Nobody is signing up to protect all guns the way I see it. Anyway, I think that there is a strong potential of danger with these dogs that there isn't with smaller breeds. They are bred that way I'm assuming since most traits of dogs have been highly manipulated (without the religious right even once saying anything about that genetic manipulation). It's not the dog's fault, but if his genes have a potential - why not just prevent that and stop breeding them?

-Rudey

I agree.

A few years ago, my boyfriend's roommate (before he lived w/ my bf) let a friend his stay with him for about two weeks. The guy had a pitbull. It was a sweet dog and they didn't train the dog to be mean or to attack. He was just a pet. My sorority sister was living with him at the time and she had a cat. They're unsure what exactly happened between the cat and the pitbull but my boyfriend's roommate came home to find...well...let's just say they were lucky to have two women who worked for the Humane Society living next door who were efficiently able to get rid of the...errrr...debris. They got rid of the dog after that incident because they feared what could happen if he were to snap like that on a human. This dog was a sweetie but, because of genetics, he was more likely to snap and put a hurting on its victim more so than a cocker spaniel or a Boxer. It's kinda like the tiger that attacked Roy a few months back. The tiger had been trained since birth to be a "show tiger" and a pet but it just snapped one day and almost killed its victim.

*edited because I was having a bad grammar day

actually guns and the right to carry guns is trying to be protected. that's what the nra is all about. (of which i'm a proud member)
secondly, it definitely a matter of treatment. the akc is basing their statement of pit bulls on pure bred pits. when they are inbred and treated improperly they will definitely get vicious, but so would any dog. the pits are just more vicious than other breeds. it kills me that people do this to dogs, but that's why we need to come up with another way to fix the problem. not by banning an entire breed. that's just an uneducated way to fix this problem.
are you kidding me about small breeds?! we've had to euthanize many small breed dogs b/c they bite. you'd be surprised what kind of bite a small dog can inflict.
just recently on one of our local radio stations, the dj's son was mauled by a dalmation. a dalmation!! cute lil dalmation from the movie. well, the dog was food aggressive and dalmations in general don't care for kids. they are not a good family dog. but there isn't a ban going out on all dalmations b/c this one (and many others) bit a child.

shelley j
sigma k

That is a very common misconception. What you are describing in called "lock jaw" and pits/am staffs...do not have it!

Do you know why it's called a pitbull and what it's derived from?

"His ancestors were brought to the Unites States in the mid - 1800's by Boston-Irish immigrants. Originally bred from a variety of bulldogs and terriers, American breeders increased his weight and gave him a more powerful head. A forbearer to the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, they were originally bred to be a fighting dog. "

After a while they didn't breed the best fighters to get better ones (well most people don't). But the traits are still there. This is a genetic game that people have played as they have with most dogs. Put an end to the game. Stop breeding them.

-Rudey

There has been a spate of Pit Bull attacks here in the Denver area, and they seem to come in waves.

My impression (from no expertise) is that they are unreliable and dangerous -- even if not specifically bred as fighters.

signed it!

Another thing. Banning pitbull won't solve the problem anyway. Those that have pitbulls for fighting/killing will just use another breed like Rottweilers.

What there needs to be are harsher punishments for those caught breeding/owning these more violent breeds if they are caught using them for fighting/killing.

But these are all violent breeds is what you don't get. Some are used as family dogs and some are used to fight. They still carry the same history and breeders should be prevented from breeding them.

-Rudey

Rudy, all dogs are violent. All dogs have violent tendencies. All dogs can turn on their owners at any given time, for no apparent reason.
If you're going to ban one breed, you've got to ban them all. I've been bitten by dogs for no reason. Dogs that are considered suitable family dogs.
I don't know if you've ever been a dog owner or not, but all dogs can be gentle if they are trained properly and taken care off properly, but don't ever become complacent (sp?) because that dog can turn on you at any given time.

well said lady. that's very true.

shelley j
sigma k

All dogs have the potential to turn violent just like ANY HUMAN.

All dogs however were not bred for attacking and fighting.

-Rudey
--And yes I've had a dog (doberman pinscher) and been around many since

Not every pit bull breeder breeds them to be attack dogs. There are some very respectible breeders out there that breed pure breds because they love those dogs.
Pure breds are not bred to be attack dogs.

Actually read earlier on the history of the pitbull. All dogs are pretty much genetic games - history has created a dog for every taste. The pitbull was bred to fight. Most places no longer breed the best fighters to get good fighting offspring, but those traits are still there.

-Rudey