Apparently, I have more than 2 or 3 readers on this here blog. I am going to respond to a comment the "pitbullspit" made about my blog titled "Sorry." I don't think that "pitbullspit" is ever going to read this, but here goes.
Here is pitbullspit's comment:
"Get some more education or awareness on the matter before you choose to add to the negative image the pit bull is already a victim of. I would guess your logic is that we should just get rid of all these dogs. Well when there are no more pit bulls to blame which breed will you choose next to eradicate?"
Here is my response:
I didn't even say that anything should be done, much less say that the breed should be eliminated. As for me getting "more education or awareness," I don't even know what that means. I am "aware" of the fact the Pits continually kill people. I also put about 90% of the blame on the owners of those dogs.
I have also spent plenty of time working at different animal shelters, and I can say, that of all of the animals that are under rabies quarantine there for biting somebody, Pit Bulls have a pretty high representation. And of those dogs, the Pits are the ones most likely to attack me there, from the other side of the cage.
In other words, Pit Bulls are pretty likely to bite somebody, and when they do, the dogs are more likely to be pretty dang aggressive. They are also more likely to kill you.
I realize the Labs and Lab mixes are also very high on the human bite incident list. There are two big reasons for that.
1) Many, many dogs, are labeled "Lab mix." It's a standard identification to give a dog when you aren't sure of what the breed is, but it "kinda" looks like a Lab.
2) There are a lot of Labs and Lab mixes running around here, much more than the number of Pit Bulls and Pit Bull mixes. I don't have any data to back that up, but in my experience, that is the case (And I am a veterinarian that has worked in dozens of practices all over the state. And at all types of practices catering to both rich and the poor.) So, I think that my conclusion is pretty valid.
As far as my "education", I believe that me actually being a veterinarian that has treated hundreds, if not thousands, of Pit Bulls, gives me a pretty good "education" on the behavior of Pits. As I said, I have had only a handful of Pits that have been a problem for me in the clinic (i.e. they are very aggressive and had to be muzzled).
That being said, Pits attack in a completely unique manner. When they attack, most of the time, if not all of the time, it takes numerous attempts to get the Pit to stop. Most dogs, after being hit once, will stop their attack. Not Pits. They are trying to kill. Or seriously injure. Just look at the reports of witnesses describing the attacks of Pits. Pits just don't stop their attack.
The biggest problem with the Pit Bull is that it is a "machismo" issue. Most people that own these dogs have them to look "badass." It's all about image. Before the Pits became popular, it was the Chow. Now, the Rott, Chow, and Pit Bull are all "Hey look at me, I'm a badass mofo because I have this dog."
Why on earth do drug dealers, gang bangers, criminals, etc own Pits? Is it because of the Pit Bull's striking personality and good looks?
No. It's because of the image that the dog portrays. And the meaner the dog, the better. And the owners of these dogs (the "badass" owners) tend to mistreat these dogs to make them meaner.*
So who are we fooling here? Do I think that Pit Bulls are bad dogs? Yes and no. I think that raised right, they will most likely be fine, and never hurt a flea.
But the problem is that they are killing people, and the vast majority of the people that own them, have them for the "image" that the dog portrays. And I'm not saying most of the owners of Pit Bulls are criminals either, so don't even think that I'm saying that for a second.
I am saying that almost 100% of the people that own a Pit Bull is for the image. Period. Not because of their personality. Not because of their striking good looks.
If you want personality and good looks, get a Golden Retriever. Or a Boston Terrier. Or an Irish Setter. Or an Old English Sheepdog. Or a Great Dane. Or a Maltese. Or a Lhasa Apso. Or a Newfoundland. Or a Norfolk Terrier. Or a West Highland White. Or a........
I do think that the owners of these dogs need to be held accountable for the actions of their dogs. Just like parents are responsible for the actions of their children.
If your dog kills somebody, you go to jail. For a long time.
If your dog rips a child's face off, you go to jail. For a long time.
If your dog rips off a 2 year old kid's arm, you go to jail. For a long time.
I think that Pits should have to be registered, in a similar manner to a gun, because we all know that a lot of these dogs are being used as weapons against people and other dogs, either intentionally or unintentionally.
I think that after a few people end up in jail because their "friendly" dog killed somebody, then the number of Pit Bulls in the country will start decreasing pretty dang rapidly.
Keep on keepin' on.
Footnote:
* I am in no way saying that all owners of Pits mistreat their dogs. So don't even go there.
No comments:
Post a Comment