Pit Bull encounter? Shoot, don't shoot, draw, don't draw

LaCrosseKevin said:

I've never seen poodle owners have to defend their breed as much as pit owners. If you need a tough dog, you need other means of defense such as martial arts or carry a gun. Pits are so terrible, you better have good insurance because it's just a matter of time until you have a bite case as a defendant. There's a way to solve that, don't have a pit. *shrug*

I've been in instances other than the one above while biking and there is just no need for them.

Click to expand...

Then I guess there's no need for police to have dogs either? Did you ever think that maybe people have "tough dogs", as you call them, to protect property? I have trained in martial arts for most of my life, I carry a gun and I have a dog to help protect my home and family when I'm at work. I guess I should take my dog out back and put him down because insurers list him as a dangerous breed and people with your attitude are afraid of him. :cuss:

I don't even own a "pit bull" and I find it distasteful that you call all pits bad dogs like anti gun people say guns cause crime and kill people in their sleep. :banghead:

LaCrosseKevin said:

mark-in-texas & Butch, good points.

I don't really know why people post answers and say "check your laws in your state". If YOU don't know, just don't post that ...<?> I realize laws vary technically, I was just looking for general input ... I'm not building a court case.

Being I never got contacted by the D.A. for a stabbing, I'd have to think I as well would have gotten into no trouble for shooting the animal in a controlled manner (making sure the projectile went into the ground).
============
Zack, certain dogs are inherently violent and have a propensity to attack for whatever reason runs through their head. The statistics do not blame the owner/s at all ... just the breed/s. Wolf mixes, rotts, pits .. at the top of the statistics, it's fact.

Click to expand...

No they don't.

LaCrosseKevin said:

Not really. If you've ever watched Judge Joe Brown, he always takes pit bull cases and makes excellent points about statistics and common sense. The pits have an enzyme imbalance that makes them aggressive over territory outside the people they know. So, if a telephone or other technician come to do work in the yard, or do a meter reading ... it's more than likely they will get in trouble if they entered and didn't see the pit.

I've never seen poodle owners have to defend their breed as much as pit owners. If you need a tough dog, you need other means of defense such as martial arts or carry a gun. Pits are so terrible, you better have good insurance because it's just a matter of time until you have a bite case as a defendant. There's a way to solve that, don't have a pit. *shrug*

I've been in instances other than the one above while biking and there is just no need for them.

Click to expand...

Wha!???

Get real. Most dogs ARE territorial. It doesn't matter which breed.

Go find some authoritative source for that "enzyme deficiency" allegation. YOU are the first that I have EVER heard even try to mention something like that. It isn't a problem with a breed of dogs. It is a problem with owners of dogs.


Some of the dogs confiscated from Michael Vick's dog fighting operation are now licensed therapy dogs. They used to be fighting dogs.

I own a pit/golden retriever cross, and he is a fantastic dog. My son owns a pit/mini border collie cross, and she is an excellent dog. Neither has shown aggression towards others, except for being territorial, as MOST dogs are.

irish52084 said:

that you call all pits bad dogs like anti gun people say guns cause crime and kill people in their sleep.

Click to expand...

lol , apples, oranges

wrightme said:

Most dogs ARE territorial. It doesn't matter which breed.

Click to expand...

Yes, it does matter which breed. If you were faced with a miniature whatever, vs. a large pit ... which one would make their point better to you about not entering their yard? lol

If you have a pit around your kids, well ... that isn't the best thing to do ... to put it politely.

I know you'll keep this up, and I can quote law all day & night, even as boring as it is ... but the stats are out there as fact. If the head is massive and the jaws are huge, I'd say that's a pit or some derivative of the breed.

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html#Thedogsmostlikelytobite
_________________________________________
"""In all fairness, therefore, it must be noted that:

* Any dog, treated harshly or trained to attack, may bite a person. Any dog can be turned into a dangerous dog. The owner or handler most often is responsible for making a dog into something dangerous.

* An irresponsible owner or dog handler might create a situation that places another person in danger by a dog, without the dog itself being dangerous, as in the case of the Pomeranian that killed the infant (see above).

* Any individual dog may be a good, loving pet, even though its breed is considered to be potentially dangerous. A responsible owner can win the love and respect of a dog, no matter its breed. One cannot look at an individual dog, recognize its breed, and then state whether or not it is going to attack.
"""
____________________________________________

Now ... ok, so any dog can be a loving pet, or an agressive dog. Bottom line, which one would you feel most threatened by? Simple answer.

Why, when this loving pet that just got away from the owner ... when it came upon my dog in MY yard, did it feel the need to bite and pin my dog? It's the fight INSTINCT, some say it's an enzyme and I agree with that, some say it was bred for that and is how it was treated. All very tough to prove. Bottom line is ... if any pit comes near me, I'll be more wary than a poodle.
===========================================
http://www.pitbull-chat.com/showthread.php?p=453188
(if you can read this ... I find it humorous how these posters seem to not be very educated, yet don't like what a judge thinks) lol

LaCrosseKevin said:

lol , apples, oranges

Click to expand...

Well, kind of. But, calling all pitbulls bad is like calling all gun owners criminals. You are falsely labeling an entire class of dogs based upon misconceptions presented by the media. Before pitbulls, it was rotties, akitas, dobermans, german shepherds, bloodhounds....etc.

It is false to label a breed as "bad." It is true to label some dog owners as irresponsible. The pit bull breeds are NOT the 'assault weapon' of the dog world. You should actually get some true facts before presenting fallacious arguments about the topic.

LaCrosseKevin said:

Yes, it does matter which breed. If you were faced with a miniature whatever, vs. a large pit ... which one would make their point better to you about not entering their yard? lol

Click to expand...

Oh, so it is the size of the dog, and not the breed? Then you are pointing at the wrong dogs, as pits are typically between 40-70 pounds.

LaCrosseKevin said:

If you have a pit around your kids, well ... that isn't the best thing to do ... to put it politely.

Click to expand...

No, that is simply not correct. You are off base to even put it politely.


ANY dog that is not well socialized around humans can be dangerous. Including small ones. Size of the dog may increase the chance of more serious injury, but it isn't some "breed that goes crazy" problem.

LaCrosseKevin said:

I know you'll keep this up, and I can quote law all day & night, even as boring as it is ... but the stats are out there as fact. If the head is massive and the jaws are huge, I'd say that's a pit or some derivative of the breed.

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html#Thedogsmostlikelytobite
_________________________________________
"""In all fairness, therefore, it must be noted that:

* Any dog, treated harshly or trained to attack, may bite a person. Any dog can be turned into a dangerous dog. The owner or handler most often is responsible for making a dog into something dangerous.

* An irresponsible owner or dog handler might create a situation that places another person in danger by a dog, without the dog itself being dangerous, as in the case of the Pomeranian that killed the infant (see above).

* Any individual dog may be a good, loving pet, even though its breed is considered to be potentially dangerous. A responsible owner can win the love and respect of a dog, no matter its breed. One cannot look at an individual dog, recognize its breed, and then state whether or not it is going to attack.
"""
____________________________________________

Now ... ok, so any dog can be a loving pet, or an agressive dog. Bottom line, which one would you feel most threatened by? Simple answer.

Why, when this loving pet that just got away from the owner ... when it came upon my dog in MY yard, did it feel the need to bite and pin my dog? It's the fight INSTINCT, some say it's an enzyme and I agree with that, some say it was bred for that and is how it was treated. All very tough to prove. Bottom line is ... if any pit comes near me, I'll be more wary than a poodle.
===========================================
http://www.pitbull-chat.com/showthread.php?p=453188
(if you can read this ... I find it humorous how these posters seem to not be very educated, yet don't like what a judge thinks) lol

Click to expand...

LOL, so some breeds have a genetic difference of an enzyme? Go ahead, find an authoritative source that supports your claim.

ANY dog can be aggressive under the right circumstances. You seem predisposed against one certain type that you feel is defective, because one attacked YOUR dog.

The facts do not support your viewpoint. In fact, I was walking a pit within the last year that was attacked by another dog. The other dog wasn't a pit, so pits aren't dangerous.

Staffordshire terriers (english pit bull) are nicknamed the nanny dog. They LOVE kids, and not for dinner. When my son and I are around pits, most of them ignore me, and go to him. And not to eat him. To love him.

They ARE strong. But, they are NOT the strongest dog in bite. Neither would I consider them the most dangerous. The MOST dangerous dog is a frightened one.

As for dog-dog aggression? THis can be from many sources. The many dogs I experience on a regular basis through shelter work fit best as a male-female in one play yard. Otherwise, alpha behavior is present. As for walking them? Bulls or others, they are dogs. They enjoy human company, and in a shelter with all the dogs barking, most just want to go for a walk. So far, the ones with dog-dog aggression have typically NOT been the bull breeds.


You have fallen for media hype because it matches YOUR experiences. Look to the owners. If that one that attacked your dog had not been socialized around other dogs, an attack is likely, whether it was a pit bull or another breed.

LaCrosseKevin said:

I know you'll keep this up, and I can quote law all day & night, even as boring as it is ... but the stats are out there as fact. If the head is massive and the jaws are huge, I'd say that's a pit or some derivative of the breed.

Click to expand...

Then cite some. That is better than false hype.

So, to you, a mastiff or st bernard is a pit bull? Their heads are massive and the jaws are huge.

So, you claim that "the stats are out there". Which ones lead you to your conclusions, and why?

LaCrosseKevin said:

Yes, it does matter which breed. If you were faced with a miniature whatever, vs. a large pit ... which one would make their point better to you about not entering their yard? lol

If you have a pit around your kids, well ... that isn't the best thing to do ... to put it politely.

Click to expand...

IYUO. Some of the Very worst breeds around Children are the smallest terriers. They are extremely aggressive and quick. Chihuahuas are about the worst and about the smallest. Remember most terriers are bred to chase and KILL small vermin, among them rats that are nearly or as big as the terriers themselves.

I would simply ask your local sheriff about this one. The sheriff in the area where I live tells us that if we feel threatened by a dog, one of our family members are threatened or even one of our animals are threatened (dog,cat,etc), they say SHOOT EM. As far as the writer's other question. I know here before you can shoot a person it has to be an immediate life threatening situation. If someone pulls out a gun and points it at you, shoot em. If they are standing 10 feet away with a baseball bat, you would have to wait until they charged at you or it would be hard to prove that is was an immediate life threatening situation.

I just have a silly question. I've heard several times in this thread that you can't shoot the other dog because your dog is just property. I get the "can't use lethal force to protect property" piece, we have that law in Missouri. But you are not using lethal force against the dog's owner. You're using it against the dog. And, what's good for the goose in the instance is good for the gander. You're shooting someone else's property. It's not murder or anything else. Yes, I know police dogs are special. Seems like that's defensible. Sure, you might get charged with illegal discharge (maybe, seems to be a stretch) or destruction of property (seems even less likely), but what else can they bring to bear?

Blah blah blah I hate pit bulls because they hurt my puppy blah blah blah.

Frankly I have known enough pits to call absolute, undeniable horseshit on the claim they are by nature going to bite your kids.

Our last dog was a red nose and she was the biggest most unterritorial kid I have ever seen. I'd have been more concerned about the queensland by far.

kcgunfan said:

I just have a silly question. I've heard several times in this thread that you can't shoot the other dog because your dog is just property. I get the "can't use lethal force to protect property" piece, we have that law in Missouri. But you are not using lethal force against the dog's owner. You're using it against the dog. And, what's good for the goose in the instance is good for the gander. You're shooting someone else's property. It's not murder or anything else. Yes, I know police dogs are special. Seems like that's defensible. Sure, you might get charged with illegal discharge (maybe, seems to be a stretch) or destruction of property (seems even less likely), but what else can they bring to bear?

Click to expand...

Cruelty to animal charges for one thing. In some jurisdictions that can be a FELONY.

You had better know those laws in your jurisdiction.

eddallen1958 said:

I would simply ask your local sheriff about this one. The sheriff in the area where I live tells us that if we feel threatened by a dog, one of our family members are threatened or even one of our animals are threatened (dog,cat,etc), they say SHOOT EM. As far as the writer's other question. I know here before you can shoot a person it has to be an immediate life threatening situation. If someone pulls out a gun and points it at you, shoot em. If they are standing 10 feet away with a baseball bat, you would have to wait until they charged at you or it would be hard to prove that is was an immediate life threatening situation.

Click to expand...

Actually in most jurisdictions anything under 21 feet and a threatening manner is considered to be an IMMEDIATE THREAT with any knife, club, sword, spear, lance, dirk dagger, singlestick, quarterstaff, etc.. 10 feet is considered waiting way too long.

Consider this, I am much older and slower than I was 30 years ago and I can still cover 21 feet from a standing start in less than 3 seconds. The average person cannot draw, aim and fire much faster than 2.5 seconds. And that does not consider the 1+ second reaction time. Unless it is in your hand, at that distance I would have the advantage. A younger, quicker person would have a bigger advantage.

wrightme said:

LOL, so some breeds have a genetic difference of an enzyme? Go ahead, find an authoritative source that supports your claim.

ANY dog can be aggressive under the right circumstances. You seem predisposed against one certain type that you feel is defective, because one attacked YOUR dog.

The facts do not support your viewpoint. In fact, I was walking a pit within the last year that was attacked by another dog. The other dog wasn't a pit, so pits aren't dangerous.

Click to expand...

I have been fighting the uphill battle of correcting the nonsense myths about this great breed in the responsible hands. The sad and scary part is there are even more misinformed people who believe the crazy crap like this about the Bully breed and guns. I wish it was not just a rule but outside of this form that people would be required to cite actual facts to back up their claims.

Here are one of several links that refute that nonsense, we have a person here who believes all the hysteria that is no where based in an ounce of fact.

By Glen Bui, American Canine Foundation


" To state that a breed of dog is aggressive is scientifically impossible. Statistics do not support such a finding. Dogs have been domesticated for thousands of years and within all breeds there can be dangerous dogs because of owner issues such as training the dog to attack, lack of training and socialization.

There is no such thing as the "Mean Gene" in dogs as well as in people. However mutant genes have been discovered. Alteration of a single DNA base in the gene encoding an enzyme called monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) has been found to render the enzyme nonfunctional. This enzyme normally catalyzes reactions that metabolize the neurotransmitters dopamine, serotonin, and noradrenaline. What this does is cause slight mental impairment which interferes with the ability to cope with certain situations resulting in aggression. There is no proof and there never has been that the American Pit Bull Terrier possesses mutant genes. There is a one in ten thousand chance of a mutant gene appearing in a population.

Aggressiveness has many definitions and its stimulus of the environment that causes behavior. Dogs defend territory, they exhibit dominance and if allowed can become protective of their family. All this behavior can be controlled by the owner and aggression is mainly an act of behavior. To make claim that the American Pit Bull Terrier can cause more severe injury than other breeds is ludicrous. Over 30 breeds of dogs are responsible for over 500 fatal attacks in the last 30 years, every victim was severely injured. The American Pit Bull Terrier is clearly a useful member of society, the breed was World War One Hero, its rated as having one of the best overall temperaments in the United States (A.T.T.S.). The breed is used for dog show competitions, therapy, service work, search and rescue, police work and companionship. Man has domesticated dogs to the point they serve as companions, workers, and even objects of beauty. Dogs will protect man, see for him, hunt for him and play. One breed is not more inherently good or evil, vicious, harmful or helpful. It is man who is responsible for the dogs behavior, not the breed of dog. Those passing breed bans fail to understand that a mis-trained Pit Bull can be replaced with another breed. People determine whether dogs will be useful members of a community or a nuisance. It is the people who allow their dogs to become dangerous and legislators must control and punish the people."
http://mabbr.org/legislation2.html

In CT you are allowed to use deadly physical force in defense of yourself or another person.

If you are bound by similar laws the logic around what you say goes like this:

1) I used the gun to defend my dog - could get you in trouble. You (according to a typical prosecutor's logic) endangered your neighbors to save your dog. A big problem.

2) I used the gun to defend for myself. The Pitbull (for better or worse, it causes an irrational emotional reaction in most people. Kindof like "ak47") was on my dog, then he turned and looked at me. Fearing for my life I killed the pitbull. Cop shakes your hand and says have a nice day.

Don

zack991 said:

I have been fighting the uphill battle of correcting the nonsense myths about this great breed in the responsible hands. The sad and scary part is there are even more misinformed people who believe the crazy crap like this about the Bully breed and guns. I wish it was not just a rule but outside of this form that people would be required to cite actual facts to back up their claims.

Here are one of several links that refute that nonsense, we have a person here who believes all the hysteria that is no where based in an ounce of fact.

By Glen Bui, American Canine Foundation


" To state that a breed of dog is aggressive is scientifically impossible. Statistics do not support such a finding. Dogs have been domesticated for thousands of years and within all breeds there can be dangerous dogs because of owner issues such as training the dog to attack, lack of training and socialization.

There is no such thing as the "Mean Gene" in dogs as well as in people. However mutant genes have been discovered. Alteration of a single DNA base in the gene encoding an enzyme called monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) has been found to render the enzyme nonfunctional. This enzyme normally catalyzes reactions that metabolize the neurotransmitters dopamine, serotonin, and noradrenaline. What this does is cause slight mental impairment which interferes with the ability to cope with certain situations resulting in aggression. There is no proof and there never has been that the American Pit Bull Terrier possesses mutant genes. There is a one in ten thousand chance of a mutant gene appearing in a population.

Click to expand...

You are ignoring reality.

1) Dogs can be bred to enhance traits. This includes aggression. Unscrupulous pit breeders do just that.

2) Powerful dogs require special care. This means making sure that they know you are the boss. This means consistent disciplined owners. This means that they need to be under control all the time.

This was very graphically demonstrated for me a few years ago. A female friend who has a history of not properly disciplining her pets bought a Rotweiler. At first the dog was simply an unruly, undisciplined puppy.

Then as it got bigger it became territorial and very defensive of her. To the point where if anyone walked into the house it would growl. While it was an adolescent of about 80 lbs I got into a staring contest with it and it eventually backed down.

A couple of months later it would not back down and made it clear that it was going to get physical. I used a leash and a training collar to establish dominance and we had an uneventful visit.

As time went on it got worse. He was actually a very nice dog. Eventually she gave him to her husbands friend who was a large powerful man who had had well behaved dogs all his life. Within a month the Rotweiler was a new animal.

He was calm, obedient and submissive. The guy began by running with the dog and then set certain concrete rules that the dog lived within. The dog had his "place". The dog would be sent to his place whenever visitors entered and could not greet them until allowed.

Here's the moral of the story. The same problem could have happened with a border collie. The difference is that if a border collie goes off on my kid I can kick the crap out of him. Also, he probably won't kill my kid in the first few seconds before I can act. All that goes out the window with a large powerful dog.

So while there is nothing special or evil about a pit, it is irresponsible to pretend that they do not demand any more from an owner than a "normal" breed.

Don

p.s. When I was younger I owned a field trial bred American style Lab. This was not your typical marshmallow of a lab. He was assertive and hardheaded. He liked to be alpha. We got into a couple of knock down, drag out fights when he was about a year old. After that it was smooth sailing. But we always had to be aware to constantly reinforce my dominance. (taking the food bowl away at random times, making him sit/stay for food, always making him enter rooms after me, etc). In contrast, I now have a german shorthaired pointer. He is VERY submissive. None of that is necessary. He is happiest and most comfortable following, not leading.

This actually has worked out great. I now have a 18 month old and a 3 year old and he even follows them. Also, he's big, strong, and fast. (about 80 lbs of pure muscle) so he knocks them down a couple of times a day. I think this is good for kids.