Jack Russell terrier saves 5 kids but dies from his wounds.

Post Reply New Topic

I hate it when they use the term 'destroyed" when referring to putting animals down. Ok, so the term 'put down' isn't exactly great, but at least it acknowledges them as a living thing... destroyed sounds like something you do to an object.
Also, if it's done such a good deed, I think it deserves a little more respect than 'destroyed'. Surely they could have phrased it more pleasantly and sensitively?
Bah.

Yeah on Digg news forum site alot people were upset over the use of the term "destroyed". Some said it was just a regional thing that was more popular in NZ.

here in Oz too.

for example if a horse breaks its leg, the vet "destroys" it.

which reminds me (my brother is a racecourse vet) he said a colleague used to like using a pistol to destroy horses and he carried it in a holster as a side arm (one of the very few people allowed to do such). He shot a horse at Flemmington and the bullet ricquocetted (sp?) off he horses skull and whinned (if you have heard a ricquocet you know) over the grandstand

brother uses a "humane killer" which cannot do that.

sorry going off topic.

BazzaMackenzie, you missed our point entirely. We weren't saying that labs were equally dangerous, we were saying that as far as "urgent safety" concerns go, more people end up in the ER from labs than Pits. That does not mean the lab is vicious, but that someone did something to allow it to hurt someone. Here in the States labs are not only hunting dogs, but kept as pets. I know for a fact people let their kids pull their ears, stick their fingers in their mouths and all sorts of nonsense. My dad's dog was very protective of the family and would snap and growl at anyone he didn't trust, including my infant son once. People are careless around dogs they "trust" and that's why they get hurt.
Pits are stronger and once they are attacking you, will inflict a lot of damage, that's true. However, statistically speaking, they aren't the ones hurting the most people.

no I think i get your point, but statistics lie.

Suppose there are 1,000 labradors and 10 pit bulls in a town. If 5 people are attacked by lab and 4 people attacked by pit bulls, then sure, more people are attacked by labs, but pit bull are more likely to attack.

Over the years my small in door poodles have bitten alot of people. My 20 year old dog even bite the finger off my mom's slime-ball boyfriend So if poodles had the same bodies as a pitbull they might really hurts some people bad.

I agree with the notion that the type of people attracted to pitbulls are not open minded
liberals who see the soft side pitbulls. But are twisted people attracted to the widely reported aggressive nature of them. Meaning scumbags tend to buy these dogs often and they tend to maximize the negative behavior.

Well, as far as pound puppies go, there are liberals that adopt pits and train them to be gentle.

are you one of those lol

Apart from Chesapeakes and pack hounds (which I have only read about), I don't know any hunting dog breeds that are nasty. Ever come across a GSP that needs to be trained to be gentle?

Pit bulls aren't a breed, they a loose constellation of breeds. Pit bulls were actually considered family dogs, now suddenly they are vicious?!?! Its humans who are to blame. The dog attacks are being over reported.

Thats a real shame... I hate pitbulls. They're so bloody vicious. So ignorant pratt was walking one without a lead not long ago.. what was he thinking? Stupid tosser.

That's terrible! 3 dogs die and those 5 kids survived. That's the worst thing that could have happened.

lol, BazzaMackenzie, no I'm not one of those Lib'rawls that adopt Pits. I don't like 'em, as I said. They are territorial, no matter if they're not violent. And that behavior alone is trouble. I have Chocolate Lab/Dalmation mix. He's only territorial of his own yard and my son. He's gentle with small dogs. He does have a submission problem because he wasn't socialized properly. It makes it very hard to take him anywhere on a leash.

The American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) was bred for dog fighting back in the 19th century and that activity still goes on to this day even though it's illegal. Because of that breeding, pits may be aggressive toward other dogs. That same fight breeding, however, made it necessary them to be non-aggressive toward humans since they had to be handled by people even in the pits where the fights took place. APBT's appeal to a very wide variety of people and therefore are sometimes, unfortunately, brought up in neglectful and abusive households. This can lead to a dog being aggressive.
My APBT, Missy, is very easy going, affectionate, and quiet. She loves people and gets along with dogs as long as they get along with her. She even likes CATS!! !! I admit that she's spoiled but she deserves it. I rescued Missy from the county animal shelter in December of 04. Even though she showed signs of obvious abuse (too skinny, shyness, scars, fear of anything i'd pick up that looked like something that could be used to beat her with, fear of sharp noises) she has always at least been very sweet and affectionate. Over the past 2 1/2 years she's gotten better and less nervous. At the time I got her I was actually looking more for a lab or weimaraner but I've never had a phobia of pits. When I met Missy I knew she was the one. I've never regretted it. I've met several pit bulls before and since getting mine and more often than not they have been nice dogs.
They are very powerful dogs for their size and have very strong jaws. The media tends to be eager to make an issue out of any APBT attack and not so much when it's another breed. I guess they want us all to have lap dogs. Not me!

Raptor

Owned one, actually. My GSP b***h used to leap at people's shirts and hang from them as a puppy (nearly strangled me once--admittedly by accident), and she was quite dog-aggressive (which led to a lot of trouble when morons let their dogs come running up to my leashed dog, shouting "he's friendly!"--yeah, well, mine isn't). I've been attacked by half a dozen Labs, two Boxers, a Dalmatian, but never a pit bull--and I've known quite a few sweet pits.

There is a difference between dog aggression, human aggression, and animal aggression, guys. Hounds are a good case in point; they typically have very little to no human or dog aggression, but no one in their right mind trusts an unproven Greyhound, say, around the pet kitty. Similarly, APBTs (as a breed trained for dog-fighting) have historically been bred for dog aggression--but not human aggression. Until recently, they enjoyed a status as the "perfect family dog," and there was a pit bull character called Petey at the turn of the century who was as well-known as Rin Tin Tin or Lassie in his time, and for much of the same reasons. In fact, the Staffordshire Terrier (a closely related breed to the American Pit Bull Terrier) has acquired the nickname "the nanny dog" because the fact that they're less pain-sensitive means that when they're properly trained, they make excellent pets for toddlers because they are less likely to react poorly if a toddler harms them and more likely to be tolerant.

In America at least, American Temperament Test Society results (the ATTS test disqualifies dogs for any sign of aggression, fearfulness (which can be dangerous) compare APBTs very comparably to other common breeds and far more favorably than some other breeds with similar sample sizes. Compare the APBT's pass rate last year of 84.1% (542 dogs tested) to that of the Golden Retriever's 83.8% (687 dogs tested), to that of the Shetland Sheepdog (67.3%, 487 dogs tested), to that of the Weimeraner (79.6% pass rate, 206 dogs tested). The overall pass rate was 81.5%, with roughly 27,000 dogs tested last year.

The problem with APBTs is mostly their reputation, which tends to attract a**holes who want a dog to look "tough" with or to make mean to scare others with or to fight. Where breed bans are passed, they simply move on to other breeds, which leaves responsible owners of the banned breed to take the punishment while the a**holes start to ruin another breed's reputation. I've also heard of Labs taking up that niche in the Denver area, by the way. So. Breed bans really aren't the answer, IMO; the best solution for vicious dogs is to pass vicious-dog laws--not breed laws.