Posted by ( Ethel Carlyle ) on January 08, 2008 at 10:31 am

I had a neighbor that owned several pit bulls, actually bred these dogs and every member of that family had been bitten by these pit bulls, because they would fight among themselves and then what ever got in the way arms, legs any body part was bitten.  it is not easy to keep dogs from fighting but the pits once they latch on it is about impossible to get them off. one day they could not get back in their house due to fighting of the dogs inside.also some insurance companies will not insure your home if you own one of these dogs.

Posted by ( liza conway ) on January 09, 2008 at 8:55 am

Dogs are not born bad or mean.  The owner of the dog has not done a good job raising and training the dog.
Any dog tied up on a heavy chain that is left alone outside it’s entire life 24/7 , living a bored life in it’s own waste in a mud pit can and probably will become anti social and territorial.

Dogs are social beings. We as humans have become their “pack”. Dogs want to be with their owner,not ALONE OUTSIDE in all weather conditions it’s entire life.
Please call ANIMAL CONTROL in your bristol neighborhood and speak up for these chained /tethered dogs. They are sad and pitiful sights. You know it crosses your mind how sad they look. Take a stand end this cruel practice in Bristol. Call Animal Control and report these sad cases. I bet if you look close enough most of these sad dogs are not wearing a rabies tag or a license as mandated by the city, use that as your reason to call Animal Control.  Become a voice for the chained and tethered miserable dogs of Bristol.
thank you

Posted by ( Tracy Taylor ) on January 10, 2008 at 9:32 am

I think most people react to stories about pit bulls and bully breeds on an emotional level first.  And, I think that is only human. 

However, as an owner who tries to be responsible with my pit bulls, I would like to point out that, contrary to popular belief, pit bulls do NOT have any special “locking jaw” (as one of my neighbors claims), and that any large dog can bite with enough force to break a human bone (why do you think they wear those large padded suits while training police dogs?).  There have been documented cases of more than fifty breeds causing fatalities, including a yorkie and a cocker spaniel.  Once one breed is banned, it becomes very easy to add another to the list, then another, and another. 

The question becomes--where do we stop the banning?  If a pomeranian is left alone with a baby and kills it, do we ban all pomeranians?  Ownership of any dog is a responsibility, and any dog can create problems.  Owners must be required to take responsibility, just as parents can be held responsible for the actions of their minor children.

Posted by ( Jenny Schooler ) on January 17, 2008 at 9:51 am

Wow, this is exactly the way that people get so misinformed about a particular topic.  Firstly, when I read the blog, it says:

“And, as the pit bull breeder states in the tricities.com story found here - http://www.tricities.com/tristate/tri/search.apx.-content-articles-TRI-2008-01-02-0028.html - requiring that pit bulls be “fixed” and be muzzled in public is an absolute must.”

NOT A BREEDER COMMENT!!! When you actually read the story, it is Debbie Dobbs, Director of Washington County Animal Control who says that.

As the owner of a pit bull I am faced everyday with the bad rap that these dogs get.  Most of it is not true.  Dogs are identified in the news as pit bulls when they are not.  Some of them are, and I don’t think any breed is without a few bad apples.  But, the preconcieved notion that pit bulls are mean leads to misidentified dogs and people watching or reading the news who become misinformed (just like readers of this blog may be misinformed about ‘breeder comments’)

Here’s a fun test, find the pit bull: http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html Can YOU correctly identify the pit bull?

Go to my URL for more info and eyecandy.  I have taken this issue up as a major cause in my life.

Posted by ( Jody Lee ) on January 23, 2008 at 8:10 pm

This reply is for Jenny of Johnson City, but it contains alot of researched information and is worth reading for any who happen across it:

First of all, I did indeed err in citing the reference for the quote.  The story switched from Williams back to Dobbs when offering quotes from the two women and I failed to catch it.  My bad.

I fail, however, to see how this misinformation effects the point of my comments or adds to a supposedly false impression about pit bulls.  Who made the comment has nothing to do with my assertion that the comment is, in my opinion, a sound one.  It was an error on my part, no doubt, but hardly one that negates my entire argument or ANY part of it, for that matter.

So on to your claims.  Let’s find out where the IMPORTANT misinformation lies.

Pit bulls are really sweethearts, eh?  Their reputation is unearned and unfair?  They are no worse than any other breed, via your comment that “every breed has a few bad apples”?  Quite an assertion on your part, so let’s check it out.

First of all, you refer to misidentifications, but according to the dictionary “pit bull is a term commonly used to describe several types of dogs with similar physical characteristics.” So the term actually does encompass more than one particular dog.

A study published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association reported that “Pit-bull type dogs and Rottweilers were involved in one half of approximately 300 dog bite related fatalities in the US.

Another study of American and Canadian dog bite related fatalities from September 1982 to November 2006 produced similar results, reporting that Pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% fatal dog attacks, and that “Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient severity to be listed, pit bull terriers are noteworthy for attacking adults almost as frequently as children.”

From the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) comes a study concerning deaths from canine attacks in 2000.  According to the study,between 1979 and 1998, one-third of all fatal dog attacks were caused by Pit Bull type dogs. The highest number of attacks (118) were by Pit Bull type dogs, the next highest being Rottweilers at 67.

From a pit bull rescue site: “Originally used as fighting dogs, the powerful American Pit Bull may go for the throat of strange dogs.  Socialize very thoroughly when young to combat aggressive tendencies and be sure to keep the dog under control when other dogs are present.”

Again and again, studies (not to mention common sense) show and experts agree that a pit bull must be trained from puppyhood with special methods and special care in order to overcome their natural aggressive tendencies.  Without such training from birth, those tendencies can and likely will rise quickly to the surface, and the dog becomes a slave to the fight that has been bred into him, making him unsafe and unstable.

Since owners cannot at this point be monitored so that the world knows that they have received proper training in how to train a pit bull, it is only fair that the dogs be muzzled and leashed whenever they are outside of their home.

All of this information just reenforces my assertion that laws requiring that the owners be properly trained in how to train their pit bulls and laws requiring that pit bulls undergo such training should be mandatory.  Conditions must be set under which owning a pit bull is allowable.  I am not suggesting that banning the ownership of pit bulls should be pursued.  But given the unarguable genetic predisposition of pit bulls, surely you agree that ownership conditions should be set, for the dog’s sake as well as that of society.

“The pit bull’s ancestors were bred from bulldogs, who were selectively bred to participate in an inhumane blood sport called baiting. In this sport, a dog was trained to attack a bull, bear or other large animal around the face and head, and had to hang on without releasing his grip until the animal became exhausted from fighting and from loss of blood. When animal baiting was banned in the early 1800s, people began to make their dogs fight against each other instead. As this sport gained popularity, enthusiasts developed a lighter, more athletic dog by breeding bulldogs with black and tan terriers. Known as bull and terriers, these dogs are the forefathers of today’s pit bulls.”

Even the ASPCA says “Pit bull puppies need more than the average amount of socializing with other dogs--to ensure that they enjoy the company of dogs and to modify their natural play behavior, which is often rougher than that of other breeds - pit bulls are extremely tenacious and stubborn. They easily become highly aroused and, when in such an agitated state, often have little control over their behavior if they have not been taught to inhibit their impulses. Hence, pit bulls have a reputation for being more mouthy and bite harder in play than other breeds. They are also relatively impervious to pain.”

The ASPCA also notes that “their intimidating appearance has made them attractive to the wrong sorts of owners - people who are looking for a macho dog and end up encouraging aggressive behavior. In order to meet the growing demand for pit bulls, unscrupulous and uncaring breeders are producing puppies without maintaining the breed’s typical reliability with people. In fact, pit bulls are now notorious for redirecting aggression from a dog to any person who attempts to break up a fight. It is a shame what has happened to this loyal and affectionate breed.”

It IS a shame. For most dogs, if you do not train them properly, they pick up annoying and unruly habits.  They do not as a rule become violent when their owner neglects giving them effective training.  That is because most breeds are not genetically predisposed to attack.  Pits are.

In the section About the Breed on your web site you write “Most of them are simply too friendly to protect a house against strangers.”

Isn’t that misleading, given all of this information? 

You yourself acknowledge that “A dog (pit bull) that was previously non-dog aggressive may “turn-on” and suddenly doesn’t like other dogs of the same sex, or, for that matter, any dogs at all, even housemates they have been raised with.” Your words, your web site.  Given this very unpredictability that you refer to and acknowledge, how can you NOT insist there be ownership restrictions? 

You also write “A Pit Bull that shows unprovoked human aggression (puppy play nips do NOT count) is showing BAD temperament and in most cases should be put to sleep. Such a dog should obviously NEVER be bred under any circumstances. “

You are right.  But they ARE bred, every day.  And until that practice is somehow stopped, since you and I agree that a breed ban is not what we want, surely some ownership restrictions are called for.

Respectfully,
Jody Lee

Posted by ( Brad ) on February 02, 2008 at 3:09 pm

http://dogtime.com/michael-vick-dogs-public.html

Also, check out the video.

The people who want to ban these dogs are the same type that want to ban Mcdonalds for making people fat and unhealthy or ban gun makers for deaths of people shot by their firearms. Why can humans not be responsible for what their dogs do?  Punish the owners of ALL aggressive dogs regardless of breed.  I’ve been bitten more by my parents 20 lb. poodle (hundreds of times) than I have my 2 American Bulldogs 90 & 105 lbs.(none).  They are NOT pit-bulls but are considered the same under this legislation.