Petitioning dogsbite.org and 1 other

This petition will be delivered to:

dogsbite.org

Coleen Lynn

Stop giving false information on pitbulls and rottweilers!

julia smith

Los Angeles, CA

I was searching online for good family dog breeds when pitbulls came up. I know 100% that pitbulls are amazing dogs, but I wanted to see what the internet said. The first four links that come up are from dogsbite.org. I clicked on the first link and it said," Pictured are the two most deadly dog breeds in America: pit bull terriers and rottweilers." I know for a fact that pomeranians are more scary than pitbulls and rottweilers. I doubt that dogsbite.org actually has had any encounters with a pitbull or rottweiler.

When I first rescued a pitbull from the shelter, my friends were scared of him. Then, they met him. There is a link on the dangerous dog page that says Pitbull myths. I clicked on that and it says, "Myth #1: It's the owner not the breed" That is such a lie! If you are going to force your dog to fight, it will be vicious to survive! I read on until I see this," Myth #5: The media conspiracy against pit bulls" Of course they are! Every one hates pitbulls, thats why they are put down in shelters, not given enough time, and shelters try to get them not adopted. "Myth #7: Pit bulls do not have a locking jaw" They don't have locking jaws! It takes a real idiot to write that as a myth! Pitbulls bite for defense. Because of pitbull hatred, people might just go up and kick the dog. What would you do if something two times your size kicked you? you would want to defend yourself! "Myth #10: Punish the deed not the breed" Dog abuse is illegal. Dog fighting is illegal. If these poor creatures escape, they will be afraid of the world. Thats when they bite. Punish the people fighting the dogs and the people watching. Don't punish the dogs.

I see another link that says Pitbull owners. I open it up and the first thing i see is," Not normal dog owners" I am a normal dog owner. I have had boxers and bull mastiffs and pitbulls are no different. I read the article and it says," Owners of pit bulls, they discovered, directly feel the stigma targeted at their breed and resort to various tactics to mitigate it. These strategies included: 
"passing their dogs as breeds other than pit bulls, denying that their behavior is biologically determined, debunking adverse media coverage, using humor, emphasizing counter-stereotypical behavior, avoiding stereotypical equipment or accessories, taking preventive measures, or becoming breed ambassadors." who would do that? Not people that own pitbulls.

They say pitbulls are fearless. My pitbull is scared of pomeranians. Do you really want people to think this? This is why America hates pitbulls. please sign this petition.

https://www.change.org/p/dogsbite-org-stop-giving-false-information-on-pitbulls-and-rottweilers

Pit Bulls; Friend or Foe? By StaceyLee

Pit Bulls; Friend or Foe?

Pit bulls have been around for centuries. Many people believe Pit Bulls are a range of dogs, but technically Pit Bulls are American Shaffordshire Terriers and American Pit Bull Terriers. Throughout time, Pit Bulls have been portrayed very differently. In present day, the media has represented these dogs as mean, vicious, and advised not to be family pets. In the past, these dogs were shown differently in the media. Pit bulls have been rescue dogs, even during 9/11, a way hero dog during World War I, and were called a nursemaid's dog at one point (aspca.org). “Pit bull's were dubbed 'America’s Dog' and used on posters during WWI to sell war bonds and recruit for the U.S. military” (O'Conner, 2013). Pit Bulls have been negatively seen in the media because of the serious injuries and sometimes fatal attacks these dogs have done to people. This negativity has lead to cities completely banning the dog and creating breed specific legislations against Pit Bulls because of the dangers the public and the media believes the animal imposes. Breed specific legislations (BSL) are laws cities and states obtain that specifically targets types of dogs and does not affect other dogs. BSL “seeks to limit public exposure to dangerous dogs by regulating ownership of these breeds...is to prevent future attacks before an occurrence” (dogsbite.org). This topic is extremely important to me because I own a Pit Bull (an American Pit Bull Terrier) and I know she is not a vicious dog. The six years I have owned her have been difficult because of prejudices against my dog and owning the type of dog and also having my three year old son around her.

Blogs and Websites

There are many blogs that are against pit bulls. They are usually against any dog that is consider a bully dog, Pit Bulls especially. Bully dogs include Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, Dobermans, German Shepherds, and so on. Dogsbite.org is a very popular site that is completely against anyone owning a bully breed, especially Pit Bulls and Rottweilers. They fully support breed-specific laws (BSL) and believe that these laws will “correct the Pit Bull problem” (dogsbite.org). The blog stats that since the 1980s, pit bulls have been a problem because attacks have been on the rise. Not regulating the breeding of these dogs have made the population sky rocket. They believe in pit bulls bans, mandatory spay and neuter, identification and liability insurance, and prohibiting felons from ownership. There blog is filled with stories of people who have been seriously injured or fatally killed by a pit bull or a dangerous breed that is common to a pit bull. The blog states that pit bulls and their mixes “accounted for 74% of the total recorded fatal attacks...from 2006 to 2012” (dogsbite.org). They believe the dog and dog-like pit bulls are dangerous because of their selective breeding for dog fighting. They have surprise attacks, lethal bite style (by holding and shaking), and a “ruinous manner of attack.” Dogsbite.org is a blog and website dedicated to informing people of the dangers of pit bulls and it's cousins (or dogs similar).

There are also many blogs and websites dedicated to informing people of the myths of pit bulls and how they are not a dangerous breed. Nopitbullbans.com is one of those blogs. The website is formatted to showing articles that are for pit bulls and then showing articles that are against pit bulls and trying to expose their wrongs. They have an article that is written to debunk dogbite.org. They wanted to bring attention “that 'pit bull' is not a breed but a slang term describing countless breeds, their mixes, and those dogs resembling those breeds and their mixes; dogs that are merely 'guilty' of fitting a type” (nopitbullbans.com). The blog also believes that no breed is more prone to bitting and killing.

“The CDC itself noted of its own statistics 1) the media is notorious for reporting almost exclusively on so-call “pit bull” attacks....notorious for getting the breed wrong, does not take into consideration mitigating factors like owner irresponsibility, abuse or neglect, lack of socialization, etc..CDC statistics are inconclusive...accurate population data for 'pit bulls' would be impossible to determine” (nopitbullbans.com).

The blog also states BSL is not proven to effectively prevent fatal or nonfatal dog bites. The ASPCA has also stated the myths about pit bulls. They do not have locking jaws. There anatomy in their jaw is no different then any other dog, but they do state that pit bulls are very powerful dogs. Also, when a pit bull is dog-aggressive is does not mean they are human aggressive. The media has portrayed pit bulls and pit bull like dogs to be dangerous but knowing all the facts before determining this is important especially with news the media deems important.

Objective or Propagandistic

Most of the website and blogs on pit bulls and pit bull like breeds are biased. Most of them are completely for or completely against pit bulls. They are either willing to pass Breed-specific legislations or think the BSL laws are unconstitutional. The websites are the best ones to research when wanting the exact facts for dogs. The ASPCA and the American Humane Association are two websites that people should research if wanting to know the facts. American Humane Association states that “any breed of dog can bite, and research suggest BSL does little to protect the community from dog-bite incidents.” It's also very costly to maintain BSL. The blogs written are usually propagandistic, which is a person involved in producing or spreading propaganda (dictionary.com). They are there to persuade people to believe what they believe. The websites are usually more objective, which is “not [being] influence by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased” (dictionary.com). They are there to give the readers the facts. There is no emotion with the websites, just truth. My own bias does affect my perception because I do not believe in BSL and do not believe pit bulls or pit bull-like dogs are dangerous. I think people are dangerous and they are able to make a dog into a weapon. I also think that, like humans, dogs have attitude and some are bad and some are good. Also like humans, all dogs have a tolerance level. I have seen many different dogs, timid and outgoing, mean and nice; all dogs are completely different with different personalities. It does not matter about the breed, it was the dog's own personality. Sometimes when bad experiences happens to dogs, they might become more aggressive, or sometimes when dogs are overbreed, they might be more aggressive, but it completely depends on the individual dog, not the breed.

With any topic or situation where people disagree it is important for people to know all of the facts. Looking at both sides, or all sides is essential to knowing the facts and being able to determine what side is more believable. Knowing what breed-specific legislation is and knowing what the conditions, restrictions, and expectations are, is always important. Some blogs and websites can be propagandistic and knowing which are can help people understand what they are reading. Also, knowing the websites that are more objective and reading those will give the audience the ability to not be so vulnerable to to be able to make their own decisions without being swayed by the media.

I own an American Pit Bull Terrier. I do not know if she is full blooded or if she is mixed with another breed. My veterinarian believes she is mixed, because she is smaller then other females in her breed. I don't just own my dog, she is apart of my family, and has been for six years. She has never even growled at my son, let alone attacked her. My report may be biased, but I truly tried to report on both sides. I believe it's unlawful to target my dog with laws, but there are people who agree with BSL. I wanted to report on both sides. I do believe the media sways people opinions about these types of dogs because they believe it's news worthy. When children or people get attacked by a different breed of a dog, it is not reported because the dog is not considered a threat to society. Doing the research, there are other types of dogs that have attacked and sometimes fatally killed a child. In South Carolina, a 2 month old boy was fatally killed by the family's golden retriever-Labrador mix. Also malamutes have cases of attacking children and adults, sometimes killing them. People kill people, wild animals kills people and each other, and dogs are no different. Sometimes tragedy happens and a fatal accident occurs. My main point is to prove that all dogs are capable of biting and fatally killing people. I and no one else should be targeted for owning a type of dog. Everyone should have to follow the same rules and regulations for their dogs. Everyone should be required to neuter/spay their dog, everyone should have to have insurance on their dog, and so on. Pit bulls and pit bull-like dogs should be treated just like any other dog and everyone should be responsible for their dogs actions.

References

American Humane Association. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.americanhumane.org/animals/stop- animal-abuse/fact-sheets/dog-bites.html

American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) (n.d.). The Truth about Pit Bulls. Retrieved from http://www.aspca.org/pet-care/virtual-pet-behaviorist/dogbehavior/truth- about-pit-bulls.

Definitions of propagandistic and objective. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objective?s=t

DogsBite.org. Some dogs don't let go. Retrieved fromhttp://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs.php.

O'Conner, R. (March 19, 2013). National Geographic.The Truth about Pit Bulls. Retrieved fromhttp://tvblogs.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/19/the-truth-about-pit-bulls/

NoPitBullBans.com. (June 28, 2013). Debunking dogsbite.org. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nopitbullbans.com/pages/debunking-dogsbiteorg/

The REAL Dog Bite Statistics Plus Media, Myths & Colleen Lynn EXPOSED Posted by BSL News By Sloane Quealy-Miner

DOGSBITE.ORG website is not run by an “expert” in the field of canine behavior. It is run by a woman with a grudge.  Her name is Colleen Lynn and she was the victim of a dog bite in 2007. Because of this incident that involved one individual dog she has decided to enact revenge on ALL pit bull type dogs.

Colleen Lynn blatantly lies on her website when she claims that pit bulls lead dog bite fatalities. She gathers all of her information from media reports, no questions asked. Clearly she doesn’t ask questions because most of what is reported in the media surrounding pit bulls and “attacks” is incorrect and has been repeatedly proven to be untrue.

Many question the truthfulness of Colleen’s account of what happened to her in June of 2007. Her story has changed multiple times. Pit Bulletin Legal News thoroughly investigated the incident and published these never before seen documents. It is clear to myself and many others “that Ms. Lynn never published the Seattle Animal Control records regarding the investigation because the story she is now telling bears very little resemblance to what actually happened, and are in total conflict with the only other witness involved: the dogwalker.” 

While Colleen’s blatant disregard for the truth on her website  is not a surprise and not unexpected, it is important for all of us to have the correct information easily available. Thankfully there is the National Canine Research Council whose dedicated staff comb through the details of every dog bite related fatality.

I encourage everyone to spend time carefully reading the invaluable information on NCR’s website including the 2010 Dog Bite Fatalities NCR and 2011 Preliminary Dog Bite Fatalities Report

The National Canine Research Council “re-interviews sources the media has reached, and located others they have not, among whom may be police investigators, animal control officers, coroners, veterinarians, health department officials, dog owners, and eye witnesses. They have obtained incident reports, bite reports, human and animal autopsy reports, summaries of judicial proceedings, and crime scene data and photographs when available.”

Access the National Canine Research Dog Bite Statistics HERE
NCRC’s informative section on ineffective laws including breed specific legislation HERE
FAQ’s regarding dog bites HERE and Breed Specific FAQ’s HERE

Dog bite-related fatalities are exceedingly rare. In 2010, 33 fatalities occurrd within a population of more than 308 million and a canine population estimated at over 78 million. NCRC is currently investigating 31 incidents in a dog population of over 78 million that occurred during 2011 thay may qualify as dog bite related fatalities. A final tally is subject to change as a result of NCRC’s thorough investigations. Their final report will be available the first week of 2013.

It is important to recognize that when attempting to research dog bites, researchers have frequently failed to acknowledge the relevance of stressful or inhumane situations that humans often force dogs to endure. At NCRC, they  urge people to consider what the world looks like from their dog’s point of view.

“There are at least two parties involved in a dog bite; a dog and one or more humans. Dog behavior cannot be understood or analyzed apart from humans, or the situations in which humans have placed dogs.”

Fight For My Rights! If not you, who? If not now, when?

Debunking Dogsbite.org ~ ZOMBIESANDDOGS

Colleen Lynn- the founder of Dogsbite.org, supposed victim of a questionable provoked dog attack and general fear monger, liar and all around piece of crap.

She loves her propaganda.

Well look at that- guess who provided that statistic- Mr. Debunked himself.

Let’s look at the real numbers-
“Over 7,000 children are hospitalized or killed due to gun violence every year, according to a new study published in the medical journal Pediatrics.” MSNBC writes. “3,000 children die from gun injuries before making it to the hospital, bringing the total number of injured or killed adolescents to 10,000 each year.”

In the 2009 Kids’ Inpatient Database (KID), 2,149 children injured were accidents.

The American Academy of Pediatrics wrote in 2012 that “firearm-related deaths continue as 1 of the top 3 causes of death in American youth.” Did you notice that? “Firearm-related deaths continue as 1 of the top 3 causes of death in American youth.”Not pit bulls.

— In 2011,14,675 people were wounded in an unintentional shooting but survived.

— Most unintentional shooting deaths occur in the home (65 percent), based on data from 16 states. The most common context of the death (30 percent) was playing with the gun.

The reality? Guns pose a bigger threat to our children and families than any dog. The reality? Lack of supervision, irresponsibility and recklessness – all actions that can have a tragic ending because of human error.

Even more reality? Guns have and always will wreck havoc and create a massive body count far greater than any breed of dog ever will.

(Check yourself.)

1. Demand honesty from Dogsbite.Org
2. Demand real legitimate statistics that coincide with governmental organizations.
3. Demand that Colleen Lynn be held responsible for her deceptive practices.

Let our politicians know just how deceptive and dangerous Dogsbite.org really is.

The Annals of Surgery published the following article in their April 2011 issue:

Mortality, Mauling, and Maiming by Vicious Dogs

John K. Bini, MD, Stephen M. Cohn, MD, Shirley M. Acosta, RN, BSN, Marilyn J. McFarland, RN, MS,

Mark T. Muir, MD, and Joel E. Michalek, PhD; for the TRISAT Clinical Trials Group

The Internet can provide access to some of  the very best of information on almost every imaginable subject or issue.

However, the Internet also provides access to the very worst type of speculation, bias, misinformation, manipulation, and even deceit, on almost every imaginable subject or issue.

As of late, it is becoming acceptable for scientific journals to cite internet sources as references. However, when did it become acceptable for the author(s) of a scientific or medical journal article to reference an internet source stating a clear and obvious agenda without  the authors doing even a modicum of fact checking as to whether their source's data is reliable and/or unbiased?

It is not possible to know if the Bini et el study is the beginning of a disturbing and troubling trend in published studies citing questionable internet sources, or if the Bini et el study is  merely a singularly disturbing and troubling use of unreliable internet sources.

Many of the errors in Bini's study are addressed in a published letter to the editor. (Annals of Surgery, May 2012 issue).

While the errors, and number of errors, are disturbing; the real question is: how did so many grievous and factual errors wind up in a published medical journal article?

The answer is simple:  The authors used uncited and unreliable "data" from  internet sources. 

Internet source:  Website Dogsbite.org

Perhaps the most shocking references cited by Bini et al  is the use of a "youtube video" and a website/blog created by Colleen Lynn called Dogsbite.org.  Dogsbite.org was founded in 2007 by Ms. Lynn, a website designer by trade. She was bitten by a dog on June 17, 2007 and soon thereafter started a dog bite victim’s website/blog.

Ms. Lynn believes the dog that bit her was a “pit bull,” and her website has subsequently evolved into a very obvious agenda against dogs she perceives to be “pit bulls.”

Certainly Ms. Lynn is entitled to her opinions and beliefs.  But the question becomes, is this obviously biased website an acceptable reference source for a published medical journal article?

Not only does Ms. Lynn/Dogsbite.org make claim to having “data” relating to “pit bull” attacks, but she also makes astounding claims about canine behavior and genetics, often presenting these claims as “factual.”

Prior to the inclusion in the Bini et al study, there is no evidence of Ms. Colleen Lynn or her website being cited in any other published, or peer reviewed article.

A large number of pages and entries on Ms. Lynn's website should have given Dr. Bini immediate pause in his use of her as a reference:

The fact that Ms. Lynn clearly gleaned all her "data" from media sources apparently was acceptable to Dr. Bini.

What is more shocking is the fact that Ms. Lynn refers to people who own or are accepting of pit bulls as "pit nutters" at least 168 times on her website/blog, apparently did not give any pause to Bini either.

Bini also did not seem deterred as using Dogsbite.org as a reference despite the fact that Ms. Lynn created a "Maul Talk Manual" in which in over four web pages she lists dozens of words she invented to describe "pit bull owners and their advocates."

Ms. Lynn's list of invented words and her made-up definitions should have caused very serious concern as to the reliability of her claims, "data" and bias:

Maul Talk Manual / Words invented by Dogsbite.org / Colleen Lynn

Pitiology:  Ms. Lynn describes, "Pitiology is a term derived from the DogsBite.org community. It refers to the study of pit bull owners by animal groups and behaviorists bent upon pitying and sympathizing with these owners."

Pitiot: Ms. Lynn states that, "Like the terms piticide and and pitricide, derived from members of the DogsBite.orgcommunity, “pitiot” combines two words to make a new one with meaning specific to the pit bull problem and the pit bull community... describing a pit bull owner “idiot..”

Pitplexia:  Here Ms. Lynn credits a website fan named, Dude, I BaggedYourPit for coming up with this term to describe an inability to identify a pit bull, or belief that a pit bull cannot be identified by appearance.  She goes on to say that "Pitplexic Disorder is a symptom and diagnostic indicator for Pitthetic Dementia."

Pittie party:  Ms. Lynn describes how she came to invent the word “pittie party" as the union of pittie and “pity party,” and is used to describe pit bull apologists who are trying to drum up sympathy (a pity party) for their pit bulls and themselves."

Ugly dog:  Ms. Lynn describes “Ugly dog” is a term conceived by blogger Craven Desires to describe all pit bulls. She goes on to say that, "To be sure, pit bulls are ugly dogs, and they maul to death countless adorable dogs."

The list goes on to include dozens of other strange and disturbing terms invented by Ms. Lynn, including: Pit nutter, post-nutter, pre-nutter, pithole, piticide, pitricide, pitthetic dementia, pitplexic disorder and others invented by Ms. Lynn to describe pit bulls, pit bull owners, pit bull advocates and the "conditions they suffer from."

"Science Whores"
Of all the terms invented by Ms. Lynn (Dogsbite.org) to insult and degrade "pit bulls" and their owners, the term that should have caused Dr. Bini, his collaborators, and the staff of the Annals of Surgery, the most concern was the term "science whore,"  to describe their Veterinary counterparts who happened to have made statements about "pit bulls" in which Ms. Lynn found disagreeable.

I shall not link to or list the names of the distinguished veterinarians and veterinarian behaviorists who Ms. Lynn referred to as "science whores" on her website because they had the audacity not to demonize or say negative things about "pit bulls."  Suffice it to say, these insults can be easily found on her website.

 

*11. http://www.dogsbite.org/. Dogsbite.org. “2008 U.S. Dog Bite Fatality Statistics,.” Accessed January 3, 2009.

 12. http://www.dogsbite.org/. <http://www.youtube.com/watch... On Pit Bull Awareness Day, DogsBite.org Releases   Video of AttackVictims: U.S. Pit Bull Attacks in 85-DayPeriod. Accessed October 25, 2008

Posted 23rd April 2012 by myra

Folks who read this blog may be wondering why we have seldom mentioneddogsbite.org , a blog dedicated to fostering hysteria about “pit bulls.”

Annie wrote:

http://www.nopitbullbans.com/debunking-dogsbi...
Debunking Dogsbite.org
June 24, 2010
Folks who read this blog may be wondering why we have seldom mentioneddogsbite.org , a blog dedicated to fostering hysteria about “pit bulls.” We have little mentioned the now infamous dogsbite.org because we didn’t think we had to. Honestly, we couldn’t conceive of anyone taking them or their witch hunt seriously. Their website is so poorly written and their “evidence” so spotty, we honestly didn’t think any elected official would actually stoop to cite their laughable “evidence” as reason to pass breed-specific legislation (BSL). Well, we were wrong, but luckily not terribly wrong since many politicos and the mainstream media appear to have wisely steered clear of dogsbite.org . Still, the fact that any municipal government – and there have been a few – or the media would citedogsbite.org with a straight face is a little alarming. So, let’s endeavor to do what has long been overdue: debunk dogsbite.org .
Forget for a moment that many court venues have ruled breed-specific legislation (BSL) unconstitutional or otherwise unlawful, the most recent being a January ruling in Toledo which declared Toledo’s BSL beyond the purview of home rule power. But what about all the worldwide evidence that BSL doesn’t work? For instance, Italy (article 1 and article 2) and the Netherlands both repealed their BSL within the last couple of years citing its ineffectiveness. It has also been widely reported in the BBC that the UK’s 1991 Dangerous Dog Act has been a phenomenal failure since there has been a huge rise in banned breeds in the UK. And just last month, the Toronto Humane Society, in a survey of cities, released statistics revealing that “Ontario’s 2005 ban on “pit bull” breeds or dogs that resemble pit bulls has not made any difference in the number of dog bites.”
Now I would call the Toronto Humane Society’s findings a pretty good indicator that Toronto’s “pit bull” ban is ineffective since the ban didn’t accomplish what it set out to do: reduce dog bites. Yet dogsbite.org appears to see it differently based on their inclusion of Toronto in a list of supposedly successful BSL cities (this from their rather vague June 21 “press release“):
On June 18, DogsBite.org , a national dog bite victims’ group dedicated to reducing serious dog attacks, released data of municipalities across the country, and one instance in Canada [m

THE BITCH SLAP HEARD ROUND THE WORLD - in your desperation to scramble around to cover your tracts you posted the identical post that ban coconuts did earlier on this thread or the other one - you just proved me right beyond a shadow of a doubt - i knew you would come through for me

YOU ARE ALL THE SAME PERSON AND ALL THE CROSS PHRASING ACROSS ALL THE NAMES PROVES IT BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT TO ANY RATIONAL PERSON AND YOUR TESTINESS ABOUT IT PROVES I AM DEAD ON THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH USING SO MANY NAMES YOU FORGET WHICH ONE YOU ARE USING AND WHAT COMMON PHRASES BELONG TO WHICH ONE OF YOU AND YOU TRIP YOURSELF UP BY CROSS PHRASING ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT NAMES - NOW THAT IS TRULY PATHETIC AND YOU ARE THE BIGGEST TOOOOOL OF ALL - THERE IS WAY TOO MUCH CROSS PHRASING GOING ON TO BE COINCIDENTAL AND SO IS ALL THE SIMULTANEOUS STARTING AND STOPPING OF POSTING - YOU ALL ARE ONE BIG FAKE - AND I WOULDN'T HAVE PUT IT ALL TOGETHER IF YOU HADN'T SENT ME ON THE HUNT - YOU COOKED YOU OWN GOOSE - GOTTA LOVE IT - WHILE YOU WERE TRYING TO DISCREDIT ME ALL YOU DID WAS TOTALLY DISCREDIT YOURSELF AND NOW ANYTHING YOU SAY IS ABSOLUTELY WORTHLESS - AND YOUR TESTINESS PROVES IT - UNTIL YOU PICK A NAME AND STICK WITH IT I WILL NOT RESPOND TO ANY OF YOUR BS ANYMORE EXCEPT WITH THIS POST - YOU USE A PROXY SERVER THAT IS OBVIOUS

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/massena-ny/T0QTD7NMP65HPM45J

Debunking Dogsbite - Thank you KuttersKru!

Please feel free to crosspost (written by KuttersKru)

After finding, reading, and admittedly laughing at what I found on Dogsbite.org, I decided to sit down on one Mountain Dew fueled night and debunk everything I found within. Enjoy. Everything from Dogsbite will be Italicized. Important points in bold shall be addressed first.

1. It's the owner not the breed

Poor ownership of a pit bull may exacerbate aggressive tendencies, but the pit bull is still an innately aggressive breed. Pit bulls have been selectively bred since the 1800s for the purposes of fighting and continue to be bred for fighting today. US courts agree that the following breed characteristics of pit bulls are not in dispute: robust strength, unpredictability, tenaciousness (the refusal to give up a fight) and high pain tolerance.

Perpetuators of this myth also cannot account for the many instances in which responsible pit bull owners are victimized by their dogs. In 2007, pit bull type dogs were responsible for 60% of attacks that led to fatality. Half of these attacks involved a family member and the family pit bull. 

First off, the "pit bull" is not a breed. Rather, it is a grouping of several dogs that occurred because certain people could not tell them apart. Secondly, there is no solid evidence that any dog labeled as a "pit bull" is actually human aggressive. When checking the standards and descriptions of said breeds, it is usually a fault to display human aggression. For instance, take the average description of the American Pit Bull Terrier, the Staffordshire Terrier, and the Bull Terrier. The average description of the dogs and discussion of temperament will often state that while these dogs may not enjoy the company of other dogs, they should tolerate and enjoy human company. And being bred for fighting puts another notch in the belt of these dogs and another noose in the gallows for you, Dogsbite. Why? Because it's common knowledge that the fate of man biters was often death. Seeing as a dogman had to hold a dog themselves in the pit, it's obvious that a dog making very enthusiastic attempts to bite it's handler would not be tolerated.


2. Pit bulls are animal-aggressive, not people-aggressive

Historically, it is believed that dogfighters removed people-aggressive dogs from the gene pool. If this is true, there is no indication that these same selective pressures are still in operation. Fatality statistics over the past 20-years continue to reflect a high number of pit bulls killing people. News stories flourish about pit bulls breaking free of their property and attacking children and the elderly. These victims did not have pets with them, nor were they provoking the dog before the attack.

Pit bull advocates who propagate this myth refuse to admit that both traits are unacceptable. It is not "okay" that pit bulls are animal-aggressive. Due to this genetic trait, pit bulls frequently maim and kill our pets. In many instances, owners of these pets get injured trying to stop the attack. While some attacks might start from animal aggression, they can quickly lead to human aggression. 

This is false, as many a modern dog man will tell you. And provided that you know what you are doing with your animals, yes, it is perfectly fine that a dog is animal aggressive. The ones that know this are clearly not the ones making headlines. Also, note that there are many other breeds that have some sort of natural aggression or natural disposition towards chasing small or larger animals due to high prey drive

3. Fatality statistics regarding pit bull attacks are false

Statistics regarding pit bull fatalities and severe injury are true. It has been suggested that because the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) fatality data relies, in part, on newspaper articles, that the entire study is inaccurate. Pit bull advocates say that pit bull fatalities are more extensively reported by the media, therefore the CDC must have "miscounted" or "double counted" the number of pit bull fatalities. Considering the time spent developing the studies, it is safe to say that the authors were careful to count each event only once.

Even the CDC has discredited the study. Quoted from them:
A CDC study on fatal dog bites lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years (Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998). It does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic. Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites. There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill.

In addition, there are many dogs that the media has labeled as a "pit bull", but clearly weren't by any standard, as proven by understand-a-bull.com:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ty/WrongId.htm


Also, note that other "studies" such as reports by Merritt Clifton should be discredited for lack of proper information and general fact bungling.


4. The media is unfair to pit bulls

Pit bulls have the highest propensity of any breed to be involved in catastrophic maulings. Media and law enforcement members treat each pit bull attack as a serious public safety threat. About half of all pit bull reported news regards police officers shooting pit bulls. In many of these cases, pit bulls are used as part of criminal operations for drug dealers, gang members and other violent offenders.

There is an absence of media regarding the collective damage inflicted by this breed. In 2007 alone, pit bull type dogs were responsible for 60% of US dog bite fatalities, the bulk of disfigurements and countless episodes of killing our pets and livestock. Over the next decade, pit bulls are on pace to maul 200 Americans to death. Major news agencies are AWOL on these important issues. 
Again, as proven by understand-a-bull.com, the media does indeed have bias:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art.../Mediabias.htm

Does anyone remember the case where a Labrador Retriever puppy killed a baby? What about the Lab that ate it's owner's face as she slept? The Huskies who mauled a two year old? Perhaps even the Greyhounds that attacked and killed a man's dog? Most likely not, as both incidents recieved minimal coverage. Once again, the media is not looking for accuracy, it's looking for a story.


5. Pit bulls are not unpredictable
Pit bulls frequently attack without provocation or warning. As a fighting breed, pit bulls were bred to conceal warning signals before an attack. For instance, they rarely growl, bear their teeth or issue a stare before they strike. They are also disrespectful of traditional signs of submission and appeasement.

Pit bulls are also liars. Randall Lockwood, a senior vice president to the American Society of the Prevention of Cruelty for Animals (ASPCA), shares the following story in a law enforcement training video:

"Fighting dogs lie all the time. I experienced it first hand when I was investigating three pit bulls that killed a little boy in Georgia. When I went up to do an initial evaluation of the dog's behavior. The dog came up to the front of the fence, gave me a nice little tail wag and a "play bow" -- a little solicitation, a little greeting. As I got closer, he lunged for my face."

This is not only untrue, but incredibly stupid. All dogs will give some hint or indcation of provocation prior to attack, no matter how small it is. There are also recollections by dogmen of dogs whining or barking prior to fights. It's also common for a dog displaying aggression to bark and snarl. Despite the lack of need for most canine posturing prior to fights, dogs of the type will often posture in small ways regardless. While it may seem like there is no warning to the average human eye does not mean that there was no warning at all.

6. Pit bulls do not have a locking jaw

A pit bull's jaw may not physically lock, but the inherent fighting trait of a pit bull is to "hold and shake." This is why we consistently hear in news reports that the dog would not let go. Many pit bull breeders and owners promote "hold and shake" behavior through the act of spring poling, in which the pit bull leaps into the air, locks down on a rope and holds for as long as possible.

The most stunning instance that debunks the "not locking jaw" myth occurred in a courtroom. During the Toldeo v. Tellings trial, Lucas County Dog Warden Tom Skeldon showed a videotape of a tranquilized pit bull hanging from a steel cable. The dog is unconscious and still does not release his grip. Having seen this video, DogsBite.org can only imagine that gasps were uttered in the courtroom

First off, holding and shaking is neither breed specific nor species specific, it is family specific. Wolves that grab prey or something that they are intent on keeping will also hold and shake, as will coyotes, dholes, African Wild Dogs, and many others. Grip on a dog is not breed specific either, as it is one of the things that those who breed dogs for hog hunting, schutzhund, french ring, police and military work look for as it is important to the job of the dog. Also, the video is questionable, seeing as due to the makeup of the average steel cable, it is very possible that the dog's teeth could have simply become caught in the strands of such a thing. Also, the possibility of a dog's jaw locking is highly unlikely, as an automatically locking jaw would prevent an animal from doing simple tasks such as eating, drinking and panting which a dog would need to survive.

Dr. 1. Lehr Brisbin of the University of Georgia offers:

"The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of pit bulls show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of "locking mechanism" unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier."

Al W. Stinson, D.V.M.
Director of Legislative Affairs, Michigan Association for Pure Bred Dogs, and the Michigan Hunting Dog Federation, and a Member of the Board of Directors of the American Dog Owners Association writes:

The following quote was sent to me from Dr. Howard Evans, Professor Emeritus, College of Veterinary Medicine at Cornell University, Ithaca New York. We were colleagues in the veterinary college for four years. He is the author of the textbook, ANATOMY OF THE DOG, (the world's definitive work on the anatomy of the dog). His statement was in a letter addressed to me on March 26. 2002. His quote was: "I have spoken with [Dr.] Sandy deLahunta (the foremost dog neurologist in the country) and [DR.] Katherine Houpt (a leading dog behaviorist) about a jaw locking mechanism in pit bulls or any other dog and they both say, as do I, that there is NO SUCH THING AS "JAW LOCKING IN ANY BREED.

We all agree that the power of the bite is proportional to the size of the jaws and the jaw muscles. There is no anatomical structure that could be a locking mechanism in any dog." As a Professor Emeritus from the College of Veterinary Medicine at Michigan State University, I agree completely with their conclusion.


7. My pit bull is a sweetheart

According to a study done by the Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy, pit bull owners use a variety of strategies to lessen the stigma attached to owning a negatively perceived dog. One of the strategies is to emphasize counter-stereotypical behavior. For instance, to offset the popular idea that pit bulls are fierce and predatory, respondents in the study voiced just the opposite: "My dog is the biggest sweetheart in the world."

Other strategies used to combat the pit bull stigma included, trying to pass their dogs off as other breeds, denying that their behavior is genetically determined, discrediting unfavorable media coverage, using humor, avoiding stereotypical gear or accessories, taking preventive measures, or becoming "breed ambassadors" 

Ridiculous and asanine psychobabble aside, these dogs obviously carries a negative undertone due to the recent years. Naturally it is up to the owners of the dogs to change mind or face the extermination of thier dogs. And seeing as a "pit bull" is not a breed and the dogs are not easily distinguishable from other dogs of the type to the untrained eye, could it possibly be that you are indeed projecting your mislabelings on the Pit Bull Community? One of the most important aspects to people educating others about thier dogs is to make sure that people know that this is a breed that is not suited for most people, therefore stemming the flow of irresponsible owners

8. Pit bulls used to be the most popular dog in America

Pit bull advocates often say that, "by World War I, the pit bull had become the most popular dog in America." A resource is never cited with this claim. Last year, Animal People News, tested this claim. By searching the classified dogs-for-sale ads between 1900-1950 on NewspaperArchive.com, they discovered that Huskies and St. Bernards topped the charts. Of the 34 breeds searched, pit bulls ranked 25th.

Due to the variety of names that pit bulls are known by, Animal People News ran searches on three names: pit bull terrier, Staffordshire, and American bulldog. The combined sum came to 34,770. This is equivalent to 1% of the sampling of nearly 3.5 million breed-specific mentions of dogs.

When I look around, I rarely see anyone stating that this dog was the most popular, but instead ONE OF the most popular breeds. This much is true. Merrit Clifton, the editor of Animal People "tested" this claim by search results on the NewspaperArchive.com website. I however, have trouble paying attention to anyone daft enough to mix up a Minature Pinscher and a Doberman.

Lassie, Get Help explains all the pitfalls in this accusation:
Forget duplicate ads. Forget multiple references to Lassie and Rin-Tin-Tin and Balto. Forget short stories, movie and book reviews, and breed names used figuratively or used in advertising. Forget the regional, racial and socioeconomic factors that affect what goes into a newspaper. And most of all, forget that Clifton failed to search for bulldogs and bull terriers: the two names most closely associated with the "pit bull" breed in the first half of the 20th century. Set all that aside, and the bias and ignorance still loom large. "Not a shred of historical evidence!" Not a shred, dammit!

To digress just a bit, how is it that people who don't know anything about dogs become dog experts? How is it that Jon Katz -- who allows his dogs to worry sheep and calls it "herding," who believes stockdogs are trained with a clicker, who views the no-kill sheltering movement as a threat to America's children, who [as far as anyone knows] has never trained a dog to do much of anything and has never attended a real sheepdog trial even as a spectator -- how is it that Jon Katz has become, in his publisher's words, "one of the country's most respected" writers on dogs?

How is it that Merritt Clifton -- who wouldn't recognize scientific research if he tripped over it, who thinks German shepherds are bred to "herd," who can't be troubled to edit his spelling errors or find out what dogs are really bred for, who has [as far as anyone knows] never cared for or trained or even patted a pit bull, who has written about "the custom" [known only to him, apparently] "of docking pit bulls' tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized," and who writes that "temperament is not the issue, nor is it even relevant," since virtually all pit bulls are "bad moments" waiting to happen -- how is it that Clifton has become an "expert" on the breed?


"There isn't a shred of historical evidence" [Clifton writes] that pit bulls "were ever commonly kept as family pets (or indeed by anyone except dogfighters)" until the 1980s.

Wrong. Again.

On the left: one example of a pit bull on a citrus crate label. I grew up in a region famous for its citrus crops, and love historic crate labels. Lots of the old ones feature popular breeds -- Airedales, Saint Bernards -- and these days modern breeds are occasionally photoshopped into old citrus labels. The Pup Brand label is an authentic oldie. This facsimile is for sale here.

At the top of this post is a photo of a book called The Dog Album. From the dust jacket: "For the nineteenth-century businessman, newly engaged couple, or Victorian family dressed in their Sunday best, a photo session was indeed a special occasion. Which makes it all the more fascinating to see how often the family dog participated in the event." The Dog Album includes a dozen or so photos of pit bull type dogs with their people. There are more pit bulls in this book than collies. More pit bulls than pugs, in fact. Even more pit bulls than Saint Bernards.

Vintage photos of people and their pit bulls are a staple on eBay. Here's a link to the photo below.


And here's a shot of a handsome pit bull with a group of railroad engineers:



On the right, a postcard of a lady. No, Zelig fans, it's not the same dog ;~)

A pit bull is the subject of New Yorker icon James Thurber's classic Snapshot of a Dog. "'An American bull terrier,' we used to say, proudly; none of your English bulls." "American bull terrier" was one of many names given to the dog now called a pit bull, according to American Kennel Gazette editor Arthur Frederick Jones. Jones wrote a chapter on terriers for the National Geographic Book of Dogs, and began the chapter with an appreciation of Joffre, the Staffordshire terrier his family owned when Jones was a boy.

Anyone familiar with pit bulls knows that these dogs have always been called bulldogs in rural areas and in southern parts of the U.S. When Laura Ingalls Wilder writes about the family bulldog, Jack, she's writing about a dog we would recognize as a pit bull. In the great children's book Sounder the dog of the title is half hound, half bulldog: that is, half pit bull.

Listen to Texan Jim Crainer of Hawgs, Dawgs, and Hunting:

Hello David,

I appreciate you taking the time to write. Your question is "Do I hunt with pitbulls and do I presently have any pups I'm selling or giving away". First, Do I hunt with Bull dogs? Yes, but I only use them in a catch dog capacity. When the hog is bayed up, I get as close as I can and release a protected vest covered and cut collar wearing bull dog to go catch the hog. I dont have bull dogs that I let hunt for me, but know of some people who do. Its just a personal preference on type of dogs is the reason I dont. Suprisingly to alot of people, some strains of bull dogs are good hunters and have a good nose especially for rig or hood hunting. But its like any breed of dog, you have to find the right dog to do it with. Such as, just because a fella has a blackmouth cur or a catahoula doesnt mean he will bay cattle or hogs. Or just because a person has a walker hound doesnt mean he will tree a coon. You have to go thru a number of them or get them from reputible breeders to find one that will work for you. Second, Do I have any bull dogs puppies to sell or give away? I usually raise one litter of bull dog pups a year, there is a picture of the two I kept on the baydog pictures, Under Dogs, picture #3. I do sell them occasionally when I raise a litter. Thanks again for your question.

Good Hunting,

Jim

[Crainer writes elsewhere that he favors the Carver line of pit bulls -- a fighting strain --and won't bother with a pit bull unless it's people friendly and can ride loose in the rig with other dogs.]

If Merritt Clifton actually knew much about dogs, or cared enough to study the history of dogs in the U.S., he would know all this. Pit bulls -- bulldogs -- have been common for the better part of a century and a half, though not as ubiquitous as they are today. They were, and are, kept and loved by all sorts of people.

The photo below was taken in the 1890s. The toddler is my maternal great-aunt [a wonderful woman who loved dogs, and owned some legendary ones -- legendary in our household, anyway] and her uncle Albert. Albert was crippled: the dog in the photo is helping to hide Albert's legs in addition to providing support for the child. Seventy years after this photo was taken, my great-aunt remembered the dog's name and spoke of him fondly as "our bulldog." Her parents were hard-working, pragmatic Iowa farmers who liked good dogs and didn't keep bad ones. They were not dogfighters.

http://lassiegethelp.blogspot.com/2008/01/nitwit.html


9. Pit bulls pass the American Temperament Test

In 1977, Alfons Ertel10 designed the American Temperament Test in hopes of creating a uniform temperament test for dogs. Since then, about 930 dogs are tested annually. Given that 74.8 million dogs populate the US today, it is fair to say that this test is not widely practiced nor recognized as a critical evaluation tool.

The 12-minute test simulates a casual walk through a park. In a few instances, the dog is required to walk on usual surfaces. The test focuses on stability, shyness, aggressiveness, and a few other factors. Over 80% of all dogs pass, including pit bulls. The test is not performed without the dog owner present (unlike the AKC's Canine Good Citizen test). It also fails to evaluate the most basic scenario that leads to aggression: How a dog reacts when it sees another dog. 

Proof that this is the most basic scenario that leads to aggression, or go away please. How would that create a more aggressive scenario than a person running/biking by? Also let it be known that a fair number of dogs labled to be "pit bulls" can, will, and do pass the CGC with flying colors. Given that you credit a publicly discredited study like the CDC's, Dogsbite, it is fair to say that you are cherry picking

10. Punish the deed not the breed!

"Punish the deed not the breed," works to the benefit of pit bull breeders and owners who accept the large collateral damage pit bulls inflict on the public. The motto also seeks to place all dog breeds on equal grounds. US courts, dog behaviorists, doctors, statisticians and public safety officials disagree. They instead recognize the grave threat that pit bulls pose to community members and our pets. Like the antiquated echoing of myth #1, "It's the owner not the breed," this last myth lies at the heart of outdated dog policy. The modern answer to this final myth is to develop policy that prevents future victims from being created: Prevent the deed, regulate the breed! 

Were this true, then all cities, towns, and states would be in favor of BSL and no bans anywhere would getting removed. Obviously, this generalization is false. The purpose of the saying is to cut fault where it really lies: the owner. Dogs, while talented in some areas, are incapable of many things. They can not buy themselves, train themselves, drive themselves to the dog park, incorrectly contain themselves, or place themselves in situations that would set them up for failure. This is purely the folly of the owner, the very person who should have protected the dog, and BSL does not correct that, nor does it prevent that same irresponsible owner from buying another dog and starting the process anew. Tougher punishments for what should happen should a dog bites (like harsh fines and jail time) are much more effective deterrents, as proven in places like the Netherlands and Italy.

Again, a big thanks to KuttersKru for taking the time to debunk dogsbite.org