Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Well done Mr Alhadi.....but what kind of parents still have a pitbull dog as a pet?

330 replies

mrsruffallo · 10/02/2011 11:50

Thank God for this man walking past...but really shouldn't all parents be thinking hard about having these kind of dogs in the home?

OP posts:
fluffy91 · 10/02/2011 23:30

Motherjack Grin.

I wouldn't go that far but i have to admit i really dislike the little feckers

TheButterflyCollector · 10/02/2011 23:31

No. I recognise the voice of an experienced dog owner who has seen beyond the headlines and beyond breed specifics.

Out of interest bristolcities, do you or have you ever owned a dog yourself?

bristolcities · 10/02/2011 23:31

so we can categorise one breed but not another???

TheButterflyCollector · 10/02/2011 23:32

:o DooinMeCleanin.

fluffy91 · 10/02/2011 23:33

Whose categorising?

You said quote 'some breeds are dangerous..they shouldn't even be on the streets let alone near a family'

Nobody here is calling for JRTs to be banned.

bristolcities · 10/02/2011 23:33

I have a dog, he is lovely but small and yappy. An exact stereotype probably but i have no issue in admitting this.

bristolcities · 10/02/2011 23:35

Yes i am categorising that has been my exact point im not the one denying it.

TheButterflyCollector · 10/02/2011 23:37

I'm sure he is lovely, bristolcities. They all are in my opinion.

I'm also sure that he's just as likely, if not more likely, to bite than my own, far larger and more widely distrusted breed of dog.

fluffy91 · 10/02/2011 23:37

Your not making much sense.
You said so we can categorise one breed but not another but nobody here except you is categorizing any breed.

Scuttlebutter · 10/02/2011 23:41

In answer to the OP, we don't know anything about who was present, or who the dog belonged to. I really, really hope the police are on to the parents right now, or whoever was supposed to be responsible for his care. This poor little boy - I hope he makes a full recovery and I support the call for the passer by to receive a bravery award.

As others have said, it's ridicolous to demonise a particular breed of dog. Yes, some dog breeds do have characteristics that make them more or less suitable for life in a family but other key factors include socialisation, training and the behaviour of the owner/family concerned. That includes training children not to hit, kick, poke, prod, pester, ride on, shout at, wake, disturb or otherwise hassle the family's dog. Given the amount of people who blithely state their kids do all these things Angry, I'm always amazed there are not more dog bite incidents.

The fault with this incident lies firmly with the adults concerned, who did not look after the children in their care. This little boy has paid a terrible price for their neglect.

bristolcities · 10/02/2011 23:43

'Has anyone ever owned one? They are fecking nasty when they get hold of prey. And alarmingly strong. Not very patient with children either (in general, some can be great with kids, mine was).'

The 'in general' part is the clue. This suggests a majority and there for a generalization of small dogs.

fluffy91 · 10/02/2011 23:46

Not very patient with children is TOTALLY different to attacks children.
Totally different.

And its not a negative generalisation. There are lots of nice dogs that aren't patient with kids.

bristolcities · 10/02/2011 23:49

Its irrelevant what the generalisation is it is still a generalization something i thought you were appose to?

DooinMeCleanin · 10/02/2011 23:51

Breeds do have what is known as breed traits or characteristics. But that does not mean that every single dog of that breed will fit neatly into that catagory. And people are clearly vastly misinformed of what those traits are, because the dogs that are being branded a danger on this thread are those breeds that are known to be loyal and good family dogs.

I have owned a Stafford who wouldn't chase. I currently own a Whippet who is scared of my sister's rabbit. My JRT was excellent with the children, but very much a classic example of a JRT when it came to hunting and ratting.

MotherJack · 10/02/2011 23:51

Bristol - I don't necessarily ask for a response, but for you to think about this - in breed specific legislation there were a number of dogs banned. When those dogs were banned, people looked for aggression in Staffords as they looked similar (but half the size or less) and others chose to breed certain dogs to get similar characteristics. Very probably aggression. So the press call for those breeds to be banned. So if BSL continues, Staffords get banned. Then what happens..... rather rotund JRTs become fashionable (Staff/JRT crosses), or Rotweillers come back into "fashion" or GSD's and they are all owned by the same people who should be on the other end of the flaming leash because they think their dog is a weapon.

That's what is crap.

fluffy91 · 10/02/2011 23:52

Why would you be offended at a positive or indifferent generalisation?

People were annoyed at the negative generalization that staffs and pitbulls were dangerous.

bristolcities · 10/02/2011 23:52

Sorry is a generalization not pretty close to putting something in to a category be it cute and cuddly or something more negative?

bristolcities · 10/02/2011 23:55

Because what your saying is that certain dogs have different characteristics that are in built. Suggesting the behavior of an animal is not just down to how its handles but in fact inbuilt?

fluffy91 · 10/02/2011 23:55

Whats wrong with a nice category?
Nobody is going to be offended if you say for example, all gsd's are beautiful but they will be offended if you say there are all vile, dangerous killers.

bristolcities · 10/02/2011 23:57

Poorly constructed paragraph, sorry.

fluffy91 · 10/02/2011 23:58

No, they have inbuilt traits thats not quite the same thing.

You can have a dog for example that has dominance as a main trait.

Treat that dog with no discipline whatsoever and it will become a demon, maybe even dangerous.

Give that dog a purpose and will be a fantastic, loyal, affectionate animal.

All police dogs are dominant. They're not dangerous.

Its how you handle a trait.

DooinMeCleanin · 10/02/2011 23:58

Yes it is but to say Staffords and PitBulls etc are in general aggressive or dangerous dogs is bullshit. No dog is generally aggressive to people. Why would they be? They were bred specifically for certain traits, why would we breed a dog specifically to be a danger to children?

Decent breeders will not breed from a dog which has shown aggression towards other dogs or people or has health problems.

fluffy91 · 10/02/2011 23:59

Or rather, the majority of the time, the owners fault if the dog is dangerous.

TheButterflyCollector · 10/02/2011 23:59

I think that MotherJack's last comments are summed up by the poem, "First they came..."

Not, in this case, for the Communists, but for the Pit Bulls.

"First they came for the Pit Bulls,

and they banned them and killed them.

Their owners cried out in horror but I did not object,

because I did not own pit bulls.

Then they came for the Rottweilers,

and they banned them and muzzled them.

Their owners cried out in protest but I did not object,

because I did not own Rottweilers.

Today they have come for my dogs,

and they will ban them and take them from me.

As I cry out in outrage and anger no one objects, because they do not own my dogs."

bristolcities · 11/02/2011 00:00

Again
'Because what your saying is that certain dogs have different characteristics that are in built.'

I thought the defence was that these animals are totally different depending on there 'upbringing'?