No wonder you keep such macho dogs around, you gotta protect those bikes!

PeeWee Herman had pits too.

http://byfiles.storage.live.com/y1pA...NXNhWqYRD1q7tM

PeeWee Herman was a connaisseur! And my wife thinks we look cute on our matching vintage Schwinns! lol

Okay now you're being you... hold on, I'm getting into character.... me,me,me,my,my,my,mo,mo,mo.....deep breath...you're a star!!!!...okay..

Whatever dude! You're "debate" consists of "me and some of my friends have pits and they haven't eaten us or our kids" and "I know people who were bitten by non-pits" Whoopie fucking doo!!! I came to the table with loads of facts and you all bring suppositions, "well, the animal control people are stupid and label all biting dogs pits when in doubt", "it's media bias", oh and my fav, "it's unfair profiling".

Listen, if there are 100 robberies in the state of North Carolina in Sept and 67 of them were perpetrated by black people, it is NOT "profiling" to state that more black people than white people committed robberies! It is NOT "media bias". It's the fucking truth! I'm not going to shoot back, "well some of those so called black people were probably mixed, so it's an unfair assessment" or even "well you know how stupid cops are, if a guy has so much as a tan, they label him "black". Pit Bulls HAVE been involved in more than their "fair share" of attacks. They have attacked and killed children, they have chewed off a baby's toes, they have ripped off a child's face. It did happen. All the finger pointing in the world won't change those facts. Have other types of non-terriers been involved in attacks? Of course but Pit Bulls compromise only a small percentage of the dog population but they are involved in a very large percentage of attacks. You can chalk it up to mismanagement by owners or mistaken identification by animal control officers/the media if you want but you can not completely wash away the fact that the dogs are inherently dangerous imho.

See? I can turn it on or off AT WILL!!!!:lol:

Due to extreme overbreeding Pit Bulls are no longer a small percentage of the dog population.

What? Okay it's fact check time! I'll check but are you saying that Pit Bulls attack/capita numbers are in line with all the other breeds?

You seem so confident that all these numbers you are researching are accurate. Do you think backyard Pit Bull breeders are registering their dogs and intentions with their prospective city? No. There is absolutely no way to account for how much these Pit Bull population has exploded in the past 5 or so years. Most of the Pit bull owners I talk to have plans to breed their dog. You can see it every time you go to the pound...full of Pitties. You can talk to Animal Control officers who routinely pick up litters of Pit Bulls. You can look at the dogs being sold on the side of the road...mostly Pit Bulls. To most Pit Bull owners breeding and making money is just part of the experience. Look up Pit Bull breeders on the net....look at all the scummy low class operations you find. Compare it to a search for Golden Retriever breeders.

My point is that if Dobermans or Goldens or Labs or Rotts or Mastiffs were considered the tough guy fighting dog then they would be the [I]victim[I] of over breeding, mal-treatment and numerous media articles quoting experts who claim they are dangerous beasts that should be outlawed.

Here's something...

http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2008/09...ics-bites.html

Media bias? Okay how about this...

http://www.kake.com/news/features/2/3352771.html

Yep more media bias... These people claim that pits only account for 5% of the dog population...

http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2009/08...-that-pit.html

Even if they were 10% of the population, they still account for more than half the reported attacks! No matter how you slice it, Pit Bulls account for more attacks than their percentage of the population would dictate. How can you disagree with that? Face it, most of us are crappy "pack leaders", very few of us are Cesars or Kanemans. If you want my honest opinion, you "superior" dog owners need to stop trying to convince the general public that these dogs are the same as any breed and rather push for special licensing to own this type of dog.

I never said these dogs are the same as any breed, I said they're the same as any breed of the Molosser ancestry. Some people shouldn't have dogs, and some people shouldn't have certain types of dogs.

No bias? :lol: Dude, the name of the website is dogsbite. You basically pulled those stats from an anti-pitbulls site.

this shit is still going on?? :lol: snort

Awwww... come on. I recognize that the numbers aren't perfect concerning ANY breed of dog. You once again want to single out Pit Bulls but there are all kinds of dogs, mutts if you will, that are being born every day without papers. There is no way, you are going to convince me that Pit Bull attacks are commiserate with their population numbers. Even if you could produce numbers that proved that PBs are 20% of the dog population, which is ridiculous, they still account for over 50% of the fatal dog attacks and I believe over half of the attacks in general. If every single, white trash guy, Mexican and brother owned a Pit Bull, it would still not compromise over half of the dog population!!!