pitbull almost dies saving owner from train tracks

[Unkotare]

Old.

2012 is old?

You need to read that shit. The ones I read were from 2010. And breed was not mentioned, and no pis of the offending dogs.

No, YOU need to read it, moron. It starts off with over two dozen articles on fatal dog attacks in 2012. There is a link to each article, and breed is mentioned in the articles. You didn't even look at the link, did you?

 

[earlycuyler]

Did you read the abstract on your lawyers blog thingy ?



No hard facts will back that at all. A pit bull, and all the other K-9's that get lumped into that category posses ant special killing ability. An I can see that you did not read the abstract, s guess you are pushing the lie side considering the guys at the blog you linked even admitted this fact here-

Pit bull owners often say that the dog is not dangerous, and most of the time they are correct. Pit bulls have not been proved to bite people more often than other dogs bite people.

You make no sense. Deer are not pets, and deer DO HAVE hoofs.

You also willfully keep ignoring the facts. The most important information citizens need to be aware of is that any dog can bite you, but a pit bull doesn't just bite you, a pit bull attacks you.

The attack pattern of pit bulls is different from that of other dogs. With other dogs, children are usually at highest risk of being bitten. In contrast, pit bulls seem to attack adults almost as frequently as they attack children. Pit bulls not only are notorious for their indiscriminate attack pattern but also are well known for the tenacity with which they continue with an attack.

The inbred tenacity of pit bulls, the unrelenting manner in which they initiate and continue their attacks, and the damage they cause are the result of both genetics and environment. Therefore, this breed of dog is inherently dangerous.

Sorry dude, you can post as meant reports written for law firms as you want, but it proves nothing really. I cant cut and past from what you posted it even says that one breed was sampled from a number of 6,000 + while another was sampled from only 950 from 1966 to when ever.

 

[earlycuyler]

2012 is old?

You need to read that shit. The ones I read were from 2010. And breed was not mentioned, and no pis of the offending dogs.

No, YOU need to read it, moron. It starts off with over two dozen articles on fatal dog attacks in 2012. There is a link to each article, and breed is mentioned in the articles. You didn't even look at the link, did you?

You need to calm down Geronimo. Did you notice the one where the "Pit Bull" that killed the child in Houston was not even removed from the home ? So relax, its ok to be wrong, its willful ignorance that's bad. Here, have a drink and calm down-

 

[Bfgrn]

Did you read the abstract on your lawyers blog thingy ?



No hard facts will back that at all. A pit bull, and all the other K-9's that get lumped into that category posses ant special killing ability. An I can see that you did not read the abstract, s guess you are pushing the lie side considering the guys at the blog you linked even admitted this fact here-



Sorry dude, you can post as meant reports written for law firms as you want, but it proves nothing really. I cant cut and past from what you posted it even says that one breed was sampled from a number of 6,000 + while another was sampled from only 950 from 1966 to when ever.

You know DUDe, I believe people should be able to own whatever dog or pet they want, with only ONE qualification. If that dog or animal is a threat to neighbors, pedestrians and old ladies getting mail from their mailbox, it is no longer a private matter. It is a PUBLIC matter. I also advocate that if your dog kills or maims my kid or my grandmother, YOU are held personally responsible, as if YOU killed or maimed my kid or my grandmother.

You should have no problem with that, now should you???

 

[earlycuyler]

-Bfgrn I also advocate that if your dog kills or maims my kid or my grandmother, YOU are held personally responsible, as if YOU killed or maimed my kid or my grandmother.-

You should have no problem with that, now should you???

On this I agree with you 1000%.

 

[Unkotare]

Sorry dude, you can post as meant reports written for law firms as you want.

If you had bothered to actually look you'd see dozens and dozens of links to news articles about fatal dog bites. Articles written by reporters for the public. You're making yourself look ridiculous at this point.

 

[Unkotare]

So relax, its ok to be wrong,

I'm not surprise you think so, since you make such a habit of it. You don't want to argue with me, you want to argue with ALL the various reporters who wrote ALL the many, many stories reporting on fatal dog attacks this year and previous years.

 

[Katzndogz]

Pit Bulls were once so gentle that they were referred to as nanny dogs and excellent pets for small children. They are not so today.

When you find a dog mauling case you will undoubtably find a pedigreed dog at fault. The inbreeding necessary for pure bloodlines doesn't make dogs vicious. It makes them unpredictable. It makes for an unpredictable Pomeranian and an unpredictable Pit Bull. Some breeds are more prone to unpredictability than others. Pit Bulls, Chows, Huskies and Akitas are more disposed to unpredictability than other breeds. The dog could be laying there sound asleep then without warning jump up vicious enough to kill. They can also hide under the bed. It's not the owner, nor is it the training, it's the breeding.

 

[Unkotare]

When you find a dog mauling case you will undoubtably find a pedigreed dog at fault.

Link? Proof? Note that you are contradicting what the other pit-apologists have been saying about the ID of dogs in the many, many, many dog mauling cases that have been referenced here and on other threads.

 

[Katzndogz]

When you find a dog mauling case you will undoubtably find a pedigreed dog at fault.

Link? Proof? Note that you are contradicting what the other pit-apologists have been saying about the ID of dogs in the many, many, many dog mauling cases that have been referenced here and on other threads.

Of course I'm contradicting them. I meant to contradict them. What they are saying isn't true so why wouldn't I contradict them. There is no such thing as "all" or "none". But most of the time random and unprovoked dog attacks by pet dogs involve a dog that is a pedigreed dog. A small dog, like a Pomeranian, or a big dog like a Presa Canario doesn't make a difference. The dog is unpredictable, it can be gentle one minute and vicious the next with no provocation. This isn't to say that a mixed breed will never become vicious, just that it doesn't occur with the same frequency.

There are breeds that are not prone to unpredictability, choose one of them. The same way there are breeds that aren't prone to hip dysplasia, heart murmurs or respiratory problems.

 

[Againsheila]

The breeds most likely to kill

Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds.

The most horrifying example of the lack of breed predictability is the October 2000 death of a 6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family's Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a dangerous breed


>>>>

Maybe we should just ban all dogs?

Why are you being disingenuous? You selectively edited the article you posted from.

It starts out with:

In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers

Because I'm pointing out that they aren't the only dangerous dogs out there. It's not the breed. Would YOU have thought a Pomeranian was capable of killing someone? Now that you know, do you want them banned out of existence as well?

 

[Againsheila]

When you find a dog mauling case you will undoubtably find a pedigreed dog at fault.

Link? Proof? Note that you are contradicting what the other pit-apologists have been saying about the ID of dogs in the many, many, many dog mauling cases that have been referenced here and on other threads.

Of course I'm contradicting them. I meant to contradict them. What they are saying isn't true so why wouldn't I contradict them. There is no such thing as "all" or "none". But most of the time random and unprovoked dog attacks by pet dogs involve a dog that is a pedigreed dog. A small dog, like a Pomeranian, or a big dog like a Presa Canario doesn't make a difference. The dog is unpredictable, it can be gentle one minute and vicious the next with no provocation. This isn't to say that a mixed breed will never become vicious, just that it doesn't occur with the same frequency.

There are breeds that are not prone to unpredictability, choose one of them. The same way there are breeds that aren't prone to hip dysplasia, heart murmurs or respiratory problems.

I've always preferred a mutt over a pure bred. Not all, but many pure breds are inbred and that affects their intelligence and personality. Think of those puppy mills. Do you really think they were breading intelligently? Do you really think they cared if brother and sister dogs were mating?

 

[Bfgrn]

The breeds most likely to kill

Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds.

The most horrifying example of the lack of breed predictability is the October 2000 death of a 6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family's Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a dangerous breed


>>>>

Maybe we should just ban all dogs?

Why are you being disingenuous? You selectively edited the article you posted from.

It starts out with:

In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers

Because I'm pointing out that they aren't the only dangerous dogs out there. It's not the breed. Would YOU have thought a Pomeranian was capable of killing someone? Now that you know, do you want them banned out of existence as well?

It is the breed. Any dog can bite. Pit bulls don't bite, they attack without stopping until you are dead or someone take extraordinary measures to stop them.

Doctors say the severity or damage from a pit bull attack can not be compared to other dogs. It can be compared it to a shark attack.

 

[Coyote]

Why are you being disingenuous? You selectively edited the article you posted from.

It starts out with:

In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers

Because I'm pointing out that they aren't the only dangerous dogs out there. It's not the breed. Would YOU have thought a Pomeranian was capable of killing someone? Now that you know, do you want them banned out of existence as well?

It is the breed. Any dog can bite. Pit bulls don't bite, they attack without stopping until you are dead or someone take extraordinary measures to stop them.

Doctors say the severity or damage from a pit bull attack can not be compared to other dogs. It can be compared it to a shark attack.

Do you have anything to support that claim?

 

[Katzndogz]

Link? Proof? Note that you are contradicting what the other pit-apologists have been saying about the ID of dogs in the many, many, many dog mauling cases that have been referenced here and on other threads.

Of course I'm contradicting them. I meant to contradict them. What they are saying isn't true so why wouldn't I contradict them. There is no such thing as "all" or "none". But most of the time random and unprovoked dog attacks by pet dogs involve a dog that is a pedigreed dog. A small dog, like a Pomeranian, or a big dog like a Presa Canario doesn't make a difference. The dog is unpredictable, it can be gentle one minute and vicious the next with no provocation. This isn't to say that a mixed breed will never become vicious, just that it doesn't occur with the same frequency.

There are breeds that are not prone to unpredictability, choose one of them. The same way there are breeds that aren't prone to hip dysplasia, heart murmurs or respiratory problems.

I've always preferred a mutt over a pure bred. Not all, but many pure breds are inbred and that affects their intelligence and personality. Think of those puppy mills. Do you really think they were breading intelligently? Do you really think they cared if brother and sister dogs were mating?

My point exactly. While breeding brothers to sisters won't mean the resulting puppy will come out with problems, breeding siblings together for generations will. Pugs can't breathe, collies can't see, and some dogs become unpredictable. Legitimate breeders will bring in dogs from a different bloodline (or cats or whatever animal it is) to minimize the effect of entrenched inbreeding. The difference is that these breeders charge thousands for a puppy compared to a few hundred for a mill puppy or even less than that from a backyard breeder. The dogs look the same, but they are very very different.

 

[Katzndogz]

Why are you being disingenuous? You selectively edited the article you posted from.

It starts out with:

In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers

Because I'm pointing out that they aren't the only dangerous dogs out there. It's not the breed. Would YOU have thought a Pomeranian was capable of killing someone? Now that you know, do you want them banned out of existence as well?

It is the breed. Any dog can bite. Pit bulls don't bite, they attack without stopping until you are dead or someone take extraordinary measures to stop them.

Doctors say the severity or damage from a pit bull attack can not be compared to other dogs. It can be compared it to a shark attack.

That can't be true! The pit bull has a scissor bite. Many dogs have a scissor bite including my poodle. Sharks don't have a canine bite. They have rows of teeth without a scissor pattern. It would be obvious to anyone seeing the difference in bite patterns between a shark and a dog. Sharks of course aren't really attacking, they are feeding.

Assuming that you didn't mean that no one could tell the difference between the bite marks, but the ferocity of attack, whether a dog attack will stop absent force isn't only true of pit bulls, but any dog at all. Dogs that are trained to attack on command are trained to stop on command. A chihuahua that attacks randomly without provocation won't stop any more than a pit bull.

 

[Againsheila]

Why are you being disingenuous? You selectively edited the article you posted from.

It starts out with:

In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers

Because I'm pointing out that they aren't the only dangerous dogs out there. It's not the breed. Would YOU have thought a Pomeranian was capable of killing someone? Now that you know, do you want them banned out of existence as well?

It is the breed. Any dog can bite. Pit bulls don't bite, they attack without stopping until you are dead or someone take extraordinary measures to stop them.

Doctors say the severity or damage from a pit bull attack can not be compared to other dogs. It can be compared it to a shark attack.

That baby was killed by a Pomeranian, not a pitbull. Banning pit bulls would not have saved that baby. Not all pit bulls are bad, not all pomeranians are bad. Do you kill the entire breed due to a few attacks? There was a boy down the road here that was attacked by a pitbull when he was little. He was nearly killed. Does he blame the dog? No, he blames the owners. The owners who knew they had a dangerous dog. The owners who knew their dog had attacked before and never reported it, they kept it hushed up even though in one of the attacks a person had to have 56 stitches in their hand. They were proud of the ruthlessness of their dog. They claimed their dog could kill mine. It's not the dog, it's the owners. The dog should have been put down the first time it attacked and it never would have put that poor boy in the hospital. They didn't think he was ever going to walk again, but he did, and he played on the highschool football team.

You come meet the pitbull down the street the other way and then tell me how dangerous they are. He wouldn't hurt a fly.

 

[Bfgrn]

Because I'm pointing out that they aren't the only dangerous dogs out there. It's not the breed. Would YOU have thought a Pomeranian was capable of killing someone? Now that you know, do you want them banned out of existence as well?

It is the breed. Any dog can bite. Pit bulls don't bite, they attack without stopping until you are dead or someone take extraordinary measures to stop them.

Doctors say the severity or damage from a pit bull attack can not be compared to other dogs. It can be compared it to a shark attack.

Do you have anything to support that claim?

Pit Bull Myths - Dangerous Dogs

Some of the genetic traits courts have identified include: unpredictability of aggression, tenacity ("gameness" the refusal to give up a fight), high pain tolerance and the pit bull's "hold and shake" bite style.2 According to forensic medical studies, similar injuries have only been found elsewhere on victims of shark attacks.3

3 - http://www.dogsbite.org/pdf/texas-medicine-report.pdf

 

[Katzndogz]

No matter how many times you say it, it's still not true.

Pit Bull bite.
American Pit Bull Terrier Network Teeth

Shark Bite
Shark Bite

 

[Coyote]

It is the breed. Any dog can bite. Pit bulls don't bite, they attack without stopping until you are dead or someone take extraordinary measures to stop them.

Doctors say the severity or damage from a pit bull attack can not be compared to other dogs. It can be compared it to a shark attack.

Do you have anything to support that claim?

Pit Bull Myths - Dangerous Dogs

Some of the genetic traits courts have identified include: unpredictability of aggression, tenacity ("gameness" the refusal to give up a fight), high pain tolerance and the pit bull's "hold and shake" bite style.2 According to forensic medical studies, similar injuries have only been found elsewhere on victims of shark attacks.3

3 - http://www.dogsbite.org/pdf/texas-medicine-report.pdf

After reading About Us - DogsBite.org - I question the impartiality of the site's information.

For example: some of the genetic traits courts have identified include: unpredictability of aggression, tenacity ("gameness" the refusal to give up a fight), high pain tolerance and the pit bull's "hold and shake" bite style.2 According to forensic medical studies, similar injuries have only been found elsewhere on victims of shark attacks.3

ALL dogs can and will bite in the "hold and shake" bite style - it's part of their genetic wiring as predators and in many dogs it can be elicited easily when playing games like "tug".

Unpredictability of aggression - that too is dubious. Very seldom is it truly unpredictable, warning signs are often missed and some dogs because of physical structures, training or temperment give fewer or more subtle warning signs before going to a bite - pits are not
unusually representative in those categories.

Statistics are often overblown because people don't realize, first off - that fatal dog attacks or dog attacks causing extensive debilitating damage are very very rare occurances - though they get a lot of media attention.

This site gives some interesting statistics: Pit Bull Facts and Myths – Infographic – 1800PetMeds

On the power of a dog's jaw:

Dr. Brady Barr of National Geographic (Dangerous Encounters: Bite Force, 8pm est 8/18/2005) – Dr. Barr measured bite forces of many different creatures. Domestic dogs were included in the test.

Here are the results of all of the animals tested:

Humans: 120 pounds of bite pressure
Domestic dogs: 320 LBS of pressure on avg. A German Shepard, American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) and Rottweiler were tested using a bite sleeve equipped with a specialized computer instrument. The APBT had the least amount of pressure of the 3 dogs tested.
Wild dogs: 310 lbs
Lions: 600 lbs
White sharks: 600 lbs
Hyenas: 1000 lbs
Snapping turtles: 1000 lbs
Crocodiles: 2500 lbs

So...I wonder, how accurate are the claims in that source?