josh, the reason pit bulls fill shelters is not because of people like myself that dislike the breed. People like me neither breed nor adopt/buy pit bulls only to relinquish them. I would like to see a drastic reduction in the numbers of this animals in order to prevent their continued suffering. Further, you do not question why so many pit bulls are abandoned. Surely this has something to do with the type of person often attracted to this breed (look in the mirror) but it is also very common for the naive to adopt a pit bull only to discover that the dog is too much for them to handle. Often this because of the aggression the breed very often displays towards other dogs and animals. This is predictable given that the breed group was selected to fight other dogs to the death in a ring or pit. It is actually quite perverse that so-called dog lovers would perpetuate a breed created by sociopaths to fight other dogs to the death. To each his own, but do not think that those of us who are wrapped a bit more tight may judge you based upon you decisions.

Josh, if you take all those pits on pack walks, then just wait until something happens. You will be thrown under the bus by your fellow pit owners for being entirely irresponsible.

Dude, you own a dog created to kill other dogs. Accept that.

And you are believing pit bull propaganda. This breed was never considered America's Dog or the Nanny Dog. It is an artful manipulation you have bought into.

Read this if you have the stomach.

http://thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com/2010/08/nanny-dog-myth-revealed.html

Then think about what else you may have been told that was a lie.

Josh wants us to trust the responsible owners to keep their fighting breeds in check.

Wouldn't all pit owners love the honor of having this level of trust from other citizens? For us to all more or less put our loved ones lives in their hands. To honor Josh's lion taming abilities.

It's not going to happen Josh. Responsible people know that only irresponsible people think they can handle the responsibility of 10 pit bulls on a pack walk.

You are not wrapped tight enough to know that your evidence is totally anecdotal and is the worst kind especially when combined with your obvious emotionalism.

Dog breeds vary in average temperament based upon genetic factors. This can be somewhat modified by human intervention. To disagree with this and play the "blame" game and point towards a human cause in all instances is simply to not think clearly. Sorry, your deep conviction does not translate into closeness to the truth.

Gilchrist is a hack and the SUV quip is totally fallacious. The CDC came under mass political fire from pit bull advocates over that report. Dog bites must be a problem seeing how 1,000s are hospitalized each year and there is a national dog bite prevention month. Gilchrist purposefully spins this around fatalities when in fact life-altering bites are much more common that kills.

raquel, you are incorrect on two significant points. The pit bull was NEVER referred to as Nanny Dogs. Google "nanny dog myth" to see this destroyed. The lie was manufactured out of whole clothe in the 1970s and bounced around the pit bull world until now it is considered fact. No citations show that a fighting breed was considered so good with kids. It seems they hurt children quite a bit now.

Also, Karen Delise slanders the bloodhound by lying, and you bought it hook line and sinker. This is typical of you folks, you claim we need to be educated, when your own education revolves around repeating faulty arguments, lies, and spin that you have digested. The bloodhound that was once feared is not the bloodhound we commonly refer to. It was the Cuban Bloodhound, which is a very different breed. Delise conveniently left this part out.

http://thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com/2010/08/scapegoats-part-1-bloodhound.html

Think about what else you believe that is a lie.

http://thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com/2010/08/nanny-dog-myth-revealed.html

Monica, this simply a series of assertions and faulty arguments from authority. Most so-called dog trainers/behaviorists have little credentials and it is obviously in their best interest to believe that the problem is entirely nurture/training as that is their business. They, along with rescue angels and fur mommies, typically wear their compassion on their sleeve and think with their hearts primarily.

I agree that it is silly to say that all pit bulls are not dangerous and I in no way meant to imply that. Pit bulls were bred for gameness and endurance, it is true that they are able to continue fighting even if they experience serious injuries in the process. Yes genetics are involved of course and many of us humans have overbred irresponsibly causing a lot of problems in temperament and health as well. Early socialization, if done right can make a big difference but sadly nowadays people don't feel it's necessary, do it incorrectly or actually want it to be their attack dog in the future. I did not use the term nanny dog, but it was a very popular family dog in the early 20th century. I do agree however that there are a lot of self proclaimed behaviorists and trainers out there with there own agendas but believe it or not, there are actual animal behaviorists out there that are veterinary certified and have extensively studied dog behavior. Good trainers and behaviorists that have actually researched and gone to school for it will tell you that it is both nature and nurture. I did choose a poor quote to cite it was done hastily as was my comment above only because of the unnecessary insults being thrown about. I will also say it's true that the bloodhounds back then were more of a mongrel type dog, not the best example but it does show how pit bulls then were more responsibly bred and less popular as the scary breeds.

A blog? Can you provide anything that is from a reputable, reliable, and unbiased source, like the Humane Society, ASPCA, AMVA, NCRC..... or any other mainstream organization that will agree with your opinions? If so, I will consider it as a legit source. I am not going to disagree with the vast majority of professionals or proven science on any subject, so if what you say is true about pit bulls, most experts will agree with you. just not seeing that happen at all. Not even close, as 99.99% of all canine experts and organizations completely disagree with your opinion. Whenever I get into this debate with others, and I ask them for reliable, unbiased sources, they skirt the question with other tactics, such as going on a tangent about pit bulls, providing unofficial stats, giving the worst of the worst of situations, throwing insults, answering with another question, or ignore the request. I am willing to bet that you take one of those roads, rather than providing a solid professional canine source that backs you up. Simply put, I am merely asking for you provide a few sources of major canine organizations that are unbiased and well known that back up what you say. Not a blog, an non-professional canine source, or a biased website. My guess is that you will not be able to provide what I am requesting, although more than reasonable in any subject. Let's see if you get it, as you had no problem responding to other comments. We'll see what you got.

Clay Hund has obviously never heard of the fallacy: argument from authority. He then goes on to say that 99.99% of mainstream animal orgs agree with him. I'm sure he is a bit circular in his definition of "mainstream" here. It's quite easy for him, he has a set of position statements from animal welfare orgs, and can sit back upon them.

How well does Clay Hund parse groups? Well, the National Canine Research Council (NCRC) is not a gov't org in anyway, although their name tries to insinuate that. It was started by one person, Karen Delise, and has self-published and horribly constructed articles and books. The Pit Bull Placebo by Delise is one of the worst pieces of tripe I've ever read. It uses every logical fallacy in the book to trick Hund here and his ilk.

Many other humane orgs have been highly infiltrated by animal goof balls, the type of folks that cannot view animals correctly and in perspective. These folks will very often put people in harms way to save an animal. They are the rescue angels and fur mommies that people think are odd. Those illogical folks are more likely to be drawn to these jobs. Other orgs like AMVA, AKC and others have an obvious monetary conflict of interest.

Overall too, if any organization says something deemed negative about pits, then Clay Hund and 1,000s more harass them. That tends to have a chilling effect.

You couldn't come up with ONE legit source that backs your claims!!! LMAO!!! You did exactly what I said you would do. I so called it. Steve, you my man, if I can call you a man, are a nitwit!! I was right on the money. Like I said, most people tend listen to experts and pros. When you can provide several professional canine sources, I will be completely open to it. Again, a person with no experience trying to tell it like it is. I'd stick to whatever it is that you are skilled at, because it certainly isn't dogs. You are a nutcase that is fanatical about pit bulls. What wrong, did you get bit by a pit bull or a dog that looked like one, and now you are on a mission to destroy? Most people in your position are victims or friends of victims that do not have any experience with pit bulls. Want to discredit the expert agencies, then you should talk to a few local vets and animal shelters. Any one of them, it doesn't matter. They will all tell you pit bulls are not the problem, but the people are the problem. Go tell them to their face they are wrong. Better yet, why don't you lead a ban of pit bulls? Afraid you will get laughed off the stage? Or make a movie that contradicts what this movies says. See how many people come to your shows. You are too funny! Keep marketing these dogs as vicious creatures, so that thugs will desire them more. You are blindly advertising them, by making them seem extremely vicious.

Josh, it is quite convenient that after I show you resources that prove that the Nanny Dog meme is a lie, that you do not mention this but slide into something else. That is the hallmark of people like you who are brainwashed. What evidence could change your mind regarding the fitness of this breed as a pet? Likely you can imagine nothing, because of how you are.

Josh " because at the end of the day they are just dogs, not monsters, not dog killers, not child killers.....Just DOGS!"

Domestic dogs have the most phenotypic diversity of all mammals because humans purposefully instilled it. To say a dog is a dog, is totally fallacious and laughable. I'm sorry you have not learned more. Take some adult ed in logic and philosophy.

We are not concerned with little bites. Fatal bites are without a doubt most commonly inflicted by pit bulls. You can show nothing to counter that. And it is reasonable to conclude that life-changing bites will track fatal bites by breed.

The common retorts to these claims are the ATTS test summaries and a paper published showing weiner dogs to be the most likely to bite. The ATTS summaries are fallacious due to self-selection bias. The bite study was conducted using an anonymous internet questionnaire that could be lied on and taken multiple times.

Go ahead and put on your blinders.

I can't believe I have to live on the surface of this planet with someone who thinks it is a good idea to go on pit bull pack walks.

Monica, you think this is a point?

"Steve, I don't really care what you have to say. No matter what you THINK you know, and regardless of how smart YOU think you sound- you're ignorant. Arguing over things that you know nothing about, over the Internet?"

Yes, Monica, I do think I'm likely much smarter than someone like you. It's just something you learn from experience in life. I come off as arrogant here because I am being condescending towards people like you, because you honestly are low functioning in a way that endangers others. I am not ignorant about this subject. In fact, I would bet I have more real information about this than you do. And I know much more about analyzing arguments.

This is the thing that escapes you. First off, your percentage stats are incorrect and you are posting them from some website without citation. As far as how you are thinging, you are not pondering why the intact, male labrador retrievers that are left alone are not attacking. You are arguing in effect that grenades are safe because a human must pull the pin while missing the fact that you can pull a pin stuck in an apple and it will not explode. Pit bulls are more dangerous. Stop fighting reality.

I'm "flaming" here because people like you in groups slapping each other on the back is both dangerous and makes me want to hurl. It's not so much that you are cognitively low functioning on average but that you are so sure of yourself and endanger others.

Raq,

If you read the blogs you will notice they give an extensive logical argument and citations you can check. It just so happens that the blog owners took on two very common fallacious things that pit bull defenders bring up. Read it if you have the stomach.

Then you say good luck with your life, as if me not liking pit bulls and being mean to you guys here is the universal litmus test. Well, it's not.

The things you said about humans with the genetic issues are great. This typifies your anthropomorphic approach. I'm surprised you did not bring up that making decisions about breed characteristics is like being racist toward humans. That's another one that is so often thrown around.

I could talk about basic logic and decision theory, and how the distinction between human and dog here actually changes this into a totally new case; but I don't have to because you gave me the ultimate chestnut here.

Raq said...."Should these people also be put to death or shunned because of their genes?"
You'll notice I never said I wanted pit bulls put to death. I want people like you to be honest about them. THERE ARE MUCH BETTER BREED CHOICES THAT ARE SAFER FOR HUMANS AND OTHER PETS! GET IT? As far as "shunned", what a perfectly anthropomorphic term, you really mean that the owners feel shunned. Do I think people should avoid this dog type, especially when they have their kids or pets with them? Yes, doing that is obviously rational decision making because you cut off the chance of injury, only lose the chance of potentially interacting with a nice dog, and can go do something else to fill that time constructively. Think in terms of net positive. Now, here's where it gets good. Ever hear of genetic counseling? People who have genetic liabilities like what you mentioned will VERY often choose not to have kids if the chance of them passing on their issue is reasonably large. Do I think that breeds created by dogfighters to be both driven to and capable of hurting one of their natural social partners (other canids) should be spayed/neutered nearly out of existence? Heck yeah. Your idea has been turned into an ice pick and jammed through the heart of your argument.

A blog? Can you provide anything that is from a reputable, reliable, and unbiased source, like the Humane Society, ASPCA, AMVA, NCRC..... or any other mainstream organization that will agree with your opinions? If so, I will consider it as a legit source. I am not going to disagree with the vast majority of professionals or proven science on any subject, so if what you say is true about pit bulls, most experts will agree with you. just not seeing that happen at all. Not even close, as 99.99% of all canine experts and organizations completely disagree with your opinion. Whenever I get into this debate with others, and I ask them for reliable, unbiased sources, they skirt the question with other tactics, such as going on a tangent about pit bulls, providing unofficial stats, giving the worst of the worst of situations, throwing insults, answering with another question, or ignore the request. I am willing to bet that you take one of those roads, rather than providing a solid professional canine source that backs you up. Simply put, I am merely asking for you provide a few sources of major canine organizations that are unbiased and well known that back up what you say. Not a blog, an non-professional canine source, or a biased website. My guess is that you will not be able to provide what I am requesting, although more than reasonable in any subject. Let's see if you get it, as you had no problem responding to other comments. We'll see what you got.

Clay Hund is using a fallacious argument from authority. He doesn't care because he doesn't care about accurate thinking, only influencing others. Does this work? How about something from the AMVA for internal review from a time before the pit nutters and rescue angels pushed an agenda that said it wasn't nice to say bad things about an abused breed?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13616704/Dos-and-Donts-Concerning-Vicious-Dogs-by-Donald-H-Clifford

Pages 3,4,and 5 from

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13616704/Dos-and-Donts-Concerning-Vicious-Dogs-by-Donald-H-Clifford

to shows you what the AMVA once wrote.

Steve, what's a matter, you cannot do better than a blog? I totally called you out and described what you would do. If you read my comment, I do not think you would have done that. I can post blogs too. Here is a really good one, actually:

http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/

Brent Toellner is a tool. What does he do? Well, he compiles a list of fatal dog attacks that are less accurate than others, but still shows pit bulls on top. He then "investigates" pit bull attacks and finds a way to let the dog off the hook. Yes Brent, we know that dogs are not moral agents and that they should not be tried by a group of their peers. What he is doing is similar to claiming that TNT is not dangerous because in all cases you can show that it was handled roughly prior to get going off. Brent also peddles outright falsehoods like the Nanny Dog myth and that people were super concerned about GSDs before the pit bull. Reality check, even during that supposed era of GSD fright, pits were killing more people than GSDs. There has never been a ban on GSDs in the US. I could go on and on about Brent T. All the pit bull defender orgs are run by people who either lie, are gullible, or can't think themselves out of a wet sack.

Brent T. and, most other humane/pit bull folk, are supporters of no-kill. They don't want no-kill to be implemented when society is actually configured appropriately. No, they want us to stop killing animals now in shelters, despite reality. You know the reality? No kill shelters are actually limited-admission shelters. The humane society co-opted animal control in my county and we now only have a no-kill shelter (limited admission). So what is the result? Homeless animals freezing to death and often no help. Several local rescues have sprung up, and I'm involved with one. I'm sure Clay Hund probably thinks this is peachy because you could describe no-kill to him in a smooth voice and then shake a set of house keys in front of his face as a distraction and get him to believe anything.

Steve,

You don't get it. That was a link was me being sarcastic. Sure, I agree with Trent, but it is only a blog, in which anyone can write whatever they want. I asked you several times for some major canine resources to back you up, and you failed to do it. That tells me that you have nothing, which means that canine experts do not agree with what you say. So moving forward, my opinion remains the same about pit bulls, as I have personal experience with them and I only go by canine expert proven science. Time will certainly prove to you that pit bulls are an excellent breed. Down the road, when thugs choose another dog, and that breed becomes feared, from hyped up media stories and fear mongerers as yourself, you will clearly see it.

As I mentioned earlier, it is people like you that made the pit bull breed type incredibly popular. Just like people like you used to bash other breeds in the past, look how they turned out. They are all now very popular, well respected, and well recognized breeds, that were little known before. Pay attention to the population in pit bulls. In Seattle for example, pit bulls have become the 4th most registered breed in the city. That is all due to people like you and the media. The internet is a vehicle that only has sped that up, and wasn't there for the other breed, thus the reason why the pit bull is the fastest growing breed in the US. People like you also create people like me, as I had no interest in pit bulls, until vilification.

Clay said..

"canine expert proven science"

This is a load of &^($#. You ask me for a list of experts. I told you why that is a fallacy. Truth is not determined by committee vote. I refuse to play into your argument from expertise fallacy. It so happens that most of the supposed experts are not experts. Take Karen Delise from the NCRC, a total airhead that is likely your guru. In one example, she "proves" media bias by showing that a pit bull attack where two pits invaded a home and mauled a woman in her bed was reported much more than a 3 other attacks by other breeds. This is obviously a case where she did a bit of picking and choosing. It's obvious that a home invasion followed by an in bed mauling will draw a little more attention regardless of breed.

You know the standard data sets I will point to: CDC, Clifton, the recent study by Bini et al.. Plus,look for a random sample of AC/LEO reports by county. Nearly all will have pit bulls as the top biter in their area.

And I know what you will do. You will bring up the study that showed dachshunds bite more (which was based on an internet survey that was non-random, could be answered as many times anonymously as wanted, and could be lied on) and you then bring up the ATTS test summaries (which cannot be used to compare breeds due to self-selection bias). You will then explain away my information by saying that it is due to media bias and breed misidentification.

Then Clay disparages linking to a blog. You don't get it Clay. If your reasoning is faulty, anyone, even a blog or a 6 year old can show you that. You don't need data to do that, you don't need a vet degree. If the way you are reasoning is wrong, all someone has to do is show you. Truth is not by committee, especially when it involves deductive arguments.

Then Clay acts like there was a hysteria over dobermans and GSD. There never was. The pit bull "hysteria" has gone on since they first started being kept as companion animals in relatively large numbers and has not abated as their fatality rate has increased each year. You are just parroting the hysteria line. Show me where a town ever banned GSDs.

Then Clay blames people that yell "this breed stinks as a pet from the rooftop" as the reason they are popular. This is a bit of heads I win, tails you lose. So, the people being a bit too positive about this breeds are not making them popular? Oh, I see, you want to make them popular but among good dog owners. Why not make them universally rare? That's what the jack russell terrier community wanted after they saw their breed being abandoned in high numbers. It truly is a bizarro world when it comes to pit bulls. Up is down it seems. It wouldn't be too hard to get Clay to believe anything that helps pit bulls, it seems. Heck, when I was checking his google search, I found him parroting the line that Darla Napora, the pregnant woman killed by her pit last month, actually died by falling off a ladder. This was a lie pushed by one person (Cindy Marabito) with no support and spread like wildfire until Clay and others believed it was received truth.

P.S. Scribd is not a blog, clay.

P.S. - Scribt is a blog. If it is not, then i welcome you to prove me wrong. just as i welcome you to prove me and everyone else wrong about pit bulls. Waiting..............

STEVIE C. says: "P.S. Scribd is not a blog, clay."

Ok, what is it then?

Clay, instead of asking me what scribd is, why don't you figure it out? It is somewhere online where documents etc can be archived for later viewing. You are dense.

"you don't seem to have very good people skills."

First, this has no bearing on the argument. I don't have great people skills when discussing something like this that is deadly serious with people that I think perpetuate a threat via their attitudes. In everyday life, you'd be surprised.

Enjoy it and try not to endanger people with your fighting breed dogs.

Josh, I hope you will change your mind as well. Or at least open yours to being wrong. I actually hope I am wrong because it would mean that things are better than I now feel they are. I am not dumb at all, josh. I just disagree with you and you can't fathom why an intelligent, educated person, can understand your arguments yet still think that you are incorrect. I just see the other side plainly and yours as well. I have seen in person what happens in the papers. You'd be surprised at my experiences with pit bulls.

Go post about your pit bull pack walks on pit bull forums and see what they say about it. Hopefully you carry a break stick.

Josh, please do not argue with Steve, as he is a lobbyist that posts on many articles about pit bulls. He is an anti-pit bull advocate, and regardless of what you say or produce, and even if it is scientifically proven and/or comes from professional experience, he will not agree. See, you are the average Joe that has it right about dogs. Steve is a lobbyist doing his job. Leave it at that, and inform others when approached by a lobbyist. There is another lobbyist also, and her name is dogcentric. I am telling you, just search there names along with the word pit bull, all in quotes, like so "Steve carol pit bull" , and you will see this is only a game to them. Don't waste your time trying to make your point, as they have an answer for everything and work in teams. Just be kind of happy that they do it. Why may you ask. Because it has made, and is still making the fastest growing popular breed in history. if you look at history, all of the other breeds, especially German Shepherds, Dobermans, and Rottweilers all became popular, well respected pets. It is happening and will continue to pit bulls. Cannot beat real life experience, and as responsible people that are compationate adopt the most misaligned breed type, others are seeing that they are not all bad. I never believed pit bulls were bad, but I really didn't care for them in the past. Due to their high popularity, seeing how awesome they are with their owners, I decided to adopt one, and I have no regrets or issues.

I'm not a lobbyist. Clay Hund shows up at pit bull threads to call people lobbyists, while he himself is also there doing the same thing. Besides, suppose I was a lobbyist, if I craft a thorough and convincing argument in this area; does it matter what my name, gender, age, or occupation happens to be? No it does not. The truth is the truth no matter who says it or how it makes you feel.

Clay Hund would be advised to repeat that final sentence over and over.

Clay Hund has flipped his lid. Googling "steve carol pit bull" returns a few hits, mostly on a handful of articles. I'm sure if you google Clay Hund and pit bull you will find many hits as well. Of course, he can explain that as virtuous as he knows his fight is in the good. By the way, Clay Hund is the name of a dog. Kind of gives you an insight into this guys objectivity given that he has taken his pit bulls persona.

I don't need to say anything of this. If Clay Hund posts enough, any fair reader will come away with a negative attitude towards him.

See what I mean. They all use the same tactics. The work in a team, they ignore history, scientific information, and experienced owners. How many people are experienced that agree with Steve? None! Experience speaks for itself. Pit bulls are awesome dogs, and regardless, there will always be people out there like him, with no experience and a paycheck to ear. As I said, just google his name and the word pit bull. Anytime you suspect them simply google their name along with the words pit bull. If you see them, do not replay to them, as you will be wasting your time. you could have a blue car, and they wouldn't agree with you, as that's what they do. I'd blow Steve away in a debate about pit bulls, as I have owned a pit bull, and I think I would know much better than him. If anyone is every in question or not sure, like I mentioned, ask a vet or any other canine professional. I garuntee Steve is like the rest, pushing sob stories and number, but no direct expeience with pit bulls. One wouldn't take investing advice from someone with out experience, so why would one listen to a person about pit bulls that did have any experience. Steve is full of bull, and he knows it. I am not a lobbyist for the breed, as if I was, you would see me posting the majority of the posts.

Steve, really, you actually are the grand marketer for these dogs to bad people. You make them look like the most dangerous dog out there, thus making the dog very desirable to criminals and thugs. Keep it up!

Clay Hund said ....

"See what I mean. They all use the same tactics. The work in a team, they ignore history, scientific information, and experienced owners. How many people are experienced that agree with Steve? None! Experience speaks for itself. "

Clay, experience is not enough. You must have a wide range of experience and be ABLE TO LEARN properly from the experiences of yourself and others.

There are many past owners of pit bulls who have had bad experiences with the dogs and many non-owners who have had bad experiences. You obviously do not allow those experiences into your orbit of thought because of how you are relying upon "experienced owners" and how you are defining "experienced owners". Quite obviously, anything that does not correspond to your opinions is disregarded as a fluke or because of a human error or an irresponsible owner. You have set up a logical system in which you can never be proved wrong, not matter the truth.

You are not fit to have any informed opinion that can be taken seriously.

Clay Hund said....

"I'd blow Steve away in a debate about pit bulls, as I have owned a pit bull, and I think I would know much better than him."

There's no way Clay.

Google dunning-kruger effect.

That will tell you why you feel so confident.

Steve says: "There's no way Clay."

I say: You're a poet, and you know it!!

Steve says: Google dunning-kruger effect.

I say: Unproven theory with no canine experts that agree. Unproven theory isn't proven science, thus they aren't facts. they are the opinions of one person.

You are free to believe whatever you want Steve. I am not trying to change your mind. I encourage you to continue to post negative comments on news articles regarding pit bulls. The more controversy, the more the breed gets the spotlight, the more exposed the breed type is to the public. People like you stir it up so much with far fetched opinions and theories, yet you have ABSOLUTELY ZERO experience. You are an internet expert, with information overload!!!

Clay said..

"I say: Unproven theory with no canine experts that agree. Unproven theory isn't proven science, thus they aren't facts. they are the opinions of one person."

Clay, you DO NOT UNDERSTAND science. You do not know a hypothesis from a theory from a law from a model from an observation, ok? You do not know that THINGS ARE NOT PROVEN in science. You are taking how you pea brain processes knowledge in an informal way and transferring that onto the scientific discipline. Google popperian falsification. AGGGHHHHHHH pit nutters are so dense. Plus you are simply using argument from authority again. Face it Clay, you do not have the mental ability to read a study and judge its validity. Therefore, if someone with a few fancy, if made up, letters after there name says it and you agree with YOU CLAIM IT IS PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACT. Or if someone shows you a paper and tells you it means that, then you buy it too. Do you even know the difference between the writings of Karen Delise and something that gets into a peer-reviewed journal? You obviously suffer from dunning-kruger effect since you think you are even in this argument.

Clay said...

"You are free to believe whatever you want Steve. I am not trying to change your mind. I encourage you to continue to post negative comments on news articles regarding pit bulls. The more controversy, the more the breed gets the spotlight, the more exposed the breed type is to the public. People like you stir it up so much with far fetched opinions and theories, yet you have ABSOLUTELY ZERO experience. You are an internet expert, with information overload!!!"

No Clay, if you notice when you pick one of the many pit bull stories where they rip a kids face to shreds, most of the initial comments are very negative toward pits. Then know what happens? Pit bull advocates begin passing along the story among themselves and all of a sudden people start showing up and defending the breed. A few people will call them out on it, but often times they are swamped by the small but vocal group of which you are a part.

I'm just stating what most people think about these dogs. You will never get people to abandon common sense just because you can remove the top of your skull and show them how cute the two crickets are that are dancing about where your brain should be.

As far as me having zero experience and being an internet expert, I didn't know that being dumb enough to own the dog type most likely to kill you was a prerequisite for being able to judge them accurately. Heck, it seems more like a criteria for disqualification from this.

Doggyengineer, the pro pit bullers here will dislike you. They may NOW come around to accepting what you say in order to preserve a unified front in these comments, but secretly they hope you aren't right. Why? Because, if you are correct, it would not only continue me on my questioning of the motives of people who understand the breed yet still want one; and it makes the pit bull owners ask "if this is true, perhaps I was wrong in my breed choice and have been spreading a pack of lie." This group, however, is way too narcissistic to go there, so they'll either dismiss, attempt to pull you into their flock or another maneuver.

If you look over my posts, I believe you would likely agree with them more than those made by the pit nutters here.

Doggy, a nice slice into the personal life of a pit owner. How can you go on depriving yourself of a more trustworthy dog?

And you know, truthfully I had wanted a GSD, but my better half wasn't going to let any long-haired dog live in our new house. :)

GSD's are a lot larger than ABPT's, and the ones I've met are generally more aggressive overall (my Dalmatian was attacked several times by GSD's when we lived in Germany, and we learned at an early age not to approach one).

So really the responsibility levels are all relative - I was already ready for a commitment to what I knew could be a potentially dangerous animal. But I feel that way about pretty much any dog over 50lbs... I reserve my disdain for owners more than breeds (though I'm not a big fan of genetically unsound show dogs).

Anyways, I'm getting off topic. But i wanted to put your comment and my answer in a bit of perspective.

You are too involved to see this from a bird's eye view.

Owning a dog that is particularly dangerous to other dogs due its genetic heritage for no other reason than your own personal desires is immoral. You are no different, in some ways, than the guy who wants to own a jacked up truck to be cool but is putting people at greater risk if he were to hit them. He likely thinks it isn't that big a deal and he's a great driver and he'll be careful. He is acting selfishly as are you. You can both "get over yourself" and start being more adverse to the risks you pass along to those NOT involved with your decisions.

You cannot trust your dog to always obey you or for the dog to never get out of the house due to human error.

If you lived in my neighborhood, and your dog got out to harass my dog, your dog would come back to you in a bag with a note attached asking for reimbursement for the ammunition spent. I hope everyone around you is of like mind.

google "steve carol" in quotes with the words 'pit bull' after it. Will reveal a lot more results. Lets see what he has to say

Pit bull attack stories? Well seeing that pit bull is ageneric term for over 40 something specific breeds and mainly mutts, it is no wonder why pit bull attacks are in the news more often, Ever hear of media sensatoion? Ever wonder if you were a sucker to the media? Google "hard new vs soft news" and you will see the entertainment value of the NEWS. Please, no need to thank me. Just be happy you realized the behavior of the media when you did, so you can stop making a complete fool out of yourself.

It jumps from 4 actual hits (other than my name showing up as part of someone else's full name in something random) associated with pit bulls to less than 10. Clay Hund still dwarfs it. It was Clay that brought this up in an accusatory manner, so he should be the one most embarrassed here in having a larger search hit, if shame is even appropriate in this case. Clay has been hoisted upon his own petard here. This is a bit of a pun as he is himself a pit-tard.

No Clay, pit bulls are Amstaffs, APBT, Staffs, and many AmBulls that are heavily mixed. All the breds called pit bulls are highly related and all bred to fight in a pit. The find a pit bull quiz you laud is a purposeful trick using grainy pictures of dogs with a size reference, of random ages, and of rare breeds purposefully chosen because they look somewhat like pits. People know what pit bulls look like Clay.

Besides, this argument cuts both ways. If hardly anyone can ID a pit bull, then how do you know you have one? How do all these pit bull folk know what they have? Pit bull DNA profiles are not well developed and breeding histories can be faked. Maybe your great pit is actually a lab/boxer mix, Clay. How do you know?

Doggyengineer said...

"Hmmm, now there seems to be some kind of rationale disconnect. I don't believe my dog is any more dangerous than any well-muscled dog of his size (which is pretty average, <60lbs). He's certainly tenacious, but that in itself is not a dangerous trait. "

If you are an engineer, can you give me a list of things you have designed so that I can avoid them? This is really ironic that you insist I am having a rationale disconnect (sic).

A dog that is tenacious in a fight, meaning is harder to dissuade from continuing in battle, IS BY DEFINITION MORE DANGEROUS, ceteris paribus. Doggy, a dog that once it attacks can be cowed with a open hand slap is safer than one that bear spray and hammers often does not work on.

You probably don't read about many pit bull attacks though. Often, you have to shoot or stab them to get them to stop, and even then they will often come back for a second bullet.

Doggy, I specifically said "harass my dog" and I meant attacking him. I have had my dog nearly killed by a pit bull. And he was attacked by two previously. I am now armed. If your dog ran up to my dog and laid a tooth on it, I will not try to grab your dog, I will not attempt to break it up, I will shoot your dog. I do not love your dog, I do not care about the feelings of people who endanger my dog. Get it?

Again, I hope all your neighbors are prepared to deal with your wiggle butt puppy if it decides to flex its DNA.

You my friend are more likely the one with sociopathic tendencies. Everything you say points to making decisions without taking others into account.

I am not sociopathic because I will defend my dog. I specifically said "if your dog gets out to harass my dog". I meant if your dog were to ever attack my dog, I will not wait to see if you can get your dog off mine. Large fighting breeds can kill a smaller dog in seconds. If your dog were to approach me aggressively, I would first pepper spray it while it was a distance away. If your dog, while behaving aggressively, bit my dog I would immediately shoot your pit bull. This is totally rational. You obviously do not care sufficiently about preventing this scenario if you own a fighting breed with the characteristics to which you admit. If people like you knew that other people were ready to deal with your animal and that afterwards you would be held fully accountable for any damages, and could serve jail time if your now dead pit had hurt me, then perhaps you would make better decisions, little buddy.

Point blank, if you care so much about other dogs dying, then why do you own a breed designed by sociopaths to be willing and capable to kill other dogs in a ring for absolutely no reason other than it is Tuesday? You lose.

Pit bull defenders try to defend the breed by stating that particularly irresponsible, dumb, and poor people tend to like this breed and that this explains the apparent breed effect in the fatality record.

When we agree with you, and say that yeah as responsibility and intelligence increases, the probability of wanting to own these dogs shrinks towards zero, then we are some type of racist or classist?

Intelligence is correlated with income and responsibility level, sorry to break it to you. Some people are poor for other reasons, but denying reality surely doesn't help your case. The link between iq and income has been extensively studied.

An example of a "rationale disconnect" (sic)

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=kQYyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=nQYEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5725,8459210&hl=en

Dog experts at that summit basically admitted that pit bulls are more dangerous than other breeds, and then back pedaled because some aren't and to regulate them differently would be unfair owners (people who CHOSE to own this breed hopefully knowing its rep and genetic liabilities).

This is just an example of politically correct people, like yourself, viewing things incorrectly and why the voices of the humane community ring hollow these days.

There is an interesting study about how people in humane and rescue orgs differ in how they view humans and the psychological mechanisms they employ to build themselves up. I am glad people do this work, but it does not change that they are often very likely to be eccentric and not well balanced.

This is actually a pretty good source of information:
http://www.pitbulllovers.com/

Doesn't beat around the bush too much, and wasn't put together by wannabe dogfighters.

http://www.pitbullforum.com/index.php
and
http://www.pitbull-chat.com/forums.php

also have pretty informed, helpful communities. If you go to game-dogs.com looking for fighters, you're going to find what you want. Seems like your entire intellectual framework is poisoned by selection bias.

No, I know there are people like you. You will notice that I said "often do". I know that some people seem to realize they own a breed likely to be more dangerous and to want to ripe other dogs to shreds, but they are cool with that. They are the lion tamers and the chest thumper types, it seems.

I find this type an even bigger enigma than the emotion-clouded rescue angels. You are all strange birds though.

And don't pretend to be able to judge my intellectual framework accurately.

It hilarious that doggyengineer corrected my spelling incorrectly.

It is "you lose". It could not be "loose". It could be "lost" as in the past tense.

Dude, you just aren't as bright as you'd like to pretend, k?

Yeah, you pit nutters do strike my nerves. Mostly it is because of your inability to see things that are obvious and your proclivity to endanger other living things.

I agree with DoggyEngineer. You lose steveO. Get the farg out of where you do not belong you freakO

Clay Hund is very smart for a pit bull. Clay Hund is the name of a pit bull, correct?

Wasn't a reference to spelling, of course. Sic can refer to errors in spelling, grammar, logic or fact (see you learn something new every day).

In this case, it's referring to the fallacious assumption that this is some kind of contest that can be won or lost.

But now I'm waaaaaaay off topic, and it's like a joke that needs explaining - kinda loses the point.

Yeah, I am angry at people like you. You are a step below people who would like to keep tamed mountain lions near other people. I hope I never become so complacent that it leaves me. I don't care for your apologies or your pseudo-intellectual psychoanalysis (which will not draw me in). I did not relish in revenge. I said I hope if your dog tries to hurt another dog that I hope the other dog's owner ends your dogs ability to do that. I do not want someone to try to get your dog off theirs and potentially be injured or to waste precious seconds while your gripping dog shakes their dog. No, aggressive dogs off their owner's property have no rights to live. If you people truly knew that, you may snap out of it.

I understand pit owners. I understand your points better than you do, doggy. The whole lot of you are either ignorant or misguided. I am not expressing disdain toward normal dog owners. I am expressing disdain for people who endanger others for no good reason. The PC environment has made it seem immoral to treat people with contempt. I for one think public shame is a good thing.

P.S. I already have my revenge. I made sure the thing got the needle.

See, that's just patently absurd. To compare a medium-sized domesticated animal to a large wild predator makes absolutely no sense.

Would you rather be locked in a room with a starving pit bull or a starving mountain lion? The dog would probably sit at your feet, staring up with puppy dog eyes and begging to be fed. The lion would most likely feed itself just fine.

Anyways, you seem to be running under the misconception that every pit bull wants to fight to the death. It'd be easy to set a scenario up - get two DA pit bulls together with nowhere to go, and encourage them to fight. The positive training and reinforcing behavior of the other dog would do it. I know a lot of pits that will snap at dogs for a variety of reasons (touching their toy, getting near their food or owner, playing too rambunctiously around them, etc), because in general they're a less dog tolerant breed, but I don't know any that would redline and go into a killing frenzy with no regard to their owners (or even other people's) commands. If you have a dog like that, then ya, you should put it down. If your dog is getting into fights because you are putting it in stupid situations though, that's your fault, not the dog's.

The Jack Russell page you linked (http://www.therealjackrussell.com/breed/baddog.php) sounds basically like what you'd want to tell a pit bull owner, except there's far more variation in pit bull phenotypes and temperaments (because so many mutts are just lumped as 'pit bulls').

"See, that's just patently absurd. To compare a medium-sized domesticated animal to a large wild predator makes absolutely no sense."

Did I not say "a step below"? Is it no more absurd to compare fighting breeds to most other dogs simply because they are both dogs? You are in fact like someone who wants to keep an animal near others that is particularly dangerous. In fact, you are that person.

"but I don't know any that would redline and go into a killing frenzy with no regard to their owners (or even other people's) commands. "

Would you like me to spend 30 seconds and make you a list of pit bulls that will and have done this? You are speaking with confidence about the impossibility of an as yet unobserved potential future event that has occurred in situations identical to your own current one. I bet Darla Napora did this too.

"Anyways, you seem to be running under the misconception that every pit bull wants to fight to the death."

Really? Is this what stating that pit bulls are more likely to have dog-directed aggression means? I had no idea that my statements could be parsed into foolish universal ones could be disproved by a single counter-example. Gee...thank goodness for you special pit bull folk with your sharp minds.

You don't get it. To live a long life, avoid jail, live well, and die in your bed; it is recommended to not take unnecessary risks with yourself and others. That includes not owning the dog most likely to kill someone when other choices exist. If I had this type of fatal attraction, I would try to point my canine desires in another direction instead of trying to convince everyone that I made a good decision, or that I am responsible enough, or that it is none of their business.

What you are doing is inherently irrational. Given what you've written, you seem to actually know this. But you just love your dog and are defending your ego. It's a very human thing to do.

The hidden travesties are all the dogs and cats killed by pit bulls. People do not truly appreciate the danger of these things. Pit bulls (and a few other fighting/guarding breeds) are the only dogs I am afraid of. I have fought 2 german shepherds in the past and they all backed down and I got the best of them. The pit bull that attacked my dog could have easily killed him and me. He stopped because he was shocked that something next to his "snack" was hitting him in the head.

A single pit bull can easily hold and pin a wild boar. That's why hog doggers use them. They require no real training to do this. Hog doggers will often go to the pound, get a pit bull and take it to the woods and see what it will do. In case you don't know, hog doggers are inbreds who have pit bull catch dogs hold hogs so that they can stab them with a knife. Very inhumane.

Oh, of course, the pit bull "intelligentsia" (a motley crue of vet techs and Milan wannabes) instantly found supposed errors in this paper. They are all misplaced. The evidence is taped to the end of your noses Clay. Maybe Clay is like Greg Napora. He buried his wife with the ashes of the pit bull that killed her.

A take down of the inevitable criticism nutters had for the above report.

http://cravendesires.blogspot.com/2009/05/mortality-mauling-and-maiming-by.html

Just a quick post to get in my 2 cents- @Steve Carol- you state that pro-pitbull people would not agree with Doggyengineer's post about how to handle pitbulls with other dogs not well known to the owner or pitbull. IN my case, you are dead wrong. Doggyengineer is 100% correct, and what he/she describes is exactly the way all owners of large / powerful dog breeds should handle their dogs in public. I own a 6 year old rescue pitbull with fighting past, and you can call my experience anecdotal, but just plug it into your matrix somewhere as one more vote for the politically moderate pitbull lovers. That is, I don't deny the history of the breed, and I accept and embrace both the postitive and negative breed characteristics that are identifiable. That means I don't send my pitbull into dogparks with a bunch of unknown dogs. I have trained my dog in obedience and packs structure firmly, consistently, and strictly. I'm not saying the breed is for everyone to own- that's why there are 200+ other breeds out there. And yes, in the wrong hands a pitbull can be a disaster waiting to happen. But what is your endgame? This is just a hugely popular, and populous breed. If handled improperly, there are 20 other breeds that are just as dangerous, if not more so, than the american pitbull terrier. For example- fila brasiliero, dogo argentino, cane corso, german shepherd, airedale terrier, etc., etc.

People just have incredible soft hearts and heads when it comes to dogs. I love my dog as well. I somewhat understand this, but to have a dog that can kill you if it likes and has a fighting past just makes no sense. The emotional motivation you have to do this is bizarre. A society of humans that live a little closer to the land (past or present) would have no idea what you are doing.

"That is, I don't deny the history of the breed, and I accept and embrace both the postitive and negative breed characteristics that are identifiable."

-I accept that antifreeze is poisonous but also tastes delicious.

"I have trained my dog in obedience and packs structure firmly, consistently, and strictly."

-I'd like to be a lion tamer. I guess I'll be be a Milan acolyte instead and use his methods based upon a misunderstanding of wolf pack structure that have been rebuked by real dog behaviorists that work at universities and people that study wolves.

" I'm not saying the breed is for everyone to own- that's why there are 200+ other breeds out there."

-Only special people like me should own one.

"And yes, in the wrong hands a pitbull can be a disaster waiting to happen. But what is your endgame?"

-Have I emphasized enough that I'm "special" and that my neighbors should trust that my pibble won't kill their dog? Now I think I'll throw in something that sounds intelligent like "endgame".

"This is just a hugely popular, and populous breed."

-I am not questioning whether it should be popular or not. I suppose the popularity of this breed is out of my hands, but I don't mind if people like Bad Rap promotes them.

"If handled improperly, there are 20 other breeds that are just as dangerous, if not more so, than the american pitbull terrier. For example- fila brasiliero, dogo argentino, cane corso, german shepherd, airedale terrier, etc., etc."

- I hope no one will notice that all these other breeds are very rare. Also, I hope no one notices that the two that aren't rare (GSD and airedales) that I slip in have kill rates that are dwarfed by the pit bull. Also, I hope people fall for my faulty reasoning. I hope they wrongly think that if B,C, and D are dangerous also then that somehow makes A less dangerous. I hope my smart stuff just confuses them.

"You can protest all you want against pitbulls, but there is no way you will ever eradicate the breed."

-I will guess what you want, total eradication, and try to discourage you. Also, I will try to prove that something not being feasible means it is incorrect. I think I'm doing well! I'm going to look responsible!!

As far as your bit of condescending advice goes.......

Where did you get that I'm in grad school? Listen, you don't get it. I am not launching fallacious ad hominem attacks. That would be "X is dumb so their ideas and decisions must be dumb". No, I'm saying "X's ideas and decisions are dumb and so this indicates they are dumb as well". If the fallacy is turned backwards, it is not a fallacy, it is just doing publicly what all people do privately (judge others based upon their ideas and actions). I am not being an advocate here particularly, I just can't stand dumb people that endanger others and would like a few more of them to know it. As far as entrenching the resistance of pit nutters, I have absolutely no hope that pit nutters will ever grow a clue. They are nearly entirely emotionally driven, so to influence them I would have to use emotional manipulation. This won't likely work given that they are now set on helping a canine misfit that they identify with. As far as disgusting people on my side. I don't care. I'm an anonymous person here on one website. Anyone who agrees with me and reads the pit nutter tripe (and is not a PC whack-a-loon that believes even idiots deserve their ideas to be heard with utmost respect and consideration) will likely not care that I treat you folks with contempt.

To avoid being a "Poe". the last few bits are my translations of Jeremy's text into what he is actually thinking/saying.

Hi Steve- neither the style nor substance of your arguments is persuasive. So was I wrong about your grad schooliness? My apologies, if I was wrong. Good luck in your endeavors.

Wow, a lawyer who thinks he is right and will say about anything to make others think so as well. I've never heard of such a thing. At least Jeremy can represent himself if his dog flexes her DNA.

One reason folks like Jeremy exist is that before or after getting their wiggle butt they did not actually read accounts of pit bull attacks by victims and eyewitnesses. Why? Well it is media and pit bull orgs say the media, when it is not being charitable to pits, is against them so that they can slam a big iron bar across, you know, the main way we get information. PIt bulls gravely injure adults in ways that someone familiar with normal dogs would not find possible. We're talking sustained attacks that others cannot stop that lead to scalpings and limb removal. It's relatively common. Find me another breed that has scalped and caused amputation in even a fraction of the number of people. Then there are the pit bulls that break windows to attack people or that jump out of 2nd floor windows or can't be stopped by several grown men with baseball bats or that are shot but then try to attack again and must be shot multiple times or.....I could go on.

Jeremy knows his dog though, even before he knew her when he was making the decision. He also knows that breed genetics is not useful to predict future behavior, even though it actually is.

Chows kill many fewer people than pit bulls each year. I agree though that chows are bad breed to own. I was child in the late 70s and early 80s and was taught certain breeds to be wary of by all adults around me. There was no PC environment to fight as I lived in a working class area of WV where people expressed common sense to children to keep them safe. Guess what? The breeds that were mentioned over and over are the exact top killers.

Typically, the most deceived are those like you with an obvious bias as well who points out the bias in others. You admit that your beliefs are based upon encounters with some nice pit bulls that you like. Fair enough, those are emotionally-charged anecdotes but have a smidgen of legitimacy. How many attacks are required to cancel out a nice pit bull story? If people defend this breed based upon experience with their nice dog, literally half of all pit bull owners could be killed by their dogs tonight and the other half would defend the breed tomorrow. It is telling to ask someone "what would change your mind about this breed as far as their average tendencies and companion animal suitability?". Most true believers will say it is a bad question or not be able to answer.