I'll ask again, why would you want a pitbull?

I was wrong about the breeding of the Little Rascal's dog, Petey. I relied on my memory rather than facts on that one although a little research revealed that there were several Peties and all but one were mixed breed although the pitbull influence is obvious enough.

Still, using a pitbull (and professional trainer) in 1930s era films hardly justifies anything. I'll wager there were no seatbelts used at the time and smoking was not only condoned but endorsed on the movie set. It was a different era.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to state what is desirable about owning this dog that is worthy of putting people, especially children, at risk? Tell me what you like about this dog and I'll select you a better breed.

 

Luckily, I can select my own pets based on MY opinion and research. But thanks! :thumb:

 

I bet if you tell me what kind of vehicle you drive and WHY you chose it, I can find a better one for you to own!

Still no one who can defend selecting a pitbull other than "it's my right to make whatever decision I want."?

Gentle Ben was a bear. Want one in your backyard?

 

If I wanted one and could maintain one, sure. If I responsibly maintained an enclosure and could manage the expense, why not?

 

The problem, again, stems from IRRESPONSIBLE owners...not from the animals themselves. If I am willing to weight the benefits against the responsibility of owning that animal AND accept responsibility for it, then I should be allowed to do so.

 

For the record, no one owning a 1/3 acre city lot would have the room to maintain a bear or big cat. I would have to problem with cities that prohibit those animals in such areas. However 1/3 acre with a properly enclosed/maintained/supervised yard, a dog that MAY have aggressive tendencies should be permitted.

Still no one who can defend selecting a pitbull other than "it's my right to make whatever decision I want."?

 

No more than I can defend selecting a poodle, chihuahua, boxer or kangaroo. It's a matter of personal choice. No one is asking you to own a pit bull...but that doesn't mean I can't.

I'm going to have to reach the conclusion that no one really wants this treacherous dog, you just don't want someone telling you that you can't. Is that it?

 

Wonderfull. I've seen enough pitbull (and Rotweiller, Doberman, and Chow) owners to know these are all stable, responsible, safety first type of people with pockets full of money to spend on escape proof enclosures (like the tiger exhibit at the San Francisco zoo).

No more than I can defend selecting a poodle, chihuahua, boxer or kangaroo. It's a matter of personal choice. No one is asking you to own a pit bull...but that doesn't mean I can't.

 

 

I would be willing to defend any of those choices minus the kangaroo.

I'm going to have to reach the conclusion that no one really wants this treacherous dog, you just don't want someone telling you that you can't. Is that it?

 

Wonderfull. I've seen enough pitbull (and Rotweiller, Doberman, and Chow) owners to know these are all stable, responsible, safety first type of people with pockets full of money to spend on escape proof enclosures (like the tiger exhibit at the San Francisco zoo).

 

Reach whatever conclusion you want. I'm certainly glad I live in a country where I DO have choices.

Reach whatever conclusion you want. I'm certainly glad I live in a country where I DO have choices.

 

This is not a freedoms issue, it's a safety issue. Very many of your freedoms are governed by safety. Do you have a choice (legally) concerning wearing a seatbelt? Driving North in the Southbound lanes of the interstate? How about selling drugs to school children? Depending on where you live, you may not even be able to buy alcohol or install a fence around your yard. Some places prohibit satellite dishes.

 

Laws, rules, and choices are our decisions. This one is worth considering.

This is not a freedoms issue, it's a safety issue. Very many of your freedoms are governed by safety. Do you have a choice (legally) concerning wearing a seatbelt? Driving North in the Southbound lanes of the interstate? How about selling drugs to school children? Depending on where you live, you may not even be able to buy alcohol or install a fence around your yard. Some places prohibit satellite dishes.

 

Laws, rules, and choices are our decisions. This one is worth considering.

 

It is totally a freedom issue. I can still buy a car that I might kill myself in. They are very dangerous...but to lessen that danger I am required to wear seatbelts, abide my speed limits, and other traffic regulations. BUT I CAN STILL OWN THE CAR - even if some people consider them to be dangerous.

 

To summarize:

 

Owning "dangerous" car = owning "dangerous" dog

Wearing seatbelt = proper kennel and fencing for dog

 

I could go on, but we probably just need to agree to disagree.

 

America's masct during WWII was a Pit Bull

 

 

Pit Bulls make great police dog's.

 

 

Helen Keller and her pet Pit Bull. :scared:

 

 

 

The number one dog in the US customs is a Pit.

 

America's first decorated war dog was a Pit named stubby during WWI.

 

Bud, the first dog to travel across the US in an automobile was a Pit. His goggles are in the Smithsonian.

 

The pit bull is the only breed of dog to grace the cover of Life magazine 3 times.

 

Between 1963 and 2001 there have been 37 dog breeds responsible for 431 deaths in the US.

Westie

Irish Setter

St. Bernard

Newfoundland

Brittany Spanial

Pomeranian

And Dauchsund's have all killed in this period.

The Staffordshire bull terrior, which is a breed that is considered a "Pit bull type" and would be banned has killed none.

 

Genetic aggression has to do with the strain of a particular dog, not the entire breed.

 

In 1865, the Boston Terrier was brought over for the same reason as the Pit bull. To fight other dogs.

 

It is a fact that training and socialization have more effect on a dogs personality than do genetics.

 

The owner is the one who dictates what type of dog he / she will have.

 

Tell me why I should not be able to have a Pit bull or any other type of dog if I am a responsible owner.

This same mindset is what make's some people think that all Muslims are terrorists, or that all black people are criminals, or that all white people are racist's.

 

 

It's silly to me.

 

Sorry for getting off subject.

This same mindset is what make's some people think that all Muslims are terrorists, or that all black people are criminals, or that all white people are racist's.

 

It's entirely different.It's all about breeding and instinctive actions. Labrador retrievers and Border Collies are two of the more intelligent, easy to train breeds. Yet, you don't see Labs herding sheep nor Borders sitting in a duck blind. It's not instinctive to them. It's not what their ancestors were selectively bred for. Pit bulls were bred to be instinctive killers. Those that were not were killed, those that were were allowed to breed and pass that trait along to others with similar instincts. It's not training nor enviroment, it's instinct.

It's not prejudice. It's simple genetic tendacies.

Between 1963 and 2001 there have been 37 dog breeds responsible for 431 deaths in the US.

Westie

Irish Setter

St. Bernard

Newfoundland

Brittany Spanial

Pomeranian

And Dauchsund's have all killed in this period.

The Staffordshire bull terrior, which is a breed that is considered a "Pit bull type" and would be banned has killed none.

 

 

I didn't want to use the space to quote your entire post so I copy and pasted the above. How in the world can they make that statement?

 

Check here: http://www.dog-bite-law-center.com/pgs/stats.html

 

From the above website:

 

 

 

Among the deadliest and most vicious of all dog breeds with killer instincts, originally bred to fight and kill other dogs, Pit Bulls are now widely popular as companion dogs, especially in American cities. Their popularly is strange given their homicidal history and aggressive in-bred traits, but that is seemingly part of the appeal. With its powerful jaws, thick skull and muscular legs the American Pit Bull Terrier (and related breeds) makes short work of children and adults it attacks often maiming them for life. The very name "pit bull" is used in our language to signify a singularly tenacious state of being.

 

This breed is variously cited as being responsible for nearly a third of all fatal dog attacks in the United States, in part due to its tenacity in a fight. Pit bulls cause one-third of dog-bite related fatalities while only make up less than 2% of the dog population. Because of the deaths, maulings and serious injuries inflicted by Pit Bulls, many countries worldwide ban these dogs altogether.

 

2% of the dog population, 1/3 of the dog bite related fatalities. Let's all load one of these cute little guys up for a drive across country.

It's entirely different.It's all about breeding and instinctive actions. Labrador retrievers and Border Collies are two of the more intelligent, easy to train breeds. Yet, you don't see Labs herding sheep nor Borders sitting in a duck blind. It's not instinctive to them. It's not what their ancestors were selectively bred for. Pit bulls were bred to be instinctive killers. Those that were not were killed, those that were were allowed to breed and pass that trait along to others with similar instincts. It's not training nor enviroment, it's instinct.

It's not prejudice. It's simple genetic tendacies.

 

Those that attacked humans were / are also killed by people who illegaly fight them.

 

Dog's are products of training. It is not all about instincts and bred behavior with dog's. It's about that combined with training.

 

Pit's were not bred to be killers, they were bred to be strong, and tenacious at whatever it is they are trained to do. That is why they make great police / search and rescue dogs.

 

How do you explain the pit's that are classified as "losers" because they wont fight. Years of genetic modification by humans should have gotten rid of that right?

 

I think I have said all that I can say on this. Anything more will be a waste of my time, because it is clear that I will not be able to change alot of people's mind on the issue and I would just be repeating myself.

 

I know through personal appearances that it is foolish to paint an entire breed of dog with such a broad brush and I would hope that something like this would never be passed into law, because it would really do us no good at all.