BuffettNews.com

Please visit this website and take a moment to read. This is just plain wrong.

http://www.freewebs.com/chloethepitbull ... nation.htm

I don't know, with the reputation of the breed, using them for service dogs is a little careless IMO. With all the wonderful German Shepards, Goldens, Retrievers I think it is a bad idea to attempt to introduce a pit to the general public. Yeah, I know not all are bad, my mother-in-law had one and it was a pussy cat, but because of the fears of the general public, I wouldn't have one. Yes Walmart violated the law and I am sure they will reach a settlement. I don't shop at Walmart for other reasons. This episode doesn't change my opinion of them either way.

Skibo wrote:I don't know, with the reputation of the breed, using them for service dogs is a little careless IMO. With all the wonderful German Shepards, Goldens, Retrievers I think it is a bad idea to attempt to introduce a pit to the general public. Yeah, I know not all are bad, my mother-in-law had one and it was a pussy cat, but because of the fears of the general public, I wouldn't have one. Yes Walmart violated the law and I am sure they will reach a settlement. I don't shop at Walmart for other reasons. This episode doesn't change my opinion of them either way.

I disagree with the "reputation of the breed", it's the handler or owner that creates the situations that puts fear into the mind of the general public. Unfortunately there have been many reports of these dogs attacking children but almost every incident has been a loose dog or dog in his own yard either being taunted or fingers going into his fenced yard. This breed is no different than a gun owner, every now and then there is a tragedy that could of been prevented with responsible ownership.

The public's fear and opinion of them is exactly why I have a pit bull and am in the process of adopting another. I will do everything in my power to show anyone who will pay attention that they are loving, loyal dogs. NO dog, not a pit bull, doberman, shepherd, rottweiler, or any other breed is born with the instinct to attack humans or other dogs. It is the irresponsibilty of humans that causes dog attacks. Whether it be lack of exercise (#1 issue w/most behavior problems), lack of training, or lack of socialization, it is the human's fault. Only the human's fault. NEVER the dog's.

carey24 wrote:The public's fear and opinion of them is exactly why I have a pit bull and am in the process of adopting another. I will do everything in my power to show anyone who will pay attention that they are loving, loyal dogs. NO dog, not a pit bull, doberman, shepherd, rottweiler, or any other breed is born with the instinct to attack humans or other dogs. It is the irresponsibilty of humans that causes dog attacks. Whether it be lack of exercise (#1 issue w/most behavior problems), lack of training, or lack of socialization, it is the human's fault. Only the human's fault. NEVER the dog's.

Good for you! As an owner of a Doberman and a previous Rottie owner I know how great these dogs are if brought up correctly. My Dobie and our 4 year old daughter are best of friends. I'd sooner leave him with her before some humans I know!

There are no bad dogs. Only bad owners.

A service dog is a service dog, breed is irrelevant. The dog has been trained and passed examinations to prove itself worthy.

bravedave wrote:There are no bad dogs.

I would disagree with this a little. Although it does go back to the "bad owner", those (usually) pitbulls that have been bred for a nasty dispostition for fighting and whatnot. Those dogs are bred to be born with the killer instinct.

But you would think the screening process for service dogs would weed out the bad ones.

Please don't take this the wrong way because I was really looking for yet another reason to hate Walmart ... but just what "service" was Chloe performing? I read the information from the link provided and all I could determine was that she was an "Ambassador For The Breed".

Maybe I am missing something, but is that really a valid reason to have a dog in a store? To be an "ambassdor"? I don't care what breed it is, I wouldn't expect that to be allowed.

I will respectfully disagree with some of the comments here re. pit bulls and other breeds. The behavior of all animals (and people) is related to genetic makeup and environment. And based on their original functions and purpose some breeds were created or refined to emphasize particular traits.

In the case of pit bulls, the breed was created as a cross between an aggressive breed and a tenacious one, so those tendencies towards that behavior are just like my caucasian skin. Within a breed certain characteristics can be emphasized to bring out specific traits...e.g. a higher level of aggressiveness, endurance, etc. just like my brown hair and hazel eyes. So the genetics of these animals is a real part of what they are and how they behave.

That said, the environmental piece (where and how they are raised and treated) is critical. If they are treated and trained (and/or provoked) in a way to exhibit the more aggressive tendencies it's very clear that they will do so. On the other hand, in the right and kind environment the likelihood of these aggressive behaviors surfacing is tremendously reduced.

Basically, we can control the environment much more than we can the genetics. Behavioral tendencies exist for all breeds and there can be extremes for all breeds...e.g. an aggressive golden retriever and a docile pit bull. However, on average, a golden retriever will be more tolerant and laid back than a pit bull.

That doesn't mean all pit bulls are bad at all; that's just the reality. On another note, as some people choose a breed that matches with their personality, the environment some pit bulls are in might be just the wrong place for that type of dog...it may bring out their aggressive instincts. And of course, some people choose such a breed for security purposes and train them to do the "work" that they were originally bred to do.

So, yeah, dog owners range from wonderful to terrible...but the underlying genetics of the animal are there regardless.

SharkOnLand wrote:

bravedave wrote:There are no bad dogs.

I would disagree with this a little. Although it does go back to the "bad owner", those (usually) pitbulls that have been bred for a nasty dispostition for fighting and whatnot. Those dogs are bred to be born with the killer instinct.

But you would think the screening process for service dogs would weed out the bad ones.

Even if a dog is bred for a certain reason, fighting, retrieving, anything...the behavior must be brought out. They do not automatically know as a pup what they are supposed to do.

The fighting instinct can be brought out by taunting, starving, and many other horrendous acts. However, aggression can also develop from a build up of energy. When a dog does not have the proper outlet for energy, obsessive and aggressive behavior can occur. Again, it is inexperienced/uneducated owners that cause these problems. None of these dogs are 'born to fight'.

Quiet and Shy wrote:In the case of pit bulls, the breed was created as a cross between an aggressive breed and a tenacious one, so those tendencies towards that behavior are just like my caucasian skin. Within a breed certain characteristics can be emphasized to bring out specific traits...e.g. a higher level of aggressiveness, endurance, etc. just like my brown hair and hazel eyes. So the genetics of these animals is a real part of what they are and how they behave.

You are right. If I should ever turn my back on my dog, she is predisposed to attack and rip off my head.

You can also see how territorial she gets.

Quiet and Shy wrote:However, on average, a golden retriever will be more tolerant and laid back than a pit bull.

Dead on again. In a temperament test in December 2006 shows, APBT only passed at 84.1% while the Golden Retriever's stats were an impressive 83.8%. Oh wait, those number show the pit bull actually has a slightly better temperament than a retriever. The Collie barely got over 50% and a dachshund only scored 67%.

Look, if you want to tell me how dangerous a breed is, do some research first. And just for future reference, the pit bull was originally bred for the same reason as a bull dog; the British would use the animal to go and round up the bull, not to fight other dogs.

In other news, I find it odd a store that allows you to carry a loaded handgun (due to a previous lawsuit) won't allow a certain breed of service dog in their store.

Caribbean Soul wrote:Maybe I am missing something, but is that really a valid reason to have a dog in a store? To be an "ambassdor"? I don't care what breed it is, I wouldn't expect that to be allowed.

The dog is an ambassador for the breed being used in the service industry. From what I gather, this person trains service dogs and this pit bull was to be one of the first in the area.

During my illustrious career at Super Target, we had quite a few trainers come through with animals.

This is legitimate question, not bashing here. Why is it that when you hear of vicious dog attacks that it is almost always a pit bull?

land_shark3 wrote:

Quiet and Shy wrote:In the case of pit bulls, the breed was created as a cross between an aggressive breed and a tenacious one, so those tendencies towards that behavior are just like my caucasian skin. Within a breed certain characteristics can be emphasized to bring out specific traits...e.g. a higher level of aggressiveness, endurance, etc. just like my brown hair and hazel eyes. So the genetics of these animals is a real part of what they are and how they behave.

You are right. If I should ever turn my back on my dog, she is predisposed to attack and rip off my head.

You can also see how territorial she gets.

Quiet and Shy wrote:However, on average, a golden retriever will be more tolerant and laid back than a pit bull.

Dead on again. In a temperament test in December 2006 shows, APBT only passed at 84.1% while the Golden Retriever's stats were an impressive 83.8%. Oh wait, those number show the pit bull actually has a slightly better temperament than a retriever. The Collie barely got over 50% and a dachshund only scored 67%.

Look, if you want to tell me how dangerous a breed is, do some research first. And just for future reference, the pit bull was originally bred for the same reason as a bull dog; the British would use the animal to go and round up the bull, not to fight other dogs.

Talk about taking points in a post completely out of context... You're more than just a bit defensive on this. I never said pit bulls were bad; there's just more to the story beyond the owner.

Some people choose to view the world as black and white...the world of pit bulls (and in fact most things) contains some gray, whether you're willing to see it or not.

Crazy Navy Flyer wrote:This is legitimate question, not bashing here. Why is it that when you hear of vicious dog attacks that it is almost always a pit bull?

Because that is what sells news stories. I'll be the first to admit, recently APBTs have bitten more people than any other breed. Up until the 80s, German Shepards held that title at almost twice as many bites as the next breed. At which point, certain localities began having issues with Shepards. People then turned to Rotweilers and APBTs.

However one thing to keep in mind is that many people cannot tell a true pit bull when they see one. They just blame the most agressive breed they can think of and the news runs with it. My favorite news story was about the baby whose toes were eaten by a pit bull while the parents slept. The story took up the front page of a newspaper. About two days later, in a paragraph in one of the back sections, the mother admitted that it was actually the pet ferret who ate the toes, not the dog.

Can you pick out a APBT?
http://members.aol.com/radogz/find.html

Quiet and Shy wrote:Talk about taking points in a post completely out of context...

Not sure how I can take your exact words out of context...

Quiet and Shy wrote:However, on average, a golden retriever will be more tolerant and laid back than a pit bull.

Temperament tests debunk that statement. On average, Pit Bulls actually have a better temperament than Golden Retrievers. (www.atts.org)

It is false comments like your's that cause Wal-Mart to ban these animals as service dogs. It is also why home owner's insurance companies deny coverage for owning such a dog. It is the reason I cannot fly with my dog, even if she is crated and put in storage. And it is the same reason many cities are beginning to have a ban against certain breeds.

So yes, I am a very defensive when it comes to false statements about a breed.

Crazy Navy Flyer wrote:This is legitimate question, not bashing here. Why is it that when you hear of vicious dog attacks that it is almost always a pit bull?

vicious liberal media.

land_shark3 wrote:Look, if you want to tell me how dangerous a breed is, do some research first. And just for future reference, the pit bull was originally bred for the same reason as a bull dog; the British would use the animal to go and round up the bull, not to fight other dogs.

Wonderful post and great pictures!! Pits can be some of the goofiest acting, funny sweet dogs. We see many of them at the dog park and my dog (a 7 year old bichon) seems drawn to play with them.....to be honest it is probably because he can easily be the dominant one with them and feels safe.

Any dog can be made mean, and in the case of a naturally strong dog, can be made very dangerous. (And for the 'duh' moment...why do we think criminal class folks pick these breeds to begin with? They are strong and they make them mean!! The meanness doesn't come first!)

However, it's not the breed that is the problem....it's the stupid folks that make them this way.

I'll take a well cared for pit bull any day over a badly trained, yappy, nasty supposedly 'safe' dog breed

carey24 wrote:
Even if a dog is bred for a certain reason, fighting, retrieving, anything...the behavior must be brought out. They do not automatically know as a pup what they are supposed to do. .

I'm not sure I agree with you on this part.....I have Jack Russell Terriers...the breed was created and continued for many years as primarily hunters....
I have NEVER spent one day hunting with my dogs (although a great number of JRT owners do) and they have never had an training related to hunting....but they are the most effective killing machines I have ever seen when it comes to snakes and rodents....they hunt, in the backyard, together as a team....it's all instinct.....heaven help a snake, mouse, frog or small cat that finds itself in my backyard.....they have an incredibly high prey drive.
What that has to do with pits....I don't know....but I do believe that some canine behavior is instinctual and is often breed specific.
I'm not anit-pit at all.....what is needed is stronger laws and harsher penalties for the miscreants that continue to fight pits....and those that harbor and continue to breed extremely aggressive animals....be they pits, rotts, or poodles.