Pit bull terriers

[Freckle]

Can anyone explain to me the attraction of owning a pit bull terrier? Why would you choose that breed over any other? Especially when there are children around and the breed has a reputation for unpredictable behaviour - and don't forget that the breed was developed to take on bulls, so it's not going to be a pussycat in any circumstances.

Another child has been killed by one, apparently owned by her grandmother - here . I don't like flagging up bad news on here, but I'm struggling to understand the mentality of people who choose to own such dogs.

I mean 'there' is no risk

Exactly, HMC. That's how I feel too. I know my kids and I know my dogs. They're all fine together. I was beginning to get a little bit twitchy, wondering if I was going to be ganged up on!

My Golden Retriever, for starters, is too lazy to move most of the time anyway!!

I agree with you both entirely, I can and do leave my 7yr old alone with my Golden Retriever, albeit only for very short periods of time (nipping to the toilet, etc.) However, i don't EVER leave my 3yr old alone with the dog!!

Like you both say, i know my dog and i know my children and its my 3yr old that i don't trust ...not the dog!

She is learning though, bless her ... the 3yr old that is! ...

xx

That's the point though isn't it, you'd leave a 7 year old but not a 3 year old.

There's a million miles of difference between leaving an 18 month old toddler with a staffy who has snapped in the past and leaving a 7 year old with a placid old lab who knows the 7 year old is higher in the pack than he is.

OK I know the lab can bite the 7 year old too, but it's about risk assessment.

Definitely.

But then i wouldn't leave ANY child of ANY age with ANY dog that had shown ANY type of aggression, be it snapping, snarling or just growling!

Yes, it certainly is about risk assessment and as parents we do what we think is best ...

xx

Agree Blue.

Found this on the internet about dog bite statistics which I found interesting:

"An often-asked question is what breed or breeds of dogs are most ?dangerous?? This inquiry can be prompted by a serious attack by a specific dog, or it may be the result of media-driven portrayals of a specific
breed as ?dangerous.? Although this is a common concern, singling out 1 or 2 breeds for control can result in a false sense of accomplishment. Doing so ignores the true scope of the problem and will not result in a responsible approach to protecting a com-munity?s citizens.
Dog bite statistics are not really statistics, and they do not give an accurate picture of dogs that bite. Invariably the numbers will show that dogs from popular large breeds are a problem. This should be expected, because big dogs can physically do more damage if they do bite, and any popular breed has more individuals that could bite. Dogs from small breeds also bite and are capable of causing severe injury. There are several reasons why it is not possible to calculate a bite rate for a breed or to compare rates between breeds. First, the breed of the biting dog may not be accurately
recorded, and mixed-breed dogs are commonly
described as if they were purebreds. Second, the actual number of bites that occur in a community is not known, especially if they did not result in serious injury. Third, the number of dogs of a particular breed or combination of breeds in a community is not
known, because it is rare for all dogs in a community to be licensed, and existing licensing data is then incomplete. Breed data likely vary between communities,
states, or regions, and can even vary between
neighborhoods within a community".