Double Agent

Another Pit Bull Attack

Recommended Posts

Many attacks by other dog breeds are misclassified as "Pit Bulls" by media reports

 

That would pretty much confirm that they get a bad rap from the media, no?

 

ETA: Sorry, forgot the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitbulls

Edited by Hugh 0ne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You honestly don't think that pitbulls get a bad rap from the media?

Well, first off, is it safe to define "bad rap" as "unfairly bad"? I mean, that seems to be the typical usage. I mean, history has said plenty bad about Hitler, but I doubt many would argue that he got a "bad rap".

 

So, provided we can agree on that, then no, I don't think they get a bad rap. I think I've made myself very clear, and btw shared an example of a "protection" breed not quite turning out as planned despite being raised by a "responsible" owner in the post that you didn't finish.

 

One of two things is happening. Either these kinds of breeds are incapable of being trained to the extent needed or far too many people are unable to do so. Frankly, it doesn't really matter which. It should be noted that I'm not calling for the extinction of any breed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you somehow skip the very next sentence in your own quote, though?

 

:wacko:

 

If skip=conveniently ignore, then the answer is yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You honestly don't think that pitbulls get a bad rap from the media?

 

yeah, and I can't figure out why. I mean, it can't just be because they bite off thousands of kids faces each year. it is a mystery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I've made myself very clear, and btw shared an example of a "protection" breed not quite turning out as planned despite being raised by a "responsible" owner in the post that you didn't finish.

 

Fine, I'll go back and read it. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What you are missing is that we aren't saying that having a dog if you have kids is a bad idea. Rather that choosing a specific breed that is selected for it's ability to rip your head off is the part we're not on board with. You're correct, you can't protect your kids from everything. But we don't have to specifically choose to subject them to the most dangerous versions of things. That is the issue at hand. Grits might have gone overboard on the whole control thing but I don't think that was his point. Well, it's not mine. My issue with pits is not that they're less controllable and more inclined to confuse their role in the family. Rather that, the consequences of that inevitable confusion is much more grave. Hell, it's not like I can get my dogs to do whatever I want whenever I want them to, but it doesn't matter that much. Nobody's going to end up without a face as a result.

 

As to the "control" issue. You will note that I said I had control over inanimate objects ... perhaps I should have said more control. Those inanimate objects don't have a mind of their own and we won't have a battle of wills.

 

You will also note that I said it is my job as a parent to take precautions with those things and to teach my child the danger associated with those inanimate objects.

 

I have more faith in my ability to control inanimate objects and teach my child the appropriate pre-cautions in regards to those objects than I do in anybody's ability to exercise the same level of control over a pit bull. Because when it comes right down to it even if I have 100% control over the pit bull and am the unquestioned alpha unless I supervise 100% of the interaction between child and pit I leave the door open for the pit to harm my non-alpha child. Additionally the possibility STILL exists that the dog reacts in some way to harm my child DESPITE my presence ... after all the dog reacts more instinctually than intellectually.

 

Sac may be okay with taking that risk with his child, I am not. ESPECIALLY when you consider the wide variety of other breeds available for the purposes of a non-violent lovable pet.

Edited by Grits and Shins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you somehow skip the very next sentence in your own quote, though?

 

:wacko:

I don't see how that matters. My friend's "protection" breed did not attack a child, it attacked a grown woman. So great, Hugh doesn't want his kids around a pit. He also seems hell bent on down-playing their danger to society. That is my concern there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, and I can't figure out why. I mean, it can't just be because they bite off thousands of kids faces each year. it is a mystery.

 

I actually agree that they are dangerous, have said I wouldn't let my kids near them, but at the same time think the media absolutely makes it worse than it really is.

 

Nevertheless, they can and often do make wonderful family pets as featured on the American Little Rascals and Our Gang television shows. The American Temperament Testing Society gives the American Pit Bull Terrier breed a "pass" percentage of 84.1%. The average of all breeds is 81.5%. [7]

 

While friendliness and tolerance towards humans are traits of the breed [4], there are, as in any breed, those that are dangerous toward humans. Many attacks by other dog breeds are misclassified as "Pit Bulls" by media reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only someone who suffers from a god complex really beleives that they can control their environm....

 

No one said you can control it. But you can mitigate risks. It's called being a good parent. Obviously there are plenty of parents out there that aren't. We see that on the news everyday too. I'm sure the facts are unfounded and they're just getting a bad rap from the media.

 

For those with Pit Bulls and kids, do you baby proof your home? It just seems ironic to me to cover electrical outlets and lock cabinets and then let your child play with a vicious animal.

Edited by Double Agent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As to the "control" issue. You will note that I said I had control over inanimate objects ... perhaps I should have said more control. Those inanimate objects don't have a mind of their own and we won't have a battle of wills.

 

You will also note that I said it is my job as a parent to take precautions with those things and to teach my child the danger associated with those inanimate objects.

 

I have more faith in my ability to control inanimate objects and teach my child the appropriate pre-cautions in regards to those objects than I do in anybody's ability to exercise the same level of control over a pit bull. Because when it comes right down to it even if I have 100% control over the pit bull and am the unquestioned alpha unless I supervise 100% of the interaction between child and pit I leave the door open for the pit to harm my non-alpha child.

 

Sac may be okay with taking that risk with his child, I am not. ESPECIALLY when you consider the wide variety of other breeds available for the purposes of a non-violent lovable pet.

Honestly, I wasn't quarreling with you. My point is, that you seem to be advocating a less dangerous breed. That breed is not less dangerous because it's easier to control, rather because the consequences of not controlling it are less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Honestly, I wasn't quarreling with you. My point is, that you seem to be advocating a less dangerous breed. That breed is not less dangerous because it's easier to control, rather because the consequences of not controlling it are less.

 

Yes I realized you weren't taking issue with me ... but based on your comments I was clarifying my comments.

 

I am a life long dog lover. For the life of me I do not understand why anybody would want to own an animal with statistically higher tendencies to violence when there is a wide variety of other breeds available which will produce a very lovable pet without an ingrained violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually agree that they are dangerous, have said I wouldn't let my kids near them, but at the same time think the media absolutely makes it worse than it really is.

OK then, back to my "cute" poke at you. So, let's say the media makes a point of taking a very dangerous breed and making it sound worse. Of course, the bit about other breeds is sort of splitting hairs. That is, if you're implying that other very, very similar breeds that laymen simply can't distinguish between are in fact, the "other breeds" you speak of. I mean, I'm guessing that no deaths at the hands of collies have been placed in the pit bull category.

 

None the less, back to the issue. Do pits get a more unfair rap than Philly fans? Really? If I dress as Santa, am I assured of being booed? If I slip and injure my neck at the stadium, am I assured of being booed and jeered? Do either of these things matter nearly as much as dogs ripping kids faces off?

 

I mean, that was the poke I made at you, right? That you laughed at a Philly fan implying that his ilk suffered the same unfair rap that Pit Bulls do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK then, back to my "cute" poke at you. So, let's say the media makes a point of taking a very dangerous breed and making it sound worse. Of course, the bit about other breeds is sort of splitting hairs. That is, if you're implying that other very, very similar breeds that laymen simply can't distinguish between are in fact, the "other breeds" you speak of. I mean, I'm guessing that no deaths at the hands of collies have been placed in the pit bull category.

 

None the less, back to the issue. Do pits get a more unfair rap than Philly fans? Really? If I dress as Santa, am I assured of being booed? If I slip and injure my neck at the stadium, am I assured of being booed and jeered? Do either of these things matter nearly as much as dogs ripping kids faces off?

 

I mean, that was the poke I made at you, right? That you laughed at a Philly fan implying that his ilk suffered the same unfair rap that Pit Bulls do.

 

 

You know wht they say...if you have to explain it... :irishwink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know wht they say...if you have to explain it... :irishwink:

 

Oh crap ... you put out the Irish-signal ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK then, back to my "cute" poke at you. So, let's say the media makes a point of taking a very dangerous breed and making it sound worse. Of course, the bit about other breeds is sort of splitting hairs. That is, if you're implying that other very, very similar breeds that laymen simply can't distinguish between are in fact, the "other breeds" you speak of. I mean, I'm guessing that no deaths at the hands of collies have been placed in the pit bull category.

 

None the less, back to the issue. Do pits get a more unfair rap than Philly fans? Really? If I dress as Santa, am I assured of being booed? If I slip and injure my neck at the stadium, am I assured of being booed and jeered? Do either of these things matter nearly as much as dogs ripping kids faces off?

 

I mean, that was the poke I made at you, right? That you laughed at a Philly fan implying that his ilk suffered the same unfair rap that Pit Bulls do.

 

I think you're completely missing the point. It is ALWAYS in good form to make fun of Philly fans, nothing more, nothing less. :wacko:

 

The reason I took issue with your comment is because you implied that I did not think that Pit Bulls are dangerous and that simply isn't the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you're completely missing the point. It is ALWAYS in good form to make fun of Philly fans, nothing more, nothing less. :wacko:

 

wurd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

That is pretty original. But the fact that you missed my point doesn't surprise me.

 

Try this one...

 

Stupid is as stupid does.

 

Their are far more fatalities to due to dumb parents than pit attacks. And it's because of their stupidity and lack of good judgement.

 

 

So let's go another 3 or so pages talking about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is pretty original. But the fact that you missed my point doesn't surprise me.

 

Try this one...

 

Stupid is as stupid does.

 

Their are far more fatalities to due to dumb parents than pit attacks. And it's because of their stupidity and lack of good judgement.

 

 

So let's go another 3 or so pages talking about that.

 

So if I am a smart parent wouldn't it make me dumb to own a pit bull?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Their are far more fatalities to due to dumb parents than pit attacks. And it's because of their stupidity and lack of good judgement.

 

Exactly. A pit bull attack is usually due to dumb parents so the math always works out that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly. A pit bull attack is usually due to dumb parents so the math always works out that way.

 

 

And irresponsible pit owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you're completely missing the point. It is ALWAYS in good form to make fun of Philly fans, nothing more, nothing less. :wacko:

 

The reason I took issue with your comment is because you implied that I did not think that Pit Bulls are dangerous and that simply isn't the case.

Well, fair enough on the first count.

 

As for the second, perhaps it's really only fair to say I think you implied they were less dangerous than we're led to believe. The board is engaged in an argument where people are fixating on things like letting your dog sleep on the bed is why they rip kids faces off and that can get a guy pretty fired up to prove a point. It's pretty easy to take a "with us or against us" sort of attitude.

 

The "bad rap" argument emboldens the side of the argument that I (and others), quite simply feel is pretty dangerous.

 

Of course, "pits" bear an unfair brunt that should really include a number of breeds (many which are barely different, many which are quite). That is, quite frankly, why some dogmatic law banning specific breeds will not work. A new breed could simply be created. I feel the only solution is to enforce laws where the owners of dogs who seriously injure people (or other dogs) are punished to hell and back. I mean, bloody crucified. That is the only way you will get people to choose not to own breeds (or variations of breeds) that are more inclined to do this. They should be treated as guns only more dangerous because, quite frankly, that's exactly what they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if I am a smart parent wouldn't it make me dumb to own a pit bull?

I guess it would, if you were trying to keep your child away from "risk". How many of the child deaths occur as a result of a family pit? Most of them that I read happen with someone else's pit.

 

This just happened yesterday, or maybe the day before.

 

The way the news stated it, the kid was with a sitter, and the sitter had a friend over that had a pit.

 

Parent's fault? Dog owner's fault? Sitter's fault?

 

:wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is pretty original. But the fact that you missed my point doesn't surprise me.

 

Try this one...

 

Stupid is as stupid does.

 

Their are far more fatalities to due to dumb parents than pit attacks. And it's because of their stupidity and lack of good judgement.

 

 

So let's go another 3 or so pages talking about that.

Right, and more kids die in pools than skydiving. Wow, you're on a roll. Just one leg short of the lame analogy triple crown.

 

So, point out potentially dangerous act to dispute another, check.

 

OK, now point out that something is more fatal quite simply because there's a ton more chances of it happening to begin with. Gotcha. Dude, nearly every single child alive has parents. Should they die from any unnatural act, it can very likely be traced back to dumb parenting. Hell, if they get killed by the family dog and that dog is a pit, the pits don't even gain any ground in your comparison because you've got to put a check in both the pit death and dumb parent death column.

Edited by detlef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think what you are missing is that you brought the weak stuff to the table. Stuff like plastic bags.

 

Pitbulls eat faces off of children. Plastic bags pretty much sit there. Unless someone picks them up. Or unless there is wind. When there is wind, plastic bags really get their "doing stuff" on. ETA: But I still don't think the wind makes them eat faces off of children.

 

Clearly, you've never seen American Beauty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.