Why is this in the Panther's Forum?
So you would ask that.
Jump to content
Posted 22 May 2009 - 12:44 PM
I bet if the dog hadn't bit anybody this wouldn't have been news.
Posted 22 May 2009 - 12:45 PM
I bet if the dog hadn't bit anybody this wouldn't have been news.
Posted 22 May 2009 - 12:48 PM
Oh, that makes perfect sense then.
We aren't packaging Dehomme too for some draft picks?
Posted 22 May 2009 - 12:55 PM
Uh, I bet you're right.
I bet if the Craigslist Killer didn't murder anybody, that wouldn't have been news either.
Posted 22 May 2009 - 01:21 PM
Posted 22 May 2009 - 01:24 PM
Posted 22 May 2009 - 01:30 PM
Posted 22 May 2009 - 01:35 PM
Edited by capfolly, 22 May 2009 - 01:37 PM.
Posted 22 May 2009 - 01:48 PM
Posted 22 May 2009 - 01:49 PM
The most recent official survey, conducted more than a decade ago, determined there were 4.7 million dog bite victims annually in the USA. A more recent study showed that 1,000 Americans per day are treated in emergency rooms as a result of dog bites. In 2007 there were 33 fatal dog attacks in the USA. Most of the victims who receive medical attention are children, half of whom are bitten in the face. Dog bite losses exceed $1 billion per year, with over $300 million paid by homeowners insurance.
The deadliest dogs
Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, has conducted an unusually detailed study of dog bites from 1982 to the present. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.) The Clifton study show the number of serious canine-inflicted injuries by breed. The author's observations about the breeds and generally how to deal with the dangerous dog problem are enlightening.
According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question. Clifton states:
If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed--and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.
Clifton's opinions are as interesting as his statistics. For example, he says, "Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all."
The breeds most likely to kill
In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers:
"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities." (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)
The Clifton study of attacks from 1982 through 2006 produced similar results. According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.)
Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds.
The most horrifying example of the lack of breed predictability is the October 2000 death of a 6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family's Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a dangerous breed. Note, however, that they were bred to be watchdogs! The baby's uncle left the infant and the dog on a bed while the uncle prepared her bottle in the kitchen. Upon his return, the dog was mauling the baby, who died shortly afterwards. ("Baby Girl Killed by Family Dog," Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9, 2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5.)
In Canine homicides and the dog bite epidemic: do not confuse them, it has been pointed out that the dog bite epidemic as a whole involves all dogs and all dog owners, not just the breeds most likely to kill.
In all fairness, therefore, it must be noted that:
* Any dog, treated harshly or trained to attack, may bite a person. Any dog can be turned into a dangerous dog. The owner or handler most often is responsible for making a dog into something dangerous.
* An irresponsible owner or dog handler might create a situation that places another person in danger by a dog, without the dog itself being dangerous, as in the case of the Pomeranian that killed the infant (see above).
* Any individual dog may be a good, loving pet, even though its breed is considered to be potentially dangerous. A responsible owner can win the love and respect of a dog, no matter its breed. One cannot look at an individual dog, recognize its breed, and then state whether or not it is going to attack.
Children are the most frequent targets
Studies of dog bite injuries have reported that:
* The median age of patients bitten was 15 years, with children, especially boys aged 5 to 9 years, having the highest incidence rate
* The odds that a bite victim will be a child are 3.2 to 1. (CDC.)
* Children seen in emergency departments were more likely than older persons to be bitten on the face, neck, and head. 77% of injuries to children under 10 years old are facial.
* Severe injuries occur almost exclusively in children less than 10 years of age.
* The majority of dog attacks (61%) happen at home or in a familiar place.
* The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim's family or a friend.
* When a child less than 4 years old is the victim, the family dog was the attacker half the time (47%), and the attack almost always happened in the family home (90%).
The face is the most frequent target
Studies also have shown that:
* Dog bites result in approximately 44,000 facial injuries in US hospitals each year. This represents between 0.5% and 1.5% of all emergency room visits
* The face is the most frequent target (77% of all injures). Mail carriers are an exception where 97% involve the lower extremities.
* The central target area for the face includes the lips, nose, and cheeks.
Posted 22 May 2009 - 01:55 PM
How anyone can put their child in harms way having apparently a pit bull in the house is effing stupidity. Let's hope the child will be OK.
Posted 22 May 2009 - 01:56 PM
pit bulls are bred to fight. it's in their DNA and only certain people should own them and those are people that are well trained to handle pits. they aren't just like any dog. if you are trying to say they are then you are very misled.
they can be nice and they can be safe but they are far from being guaranteed to be so. they are one of a few breeds of dogs who have in their nature be aggressive. even in their play they are aggressive and it's difficult for them to distinguish between the two.
they are highly sought after and used in dog fighting for a reason...they have a killer instinct and they are incredibly powerful. the good owner will know this and will try and get the dog to overcome instinct and will also be aware of those moments when they could go off and will make sure they don't.
pits have to be trained and the owners have to be trained to take care of them. there are other aggressive dogs that i wouldn't trust my children around, especially in certain situations. rottweillers, i wouldn't want strangers or new people coming to my house without them being introduced to the dog by me. huskies, i wouldn't want them to eat while my child is around or nearby. chows...they can be very aggressive and are probably more aggressive than a lot of breeds.
point is, you have to know your dog and it's breed's tendencies. with pit bulls, because of how much damage it can do whether playing or attacking, the owners need to know exactly how to handle them and monitor them closely when small kids are around. if you expect them to be a marshmallow dog like a collie without proper training, you are making a mistake.
Edited by Misty_Mountain_Hop, 22 May 2009 - 02:13 PM.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users