DEBATE: Breed worse since fighting made illegal?

This is where to talk about Pit Bulls!

Postby AmericanSuprDog » January 25th, 2011, 12:53 am

I can concede that it may have been originally developed to fight by some especially if one follows a precept that ratting is fighting as this is where they were first pitted and thus acquired that part of their name. My point however was not where the breed began but that in general throughout its history as a whole the breed has not been bred to fight. Some yes for sure. Most however no. I simply think making this over-generalization on the breed as a whole hurts the breed and will continue to support those who promote BSL instead of humane and responsible ownership laws.

As for the only way to determine game is through fighting I do not agree. But this to I guess is a matter of how one would define the term "game". I personally follow the definition of a non-quit attitude when faced with a task. I think any number of events that test a dog and its willingness and determination to complete the task at hand can prove its gameness. Basically I feel it is an attitude not a competency in any one particular action.
Some dogs need wings to fly.
Others are Super Dogs!
http://www.AmericanSuperDog.com
User avatar
AmericanSuprDog
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 30

Postby furever_pit » January 25th, 2011, 1:22 am

Don't you think that by denying what these dogs were bred for hurts the breed? Part of the problem (and part of the reason BSL exists) is the people who get these dogs who are unwilling or unable to accept the particular management issues that are common within this breed. The people who get these dogs and take them to dog parks or don't work on training them.

It's not the past we should be worried about, but the present and the future.

What other events test a dog's gameness?
IMO there is no comparison to the pit fight. Hunting may be the closest thing but only if the dog continues to catch and hold the boar or whatever prey despite injury. Weight pull, agility, protection sports, etc in no way, shape, or form ask a dog to push through what these dogs were asked to push through in the pit.

Note: I am not advocating dog fighting. I simply respect and appreciate what has been created by the culture.
User avatar
furever_pit
Supremely Bully
 
Posts: 1138
Location: NC

Postby cheekymunkee » January 25th, 2011, 2:33 am

furever_pit wrote:Don't you think that by denying what these dogs were bred for hurts the breed? Part of the problem (and part of the reason BSL exists) is the people who get these dogs who are unwilling or unable to accept the particular management issues that are common within this breed. The people who get these dogs and take them to dog parks or don't work on training them.

It's not the past we should be worried about, but the present and the future.

What other events test a dog's gameness?
IMO there is no comparison to the pit fight. Hunting may be the closest thing but only if the dog continues to catch and hold the boar or whatever prey despite injury. Weight pull, agility, protection sports, etc in no way, shape, or form ask a dog to push through what these dogs were asked to push through in the pit.

Note: I am not advocating dog fighting. I simply respect and appreciate what has been created by the culture.



I agree with the exception that I believe that boar hunting is a VERY close second. Wild boar are evil, viscous, nasty , mean, smelly , horrid creatures. (IMO of course) I think that any animal willing to tangle with one and not give up is pretty damn close to being game. Whether or not the dog is injured in the tussle. Not to mention, any hunter worth his salt goes to extremes to protect his dogs from injury with padding and other armor so IMO injury has little to do with it.

I do think there is only one way to determine if a dog is game and that is in the pit.

As far as the breed being worse? Of course it is. Why? Bad breeding. Bad breeding caused by publicity and money. Publicity ruined the breed just like it does everything else. Dog fighting became illegal. The Humane Society of U.S. decided to "save the breed" that they now hate and wrote many sensationalized articles on the plight of the breed. This attracted the attention of people who wanted a quick buck for various reasons ( gambling, peddling, needing to cull a litter but make money off of it...what have you) got their hands on a few dogs and the rest is history. I have seen it happen over the past 25 or 30 years. Not all dog men sold out the breed but enough of them did. And some still are. :nono:

And of course not all of the dogs of this breed were bred to fight. Many people ( my family included) bred them to work and as companions. But, had they not had these dogs that were bred as they were ( for bull baiting then for pit fighting) they would not have existed. Yes, when the breed originated farm type dogs were used to create it. No one denies that but these dogs were not the breed that it became. ALL breeds of dog started out as something else. Selective breeding of desired traits made breeds what they are.

Pit Bull is not a breed. American Pit Bull Terrier is the correct name for the breed.The words pit bull or Pit Bull is akin to hounds, terriers, etc. It is a TYPE of dog, not a breed.
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby AmericanSuprDog » January 25th, 2011, 2:40 am

furever_pit wrote:Don't you think that by denying what these dogs were bred for hurts the breed? Part of the problem (and part of the reason BSL exists) is the people who get these dogs who are unwilling or unable to accept the particular management issues that are common within this breed. The people who get these dogs and take them to dog parks or don't work on training them.

It's not the past we should be worried about, but the present and the future.

What other events test a dog's gameness?
IMO there is no comparison to the pit fight. Hunting may be the closest thing but only if the dog continues to catch and hold the boar or whatever prey despite injury. Weight pull, agility, protection sports, etc in no way, shape, or form ask a dog to push through what these dogs were asked to push through in the pit.

Note: I am not advocating dog fighting. I simply respect and appreciate what has been created by the culture.


What I understand from an in-depth review of many historical documents and three plus decades in the breed is that only a small minority ever fought. Under this precept I make the contention that they historically were not as a whole bred to fight but instead that a few individuals bred them to fight. Were they the best and gamest at the fight? Absolutely and this is why those who chose to fight them chose them as their breeding stock. I would simply wish to see people who neglect their other historical contribution embrace these as fervently as they do the minority of it in fighting.

When you say gameness what is your particular definition? Many people have different definitions. I have stated mine and I have stated what the Colby family's is and they have have likely produced more fighting Pits than anyone.

As for tasks that can test for gameness this would depend on your definition. Under mine hunting, herding, Shutzhund, weight pull, hangtime, treadmill, and even service dog work can tests aspects of gameness. I personally would like to see more people think outside the box and develop more activities. This is one of the underlying goals of the TV series we are working on. If your Pit Bull is active in anything how about showing others and promoting the breed in a positive manner by posting a video for consideration on our site at: http://www.AmericanSupeDog.com

In regards to taking them to dog parks and their management this would not be an issue if people were actually breeding them to their original heritage standards. Colby notes this in his book and this is validated by the many well managed Pit Bulls used as service dogs today.
Some dogs need wings to fly.
Others are Super Dogs!
http://www.AmericanSuperDog.com
User avatar
AmericanSuprDog
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 30

Postby cheekymunkee » January 25th, 2011, 2:58 am

AmericanSuprDog wrote:
TinaMartin wrote:http://www.nyx.net/~mbur/apbtfaqover.html
http://www.pitbull411.com/history.html




One of the first ways you can see if someone knows what they are talking about from true research on historical documentation is how they spell the name. If some one spells it as pit bull or in current times says Pit Bull type this either shows their ignorance on the breed or their biased nature in denying its heritage as one of the oldest recognized pure bred breeds in existence. There is no such thing as a Pit Bull type. It is either a Pit Bull (American Pit Bull Terrier) or not a Pit Bull. If it is mixed then it is a mix/mutt and a reference should not be made to the Pit Bull part of the mix no more than what ever it is mixed with. No one would say a Chow type or a Dalmation type. This failure to properly classify a dog as either pure or a mix breed is one of the very things that skews bite statistics and gives the true Pit Bull its undeserved reputation and thus supports politicians pushing for BSL. The root of this lies with the AKC and their failure to make proper references to proper registries when politicians call and ask them about the Pit Bull breed. Instead of making the proper reference to the UKC, ADBA, APBR or other registry that registers the breed as pure they simply deny it is a recognized breed. While this is true as far as their registry is concerned it is disingenuous as they know for a fact it is recognized as such by others. They also fail to mention that their very own Am Staff was built on 100% Pit Bull stock and is one in the same. This failure is intentional I believe as a means of keeping the Am Staff off of BSL lists.



Here are some quotes from Colby's book to help understand the breed and its true history better.

P. 38 "Dogs were expected to take care of themselves. If it was jumped by another dog in the street, it was expected to "lick it." A dog however, was not expected to be a bully-starting trouble in the street for no reason."

p.42 "Many modern dog fighters tend to be impressed with "barnstormers," or dogs that are hyper and dog aggressive, not realizing that many of the gamest dogs that ever lived were quite comfortable with other dogs."

p.52 "To the Colby family the much-discussed term "gameness" means unyielding and determined. Louis likes the word unyielding the best, because gameness can manifest itself in many different ways." - Throughout the book he refers to these in terms of hunting, guarding, weight pulling, etc.

p.56 "My guess is, if you were to take anybody's strain, ours included, probably out of every 100 dogs there wouldn't be more than five or ten who were completely dead game."

p.58 In reference to John Colby's dog Whiskey. "He wouldn't bother a cat or a dog, minded his own business and was very controllable."

p.77 "In the late 1980's, due to several highly publicized incidents involving careless breeders and owners, the very name of the Pit Bull became synonymous with aggression, violent behavior, and untrustworthiness. How different from the image (p.78) of the breed just a few decades before. Where once the Pit Bull had been advertised and sold as a "pal for children" (and in England as the "nursemaid dog")."

p.94 "In the yard of John P. Colby they (AKC) found Colby's Primo, a dog they felt represented a sound, athletic dog. Primo was measured and observed by this committee, and the AKC standard (for the Am Staff) was based in part on this dog."

p.95 "Some people are confused over the relationship between the modern-day American Staffordshire Terrier and the American Pit Bull Terrier. The letter from the Staffordshire Terrier Club of America (still in existence) to Louis Colby shows clearly that the two breeds are one. At the bottom of the page the words "formerly known as the American (Pit) Bullterrier" shows that only the (p.96) name was changed when the dogs were allowed AKC registration.

There are many other quotes I could pull as well but have limited these to try to keep the post as short as possible.

I have discussed the Pit Bull with Colby directly and he is a very congenial man. I would provide his phone number to you but he may not want this given (due his aging health) to be posted on a board for many others to see. For any interested however and want a true history on the breed order his book directly from his site and he will send you a signed copy. With this if you write a message with your request he will likely provide a piece of letterhead that will provide the number to you so you can contact him, his son Bruce or his daughter who now handles most of the business due to his age.


I do agree with this with the exception that there is ( or there has become) a pit bull type as I said above. And yes, the two breeds were once one. A Colby dog was used to create the Am Staff but they are no longer the same breed. They have been bred for different traits and are now not the same breed at all. There have been numerous debates on this board as well as every other pit bull board in existence on this topic.
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby AmericanSuprDog » January 25th, 2011, 3:50 am

Yeah the APBT vs. the Am Staff is an endless debate. If it is a concept based on trait one can make an argument for the difference. If it is a matter of genetics and history one can side that they are both Pit Bulls with different names. From a registry standpoint the AKC, ADBA, UKC have all actively cross-registered them.

My biggest problem really is how the AKC denies it as a recognized breed when they in fact know it is a recognized breed by several other registries, just not theirs by name. When a politician asks they should say yes it is a recognized breed, they do not however except it under that name in their registry and refer the politician to a registry that does recognize it as such. When the CDC, JAVMA, Clifton Report and others make reference to Pit Bulls in upwards of 10 different categories of mixes this adds fuel to the BSL fire. For example in the Clifton report it even has one category as Pit bull/Doberman/GSD/Lab. There is simply no way in trying to determine this accurately nor is there any way to make any kind of true statistical analysis with such. How about just referring to a mix as a mix I say. Doing so however would deflate the ability for politicians to use such to support their BSL agenda. There is no way to make a valid statistical analysis in such reports when the Pit is referred to in so many categories. By not referring to a mix as a mix one has to wonder who is really commissioning such studies and what are their motivations in the development of classes of dogs they refer to.
Some dogs need wings to fly.
Others are Super Dogs!
http://www.AmericanSuperDog.com
User avatar
AmericanSuprDog
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 30

Postby AmericanSuprDog » January 25th, 2011, 8:44 pm

Did some number crunching and thought this was an interesting current statistic.

The United States Humane Society estimates that more than 40,000 people across the country buy and sell fighting dogs and are involved in dog fighting activities.

While this seems like a lot based on the nations aprox. population of 307,006,550 this means that 1/10 of 1% (40,000 / 307,006,550 = .13029%). Comparative to other criminal acts this is an especially low number by comparison. If you average 1 murder per one murderer this means in the US .42802 people are murderers ( http://www.nationmaster.com/country/us-united-states/cri-crime ) making the chances of someone being a murderer roughly 3 times greater than that of being a dog fighter.

It is my belief that simply quoting 40,000 and not revealing the true nature of the numbers is used to negatively manipulate people's opinion without merit. All things should be seen as relative and to not show this by the Humane Society creates bias.

If you make the assumption that all fighting dogs are Pit Bulls this means based on the an estimated population of 1.5 million Pit Bull owners this means that only 2.6 % of Pit Bull owners are fighters.

I thought this might help add perspective.
Some dogs need wings to fly.
Others are Super Dogs!
http://www.AmericanSuperDog.com
User avatar
AmericanSuprDog
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 30

Postby mnp13 » January 25th, 2011, 8:50 pm

Um, I don't think anyone is debating the relatively small number of dogs that are involved in dog fighting now. What most of us are saying is that the breed's origin is the pit. Regardless of how few dogs actually ever fought, that is still the origin of the breed. Just like not everyone who had a retriever hunted, the origin of the breed was still bringing back dead foul.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby TinaMartin » January 25th, 2011, 8:50 pm

While I think that that is important info for the public to know it still doesn't change the reason for the breed being created in the first place.
Not only am I a member of the Michelle says my dog is fat club I'm the president!
I can Alpha Roll hair!
User avatar
TinaMartin
The Hair Whisperer
 
Posts: 1240
Location: Rochester NY

Postby AmericanSuprDog » January 26th, 2011, 9:22 am

mnp13 wrote:Um, I don't think anyone is debating the relatively small number of dogs that are involved in dog fighting now. What most of us are saying is that the breed's origin is the pit. Regardless of how few dogs actually ever fought, that is still the origin of the breed. Just like not everyone who had a retriever hunted, the origin of the breed was still bringing back dead foul.


TinaMartin wrote:While I think that that is important info for the public to know it still doesn't change the reason for the breed being created in the first place.



The post was not really to continue the discussion on the origin. Really I was not ever so much debating origin even though I do have a slightly different perspective. Mostly in the posts before it was about people giving too much focus to a very limited aspect of the breeds history and not giving enough credit to what is the preponderance of the rest of its colorful and positive heritage. To me this appears to be painting a small canvas with a large brush instead of painting a large canvas with a small brush.

Sorry I was not more clear in my intent for the last post as I do see how people may have seen it as continuing that discussion. In the future when I am continuing on a specific line of thought or responding to a post I will try to remember to use the quote option to be more clear in my intent.

AmericanSuprDog wrote:.............My biggest problem really is how the AKC denies it as a recognized breed when they in fact know it is a recognized breed by several other registries, ...... When the CDC, JAVMA, Clifton Report and others make reference to Pit Bulls in upwards of 10 different categories of mixes this adds fuel to the BSL fire. For example in the Clifton report it even has one category as Pit bull/Doberman/GSD/Lab. There is simply no way in trying to determine this accurately nor is there any way to make any kind of true statistical analysis with such. ..........There is no way to make a valid statistical analysis in such reports when the Pit is referred to in so many categories. By not referring to a mix as a mix one has to wonder who is really commissioning such studies and what are their motivations in the development of classes of dogs they refer to.



The purpose of my last post was more so to followup on my post before and to show how organizations who are supposed to be entrusted with the care of animals often manipulate their position and trust in society to paint a picture that is negative to promote a specific agenda that is in conflict with what is supposed to be their core mission of honest education or the betterment of animal welfare. To me it is easy to see that this is done simply to gain political favor or bolster membership contributions. Another shining example of this would be PETA and their position on the Pit Bull breed specifically and pets in general. I doubt the preponderence of PETA members who support the lives of lab rats and placing hunting vests on deers even know that their membership dues also go to acquiring would be/could be pets (dogs and cats) that are subsequently put to death. It is these types of things that I see as a breech of trust and dishonorable.

I actually have no problem with anyone tauting a number or a perentage.

AmericanSuprDog wrote:......The United States Humane Society estimates that more than 40,000 people across the country buy and sell fighting dogs and are involved in dog fighting activities.


I am actually glad to know that there are 40,000 of these people out there. I am also glad to know that a certain number of people die from dog attacks each year as posted by the CDC, JAVMA, Clifton Report and others.

I just would like to see more integrity, transparency and honesty in the process.
Some dogs need wings to fly.
Others are Super Dogs!
http://www.AmericanSuperDog.com
User avatar
AmericanSuprDog
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 30

Postby TinaMartin » January 26th, 2011, 10:53 am

AmericanSuprDog wrote:Mostly in the posts before it was about people giving too much focus to a very limited aspect of the breeds history and not giving enough credit to what is the preponderance of the rest of its colorful and positive heritage. To me this appears to be painting a small canvas with a large brush instead of painting a large canvas with a small brush.

Actually you will find that most of what is discussed on the board involves positive breed image, trouble shooting individual issues and breed involvement in a broad range of positive activities.
As I am sure others will agree if you are going to discuss a breed you cant forget part of what makes the dog what it is. It would be like discussing Huskies without ever talking about Sled dog racing.
Not only am I a member of the Michelle says my dog is fat club I'm the president!
I can Alpha Roll hair!
User avatar
TinaMartin
The Hair Whisperer
 
Posts: 1240
Location: Rochester NY

Postby DemoDick » January 27th, 2011, 9:00 pm

So now we're actually debating whether or not the APBT is a fighting dog? While we're in denial, let's apply this line of thinking across the board and drop "shepherd" from the name of every herding breed, "terrier" from every dog that goes to ground, and "hound" from every dog that historically pursued game. After all, as only a small percentage of the overall population of these breeds enaged in their working purpose, surely this information is useless for prospective owners.

I'm not afraid of the breed's history. If more people dropped the politically correct apologist line that tells us that these are special little snowflake children wearing fur suits and were realistic about the APBT's animal aggression, specifically aggression towards other dogs, we *might* actually get the right people in the breed and do some good.

Wishful thinking, I know.

Demo Dick
"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban PERMANENTLY as soon as I take office...I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."-Barack Obama
"When in doubt, whip it out."-Nuge
User avatar
DemoDick
They Like to Fondle My Gun
 
Posts: 1910
Location: New York

Postby TheRedQueen » February 9th, 2011, 11:42 am

Not about pit bulls...but it gets into the same idea...if a border collie won't herd, is it still a herding dog, is it still a border collie?

http://www.wootube.net/2011/02/yeah-yeah-i-herd-you/
"I don't have any idea if my dogs respect me or not, but they're greedy and I have their stuff." -- Patty Ruzzo

"Dogs don't want to control people. They want to control their own lives." --John Bradshaw
User avatar
TheRedQueen
I thought I lost my Wiener... but then I found him.
 
Posts: 7184
Location: Maryland

Postby shady-angel » March 1st, 2011, 3:41 am

<Snip long winded crap>
:crazy2:

I am also glad to know that a certain number of people die from dog attacks each year as posted by the CDC, JAVMA, Clifton Report and others.



What is wrong with you? :puke: bar the obvious. :nono:

Sorry guy's I'm not trying to attack this person but c'mon.
Angie.
User avatar
shady-angel
Kiwi
 
Posts: 102

Postby mnp13 » March 2nd, 2011, 1:37 pm

AmericanSuprDog wrote:......The United States Humane Society estimates that more than 40,000 people across the country buy and sell fighting dogs and are involved in dog fighting activities.


I am actually glad to know that there are 40,000 of these people out there. I am also glad to know that a certain number of people die from dog attacks each year as posted by the CDC, JAVMA, Clifton Report and others.

I just would like to see more integrity, transparency and honesty in the process.[/quote]

Seriously?? You're "glad to know" that deaths and bites are wrongly attributed to the breed? Those reports are garbage. They aren't remotely based on anything resembling "facts" so there is no way for there to be "more" honesty in the process. There isn't any to begin with.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby mnp13 » March 2nd, 2011, 2:42 pm

AmericanSuprDog wrote:Yeah the APBT vs. the Am Staff is an endless debate. If it is a concept based on trait one can make an argument for the difference. If it is a matter of genetics and history one can side that they are both Pit Bulls with different names. From a registry standpoint the AKC, ADBA, UKC have all actively cross-registered them.

Actually, the AKC stud books have been closed for quite some time. Up until recently, you could cross-register an AKC dog with the UKC, but they are closing their registrations as well. I don't know about the ADBA.

My biggest problem really is how the AKC denies it as a recognized breed when they in fact know it is a recognized breed by several other registries, just not theirs by name.

Um, that's kind of the point. According to every registry, their registry is the only registry that is "correct", well theirs and the registries that they officially "recognize." The AKC doesn't register the Pit Bull, so to the AKC they are just another "dog."

When a politician asks they should say yes it is a recognized breed, they do not however except it under that name in their registry and refer the politician to a registry that does recognize it as such.

And why would they do that? It serves them no purpose.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Previous

Return to Pit Bull Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]

cron