View Single Post
Old 12-13-2006, 01:04 PM   #25
Shawnee123
Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya?
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,206
article

From the New Yorker:


Quote:
Pit bulls, descendants of the bulldogs used in the nineteenth century for bull baiting and dogfighting, have been bred for “gameness,” and thus a lowered inhibition to aggression. Most dogs fight as a last resort, when staring and growling fail. A pit bull is willing to fight with little or no provocation. Pit bulls seem to have a high tolerance for pain, making it possible for them to fight to the point of exhaustion. Whereas guard dogs like German shepherds usually attempt to restrain those they perceive to be threats by biting and holding, pit bulls try to inflict the maximum amount of damage on an opponent. They bite, hold, shake, and tear. They don’t growl or assume an aggressive facial expression as warning. They just attack. “They are often insensitive to behaviors that usually stop aggression,” one scientific review of the breed states. “For example, dogs not bred for fighting usually display defeat in combat by rolling over and exposing a light underside. On several occasions, pit bulls have been reported to disembowel dogs offering this signal of submission.”
Quote:
Of course, not all pit bulls are dangerous. Most don’t bite anyone. Meanwhile, Dobermans and Great Danes and German shepherds and Rottweilers are frequent biters as well, and the dog that recently mauled a Frenchwoman so badly that she was given the world’s first face transplant was, of all things, a Labrador retriever. When we say that pit bulls are dangerous, we are making a generalization
Quote:
Pit-bull bans involve a category problem, too, because pit bulls, as it happens, aren’t a single breed. The name refers to dogs belonging to a number of related breeds, such as the American Staffordshire terrier, the Staffordshire bull terrier, and the American pit bull terrier—all of which share a square and muscular body, a short snout, and a sleek, short-haired coat.
Quote:
The goal of pit-bull bans, obviously, isn’t to prohibit dogs that look like pit bulls. The pit-bull appearance is a proxy for the pit-bull temperament—for some trait that these dogs share. But “pit bullness” turns out to be elusive as well. The supposedly troublesome characteristics of the pit-bull type—its gameness, its determination, its insensitivity to pain—are chiefly directed toward other dogs. Pit bulls were not bred to fight humans.
Obviously, not all pits are the same, just as all humans aren't the same, etc. I wonder if, knowing what is known (that much is unknown about the breeding of any potentially dangerous dog) having that dog is a good idea if you have babies or young children. Or, at the very least, don't time a baby dog and a baby human within two weeks of each other.

I mean, how does that work? I want a pit bull and I will have NO OTHER dog...damn what people say, damn the history of the breed. Do you really want to put your baby's life on this bet? I wouldn't.
Believe me, I saw that puppy and I just want to hold it...it's so sad. But the couple had other choices. It's not like they had this dog for years and then they got pregnant...they got the pit 2 weeks before the baby was born.

Tragic, really, for dog and human.
__________________
A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice.
--Bill Cosby
Shawnee123 is offline   Reply With Quote