I’m aware of all of that, I user to volunteer at a dog shelter and I know pitbulls are mislabeled and overlabeled, but when you have to argue with every single statistic and try that hard to make a point, maybe you’re being obtuse yourself(no offense srs) for me I’ve seen and heard enough to know to stay away. It’s sad for those left out there(I’m not opposed to them being adopted) but I think pitbulls shouldn’t be allowed to breed anymore/phased out in a non lethal way

How the fuk does cutting the dog's throat not work?

If my son was being mauled to death right in front of me any I couldn't stop it, I'd probably just go ahead and kill myself.

I am not sure if I ever met a pitbull owner that isn't completely trashy.

I agree, I don't think it should be strictly for pit bulls (which I'm aware make up 4 breeds, just can't respond to every point). But to address it now, even combining all four breeds there were still many less than there were rottweilers or GSD's, and they still made up the majority of fatalities.

In that same source the CDC listed several dog breeds or groups of breeds which were denoted as 'vicious breeds' that made up virtually all violent attacks. Those were the breeds listed in the table:

"Pit bull"
Rottweiler
German shepherd
"Husky"
Alaskan malamute
Doberman Pinscher
Chow Chow
Great Dane
St. Bernard
Akita

Personally, I see no problem with regulating or restricting ownership of all of these breeds. What I mean by that is you should have to go through some sort of training or competency evaluation and not be a convicted felon.


watch how both ownership and violent attacks of pit bulls would drop off the table if you did that. Probably rottweilers, too.

my rottie killed a teddy bear in protest of this thread.

"Every single statistic"

2 legitimate statistics have been posted ITT so far, all with the same shortcomings of failing to recognize any factor other than the breed and fatality as well as lumping together 4 breeds into one.

Like I said before...these "statistics" aren't hard to pick apart.

Like I said before...should we eliminate all black males since they commit crimes at a ridiculously higher rate than any other demographic?

And being okay with adoption but not okay with controlled breeding is backwards af, when you have no idea wtf you're getting with an adopted dog and releasing them into your home and the public almost immediately, whereas with a breeder you get them from a puppy and tailor the dog to your personality from the start. Not saying I advocate pitbull breeding either, and nevermind the fact adoption is not mutually exclusive from a breeder, since plenty of breeders now are "rescues".

And how exactly would you expect pitbulls to be phased out in a non-lethal way? ship them to another country? the breed ends one of two ways. People either grow up and realize that this is just another witch hunt in the history of dog breeds, or people keep being emotionally reactive and wipe out an entire subspecies.

pitbull haters hate pitbulls the same way liberals hate anyone with a different opinion. "brb I don't like em based off no experience besides anecdotes I've heard, murky statistics support my agenda, so not only will I champion not owning one, but I will advocate that they all be destroyed and anyone who owns them be destroyed"

not saying that's you, but it's a lot of people iTTagain, where'd you pull this number from? the chart says 60, if you divide that by 4, it's 15 fatalities total by breed, which is almost half the rottweilers. percentage wise by breed, sure. But absolutely, they are not responsible for the most fatalities. And one could argue why aren't we focusing on the more common dogs that are responsible for a higher number of absolute fatalities, not breed percentage based. Lets also not forget that many people don't register their dogs, or don't report their breeds accurately, so the statistic saying there were more rotties than pits at the time can be challenged, especially since the typically accepted demographic that owns pitbulls would probably not be the most law abiding people who would register their dogs. When I first got mine I reported him as a Black Lab mix so that I could have him in my apartment. Scummy, I know, but i've since corrected it and don't lie about it anymore.

Honestly I would absolutely agree with your proposed regulations for all those breeds and even extend it to say you should be required to put the dog through training as well as getting trained yourself to handle the dog. And said training should be standardized, not just get a completion certificate from any old trainer.

I've met tons of good pitbull owners, but on the other hand all trashy dog owners I've met either had a pitbull or a rottweiler. Seems like they're the go-to breeds for people who want to look tough but not put the time towards socializing the dog.

rekt, also mirin pupper

I take it that you never been to an animal rescue center. The dogs there are not wanted for a reason. They literally look like mutts and look like the scums of society srs. The dogs there are not bred well nor were they raised well. In all honesty they should put down most of those dogs.

I have no idea how these kid attacks happen and Im 99% sure its poor ownership of the dog. There are certain traits these dogs have that you have to accept as a owner and realize, but besides that they are probably the best dogs to ever have(rottwheilers). They don't like strangers, are naturally protective, and will engage when provoked. You have to take all 3 of those into consideration any time a new person is put into a scenario with the dog around. You have to actively engage them in a friendly manner with said person, and always keep an eye on them when/if they start acting more hyper than usual.

This is very true as well...I lived in an upscale neighbourhood for 10 years in Toronto that was dog and baby crazy...everywhere you looked was strollers and dogs. Not a single pitbull or rotty to be seen.

Live in the west end of Toronto now in another good neighbourhood...exact same scenario.

Work in downtown Toronto, see at least 3 or 4 pits a week, always a douchebag with neck tatts, smelling like weed. Never a guy in a suit or even dressed reasonably well.

Some pit owners on here would say "see...it is the owners who suck", but in truth it is the characteristics of that breed that attract a certain type of person, not a certain type of person that creates those traits

I used to work at a rescue place, and that's an extreme generalization

Its not because if a dog is well bred and well cared for, they aint gonna be in the dog pound. That's just logic. wtf is wrong wit chu

The last time I went to the animal rescue shelter, all I saw was pitbull mutts. They were large and not very attractive. I can't think of anyone in their right mind adopting them. Its just too dangerous. Sure I saw little dogs too but they were also hideous.

But its not just dogs. When people/rich folks adopt, they adopt good looking kids first. That's just the truth.

There was a similar story of a 2 yr old girl from texas who was playing with the family dog and when the family returned from shopping around 5 pm they found the dog had bit down on the girl's neck. She later died from her injuries in her mother's arm.

disgusting. I'd wreck that mutt if it was my kid.

can confirm trash checking in

not srs. that just sounds like more confirmation bias. I'm sure someone in those nice neighborhoods walked by you with a pit/pit mix, and you just didn't notice or didn't realize.

I'd challenge anyone saying pitbulls are a trash breed to hit up this website or another one like it and see how well you can identify them.

http://thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspo...-pit-bull.html

Actually it makes a lot of sense that trash people own pitbulls. The poorer you are the more violent you are. Pitbulls are great for poverty folks since they deal with violence a lot.

Lmao i'm not saying it doesn't

just trying to reiterate that not all pitbulls or their owners are trash. the confirmation bias i was referring to was him not seeing any in the nicer neighborhoods, not the ones he did see in the chit areas

And on your last point...GSD's would be a better dog since their bloodline has long been used for human attacks and submission, not the pitbull breeds. Nevermind they are usually skinner, faster, more agile, and have a stronger bite force

This^^^

It’s not that hard to realize how vicious they are. I’ve witnessed first hand an unprovoked attack.

My point is that rottweilers were very common in the 80's and 90's, so even if there were a comparable number of deaths attributed to rotteweilers and say, the american pit terrier, proportionally the terrier is still more likely to act violently. Put another way, if there are 3M rottweilers that killed 19 people, and 1M American pits that killed 15 people, then the american pit is still more likely to be violent.

Also, it's pretty safe to assume that both breeds of bull terriers are in the minority for fatalities. They are much smaller and have smaller mouths and jaws. It's very likely the american pit and staffordshire terriers made up virtually all of the fatalities by pits.


More importantly, I agree with your point we should focus on the breeds with the most fatalities, not the most on a per-dog basis. That still puts the rotweiller and multiple pit bull breeds at the top, by an overwhelming majority, with GSD's being the next most with some 30-40% less fatalities. Again, probably with more GSDs owned than pitbulls.

fakkk! I think I would go nuts and skin that dog alive. I have a toddler daughter.

Dog breed of peace, not even once

Yeah you're not wrong. The only caveat I have which I edited in my previous post but you prob missed since it was real recent, is that, while I acknowledge your'e right on a % basis, you might also take into account that it's probably pretty likely most pitbull owners who are not responsible, upstanding citizens, prob don't care at all to register their dogs and take responsibility for them. granted the same could prob be said for rottweilers as well, so it's an unknown variable by which there's no way of measuring. Just presenting that as a devil's advocate type argument.

But ultimately I think we both agree that any powerful dog should be restricted and potential owners should be vetted and held to a higher standards. I don't see anything wrong with that.

No sir, I keep my eyes peeled for those savages and rottys at all times. I promise you I would have noticed. My dad kick one in the fukkin head so hard I thought he killed it when I was a little kid...it lunged at me when we were walking past it. My pops was ready for it and lifted me by one arm LOL and kicked it in the head.

I was traumatized ...mostly because it looked just like the dog from the Little Rascals (Petey!)and I had no fear of it whatsoever. Ever since then I have spotted them before they've spotted me LOL

poor folks cant afford German Shepard's. Those dogs are high calibur. A pit is cheap and looks intimidating and das what poor folks work off of.

I work in newton/Waban area in MA. where homes are 1.7 mill and up. nice neighborhoods.
like to walk around during my lunch. no a single pit has been seen in the 4 years I work there.

my wife's family lives in a Everett, MA. lots of black people, Dominicans, white folks from projects with pittbulls. at least now that city is citing people who own pitts if they don't walk them with a muzzle on.

[QUOTE=EdwardTheGreat post_id=1565062201]No sir, I keep my eyes peeled for those savages and rottys at all times. I promise you I would have noticed. My dad kick one in the fukkin head so hard I thought he killed it when I was a little kid...it lunged at me when we were walking past it. My pops was ready for it and lifted me by one arm LOL and kicked it in the head.

I was traumatized ...mostly because it looked just like the dog from the Little Rascals (Petey!)and I had no fear of it whatsoever. Ever since then I have spotted them before they've spotted me LOL

[img]https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTMxNTc0MzY3N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODk4NjgwMw@@._ V1_SY1000_CR0,0,929,1000_AL_.jpg[img][/QUOTE]lol fair enough, i'm not going to try and tell you how your eyes work i believe you man. stay safe out there man, pitbull or not. Some of the worst dog bites I've seen have happened when it was a dog no one expected it from.

[QUOTE=Syko617 post_id=1565062621]I work in newton/Waban area in MA. where homes are 1.7 mill and up. nice neighborhoods.
like to walk around during my lunch. no a single pit has been seen in the 4 years I work there.

my wife's family lives in a Everett, MA. lots of black people, Dominicans, white folks from projects with pittbulls. at least now that city is citing people who own pitts if they don't walk them with a muzzle on.[/QUOTE]and again, that's your experience. I can cite my experience of living in San Diego and seeing hundreds of pits throughout my time here and only ever having seen one attack, while I've seen multiple attacks from other breeds within the same breeds, or across all the breeds. But that doesn't matter much.

a muzzle law on one breed is ridiculous when they aren't even the strongest or fastest breed. Should we keep black males handcuffed because they commit crimes at a higher rate? No one has answered this question yet it goes along the same line of thinking.

for some levity

Not to condemn or defend pitbulls, but who the hell are these parents that let infants play with large animals like that?

No kids crew, but if I had one I wouldn't even let him near a fukking yorkie lol.