Banning Pit Bulls

[Rydia]

In some places, at least in the US, pit bulls are banned. Do you agree with this? Should all pit bulls be banned and put down?

I think dog fighting is sick and disgusting and anyone who participates should be arrested in never allowed to own a dog again.

But I do not think that means that pit bulls should be banned.

Any dog can be vicious and any dog can be raised to be vicious. A dog that is abused, neglected, or raised for fighting is going to be nervous around humans and more likely to attack. And when pits are not bred for fighting they can be very sweet and good family dogs. People choose pits for fighting because of their body build and their high pain tolerance. They actually make good therapy dogs because of their high pain tolerance meaning that they do not become upset if say a wheel chair were to run over their tail. We had someone fall on a a pit bull therapy dog at one of my clinicals in a nursing home, and the dog just layed there until the person was helped back up, and he acted as though nothing had happened.

Pit bulls that do attack are often those that have escaped from a place where they were bred for fighting or were bred from a line that had a bad tempermant. But with all dogs you have to be careful of what gene line they were bred from because of health and tempermant issues.

Also, pit bulls are not the dog that attack the most people. Where I live, there are many more reports of St. Bernards, Dalmations, and chiuauas. Why not ban them first?

Finally, often when there is a report of a pit bull attack, the dog is not always a pit bull. Reporters will say that it was a pit bull because it makes a better story and will more likely be published. I remember one being reported on the news, when they showed the dog on screen, it was obviously a lab. Dog attacks by more popular breeds such as golden retrievers and labs will often not go reported because it would upset too many people to hear about it.

And as far as any dog can be vicious, there was a story of a pomeranian, a very tiny dog, that killed a six month old baby.

So if were are going to ban pit bulls, why not ban all dogs? Or all dogs over a certian height that could potentially do serious damage to someone?

 

[CassinoChips]

Pit bulls are often referred to as "nanny" dogs. If you ever see them around kids, they're awesome. Very protective, in a non-aggressive way, and very affectionate. It really comes down to how they are raised. Like you said, Ali, any dog can be raised to be vicious, and there are no such things as bad dogs; only bad owners.

So no, I don't agree with pit bulls being banned. I do agree with idiot dog owners who raise vicious dogs being banned from owning dogs and/or pets though.

 

[Pandora]

It seems incredibly dumb for them to be banned in several places, even if its for the safety of other people. There are multiple types of dogs that can attack bystanders, not just pit bulls - and its unfair that they're being singled out.

I've always believed that the reason dogs act the way they do all come down to how they're treated, mainly by owners. I've been around some frightening looking dogs and they would be very friendly when I played with them. If they are malnourished, often ignored and treated horribly by their owners, the one person that they look up to, chances are that they'll lose their trust with everyone else they see, thus possibly leading to the attacks. It's the owners that should be punished, not the dog (of any kind).
And we all should know that the situation can happen to people too, not just pit bulls or any other kind of dog. When you see on the news that a kid started a shooting at his/her school, it would mainly be because that kid was very much abused or hurt by other students and possibly the family - and the most reasonable action would be for the students known for picking on him/her to get punished and his/her parents to get arrested for child abuse. Should the kid that did the shooting get arrested? Obviously, but that doesn't mean to ban/expel all of the other students that may or may not have a relating problem.

I had to make that comparison, because in both stories, a big problem that was in view is linked to a series of other issues that should have been sorted out when they first began. So again, no. Banning pit bulls isn't right. I already know that the ban in those places (wherever they may be) was placed out of fear, but they wouldn't have to fear if they would give the dogs the love they deserve .
​

 

[Gingerbread Lesbian]

I do, not so much because of the dog itself but because the majority of people wouldn't be able to look after it properly. People don't realise the effort needed in looking after Pitbulls because they aren't particularly big and as such, it's underestimated. My mum's ex had a pitbull in the past and the amount of work needed is far more than an average dog and because of that people who think they are looking after them properly quite often aren't. The problem as well is that pitbulls are strong dogs and because of their pain tolerance, you aren't getting it off if it bites. So if it does attack someone regardless of the reason, it's an inevitable disaster.

Whilst the majority of the time most people won't have a problem with their pitbull, somewhere along the line they've been bred for hunting, it doesn't need to be provoked to attack someone or something, it could merely be instinctive. The amount of of reports of pitbulls killing or severely injuring a child who is asleep or minding their own business is astonishing. Unfortunately, whilst it is more of the owners fault if they don't raise the dog properly, the nature of the dog attracts bad owners who raise the dog with bad traits and the only way of solving the problem is by banning them.

 

[Squid]

hmmm this is a tough one.
There have been more pitbull attacks than any other dog attacks, lots of people can say that its the way the dog was bread which made it vicious but thats not always true.

Put bulls have been bread to fight and kill ever since they were discovered, I believe that deep down inside these dogs know to kill and fight, its in their dna. Not all will act upon it. I know some people with lovely ones but no one knows if they'd turn on you.... (I guess you can say that about any dog though)

soo I guess if there has been enough research onto these dogs then yes they should be banned.

 

[Rydia]

I do, not so much because of the dog itself but because the majority of people wouldn't be able to look after it properly. People don't realise the effort needed in looking after Pitbulls because they aren't particularly big and as such, it's underestimated. My mum's ex had a pitbull in the past and the amount of work needed is far more than an average dog and because of that people who think they are looking after them properly quite often aren't. The problem as well is that pitbulls are strong dogs and because of their pain tolerance, you aren't getting it off if it bites. So if it does attack someone regardless of the reason, it's an inevitable disaster.

If that is the case, then we need to ban all dogs. Many people do not look after their dog properly. All, large and giant dogs are also strong. All dogs need to have a walk once a day to satisfy their hunting instinct. Sure they can cope without it, but is fair to them? People buy shaggy dogs and do not comb them resulting in painful mats. Herding and working dogs need a job for their mental health. Hound dogs also need a job of tracking something to satisfy theirs. That would leave a small pool of dogs to choose from.

hmmm this is a tough one.
There have been more pitbull attacks than any other dog attacks, lots of people can say that its the way the dog was bread which made it vicious but thats not always true.

Put bulls have been bread to fight and kill ever since they were discovered, I believe that deep down inside these dogs know to kill and fight, its in their dna. Not all will act upon it. I know some people with lovely ones but no one knows if they'd turn on you.... (I guess you can say that about any dog though)

But pit bulls do not attack the most people. In fact their are quite low on the AKA's attack list. You see more attacks from more popular dogs. Also, they usually score very high on obediance tests.

Bull dogs were also originally bread for fighting, but all fighting instict has been bread out of them and they make very good family pets. Hounds were originally bred for hunting yet people still have them.

 

[CassinoChips]

Owners/breeders have created part of the problem with pit bulls, and rottweilers for that matter. One of the warning signs, and usually the last thing a dog does before it bites you, is tail wagging. But the common practice with pits and rottweilers is to dock the tail. So you lose one of the tell-tale warning signs of an attack. In my opinion, I think that contributes largely to the disproportionate numbers of attacks by pits and rottweilers. So when people say "there was no warning," well, there probably would have been, had you not had the dog's tail chopped off. So who's at fault in the end?

 

[Sum1sgruj]

If police can potentially hunt me down with dogs, then I should be able to have any kind of dog I want.

But that's only one way of looking at the big picture- leaving civilians defenseless just leads to more bad news. This includes limiting guns, militia banding, etc.
So grandma Rosy is too stupid to stay away from my pit, and when someone breaks into my house and puts me in danger I'll die knowing I'm a good..citizen?
Police and gov't already have a good enough grasp on us and half the damn world. Democracy is only good if the majority of people aren't stupid. Banning pitbulls is.. stupid.

 

[MBV_love]

I had a pitbull... it bit my friend and my dad instantly wanted to get it put down and of course the police and my friend's grandparents wanted the dog to be put down too. The bite was sudden and pretty bad, I really dont have any idea why it happen, my dog was very friendly around him.

Me and my brothers were definetly not responsible owners. My brothers were plenty old enough to take care of a dog even a pitbull but they were too busy getting high and fuckin didnt put anytime training the dog. Me I was around 10, not a great age to have a pitbull. I knew my dog was just a ticking time bomb and things could of got worse but I adored that dog. When it got taken away that was the saddest momment of my life. I'm getting a bit teary here.

The owners need to be responsible but saying that won't solve peoples laziness. Extra attention could be used when selling pitbulls but theres still the whole issue of underground selling. It's one of those really tough issues. I live in Toronto Canada and in my province the selling of pitbulls are banned and those who own pitbulls have to put mussels on them. This isn't 100% except the mussel part but I am pretty sure thats it. I must admit if my dog didnt bite that kid I wouldnt have sided with banning pitbulls at all, not even the idea of sideing with the ban. However, I'm in the middle and thats the problem with me, I am too neutral minded.

 

[Rydia]

Here's a good pit bull story. This one protected his family from an intruder and even took THREE shots to the head and lived. They should call this dog Chuck Norris.

This one saved a neighbor from her abusive husband.

Saved an owner from abusive boyfriend

This one lost his leg defending his owner.

 

[Gaige]

I don't think an animal can be inherently aggressive or harmful. That mindset is instilled in it, and most attacks aren't deliberate attempts to maim other people. We don't put down a child for accidentally breaking another child's arm while they play, do we? It's the same principle.

We as humans have a morality. Most of us anyway. Regardless of how it works, it helps us make decisions and turns us away from a decision that wouldn't necessarily be right, at least in my experience of morality, subjective though the whole concept is.

Dogs, and indeed all animals, don't have this hairline trigger, this voice or conscience that tells them that something shouldn't be done. Animals act on instinct, and do what's best to protect themselves as well as those close to them.

In fact, it's almost comparable to a human mental disorder. Extreme paranoia can be instigated when a lot of people turn against somebody, leaving them thinking everybody is out to get them. If a dog is senselessly abused by one or more humans, they'll get it into their heads that this is the norm, that all humans do this, and when a human approaches them, they'll either flee or attack in what they believe in their instinct driven mind is self defence. Other than that, they can do it out of loyalty, and why should anyone but the owner be responsible for curbing that loyalty for certain situations and keeping it under control?

When a human is mentally ill, we help them get better. We keep them in a place where they can get over their affliction and prepare to live in society again. Hell, we pay taxes towards it. If we can't do this for what's supposed to be "man's best friend," or any animal really, then who are we to call ourselves civilized, when death is the only solution to an animal acting out of fear and loyalty?

 

[Valvalis]

I don't think an animal can be inherently aggressive or harmful. That mindset is instilled in it, and most attacks aren't deliberate attempts to maim other people. We don't put down a child for accidentally breaking another child's arm while they play, do we? It's the same principle.

We as humans have a morality. Most of us anyway. Regardless of how it works, it helps us make decisions and turns us away from a decision that wouldn't necessarily be right, at least in my experience of morality, subjective though the whole concept is.

Dogs, and indeed all animals, don't have this hairline trigger, this voice or conscience that tells them that something shouldn't be done. Animals act on instinct, and do what's best to protect themselves or those close to them.

In fact, it's almost comparable to a human mental disorder. Extreme paranoia can be instigated when a lot of people turn against somebody, leaving them thinking everybody is out to get them. If a dog is senselessly abused by one or more humans, they'll get it into their heads that this is the norm, that all humans do this, and when a human approaches them, they'll either flee or attack in what they believe in their instinct driven mind is self defence. Other than that, they can do it out of loyalty, and why should anyone but the owner be responsible for curbing that loyalty for certain situations and keeping it under control?

When a human is mentally ill, we help them get better. We keep them in a place where they can get over their affliction and prepare to live in society again. Hell, we pay taxes towards it. If we can't do this for what's supposed to be "man's best friend," or any animal really, then who are we to call ourselves civilized, when death is the only solution to an animal acting out of fear and loyalty?

I couldn't have said it any better :dave: When people blame an innocent force of nature for something that happens, they're removing the responsibility from themselves and by so doing, acting like pieces of garbage. When people say "oh ban or put down the dogs," it's all just a bunch of irresponsible bullshit where people want to destroy the "fearsome" things they don't understand, rather than trying to understand them better and cope with them in other ways. It's the eternal foot of some twisted "utopian ideal" stomping on the ants and it's a completely backwards way of thinking and operating. IMHO the ends could never possibly justify the means.

And even if pitbulls DID have a record of being more innately hostile than other dogs, then it would still be a human's fault for thinking it was a good idea to have one as a pet in the first place. I mean people get exotic animals for pets sometimes too, like tigers or other wildcats, and then get mauled--what on earth are they expecting? There's only so much that you can train an animal to do, even if it's got a heredity of being domesticated. Life is not the frigging Jungle Book where you can sit down and have tea parties with them.

 

[DeadFantasy]

there are no such things as bad dogs; only bad owners.

Exactamundo. You can't possibly blame the dog itself for behaving the way it is. You can only blame the owner. If you give it the right discipline, the dog shouldn't and wouldn't be as bad as some people have made it seem. If you treat them right, they should be just fine.

ANY dog in the world can be vicious or evil but, with the right treatment, that should be 100% preventable. I don't see why the whole banning things only apply to Pit Bulls. If anything the fucking owners need to be banned for fucks sake its just stupid!

The only way I can see a dog acting 'vicious' is if they were, in any shape or form, being harmed. it's their initial reaction to respond and defend themselves. Wouldn't you?

People need to shut the fuck up about the banning of Pit Bulls dammit. Rydia posted plenty of proof that they really are loyal and friendly. It's all up to the owners.

 

[Terra Branford]

Pitbulls should not be banned!

They are very loving animals, I would know! I own a Pitball! He's half Lab though...

My father has owned them before in his childhood and in the past and they were never "evil" and never attacked anyone. If I remember correctly, he said his neighbors and friends had them as well and never bit anyone, even strangers. I know my Pitbull has never hurt a strange...its the opposite, he loves strangers! >.<

Does this honestly look like it could hurt someone?
Click me for a cute image of my dog Chilly!

He's as big as a horse now though, but he still acts like a puppy, really xD

there are no such things as bad dogs; only bad owners.

I agree!

The dogs do as their owners (parents) tell them to. If they are abused, they sometimes act out. But in the fighting cases, the dog is put down for life and the horrible owner is fined and put in jail for a few.

That's just horrible...

 

[Rydia]

Terra your dog is so cute!

It's funny, because the dog that I am the most weary of is the Chow Chow, I think it's because they look like teddy bears, however, they can be suspicious of strangers and they have a high bite rate. But mostly because people are stupid and assume that they are cuddly dogs. And I'm sure that there are well behaved and trustworthy Chow Chows.

You know, PETA actually supported the banning of breeding pit bulls? Aren't they supposed to be FOR animal rights?

http://www.peta.org/about/why-peta/pitbulls.aspx

And a letter from a pit bull advocate to PETA about this

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/articles/petaletter.html

I do agree that there needs to be limits on breeding dogs because many people do so irresponsibly and there are so many adoptable healthy dogs in shelters. But that is another debate.

 

[Terra Branford]

:33 Thanks! He is, isn't he? I wanted to call him Prince, but eh...He's a huge lug now. Almost horse size and really, really stubborn xD

PETA sucks. They spend more money on themselves and fancy things then actually for the animal. We called them about some dogs and they told us they would put them to sleep the moment they got them.

*shakes head*

 

[Squid]

I think a dog can be born aggressive or inherit it....just like a child born with ADD or whatever, they can act out and go crazy at random. I am sure dogs can and do too.
and I guess its not just pitbulls, like the Labrador on the news the other day who tore the face of a little girl coz she touched him when he was eating. I am pretty sure he belonged to a normal family.
Yes the child shouldn't have gone near him while he ate but still...it tore her cheek off

So I don't agree with people who say its ALWAYS the owners fault, most of the time it probably is but not always, and dogs can inherit a bad personality. If people can have bad personalities I don't see why dogs can't.

I am sure there are lovely pitbulls out there (I have yet to meet one) but they are the cause of so many attacks its not even funny. I love dogs but some just shouldn't be pets.

 

[Sir Fratley]

After years of volunteering in shelters and my current schooling in veterinary technology, I can say through experience that pit bulls are for the most part, the sweetest-natured dogs in the world. You will always have a handful of bad ones, no matter what breed of dog they are, but the fact that people are more likely to get bitten by a chihuahua than by a pit bull should speak for itself. The negative stereotype comes from these jackwagons who breed and raise pits for illegal dog fighting. Just as with anything, it only takes a few to make the rest look bad.

 

[SangueLuna]

A lot of dog breeds are very hard to raise and a lot have aggression because essentially they are animals. Small dog breeds are very aggressive but since they are small, they make less of an impact when it comes to injurious. However, Pit Bulls are not essentially aggressive dogs (false myth), they are actually dogs that want to please their owner. They will do anything the owner tells them, including fighting. The only thing against them is their bite. They have a nasty bite when provoked and that is why so many of them get put down. It is not so much they have an aggression, but like any dog they can easily attack. Dogs are still animals and many people forget that.

A lot of cases were a Pit Bull attacks is usually during a domestic dispute or some sort chaos happening. In some cases it is how the person walked up to the dog and if that dog was not trained properly, they may snap in fear or curiosity. In result, they can do major damage.

But, I have seen countless dog breeds who are aggressive but nobody makes mention of them. The problem is the Pit Bull became the breed of the moment. Years ago it was the Rotwieler and Doberman... Now the Pit Bull. People always do this and no, no dog should be banned. They should have good owners and owners should be trained to raise their dog properly... But I do not think they should be banned. It is dumb to ban an animal.

 

[Dragon Mage]

Pit Bulls

Okay.

I was at my grandmother's house once, and she was going to a neighbor's for dinner, who also had visiting family. This visiting family had brought their pets along as well, with the result of nearly 16 animals (cats and dogs) in a small house.


One of these dogs was a pit bull. We had blocked off the kitchen from the living room with a wooden gate meant to keep animals/kids out of certain rooms in order to keep the dogs out of the kitchen, and the pit bull -- Lucy -- was very unhappy with this arrangement. She sat in front of the wooden gate and barked constantly. I mean constantly.
I was closest to the gate, and after having my ears nearly being shredded by her powerful lungs, I turned and said, "Hush!" and snapped my fingers at her. This is how I discipline my own dogs, by snapping the fingers, and they respond quickly.

But Lucy immediately disliked me after that. After dinner, we all retired to the living room to chat a little, but when I sat down, Lucy immediately stood in front of me and growled and barked at me like I was an intruder. All attempts to shut her up didn't work. Finally, fed up with the dog, I moved into the kitchen where she followed. I moved around the large kitchen table and she chased me, barking nonstop! Desperate, I finally ran outside. And to this end, Lucy ran through the doggie door to the backyard and proceeded to bark and lunge at the fence in an attempt to get to me.

So, this is why I think pitbulls are risky pets. Now to be absolutely clear, I don't think they're dangerous to the family that owns them. But when I challenged that dog described above -- Lucy -- she immediately became aggressive to me and only me. She also sat ON my mother on the couch, and shoved her face into my mother's face. That's a dominance display. The only threat these dogs could potentially pose is to those that inadvertently challenge them or their family. Ever since this incident, I've been very nervous around these dogs.

I understand that a lot of it has to do with personal temperament of each dog, and that dog's past experiences, but it still scares me. But know that Lucy was very young, barely a year old, so there couldn't have been any negative experiences involving someone that resembles me. The owner runs a Humane Society and calls out to find homes to adopt all sorts of pets -- animal abuse is the least likely thing you'd find in that house. I know that pit bulls are very protective and loyal creatures, and I respect that and think that makes them great pets for the family -- but not necessarily everyone else.

But I think caution should be used when adopting these pets, and exposing them to lots of strangers. Not euthanasia, just -- caution. The owner's family thought it was funny how she chased me around the kitchen several times. I was terrified.


So, what do you think?