"mp" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com:
For the most part, seemingly gentle family pets of all breeds are untrained. ALL dogs should be trained. ALL large dogs should be professionaly trained.
Too bad that few dogs received knowledgeable training, much less professional training. Makes you question the sanity of allowing dangerous breeds into residential neighbourhoods.
"mp" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com:
Also too bad that most owners have never been trained and don't have a clue. There's always shock and amazement when Fluffie the Yorkie rips a squirrel to shreds in the back yard.
You were doing OK until this last little bit which succeeded in removing any credibility you had.
Sounds like you had a really nasty experience. I'm not sure why someone whose dog had to be muzzled would take it to a dog park, let alone let it run. The owner is an idiot, and it sounds like the dog might be a real threat. But note that we remember and discuss the breed, not the owners. That's always the way it is.
I was walking in a dog park with a husband and wife their dog, and my dogs a few years ago. The wife was chatty but the husband was rather quiet. At one point she told me that her husband "had a thing" about pit bulls. I asked him about it, and he said he was OK with my dogs, but he his forearm had been seriously injured when his neighbour's dog attacked him. It turns out that the neighbour had trained the dog by having it hang by its teeth from a suspended 2x4, while beating it with a wire coat hanger. Otherwise it was kept isolated outside on a short chain. The chain trick alone tends to make dogs agressive toward people.
Dave Mundt has posted a URL later in this thread that gives a fair picture of the breed and its characteristics,
Jay
Well, Searcher reported seeing two sets of people walking dogs during his encounter. That does not sound like an area where one should be firing a large handgun. But you're right, that comment was OT squared.
Just to set the record straight, he was an acquaintance. No way would a call him a friend.
-- Jack Novak Buffalo, NY - USA (Remove "SPAM" from email address to reply)
Not exactly. It's more like saying anyone who has a high-powered shaper and misuses it is a poor woodworker.
I've never owned a pit bull, but I have several friends who have them and I've spent a lot of time around them. I have found them to be loving, affectionate, even-tempered and easy to handle. What's more, any sign of aggressiveness towards humans was systematically bred out of them. They are outstanding dogs.
But they are outstanding dogs in exactly the same way a powerful shaper is an outstanding tool. If you do not know what you're doing, the consequences of having one can be pretty horrendous.
Pit bulls are extremely strong and very, very quick dogs. While aggression towards humans was bred out, they have the normal terrier aggressiveness toward other animals their size or smaller. They need to be carefully socialized to both humans and animals. Further, they require owners who understand them, will work with them, discipline them wisely and above all keep them under psychological control.
Having watched several people raise them from puppies, I firmly believe pit bulls, rewarding as they are, are not dogs for novices.
Beyond this, pit bulls have a bad reputation and are discriminated against because of it. Many animal control departments, humane societies, etc., will automatically euthanize any pit bills they acquire. If the dog is running free (which is a strong condemnation of any dog owner) animal control will typically keep it for, say, three days and then put it down.
Pit bull owners are also under legal disabilities. If the dog does bite another animal or a person, there is in effect a strong presumption that the dog is 'vicious' that works against the owner in court. And of course in some places they are classed as 'dangerous breed' by law and require special bonds, enclosures, etc. if they will let people keep them at all.
You can argue that this kind of action against pit bulls is another example of fools confusing the thing with the person behind it. In my opinion you'd be correct.
But the fact remains that anyone who allows a pit bull to run free (or get into a situation where they can get free) is a bad owner and should be sanctioned.
--RC
Not if you've ever been around pit bulls. Mostly what they are bred to do is please their owners.
Well, no. It takes works and a little knowledge, but it is not at all beyond the ability of the average person. You're simply wrong.
No, it's a clearly demonstrated fact that pit bulls are readily trained not to be aggressive toward other dogs. They are no more difficult in this respect that terriers in general. Yes, it takes training. But it is neither rocket science nor any great mystery. I've seen it done repeatedly and the dogs were perfectly safe around everything from other dogs to new-born kittens. (Whether the pit bull was safe from the mother cat was another question.)
You may doubt it all you want. But it is still a fact and easily demonstrable. In fact a well-trained pit bull is quite capable of standing there and taking it without retaliation when attacked by another dog.
Let me let you in on a little secret. Dogs, any dogs, are not tigers. They are the products of thousands of years of selective breeding to socialize them to human beings. Tigers haven't been and they are an infinitely dicier proposition to handle.
For our purposes it comes down to the same thing.
--RC
Precisely wrong! Do you have ANY experience whatsoever with being around pit bulls? Have you ever trained one or tried to train one?
It's pretty clear you're talking from a near-complete lack of knowledge.
--RC
What is scary is the level of arrogant ignorance we're seeing demonstrated here.
--RC
On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 08:12:30 -0400, Tom Watson scribbled:
That should have CATI (or CATV - sorry to undermine your cool acronym), as the people from Vicenza (vicentini) are renowned for eating cats. Luckily, few of them immigrated to North America, so we get pizza & spaghetti rather than cat polenta.
Luigi Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address
Yeah and some of those inborn tendencies relates to degree of socialization and aggression. Keep in mind that pit bulls as a breed are perhaps 200 years old at most. (Actually only about 100, but the difference is nugatory.) Dogs split off from wolves about 10,000 years ago and for all that time they were bred to socialization with humans, obedience and away from wolf-like aggression.
Terriers in general have a tendency to attack other animals. The differences in pit bulls relate more to their size and strength and to any 'killer instinct'. (BTW: As near as I can see, pit bulls have no more killer instinct that other terriers. What they do have is 'gameness' -- the unwillingness to quit. That and an extreme willingness to do anything to please their owners.)
If you'd spent as much time around pit bulls as you have around hawks you'd understand that.
And neither of you apparently has any experience with the animals in question. Sheesh!
--RC
No, actually he's pointing up the irrationality of your position.
In other words the person wouldn't know a pit bull if he saw one. A Staffy is NOT a pit bull and the differences are pretty obvious if you do know.
Now it is true that Staffys were also fighting dogs and one time and have the terrier aggressiveness. What your story proves is that the owner didn't take the time to properly socialize the dog so that it would not attack other dogs. That can be a problem with any breed and its especially likely to be a problem with terriers. Even very small terriers are notorious for picking fights with other dogs.
You have the scars on your hand to prove you got in the middle of a dog fight -- albeit for good reasons -- and you got bit. This somehow makes the dog that bit you unusually vicious?
Swing, I've got news for you. If a dog -- any dog -- is out to hurt you, you don't just get bit on the hand.
Then you simply haven't been paying attention.
Look, I'm sorry you got bit. I'm even sorrier the dog that bit you was a pit bull. (If in fact it was. There's a tendency to claim any medium-size short-muzzled dog that bites someone is a pit bull. A lot of people can't even recognize them.)
But your position is something like claiming that all African-Americans are dangerous criminals because you were once mugged by an Africian American.
--RC
Better a ripping squirrel to shreds than the face of your neighbours kid.
Nor should you. With any breed of dog. Two dogs running loose together compounds the problem.
But don't blame it on the dogs being pit bulls.
--RC
Lobby Dosser did say:
All Usenet posts should be professionally edited before being posted.
"Snapped and went wild"? What utter nonsense! Absent psychosis, dogs simply don't do that. Dog behavior is actually quite predictable, including a potential attack, if you speak dog fluently enough.
One of the problem here is that dogs of any breed tend to behave differently around their owners and families than they do around strangers or other dogs. Most dog owners, unfortunately, are content if their dog is reasonably well behaved around the family. And of course none of them will admit that their dog had behavior problems after a dog bite incident.
--RC
People who fight dogs are a pretty low form of life. It's one of the things most pit bull owners hate. Not that that stops the dog fighters.
(If you've ever seen the 'winner' of a tough dog fight you'll know why most pit bull owners hate dog fights so much. A battle sick dog is an awful sight.)
--RC
In fact a fighting pit bull that showed aggressiveness towards humans was killed out of hand.
The rules of American dog fighting require that the owners stay in the ring while the dogs are fighting. Further, they have to wade in an separate their dogs at the referee's command. They can't afford to have a dog which is aggressive towards humans because they're the ones most likely to be bitten.
In fact you're less likely to be bitten by a pit bull in breaking up a dog fight than just about any other breed. Which does not make it a good idea to try to do it.
As you say. A scum bag.
--RC
Reality check: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "DANGEROUS BREED" of dog. All breeds of dogs are potentially dangerous and the danger increases in proportion to their size and strength. This is not because larger dogs are more aggressive. It is because they can do more damage.
--RC
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.