Surgery, January 2001), which describes itself as "the largest review of coconut-palm related injuries," also reports no deaths and on the question of mortality merely cites Barss.

even if coconuts did kill more people, so what? lightening, bees, snakes, sharks, jellyfish, hippos, crocodiles, earthquakes, hurricanes, extreme heat, extreme cold, tsunamis, tornados, kill more people, so what? what do natural disasters and freak accidental deaths by nature have to do with a man made, man controlled fighting dog?

just how desperate or stupid are you people?