Pit bull attack suggests that dog owner isn't always the problem

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      Lovers of pit bulls have been known to blame people whenever one of these animals maims another dog or child.

      It's a message articulated by the American Pit Bull Foundation.

      Bad dogs are the result of bad owners.

      Today at Trout Lake in Vancouver, I witnessed an out-of-control pit bull that appeared ready to tear up a tiny dog.

      Only the intervention of a brave woman nearby prevented the little mutt from being chomped down within about 30 yards from me.

      The pit bull's owner apologized profusely as she slapped a leash on her dog.

      She seemed genuinely mortified that her canine appeared ready to kill another dog. To me, she seemed like a responsible dog owner with a very irresponsible and dangerous pet.

      In Burnaby last year, a city staff report noted that reported dog bites on other dogs and humans went from 69 to 81 between 2007 and 2012.

      Pit bulls only accounted for two percent of licensed dogs in the city, but the breed was blamed for 24.7 percent of the bites over that five-year period.

      Burnaby has jacked up fees for vicious dogs, much to the consternation of pit bull owners.

      However, my guess is that none of the candidates for Vancouver park board is going to make an issue of pit bulls roaming free at Trout Lake.

      That's because the HugABull Advocacy and Rescue Society will condemn anyone who suggests any breed-specific regulations in Vancouver.

      We're often told dogs don't cause the problem; irresponsible owners are the real culprits.

      It reminds me of the National Rifle Association's oft-stated claim that guns don't kill people; people kill people.

      That leads to political inaction, regardless of the amount of evidence anyone accumulates to suggest otherwise.

      Comments

      35 Comments

      Thomas McCartney

      Sep 20, 2014 at 12:21pm

      Merritt Clifton Editor Of Animals24-7:

      I have logged fatal & disfiguring dog attacks in the U.S. and Canada since September 1982.

      Of the 4,960 dogs involved in fatal and disfiguring attacks on humans occurring in the U.S. & Canada since September 1982, when I began logging the data, 3,417 (68%) were pit bulls; 556 were Rottweilers; 4,253 (85%) were of related molosser breeds, including pit bulls, Rottweilers, mastiffs, bull mastiffs, boxers, and their mixes.

      Of the 567 human fatalities, 299 were killed by pit bulls; 87 were killed by Rottweilers; 430 (75%) were killed by molosser breeds.

      Of the 3,014 people who were disfigured, 2,096 (68%) were disfigured by pit bulls; 327 were disfigured by Rottweilers; 2,575 (84%) were disfigured by molosser breeds.

      Pit bulls--exclusive of their use in dogfighting--also inflict more than 70 times as many fatal and disfiguring injuries on other pets and livestock as on humans, a pattern unique to the pit bull class.

      Fatal and disfiguring attacks by dogs from shelters and rescues have exploded from zero in the first 90 years of the 20th century to 80 in the past four years, including 58 by pit bulls, along with 22 fatal & disfiguring attacks by other shelter dogs, mostly Rottweilers & bull mastiffs.

      The only dogs rehomed from U.S. shelters to kill anyone, ever, before 2000 were two wolf hybrids in 1988 and 1989. 33 U.S. shelter dogs & one U.K. shelter dog have participated in killing people since 2010, including 24 pit bulls, seven bull mastiffs, and two Rottweilers.

      Surveys of dogs offered for sale or adoption indicate that pit bulls and pit mixes are less than 7% of the U.S. dog population; molosser breeds, all combined, are 9%.

      Thomas McCartney

      Sep 20, 2014 at 12:22pm

      Toronto:

      In a November 2011, public health statistics published by Global Toronto showed that pit bull bites dropped dramatically after Ontario adopted the Dog Owners Liability Act in 2005, an act that banned pit bulls:

      The number of dog bites reported in Toronto has fallen since a ban on pit bulls took effect in 2005, public health statistics show.

      A total of 486 bites were recorded in 2005. That number fell generally in the six years following, to 379 in 2010.

      Provincial laws that banned 'pit bulls,' defined as pit bulls, Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and dogs resembling them took effect in August 2005. Existing dogs were required to be sterilized, and leashed and muzzled in public.

      Bites in Toronto blamed on the four affected breeds fell sharply, from 71 in 2005 to only six in 2010. This accounts for most of the reduction in total bites.

      Ban The Breed

      Sep 20, 2014 at 12:26pm

      Pitbulls ARE a dangerous breed. There is a reason that police services don't use them as Service Dogs. To be fair; I've heard the US uses them in security/ border patrol ...it is my guess is that if this is the case it is due to the Pitbull's ability to rip apart whoever they set it on is the primary consideration here- rather than the risk of the dog turning on their handler.

      Christy

      Sep 20, 2014 at 12:49pm

      http://www.daxtonsfriends.com/

      Pick a less risky breed than a pitbull. There are over a hundred different breeds to choose from, and plenty of medium to large dogs are good family breeds. Choose one of those, train it, socialize it, and then you will have made the effort to have the safest pet dog.

      Save Vancouver

      Sep 20, 2014 at 1:11pm

      It's time to ban these Drug Dealer Dogs. There's no reason on earth to choose one over another breed.

      Pitty Owner

      Sep 20, 2014 at 2:19pm

      Hi , I am a pit bull owner . I place my wants and desires to own a pit over the lives and safety of the children in my neighborhood .

      ELizabeth English

      Sep 20, 2014 at 3:25pm

      the Reality is that these bred to fight and kill dogs attract the kind of person who would either overtly or covertly like to to do the same. These dogs are the projection of the anti-social mindset of the owners. If there were no such individuals the dog would be extinct instead of blossoming and becoming a cause celebre, likened to the civil rights movement in the US of the 60s. They are dogs. Like all dogs, they were bred for a purpose.... originally to hold the cattle while they were being slaughtered by the butchers in the villages. (You don't think the lords of the manor did that all by themselves did you?)... and they did it in a pit, usually filled with sawdust to catch the blood that wasn't collected for blood pudding and sausages.
      When the ladies of the village found that too gory, they moved the spectacle indoors and the dogs were no longer needed. The dogmen who rented them out needed a new source of income so they started to bait the bulls waiting to be butchered. That was termed too bloody and banned. So they turned the dogs on each other and could move the blood sport indoors. Same lowlifes that enjoyed the blood letting of cattle and dog now enjoyed the dog on dog blood sport.
      As we grew more 'civilized' the 'sport' went underground. Now that the bloodlust for violent sports seems to be flowering once more, these dogs are being foisted off onto the mainstream public by dogmen, as well as prison gangs and druggie thugs who use them as weapons. To get the public to accept the presence of these bred-to-kill 'dogs' is the purpose of the TV shows and whines and sniveling of 'discrimination' against these mutant beasts... all the better to hide the bloody sport of dog fighting in plain view. Any laws restricting the breeding and importation of these dogs would make it obvious who was participating in this odious activity.

      THIS IS THEIR MAIN OBJECTIVE... and they will threaten you with death, with lies to get you fired from jobs, to demean your business and to harass you until you are silent. These are NOT nice people but without them, the dogs would be extinct of their own weight and behaviors.

      Elizabeth English

      Sep 20, 2014 at 3:26pm

      Psychological Characteristics Owners of High Risk for Aggression Dog Breeds | Psychology Today
      http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/200903/psychological-c...
      photo.php
      Ownership of High-Risk (“Vicious”) Dogs as a Marker for Deviant Behaviors - https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_TQhn0TrPSbc3NwT0ttcHdlbEk/edit?usp=sha...

      Dogmen: The Rationalization of Deviance - https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_TQhn0TrPSbYkdBejJKMzNqcjA/edit?usp=sha...