Pitbulls kills 3 day old baby

a reply to: Zaphod58

Even shelters misidentify dogs as Pitbulls.

I bet they don't misidentify cats as pit bulls.

The different Pit breeds have nothing to do with it.

You are probably right. 90% of the dogs are either chihuahua or Skye terriers.

Many owners of pit breeds refuse to even admit that their dogs are pits..... mainly because of the stigma attached.
Pits were (and still are) bred as a fighting dog. If you don't believe that, check with Michael Vick.

a reply to: butcherguy

Where have I ever said they weren't? That doesn't mean that they're aggressive killing machines, contrary to popular opinion on ATS. God forbid people let facts get in the way of their opinions.

People do mistake dogs as pits all the time ... I think they have such a fear of them that they see them everywhere.
I have been asked 4-5 times if this dog is a pit bull ...



He is a 40 pound pointer / blue heeler. This is a younger picture of him, he has a lot more heeler freckles now. I think they see his lean muscular build and the half perked ears and automatically think "pit"! When I tell them his mix I get these looks like "yeah, right". There are a lot of people that have no clue what a pit looks like.

Ollie and I have said hello to many pits on our walks and they have all been sweet dogs. But you could tell they had responsible owners who worked hard at keeping them well socialized.

I have nothing against pits. But I do have a very simple rule in my house. I will not own any animal that could kill me if it went crazy and decided to attack.

I own cats. If a cat went crazy, I could drop kick it across the room.

I would own a small dog for the same reasons.

And no, I wouldn't leave a cat, a small dog, of any other creature in the same room with an untended infant. I might be able to drop kick a cat, but a 3 day old baby could not.

Note for the animal lovers: Just to be clear, I do not abuse my cats! I love my cats.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: butcherguy

Where have I ever said they weren't? That doesn't mean that they're aggressive killing machines, contrary to popular opinion on ATS. God forbid people let facts get in the way of their opinions.

Where did I say that they all are aggressive killing machines?
We have no real idea of what the dogs owners are like in this story.
They could be breeding dogs for a dogfighting ring for all I know.
I mentioned that there are a lot of pit bulls in the list for dog attack fatalities and of course, every owner of former owner of pit bulls take offense to it.

I will not disagree that pit bulls have a reputation that is undeserved in most cases.
But it isn't a fluke that they have the reputation.

It's funny how you all are so quickly to judge when you don't even know the circumstances...

I see alot of Pro dog people, you're sorta right the owner is responsible for most cases but in the end of the day...A DOG IS A DOG...which is a wild animal. If you actually believe dogs are domesticated you're a fool.

originally posted by: BLee8127
It's funny how you all are so quickly to judge when you don't even know the circumstances...

I see alot of Pro dog people, you're sorta right the owner is responsible for most cases but in the end of the day...A DOG IS A DOG...which is a wild animal. If you actually believe dogs are domesticated you're a fool.

I think you might want to review the definition of domesticated. Dogs are the archetype for domesticated species.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: butcherguy

Pointing out that many if not most of those may not even be a pitbull isn't taking offense, it's pointing out that they're maligned and misidentified, which if you read the articles you'd see is true.

How much of that reputation is from people? How much is because they claim that a pitbull attacked when it wasn't? Yes a pitbull can easily kill someone, so can a lot of dogs. When actual scientific studies are done, amazingly the pitbull has a totally different result than you see in the news or message boards. Yet you never hear that, do you.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Pointing out that many if not most of those may not even be a pitbull isn't taking offense, it's pointing out that they're maligned and misidentified, which if you read the articles you'd see is true.

The articles that you posted do not prove mis-identification in the list of fatalities.

originally posted by: BLee8127.

.A DOG IS A DOG...which is a wild animal. If you actually believe dogs are domesticated you're a fool.

If that were true they would all resemble the wolves they were tamed from 30+ KA. They don't and they're not. They were Homo Sapiens Sapiens first domestication project and judging by the wide array of dog breeds today, quite a successful venture.

a reply to: butcherguy

So people misidentifying dogs as Pitbulls has no effect on dog bite statistics. They're miraculously able to identify a Pitbull every time there's a dog attack, without doing DNA checks to see what kind of dog they are. The media and witnesses are suddenly 100% accurate when there's a fatality.

Seriously? That makes even the LEAST bit of sense to you?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
There was an actual study done in 2013, that looked at hundreds of dog bites in the US, many of which were claimed to be Pitbull bites. In 80% of them they couldn't positively identify the breed of dog involved. ANY dog that has a square head is identified as a Pitbull when it comes to dog bite statistics, which blows their bites out of proportion.

Not so fast.

dogsbite site

DogsBite.org - For 25-years appellate courts have ruled that a dog owner of ordinary intelligence can identify a pit bull (See: Ohio v. Anderson, 1991). In addition to this, the high courts have ruled that scientific precision is not required when determining the breed (See: Colorado Dog Fanciers v. Denver, 1991). Yet still the myth persists ad nauseam -- pushed by the Pit Bull Propaganda Machine, pit bull advocates, animal groups and more -- that it is impossible to identify a pit bull.

Readers are familiar with this myth, which has variations like, "it is impossible to identify a pit bull" and "pit bulls can't be identified," and the mothership motto, "there is no such thing as a pit bull." In a series of 8 memes, directly quoting high court rulings, we highlight how the high courts have ruled on this subject. The courts have ruled that a pit bull is a breed of dog with distinctive traits that can be recognized by its physical appearance by a dog owner of ordinary intelligence.

In the 11-year period of 2005 through 2015, canines killed 360 Americans. Pit bulls contributed to 64% (232) of these deaths. Combined, pit bulls and rottweilers contributed to 76% of the total recorded deaths

a reply to: reldra

I didn't say they COULDN'T be identified, I said they're MIS-identified. So you're going to argue with actual vets and scientists that did the study that they're somehow dumber than the average person and they can't identify dog breeds.

But you guys are right, Pitbulls are evil and just ban them. Hell, why not eliminate the breed and get it over with. Then we can move on to the next breed, and the next, and the next.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: reldra

I didn't say they COULDN'T be identified, I said they're MIS-identified. So you're going to argue with actual vets and scientists that did the study that they're somehow dumber than the average person and they can't identify dog breeds.

But you guys are right, Pitbulls are evil and just ban them. Hell, why not eliminate the breed and get it over with. Then we can move on to the next breed, and the next, and the next.

I am going by the courts, that on average, a dog owner of average intelligence can correctly identify a pit bull. I cannot say that axactly 100% of of the dogs on the list identified as pit bulls in fact were, but based on court rulings, I would say that misidentification is not the norm.

Especially for this case, in the OP, one post says 'shar pei mix'. The Shar pei part would be the lesser part, the dog was obviously, mainly, a pit bull.

originally posted by: CB328
Some people are too stupid to exist, IMO. Why are so many Americans too stupid to realize that dangerous things are dangerous? I can't believe that people still defend these monsters in spite of all evidence and common sense. I wonder if anyone will be prosecuted over this?

Why would you want anyone to be persecuted over a dog attack?

a reply to: BrianFlanders

True. I don't want to see anyone prosecuted. It was an accident. The dog can't stand trial and has been removed. The animal will likely be euthanized.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
Dogs don't kill people

Well, apparently they do...

originally posted by: trollz

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
Dogs don't kill people

Well, apparently they do...

They do. I wonder why your IQ is in your bottom banner? Mine is somewhat higher and I would posit that others on here have an even higher IQ than mine. Sorry about OT, I just wondered why.

a reply to: trollz it's usually the owners fault though isn't it? Or those who breed the dog to fight and kill

Pitbulls arent bad dogs. Dogs who receive bad training, or no training are bad dogs. Pitbulls are the original babysitter dog. My kids all grew up with pitts. They lounged on them with their blankets while sucking their thumbs. There were never any bites. When a small child is here, My pitts will, as if instinctivly, come and lay next to them as if they are on duty as a nanny. A 3 year old boy was here recently asleep on the sofa. My female blue nose went up on the sofa and curled around him and under his head to make a pillow for his head. At first the childs mother was alarmed for a second, then she saw what was up and was at ease.
Ive had all kinds of dogs the years. My lab was goofy. My Queensland was unpredictable, and my golden retriever shed and smelled bad. None of them were anywhere near as intelligent as the 3 pitts I have had. The male I have now can even speak. He has called me Dad before, very clearly, and always says hello when I come home from work.