I gotta chime in here.
I think this guy should be dealt with under local laws and if found guilty he should be punished. It looks like he has been dog fighting, which is wrong in the eyes of the law.
Now about Pitt Bulls in general.
Pit Bulls kill people.
About 10 miles from here a 40 yr old lady was attacked by her own pit bull when she tried to break up a fight between her dog and another dog.
She had to have both arms amputated at the shoulder.
They have the potential to maim and kill humans far above that of other domestic breeds. Their heads look like a cinder block and when they start an attack, you just about have to kill them to stop. Pain to them just spurs them on, beat them with a ball bat and they just get more into it.
I don't like them as a breed, esp around kids and when I'm out in public and see one being walked around my kids, I am always ready to respond should something happen.
Now, do responsible owners have the right to own one?
yes
I have the right to own a 500 hp Corvette also, but my Corvette isn't going to kill someone on it's own without me driving it.
I have the right to own a gun, but my gun isn't going to kill someone with out me being involved in pulling the trigger.
So if you own a dog like that, that's your right. But you have the greater responsibility to keep the public safe from your dog. If a dog with that potential is unbalanced or has low esteem it can be uncontrollable by the most experienced owner.
Some pit owners think they are on a mission to change the publics perception of the breed and work to calm people about the "isolated" cases of attacks.
Don't waste your time on me. I don't like the breed and it's might right to be that way.
Make any comparison you want to about cars, guns, alcohol but none of those things kill people without a human being involved.
Pitt Bulls make a decision to attack on their own.
now...let the flaming start:flamethro
First off, I don't think there's any reason for anyone to flame you for that opinion, it's not a ridiculous contention. I also think your logic is pretty good in your agument. I respect your opinion, however I disagree somewhat.
But I do want to clarify, this thread is about Michael Vick who is a murderer of dogs, not really about whether Pits are or aren't dangerous. (Not that the subject isn't worthy of talking about) Whether they are dangerous or not, they don't deserve to be drowned or beaten to death for being a bad fighter.
Why I disagree:
I think Pit Bulls who are killers, do so largely due to human action. Just like "People" become killers as a result of human intervention. Are they more equipped to kill? Well, that's debatable.
They have stronger bites, true. But they aren't as strong as some breeds in other ways (Speed, Body strength, neck strength) and haven't as large a tooth as many dogs, such as Germans, Rots, etc. Pits are most lethal vs. other dogs, because their ergonomics are more suited to killing dogs, but other larger dogs are much more lethal to humans. And the "Locking Jaw" phenomenon is an urban myth.
The infamous locking jaw is a myth. The American Pit Bull Terrier and related breeds are physiologically no different from any other breed of dog. All dogs are from the same species and none have locking jaws. Dr. I Lehr Brisbin of the University of Georgia states, "To the best of our knowledge, there are no published scientific studies that would allow any meaningful comparison to be made of the biting power of various breeds of dogs. There are, moreover, compelling technical reasons why such data describing biting power in terms of 'pounds per square inch' can never be collected in a meaningful way. All figures describing biting power in such terms can be traced to either unfounded rumor or, in some cases, to newspaper articles with no foundation in factual data." Furthermore, Dr. Brisbin states, "The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of pit bulls show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of 'locking mechanism' unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier."
All large dogs are capable of killing. So, I say that an adult owner who owns a German Shepard has the same amount of responsibility of leashing, controlling, and knowing his dogs temperament. Attack dogs attack because their owners have trained them to be that way.
These stigmas go in cycles. Remember when the bad breed used to be a Doberman? Before that, it was the German Shepard.
Secondly, their viciousness is a myth. Pits have been proven (via something scientists...specifically zoologists... call "temperment tests".) that their temperament is less aggressive or vicious than the average dog.
It is reported on temperament tests conducted by the American Temperament Test Society that Pit Bulls had a passing rate of 82% or better -- compared to only 77% of the general dog population.
Some have other tests show Pits to be higher in temperment ratings, however non show them to be more aggressive than average.
Pit Bulls are one of the most stable people-friendly dogs in existence. The National Canine Temperament Testing Association tested 122 breeds, and Pit Bulls placed the 4th highest with a 95% passing rate!
So, the stats don't support any of the Pit Bull scare mythos. In order to ban Pits, one would have to ban all dogs that are potentially lethal. Where do we draw the line? Cocker spaniels? Collies? Chows?
Now here's where I agree with you 90. While I do think that humans are responsible for attacks in training, I do concede that any large breed can have an "episode" and maim or kill someone. Similarly to a gun, it's the owner's responsibility to control their dog.
I know what you're going to say, but guns don't kill people on their own, dogs do. I get it, but while a gun must have a trigger pulled, a dog owner must lose control of their dog in order for it to kill. In other words, the owner not having control, or a sufficient barrier controlling the dog is equivalent to pulling the trigger on a gun. That's where your human intervention causes a dog bite, by NOT controlling their dog.
But then you come to whether you should trust the average human to be responsible with their dog or not. I have a hard time trusting the average person out there with anything lethal be it a car, dog, gun, poison, drugs, whatever.
My personal experience is that I've never met a mean or vicious pit. In fact, they've all been sweet and very safe dogs.
In either case, using dogs (any breed) for dog fighting is putrid, disgusting behavior I think we all agree...fry that *******!
