Main > Everything Else
Neighborhood problem turns violent
sparcade:
My 2 cents......
In general it has not as much to do with the "neighborhood" or type of dog as the fact that
dogs are animals and we can't predict their behavior which is why they should always be on a lease or fenced in.
I live in a nice middle class area and while my daughter was out riding her bike in front of the house, a neighbors dog(not a pit bull) got loose and did a nice job tearing up her lower leg. She'll have those scars forever.
Love dogs or hate em.... doesn't matter......... when it's your kid that gets scarred you see the light ... there should be ZERO tolerance for unleashed dogs!
patrickl:
How are you going to decide if someone is a good owner or not? Give them an evening course in dog training? I seriously doubt these people listen to reason. All current owners would protest and so they probably get a "free" license. So then what. You revoke the license when their dog does kill someone anyway?
Besides, even the dog of a good owner can kill/maim. As in 50% of pit attacks are dogs that were fine for years.
Banning dogs is difficult enough. Let alone setting up an entire system for licensing and certification of owners.
Muzzles and a leash laws would be the very least that should happen. Although I'd say most attacks happen indoors where they grab a visiting child. Even with leash laws and muzzles, you still have all those attacks.
Why should society be penalized for this dangerous dog fetish of a few people?
ChadTower:
E. Many "good owners" are in fact "bad owners" and will never acknowledge or understand that fact.
shardian:
Here's yet another piece that has plenty of pictures of Pits cuddling with babies. It also has a bit of decent information of Pit Bull behavior motivation and characteristics written by an expert on Pit Bulls
http://www.workingpitbull.com/aboutpits.htm
According to the article, ANY aggression towards non-threatening humans is atypical of the breed. I'll buy that to a point. For instance, when my neighbor only had the white Pit, it WAS a happy go lucky dog, that was great with his kids, friendly to all passersby, (although a little to jumpy and kept trying to get at my baby - which was not cool no matter how friendly her intentions), and NEVER barked. While it did make us a bit uncomfortable to be out walking, I wasn't afraid to walk to my mailbox. The male on the other hand was aggressive towards humans other than his family from day one. It could be because he was defending his woman, or because he has a behavior problem. Still, a good pit should not feel the need to defend his woman from a non-threatening human. The female Pit followed the big dogs lead and also became aggressive, along with a loose mut from around the corner. They trapped me in the middle of the street one night and I won't lie to you, it scared the ---Cleveland steamer--- out of me. Every time I turned my back they would start toward me. I get the feeling that Tommy would change his tune pretty quick if he was able to see "the other side" of his Pit Bull. I have faced down more than a few highly aggressive dogs, and this was on a different level.
The problem with Pits is their genetic traits - gameness and determination. It is up to the Pit to decide if an animal is a threat. If they see a child acting funny and feel they are being challenged, then as we say "it's on like Donkey Kong".
The article explicitly states that a Pit is a horrible guard dog because they love all humans. Basically, they are saying that a "good" Pit will not even bark at the mailman when he comes to the door. If that is true, and is brought to the attention of former Pitt owners who were attacked to contemplate, I wonder how many would come back and say their dog did bark at strangers. Puts a new light on things when you consider that huh?
So I will submit this to Tommy for his consideration from an expert who has written many books on Pit Bulls:
Mentally sound Pits do not show ANY aggression to ANY humans, unless very obviously threatened. Conversely from that, if ANY Pit shows ANY aggression whatsoever to ANY human, then it should be considered a safety risk from that point on.
Tommy, has your Pit ever shown ANY aggression to ANY human?
ChadTower:
--- Quote from: shardian on January 15, 2008, 09:22:07 am ---Tommy, has your Pit ever shown ANY aggression to ANY human?
--- End quote ---
Frankly, that's a useless question. Very, very few dog owners will ever admit to this. Hell, when I had a paper route there was a little poodle thing that would try to get at me every day. One day it finally did and ripped a chunk out of my forearm... as I'm standing there bleeding, and her white poodle has blood all over its muzzle, the woman is still standing there saying it didn't happen.
When my older son was 2 we went over the wife's cousin's house... they had some rather large but mostly docile dogs. Not knowing the dogs, I wanted them put away while my son was toddling around... they refused and told me I was being unreasonable. 5 minutes later one of the dogs went after my son, who was just standing there (about ten of us saw it) to the point that my mother in law snatched him off the ground and I tackled the dog. To this day the owners deny the dog was wrong and that everyone else in the room must be lying.
I've met very, very few owners that were honest with themselves about safety issues with their dogs.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version