• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Pitbulls - Love 'em or Hate 'em?

Pitbulls, what's your opinion of them?


  • Total voters
    54
A large dog poses a significantly greater intrinsic risk to public safety than a firearm or motor vehicle, yet their ownership in most societies isn't subject to nearly as much scrutiny.

What? My dog is more of a threat to society than a gun in the wrong hands? More of a threat than a car piloted by someone who's not quite lucid or distracted? Somehow, I doubt that claim has any merit.

A car, of itself, will do nothing. A gun, of itself, will do nothing. A dog, of itself, can attack and potentially kill someone. Negligence on the part of the owner, as with a gun or a car, can contribute to a greater or lesser degree, but a dog remains largely an autonomous agent.
 
A large dog poses a significantly greater intrinsic risk to public safety than a firearm or motor vehicle, yet their ownership in most societies isn't subject to nearly as much scrutiny.

What? My dog is more of a threat to society than a gun in the wrong hands? More of a threat than a car piloted by someone who's not quite lucid or distracted? Somehow, I doubt that claim has any merit.

A car, of itself, will do nothing. A gun, of itself, will do nothing. A dog, of itself, can attack and potentially kill someone. Negligence on the part of the owner, as with a gun or a car, can contribute to a greater or lesser degree, but a dog remains largely an autonomous agent.
Nothing for it but to exterminate all life with the potential to kill a human. :borg:

That leaves... smelt?
 
Nothing for it but to exterminate all life with the potential to kill a human. :borg:

Not at all, most people don't keep sharks, box jellyfish, or grizzly bears as pets, and those who do don't generally take them for walks in the park.
 
Nothing for it but to exterminate all life with the potential to kill a human. :borg:

Not at all, most people don't keep sharks, box jellyfish, or grizzly bears as pets, and those who do don't generally take them for walks in the park.
What difference does it make whether an animals is kept as a pet or is usually found in a park? A dangerous animal is a dangerous animal, an can be encountered at any time. I once saw a video of a rabid fox run crazily into a bar, bite one woman on the leg, chase another on top of a table, and run off back out the door.
 
I have never encountered a dangerous animal that wasn't a dog unless I consider jackjumper ant to be dangerous animals - they actually kill more Tasmanians than spiders, snakes, sharks and wasps combined but are only dangerous to the 3% of Tasmanians that are allergic to them which I am not (but one of my sons is).

Luckily we do not have rabies in Australia, and no foxes in Tasmania.
 
Nothing for it but to exterminate all life with the potential to kill a human. :borg:

Not at all, most people don't keep sharks, box jellyfish, or grizzly bears as pets, and those who do don't generally take them for walks in the park.
What difference does it make whether an animals is kept as a pet or is usually found in a park?

The difference is that one exists within the purview of society and the other does not. Folks die all the time for all sorts of reasons, yet society still regulates certain activities (like driving on public roads) and mandates safety standards (e.g. for electrical equipment) in spite of this. Most societies regulate ownership of pets in a number of ways, from number and species of animal to registration requirements, conditions of treatment, and so forth. Mandating standards of training and behaviour for domestic animals (those with the potential to seriously injure humans) in public spaces is but an extension of that.
 
A large dog poses a significantly greater intrinsic risk to public safety than a firearm or motor vehicle, yet their ownership in most societies isn't subject to nearly as much scrutiny.

What? My dog is more of a threat to society than a gun in the wrong hands? More of a threat than a car piloted by someone who's not quite lucid or distracted? Somehow, I doubt that claim has any merit.

A car, of itself, will do nothing. A gun, of itself, will do nothing. A dog, of itself, can attack and potentially kill someone. Negligence on the part of the owner, as with a gun or a car, can contribute to a greater or lesser degree, but a dog remains largely an autonomous agent.

Okay, now I understand your argument.
 
Fond of dogs in general. Never owned a pitbull, but never had a problem with one either.

I will say that I'd rather live with a pitbull than with someone that's comfortable with wanting to "exterminate" something. Particularly living somethings. Public opinion is ridiculously fickle. Today it's fashionable to want pitbulls "exterminated". Who or what will it be tomorrow?
 
I once saw a video of a rabid fox run crazily into a bar, bite one woman on the leg, chase another on top of a table, and run off back out the door.

That sounds bad
but it ain't nothing compared to a Pittbull once they go psychotic, its a whole other level of carnage. I have never ever heard of somebody dying from getting mauled by a Fox...unless the thing was carrying some weird disease

Public opinion is ridiculously fickle.

No mine isn't I love dogs and I've felt this way for years and years and years about Pittbulls, they are inevitably dangerous fight dogs. They were breed for a specific purpose to maul other animals to death and have no place in our modern society

Today it's fashionable to want pitbulls "exterminated". Who or what will it be tomorrow?

No its not fashionable...I believe my opinion is a little anti-whatever since amnesty international or whoever will always be "think of of the poor owners" and "think of the poor puppies"
My opinion is also perhaps anti-social since its going to cause offense to many Pitt owners in this thread
Unfortunately for them I'm more concerned about the kids who get their face mauled off by these inevitably dangerous "pets"

On a side note, I had some trashy neighbors at one point that had several of them. They used to eat through the fence and run loose around the neighborhood. I heard them making a godawful racket one day, and I looked over the fence and saw two of them ganging up on another one, ripping his chest out. No one was home, so I called animal control. When they finally showed up several hours later, the guy had come home, and I had informed of what was going on. He proceeded to ignore me and kept talking on his cell. Anyway, he's got the dead dog wrapped up in a blanket, stufffing it in his minivan. He talks with the animal control officer for a minute before they shake hands and go their separate ways. I'm glad those assholes moved. Fucking renters.

These is what I'm talking about, those dogs will inevitable return to their savage fighting nature unless supervised 24/7, you put them on chain they can be so strong they can snap the chain clean off....and who has time to watch a dog 24/7...maybe somebody on welfare but even folk on welfare need to eat, to sleep....a Pittbull is not a pet its a fighting machine
I have seen too many of those dogs go bad. Maybe there is some special use for them, maybe the style should not be exterminated, maybe they could use the style of dogs to deter convicts from trying to escape death row, or use them in Iraq or something
but other than some very, very extreme circumstances I see absolutely no need for a dog like this in our modern societies.

Also, I think it's worth noting that there's an elementary school down the street from me and I pass by there with Dixie almost everyday on our walks. Whenever the kids see her, they always get excited and ask me questions. The kids also know she's a Pit and they aren't even remotely afraid.


Sorry dude I know how much a dog can change your life, you love it, it loves you and gives you comfort but I firmly believe this dogs is inevitably dangerous and should not be allowed exist in our modern society.
I would be EXTREMELY concerned you allow this dog interact with children at schools. Some day some poor little innocent child is going to do something stupid while petting your dog, like do some clumsy poke the dog straight in the eye, when a dog like a Pittbull finally does go nuts there is no stopping it. It's not going to be stopped by a simple command like "down girl stay" or even a stopped by a good kick, the dogs are extremly strong fighting dogs.
They also got this thing called "Lock-Jaw" which allows the fighting dog to bite down like a wrench with its teeth
When a dog like yours does go crazy near children be prepared to do anything or else its going to be a massacre. IMO your style of dog should not be anywhere near kids.

Pit bulls have by far more deaths and maimings then any other dog breed. Obviously something within the breed gives them the tendency to be more aggressive. Bad ownership is simply not enough of an excuse for the consistently high number of deaths and maimings by pit bulls over an extended period of time.

It's the whole fighting dog thing. Pittbulls don't just nip, bark and deliver bites like a regular dog, the Pittbulls when they are psycho mode go in for the maul. They got the "LockJaw" business which means when they do go for it they clamp down there's no stopping them.
A variant of the "locking jaw" story is told by Tom Skeldon, Lucas County (Ohio), dog warden, who said that an impounded Pit Bull that had been used in fighting started "going wild," biting at the walls of the kennel. He shot the dog with a tranquilizer, and then left it for five minutes to let it pass out. When he came back the dog had indeed passed out, but not before it had leaped up and clamped its jaws on a cable used to open the door of the kennel. "Everything else was relaxed, the dog was out cold, but its jaws wouldn't let go of that cable, and he was hanging in midair," said Skeldon. "Not even a jaguar will do that."
When the crazed Pitbull bites onto something soft and cushy like a human the teeth in their jaw bites into them like a wrech. Its no good just pulling the dog away because their jaw has clamped down, if you pull the dog off its jaw is going to be coming away with a big chunk of skin, muscle, vascular beds and all kinds of bleeding flesh....they were a highly sucessful animal at mauling other animals to death for a reason.
 
Last edited:
No its not fashionable...I believe my opinion is a little anti-whatever since amnesty international or whoever will always be "think of of the poor owners" and "think of the poor puppies"
My opinion is also perhaps anti-social since its going to cause offense to many Pitt owners in this thread
Unfortunately for them I'm more concerned about the kids who get their face mauled off by these inevitably dangerous "pets"

Did you know a Pitbull was responsible for the largest cocaine bust in history at a US Border Patrol checkpoint? It was a former 'fighting dog' and it's been nothing but an excellent working dog to its handler. What about Sergeant Stubby of the Great War, beloved comrade at arms by his fellow soldiers who also saved the life of a French child? Surely a 'vicious fighting dog' couldn't do that. What of many Pitbulls, even some who were former dogfighters, that function very capably as Search and Rescue dogs in all sorts of terrain? A number of lives were saved by these Pits.

A variant of the "locking jaw" story is told by Tom Skeldon, Lucas County (Ohio), dog warden, who said that an impounded Pit Bull that had been used in fighting started "going wild," biting at the walls of the kennel. He shot the dog with a tranquilizer, and then left it for five minutes to let it pass out. When he came back the dog had indeed passed out, but not before it had leaped up and clamped its jaws on a cable used to open the door of the kennel. "Everything else was relaxed, the dog was out cold, but its jaws wouldn't let go of that cable, and he was hanging in midair," said Skeldon. "Not even a jaguar will do that."

I know the wikipedia article you copied this from quite well. Did you know Pits aren't the only breed with this 'locking jaw' mechanism. Many herding dogs have this as well, and one of the ancestors of the Bull and Terrier from which the Pitbull descends is a herding animal.

inevitable return to their savage fighting nature unless supervised 24/7

Pits function just as well in other roles too, as previously elaborated: Search and Rescue, Counter-narcotics, Cattle Herding and farmwork. As long as you channel all that energy, they're not that bad of a breed of dog.
 
Fond of dogs in general. Never owned a pitbull, but never had a problem with one either.

I will say that I'd rather live with a pitbull than with someone that's comfortable with wanting to "exterminate" something. Particularly living somethings. Public opinion is ridiculously fickle. Today it's fashionable to want pitbulls "exterminated". Who or what will it be tomorrow?

In the 1970's is was German Shepards that were the "dangerous animal" followed by the Doberman Pinscher.

How is it that the Pit Bulls at Michael Vick's place were rehabilitated and adopted out?
 
Dixie was after Katrina. I'm not even sure where.



Well, I like the fearsome reputation that my Pit-Bull has with idiots. That makes her job as the guardian of my family & property (a role that all dogs have by their very nature) a lot easier.


Until she turns on YOU (or a member of YOUR family) and chews you up like a prime rib steak! Personally, I'm not afraid of any dog. I have an AK-47 Phaser Rifle (LOL!!!) that will take care of em in record time -- should a stray one attack me or any member of my family. I certainly would not let my kids spend one nanosecond near such a beast.

So, that's not the issue.

I just don't like the breed. They are four legged ticking timebombs.

The breed should be outlawed. They are genetically more unstable than just about any other breed you can name.

Granted, it's not the dog's fault that they come from a long and ill-trained genetic line...but then, it's not a Great White Shark's fault that it is what it is. Still, I wouldn't want one in my swimming pool...nor would I want to frolic in the surf with one.

All these pitbull owners all call theirs "sweethearts" until one fateful day. Then it's "Chomp"...and to the hospital...and possibly *beyond* the hospital depending upon the victim.

If you like Pitbulls, can I also interest you in a pet Chimpanzee?

Any dog can be vicious. Terriers were bred for hunting, and they can become uncontrollable and unpredictable if their little brains aren't kept occupied. There's nothing worse than what some little dog will do when it goes nuts. The general rule of thumb is anything with small, sharp teeth will do a great deal of damage.

You're nothing more than an overreactive ninny. :rolleyes:

I got yer ninny hangin!

I hope your pitbull turns on you and chews up real good!
 
Those who defend pit bulls also acknowledge that a problem exists.

They have a tendency to place the blame on the owners rather than the breed. Those who revile them tend to place the blame squarely on the dogs. The truth, however, lies somewhere in the middle.

Pit bulls have by far more deaths and maimings then any other dog breed. Obviously something within the breed gives them the tendency to be more aggressive. Bad ownership is simply not enough of an excuse for the consistently high number of deaths and maimings by pit bulls over an extended period of time.

So something has to be done. I can see three solutions.

1. Exterminate pit bulls
2. ban the breeding and force all pit bulls to be nurtured or spaded.
3. Highly restrict ownership and breeding

1 - Cannot be done easily. People love their dogs and will not easily give them up--hell they might kill to protect them.
2 - Is something that will take time, but will eventually phase out the breed. This seems to be the most practical solution.
3 - This doesn't necessarily solve the problem. It only solves the pit bull problem if good ownership stops pit bulls from being aggressive...which well is not a proven point. It would also be the most difficult to administer.

I like option 2.
 
No dog is sweeter than a pug! Especially mine!:)
kisssmall.jpg


couchsmall.jpg

Pugs are cool. I've wanted one ever since seeing Men In Black...:guffaw:
 
"No mine isn't I love dogs and I've felt this way for years and years and years about Pittbulls, they are inevitably dangerous fight dogs. They were breed for a specific purpose to maul other animals to death and have no place in our modern society"

THIS says it perfectly.
 
I've met pit bulls that are docile and sweet.

Yet, I don't care. Pitts, obviously, by looking at attack numbers are vicious dogs (in general) and pose a threat to public safety. The stigma is not just made up---its actually earned.

Yes, good/bad owners affect the nature of their dogs. Not everyone is a good pet owner however. Unless we are going to start doing background checks on people who purchase dogs, then pit bulls need to go the way of the dodo.
You cannot determine that a breed is "vicious" by looking at attack numbers. All overwhelming evidence as to the temperament of the breed is that the dogs are not.
Did you consider the number of pitt bulls, as opposed to say, purebred chow chows? And the per capita results? Otherwise those numbers are meaningless.
What is more reliable, scientific testing of a breed's temperment, or emotional interpretation of statistics?

It's not just "idiotic" owners, there are plenty of stories where the family dog "suddenly" went nuts and bit a kids face off.
Most likely to breed to do that: cocker spaniel.
 
I've met pit bulls that are docile and sweet.

Yet, I don't care. Pitts, obviously, by looking at attack numbers are vicious dogs (in general) and pose a threat to public safety. The stigma is not just made up---its actually earned.

Yes, good/bad owners affect the nature of their dogs. Not everyone is a good pet owner however. Unless we are going to start doing background checks on people who purchase dogs, then pit bulls need to go the way of the dodo.
You cannot determine that a breed is "vicious" by looking at attack numbers. All overwhelming evidence as to the temperament of the breed is that the dogs are not.
Did you consider the number of pitt bulls, as opposed to say, purebred chow chows? And the per capita results? Otherwise those numbers are meaningless.
What is more reliable, scientific testing of a breed's temperment, or emotional interpretation of statistics?

Chows -- now there's an unstable accident waiting to happen. I've read about more children being attacked by Chows than any other dog. Pit Bulls get a bad rap because *TADA* of the media exposure.


It's not just "idiotic" owners, there are plenty of stories where the family dog "suddenly" went nuts and bit a kids face off.
Most likely to breed to do that: cocker spaniel.


Cocker Spaniels. The one breed where the tails should be docked just behind the ears. Talk about a worthless animal.

How come no one mentions Bulldogs? After all, they were bred for fighting and -- err, never mind. That part was BRED OUT.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top