Archive

Pitbulls are for poor stupid people

  • sportchampps
    3 of my best friends all have pits. 2/3 are the smartest most gentle dogs you will meet. The third is stupid and causes so e trouble but would never bite. They were all trained by a friend who went on to become a professional dog trainer. It's not the breed that causes a dog to be bad its bad owners. Unfortunately for pits they are a popular breed for stupid owners to buy.
  • vball10set
    This is true...however, certain breeds are predisposed to viciousness, the pit being among the leaders in this category.
  • bigkahuna
    sportchampps;1176316 wrote:3 of my best friends all have pits. 2/3 are the smartest most gentle dogs you will meet. The third is stupid and causes so e trouble but would never bite. They were all trained by a friend who went on to become a professional dog trainer. It's not the breed that causes a dog to be bad its bad owners. Unfortunately for pits they are a popular breed for stupid owners to buy.
    I don't see what's so hard about this to understand. Reps.
  • bigkahuna
    isadore;1176158 wrote:talk about a self fulfilling prophecy, a dog kills a kid, it must be the owner's. Why because it can not be the dog's fault.
    why is that true, well one once licked my hand, so they must be nice.
    Well it is the owner's fault in one way, they brought a killer into their home.
    You mock the ones on here who say what's in bold. In reality, you're doing the same thing. "Oh, x% of dog killers are pitts, so all pitts are killers
    WebFire;1176163 wrote:So why would someone want to choose this breed to bring into their home with children, when it needs special attention and extra monitoring to not hurt anyone?
    This is true with any dog/cat; especially around young children babies. I've said it about 3 times in this thread. My wife was maimed by a cat when she was 3 months old, and her parents will even say it's their fault for leaving her in her seat thing unattended.
    WebFire;1176179 wrote:Your point is moot. Guns can't kill without a human using it. Dogs can.

    Comparing inanimate objects to living objects is a terrible argument. You're smarter than that.
    Ok, so take a bucket of water, or a pool. You don't need to use those, they're just sitting there doing nothing.
  • isadore
    sportchampps;1176316 wrote:3 of my best friends all have pits. 2/3 are the smartest most gentle dogs you will meet. The third is stupid and causes so e trouble but would never bite. They were all trained by a friend who went on to become a professional dog trainer. It's not the breed that causes a dog to be bad its bad owners. Unfortunately for pits they are a popular breed for stupid owners to buy.
    of course it is the breed. Statistics trump anecdotal evidence. gosh my friend had a rattlesnake, he was just so docile and friendly, kids loved to play with him.
  • isadore
    bigkahuna;1176338 wrote:You mock the ones on here who say what's in bold. In reality, you're doing the same thing. "Oh, x% of dog killers are pitts, so all pitts are killers



    This is true with any dog/cat; especially around young children babies. I've said it about 3 times in this thread. My wife was maimed by a cat when she was 3 months old, and her parents will even say it's their fault for leaving her in her seat thing unattended.



    Ok, so take a bucket of water, or a pool. You don't need to use those, they're just sitting there doing nothing.
    not analogous. what we have is a type of dog that kils much more often than any other type. why take the chance when so many other types of dogs do not have that track recoord.
  • WebFire
    bigkahuna;1176338 wrote:You mock the ones on here who say what's in bold. In reality, you're doing the same thing. "Oh, x% of dog killers are pitts, so all pitts are killers



    This is true with any dog/cat; especially around young children babies. I've said it about 3 times in this thread. My wife was maimed by a cat when she was 3 months old, and her parents will even say it's their fault for leaving her in her seat thing unattended.



    Ok, so take a bucket of water, or a pool. You don't need to use those, they're just sitting there doing nothing.
    When is the last time a pool attacked someone? The human had to derp for the pool to cause harm. Not the case with dogs. Are you seriously arguing this?
  • WebFire
    bigkahuna;1176337 wrote:I don't see what's so hard about this to understand. Reps.
    What is so hard to understand that all pit owners say this...after they've attacked or killed someone?
  • WebFire
    THE4RINGZ;1176268 wrote:True, but if these smaller dogs I own were bigger and had the same temperments they do, they would.be killers.
    But but but, if if if. IF I killed someone I would be a murderer. But I don't kill.
  • WebFire
    LJ;1176254 wrote:Your extensive research on the anti bully dogbites website?

    Mixed breed and little dogs top the lists for most overall bites.
    Links? My research so far is more extensive than yours. Because you've provided none. And really we are talking about deaths. Not ankle bites. But please keep telling me how vicious these ankle biters are compared to killing machines.
  • vball10set
    bigkahuna;1176338 wrote: This is true with any dog/cat; especially around young children babies. I've said it about 3 times in this thread. My wife was maimed by a cat when she was 3 months old, and her parents will even say it's their fault for leaving her in her seat thing unattend.
    This is NOT TRUE, and for the record, a three month old infant should never be left unattended in a "seat thing", regardless of whether a pet is present or not--ever! :thumbdown:
  • WebFire
    vball10set;1176365 wrote:This is NOT TRUE, and for the record, a three month old infant should never be left unattended in a "seat thing", regardless of whether a pet is present or not--ever! :thumbdown:
    Yeah. We've all agreed many time that kids shouldn't be left unattended around any pet, but they keep repeating it as a defense for pits.
  • bigkahuna
    WebFire;1176351 wrote:When is the last time a pool attacked someone? The human had to derp for the pool to cause harm. Not the case with dogs. Are you seriously arguing this?
    Yes, I'm arguing this because the bigger issue is lack of attentiveness by the parents. All of the links that have been shared on this thread, how many times has the dog walked up while the family is watching tv together and attacked? How many times has the dog attacked, while the entire family is seated at the dinner table? Now, how many times has the dog attacked, while the kid as left alone and the parent in the other room/other side of the house...?

    Take out dog attack and put in anything you want. The point is that the majority of these incidents wouldn't occur if the parents had been watching the kid. This is true with any dog/cat. You don't leave them alone with an infant/toddler. When the kid is of school age, then yes, it'd be ok to leave them alone with the dog because there's a lot less likely chance for something to happen.

    I'll agree with LJ about the strength of the dog. It's been said several times that a lot of other breeds have a high tendency to bite, but they aren't nearly as strong as the pitt bulls. Of course they're bite is going to be lethal, they're stronger.

    I know I'm not allowed to make comparisons with inanimate objects, but which gun is more lethal a bb gun or a glock?
  • WebFire
    bigkahuna;1176371 wrote:Take out dog attack and put in anything you want. The point is that the majority of these incidents wouldn't occur if the parents had been watching the kid.
    False. Attacks on adults are a higher percent. So it's not all the parents fault. Pits (dogs in general) attack quite often when unprovoked.
  • WebFire
    bigkahuna;1176371 wrote: I know I'm not allowed to make comparisons with inanimate objects, but which gun is more lethal a bb gun or a glock?
    Doesn't matter. Neither by themselves can do anything. They REQUIRE a human to use them. Dogs do not need a human to attack. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
  • bigkahuna
    WebFire;1176377 wrote:Doesn't matter. Neither by themselves can do anything. They REQUIRE a human to use them. Dogs do not need a human to attack. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
    Can you not see what I'm saying with what you quoted?

    A pit bull bite is going to be more harmful/deadly than a poodle's because they're stronger.

    A bullet from a glock is going to be more harmful/deadly than a bb gun because it's a stronger gun.

    I didn't find the stat(LJ did I think) about pitt bulls not even being the most likely to bite, but they are to kill because that one bite is stronger. I'd rather be bitten by my bichon than a pitt bull because it's going to hurt a hell of a lot less because of the strength of the two dogs.

    I'm saying the strength of the bite can be contributed to why there are so many more deaths from a pitt.
  • WebFire
    bigkahuna;1176382 wrote:Can you not see what I'm saying with what you quoted?

    A pit bull bite is going to be more harmful/deadly than a poodle's because they're stronger.

    A bullet from a glock is going to be more harmful/deadly than a bb gun because it's a stronger gun.

    I didn't find the stat(LJ did I think) about pitt bulls not even being the most likely to bite, but they are to kill because that one bite is stronger. I'd rather be bitten by my bichon than a pitt bull because it's going to hurt a hell of a lot less because of the strength of the two dogs.

    I'm saying the strength of the bite can be contributed to why there are so many more deaths from a pitt.
    So what are you trying to disprove? You are agreeing that pits are more deadly. Is that not what this discussion is about?
  • isadore
    gosh the bite, the deadliness of the bite is a definite factor to consider. like the difference of having a garter snake or a rattle snake for a pet.
  • vball10set
    @ bigkahuna

    http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-study-dog-attacks-and-maimings-merritt-clifton.php
  • bigkahuna
    WebFire;1176396 wrote:So what are you trying to disprove? You are agreeing that pits are more deadly. Is that not what this discussion is about?
    Yes, I agree. I just don't think that the deadly aspect comes into affect unless they're not taken care of properly. Rex might have been a great family dog, but was he taken to obedience school or anything like that?
  • bigkahuna
    Notice in that report that pitt bulls also have the highest % of the population? lol.

    Edit: Forgot to mention that I guess LJ was wrong.
  • vball10set
    bigkahuna;1176518 wrote:Notice in that report that pitt bulls also have the highest % of the population? lol.

    Edit: Forgot to mention that I guess LJ was wrong.
    First of all it's 'pit' bulls, and secondly, why the lol? is this funny too??
    Pit bulls are noteworthy for attacking adults almost as frequently as children, a characteristic not shared by any other breed.
  • LJ
    bigkahuna;1176518 wrote:Notice in that report that pitt bulls also have the highest % of the population? lol.

    Edit: Forgot to mention that I guess LJ was wrong.

    That's maiming and serious injuries. I got my info from cdc reported bites.

    Dogsbite is a highly anti bully breed org as well.
  • LJ
    vball10set;1176526 wrote:First of all it's 'pit' bulls, and secondly, why the lol? is this funny too??

    If you want to try to be an ass and try to correct people, maybe I should point out that "Pit Bull" is a single very specific breed and "bullys" or "bull terriers" is the TYPE of dog that you all are arguing against. Notice I keep referring to them as "bullys"? There is a reason for that.
  • LJ
    AVMA > Ohio Chatter
    There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill."
    [INDENT]"There are several reasons why it is not possible to calculate a bite rate for a breed or to compare rates between breeds. First, the breed of the biting dog may not be accurately recorded, and mixed-breed dogs are commonly described as if they were purebreds. Second, the actual number of bites that occur in a community is not known, especially if they did not result in serious injury. Third, the number of dogs of a particular breed or combination of breeds in a community is not known, because it is rare for all dogs in a community to be licensed, and existing licensing data is then incomplete. [Source: AVMA Task Force on Canine Aggression]


    My last post in this thread. Enjoy your fear mongoring.
    [/INDENT]