Experiment: Pit Bull Interaction & Attack Poll

[DrDNA]

Sounds a lot like, "I've been smoking for 20 years and it ain't killed me...cough .....cough...."

 

PS: I do conceed that they (in the pics) are beautiful babies, beautiful dogs, look like fun times....

[Marty]

Sounds a lot like, "I've been smoking for 20 years and it ain't killed me...cough .....cough...."

So your telling me this site is totally against Pit bulls?

 

Let me read this thread in it's entirety

 

I'll be back

[DrDNA]

I have been involved with over a hundred Pit bulls and have never been bitten by any, I have been into the breed for over 20 yrs and I can tell you now they were never bred for human aggressive only animal aggressiveness... have any of you read the ATTS Breed Statistics?

 

You know as well as I do, that when a dog is fired up, it doesn't stop to think about what species it is going after.

 

So your telling me this site is totally against Pit bulls?

 

Let me read this thread in it's entirety

 

I'll be back

 

Nope. I'm not saying that at all. Some of these people apparently love Pitbulls A LOT.

[Marty]

To iNow

 

I am not sure that your approach can properly be called scientific. You are dealing with very small numbers of people and experiences here, in your survey. The references DrDNA and I provided deal with dog attacks across the entire country. Total numbers of attacks are in the thousands. That rather makes a very small scale survey a bit misleading, don't you agree?

 

My reference showed that between 1979 and 1998 in the United States, 66 people were killed by attacks from pit bulls, while the next worst (Rottweilers) killed only 39. This kind of data is surely more valid?

Are you sure?

 

This is what I have as temperament testing of all breeds...

 

ATTS Breed Statistics

as of December 2006

 

Page 1: Afghan Hound - Belgian Malinois

Breed Name Tested Passed Failed Percent

AFGHAN HOUND 161 116 45 72.0%

AIREDALE TERRIER 98 75 23 76.5%

AKBASH DOG 14 12 2 85.7%

AKITA 447 329 118 73.6%

ALAPAHA BLUE BLOOD BULLDOG 6 4 2 66.7%

ALASKAN MALAMUTE 187 158 29 84.5%

AMERICAN BULLDOG 136 113 23 83.1%

AMERICAN ESKIMO 78 65 13 83.3%

AMERICAN FOXHOUND 2 2 0 100.0%

AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER 542 456 86 84.1%

AMERICAN STAFFORDSHIRE TERRIER 521 437 84 83.9%

AMERICAN TUNNEL TERRIER 2 2 0 100.0%

AMERICAN WATER SPANIEL 6 5 1 83.3%

ANATOLIAN SHEPHERD DOG 26 21 5 80.8%

AUSTRALIAN CATTLE DOG 162 127 35 78.4%

AUSTRALIAN KELPIE 6 5 1 83.3%

AUSTRALIAN SHEPHERD 571 461 110 80.7%

AUSTRALIAN TERRIER 16 13 3 81.3%

AZAWAKH 1 1 0 100.0%

BASENJI 159 106 53 66.7%

BASSET HOUND 33 28 5 84.8%

BEAGLE 59 47 12 79.7%

BEARDED COLLIE 45 24 21 53.3%

BEAUCERON 11 8 3 72.7%

BEDLINGTON TERRIER 19 18 1 94.7%

BELGIAN LAEKENOIS 4 4 0 100.0%

BELGIAN MALINOIS 214 194 20 90.7%

 

Yes, they attack more than other breeds.

.

How can you say this? are you listening to what the media tells you?

[DrDNA]

Tested how...pass failed how.....????

 

ATTS stands for American Terrier...what exactly?

Unbiased are they?

 

Did you read the stats that were posted and linked on here?

[Marty]

There is a hell of a lot of wishful thinking in this thread, by dog lovers who do not like to believe that any breed can be inherently nasty. There are two clear cut facts about pit bulls.

 

1. They were bred to be aggressive, as a fighting dog, fighting and killing other dogs.

You are 100% right here!

 

2. They are responsible for serious attacks on humans, resulting in maiming and fatalities, at a rate of almost double that of the next worst breed.

 

You are 100% wrong here!

 

You are listening to the Media here and there wrong

 

All the rest is interpretation, and often coloured by emotion rather than hard logic. To me, the logic is clear cut. They were bred to be what they are : nasty, aggressive killers. This is in their genes, as a result of breeding.

 

But NEVER towarded humans.

 

It is not primarily the result of training and upbringing. Sure, how an owner treats his/her dog has a profound effect on their behaviour. But there are heaps of case histories of pit bulls raised in a caring and loving home which unpredictably turned nasty. A simple google search will show lots of such cases.

Give me one example of A known APBT turning on its owner...

 

Tested how...pass failed how.....????

 

ATTS stands for American Terrier...what exactly?

Unbiased are they?

 

Did you read the stats that were posted and linked on here?

No!!! lol ATTS stands for American Temperament Test Society are you still blind to the fact that APBTs passed with flying colors?

 

You are more amp to be struck by lightning than to be bit by an APBT, Please educate yourself about the breed before you go spouting off at the mouth like the media does

 

Would you'll like to continue?

[DrDNA]

"For every fatal dog bite in the United States, there are 230,000 bites that are not treated by a physician.

................

Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, has conducted an unusually detailed study of dog bites from 1982 to the present. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.) The Clifton study show the number of serious canine-inflicted injuries by breed. The author's observations about the breeds and generally how to deal with the dangerous dog problem are enlightening.

 

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question. Clifton states:

 

If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed--and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.

 

Clifton's opinions are as interesting as his statistics. For example, he says, "Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all."

The financial impact of dog bites

Dog attack victims in the US suffer over $1 billion in monetary losses every year. ("Take the bite out of man's best friend." State Farm Times, 1998;3(5):2.) That $1 billion estimate might be low -- an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that, in 1995, State Farm paid $70 million on 11,000 claims and estimated that the total annual insurance cost for dog bites was about $2 billion. (Voelker R. "Dog bites recognized as public health problem." JAMA 1997;277:278,280.)

 

According to the Insurance Information Institute, dog bites cost insurers $345.5 million in 2002, $321.6 million in 2003, $317.2 million in 2005, and $351.4 in 2006. The number of claims paid by insurers was 20,800 in 2002, but fell to 15,000 in 2005. The insurance payment for the average dog bite claim was $16,600 in 2002, but rose to $21,200 in 2005. Liability claims accounted for approximately 4 percent of homeowners claims. Dog bite claims in 2005 accounted for about 15 percent of liability claims dollars paid under homeowners insurance policies."http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

 

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Atta...%20Clifton.pdf

 

To summarize, of 2209 dog attacks doing bodily harm, 1110 were by pit bull terriers. This is not counting pit bull mixes.

"Pit bulls seem to differ behaviorally from other dogs in having far less inhibition about attacking people who are larger than they are. They are also notorious for attacking seemingly without warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking pit bulls' tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized. Thus the adult victim of a pit bull attack may have had little or no opportunity to read the warning signals that would avert an attack from any other dog."

 

Regarding German Sheps and Wolf Hybrids (Sorry, I can't find similar data on pure wolves):

" German shepherds and German shepherd mixes in which the German shepherd line predominates together amount to 16% of the entire U.S. and Canadian dog population, according to the data we have on breed-specific licensing, or just about nine million total dogs. There are by contrast only about 300,000 recognized wolf hybrids: about one for every 30 German shepherds.Relative to their overall numbers, wolf hybrids are accordingly 60 times more likely to kill or maim a child than a German shepherd--and that is before even beginning to consider the critical behavioral distinctions."

 

"In the German shepherd mauling, killing, and maiming cases I have

recorded, there have almost always been circumstances of duress: the dog was deranged from being kept alone on a chain for prolonged periods without human contract, was starving, was otherwise severely abused, was

protecting puppies, or was part of a pack including other dangerous dogs.

None of the German shepherd attacks have involved predatory behavior on the part of an otherwise healthy dog.Every one of the wolf hybrid attacks, however, seems to have been predatory. Only four of the fatality victims were older than age seven, and all three were of small stature. The first adult fatality was killed in the presence of her two young sons, whom she was apparently trying to protect. The second was killed while apparently trying to protect her dog.

Most of the victims were killed very quickly. Some never knew the wolf

hybrid was present. Some may never have known what hit them. Some were

killed right in front of parents, who had no time to react.

Unlike German shepherds, wolf hybrids are usually kept well apart from

children, and from any people other than their owners. Yet they have still

found more opportunity to kill and maim than members of any other breeds

except pit bull terriers and Rottweilers, each of whom may outnumber wolf

hybrids by about 10 to 1.".

 

This has been discussed ad nausium....http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=28108&page=4&highlight=pit+bull

[Shon]

This is supposed to be a scientific experiment? LOL!

 

To begin with... what is a "pit bull?" It definitely isn't a breed of the canine world. The statistics presented are based upon what evidence? People's perception or actual facts?

 

The fact is there is no such breed of dog as a "pit bull." The term "pit bull" is ambiguous label given to dogs which appear to be muscular, dangerous dogs. Who defines what a "pit bull" is exactly? How are these so-called "statistics" relevant to an actual breed of dog?

 

A "pit bull" is, in fact, misidentified among at least 12 popular, pure-bred breeds of dog. Among the most misidentified breeds claimed to be a "pit bull" are: American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, Boxers, American Bulldogs, Cane Corsos, Perro de Presa Canarios, Argentine Dogos, many Mastiff mixes as well as many others.

 

The truth is, a "pit bull" is labeled by people who have an assumption of what "breed" of dog a particular dog is. According to many temperament tests by prestigious organizations, the American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier and Staffordshire Bull Terrier (the main breeds which actually ascended from the "fighting dogs" of yesteryear) score among the top of the most stable breeds known to man.

 

The problem is people who claim to have "pit bulls" are breeding them for a purpose which is salable and that is for aggressiveness. Many popular bloodlines of "pit bulls" are mixed bred mutts, bred simply to make a profit. Their is actually a breed name becoming more popular for these mutts as people are made more aware of the mislabeled ridicule this so-called breed receives and that is the "American Bully."

 

I encourage you to do more research of a particular "breed" of dog before making an assumption of an actual "breed" of dog based upon the nonfactual "evidence" (bullshit) presented to you as factual information. You will find that the true statistics are quite the opposite and that there are many misinformed, ignorant individuals who wish to seek out and destroy breeds of dogs simply because of ambiguous label placed upon them by idiots such as themselves.

 

Here is a quote which is relevant to this thread, but on the subject of "dogfighting," from a very respected "pit bull" forum, pitbull-chat.com:

The fact is, even though the original creators of the American Pit Bull Terrier fought them and used fighting as a test of will, courage, strength and tenacity; they created the most stable mammal on the face of the earth (even superseding humans). The use of dogs in the pit and the act of handling them is the direct result of their most stable temperament toward humans.

 

Even though the act of dog fighting, in any sense, is deemed immoral, it is the direct result of the breed being as uniquely human responsive as it is.

 

The "evil criminals" who created the breed for the purpose of fighting had a much larger view on the subject of a "family dog." Even though the dogs were combatants and were fought exclusively to determine the worth of one bloodline versus another, the outcome was always the same; a uniquely human responsive dog who would care for even an infant child in the event a guardian was not present.

 

The use of fighting was never about money, popularity or even the act its self, as the media tends to claim. It was the same as hunting, tracking, or any other use a "dog" was deemed useful for. The result just happened to produce a more stable animal than many others because of the stress levels and human interaction under that stress, among many other things involved with such usage of canine development.

 

------------------------

 

It is a myth that all dogmen put down every human aggressive dog they encountered. If the dog was a good fighter, won consistently and could be handled in way to avoid (or lessen the risk of) getting bitten, much of the time it was not put down and was even bred. Even though some human aggressive (at any level) dogs were bred; since human aggression was not bred for, was an undesirable trait and the dogs were bred strictly for the task they were created for, much of the time human aggressive offspring were few and far between.

 

The stability of these animals toward humans came solely from countless generations of being fought and handled by humans. It was only after the Animal Welfare Act of 1976 that many breeders started breeding for a stable temperament because they realized the need to.

 

It's fairly logical if you think about it. Why do most dogs bite? Much of the time it is due to fear or excitement, being suddenly surprised, over food or prey, etc. Separating fighting dogs over many, many generations pretty much tests all of those reasons and over time, they became (one of) the most stable breed known to man simply because of that.

Please respond with whatever you wish to refute this information, I will be glad to counteract.

[thomast1777]

I am surprised at how many responses are given here that are based on nothing more than misinformation and personal opinions rather than fact, given that this is a forum dedicated to science.

 

First off, I would like to say that I have been in contact with more pit bulls than I can ever count. Literally, it is probably over a couple of hundred. I have never been bitten. Coincidence? I think not.

 

To start off, I would like to speak of the reliabilty of the ATTS regarding temperment testing. Have any of you ever heard of getting your dog temperment tested and certified for the testing? It is a common practice among reputable breeders and responsible owners. The ATTS is THE place to get this done. If you hear of someone whom is taking their dog to get temperement tested, it was done by the ATTS. If you look at the http://www.atts.org website, you will see that several thousand dogs have been tested by this organization. This is obviously a large organization that is respected in this field. As you can see, the APBT ranks higher than many of your favorite breeds including the Border Collie, Cocker Spaniel, German Shepherd, and the Golden Retriever.

 

As mentioned before and as proven by the poll, most people have not been in contact with an APBT and most people do not know what they look like. Do me a favor and picture in your head, how much do you perceive these dogs as weighing? What do you think they look like? I'll give you a second.

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

Now look at this site:

 

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

 

and this one:

 

http://www.coldsteelpits.com/coldsteelfindthepitbull.htm

 

How did you do?

 

 

The fact is, they are relatively small to medium sized dogs. They are not big or overly muscled. The average size for a male is around 40-55 lbs for a purebred male APBT. These are dogs that are within standard and stand the best chance of winning at a conformation show that adheres to the original standard.

 

However, this is not how the public perceives these dogs. Any dog that is short-haired and muscular can become a pit bull. Fueled by media hysteria, any person that is bitten by any short-haired muscular dog will automatically assume and call the dog a "pit bull". It can be mixed with any range of breeds but it can be lumped into this category.

 

For those that mention documents or so-called reliable news articles that say that the dog was full-blooded, how can you be sure? Even with papers, the dog can be mixed.

 

The Pit Bull is extremely popular and unfortunately it is increasingly popular with the wrong crowds thanks to antics from those such as Michael Vick. This increases the population of the breed within the country and also increases the potential of the breeding of dangerous dogs. These dogs are not a true representation of the breed but rather a by-product of appeal to unsavorable owners which breed these dogs for the wrong reasons and then turn around and sell them to other people with less-than-honest motives.

 

There is also the fact that there is an absolute hysteria regarding these dogs. People automatically assume that any short-haired muscular dog is automatically a "Pit Bull" when it could be any range of mixes.

 

I have personally owned a Labrador and Pit Bull mix and he looked pure-bred to every person I have met. A Presa Canerio, which is also growing in popularity for the wrong reasons can easily be confused with an APBT. Virtually, any short-haired breed including American Bulldogs (which are also very popular) can be confused with this breed. If someone is attacked by one of these short-haired muscular dogs or a mix of the such, guess what? They won't be calling the dog by the actual breed, they will say the breed that the media has taught them to associate this behavior with.

 

Unfortunately, this has caused me to fear for my dog's life. I can't leave my dog outside without supervision for fear of being poisoned. I can't own a treadmill like hundreds of people who own dogs other than Pit Bulls for fear that I will be arrested for training a dog to fight. I have to fear the fact that the breed I have always owned and loved will be banned and forced into euthanasia because of misinformation.

 

Please, don't believe all of the things you hear. Don't believe that every dog that is associated with these attacks are indeed pure bred APBTs or APBTs at all. There is a lot of misinformation regarding this breed and I would hope that a science-dedicated forum would rely more on fact and reason.

[GameBeth:)]

Howdy howdy.

 

I think this is great. A science-based forum engaged in this topic! We can speak in control groups if you wish, because statistics, well...we all know there are three truths out there: (1) You have lies. (2) You have doggone lies. And (3) You have a whole new level of lies: statistics

 

The only control group out there being tested is the amount of "Pit Bull" type dogs (BTW who can identify a "Pit Bull" quickly and correctly? It's trickier than you may think) who have attacked people. Now...there is another group out there which has yet to be considered: ALL the "Pit Bulls" out there who HAVE NEVER ATTACKED ANYONE. The figures would be staggering, especially when you take into consideration how popular the breed has become since the 1980's (thanks again to the media who helped create the machismo thuggish ruggish image people think the "Pit Bull" represents ). Once this group -the huge number of "Pit Bulls" in existance who have never attacked- is figured out, there can be no conclusive or even slightly credible scientific theory about these dogs. Is there anything else to discuss guys?

 

XOXO

[iNow]

The fact is, they are relatively small to medium sized dogs. They are not big or overly muscled. The average size for a male is around 40-55 lbs for a purebred male APBT. These are dogs that are within standard and stand the best chance of winning at a conformation show that adheres to the original standard.

 

However, this is not how the public perceives these dogs. Any dog that is short-haired and muscular can become a pit bull. Fueled by media hysteria, any person that is bitten by any short-haired muscular dog will automatically assume and call the dog a "pit bull". It can be mixed with any range of breeds but it can be lumped into this category.

 

<...>

 

If someone is attacked by one of these short-haired muscular dogs or a mix of the such, guess what? They won't be calling the dog by the actual breed, they will say the breed that the media has taught them to associate this behavior with.

 

<...>

 

Please, don't believe all of the things you hear. Don't believe that every dog that is associated with these attacks are indeed pure bred APBTs or APBTs at all. There is a lot of misinformation regarding this breed and I would hope that a science-dedicated forum would rely more on fact and reason.

 

You have made a wonderful contribution to this thread. Empassioned and accurate, and I thank you for it. Your points drive to the heart of the issue.

 

 

 

 

Once this group -the huge number of "Pit Bulls" in existance who have never attacked- is figured out, there can be no conclusive or even slightly credible scientific theory about these dogs. Is there anything else to discuss guys?

Yeah... It seems like people are trying to ban copper pennies becuase a hand full of children died from swallowing too many.

 

 

Maybe we can turn the conversation toward an attempt to describe why the populace believes misinformation and why facts don't seem too often to alter those beliefs. Oh... wait... we already have a thread like that:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=30016

 

 

 

Cheers.

[GameBeth:)]

I couldn't have hoped for a better turn for this thread. Thanks to SFN for allowing us to educate a little about our breed.

[John Cuthber]

I note with interest that the reasonable unbiassed temprament testing group say that about 14% or pit bulls (by whatever definition) fail. Roughly the same proprtion of bassets fail too.

The difference is that a basset that attacks a human will generally lose the fight whereas a pit bull is likely to win.

 

I'm still waiting to see what people think the benefit of permitting these animals is.

[thomast1777]

I note with interest that the reasonable unbiassed temprament testing group say that about 14% or pit bulls (by whatever definition) fail. Roughly the same proprtion of bassets fail too.

The difference is that a basset that attacks a human will generally lose the fight whereas a pit bull is likely to win.

 

I'm still waiting to see what people think the benefit of permitting these animals is.

 

 

A Rottweiller, German Shepherd, Great Dane, Mastiff, American Bulldog, and hundreds of other breeds can easily overtake a human too. Under your logic, these dogs should also be banned.

 

The problem does not lie within a certain breed. The problem is people. The owners of these dogs are responsible for these attacks. If you take away Pit Bulls, these very same people will find a different breed. What are we going to do then? Ban that breed also?

You must attack the root of the problem to make a change. The breed is not the root of the problem. It is the people who are responsible.

[waitforufo]

Part of the breading of pit bulls was to produce jaws with tremendous biting force. They may be no more likely to attack than any other breed. Their physiology may however make that attack more deadly.

[thomast1777]

Part of the breading of pit bulls was to produce jaws with tremendous biting force. They may be no more likely to attack than any other breed. Their physiology may however make that attack more deadly.

 

This is not true. The Pit Bull was never "bread" to produce jaws with tremendous biting force. Once again, speculation. I challenge you to find reliable scientific data that proves that they have "locking" jaws or proof that their bite is more dangerous than any other dog of relatively the same size.

 

The data doesn't exist. On the other hand, I can show you scientific studies which state that there is no truly reliable way to test a dog's bite because there is no way to determine if the dog is actually trying to exert maximum force. I can also show you documents that prove that the APBT has jaws that are no different from any other dog.

 

The dog was bred to fight. That is true. However, the dogs were never bred with the sole intention of having powerful jaws. Also, there is no reliable scientific proof that proves that their bite is any more stronger than any other breed of similar size.

 

You are fooling yourself if you believe that a 50 lb Pit Bull can exert more damage than a 90 lb American Bulldog or a 100+ Mastiff.

[GameBeth:)]

My apologies to TommyT and Marty...I know you have seen my outline more than enough over the last year-but sometimes it comes in handy

 

In case anyone here is interested. This is a very easy to follow outline of APBT History

 

 

 

APBT History 101 This is a general and somewhat remedial outline of APBT history. My source at the bottom. Hope it helps answer a question or two.

 

APBT defined/early history/debates

 

* American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) - descendent of original English bull-baiting Bulldog , has historically been bred with working/performance goals in mind.

 

There are several types of dogs that are called "Pit Bulls."

-American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier (AST), Staffordshire Bull Terrier (SBT).

- These 3 dogs share common ancestry, but have different breeding criteria

 

APBT roots go back at least one hundred fifty years to England (excluding ancient bulldog history ).

-In late 18th and early 19th c."bulldogs" were bred for bull-baiting as sport, game catching, and bringing down cattle.

Historically, "Bulldog" did not mean a specific breed of dog, but rather it was applied to descendants of the ancient Mastiff- type dogs that excelled in bull-baiting.

- performance-bred working bulldogs of old resembled modern APBT's.

- todays APBT enthusiasts use "bulldog" to describe APBT's

Bull-baiting outlawed in England in 1835

- so matching two dogs against one another rose in popularity.

APBT history debate: were these pit fighting dogs a new breed of dog specially created for this pastime?

-Some (i.e.. Richard Stratton) feel APBT is basically same breed as Renaissiance bull-baiting dogs and NOT mixed with terrier, as commonly accepted. These folks feel a bull-baiter/ terrier cross is more consistent with the English Bull Terrier's history, not APBT.

-Others (Dr Carl Semencic) argue the APBT is indeed a bull-baiter/terrier cross, and did not exist in its current form during Renaissance.

Proving early breed history is difficult

- Extreme secrecy of dog breeders. Breeders feared letting rivals discover secrets of success and replicating it.

By the mid-19th century the breed has all essential characteristics of today: awesome athletic abilitiy, gameness, easy-going temperament.

 

APBT crosses the pond

-Immediate APBT ancestors were Irish and English pit fighting dogs imported to U. S. mid-19th century.

-In America, these dogs were used as pit fighters, catch dogs (i.e., for forcibly retrieving stray hogs and cattle) and family guardians

-Breeders producing a slightly larger, leggier dog.

-From the early part of this century, it is rare to find a specimen over 50 lbs. (with a few notable exceptions). From 1900 to 1975 or so, there was probably a very small and gradual increment in the average weight of APBTs , without any loss in performance abilities.

APBT- the name game

Throughout 19th century, these dogs were known by many names:

-"Pit Terriers", "Pit Bull Terriers", "Half and Half's", "Staffordshire Fighting Dogs", "Old Family Dogs"(the Irish name), "Yankee Terriers"(the Northern name), and "Rebel Terriers"(the Southern name), and more.

In 1898, Chauncy Bennet formed the United Kennel Club (UKC) for the sole purpose of registering "Pit Bull Terriers"

- American Kennel Club wanted nothing to do with them.

-Bennet added "American" and dropped "Pit" from the name, this didn't please everyone so later "Pit" was added back in parentheses as a compromise.

- parentheses were later removed from the name

 

Early stardom and the road to distinguish the "official" APBT

In 1936, "Pete the Pup" in the "Lil Rascals" and "Our Gang" familiarized a wider audience with the APBT

-During this time the APBT was liked in America.

-kids of Lil Rascals generation wanted dogs just like "Pete the Pup".

AKC now jumped in, registered the breed as "Staffordshire Terrier"

- name changed to "American Staffordshire Terrier" (AST) in 1972 ( to distinguish from its smaller English cousin: Staffordshire Bull Terrier)

In 1936, the AKC, UKC, and ADBA version of the "Pit Bull" were identical since the original AKC stock came from pit fighting dogs, which were UKC and ADBA registered.

 

Due to different breeding goals, American Staffordshire Terrier and American Pit Bull Terrier split in both phenotype and spirit/temperament,

- both continue to have an easy-going, friendly disposition.

-Some feel after 60 years of different breeding goals, these dogs are now different breeds, others view them as two strains of same breed (working and show).

- ASTs tend to look alike within themselves more than APBTs

- APBTs have more wide range of appearance, because historic breeding goal was for performance in contests, not looks

-Some game-bred APBTs are practically indistinguishable from typical ASTs, most APBT's are leaner, leggier, lighter on toes, have more stamina, agility, speed, and explosive power.

From WWII - early 1980s,

-there were only a devoted few who knew the breed in intimate detail. These devotees typically knew much more about their dogs' ancestry than their own--they were often able to recite pedigrees back six or eight generations. They were a small group of knowledgeable dogmen.

 

Where it all went wrong for the modern day APBT:

APBTs became popular with public around 1980

- people with little or no knowledge of the breed owned and bred them

- these newcomers did not respect traditional breeding goals of the old-time APBT breeders.

-they began randomly breeding dogs to mass produce puppies as profitable commodities.

- neophytes started selecting dogs for breeding for the trait of human aggressiveness.

-Ignorants were owning and producing poorly bred, human-aggressive "Pit Bulls" for a mass market.

- media began its propensity for over-simplification and sensationalization, and gave rise to the anti-"Pit Bull" hysteria we now know.

- In spite of bad breeding practices over last 15 years or so, vast majority of APBTs remain very human-friendly.

The American Canine Temperament Testing Association, which sponsors tests for temperament titles for dogs, reported that 95% of all APBTs that take the test pass, compared with a 77% passing rate for all breeds on average. The APBT's passing rate was the fourth highest of all the breeds tested.

The APBT today

Today, the APBT is still occasionally used (underground and illegally) as a fighting dog in the United States; pit matches also take place in other countries where there are no laws or where the existing laws are not enforced. However, the vast majority of APBT's--even within the kennels of breeders who breed for fighting ability--never see any action in the pit.

- they are loyal, loving, companion dogs, working dogs, and even family pets .

One activity that has really grown in popularity among APBT fanciers is weight pulling contests.

-Weight-pulls retain something of the spirit of competition of the pit fighting world, but without the blood or sorrow.

-APBTs are ideally suited for these contests, in which the refusal to quit counts for as much as brute strength.

- APBTs hold world records in several weight classes.

Another activity that the APBT is ideally suited for is agility competition,

-his athleticism and determination can be widely appreciated.

The APBT also continues his popularity as a naturally able bodied hunting dog for bear (where legal) and hog hunting.

Some APBTs have been trained and done well in Schutzhund sport

-these dogs, however, are more the exception than the rule. APBT's excel more in sport exclusive of the need for human aggression (bitework) or guardianship

 

More information on the history of the breed in Dr. Carl Semencic's book "The World of Fighting Dogs".

 

Books by Richard Stratton

 

 

 

 

SOURCE: History of APBT

Michael Burr

[Psyber]

I have patted several of the "Pit Bull" types breeds at dog shows and only ever got licked. On the other hand I knew a family who were dominated by their very aggressive Cocker Spaniel.

 

There are two factors to consider:

 

1. Yes, certain breeds were bred for fighting and can more easily be induced to be aggressive, or can act aggressively if accidentally provoked by un-dog-wise behaviour - e.g. by unsupervised or untrained children.

 

2. Certain aggressive types of humans choose the known "aggressive" breeds because they want to use them as weapons ot tools of intimidation.

 

 

We have had a series of Irish Wolfhounds. The last one was 90cm at the shoulder and weighed 80Kg [ 35" and 178 pounds] and was gentle as a lamb, and could be led around witha lead held loosely in one hand, but he had been trained to be like that since he was 12 weeks old and they are innately gently.

 

However, a neighbour's aggressive Rottweiler would back away and keep at least a 15 foot gap because it was intimidated by his sheer size.

[waitforufo]

Those that fight dogs in competitions, competitions to the death, choose pit bulls. You never see the police drag away cocker spaniels, Jack Russell terriers, English setters, great danes, or other breeds from dog fights. There must be some reason for that.

[bahamutt99]

I'd like to help, if I may. I started my interaction with Pit Bull-types when I was 8 years old, and it has spanned many more than 10 dogs. I have never had an aggressive encounter with one of these dogs. In fact, I have waded into a furious fight between two Pit Bulls and pulled them apart, without the resulting loss of limb that one might imagine. The amazing thing about breeds bred to fight is that they are usually well aware of their opponent, and are equally aware that the owner grabbing their collar is not it.

 

Hopefully it isn't untoward of me to address some of the comments here, because I must.

 

Those that fight dogs in competitions, competitions to the death, choose pit bulls. You never see the police drag away cocker spaniels, Jack Russell terriers, English setters, great danes, or other breeds from dog fights. There must be some reason for that.

 

Would you consider it unusual for the breaking-up of a dog-sledding operation to involve huskies and malamutes being dragged away? Or if there were a raid on a rat hunting kennel, would you be surprised that there are only feisty terriers being removed, rather than other breeds? Do you lament that they never discover bloodhounds on the racing track? The APBT evolved at least in part from the dog pits, so it is natural that he is the main participant. It is not that a fighter chooses this breed over others, but that this breed is the one created from those conditions.

 

I'm still waiting to see what people think the benefit of permitting these animals is.

 

I suppose I don't think that way. Innocent until proven guilty, right to own property, right to life and liberty and all that jazz. But it may interest you to know things like this:

 

Pit Bulls serve in many different capacities to mankind. They are being used as drug detection dogs, service dogs, therapy dogs, as well as good family pets and sporting/working/competition dogs. Here, for example, is a Pit Bull who acts as a hearing ear dog for his owner. I have the article copied, but no link, or I would post that as well.

 

 

A Pit Bull named Neville was banned in Ontario Canada, and came to America, where he is serving as a narcotics detection dog, I believe. (Click here to read about the Lawdogs program that uses Pit Bulls to serve and protect.) A rescued Pit Bull named Wallace just won the national disc dog championships in St. Louis, Missouri, beating border collies, Australian shepherds, and many other breeds.

 

Myself, I own three American Pit Bull Terriers. Two are just pups, and are starting their show career. My 4-year-old female, Loki, is a competitor in different sports, such as agility and weight pull. She also helps me in small ways around the house -- picking up things I drop, shutting doors for me, even getting a soda out of the fridge. I'm not disabled, but if I were, Loki would make the ideal assistance dog.

 

Did you read the stats that were posted and linked on here?

 

It may interest everyone to know that the CDC has stopped tracking dog bite fatalities by breed because they felt that the ratio of error is too high. This is a science site, so tell me exactly how reliable the human eyes are. How many witness are truly reliable? I have read a very interesting study which basically says that 98% of people cannot identify a Pit Bull without also misidentifying other breeds as such. It also noted that the vast majority of people who don't like the breed could not identify it at all! So while its all fine and well to say "that dog looks like a Pit Bull," just how accurate are such identifications, even when made by trained individuals?

 

And if humans cannot identify the breed, then what are we really talking about here? If we are lumping in anything with short hair and muscles, then that's hardly scientific. You could be talking about Labradors or greyhounds. One person mentioned they didn't know if another person's dog was a Pit Bull or a Rottweiler, even though there is a tremendous difference. They aren't even in the same family, except as grouped together by the misinformed.

 

As for the ATTS (American Temperament Test Society), some may scoff at those numbers, but right now, they're the only national body which temperament tests all breeds and keeps a record of the findings. They gague a dog's reaction to strangers, strange noises, weird footing, visual stimuli, etc. Myself, I am proud to say that my Loki is one of the many who has a TT title. Terra and Priest will have them as well, when they are older.

 

I cannot help but be passionate about this breed, since it has changed my life for the better from a young age. I was what you would call a troubled youth, but getting involved with dogs gave me focus and balance. Getting involved with a breed which is also a bit "troubled" -- not in the sense that there is something intrinsically wrong with the dogs, but in the sense that most people don't "get" them -- made it even more worthwhile, because here was something I could understand. As an adult, I get a kick out of being the only handler running a Pit Bull in agilty next to all the herding breeds, and doing just as well as many of them. Its far more rewarding than going with the status quo.

 

I'm rambling. But if I can be of any further aid, let me know.

[dichotomy]

Unfortunately, what we need and I don't think we have is data on how many pit bulls etc there are. After all if there were only 66 pitbulls in the USA and they were each responsible for a death but 39 million rottweilers were only responsible for an average of a millionth of a death each, then I think we could agree that 66 is statistically signinficant.

(incidentally, 66 ! is nearly too big to fit in my calculator).

 

Also, what we haven't got is the number of things like -

- disabilities and loss of limbs (to humans).

- PTS disorders inflicted as a result of an attack on humans

- injuries requiring surgery

- minor injuries inflicted

 

if there were 66 deaths, then it stands to reason that there must be many more attacks, and unreported attacks.

[iNow]

if there were 66 deaths, then it stands to reason that there must be many more attacks, and unreported attacks.

 

I ask again...

 

Why no outcry over banning bathtubs (since more babies drown in bathtubs each year than pit bulls have killed in the last 20)?

 

 

Let's do some quick math. I propose (as a conservative estimate) that there are 10,000 pit bulls in the US right now.

 

Over the past 20 years, there were (according to an article shared in one of these threads) 66 deaths caused by pit bulls. That's 3.3 deaths per year.

 

 

So... out of 10,000 pit bulls 9,996 (or 99.96%) of them are not killers. Less than five one hundreths of one percent MIGHT kill someone.

 

 

Yes... Let's start a fire and burn them all alive. Clearly it's not worth the risk to let them live in my neighbors yard.

[DrDNA]

I ask again...

 

Why no outcry over banning bathtubs (since more babies drown in bathtubs each year than pit bulls have killed in the last 20)?

As soon as a bathtub chases your granny down the street and mauls her, I'll bet you'll see a loud call for a ban on bathtubs and we'll all be taking showers.

 

 

Let's do some quick math. I propose (as a conservative estimate) that there are 10,000 pit bulls in the US right now.

 

Over the past 20 years, there were (according to an article shared in one of these threads) 66 deaths caused by pit bulls. That's 3.3 deaths per year.

 

 

So... out of 10,000 pit bulls 9,996 (or 99.96%) of them are not killers. Less than five one hundreths of one percent MIGHT kill someone.

 

 

Yes... Let's start a fire and burn them all alive. Clearly it's not worth the risk to let them live in my neighbors yard.

 

Maybe the negativity regarding this breed is more related to perception about pitbull owners than the dog breed itself. Using your analogy to bathtubs above, if the stereotypical pitbull owner was envisioned in the same light as the stereotypical bathtub owner, the pitbull itself would have a more favorable image. Conversely, if a significant portion of the public envisioned bathtub owners in a light similar to the stereotypical pitbull owner, bathtub sales might drop significantly.

[SkepticLance]

This discussion is not going to go anywhere, due to the simple fact that too much emotion is involved. Pit bull owners refuse to believe anything is wrong with their darling breed. This is understandable, bearing in mind the enormous emotional commitment those people have with their child surrogates.

 

For those of us who can look at this without emotional bias, because we do not own, and do not want to own a pit bull, there is a sense of bemusement, as the power of emotion is seen in action.

 

The simple fact is, regardless of all and any of the contrary arguments seen here, pit bulls are the dog breed that kills more people than any other.

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/06/23/MNGRODDH561.DTL

 

I quote :

 

"Attacks by pit bulls accounted for about a third of the 238 fatal dog attacks in the United States during a 20-year study, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

 

Pit bulls were blamed for killing 76 people, or 32 percent, during a study of dog attacks from 1979-1998, the study showed. Rottweilers were the second most deadly animal, reportedly killing 44 people, or 18.5 percent, during the same period.

 

About 4.7 million people are bitten every year by dogs, resulting in about 12 fatalities a year, according to the federal statistics. About 500,000 to 800,000 dog bites require medical treatment annually."

 

Pit bulls are the most dangerous breed. Full stop!

 

Of course, to put it into perspective, dog attacks are a very minor cause of human fatality. Thus, you can argue that the joy pit bulls bring their owners outweighs the few fatal attacks. That's fine. Just don't deny the basic truth, shown clearly by official statistics, that pit bulls are the biggest cause of fatal dog attacks of humans.

[iNow]

Who has denied anything? Quit strawmanning this argument, lance.