September 29th, 2004, 10:36 AM
With all of the media focussing on dog attacks lately, I see that the majority of the dogs doing the attacking are being labelled as "pit bull". Who is affixing the breed to the dogs? Is it the media? Are the owners forthcoming with theinformation of the breeds of these dogs? Is the guy who lives next door deciding what breed the aggressor is? Or the police? Or, is a professional called in to assess the breed?
As we may be aware, it is hard to distinguish a pit bull from some of the other similar-looking breeds out there. Many of us have looked at and taken the test offered at: http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
I just wonder how it is decided and by whom by press time, which seems to be instantaneous. If an attack has occured, only a few hours go by before we learn about it.
September 29th, 2004, 10:53 AM
If you give this test to most people they don't pick the pit bull I have more seen more people pick the Boxer or the Presa. Most people assume any dog with a big head and is muscular is a pit. If they only had a clue what they looked like before deciding they need to be banned that would be a start. I have idiots tell me that my dog is the biggest pit bull they have ever seen and the dog should be killed. I then try to tell them that not every dog that is muscular with a big head is a pit bull and they really need to learn what they look like before they assume and make rude comments to the owners about having their dogs killed. I do as much as I want to tell them where to go, I try and educate them since this is not the time to give these people the wrong impressions of dogs and owners we need to stick together and beat this ban
September 29th, 2004, 11:09 AM
I take the same tack as you: education. While my dogs are not related to the pit bull family, the are large and do seem ominous to passersby. The information I bestow on people is about the "halti" or "gentle leaders" that my dogs wear, by my choice. Currently, London is about to embark on the "pit bull banning" bandwagon and "muzzle all large dogs" train. Just this morning, a lady commented that it was a shame that my dogs and all dogs must now be subjected to muzzles. This is not (yet) the case, but I saw that she is aware of the dog issues of the times and does not agree with an all-dog muzzling law. I took the opportunity to explain and demonstrate that the devices my dogs were wearing were actually NOT muzzles, and explained the difference between the two. She was fascinated at the ease with which I could lead and control my dogs and glad that I did not feel the need to muzzle my dogs.
Sorry this is slightly off topic, but I feel it needed to be shared.
September 29th, 2004, 04:39 PM
that situation in england is jsut disgusting and foul. ppl are so racist or breedist which ever you like.
i would never muzzle my dog, if she was dangerous yes i would but until then, nope, i would happily get charged for it, it is too cruel, there is a big difference between the gentle leader nad a muzzle, poor dogs.
i am sort of lucky, around here dogs are not respected very much and are not any real priority. but at least in that situation we can go pretty much undetected because no one cares about our presence and consider her just a dog. and being in a rural area with lots of farmers it hopefully will never happen.
that stinks :mad:
September 30th, 2004, 09:48 AM
I was talking to some people at my work about this, and some friends who work in the media.
When they use "Pitt Bull" they are referring to any dog that is commonly associated with dog fighting (staff terriers, pitt bulls, rottwielers, boxers, etc. I know my spelling sucks). It's a media trick to "spark" peoples attention.
When I was watching City TV the other day and they were talking about a vicious "pitt bull" attack on an 18 year old girl which they would talk about later in the program. When they did the story, it was acutally two staffordshire terriers, not 2 pitt bulls. It was their way of making all those "pitt bull haters" tune in and watch their new instead of another channel.
all I can say is...never trust the media.
September 30th, 2004, 10:16 AM
Just to clarify, the London I am from is in Ontario, not England, as some may have thought, and yes, the possible proposed ideas of muzzling all dogs and banning breeds is sickening and unfair, no matter which part of the world we live in...
September 30th, 2004, 12:19 PM
I think the biggest problem with the pitbulls is that they are a "status symbol" for gangs and street kids. I work in Toronto, Ontario, and all around there are either gangs or homeless kids with pitbulls, boxers, rotties, etc, and they train them to be vicious. They get them as puppies, and keep them outside in chains, and the badder the better. There's a group of kids...maybe I gang, I don't know, near my house. They have one that I overhear them training all the time to attack etc. It's really starting to freak people out. I have to walk by them daily walking home. But because the dog hasn't done anything wrong *yet* they won't do anything about it, or the kids. I know one day that thing will get loose and seriously hurt someone or something.
I think if there is any legislation, it should be against people like that. You shouldn't be allowed to train a dog to attack or train it to be vicious. If there were less kids getting a hold of these dogs, training them to be bad, and vicious, I don't think there would be so many problems, and so many of these dogs in shelters. I know that some of these gangs breed them for cash as well.
September 30th, 2004, 01:19 PM
MAYBE they should make anyone that wants a pit bull be put through some kind of interview process,dont ban the dogs screen the buyers
September 30th, 2004, 01:25 PM
I totally agree with you 100%. They should do this to anyone who wants to own ANY type of dog. Maybe we could cut back on animal abuse and neglect altogether....
September 30th, 2004, 01:44 PM
It really is the only thing i can think that would help with the pit bull problem,screen people that want to own one,make them carry some kind of id in there wallet....I dont know sounds crazy but necessary
September 30th, 2004, 01:55 PM
I just did that Pit Bull test and it was crazy!!!! If you are not a professional (which I am not) you would not be able to tell the difference. You would just assume that they were all Pit Bulls if seeing them all seperately and not side by side. Side by side you can see all the little, or big, differences. I was able to find the right one right away but my friend and his girlfriend own two pure breds that pretty much look exactly like that one. If I had never met these dogs I am sure I would have picked the wrong one over and over again. It just goes to show that people can be easily mislead and are most definitely making a wrong accusation time and time again.
Such beautiful dogs - I hope the Provincial ban does not go through :(
September 30th, 2004, 02:22 PM
I just did this test with the ppl I work with and you guessed it nobody could pick the pit. lol. I think this should be sent out to all the media. Also I was trying to remeber the famous pits over the years such as Petey from little rascals. Someone posted a list at one time, does anyone remember?? Thanks K :)
September 30th, 2004, 02:47 PM
I have given the test at the dog park and you would not believe how many got it wrong. Even some of the pit owners messed up. More people picked the Presa and the Boxer. Shows even people who are against the the ban make mistakes. I picked the pit but I have to admit I looked long and hard at them.
September 30th, 2004, 02:49 PM
It took me 7 tries.....not all that great, eh?