Pit Bull Terriers: Should we require background checks and licensing?

[RaoulDuke79]

3 hours ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

Thanks for the valuable input and feels 

 

Here’s some info for you.      Watch your back around those malamutes chief 

 

No golden retrievers on the list. I can sleep soundly tonight.

[Teddy KGB]

3 hours ago, bbb said:

 

When they can crack into this graph from Forbes instead of your pitbulllovers.com graph

 

284 of 5 million is too many.  

 

Build that wall ! 

[Augie]

4 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

284 of 5 million is too many.  

 

Build that wall ! 

 

I appreciate your passion and your love, but does that visual mean nothing to you? 

 

I find it to reinforce my preconceptions and also disturbing. 

[GoBills808]

3 hours ago, Augie said:

 

I appreciate your passion and your love, but does that visual mean nothing to you? 

 

I find it to reinforce my preconceptions and also disturbing. 

Not a whole bunch when you consider ‘pit bull’ encompasses a lot of different breeds of dog (meaning there are a ton of dogs that get thrown into the pit bull category, and that’s without mentioning how popular ‘pit bulls’ are in general ie there are a LOT of em in the US), whereas say a Rottweiler is a very specific (and not nearly as common) breed. Statistics, guys.

[bbb]

4 hours ago, Augie said:

 

I appreciate your passion and your love, but does that visual mean nothing to you? 

 

I find it to reinforce my preconceptions and also disturbing. 

 

He's reinforcing the preconceptions of pit bull owners mentioned earlier.  

4 hours ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

284 of 5 million is too many.  

 

Build that wall ! 

 

284 deaths.  What about the many maimed?  Pets killed, etc?  

[Gugny]

11 hours ago, bbb said:

 

When they can crack into this graph from Forbes instead of your pitbulllovers.com graph

 

Some data about this graph:

 

 Breeds of dogs involved in the most human fatalities

• In the 13-year period of 2005 to 2017, canines killed 433 Americans. Pit bulls contributed to 66% (284) of these deaths. Within this period, deaths attributed to pit bulls rose from 58% (2005 to 2010) to 71% (2011 to 2017), a 22% rise.1 [Table 2]
• Today, when averaging the last 3 years (2015 to 2017), pit bulls comprise about 6.5% of the total U.S. dog population. This is a 63% rise since the 3-year period of 2010 to 2012 when the total U.S. pit bull population was estimated to be 4%.2
• Rottweilers, the second most lethal dog breed over the 13-year period, inflicted 10% (45) of attacks resulting in death. This is a decrease from an earlier period (2005 to 2010) when rottweilers inflicted 14% of the total recorded deaths. [Table 2]
• A group of dog breeds followed rottweilers, each with fewer than half the number of deaths: German shepherds 20 deaths, mixed-breeds 17 deaths, American bulldogs 15 deaths, mastiff/bullmastiff combination 14 deaths and huskies 13 deaths.
• The 13-year data set shows the combination of pit bulls, rottweilers and "baiting" bull breeds, fighting and guardian breeds -- American bulldogs, mastiffs, bullmastiffs, presa canarios, and cane corsos -- contributed to over 80% of all dog bite fatalities.

 

Of the 284 fatal pit bull attacks, 52% (149) involved killing a family or household member.

 

Lots of great stats here:  https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-multi-year-fatality-report-2005-2017.php

 

 

Edited June 7, 2019 by Gugny

[Teddy KGB]

4 hours ago, bbb said:

 

He's reinforcing the preconceptions of pit bull owners mentioned earlier

 

You’re a better person than me and all of the other pitbull owners ??

 

Have another drink ??

Edited June 7, 2019 by Teddy KGB

[BringBackFergy]

1 hour ago, Gugny said:

 

Some data about this graph:

 

 Breeds of dogs involved in the most human fatalities

• In the 13-year period of 2005 to 2017, canines killed 433 Americans. Pit bulls contributed to 66% (284) of these deaths. Within this period, deaths attributed to pit bulls rose from 58% (2005 to 2010) to 71% (2011 to 2017), a 22% rise.1 [Table 2]
• Today, when averaging the last 3 years (2015 to 2017), pit bulls comprise about 6.5% of the total U.S. dog population. This is a 63% rise since the 3-year period of 2010 to 2012 when the total U.S. pit bull population was estimated to be 4%.2
• Rottweilers, the second most lethal dog breed over the 13-year period, inflicted 10% (45) of attacks resulting in death. This is a decrease from an earlier period (2005 to 2010) when rottweilers inflicted 14% of the total recorded deaths. [Table 2]
• A group of dog breeds followed rottweilers, each with fewer than half the number of deaths: German shepherds 20 deaths, mixed-breeds 17 deaths, American bulldogs 15 deaths, mastiff/bullmastiff combination 14 deaths and huskies 13 deaths.
• The 13-year data set shows the combination of pit bulls, rottweilers and "baiting" bull breeds, fighting and guardian breeds -- American bulldogs, mastiffs, bullmastiffs, presa canarios, and cane corsos -- contributed to over 80% of all dog bite fatalities.

 

Of the 284 fatal pit bull attacks, 52% (149) involved killing a family or household member.

 

Lots of great stats here:  https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-multi-year-fatality-report-2005-2017.php

 

 

Those are some pretty damning statistics. The rise in the PB population is scary. Despite the prevalence of PB attacks, people continue to breed them (perhaps some scum are trying to create the perfect fighter?). 

[Gugny]

13 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:

Those are some pretty damning statistics. The rise in the PB population is scary. Despite the prevalence of PB attacks, people continue to breed them (perhaps some scum are trying to create the perfect fighter?). 

 

The scum are just making money.  I've got employees who can't get to work because their car insurance lapsed ... but they'll still drop $1,000 on a pit bull.  These "breeders," know people will pay for pit bulls, no matter what.

[transient]

3 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

Some data about this graph:

 

 Breeds of dogs involved in the most human fatalities

• In the 13-year period of 2005 to 2017, canines killed 433 Americans. Pit bulls contributed to 66% (284) of these deaths. Within this period, deaths attributed to pit bulls rose from 58% (2005 to 2010) to 71% (2011 to 2017), a 22% rise.1 [Table 2]
• Today, when averaging the last 3 years (2015 to 2017), pit bulls comprise about 6.5% of the total U.S. dog population. This is a 63% rise since the 3-year period of 2010 to 2012 when the total U.S. pit bull population was estimated to be 4%.2
• Rottweilers, the second most lethal dog breed over the 13-year period, inflicted 10% (45) of attacks resulting in death. This is a decrease from an earlier period (2005 to 2010) when rottweilers inflicted 14% of the total recorded deaths. [Table 2]
• A group of dog breeds followed rottweilers, each with fewer than half the number of deaths: German shepherds 20 deaths, mixed-breeds 17 deaths, American bulldogs 15 deaths, mastiff/bullmastiff combination 14 deaths and huskies 13 deaths.
• The 13-year data set shows the combination of pit bulls, rottweilers and "baiting" bull breeds, fighting and guardian breeds -- American bulldogs, mastiffs, bullmastiffs, presa canarios, and cane corsos -- contributed to over 80% of all dog bite fatalities.

 

Of the 284 fatal pit bull attacks, 52% (149) involved killing a family or household member.

 

Lots of great stats here:  https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-multi-year-fatality-report-2005-2017.php

 

 

 

The problem with both this site (which tries to give the appearance of being objective until you look a little more closely under the hood) and the pro-pit bull sites is they’re pushing statistics in a way to tell their story. If you go to the bottom of that site it’s clearly pushing an anti-pit bull agenda, and it has a picture of a pit bull with an exclamation point over the US). 

 

To put those statistics in context you need to know not only how many pit bulls are there in the US (apparently between 4-5 million, with over half the population of dogs in shelters being pit-type dogs), but what are they referring to as pit (mixed breeds make up over 50% of household pets, how many of those go from mixed breed to pit once they become a statistic?), and what percentage of the dog population do the other breeds make up?  Saying Rottweilers are responsible for 17% of fatal dog attacks (or whatever the number was) is a very different thing if they make up 10% of the dog population vs 0.1% of the population, and despite trying I can’t find numbers like that to make sense of these  statistics.

 

Its clear certain breeds like labs are less likely to cause severe or fatal dog bite injuries, but which breed do you think the statistics are attributed to when a lab/pit mix bites someone or mauls someone? It’s all in the reporting, and with what’s being posted the data presented in this thread from either viewpoint are clearly biased, as are most things nowadays.

Edited June 7, 2019 by transient

[Mark80]

I just don't get the point.  Is it to look cool or look tough?  There are plenty of other dogs that look cool and look tough that have far fewer "accidents" of attacking/killing people.  These dogs were bred to be killing machines, not pets.  Society should let this bread die out naturally. 

Edited June 7, 2019 by Mark80

[transient]

5 hours ago, Mark80 said:

I just don't get the point.  Is it to look cool or look tough?  There are plenty of other dogs that look cool and look tough that have far fewer "accidents" of attacking/killing people.  These dogs were bread to be killing machines, not pets.  Society should let this bread die out naturally. 

 

You don't have to say that, the rest of your post makes that abundantly clear. 

 

What do you envision that letting a dog breed consisting of 4-5 million dogs "dying out naturally" would look like?  Do you think that if you ignored them they would do you the kindness of just going extinct?  Are you suggesting by letting them free to do as they please they would find the world inhospitable and just die out as opposed to forming more packs of stray dogs that hunt for food, thereby making the problem worse?  There is no eliminating a breed that large without euthanasia... so maybe you're suggesting "naturally" euthanizing 4-5 million dogs?

 

As for the "cool, tough" argument, I rescued my dog from a shelter when she was less than a year old and was told she was a mix of different breeds but not a pit, which I was suspicious of/doubtful of at the time (and which also is part of the problem for unsuspecting dog owners).  I was also told by the shelter that she was a year and a half old and that she was done growing.  When I took her to the vet he said she's definitely a pit mix and that she's definitely going to gain another ~20ish pounds by the time she's done growing, and he was right.  Regardless, I adopted her because she's the smartest, sweetest, friendliest, most personality filled dog that I've ever owned, and that was on display from the moment I met her.  I wasn't going expressly to adopt a pit, she was just the dog I connected with when I went to the shelter.

Edited June 7, 2019 by transient

[Teddy KGB]

5 hours ago, Mark80 said:

I just don't get the point.  Is it to look cool or look tough?  There are plenty of other dogs that look cool and look tough that have far fewer "accidents" of attacking/killing people.  These dogs were bred to be killing machines, not pets.  Society should let this bread die out naturally. 

 

The dumbest thing I’ll read all year ^ 

[BringBackFergy]

3 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

The dumbest thing I’ll read all year ^ 

Why? Because it wasn’t sponsored by www.pitbullstatstowinarguments.org?

[stony]

5 hours ago, Mark80 said:

I just don't get the point.  Is it to look cool or look tough?  There are plenty of other dogs that look cool and look tough that have far fewer "accidents" of attacking/killing people.  These dogs were bred to be killing machines, not pets.  Society should let this bread die out naturally. 

Dudeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. No.  You're making it so easy to defend the "it's the owners, not the breed" point of view.  Pit bulls (is it even a breed classification?) have suffered from moronic owners who think their dog's are bad ass.  Often, these are the same owners who encourage bad behavior in their dogs.  

[transient]

12 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:

Why? Because it wasn’t sponsored by www.pitbullstatstowinarguments.org?

 

C’mon, Fergy. Be fair. The response did kinda look like the poster gets tips from  www.howtomakeanassofyourselfonamessageboard.org sent to his inbox. 

[Johnny Hammersticks]

Pit Bulls may not even be the most aggressive breed of dog, but they are the ones who can and will do the most damage if they do snap.  I had a mini dauchshund that we had to put down.  Despite spending thousands of dollars on trainers, vets, a pet “psychologist,” psychotropic medications...she bit 5 people before we had to make that difficult decision.  Fortunate for us, her bites were tiny and largely harmless.  I think she only broke the skin once and just barely.

 

Chows, chihuahuas, collies, and cocker spaniels can ask be very aggressive breeds.  Unfortunate for PB’s is that they are so big/strong and attack so relentlessly and violently...their worst attacks tend to make national news.  I think Pitts are beautiful and I have found them generally to be very sweet and loyal dogs (although I have never owned one).  I would never, however, let my children near one...especially one that I don’t know extremely well.  Maybe less of a chance that they get attacked by a chihuahua, but at least the chihuahua wouldn’t leave them disfigured for life or dead.

[RaoulDuke79]

16 minutes ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

Pit Bulls may not even be the most aggressive breed of dog, but they are the ones who can and will do the most damage if they do snap.  I had a mini dauchshund that we had to put down.  Despite spending thousands of dollars on trainers, vets, a pet “psychologist,” psychotropic medications...she bit 5 people before we had to make that difficult decision.  Fortunate for us, her bites were tiny and largely harmless.  I think she only broke the skin once and just barely.

 

Chows, chihuahuas, collies, and cocker spaniels can ask be very aggressive breeds.  Unfortunate for PB’s is that they are so big/strong and attack so relentlessly and violently...their worst attacks tend to make national news.  I think Pitts are beautiful and I have found them generally to be very sweet and loyal dogs (although I have never owned one).  I would never, however, let my children near one...especially one that I don’t know extremely well.  Maybe less of a chance that they get attacked by a chihuahua, but at least the chihuahua wouldn’t leave them disfigured for life or dead.

I agree with this sentiment. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Sorry I wasn’t able to check the board these past few days. 

 

Is this for the dog or owners?

 

@BringBackFergy

Edited June 7, 2019 by ShadyBillsFan

[Chandler#81]

58 minutes ago, transient said:

 

C’mon, Fergy. Be fair. The response did kinda look like the poster gets tips from  www.howtomakeanassofyourselfonamessageboard.org sent to his inbox. 

I moderate that site too, but I don’t do anything..