Baby, Pit Bull Puppy Are Cutest Best Friends You'll See Today
The Huffington Post | By Cavan SieczkowskiPosted: 07/28/2014 9:50 am EDT Updated: 07/28/2014 10:59 am EDT
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Best Friends
The Huffington Post | By Cavan Sieczkowski
Posted: 07/28/2014 9:50 am EDT Updated: 07/28/2014 10:59 am EDT
Pit Bulls in Peril
What Puts Pit Bulls in Peril
by Matthew Bershadker, ASPCA President and CEOHuffPost - PitBulls
Posted: Updated:
Dogs Forgive
This Handsome Pit Bull Is A Perfect Example Of Rehabilitation Gone Right
HuffPost LivePosted: 07/28/2014 6:18 pm EDT Updated: 07/28/2014 6:59 pm EDT
What You Know About Pits is Wrong
Everything You Know About Pit Bulls Is Wrong
HUFFPOST LIVEOriginally aired on July 28, 2014
Hosted by: Caitlyn Becker
http://tinyurl.com/lal5773
Monday, July 28, 2014
Breed is a Red Herring
from
When It Comes To Identifying Dangerous Dogs, 'Breed Is A Red Herring'
Arin Greenwood joins HuffPost Live to explain why breed has very little to do with whether a dog with be aggressive.
Hosted by: Caitlyn Becker
Guests:
Arin Greenwood @arin_twit (Washington, DC) HuffPost Animal Welfare Editor
Brian Garton @PibblesnMore (New York) Adopted a Pit Bull; Volunteer, Pibbles & More Animal Rescue
Rebecca Corry @TheRebeccaCorry (Los Angeles, CA) President, Stand Up For Pits Foundation
Leah Brewer @HeroDogElle (Roanoke Rapids, NC) Owner, Elle the Pit Bull
http://tinyurl.com/pezkg76
10 Stereotypes - Dead Wrong
10 Stereotypes About Pit Bulls That Are Just. Dead. Wrong.
Elle and Betty White
pose during the American Humane Association Hero Dog Awards
at the Beverly Hilton Hotel
on Oct. 5, 2013.
Photo by Ryan Miller/Getty Images
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
FIGHT AGAINST BSL
Excellent suggestions for how to write a letter to officials expressing your opposition to BSL.http://www.defendingdog.com/id2.html
American Humane Association (AHA) opposes legislation that seeks to ban a particular breed of dog. Such laws provide a false sense of security as all dogs, when improperly treated or trained, can present a risk to public health. Breed-specific legislation that outlaws specific breeds of dogs can increase the danger to the community by spawning black market interest, indiscriminate and irresponsible breeding practices, and subsequent overpopulation issues.
http://www.americanhumane.org/assets/pdfs/animals/au-animal-welfare-position-statements.pdf
The American Kennel Club (AKC) strongly opposes any legislation that determines a dog to be “dangerous” based on specific breeds or phenotypic classes of dog
http://www.akc.org/pdfs/canine_legislation/PBLEG2.pdf
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) advocates the implementation of a community dog bite prevention program encompassing media and educational outreach in conjunction with the enactment, and vigorous enforcement, of breed-neutral laws that focus on the irresponsible and dangerous behavior of individual guardians and their dogs
http://www.aspca.org/about-us/policy-positions/breed-specific-legislation-1.aspx
The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) supports dangerous animal legislation by state, county, or municipal governments provided that legislation does not refer to specific breeds or classes of animals.
http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/dangerous_animal_legislation.asp
The Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT) opposes any law that deems a dog as dangerous or vicious based on appearance, breed or phenotype. Canine temperaments are widely varied, and behavior cannot be predicted by physical features such as head shape, coat length, muscle to bone ratio, etc. The only predictor of behavior is behavior.
http://www.apdt.com/about/ps/breed_specific_legis.aspx
Best Friends Animal Society is working throughout the country to help pit bulls, who are battling everything from a media-driven bad reputation to legislation designed to bring about their extinction. Best Friends hopes to end discrimination against all dogs. Dogs are individuals and should be treated as individuals.
http://network.bestfriends.org/initiatives/pitbulls/default.aspx
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), opposes legislation aimed at eradicating or strictly regulating dogs based solely on their breed for a number of reasons
http://www.humanesociety.org/animals/dogs/facts/statement_dangerous_dogs_breed_specific_legislation.html
National Animal Control Association (NACA). Regading extended animal vontrol concerns – Dangerous/Vicious Animals (2002). "Dangerous and/or vicious animals should be labeled as such as a result of their actions or behavior and not because of their breed."
http://www.nacanet.org/guidelines/Guidelines%20Dangerous_Vicious%20Animals.pdf
The Centers for Disease Control, Injury Prevention and Control (CDC) - "Breed-specific legislation does not address the fact that a dog of any breed can become dangerous when bred or trained to be aggressive. From a scientific point of view, we are unaware of any formal evaluation of the effectiveness of breed-specific legislation in preventing fatal or nonfatal dog bites. An alternative to breed-specific legislation is to regulate individual dogs and owners on the basis of their behavior."http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Dog-Bites/dogbite-factsheet.html
Saturday, August 18, 2012
To you, morons!
When I saw this, I immediately thought of a band of sycophantic stooges who spend their lives bitching (with apologies to dams) and moaning. What a waste of oxygen.
Here is to you, mindless morons..
Here is to you, mindless morons..
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Break stick?
There is this mosquito, or is it a troll, that keeps buzzing in my ear... its latest inquiry is whether I have a break stick or not. Apparently, not only is it a nuisance, it is also ignorant. This is unfortunate... a mere 10 minutes reading a posting on this blog would have assured it that its poodle's life would be spared if my dog got hold of it. Oh, wait... that can NEVER happen, because my dogs don't make choices. I do.But those of you who missed my post about three years ago, can get proper instruction on American Pit Bull Terrier ownership by reading my "primer."
http://andrew-rozsa.blogspot.com/2009/06/andrews-primer-for-having-american-pit.html
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Heroes or foes? YOU decide
In his inimitable and useless endeavor to convince me that Pit Bulls are bad, my foe (DubV) points me to this utterly useless piece of YouTube propaganda that uses fabricated numbers to pursuade you. Viewed by a total of 23 people. :-P
 |
| GOOD DOG DOWN Four-year-old "Chief", an American Pit Bull Terrier, dashed in front of a venomous snake which was poised to strike at 87-year-old Liberata la Victoria and her granddaughter Maria Victoria. Shielding the women from the attack, Chief saved them but died minutes later from the snake's bite.(Photo: Marc Sabelita) |
So DubV and his 2 friends, who don’t have a life, will bring “talking in circles”
type evidence (a.k.a. hearsay cherry-picked, culled from the media, unreliable,
pulled-out-of-the-thin-air, b.s pseudo-data).
The lovely threesome will ignore the testimony, personal
experiences and documented data supported by all major associations and
agencies (such as the American Medical Veterinary Association, The Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, American Canine Foundation, the National Animal
Control Association, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals),
opinion of experts, and the love of hundreds of thousands of Pit Bull lovers (the
mindless trio and their army of 23 cohorts call us “pitbull nutters”), and
continue to spew propaganda, while citing Goebel’s philosophy of it… how
hilariously ironic… or is it hypocritical?
But I digress…
So, on a lark, I entered the keywords “Pit Bull Saves”… got
683 hits… the “PitBull DSaves”.. got 663 hits…
Some interesting links:
Pit
Bull SAVES family from house fire
Blue,
the dog (Pit bull) wo (sic!) saved my son's life.
Pitbull
saves pregnant woman and child!
Pit
Bull killed protecting her family
Pit
Bull scares away molester
Pit
saves family from Cobra
A
Virginia Beach Pit Bull Is Being Called A Hero
Thank you, DubV, for being cannon fodder...
Monday, January 9, 2012
Talking about "unholy alliances"...
My foe, DubV, once again pours
water on a duck’s ass and “alerts” me to yet another masterpiece of foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric. This time an “article” written
by Branwyne Finch, a self-proclaimed “expert” and “contributor” to the blogs of
two ladies whose life-goals are to kill dogs.
I have no idea who Branwyne Finch is, what are
his qualifications, or whether anything about what he writes has any value. Is
he a geneticist? An animal behaviorist? A sociologist? A veterinarian? Or is he a self-serving mouthpiece
for two women who have nothing better to do with their lives than to denigrate
an entire dog breed?
Finch writes well; however he
self-references exclusively the blogs written by these two ladies and this puts
a serious dent in his credibility. Given that these blogs are read ONLY by folks
who are already convinced by the righteousness of their “cause,” he is “preaching
to the choir.” He sounds convincing and reasonable, however, the numbers he is “citing”
are pulled out of thin air and the arguments he uses are exactly of the same
caliber as those used by “pit nutters” (as these people, globally, call us).
At some point in his diatribe,
Finch states “It has become increasingly
apparent that a relatively small but vocal group of people who are fanciers of
dangerous dog breeds have managed to form an unholy alliance with the dog
breeder lobby and animal welfare organizations to ensure that the breeding and ownership
of dangerous dogs goes completely unregulated.”
I wish Mr. Finch did not lump
all of us together. MY cadre of Pit Bull fanciers has little tolerance for
backyard Pit Bull breeders or breeders in general. We are definitely NOT
aligned with any organizations that promote “the breeding and ownership of
dangerous dogs.” We loathe criminal behavior and cringe at the thought of dogs fighting
each other. In
fact, what Mr. Finch wishes for (i.e., “a call for cracking down on criminals and backyard breeders
producing the glut of unstable dogs, a call for breed clubs to redefine ethical
breeding practices, and a strong commitment to breeding away from the
aggressive behavior, including dog aggression that defines the pit bull breed”) is EXACTLY the focus of our endeavors.
Mr. Finch’s statement that Pit Bull fanciers promote unregulated
ownership of dangerous dogs is patently false. What we want is a distinction
between a “dangerous dog” and Pit Bulls. In his mind and in those of his cult,
the two are synonymous.
What Finch purposely misstates is that we are a “relatively
small” group. Actually, there are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of us who
are rational, thoughtful, socially responsible, and kind human beings who just
happen to love a dog that gives us and our families much pleasure and improves
the quality of our lives.
Probably much to his surprise,
we (genuine Pit Bull fanciers) completely agree with Finch’s conclusions. Those
of us who work to rescue Pit Bulls and advocate responsible ownership will automatically
spay and neuter the dogs and will foster and re-home only those dogs that are
animal and human friendly. Demanding
dogs are paired with experienced handlers and placed in families that are
appropriate for the dog. The gauntlet of tests and the level of scrutiny through
which prospective adopters AND the dogs have to pass is probably matched only
by the FBI applicants.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
FAIR USE STATEMENT
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
A Tale of Two Cities
There are these two towns in Nebraska: Rushville and La
Vista.
Rushville, citing a rash of dog attacks, had the City Council
members vote unanimously to prohibit pit bulls inside the city limits. They “recently
passed an ordinance that bans “pit bulls.”‘
 |
| http://tinyurl.com/35uvp57 |
Let’s follow the logic:..”Mayor Chris Heiser said some of
the problems that prompted the ordinance originated with stray dogs that enter
the city from the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. Although other breeds cause
problems, pit bull attacks are often more dangerous, he said. "In 2009 we
had 10 dog bites, and of those only one was from a pit bull," Heiser said.
But he added that, due to the strength of their jaws, a pit bull attack can
cause much more harm that a bite from a Chihuahua (sic!). "We have talked
about (making an ordinance) before, and we currently have a vicious dog
ordinance. We're just trying to catch up with the times," he said. http://tinyurl.com/7k84htj
So, to summarize… the town has a problem with stray dogs,
they had 10 dog bites in 2009, one of which was a “pit bull,” so the city makes
the decision to ban Pit Bulls. Now THAT ought to protect the citizenry.
Our colleague Jodi Preis of Bless the Bullys fame, tells us
about another city ion Nebraska.
"The La
Vista City Council on Tuesday unanimously approved an ordinance to cope with
potentially dangerous dogs and their owners.”
“The ordinance, which
will take effect Jan. 1, gives the Nebraska Humane Society the power to declare
a dog as "potentially dangerous" if the dog is unprovoked and attacks
and injures a person or another pet.
Unprovoked dog chases,
or a tendency to attack or threaten animals or people, could also lead to the
tag of potentially dangerous.
 |
| http://tinyurl.com/8yedmpl |
Mark Langan, a vice
president for the Humane Society, said similar measures have been effective in
other cities. He said only about 100 dogs in Omaha have been declared
potentially dangerous since the city's ordinance took effect in 2009.
Dogs, regardless of
breed, can be classified as potentially dangerous only after an incident that
leads to the intimidation, injury or attack on another animal or human.
"It holds the
owner responsible, which I think is key to this," said Councilman Kelly Sell.”
So, dear reader, what makes sense? An ordinance that
prohibits Pit Bulls or an ordinance that holds the owners of ANY dangerous animal
responsible?
You tell me…
Monday, December 5, 2011
TIME Magazine's "Top 10 Heroic Animals
Eighty-five years after his death, guess who make TIME
Magazine’s "Top 10 Heroic Animals?" Sergeant Stubby, a Pit Bull.
Some sources speculated that he was
part Boston Terrier and part Pit Bull, while other sources state that he was in
fact a pure bred American Pit Bull. His obituary described him as a "Bull
terrier" (which was, at the time, synonymous with "American Bull
Terrier" and "Pit Bull terrier"). One thing is for sure: he was not a Shih-Tzu.
 |
| At the Smithsonian |
Sgt. Stubby's endeavors are well chronicled. Just follow the
links at the bottom, if you are interested. Stubby was made a life member of the American
Legion, the Red Cross, and the YMCA. In 1921, the Humane Education Society
awarded him a special gold medal for service to his country. It was presented
by General John Pershing.
Riffenberg’s blog reminds us of the unavoidable irony that
the dog that was the most decorated military dog in the history of United
States, today would not be allowed on any of America’s military bases.
Way to go people: take something precious and turn it into
anathema.
As a note to all dog haters out there: four of the “Top 10
Heroic Animals” are dogs. Trackr, the 9/11 hero, was cloned five times. Mei Chan, the “loyal tsunami dog is a Brittany
spaniel. Brittanies are genuinely
sweet bird dogs. Togo the Sled Dog is a Siberian Husky, Trackr was a German
Shepherd, and Sgt. Stubby a Pit Bull. With the exception of Mei Chan's, all the others' breeds frequently make the top 10 “vicious
dogs” lists of people who use such terminology.
References:
Wikipedia
Smithsonian - The Price of Freedom: American at War.
History Wired
A Connecticut Hero
Disonancia
Riffenberg's blog: U.S. & World Political News &
Opinion
The Most Decorated Dog in History Would Not Be Allowed on
Military Bases Today.
Sgt. Stubby: American War Dog
Monday, November 28, 2011
The most hated dog in America? Depends on the decade.
My “esteemed critic” is at “it” again - splitting hairs. S/he
utters in Comments to my previous posting: “Blame
is an incorrect way to frame this issue. Dogs are not moral agents. Therefore,
they cannot be blamed. Their behavior can be influenced by breed genetics. It
is best to think in terms of cause and effect."
Cute. S/he uses the usual red herring - quibble about minutiae to distract from the message.
 |
| About the history of the breed |
Cesar Millan's is not a native English speaker. I am not
sure whether he said what it’s attributed to him, or whether he said it first,
or whether he said it at all, etc. OK, s/he doesn’t like “blame.” To appease our prevaricator, we can replace “blame”
with asperse, attack, bad-mouth, blot, blotch, calumniate, decry, defame,
defile, denigrate, dishonor, do a number on, give a black eye, knock, libel,
malign, rip up and down, rip, slander, slur, smudge, stain, sully, taint,
tarnish, traduce, vilify, or any other similarly-meaning word from a thesaurus.
The historical facts remain that at different times in the
history of this country people had the same visceral hatred for specific breeds
of dogs that Bully-haters demonstrate for Pit Bulls now.
The entire argument that Pit Bulls are dangerous because the
media reports fatal dog attacks is an egregious example of post-hoc ergo
propter hoc type argument. It’s a huge logical fallacy and my detractors know
this. But an agenda is an agenda and, quite obviously, selling your soul is
secondary to that.
To spare the readers of this blog a serious tension
headache, I will NOT engage in a nature vs. nurture argument here. I know for a
fact that I can modify the behavior of the dog to conform to the needs, rules,
and social requirements of the milieu in which it lives. A glancing shot at “nurture”
here: as everybody who cares to learn about Pit Bull terriers knows, the animals
that WE call Pit Bulls have been genetically selected AGAINST human-aggression.
Cause and effect? Really? Science deals with probabilities. The probability
that ANY of my Pit Bulls will bite anybody… ever… is ZERO.
I reiterate a statement that I, and all similar-minded
people, hold as truth: Only owners who take the responsibility of a Pit Bull
ownership SERIOUSLY should have Pit Bulls in their families. Is this not an
unequivocal and pretty clear statement?
In the hands of responsible owners, a Pit Bull of any sort
is not more likely to harm a person than any other breed of dog. IF, my Pit
Bull bites you, brother, you have the right to take me to court, sue the hell
out of me for medical bills, pain and suffering, and whatever else you and your
shyster desire. Plus, you also have the right to have criminal charges brought
against me.
What you DON’T have, Bully-hater, is the right to assume that
my dog will bite you because s/he happens to look like a dog you don’t like.
I will fight you and your pals with all the resources available
to me to prevent you from empowering police, dog catchers, sexual deviants, and
whoever you care to name to come barging into my house and kill my dogs because
they simply LOOK like a dog you don’t like.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Life magazine covers
"The Pit Bull is the only dog to have graced the cover of Life magazine three times."
Monday, October 31, 2011
To “Nanny-Dog” or “Not To Nanny-Dog,” that is not the question
To “Nanny-Dog” or “Not To
Nanny-Dog,” that is not the question
Science, or scientific
research, does not answer the question ‘why.’ Scientific inquiry deals with
probabilities. For example, if event “A” happens, what is the likelihood that
it will be followed by event “B” or event “X?”
So, if we call the Pit Bull a
“Nanny Dog” what’s the probability of someone getting bitten or killed by a Pit
Bull? Conversely, if we agree that Pit Bulls are too dangerous to have ever
been called “Nanny Dogs,” what is the probability that someone will show up at
my door and want to take my dogs away and kill them?
So let me set up a decision
making matrix to see which way I would rather err..
The decision-making matrix
will depend on the payoff.
|
|
Null Hypothesis (H0) is true
Nanny Dogs |
Alternative Hypothesis (H1)
is true
Not Nanny Dogs |
|
Accept Null Hypothesis
Nanny Dogs |
Right decision
|
Wrong decision
Type II Error |
|
Reject Null Hypothesis
Not Nanny Dogs |
Wrong decision
Type I Error |
Right decision
|
H0 is False and I call it False – we continue calling Pit
Bulls “Nanny Dogs.” All Pit Bulls are loved and owned by responsible families. If we make a Type II error –
some people get bitten, maimed, or killed. The proposition is to mitigate the
Type II error by educating the public and make them “bite-proof.” Which is what
the experts tell us to do. The number of Pit Bull (or any dog) bites decreases.
Ho
is true and we fail to reject it – we state that Pit Bulls are not “Nanny
Dogs” (because… they are vicious – otherwise why not call them potential
“Nannies?”). Millions of dogs get killed, ownership is penalized, more
governmental control is put in place, people learn to be helpless because
somebody else will take care of them, individual responsibility is, once again,
minimized, and OTHER type of dogs will bite, maim and kill. A Type I error is vastly most
costly, if you care about dogs, freedom, responsibility, and are one of the
hundreds of thousand of us who love Pit Bulls.
My opponents’ aim is “prove”
that the Pit Bull was not named a “Nanny Dog” (because “it couldn’t possibly,
look at the terrible evidence we have..”) thereby further demonizing an animal
that doesn’t deserve it. My projection of his/her desired outcome: nothing will
change, except hundreds of thousands of more dogs will be killed. Cities that
banned Pit Bulls have NOT seen a decrease in dog bite fatalities. I can bring statistics
supportive of this statement. Their supporters: people who have been bitten by
dogs, people who are afraid of their shadows and want Big Brother to protect
them, politicians, media, and breeders.
My aim is educate the public
and let it know that the dogs are safe when handled properly and the public
needs to learn some basic knowledge to protect itself against DOG bites. I
said, DOG, not Pit Bull, on purpose.
The focus of Bully-haters remains heavily on the dog’s conduct
rather than on the owner’s conduct,
which, to me, seems misguided. Owner conduct is easier to correct through law,
education or other means, which is more likely to promote owner accountability
for dogs in the future. Focusing on the dog’s actions may mean it is destroyed
as ‘dangerous’ while the owner can still get a new dog, a new kind of dog, or
an alligator and act equally irresponsibly in the future.
Calling Pit Bulls “Nanny Dogs” seems to irk a cadre of
Bully-haters to such extreme that makes me wonder not only about their agenda,
but also about their mental health. In a country in which up to 300 kids are
killed each year by their biological parents we worry about what a Pit Bull may
or not have been called? What a costly investment of misplaced priorities,
energy, time and resources this is.
Just in case I have not stated my intentions clearly, the goals
of this blog have always been and remain to:
1.
Debunk the bad rap my favorite dog
breed gets;
2.
Provide (however biased) evidence that
Pit Bulls have been vilified by the media ad nauseam;
3.
Present evidence that close-minded people use b.s. published in the media to
further their own agenda with no regard to whom it may harm;
4.
Provide whatever
means I can muster to show off Pit Bulls as the great pet that they are in the
right hands and with proper treatment;
5.
Remind the
uneducated that the breed was bred for dog-aggression NOT human-aggression and
that two are vastly different from each other;
6.
Help the Pit
Bull by convincing folks to a) spay or neuter their dogs; b) understand and
assume responsibility of dog ownership; c) behave as they want others behave
towards them; d) put unethical and immoral breeders out of business; e) stop
dog-fighting; f) prevent the killing of nearly 500,000 Pit Bulls every year by
rescuing, fostering, training and adopting as many of them as possible; and g)
stop ill-equipped, uneducated, mean-spirited, angry individuals from showing up
at MY doorstep and take and kill my dogs simply because they look like
something a politician thought of as not deserving to live
So,
it’s not about “Nanny Dogs” at all. It’s about BSL, stupid!
More
about that later.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
The Nanny Dog issue - redux
My
discussion opponent seems unconvinced that Pit Bulls were ever called “nanny
dogs.”
I guess
that means he will not be adopting a Pit Bull sentenced to die, any time soon.
Were Pit
Bulls called "nanny dogs." Who knows? The thousands of pictures we
see seem to support the notion that a lot of people liked them and have no
problems with the dogs being around their children. We don't know what people
called them. Just because it's not in the papers, doesn't mean people didn't
call them "nannies." Do people call TVs nannies? I don't know, but
sure as hell they use TVs/video games as nannies.
My evidence
for "nannyhood?" Thousands of vintage pictures. My “friend's”
evidence? Sensation-seeking media. My experience? Thousands of owners I know
who adore their dogs. His? Somebody got bitten by a dog she thinks it was a Pit
Bull.
MY dogs
would OK with families with children. Would I leave them alone with my
grandchild? Absolutely not. Why not? Because NO DOG should be left unsupervised
with a child. I have an article about a Pomeranian killing a baby.
If you are interested in the truth, do find the nearest Pit Bull owners' gathering in your
area and visit them. Talk to the people. Spend some time around the dogs. I think you will be
pleasantly surprised that the Pit Bull is not the ogre it is made out to be.
OTOH, you can walk with me through the areas where I see clients in the
evenings and weekends and you will see 12-year-olds with a Pit Bull on a rope
looking for an impromptu street dog fight. Do you know what would happen if Pit
Bull haters managed to kill all the Pit Bulls? We, who love these animals and
commit ourselves to responsible ownership would be deprived of our companions
and the misguided 'users', greedy breeders, and macho criminals would switch to
Presa Canarios. I wish they did, already. L
Last few
DooDah Days - when our city parades its pets - tens of thousands of them - we
saw a lot of people and a lot of dogs and cats. Nobody flinched at the sight of
my Pit Bulls. In fact they just smiled at my T-shirt that says "Owned by a
Pit Bull." Then I joined the Bama Bully Rescue booth and the dozen
absolutely delightful young ladies who were working to educate the public and
adopt out some of our dogs.
What is the
official position of the CDC and American Veterinary Medical Association?
Educate the public in dog bite prevention! Do they advocate the use of Pit
Bulls as "nannies?" Nope. But they also emphasize that one cannot
ascertain "viciousness" based on breed. Certainly, not with the 79
people maimed or killed by so-called Pit Bulls that my “friend’s” friend is so
fond of citing and not with ANY available scientifically documented data.
Was I ever
bitten by a dog? Of course I was. By a Deutscher Schäferhund... I was a child
and I was teasing it. You know what happens when a child teases a trained,
well-cared for and balanced Pit Bull? NOTHING! It will probably lick the kid.
Pit Bulls are tolerant, loyal, gentle, and loving. My dogs would rather be
petted than eat. The dozens of people with Pit Bulls we walked with in the park
last Friday, many of whom were children, seem to agree with me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)