Tragic.

Just to add the UK perspective here..

'Pit bulls' are already a banned 'type' in the UK under the Dangerous Dogs Act. This was a deeply flawed piece of legislation introduced after some other dog 'attacks. Dogs banned were the Tosa Inu, Fila Brasileiro, Pit Bull and Dogo Argentino, despite none of these being recognised breeds by the KC.

In the UK a pit bull is defined by type, so although this does not include English Bull Terriers and Staffordshire Bull Terriers, if you have no documentation of the breeding and it looks like a pit bull 'type' (could be a Staffy with long legs?) it could be restricted.

Additionally, there is no-one to police this act and virtually no-one in Britain would know what a Tosa, a Fila or a Dogo looked like.

The real problems are still the same..

-Anyone with a dog and a bitch can breed and sell pups.
-Anyone with a bit of money can buy these pups.
-No licencing for dog owners or breeders that sets out minimum standards of knowledge/training.
-No-one interested in enforcing legislation relating to dogs.

A lot of idiots own dogs and unfortunately (especially as I am a rotty owner), these people choose to own Bull Terriers and Rottweilers.

I think they get alot of attention because they are so particularly strong also. Whenever a Golden bites (or other breed) it doesn't seem to be a mauling. Just a bite that breaks the skin. When it's a pit bull with massive jaws and bred to hold on and tear through flesh when they bite (like in fights) they are just doing what their body or genes are made to do. So you end up with someone seriously hurt bad and it gets publicized. I'm sure there are alot of 5yr old girls bitten by other breed of family dogs, but not "mauled". Just my thoughts on it.
(I have had several pit bulls from fighting lines from rio grande valley, texas where they still have fights and everyone turns their head!)

Alison,

I am not surprised. I remember a story about a dog fight being raided. Amongst the spectators, a member of the SHERIFF department!

Alison,

I was thinking the same thing. A nasty golden retriever or Lab, will snap and bite but they might just bite once to get the point across.

Pit bulls, on the other hand, are tenacious. Once they start, it's probably hard to get them to stop (breaker bars, anyone?) and they aren't likely to just snap or bite once. If they're going to bite, they're going to BITE.

That being said, the case in Europe with the woman who had a face transplant, had her face chewed off by her pet LAB mix.

 Quote: kristine velasco

Sometime ago it was the German Shepherd. It's not the breed.

I know there are quite a few breeds who have a "questionable" reputation out there with the general public - dobermans, GSDs, Rottie's - but none of these dogs, to my knowledge, routinely maul/kill the victim. Don't get me wrong...I'm not saying these breeds don't or can't do serious damage. Of course they can but it just seems that they generally don't have a mindset of "bite to kill" the way a pit seems to. It is for this exact reason I can understand the bashing of the pit.

I agree with one of the other posters that image is the reason many of these dogs are purchased in the first place. This statement implies that the "many" that are purchased for this reason are purchased by neanderthals who mistreat, neglect or mishandle the dog during it's lifetime. But 99% of the horror stories I read seem to be about families whose normal, everyday household pet has suddenly gone haywire and, though unprovoked, attacks and mauls a child.

Again, I understand the bashing of the breed.

when an animal has been bred to be used as a weapon, don't be surprised that some people think it should be restricted, just as some people feel guns need to be restricted. these dogs in the wrong hands are just as dangerous as a gun in the hands of a criminal.

but then, even benign breeds are getting turned into monsters by poor ownership. i'm guessing we'll fix that about the same time we require prospective parents to be tested and licensed to have children. which wouldn't be a bad idea, either....

 Quote: angelique cadogan

Judy I totally have to agree with, I know there are a lot of Pit lovers that will sware it's the owners and not the breed but I think they forget sometimes that the "gene" of these dogs are very important when they purchase or rescue these dogs.For instense my X lives over seas and travels all around Asia,and he has seen a dog fight event, hundreds showed up ,pits against pits or russian bred dogs and middle eastern dogs and he ws telling me that talking with the gentlemen that invited him to the fight(wich is legal in part of Asia)was telling him that you can't buy pups from these dogs (for family dog purpose)because they have been fighting dogs for long generations and are very hard to handle as pups.He also said that they only get their stock from only fighting generation dogs.Anyways, that certain genes of pits are fighters at heart.And I am sure that a lot of pits in rescues or even for sale have that close fighting gene.People have to research their pits pedigree or background.I am not answering to all the questions of why they do what they do but you have to wonder, we talk about working lines and show lines, the ability of working for how many generations ect..I know they are the same things going on with the "fighting" line in these dogs.I asked my x if he finds anything written about those dogs( in Asia) to e-mail it to me.But I really wonder about that ever since he told me about it.We have in numbers as many Pits as Rotts or more and so it's fair to say that pits can be more dangerous in the "average dog owners home" than any other breed?

I think you misunderstand what this gentleman told you, let me explain why. I think he is absolutely correct, it is very difficult to obtain dogs that are from breedings that will ultimately be used for matching. I would assume at least in the US because matching is illegal. These dogs are high drive, tenacous and very willing to take ownership of anything you let them take. The dogs you see in the media are NOT the dogs that are used for these purposes, because you simply will NOT see them out in the general public, or running loose or not contained properly or not excersized and conditioned properly because these dogs are handled by folks that truely know th breed. It is my opinion based on the research I have done, that these quality dogs are very people passive because if they are not they are of no use to those who use them. What I am seeing is the POOR product of back yard breeders selling unstable dogs to more people that know not the first thing about a well bred APBT, or how to own one. So you have unstable or weak nerved dogs in the hands of the uneducated or ignorant, and yes this is a disaster. You cannot get an APBT of AKC show quality, only and American Stafforshire, a breed of dog that has been bred away from the purpose of the APBT for the sake of a completely different show standard. Do I feel that this too can contribute to unwanted characteristics in a Pit Bull (Am Staff, APBT and Staffy Bull), the answer is yes. And I don't think the Pit Bull is a suitable houshold pet for the majority of "regular people", they are not poodles and they are not Lassie. They are as many Pit Bull owners have labeled, the "Ferrari" of dogs, and you would be crazy to hand over the keys of a ferrari to your 17 yr old teenager that is just learning how to drive. Don't get a PB and stick it in the house like you would a Cocker Spaniel and expect it to be a well balanced dog...because it won't be. Then don't expose this unbalanced animal to small children and expect them to behave like Lassie, because they won't...one would think this is common sense, assuming one knows what kind of animal they have.

So is it Pit Bulls - YES, is it dumb people - YES, is the answer to exterminate the breed - IMHO NO, for one reason only, when you eliminate that variable in the equation (the pit bull breeds)...the other half is left......the dumb people, and a GSD, or Mastiff, or a Mal, or a Dobermin, or a Rott can all be used as weapons in the hands of those same DUMB people, and will should the Pit Bull ever be eliminated.

A dog that likes to fight with other dogs is not a danger to people neccessarily...DA and HA are worlds apart.

Jennifer,
I agree with you it is a 50/50 BUT like you said you researched the dogs pedigree and went out and bought a pup/dog from a bloodline that was "clean" if you say, but also same thought as I have had about the pits, most pits don't even look alike most are mutts.I saw at the shelter a bulldog mixed with rodesian and it looked like a pit, and I thought I bet any one that gets this dog everyone will say it's a pitbull.Like.The mojority of people buy from the news paper and I am sure none and most pitts have no papers, and the buyers don't research enough before they buy.

Jennifer, your last statement is right on. Most people wouldn't know a REAL APBT if it bit them on the a$$. In fact, I need to find a link to a GREAT quiz online in which you have to pick out the only APBT in a whole page of color photos of similar-looking dogs. It's awesome for making this very point.

As far as this mysterious "fighting gene,"...um, people, they were bred to fight other DOGS...not people. They know the difference...unless they're nuts.

An APBT displaying any aggression toward people is not right, and should be destroyed. The problem is that instead of being destroyed, they were bred. I had one from fighting lines (fighting way back in the day...not underground fighting in dirty basements). The true fighting lines could not be people mean, b/c they would not be able to be treated for injuries. Guess what happens then? Yep, they die. Natural selection weeded 'em out.

People mean Pit Bulls were not ever supposed to exist. Say what you will about dog fighting (not the topic here), but dog fighting is not responsible for the ruin of this breed; morons are. Any sketchy dog is not going to be dangerous as a puppy; this supposed age where they "turn" is b.s. that could be applied to any dog of any breed; it's called maturity. If a dog has bats in the belfry, maturity is when it's gonna get dangerous, not puppyhood. They don't "turn," they were nuts all along, and the signs were missed. Many people miss these very signs in other breeds, but Pits are even tougher, b/c yes, they were bred to fight. They do so silently, and almost always, without any verbal or obvious warning. To a casual observer, it happens "out of nowhere."

I recently had a squabble w/my GSD and my Pit that illustrated this perfectly; he was impersonating Cujo, and she was totally silent, but I knew by the slight change in her face that all hell was about to break loose, and we were able to separate them before I had thousands in medical bills. Someone unfamiliar with Pits would've thought she came at him out of the blue, when in fact he more than deserved a whole lot more than he got.

I will now await the backlash;-)

Edited to say: everyone who is interested enough in this topic to reply should do a google search for Richard Stratton and his APBT books. Great writer, and great understanding on why they are what they are (and what people think they are) today. Very interesting!

Jenni,
No backlash here because I also agree that the orginal fighting pits, (not underground) were bred to be only dog aggressive and NOT people aggressive. They were encouraged to bond with their handler and through that relationship be a better fighter through training and conditioning done outside the ring. "The hopelessness a dog would experience without a handler cheering them on in the ring would lead to defeat" is one way of putting it also. Sounds so opposite- why would a handler and dog with such a bond put an animal through that? and do it to his canine "friend"? I don't know that answer, but that's what I've learned. It was also silent, like you said, hence the mauling and inexperienced people thinking their dog "turned" on them. They just didn't know the signs.

Now I do wander about warring dogs, like the neopolitan mastif and cane corso having different genetics with people aggression.