Top 10 dogs involved in fatal attacks

The American Veterinary Medical Association, the Humane Society and the Center for Disease Control pulled together dog bite statistics over 20 years to come up with a list of dogs involved in fatal attacks.

READ MORE: Dog Bites report 2000

A 1997 CDC study outlined 10 dog breeds that were involved in a fatal attack from 1979 to 1997

READ MORE: CDC fatal dog bites report 1997

10 - Akitas
9 - St. Bernards
8 - Great Dane
7 - Chow Chows
6 - Doberman Pinschers
5 - Alaskan Malamutes
4 - Huskies
3 - German Shepherds
2 - Rottweilers
1 - Pit Bulls

http://www.news10.net/news/article/149712/339/Top-10-dogs-involved-in-fatal-attacks

:popcorn:

:rofl:

Sneaky little bastards get underfoot and trip you.

If my brother hadn't gotten in to the room and pulled her out, I have no idea what could have happened. Yes, they were in a strange home, and yes they had a litter of kittens (3). Never would I have thought a cat could do what they did to her.

was in high school. This is why I think people who keep bobcats and larger kittehs as pets are really taking their lives in their hands. (We did have someone on DU with a pet bobcat they rescued as a kit. She was cute as all get out, but still I would worry.)

:rofl:

They hide under anything they can find and ambush my feet every time I walk by. Vicious midget felines.

with CUTENESS! :loveya:

:D

and Morris the cat.

No pussycats were harmed making this film.

:evilgrin:

Calicos

They're evil and insane.

:D

Just sayin' ...

B-)

Is it attacks per 1000 of the breed or total attacks? Double counting for mixed breeds seems poor methodology as well

Answer: Border Collie...32 lbs. female. No problem for them apparently.

that my first three girls were...one Black Lab and two German Shepherds...they wanted to cancel the insurance (because of the GSDs).

We had to sign some waiver saying that if they ever bit someone we would have to handle the damages ourselves.

Those three lived to be 12, 13, and 13 and never so much as laid a tooth on anyone.

The two girls I have now are three year olds...sisters...German Shepherds. They're very sweet, but I never take it for granted that my dogs wouldn't bite or attack someone. Someday when they're old I hope I'll be able to say the same about them as my other girls...that they never bit anyone their whole lives.

"No, not cats, dogs", he is actually a pretty funny guy.

they said they would drop our policy unless we got her spayed.

I reluctantly agreed (we had once considered breeding her) but never went through with it and they never followed up on it.

number 2 (Rottweilers)

Pit Bulls stand out in this category.

(I am sure we will soon be seeing the typical barrage of "its the owner, not the dog" posts as well as the "can't identify a pit bull" posts.)

bad owners DO choose pitbulls over other breeds. A normally socialized pitbull will always be prone to attack other dogs (that's in the dog's genetics because it was bred as a fighting dog) but won't attack humans (centuries back any pitbull that turned it's aggression to humans was swiftly put down).

But they weren't bred for that and it's not in a normal pit's temperament. The reason they have a higher attack rate is because a lot of bad people own them due to the fact that the breed is naturally strong and looks intimidating. It doesn't change the fact that a pit bull raised by good owners is just as unlikely to bite a human as a Labrador raised by good owners.

I only know that when I read of a dog attack or mauling, it seems to always be a pit bull.

Because it used sources which could not identify the breed with any certainty.

The NCRC has done some actual research. Recently, too.

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/tinymce/2009%20Final%20Report%20DBRF.pdf

from last night

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18665049?nclick_check=1

Try again.

Any clue at all?

All of these links you've supplied are NOT primary reports of originals incidents - they're reports about subsequent events.

So you would supply all of these:

-The report of the original incident
-The search for the dog
-The search for the owner
-The fate of the dog
-The victims' story
-Stories from the neighbors
-The charges leveled against the owner (if any)
-The story from the police investigation
-The trial of the owner
-The victims' recovery
-The sentencing of the owner
etc
etc
etc

As an ORIGINAL INCIDENT to be held up as proof the PIT BULLS ARE EVIL!!! And you'd use the same stories for years & years, again & again.

Lets look at these "recent" incidents:

#179 from last night
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18665049?nclick_check=1

Still "Problem loading page". Are you making these web addresses up?

#180 and this from last night
http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Dog-Made-Famous-by-Former-Soldiers-Lie-Gets-Death-Penalty-127565463.html

This does not describe an original incident. It describes a court decision originating from that incident - indicated by the statement "Thursday, a judge agreed...". The original incident occurred in November.

NOT "last night".

#182 and this from yesterday afternoon
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/08/11/3832115/shooting-of-dog-in-adelanto-ruled.html

The first sentance says it all: "Prosecutors say a San Bernardino County sheriff's deputy is not criminally liable for a shooting that killed a pit bull and slightly injured an animal control officer in Adelanto in June 2010."

NOT "yesterday afternoon"

#183 and from Wednesday
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/mexican-doctors-reattach-childs-face-after-pitbull-attack/story-e6frf7lf-1226112563889

This is about an operation to correct injuries from an incident in June 2010.
in Mexico. :eyes:

NOT "Wednesday"

#184 month ago or so -
http://savannahnow.com/news/2011-07-23/javon-roberson-healing-after-savannah-pit-bull-attack#.TkWwnoLH2uI

Wow, you actually deduced the approximate date of the incident by reading the article! I'm impressed. You're one-for-five so far.

But still: Who identified the dog as a pit bull? And how?

Who knows?

#185 and then there is this
http://www.10news.com/news/28430958/detail.html

When did this happen? "...more than seven months ago."

NOT "yesterday"

---------------------------------------------------------

So, in conclusion you LIED regarding at least 2/3 of these news stories.

If you have ANY evidence that the dogs involved were not pitbulls, please post the source.

Anyone claim otherwise? Please post the source.

Any HINT of a misidentification? Please post the source.

Even a peep of anyone thinking differently regarding the breed. Please post the source.


Of course not. But feel free to continue to rationalize and deny the facts of each RECENT incident.

How did the reporters make those determinations? The articles don't say! Media accounts are notoriously inaccurate - some would say negligent - in identifying the breed of dog in these cases. As such, unless it's specifically attributed to an identifiable breed expert (not the police reports, neighbors, passersby & other un-knowledgeable sources that are usually used) then ANY breed identification in a media report must be disregarded.

As the accuser, it's up you to provide evidence. You haven't. Anti-Pit Bull bigots offer nothing but disreputable, biased and discredited propaganda, and ill-informed news articles. While the pro-dog rationalists post peer-reviewed scientific studies. Just try and debunk any of the NCRC reports.

Given the care you took when selecting those stories (lying about the date for 5 out of 6 of them), and given the care with which the media usually treats these stories (which is none: if a dog bites then it's a "Pit Bull" no matter what the actual breed is), and given that your entire premise hangs upon the notion that Pit Bulls were involved in these incidents - then your whole argument is based on a pile of shit. A steaming, gooey, stinky pile of shit at that.

"lying" - ha

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

#179 = 8/11/2011
#180 - 8/11/2011
#182 - 8/11/2011
#183 - 8/10/2011
#184 - 7/23/2011
#185 - 7/2/2011

Now why don't we just knock off the charges of "lying". Those are RECENT articles.

You are doing little more than confirming my thoughts about pit bull owners.

So, where are those sources challenging the breed-identification in those articles? Thought so.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

contradictory evidence.

You should know the type.

From the 2009 NCRC report: "In 6 of the 31 cases, the owners had continuously subjected their dogs to serious abuse and
neglect..." If the dog is not trained & socialized properly, they can't be expected to behave properly. the breed doesn't matter

This is just the type of anecdotal incident that makes the CDC report invalid. It was most likely an indeterminate mixed-breed that was labeled as a "pit bull" not because of it's lineage but because of it's behavior. "All speeding cars are red, therefore all red cars are speeders." Right?

Seriously? The type of dog only matters to those who try and prove a point about a body type.

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/tinymce/Voith%20poster.pdf
DNA and Adoption Agency Comparison
•Only 25% (4/16) of the dogs identified by agencies as specified breed mixes were also identified as the same predominant breeds by DNA (3 were only 12.5% of the dogs’ composition)
•No German Shepherd Dog ancestry was reported by DNA in the 2 dogs identified only as “shepherd mixes” by adoption agencies
•In the 3 dogs described as terrier mixes, a terrier breed was only identified by DNA in one dog
•In 15 of the 16 dogs, DNA analyses identified breeds as predominant that were not proposed by the adoption agencies

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/tinymce/Voith%20AVMA.pdf
A short report in press in the Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science indicates low agreement
between the identification of breeds of dogs by adoption agencies and DNA identification. The
dogs in this study were of unknown parentage and had been acquired from adoption agencies. In only
a quarter of these dogs was at least one of the breeds proposed by the adoption agencies also
detected as a predominant breed by DNA analysis. (Predominant breeds were defined as those comprised of the highest percentage of a DNA breed make-up.) In 87.5% of the adopted dogs, breeds were identified by DNA analyses that were not
proposed by the adoption agencies. A breed must have been detected at a minimum of 12.5% of a dog’s make-up to be reported in the DNA analysis.

Reports of DNA analyses of percentages of purebred dog breed ancestry, while accurate most of the time, are not infallible. The laboratories providing such analyses may have qualifiers in their reports stating that there is an 85% or 90% validity
of the results and indicate which results have lower confidence levels. Different testing laboratories may report different results depending on which dogs were usedto develop their standards and how the laboratories analyze the
samples.

As the tests are refined, the same laboratory may report slightly different results at different points in time.
The discrepancy between breed identifications based on opinion and DNA analysis, as well as concerns about reliability of
data collected based on media reports, draws into question the validity and enforcement of public and private policies pertaining to dog breeds.

where there was a HINT of misidentification of breed. Even an accusation.

More anecdotal evidence that has been proven to be generally inaccurate. The only reason dog was labeled as a pit bull was because it attacked someone, not because of it's actual breed.

Maybe you need to volunteer at an animal shelter to get over your phobias.

you mean a statistically insignificant amount of the overall dog population?

Stay under the covers -- you never know when you'll be bit by a dog, hit by lightning, or get hit on the head by something that fell out of plane.

to make your point? Try being honest. Post a peer-reviewed study without statistical problems.

Regardless, your dog hysteria is completely absurd.

Take a look:
Deaths by dogs, 2010: 33
Deaths by lightning, average per year: 39

If you're not scared to death of being hit by lightning, you sure as hell shouldn't be scared of every dog you see and make shit up about their supposed violence.

Do you realize how many people die on the highways each year. Hint: it's a bit more than 33...

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States
http://www.weather.gov/om/lightning/medical.htm

Read some of the posts I have provided regarding incidents within the past few weeks. I am not making those up.

And let's just knock off the personal insults. What do you say?

is less than 1/10000th of a percent. Let's say the injuries are 100x the amount of those killed (a very generous assumption), we're still talking about a extremely small amount of people.

Face it: you're completely overblowing this threat. So what if you posted a few articles. I'm talking about actual stats. 33 out of 310000000 is something to get upset about?

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

http://www.pbrc.net/poppysplace/games/AdultFindabull/findpitbull_v4.html

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dogbites/the-problems-with-dog-bite-studies/
Inaccurate breed identifications result in bad data:

Most dog bite studies are developed from one or more of the following sources:

Animal care and control, or health department incident reports
Hospital outpatient or inpatient data
News accounts
Telephone surveys

Breed descriptors obtained from these sources may come from the dog's owner. They may also come from persons who have no direct knowledge (i.e., animal control officer, victim, neighbor, police officer, witness, unnamed source) of the dog's lineage.

There is robust evidence that these breed descriptors are often inaccurate. Roughly half the dogs in the U.S. are mixed breed dogs. Surveys conducted by researchers from Western University in California have shown that, when asked to name the breed or breed mix in mixed-breed dogs whose origin they did not know, adoption agency personnel responses correlated extremely poorly with DNA analysis of the same dogs. It's not that professionals can't identify commonly available, physically distinct pure-bred dogs, but that mixed-breed dogs do not always look like their parents. If professionals cannot accurately identify the dogs, what about the breed labels assigned by non-professionals, who might nevertheless be the source of a breed attribution in a news story or bite report? .

incidents I posted are false based on misidentifying the breed, please provide the source.

where the dog was identified as some other breed.

Works both ways if what you say is true. Right?


Please provide source for any misidentification in the incidents I provided. Post the source where a misidentification was even implied. Post the source where the claim was made that the breed was misidentified.

you are probably right.

What would be really interesting to see is a study of how these different breeds are treated. I suspect you'd find that at least the first 3 on the list are more likely to be neglected, chained, and abused.

A lot of people with aggressive dogs are in denial.

We should have better laws about how animals are treated.

Calmer than the labs, much much sweeter than the German Shepherds, who I do not trust if they are older, they are wonderful dogs!! I have said this many times before on here, the issue is that when they bite, they have the jaw configuration that they do damage. Chihuahuas bite more, I can guarantee that, and the only dog that ever bit my kids was a Golden Retriever. They bite a lot, but they are fuzzy, yellow and pretty, so everyone thinks they are sweet. Most are, but many are not inbred.

But they're so cuuuuute!

:evilgrin:

Data do go back to 1977, after all.

:P

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Lord knows I needed that laff today.....

thank you!!!!!!

with slobber when they grow up.

saved her life.

to you? :P

While the cartoon versions of them might be, the actual dogs aren't all that sociable. He has a neighbor who has one and he has to walk the dog away from people. He's turned on people who've tried to pet him.

I made one class of St. B. only because they were nasty to other dogs and people. the instructor was trained in St. B. habits.

training their owners was the first step. that's a lot of dog to control.

I got the distinct impression that not only was it capable of killing me, but wanted to kill me.

It was a beautiful dog.

I had the same feeling. Very aloof, steely, but always watching.

All of the wandering animals in the neighborhood disappeared shortly after he showed up.

Exactly. It kept an eye on you and took mental notes.

field that a pond in the middle and dirt track around the perimeter. We took dirt bikes there and camped on the weekends. We were camping one weekend and the friend had his Malamute chained to the frame of his old pick up. Some guy and his German Shepard walked by apparently a little too close for the Malamute, he went after the dog and pulled the truck, it was turned off and in park. I dread to think what would have happened if the Malamute was free.

He is very smart, very social, and very sweet. On the other hand, he's the only dog I've ever had as a pet who I'm sure would bite me if he needed to. He's got higher boundaries than my other dogs have had, and he's given me a warning when I've pissed him off.

So I respect his boundaries, and we get along fine. He's affectionate, but not cuddly. Really has a different body sense than any other dog I've had- you can be close to him but you can't treat him any way you like. We howl together.

They love her there because she's very smart. Sometimes some of the other dogs won't approach kids who have tons of medical apparatus hooked up, but she's smart enough to understand what's what and go right up and visit with any kids and to adjust her activity level to what's appropriate for them. Another friend has a malamute-wolf hybrid, who is the smartest dog I've ever encountered in my life. I've seen him carry wandering kittens back to their mother in his mouth, deposit them gently, and then go back down the hall to round up more escapees, play gently with little kids, and be an older person's gentle lap dog. He's also jumped through a closed window to chase off a burglar (he needed surgery afterward to fix a torn tendon, but he chased the burglar off on three working legs) and over a six foot fence to repel a car thief (he then waited patiently by the car in question until his people got home.)

They're the smartest dogs you'll ever meet. That's a blessing or a curse, depending on whether or not you're up to training them. Your brother probably should look into getting a less intelligent dog, malamutes aren't for amateurs.

She weighs almost 8 lbs! She just knows how adorable she is. In fact, she trades on it.

They make occasional visits over to see my Golden. They dwarf him in size. They seem friendly enough, but very timid. Still, I wouldn't want to piss them off.

The first time I went to the dog owner's house, though, he barreled down the yard toward me, barking, and I almost peed my pants.

were just looking for something sensational even going back as far as 2000 when the report was first released.

AGREED

That's insane, really.

The biggest flaw in CDC statistics, and certainly the one that causes the most grief, is that the “breed” categorized by the CDC as “pit bull-type dog” does not exist. Nor is “pit bull” a breed recognized by any breed registry. Housed beneath the catch-all designation “pit bull” are any number of different breeds of dog. Lump 20-30+ breeds (and their mixes and lookalikes) of dog together as one breed and you will certainly have what looks like a breed problem as relates to dog bites and dog-bite-related fatalities! What you’ll also have is a massive skewing of the statistical data rendering the findings erroneous and misleading.

Worse, a majority of the CDC’s statistics were taken from media reports of dog bites or fatalities which are notorious for being inaccurate, particularly as regards “pit bulls.” And yes, American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, and Staffordshire Bull Terriers are often referred to by the slang term “pit bull,” but were these the actual breeds responsible for the attacks? Probably not since a slew of other breeds of dog — like Presa Canarios, Cane Corsos, Spanish Alanos, Rhodesian Ridgebacks, Bandogs, Dogues Brasileiros, Dogo Argentino, Guatemalan Bull Terriers, American Bulldogs, Boxers, Bull Mastiffs, Bull Terriers, English Bulldogs, and even Labradors, Rottweilers, Akitas, and Chow Chows — have also been labeled “pit bulls.”

Much like the media, the CDC is also unable to get their reporting correct, but the CDC at least has an excuse: missing population data. In addition to breed misidentification, the CDC statistics are inaccurate because they are not based on “reliable breed-specific population data” (JAVMA, Vol 217, No. 6, September 15, 2000, p. 838). Certainly Rottweilers and “pit bulls” appear more prone to bite since they top the CDC list of most bites, but the probability of them to bite may be the same as any other breed since these dogs could just simply be more popular. The more dogs of a breed you have in existence, the more bites you would have just as a matter of course. However, their propensity to bite would remain unchanged. And as already stated, it is impossible to get accurate population data for “pit bulls” in particular since they are not a breed.

From: http://www.nopitbullbans.com/about-cdc-bite-stats/

If you look at the PDF under the heading "purbreds" it has "pit bull type" listed, with the rest being very specific pedigreed breeds. If you can sell that kind of sloppy methodology you can sell anything. American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers and Staffordshire Bull Terriers are specific breeds of dogs. A "pit bull" is anything the media wants it to be anytime a dog bites somebody. :grr:

That the news headlines would not read Beagle attacks child or even mixed breed dog attacks child...it would be Vicious Pit Bull attacks child.

Not that my pit is every likely to do more damage that give someone wrinkly skin due to constant licking.

And the dog doesn't even have to have a drop of APBT blood in it to make the news as a "pit bull". It just has to remotely look like one and they are all over the "vicious pit bull" angle. It's ludicrous.

<edit typo>

and she's submissive to our other dog - the "full" beagle.

She was a breeding dog and previously (until she was about 2 years old) kept caged and confined with litter dog or human interaction most of her life. She's doing very well with dogs she "knows" (dog next door, and dogs she plays with frequently) but is still not real sure how to react to "stranger" dogs. We're getting there.

Her closest friend is a big golden lab puppy who is about 9 months old (already the same size as she is). I think they are learning a lot from each other. So far, she's been the dominant dog (or tried to be) in most situations.

She looks mostly pit (Am Staff, really) but barks like a beagle. Very funny.

Socialization and understanding pack order is everything when living with ANY type of dog in your family. It all comes down to you as a pack leader to make the dog(s) understand where they fit in that order. Recognizing dominant and aggressive behavior and immediately correcting it is critical when bringing a new dog into the family.

My current dog, Olive is a rescue that bounced from foster to foster before I got her at approx. 14 months old. she's a APBT/Pointer mix, as was her predecessor, Birdie and she had been pegged as "having trouble understanding where she fit in the pack order." It was because she never had a strong pack leader, which was remedied when she wound up with me at the head of her pack. she now understands very clearly where she fits in, and knows without a doubt that she falls BELOW the smallest and weakest human in the pack, my daughter.




Her predecessor, Birdie, had the same understanding



Training dogs doesn't have to be difficult, and granted some dogs are harder than others, but for them to live with a family a certain amount of training is a MUST, with ANY dog, or the results can be tragic.

Welcome to DU :hi:

And training the people too!!!!

Your dog and your daughter are both adorable :)

it's very important that all the members of the family play an active role in bringing the new dog in and socializing her. The first thing I did was put up the dog's toys,as pack leader, all toys are "mine", she plays with them when I say. I gave her a toy and let her play with it for a while, then under my close supervision, I had my daughter take the toy and put it away. Later, I had my daughter give the toy back, and so forth.

the first few days, I fed her, but then I had my daughter feed her. In this way, she started to learn, quickly since she's a smart dog, who's who in the household ;)

Can you imagine living in a cage like that :( I think it's awesome that she found someone with the patience and caring to rehabilitate her!

You guys are my heroes!

The CDC study is very careful to discuss limitations to the data and the conclusions that can be drawn from it. It's an estimate of bites by breed (or in the case of "pit bull types" breed group. That raw number can not be used to suggest which breeds are more dangerous than others -- for that, a bite rate is needed.The CDC study is clear that there is no scientific way to calculate the rate by breed because there are no accurate counts of dogs by breed (and for historic data, there is no way to define the "pit bull types" by individual breeds.)

The flaw by others like the media is the misuse of a raw count as a rate.

Has it been a month already, DU?

I'll be on the sidelines...

than one traveling religious salesperson to back down off of our porch :) ...and occasionally she sounds like she would like to eat the pizza delivery person. She could act better when we invite strangers into our house, but I'd trust her with our lives, and she's smart as a whip!

She's a rescue and we love her, I just wish we had some success in getting her to stand down on her alert when we invite people into our home. She is capable of barking until they leave - even if my daughter has a friend over to spend the night!

It ought to.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I have always been of the impression that it's the owners who influence the (bad) behavior.

I rarely meet a dog that doesn't love me at first sight, unless the owner is a complete asshole, and I judge people by their dogs.

She brought the Chow and her YorkiePoo over to my house to visit once.

My Norwegian Forest Cat, Tiger, lunged at the Chow and started chasing him. I had to lock Tiger in a room for the duration of the visit.

:loveya:

He went out with honor. For the last six months of his life he served as Sensei for Samantha, my Calico. I call her Sam the Beast. She really knows how to fight!

Sam figured out how to catch them, which is a very good thing indeed!

So many people try to turn dogs into people, when what they are are dogs and they need to be treated like dogs. Not babies, not toys, not children. When you have big breeds with natural instincts that can cause great harm, the mixture can be fatal.

There is a psychology to dogs, and I seem to get it.

the first and most important piece of advice I give anybody who asks me about getting a dog is "if you ever find yourself afraid of your own dog, either get a grip immediately or find it a new home as fast as you can".

Dogs aren't stupid, and when they discover they can run over you, they will. They will be a danger to you and anybody else around. Denial of this simple fact can be a fatal mistake

you think the cute little thing is just taking a nap, and the next, it's trying to stab you to death with a large carving knife. :scared:

THAT would terrify me, especially since I have yet to see a well trained one outside of a show ring. They all seem to have Napoleon complexes :) My birth mom has 6..... if they were big I would run like hell ...hehe

http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/blog/new-study-finds-banned-breeds-no-more-aggressive-than-any-others/


from the study

The authors looked for risk factors for various behavior problems as reported by dog owners. They found that dogs identified as belonging to breeds designated as dangerous according to Spanish law were no more likely to behave aggressively toward people or toward other dogs than were dogs of the random group of breeds in the sample.

... I think. The listed dogs are those most frequently involved in FATAL attacks. They may or may not be any more aggressive than other dogs in initiating a conflict, but they are big, strong and capable of overpowering the average person and doing a lot of damage. And most have an instinct to stay in the fight until the opponent is dead. A Chihuahua might be a vicious little bastard, but he's probably not going to get you by the neck and kill you. A pit bull could... quickly.

That seems strange to me. My family raised and always had danes around (I had one myself until two years ago), and they've always struck me as some of the most gentle creatures on earth. The only time I ever saw a dane get even halfway threatening is if they perceived someone was threatening my mom. Oh my, they did not like that. But even then, they'd just put themselves between the other person and her and bark very, very loudly.

They're especially good with children.

This surprises me.

- and I agree, Danes are friendly dogs and great around kids - but I was thinking that if something goes wrong it could go *really* wrong b/c of the sheer size. The OP talks about *fatal* attacks, after all.

Again, I don't know, just a thought. If we're talking non-fatal attacks/bites the statistic might look very different.

I got bitten by sheep dogs all the time as a kid. We used to spend summer holidays at the country side, sheep dogs running around all over the place.

Lots of great memories from those days, but somehow one of my calves was always bleeding... :)

He seemed pretty chill.

And so was Marmaduke. Yeah, this study is bullshit.

in the latter part of the 1800's IIRC. They were used to hunt wild boar and as war dogs, and looked a bit different (larger, more muscular, slightly different head) than we see today.

They were removed from shows for several years until breeders could create the couch potatoes we see today.

as an identifier for the likelihood of attacks.

There is a site out there, dogsbite, constantly pushing this misinformation.

Like Teabaggers do in the political arena, except they don't have the moral boundaries of Teabaggers.

Too bad, really, because following that misinformation has directly caused unecessary death and disfigurement
of kids and others. Their site is stained with the tears and blood of those victims.

It's pretty simple. If you insist that people manage their dog, if you don't enforce or ignore leash laws, or if you leave children and dogs unsupervised, there will continue to be unecessary deaths and disfigurement.

It has nothing to do with breed.

It has everything to do with people.

Furthermore, what does 'involved in a fatal attack' mean - how were they involved, what were the circumstances - were these defensive attacks....some of the breeds identified are trained to protect.

UNREC

The one that I cared for while owner was away tended to be jerk with other visitors. But was well behaved when I was around or at my place.

It latched onto my arm and wouldn't let go.

I think that's pretty fucked up.

three days later my dad was attacked (see difference in words) by a mastiff, knocked down stairs, cut open his head and mauled on face, both arms and both legs....

stitches in head, legs and the rest taped.

ya... i get it.

He is very aggressive towards strangers...any strangers.
Passive and loving with the family... but strangers..(((shudder)))

You don't need hormones helping a 135lb dog to get worked up.

Especially when you consider that the St. Bernard is big enough to put its paws on your shoulders and give you a doggy look of love while they're humping away.

Ruins the crease in your pants, but it's a hell of an icebreaker. Especially when insurance salesmen drop by.

I must admit that I'm a bit less comfortable around "pit bull type" breeds than other breeds (not if I know the dog well, obviously).

But my last dog (RIP) was a 100 lb German Shepherd. Very protective, especially with my fiancee, but not agressive at all.

I know that sense of mistrust/irrational fear that pit owners describe from having a "high risk" breed, though.

Always seemed like gentle giants to me.

any type of dog can attack. This all seems like big dogs have a bigger bite sort of thing.

Just the size of their bite is a big thing. You also have to look at the breed itself and what it was bred for, what its needs are, how pushy or dominant they tend to be.

peoples ignorance of what a dog needs is always the base problem.

I like pit bulls. I like every dog on that list. They just need to be owned by people who take the time to learn the breed and train both themselves and the dog :)

He wanted to be alpha and let me know. He ended up having to be put down because was not safe around people. It was a shame but needed to be done.

You did the right thing though. I adopted a lab mix that was very unpredictable and aggressive towards men mostly. She would give no warning before biting. The shelter apparently didn't see the behavior. She had to be put down also. There was no undoing the damage that had been done to her previously :(

and they were all aggressive. What are the odds, right? I know that they are supposed to be "gentle giants" but it was just my luck. The first one was when I was 8 - it lived next door and always was very aggressive/protective of it's yard. The second and third both lived on farm type land and were not friendly with most people - just the owners. Weird. I still want to meet that cuddly, cute St. Bernard. :)

I rest my case.

Breed and AggressionI deal with a lot of red zone cases, and I often hear people incorrectly blaming the breed. Any breed can cause trouble. The difference between an aggressive Chihuahua and an aggressive pit bull is that the bigger breeds can cause proportionately bigger damage.

It is important to recognize the power of a strong breed, like the pit bull, the Cane Corso, and the Mastiff. These dogs are very powerful and, if they are unbalanced, they can cause serious injury. Remember, these dogs don’t dream of being in the news when they grow up. Dogs don't premeditate bad acts like people do. Bad things happen when powerful breeds (or mixes of powerful breeds) live with humans who like the breed but don’t understand and fulfill the animal in the dog. Many people consider the look or popularity of a breed before thinking about whether the dog works for their lifestyle. This is a recipe for disaster.

To control a powerful breed, you need to become the dog’s pack leader and establish rules, boundaries, and limitations. You need to fulfill the dog as Nature intended him to be fulfilled. If you are considering adopting a powerful breed, make sure you are willing and able to take on the responsibility.


I agreed with Cesar

We've had, Dobies, Rotties, Shepherds, my daughter currently has a Pitt that she rescued, he's the most lovable dog. Big ole' teddy bear.

I want a Great Dane. My friends had a St. Bernard.

No issues with any of these dogs. Or with neighborhood/friends dogs that are in this list.

I don't know why, but I have talked to a lot of owners who just love their dogs.
I wouldn't have one myself.

Now they've got a wolf hunting season out here.
I'm just about sick of these low-life Republicans who got that crap started.

Wolves are canines, so basically they are giving out tags so Mister Big and Bold Hunter Man can go out and kill a dog!!!!!!

Kind of a hot button issue in some circles. When we're talking GSD (or any dog - Huskies, Malamutes...)/wolf hybrids, results are very unpredictable.

I've been around a couple of GSD/wolf hybrids. Beautiful canines, but their predatory instincts were stronger than in any Canis Familiaris I've ever encountered. Owning such a hybrid is a HUGE responsibility.

A wolf has instincts that have long been bred out of domesticated dogs. Owning a wolf or a hybrid wolf, in my opinion is very irresponsible. Wild animals are wid animals. Domesticated animals are domesticated animals.

So, I don't know what the hell they are doing it for.

One is the "cool" factor.

The other is a weird need that some people have to believe that they have a special relationship with a dangerous wild animal that sets them apart from others.

Sort of like people who own tigers or poisonous snakes.

He never gave anyone any problems. And the entire town knew him and he loved kids, too.

I love wolves...from a distance :)

or you are excellent with wilder animals. An ex of mine had the same mix and she needed a lot of work to get her to be so good with her family. She was extremely protective and they couldn't invite just anyone into their house. She seemed to like me a lot for some reason and once even went as far as to growl/bare her teeth at my ex when he came into the room I was sleeping in. He wasn't scared though and just grabbed her snout and gave her a good "talking to". She didn't do that to him again.

5.Ford F-150
4. Nissan Sentra
3. Hyundai Santa Fe
2. Chevrolet Malibu
1. "Sports-type" cars


And THAT is about how accurate this so called "report" is :eyes:

All "sports cars"

If they're involved in an accident, just like any old mutt can become a "pit bull" as soon as they bite somebody and the local "news" gets hold of it ;)

how such a list can distort the reality.

It's not the car, I'm thinking, but the type of driver that a particular car attracts. Maybe safety features aren't as good, either. Or size of car? Who knows?

But the kind of person who buys, say a Subaru Forester...you won't find that person drag racing or speeding (much), etc. But I suppose if a reckless person buys one, that could happen.

I picked the cars models out of my head for no particular reason other than that they were particular, specific, like the other 9 specific breeds of dog placed alongside "pit bull type".

Her Subaru Forester is famous in 8 counties. :scared:

She is 5 months old and goes to puppy class every week. My bf has raised them before and knows the breed well. I would NEVER suggest that someone get one without knowing the breed. You have to be very strong willed and the dog CANNOT ever think it is above any human being in the pecking order. It's not a baby, not a person, not your little toy. It's a dog that can cause a whole lot of damage if it wants to. Any reputable breeder of Malamutes will make sure the owners are capable and educated before any sale.

I think that any large potentially deadly breed should have a requirement for owners to take classes BEFORE acquiring the dog. In fact, frankly I think any dog owner should be educated about the breed they are getting. So many end up in shelters because HUMANS are clueless about what the DOG needs.

Here is a little thought:

If you think playing tug of war with any of the above breeds is cute or a good idea then you should not be owning one.

playing tug-of-war is not a good idea. A dog should NEVER be taught that they can use their mouth/teeth to get their way

Right between the people who insist the breeds are all the same and should be judged the same and not dangerous and those who think the breeds are killers are all need to be banned.

It's nice to see someone else out there who gets it :)

People needs to be educated before owning a dog and frankly I am surprised that more shelters don't require classes before adoptions just to cut down on return rates.

My own personal belief ( and probably unpopular) is that people should need a certificate before being allowed to adopt, buy, own any dog :)

"any dog owner should be educated about the breed they are getting". This is so important!

When my GSD hit 12-14 months the fight for dominance started, but I was prepared and knew how to deal with it. I noticed, at the same time, that 12-14 months is the age where most GSDs end up in shelters...

And by that time it is very hard to reverse the damage done by the previous clueless owners. I adore German Shepards!

Did it bite their knee or something?

they can be very strong and athletic so an aggressive Chow can kill you dead if it gets out of hand. They are generally larger and heavier than most American Pit Bull Terriers and about as strong

See:

Once he was officially introduced to us, we had nothing to fear -- except perhaps being kissed to death. But he was leery around strangers.

That's why civilized countries ban them.

There's this, too.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1722111

A woman is more likely to die from complications due to pregnancy than she is from a dog bite.

Show legit data that proves what you say. You say it all the time and can never, ever back it up.

Only idiots support BSL.

M-C report in 5,4,3....

:P

lol!

Behold the beast!

I have an American Pit Bull Terrier and a Shi Tzu. Of the two of them, it's always the ShiTzu that wants to start some shit with the biggest dog she can find :crazy:

when she meets a bigger dog. Your Shih-tzu obviously has been taking lessons from the pitbull. :P

Our current pit bull is very friendly with other dogs, she has several friends around the neighborhood she loves to play with. Our previous pit wasn't as hospitable toward other dogs and that's the one the shi tzu grew up with. She sparred with Birdie right up until a few weeks before she passed. I guess that's what made her tough lol

Yup- little napoleons! My birth mom has 6 pomeranians....they are chaos in a furry little package.

She would always chase strange dogs off the property, no matter how big they were, but since her long time companion, Birdie, died last year and we got the new dog she's gotten a lot more aggressive toward other dogs. She will go over to the neighbor's looking to start shit with their dogs for no reason. I've really had to bring the hammer down on her lately over it, I won't tolerate an aggressive dog no matter how small. She bit the neighbor's Chow right on the butt. Poor Lou!

The neighbor thought it was funny but I didn't, I leashed her up and marched her little butt all the way home while reading her the riot act all the way

RWers that make fun of global warming: "idiots...can't understand science..."

There have been many documented examples of fatal dog attacks...yet you folks think it's "propaganda?"

What's really interesting is that you are using the SAME arguments as RWers: Wait! I KNOW a nice pit bull/st. bernard! I met him/her! WTF? I MET a nice one...this MUST be a STUPID study! Wanna know what you sound like?

"I SHOVELED snow last winter! I TOUCHED it! Global warming idiots are stupid jackasses!"

Jesus, some "liberals" embarrass the fuck out of me.

:rofl:

Good one!!!

but, I have never thought much of adults that have to use emoticons to attempt to engage in a conversation.

what you railed against in your post.

WHAT THE FUCK? (since you despise emoticons).

I don't know many grownups who do. But, thanks for agreeing with me, and finally stating that.

If you read the PDF of that report, in the top 10 "purebreds", there are 9 very specific pedigreed breeds listed along with "pit bull type". Listing "pit bull type" which may include everything and the kitchen sink in media accounts as a "purebred" dog pretty well shoots any credibility that "report" has right in the ass.

Although there certainly is plenty of hyperbole. As someone who has quite a bit of experience with dogs, including German Shepherds, Rottweilers, Dobermans, Rhodesian Ridgebacks, I take any credible statistics very seriously.

There are some very responsible dog owners on this thread. I'm sure they're at least as angry with irresponsible owners as you are.

Ok, maybe some breeds should be banned, at least in certain circumstances. It would be sad if it came to that, but I'm open to it. If someone who lives in an urban environment aquires a dogo argentino I find myself seriously questioning their motives. But I guess the most frequently asked question among dog owners, as far as banning is concerned, is "where does it stop".


(I actually don't have any dogs right now - I have an 11 year old cat that I adopted b/c her owner was too old and infirm to take care of her, though)