Re: Pit bulls
Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 9:03 am
Of course. Pitbulls are a powerful breed and if they attack, it is bad news for all around. What PerciFlage and I are saying is that pitbulls are not inherently vicious. It just so happens that at this moment in time, pitbulls are usually adopted by people who are...marginal, troubled, or - to use a popular expression - socially dysfunctional. Bloodhounds, German sheppards, rottweilers, boxers and dobermans have all been popular among the marginal and in their day, people considered them vicious as well. The human is the problem!RickD wrote:So, in other words, if a pit bull attacks, it is much more likely to inflict serious harm.
One last thing: I once had a tenant with the meanest Shi Tzu imaginable. That little SOB would growl and lunge at me everytime I was around him. He bit me several times. His owner was a crazy lady who was just as hateful as her pet.
Exactly! The human master is the problem, not the breed of dog.PerciFlage wrote:I think owners of dogs with the potential to do more damage need to be mindful of that fact, and take extra steps to make sure their dog is socialised and well trained. As I mentioned before, I don't think breed-specific laws are an effective way to tackle the number and ferocity of dog attacks, because there is always another breed for irresponsible owners to bestow their favour upon.
Legislation needs to focus on owners and breeders if it is to make a truly meaningful difference. There's a crude comparison to be drawn with road safety laws here - you're more likely to die if you get hit by a truck than a small car, but bad drivers are legislated against more than vehicle size.
FL