Prometheus wrote:

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 07:00:02 GMT, Rick Cook
wrote:

I realize it verges on tasteless to introduce facts into an off-topic argument
in this newsgroup, but if anyone is interested, here are some references on the
'dangers' of pit bulls that I turned up in a quick google search.

An article on pit bulls and the problems involved in pit bull rescue.
http://www.forpitssake.org/chronicle.html

A FAQ on what pit bulls are really like
http://www.pbrc.net/misc/pbrcbrochure.pdf

A report on an Alabama Supreme Court ruling finding no evidence pit bulls are
inherently more dangerous than other breeds.
http://www.angelfire.com/biz6/doghol...ourdogs18.html

Long experience with pit bulls.
http://www.richardfstratton.com/main.htm

A good discussion of pit bulls and aggression.
http://www.goodpooch.com/MediaBriefs/GPpitbulls.htm
(IMHO, this source makes too much of the fatality statistics. While pit bulls
probably less likely to attack a human than other breeds, there is no question
that a pit bull's
strength and quickness means it can do a lot more damage when it does attack.)

I know you love pit-bulls, and from the fervor you're showing in
defending them, and the links you've gone through the trouble to find,
I've no doubt that you have good dogs. I've no doubt that your
friends are good dog-owners as well. You've probably never met a pit
bull you didn't like- believe it or not, I get it.

On the other hand, I have never met a responsible pit bull owner. I'm
not saying that there are none, or even that it is very uncommon- but
it is not possible to draw a conclusion that is completely
inconsistant with every experience you've ever had. If I were to tell
you Black and Decker made THE BEST woodworking tools on earth, and
posted links to pictures of masterfully crafted furniture, and
hundreds of testimonials saying the same, would you believe me? Even
though your experience had shown you that that brand was inadequate
for almost every task you tried to apply it to? Could you change your
mind because I said so, or because someone put up a website that said
so?

I would say that the responsible pit bull owners far out-number the irresponsible
owners. But that doesn't mean the irresponsible/psycho owners don't exist and that
they don't produce some very dangerous dogs. (Hell, there are creeps out there who
fight their dogs.) As I say, some people shouldn't be allowed to own a goldfish.

But those are the owners, not the breed.



I don't want to prevent anyone from owning dogs of any breed. I just
would like to see those dogs taken care of properly. If you have a
pit bull, and love it as a part of your family, great. Just don't
assume that it acts the same when you are not around, and let the
animal go roaming about the neighborhood. That's all I or anyone else
has the right to ask of you.

No one should let their dog of any breed run around loose. That is irresponsible and
dangerous to the dog and everyone else. Dogs that run loose tend to have real short
life spans. I can't understand how anyone who claims to care for a dog can allow it.

Do what you like on your own property-
hell, keep an elephant in your backyard and an alligator in your
bathtub for all I care. But if said elephant steps on my car, don't
expect your assertion that the elephant is a noble, wise and gentle
creature to change the fact that I can't get to work that day! And
don't expect the fact that not all pit bulls are the devil incarnate
to change the fact that it is damn scary when a muscular, viscious
animal corners you in your own yard.

Well, if the dog is viscous, it's not going to be moving very fast. :-)
Seriously, being confronted by any dog that is acting aggressively is scary. It
shouldn't happen and it is a sign of an irresponsible owner to let a dog run loose.

The fact that are no inherently dangerous breeds doesn't mean there aren't any
dangerous dogs.



I've got a friendly little pooch that doesn't seem to be a danger to
anything but table scraps, but I don't let him wander around on his
own- not only because he could be a danger to someone who is strange
to him, but also because he lacks the discernment to look both ways
before crossing the street, or to prevent himself from crapping in the
neighbor's yard. So the breed of dog is not all bad; fine, I'll agree
to that- but the overwhelming tendancy in my experience is for the
wrong kind of people to adopt that breed, and that- more than anything
else, is what makes them dangerous. I've seen other kinds of dogs
cause problems, but all of those others put together do not add up to
even 1/10 of the trouble I have personally witnessed when a pit bull
is present. The statistics [in the link another poster provided] show
that pit-bulls and rottweilers (which I have seen to be friendly,
gentle dogs) cause over 50% of all dog-related deaths. There must be
*something* there, even if the statistics are skewed.

Don't confuse dog-related deaths with dog bite incidents. Problems with
identification aside, dogs like Rotts and pit bulls are strong, fast animals and
when they do bite they tend to do a lot of damage. I'm not surprised they account
for a disproportionate number of deaths. But apparently, as best we can judge from
the dog bite reports, the _number_ of biting incidents pretty much tracks the
popularity of the breed.


You could argue that not all bites lead to death, and you would be
right. I don't have any statistics showing the tendancy of each breed
of dog to bite- but for my buck, I'd rather get a superficial flesh
wound from a spaniel than be killed by a pit bull.

Again, I do not believe that people should be prevented from owning
pit bulls- I just don't want them growling at me on my property.
That's all.

You should not have to tolerate _any_ dog growling on your property. Any dog that
does is a candidate for removal -- either by animal control in a reasonably
well-policed county or by more direct means if you don't have that option.

--RC