North Carolina ban to Kill Numerous Breeds

[deerman]

Quote:
have to disagree pure pits when giving the command, to attack.....hardest dog to stop. yes not likely to attack just someone breaking in.

 

[dainerra]

What ranch said!

I own a GSD. I can tell you that it wasn't that long ago that they were exactly where the pit is nowm. They were THE dog of thugs and lowlifes. Even more, they are naturally larger than a pit and have been bred since the foundation of the breed to have civil aggression (willingness to bite people).
Owning a GSD, I can tell you that we are STILL fighting this reputation.

At one time it was the rottie. At another, the dobe. They still deal with the consequences of being a fad dog as well.

The only common denominator in these situations is the owners.

I'm posting from my phone again, but last year(?) There was a baby killed by a pom. Know what happaned? Yup. Newborn baby left alone with the dog. Dead baby.

The more popular the breed, the more likely of an incident. 40% of fatalities was from pits. But pits and all the breeds lumped into that category by the public make up much more than 40% of the dog population.
We don't have 40 dead people, or even 40 bites, for ever 100 pits. I've seen estimates of over 4 million pits in America. We def don't have 400,000 dog bites a year.

 

[Jamie_Dog_Trainer]

Maybe it is the area I have worked in for the past 13 years, but I have seen many Pits and Amstaffs that had such poor temperament they bit people. Off hand I know of four that I worked with, and that isn't going back very far in my professional history. Of those that bit people there are several more I can think of that mauled dogs that they were raised with in their own homes. In two of these situations these dogs were pointed show dogs and owned by different trainers I know.

I am not arguing that Pits or Amstaffs are horrible dogs -- but there are many cases of very poor temperament, at least where I live.

I'm not for banning the breed or any breed, but there's got to be better breeding and culling even in so-called quality breeders lines. Its not just education, it comes from the sources of breeders, and consumers, and then down the line is the ignorance that seems especially bad in these powerful breed circles. I am frustrated with this as well. I love a good Pitty or Amstaff.

Edit to clarify my point: Pitts as a breed aren't terrible, but their breeding is getting worse IMO. Something has to be done about it.

 

[deerman]

Quote:
I no way said 40% of pits attack. just that 40% of fatalities are from one breed...the nerest to that 13% thats a big spread.

my breed is also the GSD which was only 3% , my guess with out checking the GSD attacked more than pits.

better odd surviving a GSD attack than a Pit bull Attack

Sorry didn't mean to turn this thread all about pits....

 

[dainerra]

and at onme time those numbers were reversed. GSDs were the dog of ch oice for thugs and lowlifes. Are they still owned by clueless people. Yes, but there has also been a HUGE amount of work by responsible breeders to bring the GSD back to what it should be.

Locally, there isn't a GSD that I would touch with a 10ft pole. Backyard bred, skittish, terrible temperamnets. Same goes for labs. There are 3 HORRIBLE labs, extremely aggressive on the road my in-laws live on.

Responsible pit breeders and owners are working to keep the breed as it should be. I don't count those "sunshine and roses" owners who think you can love a pit into being non-dog aggressive as responsible. Just as I don't count the lab owner who walks his dog on a 20ft flex-lead and charges anything he sees while the owner yells "he just wants to say hi" as responsible.

Is there a reason to ban pits? No. Unfortunately,though, we can't ban stupid people either.

 

[PurpleChicken]

It's funny that many people mentioned Labs. In the northeast I've never met an aggressive Lab, just an occasional anxious one.

I did have 2 Labs chase me on my Harley through a Louisiana back road last week. They almost caught me because I was laughing so hard at them and keeping just a hair ahead of them.

I'm saddened to hear that people are messing up that breed too.

 

[ChickenWisperer]

Quote:
If only if only!

 

[deerman]

Quote:
I'M like you , matter of fact i have yet to see a mean Lab.....now lab mixed with something yes.

 

[deerman]

Ok here is info on human kill by what breed of dog.....20 years of records pit bull still top killer of people(by a large number too) over any other breed. The numbers don't lie, just some people can't accept facts.


Dog breeds in general have similar characteristics. Some dog breeds are more likely to kill than others and some breeds are more protective of their masters and physical surrounding than others. There has been a 20 year study to determine which dog breeds are more likely to actually kill human beings. This United States study was done for the years 1979 through 1998.

This study tracks 238 human deaths from dog attacks during a 20 year period. 24% of these attacks involved unrestrained dogs off their owners property. 58% of the deaths involved unrestrained dogs on their owners property. 17% involved restrained dogs on their owners property and less than 1% involved a restrained dog off the owners property.

Some of the conclusions of the study are not suprising. Yes, certain breeds are more likely to kill than others. Yes, deaths from dog attack are quite rare. Also it is sometimes difficult to determine the actual breed of a dog. Communities who try to ban specific dog breeds for public safety will find it difficult to define the parameters of what constitutes that breed.

Several factors interact with the dog to enhance the possibility of a human being attacked by a dog besides the breed of the dog. These factors include heredity, sex, early experience, socialization, training, health, reprodcutive status, quality of ownership and victum behavior. Additionally, this study did not look at intervening variable such as was the dog protecting his owner from serious harm or death or was the dog actually protecting himself from serious harm or death.

Male dogs are 6.2 times more likely to bite then female dogs. Sexually intact dogs,both male and female, are 2.6 more times likely to bite than neutered dogs and chained dogs are 2.8 times more likely to bite then unchained dogs.

One suprising conclusion of several studies is the fact that many varieties of dogs have been involved in a fatal human attack for one reason or another. Topping the list of deaths by dog in a twenty year period is the Pit Bull and Pit Bull mix at 66 human deaths. The Rottweiler and Rottweiler mix was responsibe for 39 human deaths. The German Shepherd dog and mix were responsible for 17 human deaths. The Husky type dog was responsible for 15 human deaths as was the Malamute responsible for 12 human deaths. The Chow Chow was responsible for 8 deaths while the Doberman was responsible for 9 human deaths. The Saint Bernard was responsible for 7 human deaths and the Great Dane was also responsible for 7 deaths. The Akita killed 4 people, the Bulldog 2, the Mastiff 2, the Boxer 2 and believe it or not the Labrador Retriever was responsible for 1 death while Lab mixes were responsible for 4 deaths. The following dogs were responsible for killing one human each during these twenty years: The Bullmastiff, Cheasapeake Bay Retriever, West Highland Terrier, Japanese Hunting Dog, Newfoundland, Coonhound, Sheepdog, Rhodesian Ridgeback and cocker Spaniel.

 

[deerman]

another link , that shows the last 10 years the spread from the pit and other dog breed is getting larger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States