[rob666]

Originally Posted by CrunchyCripple ↗

I lived in a 3/4 of an acre sized yard. Cats liked to get in and try to hide in the bushes. My dog was used to go after rats and moles - which are a problem. You are aware that stray/feral cats are also a problem? No different than an infestation of rats or mice? They carry diseases and such. Just because people keep them as pets, doesn't mean they are any less of a problem, or have any more worth.

They were always chased out of the yard by people and dogs. The dogs were never taught that cats in the yard are friendly.

She is a vermin hunter and was used as such
*Never sic'd on a cat, or instructed to go after one.
Although she really started going after them after one ate my first duck - which was a friend of hers. I found that interesting.

She's lived/lives with ducks, multiple chickens and chicks on multiple occasions, puppies, kids, lizards, snakes, parakeets ect. ect. No problems. My animals are fine - it's the trespassing ones that she has a problem with.

I've managed to keep her from "snapping(not a real thing)" for 9 years now. Not because "Oh, nothing's happened yet - I must be lucky!!"

It's because I've studied and paid attention to my dog and many other dogs, so that I know what I'm doing.

As for statistics -

My uncle is black - yet has never, ever committed a crime. He went to college and has a successful job. But, according to statistics, I should sleep with a knife under my pillow - you know, cuz statistics.

Yeah, but if a kid ever trespasses on your property, it's not going to be a good scene. Everything you've said identifies your dog as a potential hazard to anything that comes into your yard, or anything that might represent a prey animal.

Cats are usually very in tune to their surroundings too. Most would think twice about jumping into a fenced off yard that was less than an acre containing multiple dogs

It is what it is

Far as the stats
They bring up a lot of questions. I don't think that it equates to the social issues faced by black people.
If we have people owning dogs that are known to be animal Aggressive, and the owner sees nothing wrong with that, and there is a known connection between prey drive and attacks on children......... I really don't know

Now you're saying your dog was a "vermin" hunter. You go on to explain how cats are sometimes categorized as such.
So, just what is the complete history of this dog? You started off saying it killed 7 cats and 2 rats, but now that's changed.......... Was it bred out of a hunting lineage?

[rob666]

Originally Posted by CrunchyCripple ↗

LABRADOR, PIT BULL, LITTLE TERRIER & GREYHOUND/MIX

All killing rats. Do they look unstable, or like they are about to go eat some kids?

When any of those dogs account for 60% of fatal attacks, despite making up 6% of dogs, this might be credible.

[CrunchyCripple]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

Yeah, but if a kid ever trespasses on your property, it's not going to be a good scene. Everything you've said identifies your dog as a potential hazard to anything that comes into your yard, or anything that might represent a prey animal.

Cats are usually very in tune to their surroundings too. Most would think twice about jumping into a fenced off yard that was less than an acre containing multiple dogs

It is what it is

Far as the stats
They bring up a lot of questions. I don't think that it equates to the social issues faced by black people.
If we have people owning dogs that are known to be animal Aggressive, and the owner sees nothing wrong with that, and there is a known connection between prey drive and attacks on children......... I really don't know

Now you're saying your dog was a "vermin" hunter. You go on to explain how cats are sometimes categorized as such.
So, just what is the complete history of this dog? You started off saying it killed 7 cats and 2 rats, but now that's changed.......... Was it bred out of a hunting lineage?

My personal dog is an American Pit Bull Terrier. She has traits of Bulldog type breeds and traits of terrier breeds that are the base of her breed. She is purebred and is paper-able with the UKC(didn't pay to have her registered). She came from weight pulling lines. She seems to be more on the terrier side than the bulldog side, since she is more of a hunter and higher energy. The calmer, more laid back Pit Bulls seem to act more like their Bulldog side. That's just assumption on my part.

She was good at hunting rodents, so was used as such. Just as a Labrador retriever is a hunting dog, but is often used as a service/seeing eye dog. Not its original purpose, but damn good at it.

Rat baiting used to be a sport before dog fighting - so it is in their backgrounds. It was never bred out.

My dogs have been around kids in their yard many times. As for someone coming into the current yard uninvited, they cannot get to the dogs. I made sure of that.

Dogs, in general, bite trespassers. They are not outside when I am not home, or within earshot. just because dogs like to get into trouble for many different reasons.

As for the numbers of animals, that's what I've personally witnessed. While out with family members she was also hunting moles and rats While gardening. It was both her and my Boxer's job, which they love.

It is very much possible for a dog to be a killer and a stable companion at the same time.

While, I personally am uneasy about having a pet that is of the same species as the one the dog exterminates, I've never attempted a bonding between the two. Although, I've heard of many people who have pet cats and a dog that is fine with them, but will kill a trespassing cat. That probably also depends on what comes first, the killing, or the pet.
So, it depends all on the individuals involved on how that situation works out.

As for race in humans not equating with breed of dogs.

You threw up statistics that lump all attacks under just the breed name. Nothing as to what led up to them. No attempt at understanding dog behavior or anything else, just that the dogs were pit bulls.

You can do that with blacks too, but you know better. You know that it's a more complex issue than just blood and skin color - which doesn't make them criminals, but other factoring issues are the cause.

[TheVrist]

Like I said previously, pitbulls are a brand. When you have a substantial amount of people breeding, and training dogs for the wrong reasons, the handful the do so the right way gets muffled in the mess.

Pit-bulls have two characteristics that could, and does make them lethal if not handled, and trained correctly. They are very highly energetic, and competitive. Maximize their prey drive instinct in them, and you have a relentless killing machine.

So with that knowledge, you have a shit ton of people breeding these dogs, for that negative results, because the darker side of the pitbull community wants mean, snarly aggressive dogs. and statistically, there are more people wanting bat pitbulls, than there are good people wanting a good loyal pet. So the numbers stack against them.

Truth of the matter, pittbulls like any other high prey driven dogs, can be trained to either have none, or moderate, or sever. Many breeds are trained to supplement their prey drive, and use it to benefit hunters. The downside for pitt bulls is their natural competitiveness, and high energy characteristics, gets the better of them for this practice. Not to mention their acute bullheadedness, which made them less popular in modern hunting.

As far as a dog with high prey drive harming children? Well that is circumstantial. A dog that has controled training of prey work, would be less likely mainly because they have orders to follow before they can/will do anything. A dog that is let go, free willy to kill kill kill whenever they desire could be problematic. Even what seems like a well behaved dog, when facing the situation could go south.


So tl;dr

More pit owners/breeders with high energy, competitive bred, prey killing dogs, than their are pit owners/breeders focused on taking that competitive, high energy, and focusing it on something less prey intensive.

[Illusion]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

When any of those dogs account for 60% of fatal attacks, despite making up 6% of dogs, this might be credible.

60% of fatal attacks despite being the minority. Thank you.

Also, take a look at all the pit bull victims. Pits usually target children. That's why I made the comment regarding children on the first page.

Originally Posted by mr black ↗

How many children will have to be maimed before the rest of the U.S. bans pit bulls?

The Following 9 Users Disliked mr black For This Post:
candice81, CrunchyCripple, GODISNOTGREAT, juliemd, K9Grip, MadCore, Mr Poo, Pit Bull, Sybil


Yea, fuck you too.

[rob666]

Originally Posted by mr black ↗

60% of fatal attacks despite being the minority. Thank you.

Also, take a look at all the pit bull victims. Pits usually target children. That's why I made the comment regarding children on the first page.



The Following 9 Users Disliked mr black For This Post:
candice81, CrunchyCripple, GODISNOTGREAT, juliemd, K9Grip, MadCore, Mr Poo, Pit Bull, Sybil


Yea, fuck you too.

Attacks on children seem to fall under prey drive more so than human aggression........ Which most breeders seem to agree can be trained out, IF......IF...... The owner both acknowledges the issue and trains the dog to not attack other animals.

If you feel that cats are a vermin animal, and choose not to train the dog not to attack them Or if you feel that a pit bull should not be disciplined for killing cats because a pit bull with prey drive cannot be trained to not kill other animals

I don't know what to say

At least with a gun it won't go off if you don't pull the trigger. It won't shoot if there's no bullet in it.
All it takes is one mistake, a child jumping your fence.........

I don't know why a person would want to own a dog that likes to kill other peoples pets for sport, that could attack a child out of that same drive.... And either refuse to train it not to or claim it can't be trained.... Why not just get a Boston terrier or a golden retriever?

[Illusion]

Originally Posted by CrunchyCripple ↗

So I guess you're ok with innocent people's dogs, who don't have a drop of pit bull blood in them, to be taken away and destroyed, all because some animal control officer thinks it might be a pit bull mix?

That's cool. As long as those filthy Pit Bulls are being wiped out. Who gives a shit about the casualties, right?

You are forgetting the real reason why pits and rotts are being banned in the first place.

One of your main arguments is inaccurate bite statistics. You say a large percentage of bites attributed to Pits are actually mutts that are labeled Pits because they can't pick out a breed. That's why they banned not only pits but a dog that has an appearance and physical characteristics that are substantially similar to those of bit bulls.

[Flaka]

Some kid played soccer with his mothers head in broad daylight, and yet people are so shocked a pit bull, A DOG, AN ANIMAL can turn on someone? People turn on people all the time not uncommon for an animal to do the same. Can't always blame MOM.

[rob666]

Originally Posted by Flaka ↗

Some kid played soccer with his mothers head in broad daylight, and yet people are so shocked a pit bull, A DOG, AN ANIMAL can turn on someone? People turn on people all the time not uncommon for an animal to do the same. Can't always blame MOM.

I'm not shocked at all.

All animals are unpredictable to a certain degree.

That's why the responsibility is always on the owner of the animal to make sure that it's under control.

Parents are responsible for their kids too

If a person decides they don't accept that responsibility, they shouldn't have kids or a dog.

[sunairco]

While you're adressing legislative bans, there's a much more insidious one going on behind your backs.

Insurance Companies.

Many are cancelling policies, raising rates, or refusing to write ones if you have on of the dogs known to be on a list. My parents had chows. Last one died 13 years ago. They got a letter from their insurance company notifying them they were in the possession of a Dangerous dog obtainied from a county vaccination records and it will affect the status of their insurance. A simple call cleared that one up, but you can already see there's an effort to reduce liability exposure not only to certain breeds, but large breeds in general.

This is how some of the anti-gun organizations are trying to pull a back door approach if gun contrtol legislation won't pass. Own a firearm and your insurance policy will be recised or rates vastly raised. Give up your weapons or suffer the rates that won't make it worth it to own.

Animal rights groups like have managed to convince townships to ban the sales of any kittens or puppies in some places to deter pet ownership or breeding. I don't get the logic of owning a pet is paramount to supporting an abusive industry or animal cruelty.