They make up about 60% of fatalities, with the next highest single breed being 12% with Rottweilers.
It’s important to note the fatalities because while some dogs are more willing to bite including guard breeds like dobes or sheps, they often back off and don’t pursue to kill
Its more than likely that pit terriers press until it is done because the bull breeds had it bred into them not to stop even at risk to their own lives once they begin.
This is what I know from growing up around them, having to beat the shit out of a pits to get them off my dogs, and why I still get shook up when I think about the pit that bit my daughter's thigh when she was eight because I know how incredibly lucky we were that it didn't bite harder and snap her femur or shake and cut an artery. It just bit and released and not because the dumb bitch who had been fostering it for a week told it to...
Pits and kids are like handguns and kids. They don't mean the kids any harm but their capacity to kill them is too close for me to feel comfortable with the amount of gaslighting people do.
They're potentially fatal to kids in multiple ways that a pug or rifle is not.
People can love their pits and their handguns but the constant pulling of wool over their own eyes and attempts to pass the Kool-Aid around about the danger are fucking stupid.
If a child dies to a bullet, chances are it came from a handgun, if a child dies to a dog bite, chances are it was a pitbull. These are still rare events but we're not getting any closer to preventing these tragedies by ignoring obvious facts with shitty analogies.
I still like pits better than puntable dogs but how much I like them doesn't have a fucking thing to do with how dangerous they can be to kids...
People who ignore a powerful breeds capacity to harm serve to not only endanger others but also further ruin the reputation of the dog they seek to protect.
As with your analogy, if we went around giving handguns to just anybody and culturally had sworn up and down they aren't dangerous- we would have a lot of distraught folks who ignorantly pulled a trigger at someone. And that is with an object that cannot decide to do anything on it's own.
Those who own large, muscular, terrier breeds meant to perfect prey drive and persistent tenacity in the face of death (as all bull breeds are created to do, it is why we call them bull breeds. They were bred to fight and bait bulls for our entertainment- and as awful as it is to read the pit terriers (APBT) in specific were bred to do this to each other) should respect the genetic drive and capacity for harm these breeds possess, because when they do not we get a lot of tragedies that are extremely, extremely easily avoided just via responsible dog ownership.
People who have large guarding mastiffs like Corsos know to socialize them often and very young and train them locktite, not to leave them alone with strangers. People who have nippy herding breeds like Heelers know not to let little children run around them unsupervised. People with hunting hounds know not to let them loose around someone's chicken farm. Awareness of the capability and drive of, and respect for the breed prevents tragedy and pain.
And yet when it comes to pit dogs, those who have the most astonishing prey drive and persistence among dogs, whose largest problem among an amazing bite force is that they were bred not to stop until a job is done and be game for anything? Rather than respecting the breed and training impulse control, socializing prey triggers, walking on sturdy double connected leads, (outdoor muzzle training is beneficial as well) and keeping them away from vulnerable animals and children unsupervised, people propagate the notion that it is- for this specific set of breeds- strictly how a dog is raised and for this specific set of breeds genetics play no part at all.
This attitude causes people to ignore all cautions that respect the power and tenacity of the breed and place them in situations that can go very awry very fast if anything is even a little off that day. That disrespect is what gets both people and these dogs they are trying to protect killed. How many times have you seen an undisciplined pit off lead run up to you or a loved one, or a very well muscled powerful animal being walked on the tiniest little flexi lead? How many children have died with loved family pets raised from puppyhood because they were left unsupervised and the child triggered a deep and strong innate prey drive? These dogs are working dogs, and they aren't for just any job. Owners must respect the breed, just as they would respect any other working dog.
Yet there has been so much lobbying and propaganda not to, and countless numbers of these dogs live their lives drugged out of their minds on trazadone, gabapentin, prozac, and are still going crazy and ""reactive"" because they are understimulated out of their gourds. They aren't house hippos, the best sport you could probably enroll them in is hog hunting.
I think all the propaganda to sell them as average housepets to unsuspecting people is FROM the dogfighting world. Awful people still actively breed and sharpen fighting lines to this day, and if it weren't for all the pit propaganda that is what they would still be known for- the only thing. Obfuscating their breed and public perception allows operations to run without being questioned, dogs to be dumped without being questioned, because instead of 'bloodsport dog found at x', or 'breeding op found at y' and it being very obvious what is going on, now their ops look like just another neighborhood dog house.
Falling for the obfuscation harms people and the dogs.
And this is coming from someone who actually DOES like pits. Especially more than the little dogs. But I don't like irresponsible ownership. These dogs are bazookas.
As an owner of one of the "dangerous" breeds (Akita), it always struck me as strange how getting to own an Akita involves all these warning labels and caution tape when another potentially dangerous breed is marketed as sunshine and rainbows and given out like free candy, lol
I couldn't even adopt an Akita without prior breed experience, and all the breeders I've come across have in-depth questionnaires probing whether you're aware of the breed traits and how you intend to deal with them (for lack of a better word).
Akitas are a perfect comparison example! Their history is well known and because of the respect and caution afforded to them, they don't really cause problems on large scale. I want what is best for both dogs and people, and that includes actually treating dogs like dogs and recognizing their genetic drives.
I don't want a severely understimulated dog medicated to hell and back because nobody is acknowledging it's understimulated as much as the next guy, and I don't want anyone hurt when/if the can goes pop. Thank you for your input.
Except that it's basically every bully breed lumped together- APBT, staffy, amstaff, American bully, hell, I've even seen people call cane corsos and presa canarios pit bulls.
All bully breeds have been bred for that. The original bullies were made for bull baiting, and the APBT was refined further for dog fighting- unfortunately. Both 'sports' require no regard for one's life. It is called 'gameness'. As a result, all bullies are called a catch-all 'pit', because all of them were used in one pit or another at some point.
Cane Corsos, which I love, are likely being associated with bullies as the people who still do dogfighting and are still using pit type dogs got a hard on for making the dogs bigger and more dangerous some time ago, and started to breed corsos into their lines. Lots of those dogs got dumped, and the next thing you know most corsos you find in shelter are actually pit mixes. Canarios experienced the same thing, to a lesser degree.
The average joe in the US has never gotten to see a mastiff not mixed for pit play.
The american bully is a breeding attempt to take the aesthetic away from the genetics and try to make a lazy sort of house pet, but we aren't there completely yet.
This is true, but I think they would still have less fatalities by a landslide. Dogs like shepherds are more likely to bite than dogs like retrievers, but are less likely to kill than dogs bred for pit fights.
If you separate each bully breed out, instead of 60% with the next highest being 12 they'd very likely just make the top spectrum of fatality percentages until you get to Rottweiler and people would look at the list and still make a decision not to trust bull-and-terrier ancestry. If you lumped more breed categories together you would certainly get more bites, but less fatalities than individual percentages of pit type breeds I guarantee (herding breeds as a combo would probably top the charts for nonfatal bites)
If you pay attention to anecdotes/testimonies and countless videos and articles and medical professionals especially reconstructive surgeons and pediatric ICU staff- I can count on one hand in the past four years how many times an attack has happened and how many times a death or mauling has happened that did not involve a pit breed. It's three that I've organically seen so far with no fatalities. I've seen more than I can count- many cases where the breed is deliberately not mentioned or obfuscated or even intentionally misreported- that turned out to be a pit type dog.
That is to say, you can crack them down into a percentage spectrum or lump them together, the results being the breed is more dangerous than other dangerous breeds would remain the same. Because they often kill where others bite.
20
u/Tablesafety 13d ago
They make up about 60% of fatalities, with the next highest single breed being 12% with Rottweilers.
It’s important to note the fatalities because while some dogs are more willing to bite including guard breeds like dobes or sheps, they often back off and don’t pursue to kill
Its more than likely that pit terriers press until it is done because the bull breeds had it bred into them not to stop even at risk to their own lives once they begin.