[Sariss]

Just to throw it in their - the jaw lock thing on Pitbulls is a total myth.

[shazamataz]

Nope, it's actually true :)

[Silverfoxkit]

I wasn't sure if it was fact or fiction, I was believed it was fact as well and here's what I came up with:

According to Dr. I. Brisbin, a senior researcher with the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of South Carolina, Pit Bulls do not have a "locking jaw" mechanism:[38]
“ The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of Pit Bulls show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different from that of any breed of dog.

There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of 'locking mechanism' unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier.


I found many other links that support this.


RULING: MYTH

[shazamataz]

Fair enough, I've always been told it was true :)

[Silverfoxkit]

Yeah, so have I and I've been around countless pitts. They are one of the most popular breeds around here. Almost every single one I have met has been a sweetheart. I always thought it was just fact, just goes to show I don't know everything either, and I am a huge supporter of the breed.

[shazamataz]

I won't deny there are some nice, sweet pitts out there, I'm just saying that so many generations of being bred to be aggressive is not something that can be easily undone.
They were originally bred to be fighting dogs as everyone knows... How do you think they became such a popular fighting breed?
The most aggressive dogs that won fights were bred to more aggressive dogs and the cycle continued...
It was done for many many many generations and some traits are still out there even if the dog does seem "sweet"

I will agree to disagree about pitts and stay out of this thread :)

[Silverfoxkit]

I won't deny there are some nice, sweet pitts out there, I'm just saying that so many generations of being bred to be aggressive is not something that can be easily undone.

I agree on that count. Bad breeding is a problem. There are still "game" bred dogs out there in abundance. Only one or two puppies in the litters are the right material for the fighters so the rest are often pawned out cheaply to unsuspecting buyers who don't have enough sense to get a dog from a reputable breeder or to check the temperament of the parents.

As far as bans go I do not think they should be banned by breed alone. A license to own and temperament tests, sure.

A ban on the breeding and selling of them in a certain area, great idea!

Just saying no pitt bulls allowed doesn't help the real problem, just puts a band aid on it.

Like I said before, do you think dog fighters are going to give up their money making fighting dogs for a little ban? Hell no. no more then they will give up their illegal drugs or other affairs. That just means the family pets have to pay the price and there will be less pitts, yes. Less dangerous ones, no.

Education, stopping the poor breeding and cracking down on dog fighting more heavily are the keys to the solution.

Putting a ban on it is more like ignoring it and hoping it fixes iteslf.

[shazamataz]

I do agree with that Silver...
Mostly I'm just glad someone actually understood what I was trying to say! I've argued this quite a few times and you are the first one to get me lol :)

Temperament tests aren't always accurate at a young age.
Licenses to breed need to be enforced a lot more and there needs to be an active program to try to breed the more good natured dogs so they can lose their bad reputation.

[Silverfoxkit]

I agree. There needs to be a system, not just a write off ban. Having a better system will get you a lot farther then bans. The responsible pet owners with the sweet pitt bulls will most assuredly comply. The ones that don't are more like to be the dogs you need to worry about. I have talked with people who loved their dogs so much they picked up and moved. Surely a license is cheaper then moving.

In banned areas if they find out you have a pitt bull they will likely say you have X amount of time to get rid of the dog. Well if they can do that then why not say you have x amount of time to get a license?

On top of that, what if the dog was dangerous? So it gets shuffled off onto another area for them to deal with it. Someone is going to have to face the problem soon instead of just blacking it off and going lalalalala to the overall picture. In a way the cities are just as responsible for the attacks as the owners because even though the issue is well known no one has the initiative to actually address it.

[sdcummings2000]

Can I just ask you why you want a pitbull?
Sorry if it's personal, I'm just always curious when someone is desperate to get a fighting breed.

You're question annoys me.I see you have a pic of a poodle,did u know they were bred to hunt and retrieve ducks?? If you would research all breeds you would be surprised as to how many were bred for fighting or hunting.Please don't be one of those people whom judge the poor dog.I LOVE MY PIT BULL.AS does anyone whom meets him.

[Sariss]

This thread is old anyway...
It all depends on who raises the dog. But I think someone should have to meet a large amount of one breed to have an opinion so accusatory as many people do of a breed (pitbull) that they've rarely met in person.
When I worked in the city, about 75% of our client base at the Animal Hospital was pitbulls. So, I would see literally 10-15 a day, every day for a year and a half.

[Sariss]

I know this is old, but I missed the end of this thread and wanted to point something out...

The most aggressive dogs that won fights were bred to more aggressive dogs and the cycle continued...
It was done for many many many generations and some traits are still out there even if the dog does seem "sweet"

You are correct. But, if you research more, how they were around people was also selectively bred. They bred for gameness first, but second they bred for how they were with people. A dog who bit their handler (or anyone for that matter) in the pit was immediately removed from the breeding stock and usually shot on the spot, as aggression towards people was a highly undesirable trait in the breed, and still is. During the days of pitfighting, pitbulls were the all-american family dog. That is - until they got into the wrong hands. Dog fighting done illegally now is not regulated as much as it used to be, and the 'handlers' now don't care about anything but how good they can fight - manbiters or not. That would never fly back then.

[shazamataz]

I have researched into pitt bulls ;)

Yes they are not people aggressive, once a fight was over and the winning dog was still attacking the now 'defeated' dead dog the handler could enter the ring in complete saftely as the dog would not turn on its owner.

My point was about dog aggression.

[shazamataz]

youre question annoys me.I see you have a pic of a poodle,did u know they were bred to hunt and retrieve ducks???If you would research all breeds you would be surprised as to how many were bred for fighting or hunting.Please dont be one of those people whom judge the poor dog.I LOVE MY PIT BULL.AS does anyone whom meets him.

Retrieving and fighting are completely different subjects.

My question still stands though.

I would ask the same thing to someone desperately wanting an Akita.

I would rather "annoy" someone than risk another dog fighting ring starting up.

[Sariss]

I have researched into pitt bulls ;)

Yes they are not people aggressive, once a fight was over and the winning dog was still attacking the now 'defeated' dead dog the handler could enter the ring in complete saftely as the dog would not turn on its owner.

My point was about dog aggression.

Well then. :)

Yeah I don't think I'd trust a Pitbull alone with another dog, that's just asking for trouble. Same for any fighting breed though.

[shazamataz]

Well then. :)

Yeah I don't think I'd trust a Pitbull alone with another dog, that's just asking for trouble. Same for any fighting breed though.

Yeah, I totally agree with you about them being fine with people, it's just unfortunate that the 'dog fighters' are caring less and less about the overall temperament like you said, it's all about aggression these days, whether it be human or another dog.
Generally speaking though they are only dog aggressive and even then not all of them are, you just have to be careful who you buy a dog from.

I don't want to start another argument like I did last time this subject came up haha :), I have my opinions which are based on what I have researched, other people disagree and have come to different conclusions which is fine, but it isn't going to change mine ;)

I'll just leave this open for a little bit to see if there is any other input before I close it.

[Sariss]

Don't take it as a shot at you, but you diiiiiiiid think they had locking jaws...

[shazamataz]

Don't take it as a shot at you, but you diiiiiiiid think they had locking jaws...

Haha yes I know, I was wrong on that one...

Pretty much everyone I know has told me that they do!

We don't have Pitt Bulls here so I don't have any first hand experience with them.

[Cat1864]

Yeah, sure. Pit Bulls are evil.

10 years ago Rottweilers were evil.

20 years ago Chow Chows were evil.

30 years ago German Shepherds were evil.

40 years ago Dobermans were evil.

Tomorrow, maybe Parrots are evil.

Get with it. PT Barnum said it first: "Never underestimate the power of HUMAN stupidity."

[shazamataz]

I never said they were evil :)

Just said that you have to be careful who you buy one from because they can have a 'mean streak' with other dogs if you buy from a bad breeder who does not give a rats about temperament.

Buy from a reputable breeder who has taken the tme and effort to only breed dogs with good temperaments and you should have no problem at all.

I still think German Shepherds are evil :p