spridgets
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RANT!- NO LBC

To: Dbcooper292@aol.com, kgb@frontiernet.net, spridgets@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: RANT!- NO LBC
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:53:38 -0600
Cc: spridgets-owner@autox.team.net
References: <159.39ea6c67.2e282d8e@aol.com>
I wasn't going to wade in, but I don't think you're really eliminated the 
human factor here.  

1) I would argue that the type of people who are looking for a dog with the 
reputation of Labs and German Sheperds are very different people who are 
looking for a dog with the reputation of a Pit Bull Terrier.  "Lab and 
Shepherd people" treat their dogs, on the whole, differently from "Pit Bull 
people".

2) Pit Bulls have a reputation for viciousness, which makes any Pit Bull 
attack likely to be cited more frequiently in the news and on the Web than 
other breeds.

Yes, Pit Bull Terriers were bred to be fighting dogs.  So were Poodles.  How 
many hits will you get on "Poodle attack child"?  Rhodesian Ridgebacks were 
bred to fight (and kill) LIONS for pity's sake!  Try "Ridgeback attack 
child", you'll get 815 matches, fewer if you eliminate words like "never" 
and "won't".

The fact is that a well treated Pit Bull Terrier will be safer to have around 
kids than a badly treated Chihuahua (BTW:a dog bred for fighting rats).

The problem here is that the dog will be put to sleep, and the owner will be 
free to get another dog of whatever breed he/she chooses.  

Who's >really< responsible for the death of the child?

Chris K.

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:57:18 EDT, Dbcooper292 wrote
> Just to make sure I wasn't talking out my arse I did a quick check.  
> I typed the words "labrador retriever attack child" into google, 
> then "german shepard attack child" then "pit bull attack child". 
>  Here are the results:
> 
> Lab - 4,260 hits
> Shepard - 7,270 hits
> Pit Bull - 55,100 hits.
> 
> How does this factor in to your equation?
> 
> Mark M.






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>