Thread: The Pit Bull Problem

I like dogs, even pit bulls. But it's the owners of these fighting dogs that make me nervous. Whenever I take my own dog Lucky for a walk in the park, I'm always looking ahead for any danger that might be coming our way. And by danger, I mean pit bulls unleashed by their irresponsible owners.

From a newspaper I pulled this story about a woman attacked and killed by four pit bulls. It's not the first, I have read many such incidents. I don't blame the dogs but the owners. I think the authorities are dragging their feet on this issue. I think something ought to be done to keep these fighting dogs out of the hands of irresponsible people.

Pack of pit bulls kill woman, Margaret Salcedo, in Truth or Consequences, New Mexico: cops

People who want to have a pit bull for a pet should be interviewed by authorities (local ASPCA). I would recommend giving these people IQ tests to determine whether they have the mental capacity to handle one of these animals that, in the wrong hands, can be as deadly as a shark. An IQ test sounds like a far-fetched idea, but it's an idea that would probably have saved many lives in the last decade.

I like pit bulls, but they should be kept away from irresponsible people.

Or, irresponsible people should be kept away from them, because it's not the dog's fault, right?

Anyway, Staffies, Rottweliers, Dobermans etc are big man status symbol animals. They're for show and chest beating purposes.

Originally Posted by Candra H

Anyway, Staffies, Rottweliers, Dobermans etc are big man status symbol animals. They're for show and chest beating purposes.

Of course they are. . .



I'm definitely more afraid of owners than dogs. It's always sad to see aggressive dogs off the leash with owners doing nothing to calm them. I don't like to judge owners based on their pet's behaviour, but some just don't have a clue. Some of those stories you read in the papers can usually be put down to simple negligence.

My Staff Boycie has had a few (unprovoked) fights with Rottweilers, Huskies, and the owners did nothing almost every time, sometimes blaming and even threatening me afterward. Most of the time it's fine with those same breeds.

I think the idea of people planning to own dangerous dogs being interviewed -- almost like in an adoption agency -- is a very good one, but I'm not sure an I.Q test would be helpful or reliable. I don't see how completing sequences of shapes and the like can prove you'll be a good owner; the tests don't measure common sense.

I think they should just be given some sort of training and use some sense every now and then.

I'm not a dog expert, but I know how to keep mine in check. He's a good boy .

Bruno and Boycie. Nice combination. He's a cute wee dog and he reminds me of my friends' Staffie, Flo, who was as friendly and cute and loyal as dogs come. Most if not all the Staffies I've met are the same. Loyal to a fault and ridiculously friendly and playful. Doesnt change the fact that they're used by idiots and money grabbers for fighting and status though.

A nice idea, interviewing prospective owners, but probably not practical in reality. It's too easy to learn rote answers and pretend to be something you're not, especially in this day and age. Seconded about IQ tests by the way, haha. Education would be good but I don't know. Create a mythology round an animal that idiots can exploit to appear tough in the eyes of others, and thats exactly what they'll do. It's just a shame the dog is the one that suffers most by being given a reptuation for violence when it's really the humans who, through lack of control or common sense or basic knowledge of how animals work, are the ones creating the violence in them in the first place. And thats not even getting into the whole breeding side of it.

Eh, sorry, think I rambled a bit there.

Sometimes, a glance at the owner can reveal a bit of the dog's behavior. In the dog park where I live, there are a lot of really sweet pit bulls; however, I trust only the females around my dog Lucky who is a male, shepherd/Lab mix. I tend to keep my dog away from other males, especially the ones I'm unfamiliar with. Dogs, like people, may have a natural distrust for one another, and the bite of a pit bull could have serious consequences. Instead of taking any chances, I just keep Lucky at a safe distance.

I once ran into a guy who had three small dogs running around in the dog run. He pulled out a hunting knife that was so big it looked like it could bring down a grizzly bear. He told me that if any pit bull attacked one of his dogs he wouldn't hesitate using it on the pit. I took my dog away from his in a hurry.

Dog warfare; it's a jungle out there.

Originally Posted by Robinjazz

I once ran into a guy who had three small dogs running around in the dog run. He pulled out a hunting knife that was so big it looked like it could bring down a grizzly bear. He told me that if any pit bull attacked one of his dogs he wouldn't hesitate using it on the pit. I took my dog away from his in a hurry.

Bloody hell! Who did he think he was, Bear Grylls? I can understand wanting to protect your dog; I would put myself right in-between the fight if something happened, but that's just crazy; not a very elegant solution at all.

There's always a friend of a friend whose dog's having puppies, and potentially, someone's going to get lumbered with a dog they can't handle. There'll always be dangerous dogs/owners out there, I think; more measures should be taken, but it'll be tough to control the situation, and I understand why certain breeds are labelled, but it's not fair on the animals in any way.

We had a really wonderful pit mix, most devoted and sweetest thing ever. I wanted another when we lost her to old age, but already had both a five and a fifteen pound terrier, and have kids here all the time. A pit makes people nervous, and understandably with the stories that hit the news. I did not want parents afraid to have kids over, regardless of how sweet the dog might be. Breeding sometimes matters but not always, sometimes you can get a fabulous dog from the street, like we did [she was a rescue], with no knowledge of their history. Not saying that is the way to go. Much better to have a history and people that take care to breed responsibly. I think most pits that have loving owners are excellent dogs. I researched when I was thinking of getting another pit, and it seems that the danger is when the pit is let loose, packs with others and is not under the influence of their owner. Even good pits get carried away with a pack and are dangerous ,from what I understood. Some people want them to be mean, and I pity those dogs, I really do. It leads to a terrible reputation for what in my experience is a sweet and exceptional breed.
As for interviewing and testing intelligence, I don't think that is going to work. Just take a look at CL. There are new and older pits on their all of the time. There just is not the manpower to keep it under control and it would never pay enough to keep enough employed to do it. As it is, so many help centers for animals are voluntary. Sadly, I think the only way some people might mind their dogs, would be to be highly fined for a loose pit and personally charged for murder or serious damages should they occur. The dog is an extension of the self, legally, and in today's crowded world, I think people have to know their dog and be particularly careful. Personally, I think along with classes on credit cards and sex education, caring for animals and animal responsibility would be a very beneficial class for children, as so so many adults get cats and dogs, especially when they are families, it would seem. Showing children how to be a good owner is something I think would stick with them and might lead to seeing the dog for a friend and a just on this side of tame animal, rather than a status symbol.

Originally Posted by Robinjazz

People who want to have a pit bull for a pet should be interviewed by authorities (local ASPCA). I would recommend giving these people IQ tests to determine whether they have the mental capacity to handle one of these animals that, in the wrong hands, can be as deadly as a shark. An IQ test sounds like a far-fetched idea, but it's an idea that would probably have saved many lives in the last decade.

I like pit bulls, but they should be kept away from irresponsible people.

It will be hard to enforce that now in the U.S. because so many people in the inner-cities have pit bulls and sell their pups.

In the favelas (slums) of Brazil it's not pit bulls that are popular but the Fila Brasiliero.

Fila Brasileiro - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Fila Brasileiro is a large working breed of dog developed in Brazil.

The Fila Brasileiro is an excellent estate guardian. It does not hide its dislike towards strangers, but these dogs are not disqualified from the show ring for showing aggression to the judges. Such aversion is instinctive in Filas, so much so that the Brazilian breed standard advises judges not to touch the dog.

Filas bond strongly with their immediate families and show extreme loyalty and protectiveness towards them. They live to protect their loved ones, including children and other pets. Very few will accept strangers. Many Filas will never tolerate any stranger. Perhaps because of their aversion towards strangers, they are excellent family dogs, devoted to the children in their family.

The Fila Brasileiro is believed to have been evolved from a number of breeds, predominantly the Mastiff, the Bulldog, and the Bloodhound.

In the New York City, United Kingdom,[1] Israel, Denmark,[2] Norway,[3] Malta[4] and Cyprus[5] it is illegal to own any of these dogs without specific exemption from a court. The Fila is a restricted breed in Australia, the states of Qld, N.S.W., Victoria, S.A and W.A the Fila is a restricted or prescribed breed. Imports are also prohibited. They are automatically classified as a dangerous dog in New Zealand, meaning they cannot be imported and males must be neutered.

My two dogs are mixed breeds and came from the streets, one in 117 degree heat. In the last thirty years, every cat and dog I've owned (I've had quite a few) had found me. There is something special about an abandoned animal that gets rescued. I think it truly understands that its new owner had saved it from a tragic ending.

They are appreciative to the maxium.

An idea was floated recently of making dog owners carry insurance-not unlike car insurance. Dog owners screamed bloody murder, but people being bit (medical bills) has necessitated this. I'd lke to see it implemented.

In the case of certain dogs, the insurance would be high. I know that a lot of Houston residents have pit bulls and they train them to be vicious. Mailmen, meter readers, and children are the most often named victims.

In the case of the woman mauled to death, the dog owners should be jailed for a good while as an example.

I agree that dog owners of certain breeds should be required to carry insurance as well as be a licensed dog owner. I think the same should apply to owners of exotic pets as well, particularly chimps and big cats.

As for the owners of those dogs that killed that poor woman, they obviously didn't take the necessary precautions to ensure that this sort of thing wouldn't happen. Assuming the attack was unintentional since the owners were away, I call it negligent homicide.

I was playing a little rough with my medium sized dog earlier today - I'm not sure what breed but some say she's a basenji, or at least part - and now I have few one to four inch lacerations across my forearms and the backs of my hands.

Originally Posted by Robinjazz

I like dogs, even pit bulls. But it's the owners of these fighting dogs that make me nervous.

You may find this difficult to believe, but sometimes the dogs of responsible owners have attacked people. I think it's the strength and bite of the animal that's a problem. If a yorkshire terrier goes nuts it's not a big deal. But a pitbull is basically in charge of a very dangerous weapon - it's own mouth. The owner, and society, believe that the owner is in charge. This is surely only secondary, and only if the dog wants this. I'm often astonished at society allowing it.

If a father gave a ten year old a hand gun and told him he wasn't allowed to use it, would that be okay? What if the father is a responsible parent and the boy is a good boy? Would it be okay for him to carry a gun? If not, why are pitbulls allowed? In the UK we have muzzle laws but I see dogs without muzzles more often than with them.

Once I was bit on the lip by a dog when I was play- wrestling my mate. It was normally a good dog, 'responsible' owners, but it was an animal protecting his family, simple as. It was only a scottish terrier so not too much harm done, puncture wounds only, but what if it was a bull terrier?

Originally Posted by spider8

You may find this difficult to believe, but sometimes the dogs of responsible owners have attacked people. I think it's the strength and bite of the animal that's a problem. If a yorkshire terrier goes nuts it's not a big deal. But a pitbull is basically in charge of a very dangerous weapon - it's own mouth. The owner, and society, believe that the owner is in charge. This is surely only secondary, and only if the dog wants this.

I find that impossible to believe. It is irresponsible to take a dog for a walk knowing that it could over power you anytime it feels the urge to attack. 'Not knowing' is no excuse.

Originally Posted by Blood

I find that impossible to believe. It is irresponsible to take a dog for a walk knowing that it could over power you anytime it feels the urge to attack. 'Not knowing' is no excuse.

Once, when I was a kid (about 12 years old), I was late for school and running across South Norwood Lake's grounds. A policeman was training his police dog. His dog ignored him when he saw me running. The dog sprinted towards me. The policeman's arm had protective padding around it. The policeman screamed at me 'Stand still, stand still!'

I stood still. The dog, a huge alsation, ran around me and back to the owner/trainer. They're animals, simple as. Surely, you can see that this policeman was responsible but, yet, relying on the dog to also be responsible.