Denver News Blog

Taking lessons, I see, from Karen Delise. Where is the raw data so we can see it and draw our own conclusions? I'm not taking the word of pit nutters who contort information for their own agendas.

@NoPits: First off, I'm fairly sure that all the numbers stated would be publicly available under the Freedom of Information Act, being based on public records. If you think the author is a "pit nutter" trying to forward his agenda, do your own digging. Secondly, just because you don't agree with the author, you assume he's lying and attack his research without any merit. Do you have different numbers that contradict what he's saying? If so, let's see them. If not, kindly shut it.

That Denver would confiscate and kill thousands of dogs based on breed alone (without temperament testing or analysis by an objective vet) is not only inhumane, it's also stupid to base this kind of legislation on breed. Any dog can be dangerous, and you can make any dog mean. I've only been bitten by one dog in my life, and it was a golden retriever.

If you want to make it easier for the authorities to confiscate mean dogs, fine. If you want to make people register certain breeds, that's fine too. But simply taking away and killing a dog that's never hurt anyone, regardless of breed, seems like a violation of civil liberties and a lazy approach to solving a problem.

If anyone tried to confiscate my dog, they'd find out in a hurry that the dog isn't nearly as dangerous as the owner. What is Denver thinking?

Remember the past so it is not repeated. Q: How can a country that stands for liberty and justice for all, practice discrimination based on breed ? A; The same way it has and continues to practice discrimination based on ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation.
Have you not heard the sentiment voiced that blacks,jews,hispanics,and gays are dangerous to the American Way of life.

When I was young and did not know how to behave rationally around dogs, I was:
chased once by a cocker spaniel
bitten by a dachshund
bitten by a german shepherd
As I matured I realized that as a human being it is my responsibility to take care of myself and that included learning how to behave with animals. Just as an intelligent person learns to swim and drive and do any number of other things required to function in the world, people need to learn how to behave around animals. If you stick your finger in a parrot's cage it will be bitten. If you try to grab a cat you may be scratched. Many dog bite incidents are the result of dumb behavior on the part of people. Yet, people choose to be irresponsible and blame the animal. -sigh-

Canuck, I suppose now you'll tell us how credible Delise is. Oh how you wish you could find something other than links put up by pit bullies. But they just aren't there, are they Canuck? You guys are in favor of punishing the owner which translates into allowing the attacks to continue. Regulating the breed is preventative. I do believe most sane people would prefer to prevent an attack rather than mop up after one. Prevent the Deed, Regulate the Breed.

No Pits , clearly is Kory !The same drole and lame styatistics , misquoted . The CDC study so often touted (based on those wonderful media reports ) reaches the never quoted finding that the "study " CAN NOT be used to draw any conclusions about breed specific risks !When you cite "facts" cite them all .

No , I do not own a "pit bull"

NoPits is a well known Pit hater whose only source of information is from the media. CDC does not associate breed with dangerousness or aggression. Clifton does as he uses biased media reports.

@NoPits: Seriously? Name calling? Didn't you grow out of that in 5th grade? (Well, 8th grade if you're a guy.)

Rather than wasting your time posting hateful comments on message boards, why don't you get off your tush and go get the raw data that you want so badly?

I did. I got raw data from the folks quoted in this article. I got raw data from Karen Delise. As proper researchers should be, they were all very nice, cordial, and helpful.

Then I tried to get raw data from Merritt Clifton, whose "study" you cite. All I got from him was shocking verbal abuse and lame excuses why he couldn't provide the data I asked for. Disregarding that, his numbers don't mesh with the data provided by any other organization that's studied the issue. He's a kook. (Oops, name calling.)

Sincerely yours,
Someone who is a "pit nutter," I guess, because I happen to know how to properly apply raw data.

To No pits,

The American Pit Bull Terrier if that is what you are talking about has attacked no one period. I am not getting snobby here, but the actual breed has probably the best record you can find to stability. Don't like it...stick it up your aaaaaaaa.ss

My little Shih tzu was killed a couple of weeks ago by a pit bull. Also a little girl had half of her face ripped off last week by a pit bull. Any pit bull mix breed that has been unpredictable, attacked , mauled , killed , or has a unknow past hx should be euthanized so that pets and people can be safe.
Some young person had this pit bull for 1 week , took it to a dog park with no leash , no muzzle. It is also stated at the dog park that these breeds are prohibited. Any one being that irresponisible should have to pay the price of hospital bills and any other incured damage done to pets and or people, or property. There is a law that they should have $100,000 insurance because of the violent nature of the breed. It's sad the innocent have to pay the ignorance and stupidity of people because they think it's cool to have a vicious breed.

Can someone please explain to me what a dog that "appears to be a pit bull" or "has the majority of the characteristics of a pit bull" is?

I just moved to Denver with my 55-pound dog who happens to have a short coat, a long tail, floppy ears, and a square-ish head--like most pit bulls. But she also has rather long legs, a leopard coat, and a longer muzzle.

I can't say she wouldn't hurt a fly as she is rather fond of chasing them, but she will endure unending "love" in the form of poking, dragging around, hugging, etc. from a 4 year old.

So is she a pit bull? What "characteristics" are used to make this determination? Frankly, she's a rescue, and nobody knows what she is. How would one even find out definitively? More to the point, how would an animal control officer (with what kind of training?) in a city with a 20+ year ban on pit bulls know a pit bull from a Pomeranian?

Someone please enlighten me. I am horrified to think that the city of my birth would take my best friend away to her death based upon such an obviously vague ordinance.

NoPits says:

"Taking lessons, I see, from Karen Delise. Where is the raw data so we can see it and draw our own conclusions? I'm not taking the word of pit nutters who contort information for their own agendas."

"Pit nutters"? I wonder where that term originated?

So the rule that you follow is that anyone that presents well-researched and accurate information is a "pit nutter" with an "agenda"? What would you call people that troll the internet looking for pit bull stories and use them as an opportunity to further their agenda and spew hyperbole?

I can post the extensive list of urls where your screen name continues to appear and the message never changes.

"2009 U.S. shelter data released this month shows that the City of Denver kills far fewer pit bulls per 1,000 human residents than any other major U.S. city. While the national average of pit bulls killed per 1,000 human residents is 3.15, the rate in Denver is only .14. The City of Cincinnati, which also bans pit bulls, fell significantly below the national average as well at 1.34."

Do you have any data on the rate of pit bull attacks per 1,000 humans, or per 1,000 dogs?

I would venture to guess that the rate of attack is no where near as high as the rate of euthanasia.

We know that based on the information provided by fanatical websites run by psychotic anti-pit bull groups that approximately 17 people are killed each year by pit bulls (that is YOUR "one every 21 days" post, remember?). Your favorite website, run by complete crazy person, Colleen Lynn, says that 60% of bite related deaths are by pit bulls (and Rottweilers). So that means that there are approximately 29 dog bite related deaths in the US each year.

29 deaths out of a population of 74 million. That is .003%, right? 3 one thousands of one percent, and that is the total dog population. If we apply the 60% pit bull (and Rottweiler) responsibility factor how much lower would that number go?

It is worth mentioning that in the past 10 years (1998 - 2008) the AKC ranking of popularity of dog breeds has show the following changes:

Breed 2008 1998
Retrievers 1 1
AmStaff 69 68
Staff Bull 76 94

http://www.akc.org/reg/dogreg_stats.cfm

"Don`t care personally"
First of all Pit Bulls are dogs,not tigers,wolves bears or dangerous animals.

I think the comparison with the Holocaust is very apt.
I don`t think the comparison people are making is about the death of animals vs people.

It`s about the techniques used to isolate a certain group,the stigmatization of a group.
The techniques used are identical and I believe that is what people are comparing.
Remember there are PEOPLE involved in this.
There are PEOPLE at the end of those leashes.
PEOPLE are being charged.
PEOPLE are being arrested.
PEOPLE are being thrown to the ground.
PEOPLE are losing their homes.
PEOPLE are being kicked out of towns or are being prevented from moving to towns.
PEOPLE are being told that they have to put up a "special" sign" indicating that THEY are somehow different from others.
PEOPLE are being threatened with violence because of these laws.
Will it take the violence against these "different" PEOPLE to escalate before you see that the techniques used to isolate and stigmatize this group of PEOPLE is identical to the techniques used in the past.

It`s so much easier to allow this type of thing to happen if PEOPLE are seen as lesser or somehow different.

Take dogs out of the equation and look at what`s happening to the PEOPLE involved in this.
Will it someday be ok to kill someone because they were "different".... JUST one of THOSE people....a pit bull owner?

No, there's nothing to get. Your point is silly. You might actually have a good argument if you went on the facts, but because you're insisting on comparing a pit bull ban to the Holocaust (and then defending that comparison!) and Jim Crow, you're completely undermining yourself. You're never going to convince people by making wild comparisons to Hitler and segregation, you're going to turn people off. Keep doing it if you want to, I just thought you should know you are being entirely self defeating.

I guess you`ll have to be targeted before you get it.

Let's see, No Pits, Mao, Don't bite me pit, Don't care personally, and still don't care all originate from the same disturbed, mentally ill, and moronic gene pool. I would be willing to bet Pit Bull Dog crap that they reside under the same rock as well. And I am absolutely positive they frequent the same boards and posts to stimulate their twisted and disturbed little pea brain minds. The only way we are to rid ourselves and this world of their poison is by enacting HSL (Human Specific Legislation). I propose a ban on them right now as we speak. Quick! Get out the muzzles, ready the cells, get out your checkbook for it will be costly to the American Taxpayer but hey its worth a try, after all we might get rid of a few thousand troublesome beings. SO what if some are innocent, who cares, at least we will have thinned out some of the masses of humans taking up space, regardless if they are worthless or not.

terrible animals, worse owners.

NoPits is an angry, bitter old woman named Pat Dunaway who lives in the wilds of Oregon and delights in spreading her lies and misplaced fears about pit bulls because she has nothing better to do. Just ignore her. Bravo, Jared, for printing the TRUTH!

Here is why breed bans are more dangerous than you would imagine.

The problems that we are seeing today with large breed dogs attacking are due to them being poorly socialized. Puppies have a fairly narrow window of opportunity in which to be socialized with people outside their "family pack', other dogs, other animals, mailmen and so forth. While the damage from poor early socialization can be corrected it takes, intensive training by an experienced trainer. Without proper socialization and follow-up training these puppies grow into adult dogs that are fearful of strangers, other dogs and mailmen. This fear results in one of the three basic animal emotions; fight, flight and avoidance. Avoidance is a fairly benign issue, but if pressed, a dog in avoidance can become flighty and then aggressive, under continued pressure. By the same token, a dog that responds by fleeing can quickly move into fight mode if pressured. This is evidenced, I believe, by the number of instances where police and animal control are trying to "chase a dog back home" only to have to use lethal force when the dog "turns and lunges". The dog does not know that they are trying to get him back into his yard. All the dog sees are strange people chasing him and at some point he decides that he cannot escape and moves tot he next natural level of self preservation. This response can be elicited in any animal.

There is a very basic tenet of animal behavior (humans included) and that is to fear that which is not familiar, or understood and to seek to destroy that which is threatening.

The problem with banning a certain breed, or promoting an overt anti-breed position is that it drives the owners of these breeds out of public view; underground, if you will. This leads to fewer opportunities for the dogs to be socialized during the brief formative period of 4 to 12 weeks of age.

Media hype that vilifies a breed is a major factor in limiting socialization of puppies and increasing negative public opinion which in turn can produce more poorly socialized dogs.

In many of the stories that I read about pit bulls, that allow public comment, I see scores of people saying, in effect, "I don't care how nice your pit bull is. Keep it away from me, or else." Again, this diminishes the opportunity for well-meaning, responsible dog owners to correctly socialize their young dogs.

Dr. Bruce Fogle wrote an amazing book titled, The Dog's Mind: Understanding Your Dog's Behavior. I strongly recommend that any dog owner, or person interested in the impact of poor early socialization, read the book. It will very likely change your mind when it comes to banning (or ostracizing) any breed.

Here's my biggest problem with pit bull bans. My husband and I are educated, upper middle class people who own pit bulls. A ban like that in Denver simply tells us we need to take our dogs and relocate to a better city. Drug dealers, gang members and criminals (the thugs we are all accused of being for owning these wonderful family pets) could care less what the city says about their dog. They're out on parole and know they aren't supposed to have a gun, but they do. They know dealing drugs, which got them thrown into jail in the first place, is illegal but they are still doing it. What makes anyone think that passing a law is going to effect them at all? It won't. Good, responsible families like ours will simply choose to live elsewhere with our dogs while the criminals and thugs (the LAST people you want owning ANY large breed dog) will stay in your city and continue to own their undersocialized, untrained, intact, dangerous dogs. Those of us with our well socialized, trained, neutered dogs will be living elsewhere.

I understand that it is much easier to blame the dog and kill it. While I do believe ANY dog of ANY breed who bites should be euthanized, it doesn't do any good to not hold owners accountable. They just run right out and get another large breed dog that won't get socialization or training and will be a threat to the neighborhood all over again. We have two labs in our neighborhood they need to be put down. They are a menace. They are never allowed inside, are poorly socialized and bite (kids and adults - oh wait, wasn't that only a pit bull trait?!?) or attack (other dogs) anytime they hop the fence. They are purebred english labs, though the last attack the paper reported them as pit bulls. Before the owner had them, he owned shepherds who were just as much of a danger before Animal Control finally took the dogs and put them down. What did that solve? He has now ruined two more dogs and the neighborhood is still unsafe for children.

"By compiling US and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2007, Animal People News determined the types of breeds most responsible for death and serious injury."
Well, this is flawed already. The CDC themselves stopped keeping track of attacks by breed precisely because they were doing it from headlines that they later would find out didn't correctly identify the breed. We just had an attack in Ontario last year - "Family Pit Bull Rips Face Off Two Year Old" that was picked up by every major news source across the states. An LAPD officer did the identification. When Animal Control got there, they identified the dog as a Shepherd with NO pit bull in it. Only the LA Times ran a retraction and even that was very far back in the paper. If we go by headlines, this attack gets credited to a pit bull when it wasn't actually a pit bull. My neighbors labs went on record as "pit bulls" when they were, in fact, purebred labs. Taking from headlines doesn't even begin to give you an accurate study, which is why the CDC stopped using them to compile data.

Just a fun fact for all you pitt bull haters out there. Maybe you should do a little reading up on the breed before you make your ignorant comments. Pitt bulls are not NORMALLY agressive toward people. If they are agressive, it would NORMALLY be toward another dog or animal...but even then, many pit bulls get along great with other dogs and animals. Pit bulls were originally used as bull baiters because people believed that if the dogs fought the bulls before they were killed, the meat would be more tender. Unfortunately, as time went by, people decided to TEACH these dogs to fight each other. When these pit bulls were brought into the fighting ring, it was customary to have the owners swap dogs and bathe them to be sure the owners did not rub something on the fur that would make their dog not want to bite them. If ANY of these dogs were to attack other people or their owners, they were put down. IT IS NOT IN THEIR BLOOD TO BE AGRESSIVE TOWARD HUMANS. I am not saying that is never happens, but it is not a natural thing. Pit bulls and bully breeds are some of THE MOST abused and poorly treated dogs in the world. And why? All because they "look vicious and scary"? Please America, we cannot be THIS ignorant. What the Denver shelter is doing is right up there with what Hitler did...committing mass genocide on this poor breed. Do your research people...and media...you might want to start reporting the facts, instead of reporting what sells. I mostly blame you for all the ignorant pitty haters out there.

Pat Dunaway lives in Riverside, California in the Inland Empire area for years, looks like a backwoods type. Never heard she moved to Oregon, that would be nice. She's in her mid 70's, odd looking and homely, poor thing. She has a speech impediment. She's a loud mouth with a temper and can be scarey. Had low-paying jobs, probably collecting social security now. Her 15 minutes of fame is the computer and her letter writing almost always doing everything under phoney names. I think she'd rather kill animals than see them saved and have the no kill movement succeed. She doesn't speak for anyone, she doesn't represent anyone and there's no organizaion that wants anything to do with her.

The one thing I don't see anyone commenting on is the fact that, more than any other breed, Pit Bulls are abused, neglected, and mistreated in ways that defy comprehension.

The dogs are often "owned" by people who scarce care for themselves, let alone children or animals.

Every Pit I've known has had the good fortune to receive a steady diet of love, care, exercise, nutrition, and the chance to be part of a family, including socialization with other dogs.

Take any other dog, mixed breed or pure, and put it through the same miserable conditions under which most Pits have to live. You'll have yourself a crazy, jumpy, angry animal that is not fit to be part of society. Treat a child that way and you'll most likely have a criminal mind on your hands as well.

Dogs look to us for leadership and will reflect the psychological state of their owners. If the dog is running crazy, chances are the people are too.

Stop letting idiots and psychopaths destroy the minds of animals. You will no longer need a breed ban.

B. Anderson

You will also find that most cities keep very poor dog bite records, breed, type of bit, incidenses leading to it ect. Calgary keeps meticulous records and in 2008 or 2007 the most dangerous breed if dog I'm the city was the bichon freise(sp?)

Why is it maul and for Pit-bulls and bit or attack for other breeds.
I think we should also outlaw all the cars that are most prone to hitting people

i agree with stuart fisk!!!

I can see the dogsbite people are on this article FULL STEAM again. When will YOU people learn that discrimination and profiling based on LOOKS does not work?

You have been "at it" for years now but have only about 40 committed members. Does THAT not TELL you something? However I give it to you for being on top of every article that comes out on so called pit bull type dogs.

While projecting yourselves as a "victims group" your real goal is to promote breed bans throughout the US and ANYONE against KILLING, based on LOOKS are "pit nutters".

YAWN.

I'm absolutely appalled at the fact that so many people are so quick to make such broad generalizations about the pitbull breeds - good or bad. It is obvious that there is very, very little accurate information being circulated about pitbulls. I am the proud owner of a pitbull mix - a shelter dog who I rescued after he was found wandering the streets and I thank my lucky stars every day that I found him b/c he's the sweetest, most loyal mush of a dog I've ever owned. HOWEVER, as a responsible pitbull owner I've done my homework and I'm not blind to the realities and challenges of the breed, as some of you "pitbull nutters" (or whatever you're called) are. Pitbulls ARE very strong dogs with a natural inclination to protect what is theirs, and they need the proper exercise, socialization, and training to make them suitable family companions. They ARE very often irresponsibly breed and owned for the wrong reasons and that can absolutely lead to an aggressive and dangerous animal who poses a threat to people and other animals.

Of course that's not to say they are the only breed with the capability of violence. Before owning my mushy pit, I owned a Golden Retriever (the stereotypical gentle All-American family dog) which I had to finally get rid of b/c he would attack my family without warning and caused enough damage that it required emergent medical attention.

Any animal, no matter the species or breed(humans included) has the potential to be a danger. Responsible pet owners know this and do what needs to be done to prevent this. If the city of Denver really wanted to protect it's people from dog attacks, they would monitor and punish the dog owners who are being irresponsible - not the dogs, and especially not the dogs who haven't even so much as exhibited aggressive behavior! It is inhumane to punish innocent animals, PERIOD. The fact that so many people are not willing to see this - particularly people in positions of power - makes me think that there is definitely vicious behavior going on...except it's not coming from the dogs...

i have seen worse attacks from a black lab than a pit matter of a fact a pitt had wondered into our yard while our lab was chain up and the pit attacked but our lab tore half it face off so pitts arn't the worse thing out there they just have a bad name from the news

I own 2 pit bull mixes myself and worked in a shelter for about a year. This sort of "cleansing" has more to do with WHO it affects. Who owns pit bulls? The same people whose civil liberties are stomped on everyday. Dogs ARE connected to their owners. Every person who has ever hesitated to let their dogs play with my dogs, looked at me first and THEN my dog and assessed that it wasn't "safe". Just as a large population of the US believes that homosexuals are not "safe". I've known dogs that bite or more importantly, I've known OWNERS with dogs that bite. Typically, they are scared, they've been abused, they've been conditioned to react aggressively, they have complacent owners that tote them around to feel bigger. I do not believe that a dog that has been nurtured and loved from birth will be aggressive. Cesar Milan and every other good dog trainer I've met attributes aggression with the owner. I am not saying that dogs with aggressive behavior should be allowed to harm humans BUT I am saying there should not be legislation punishing every pit bull owner for the few that could not be responsible for the breed they had chosen. Animals rely on us, if domesticated, to show them the way. I've had WONDERFUL experiences with pit bulls- they are my dog of choice. Working at a shelter, I saw again and again, that dogs that did bite (never a pit bull) seemed disconnected, jaded, and unwilling to give me a chance. Why would a dog approach a human defensively? For obvious reasons. But WE ARE NOT DOGS- we should know that one does not make up for all.

It's sad but not surprising that there are dogs just waiting to die because of careless and discriminant people. Being broad is not a good solution to anything. Killing any creature rampantly has been looked at historically with sadness. We always look back in anger- at genocide, ignorance, blind hatred & intolerance. How is this any different?