I heard that on the radio yesterday and was stunned into disbelief.

I know it's hard to get teenagers to read (their response to me: I read the Mail Online) but even so, gobsmacking!

1 in 8 of the population have traces of cocaine on their fingers.

Comes from handling money.

I don't understand why any owner would have one. Is it the 'challenge' of keeping a vicious animal in check, or the 'coolness' of having one as personal protection? Or does the dog simply match the owner's temperament?

I'm not sure Martin, but I suspect it's part a statement about ones self. The dogs are very common here so I believe there is an abundance of pitbull pups for people to adopt. I see groups of young guys walking one or two pitbulls all the time.

I would never choose a pitbull but if someone gave me one that needed a home I'd gladly take it but wouldn't let around kids or strangers at all. Which would cut some of the fun of ownership imo.




Imo Mike the dogs are painted only slightly worse than they are. They maul people to death. I can tell you 4 stories I know of off the top of my head. Two of little girls ripped to pieces, one of an adult trying to break up dogs fighting and one of another adult attempting to load a pitbull into a van at an veterinary office where the owner of the pitbull had just left after filling out forms on which the owner stated that the dog is not aggressive. These people were physically ripped apart. I can easily track down another ten stories just like those.

I've never heard of a Labrador killing someone. Maybe they have but it's uncommon enough for me to have never heard about it happening. With pitbulls I hear a handful of fatal mauling stories per year.

This is an unwinnable debate, and I can only offer an opinion. I know people with Pitbulls as family pets and they are lovely, loyal dogs. The idea that they are horribly dangerous is in part, a self-perpetuating myth caused by many of the morons who own them only because they are thought to be horribly dangerous.

Long before Pitbulls, I can remember when Alsatians had a bad press in the UK, mostly because they were owned by the same type of people who now own other "dangerous" breeds. I'm not saying that Pitbulls (and Staffies) don't have a propensity for violence, but you do have to take into account the possibility, if not the likelihood, that a "dangerous" dog has been bought by, and is owned by, someone who sees little "Tyson" as an extension of their own personality:  "I'm f*ckin' hard, so's my f*ckin' dog!" and has possibly been trained to attack on command. 

I think we also need to remember that although we talk about dogs as being intelligent animals we're comparing them to other animals; it's not 'human' intelligence.  A dog may "know" when it's done something wrong, but if it's taught that a particular action pleases its owner, it will simply attempt to please its owner.

If you take a look at other lists, you'll find that most attacks in the UK (not fatalities) are in fact perpetrated by Labradors.  Although Liverpool police revealed that in 2015 that  Jack Russell terriers were responsible for the most dog bites in the city.

Dogs, like humans, are products of their environment(s) both physical and emotional.  Humans are just better equipped to rise above it, and even then many don't make that leap...they just buy a Pitbull.

Most attacks, both fatal and otherwise, on dogs, are committed by the breed Homo Sapiens...although I would question the "Sapiens." 

I have never owned a dog myself.

Thanks for letting me ramble.

"During the 13-year period of 2005 to 2017, canines killed 433 Americans. Two dog breeds, pit bulls (284) and rottweilers (45), contributed to 76% (329) of these deaths. 35 different dog breeds contributed to the remaining fatal dog maulings."

Guys, a lot of what you wrote I cannot argue. But it has already happened. We're not talking about 30 deaths in 8 years, which would still be incredible. We're talking 433 deaths by dog in 8 years, 3/4 caused by pittbulls and Rottweilers.

I've personally never understood the argument that pittbulls turn out how they do because of their owners. In some cases, yes, as with all pets, but these dogs have another element to them, the statistics show that.

You can see it in them just by looking at them and how they move and how aggressively they approach you to smell you.

And, even if it were a matter of not the dogs fault, but the owners aggressive manner at fault, it wouldn't matter, enough killings have already occurred to tell me that aggressive people are sending a constant flow of mistreated Pitbulls into the world.


2 days ago. Pittbull mauls 8 month baby girl in her bouncy chair in Florida.

nypost.com/2018/05/31/pit-bull-fatally-mauls-9-month-old-in-bouncy-chair/



Little girl killed after pitbull played with her brother, so she wanted to play too. Dog attacked her as soon as she opened the door. They had the dog for just 5 days.
amp.wgal.com/article/3-year-old-girl-attacked-killed-by-dog-family-owned-just-5-days/15170630#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

4 year old girl killed when watching TV with her mom. A monster looking pittbull was in heat, father didn't know it, and brought the pittbull into the home as new pet. Dog killed the little girl in front of her mom.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2590119/Mia-Derouen-4-tragically-mauled-death-familys-pit-bull-watching-TV-mother-Megan-Touchet.html


There's 50 more I can post now. The full stories. I searched for "mauled to death by Labrador" got nothing but the same story 4 times of an infant killed by schnauzer-labrador mix, and another story of a dog that was mauled by other dogs to death. I'd not be surprised at all if a pittbull was in that bunch.