3,497 dead dogs and other numbers from Denver's pit bull ban

Like many stories about dog attacks, the recent description of an aggressive "fight dog" that bit a woman on the thigh and elbow in a Superior parking lot prompted many online comments at Denverpost.com.
"Anyone who owns a mutt from one of these killer breeds should be REQUIRED to have 100k in liability insurance," wrote one person. Another poster seethed about seeing more unleashed pit bulls without muzzles in public places: "I used to only carry a weapon to kill pit bulls in cities, and now the situation is only getting worse. Aggressive dogs should all be put down. Peace, Love, and Golden Retrievers!" Despite the fact that the article states very clearly that police listed the dog "as a mastiff or German shepherd mix," several other comments also mention pit bulls in reference to the attack.
Such assumptions aren't surprising. People often use "pit bull" as a synonym for any dog that is hyper-aggressive and dangerous. In hopes of preventing severe dog attacks, Denver has maintained a controversial twenty-year prohibition on any dog that appears to be more than 50 percent pit bull. In this week's story examining how Denver's pit bull ban has performed over the years, Westword intern Kiernan Maletsky and I spent several months collecting dog bite statistics from Denver and several other metro-area cities with and without breed bans. Click below for some visuals on what we found.
First, we looked at the number of bites recorded by Denver Animal Care and Control going back to 1990, the first full year the breed ban was in effect. (Click charts to enlarge.) Aside from a bump in 2004 when enforcement of the ban was temporarily suspended, reported bites from pit bulls in Denver have stayed relatively static -- around twelve per year. What is notable is the significant drop in dog bites of all breeds, from 1,146 in 1990 to 305 in 2008. Animal control officials attribute this decrease in total bites to increased enforcement of Denver's non-breed specific dog laws and county-wide spaying and neutering efforts. ![]()
Denver's bites (click to enlarge)
Some studies on dog bites show pit bulls and Rottweilers as inflicting the most reported bites; others show Golden Retrievers, Labs and Chow Chows as causing the most. But is this because these breeds bite more often or because more of these dogs are represented in a given area? Since there's no reliable doggy census, it's nearly impossible to know if one breed bites more often than another.
Proponents of breed bans, such as Denver Assistant City Attorney Kory Nelson, instead argue that pit bulls are more dangerous because, when they do bite, the injuries they inflict are more serious. So we looked at figures gathered by the Colorado Department of Public and Environment on hospitalization rates for dogs by county. From 1995 to 2006, more people sought medical attention for dog bites in Denver County than anywhere else in the state. Counties without pit bull bans -- Boulder, El Paso and Jefferson -- showed fewer people going to the hospital dog bites. ![]()
Bite hospitalizations (click to enlarge)
Are bites from pit bulls more severe?
The Coalition for Living Safely with Dogs, a Colorado group made up of veterinary associations and animal welfare groups, gathered information from animal control divisions across the state. Their report found that the severity of pit bull bites -- 1 being a "bruising" and 5 being a "maul (serious bodily injury)" -- was about the same as bites from breeds such as Australian Cattle Dogs and Akitas, and below breeds such as American Bull Dogs, Dalmatians and Dachshunds. ![]()
Bite severity by breed (click to enlarge)
In late 2005, Aurora joined Denver in banning pit bulls. Here's how their average number of reported dog bites stack up against Broomfield, Boulder and Lakewood, which don't outlaw pit bulls. ![]()
Dog bites in cities without bans(click to enlarge)
![]()
Pit bulls impounded(click to enlarge)
Denver has impounded 5,286 dogs under its pit bull ordinance. In 1992, the third full year of the ban, Denver impounded 27 pit bulls. In 2000, the number increased exponentially until its height of 1,011 in 2005, when animal control began to enforce the ordinance after a one-year moratorium. Last year, 354 pit bulls were impounded.
The more pit bull that are impounded, the more pit bulls are euthanized. In 2005 and 2006, Denver put 1,453 pit bulls to death. City staff only had euthanization numbers back to 2002. But by applying the impound/euthanization rate to the previous ten years, we estimate that at least 3,497 pit bulls have been euthanized under Denver's ban. ![]()
Pit bulls killed(click to enlarge)
From investigation to impound to euthanization, it costs the city roughly $256 per dog.
The recent case of a Pomeranian that was banned from Aspen shows that any dog breed can be vicious.
But which breeds have killed in Colorado? As this list reveals, out of nine reported dog attack fatalities in the state since 1980, pit bulls were responsible for two. ![]()
Dog attack fatalities (click to enlarge)
For more information, read the Westword feature story on the pit bull ban, view photos from the city's "pit bull row" and check out a sidebar on how the City of Boulder is dealing with aggressive dogs without banning pit bulls.
51 comment(s) / Post a Comment
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.
Posted On: Friday, Sep. 25 2009 @ 4:01PMIt's depressing, although ironic that the first post is such a moronic ad hominem attack. I doubt that you are however, a moron. Can you bring some relevant arguments to the table instead?
Posted On: Friday, Sep. 25 2009 @ 4:26PM@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.
Posted On: Friday, Sep. 25 2009 @ 4:41PMThank you so much for "rolling up your sleeves" and actually digging into the data for this factual and informative story.
It still baffles me how people can support a law that makes 2nd class citizens out of their neighbors, friends, and relatives. Forcing dog owners to sign a confession that their dog is a pit bull to get their dog out alive, is like demanding a drug dealer sign a confession when bonding out of jail.
Many communities have passed legislation based on Denver's bad law, without regard for public safety and fiscal responsiblity. Pit bull bans are costly and simply not a good return for the dollar.
Posted On: Friday, Sep. 25 2009 @ 4:44PMIf 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?
Posted On: Friday, Sep. 25 2009 @ 4:44PM2009 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.
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.
The combination of pit bulls, rottweilers and wolf hybrids:
77% of attacks that induce bodily harm
73% of attacks to children
83% of attack to adults
70% of attacks that result in fatalities
77% that result in maiming
Interesting fact about pit bulls:
Pit bulls attack adults nearly as often as they attack children, a characteristic not found in any other breed.
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.
"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."
You mean that "researcher" Merritt Clifton?
A look at his "study"
Part 1
The Numbers
http://lassiegethelp.blogspot.com/2007/08/dangerous-breeds-dog-bite-statistics.html
Part 2
Clifton`s "Analysis"
Clifton List updated
http://lassiegethelp.blogspot.com/2009/03/merritt-clifton-list-updated-still-with.html
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-
Final some results that show pits are no more dangerous that any other large dog. The fact that the rest of the nation excluding Denver is seeing lower bites goes to show you bans don't work just cost a lot of money and tear happy loving home apart.
Remember that the folk keeping vicious dogs don't play by societies rules. So laws don't really cross there minds. The people hurt by these bans are folks like me and you, but in truth I will not registered my dog for fear of a ban being passed and her being taken away from me. But I do donate the money (way more then the fee) to my local and out of state rescue groups.
She as been my best friend for the last 9 years and about the only thing she has ever killed was some bees and flies. Real killer!
This pit bull will never make headlines but in my home and amongst my friends family and work colleagues(she come to the office) she is truly a sweet one pit!
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.
Posted On: Friday, Sep. 25 2009 @ 7:00PMNo 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"
Posted On: Friday, Sep. 25 2009 @ 10:22PMHey, No pits -
You are constantly saying that Delise's work is not credible because you cannot see the raw data (which by the way, IS in her books)- and then you go on to quote Merritt Clifton and Animal People.
Well, NO Pits - LET'S SEE THE RAW DATA !
Were is Clifton's raw data?? -
Posted On: Friday, Sep. 25 2009 @ 11:58PMNoPits 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.
Posted On: Saturday, Sep. 26 2009 @ 12:27AMYou all are missing the main point: instead of being euthanized, those dogs could have done valuable service in any number of authentic Chinese restaurants or in food kitchens for the homeless.
Posted On: Saturday, Sep. 26 2009 @ 7:33AM@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.
Breed-Specific Ban's get my blood boiling. I own a full blood Staffordshire Terrier, the "official" pitbull & people are so surprised to hear she's a (gasp!) pitbull!
Can you tell which is a real pitbull?
Posted On: Saturday, Sep. 26 2009 @ 2:40PMTo 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
Posted On: Saturday, Sep. 26 2009 @ 8:11PMKaren D's work is very credible. Her data was evidence during our trials here in Ontario Canada. When people do research, work hard to acquire truthful data, and gather facts it should be respected. Breed bans are in short, nothing more then hate crimes.
Posted On: Saturday, Sep. 26 2009 @ 8:16PMMy 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.
Have you heard about these attacks... "don`t bite me pit"?
Probably not because they don`t interest people like you.
http://dogattacksyouneverhearabout.blogspot.com/
Dog Bites and the Media
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/
And BTW our dog was killed by a Golden Retriever a while back.
Can I get that vicious Breed banned?
"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.
Posted On: Sunday, Sep. 27 2009 @ 11:39AMGASP!
I am horrified that we are now living in a society which is discriminating against Dog Breeds, and sentencing them to death; much like Hitler did with so many thousands of innocent Jewsish people!
("You are a Pit Bull or a Pit Bull mix, or any breed of dog which We The Idiots have determined to be, in our own bizzare uneducated way, to be among a Class which we wrongfully call "Vicious"; therefore we're sentencing you to death....no matter that you are a gentle soul, no matter that you have a family who loves you tremendously, no matter that you have done absolutely nothing wrong!)
Have we run out of ethnic groups of people to discriminate against, so we're now turning to dog breeds?
(Though admittedly we still have more than our share of White Supremist groups out there, and it does make me wonder how many of you are also involved; in your own uneducated, moronic way.)
Fortunately, the ADA has made it impossible now for any of you to *technically* discriminate against me, personally, because I have Physical Disabilities.
But you'll still groan if I fumble at the cash register, ignore me if you see I can't reach an item on a shelf or open a door without help, or rev your car past me when I'm crossing the street with a not-so-friendly gesture involving your middle finger.
I would like to hope that the people who are yelling (the most) about not only banning Bully's, but actually extinguishing the breed as a whole are intelligent, well-informed citizens who are able to think and speak for themselves. I'd like to think that they are informed by just more than Fox News, the Internet, their daily newspaper and idle gossip....but sincerely, I have my doubts.
Have any of you ever actually met a family Bully? Have you yourselves spent time with the dog....watched it fetch a ball for a 5 yr. old, or lay protectively on the floor next to it's Family's newest addition of a set of twins?
Have you petted, scratched, rubbed and nuzzled a Bully *ever*? Fed it a treat? Seen the Bully actually *smile*
Nope, I didn't think so.
So after the Bully's are "extinguished", tell me, where will you turn your attention next?
Are my cats safe from your rampage? Are my doves and pet rats safe? How about the Koi Fish living out in my water garden?
There are two types of dog owners, those who are responsible and those who are not; and when it boils right down to it, breed isn't the real issue here.
I've been bitten by a poodle whose owners couldn't be bothered to train it, because they "spoiled" the dog instead. I was actually told by one of my neighbors, that "it is impossible to train a dog not to bark". It was all I could do to keep from laughing at their stupid ignorance!
(Note that the people mentioned above are one and the same :-/ )
I've been bitten by a Labrador Retriever when I did *nothing* to provoke the attack. I was standing quietly, very still and never made a sound as I was being introduced to him.
(I do know a bit about dogs, thankyouverymuch!)
The first words out of the owners mouth were,"Don't worry, he's *never* bitten anyone!", yet within seconds this dog had his hand in my mouth and was shaking it fiercly with blood from my wounds being tossed around as if a water balloon had been thrown. My hand and wrist required a total of 123 stiches, not to mention 17 butterfly's; and after 6 years it is still mangled to the point of no return.
I learned the next day, from his own pre-teen daughter, that the very same dog who bit me had also bitten his wife once, his six-year-old daughter on nine seperate occasions (including two of *her* friends), the pre-teen daughter twice and a few adult neighbors/friends more than once.....and her father; aka the same man who had the audacity to tell me to my face his dog didn't bite.....*seventeen* times. That she knew of.
(Being a semi-decent individual, I made telephone calls to the Child Welfare Dept. and the ASPCA within minutes of learning this. I also called the Police and pressed charges, like no one else had bothered to do.)
Here's another interesting tidbit which ties in very nicely to the subject of my being Handicapped:
I use a battery-powered wheelchair to get around in for errands & pleasure, because I am unable to walk due to a disease in my feet and severe back pain makes it impossible to drive. Not to mention my 'this-dog-has-never-bitten-anyone' mangled hand.
I have been chased by a total of 14 *different* dogs in the 3 months that I have had this chair, in spite of living in a small town which *supposedly* has a leash law. (However, the law it would seem, goes unenforced; the dogs are never picked up and owners are never held accountable.)
And I assure you, not one of the dogs that has chased me thus far was a Pit Bull; and nary a one was even a Bully-mix!
None of the dogs, as far as I could tell, were even wearing an Identification Tag to be able to find out who owned them, because the majority of them were not even wearing collars!
(As an aside, yet most certainly relevent, I live in a quiet, upper middle-class neighborhood....not "on the other side of the tracks".)
And yet here we have it, friends: dog-owner irresponsibility at it's finest....and not a single Bully anywhere involved!
It's time to start taking a look at the people who own the breed, not the breed itself; and that goes for any breed of dog.
Personally, I have found Bully-owners to rank highest in responsibility for their dogs; as well as general care, training, daily personal attention and veterinary needs.
I think it's way past time the majority of you go back to school and get yourselves a really good education in the fields of 'Responsibility', 'Respect', and 'How To Win Friends And Stop Trying To Influence Others With Your Ignorance'.
I also highly recommend a few intense courses in Pit Bull Education from Bully Rescue Groups, etc for Extra Credit :-)
(Note: I do not own a Pit Bull. I'm just a very proud, outspoken "Grandma" to one!)
Posted On: Sunday, Sep. 27 2009 @ 4:53PMNoPits 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
Posted On: Monday, Sep. 28 2009 @ 12:55PMDo you people who use the logic that banning certain dog breeds is somehow equivalent to the Holocaust realize just how offensive that is? I'm guessing you don't or you'd stop doing it. I honestly don't have much of an opinion either way on the whole pit bull issue, but that kind of post just makes me instinctively want to take the opposite position from you.
To spell it out: animals are not people. Animals can, and should, be regulated by governments. Tigers, wolves, bears, or other dangerous animals are rightfully prohibited as pets. If pit bulls are actually dangerous (and, again, I don't really have strong feelings on either side) then they can certainly be regulated as well.
Posted On: Monday, Sep. 28 2009 @ 7:23PM"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?
BTW
I`m not a pit bull owner but I see what`s happening to these people who are seen as somehow "different".
Maybe these 'pit bull' owners shouldn`t be allowed to use the same washrooms as the rest of us,or eat in the same restaurants as us or maybe their kids should not be allowed in our schools.....are you starting to get it?
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.
Posted On: Tuesday, Sep. 29 2009 @ 2:43PMEvery month it seems there is another community in this country that adopts breed bans. Sometimes even illegally in order to keep from taking the heat from the public. Then there are communities have a bit of intelligence that do the right and the smart thing and pass broader Dangerous Dog ordinances that encompass all breeds and put the responsibility for any aggressive dogs back on the owner where it should be.
What Denver did and how they have handled their pit bull ban is outrageous and disgusting. As a lifelong Coloradoan, I'm ashamed of Denver.
Those of you with your Golden Retrievers and designer dogs can rant all you want but what are YOU going to do when your breed is next on the ban list? Hmmm??? Don't think it will happen?? Don't kid yourself.
Many, many pit bulls die in this country every day. They are the #1 breed of dog that suffers abuse and cruelty in this country. They are the #1 most euthanized dog and many do not deserve it. Many dogs that are not even pit bulls are euthanized just because they may have pit bull characteristics. Its absurd!!
The media has people so hyped up about pit bulls that you rarely see news articles about other attacks involving other breeds of dogs. Why? Because those don't get rating or sell papers!
People are so hyped up about pit bulls that they freak out when a stray dog comes near them and claim it was a pit bull when in fact it may have been a boxer or some other breed. Its just ridiculous!
The folks that are pro-ban have no clue how dangerous these bans are going to be. Its a mindset that is wrong and dangerous and they are the ones who truly have the "agendas."
PEOPLE have to learn to responsible. PEOPLE must be responsible pet owners and stop placing blame on everyone and everything else they can find. Its a PEOPLE problem, not a pit bull problem.
I guess you`ll have to be targeted before you get it.
Posted On: Tuesday, Sep. 29 2009 @ 5:42PMThis is so reminiscent of someone that had been an unwelcome visitor that never left over on another site........ Heheeeeee.....
aka Dogcentric, Pat Dunaway, Betsy, I can't even keep up with all of the alias and genders this person goes by. :) But I can recognize her/his work a mile away. We grew tired of her/his rantings and eventually she/he lurked over to here...
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.
Posted On: Tuesday, Sep. 29 2009 @ 9:27PMWhere do we donate dogexaminer?
The only "good" thing about these types is that they`re making a lot of non pit bull owners take a much closer look at this issue because of their obvious bias and rantings.
I am proud to say I would now be considered a "pit nutter".
Posted On: Wednesday, Sep. 30 2009 @ 7:59AMpitbulls are amazing !! its the owners who have no common sense !!
punish the deed .. not the breed =]
Posted On: Wednesday, Sep. 30 2009 @ 8:14PMNoPits 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!
Posted On: Wednesday, Sep. 30 2009 @ 8:23PMi own a pit and i love it so you can get over your self. there is nothing wrong they just dogs!
Posted On: Thursday, Oct. 1 2009 @ 12:17PMHere 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.
Posted On: Thursday, Oct. 1 2009 @ 8:04PMYou can judge a society by how they treat their animals.
Posted On: Monday, Oct. 5 2009 @ 4:04PMHere'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.
Anyone who comes to confiscate any dog of mine for any reason will find themselves staring down the barrel of a rifle.
Posted On: Thursday, Oct. 8 2009 @ 7:56PMJust 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.
Posted On: Friday, Oct. 9 2009 @ 8:40AMPat 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.
Posted On: Friday, Oct. 9 2009 @ 9:51AMEveryone should have a look at calgarys animal by laws by Bill Bruce. He has revolutionized animal bylaws by being proactive, hiring and training intelligent bylaw officers, has a 95% registration sucess, no breedbans, in school dog bite education program, bite and dog education for mailcarriers, NO BREED BaN!!!, and the lowest dog bite rates the province had ever seen. They take every dog on an individual basis and have enourmous success. They use dog registration as a service to the people instead of a punishment and will kindly return you picked up loose dog directly to your door without it ever seeing the inside of a shelter. Repeat offenders are all taken on a case by cAse basis. There is much much more!!!
Posted On: Sunday, Oct. 11 2009 @ 12:13PMThe 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
Posted On: Sunday, Oct. 11 2009 @ 3:03PMYou 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?)
Posted On: Friday, Oct. 16 2009 @ 12:45PMCouldn't agree with Caleb more. Vick is a sick individual -- an uneducated POS that deserves no compassion as it is clear he can show none and is a horrible example for kids. According to the ASPCA, dog fighting has become epidemic in Philadelphia since Vick was busted - all the hoodlums think its cool since Vick was into it.
SIMPLE FACT -- Denver official are charged with the betterment of their community. Vick is an uneducated low life. What is the excuse for Denver officials? Who should we fear the most? Gang bangers and hoodlums? City officials? Pit bulls were Americas dog not so many years ago. Those who are ignorant to this fact and choose to bury your heads in the sand and play to foolish unfounded fears are beyond help. For the rest of us, you all need to realize that Denver officials make Vick look like a saint. Check out the following link: http://media.phoenixnewtimes.com/3982131.47.jpg then tell me these bastards are not sick in the head!! Tell me how Denver official are better than dog fighters. Tell me how Denver officials are better than gang bangers. These people are mentally deprived and should not be in control of peoples lives on any level!!!
Posted On: Saturday, Oct. 17 2009 @ 11:58PMWhy 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















