|
August 22, 2007
the lowest common denominator keeps getting lower
A comment from Tom Scott just caused me to write a long and rambling comment that wants to be a post, so rather than expect people to read comments (a process many reasonable people avoid) I guess I should just let the comment become this post. Replying to my earlier comment that I had "seen many dogs (especially pit bulls) which have simply wanted to fight without any training," Tom says: this reportfrom Tacoma would seem to confirm your point. However, there is no evidence that the dogs were not trained to be aggressive or violent.Yes, I saw that story. Drudge (never one to shy from "pit bull" headlines) linked and embellished this version with the following headline: NIGHTMARE: Pit Bulls Break Into Home, Maul Woman...From what I can see, there was no indication that the dogs had been trained for dog fighting in any way by their young, very flaky-looking owner. It appears that these were simply aggressive, untrained, undisciplined, unsupervised animals who were allowed to roam the neighborhood at will, and one of his dogs was familiar with the woman they attacked (the latter, along with the whole neighborhood, knew they were vicious): ...Gorman [the victim] and neighbors say Wilson's pit bulls have long terrorized the area.I agree with the victim that any animals which run around and terrorize the neighborhood like that should be shot, and I also think an irresponsible owner like that should not be allowed to have them. While this in no way excuses the culpability of the owner, I do think it's nonetheless a bit peculiar that the victim (who has a dog of her own and knew about the dangerous pit bull) left her patio door open, and that not only did the two pit bulls go in, but so did another dog. Video and accompanying story here: "I can just say I'm sorry because I can't take it back," said Zack Martin, one of the dogs' owners. He says the other dog belongs to a friend. Martin says one of the dogs chewed on a rope holding up the fence to his backyard, and that's how the dogs escaped.Well, the entire neighborhood seems to have known that they roamed at will, and had repeatedly had to fend them off and call the cops. I should point out again that notwithstanding the disproportionate media coverage they receive, for this breed, attacks on people are an aberration. While it's not generally well-known, those who bred them for fighting traditionally wanted dogs that were people-friendly in the extreme -- otherwise they could not have been handled in the pit. A very well written piece in the New Yorker explains in more detail than most readers probably want, but here it is anyway. A brief excerpt: The supposedly troublesome characteristics of the pit-bull type--its gameness, its determination, its insensitivity to pain--are chiefly directed toward other dogs. Pit bulls were not bred to fight humans. On the contrary: a dog that went after spectators, or its handler, or the trainer, or any of the other people involved in making a dogfighting dog a good dogfighter was usually put down. (The rule in the pit-bull world was "Man-eaters die.")Breeding for characteristics, of course, is not an absolute science. But in general, coonhounds were bred to go after (and do go after) raccoons, Bulldogs were once bred to go after bulls, Foxhounds to go after foxes, Beagles to go after rabbits, Bloodhounds to follow the human scent, Dobermans to be aggressive towards human intruders, etc. These tendencies can be overcome -- or accentuated -- by training, and there are always aberrations and exceptions. Many a "hunting dog" not only won't hunt, but will run from the sight of a gun. And Saint Bernards (considered one of the most loving of all) have been known to attack children. My worry with the pit bull is that its amiable nature (which once went with the fighting genes) is being screwed with by psychopathic criminal breeders who do not seek the same characteristics as the original Victorian gamblers who bred them to be pitted for money. I have seen very friendly pit bulls owned by young thugs who were angered to see their dogs wag their tails and lick me when I pet them. A lot of these kids would do better with a Rottweiler or a Dobie, but they want the muscle-bound look that the pit bull has. (Unfortunately, I suspect that what they want is a pit bull that acts like a Doberman, and I hope such an animal is never created. In my view, such an aberrant variety would constitute a different breed.) Sorry to ramble, but I am often concerned. I worry that what is going on in the streets is not in the best interests of a wonderful but misunderstood breed. It often reminds me of the gun issue. Problem is, there's no Second Amendment for dogs. Which sets this thing up as a debate between loyal and responsible dog owners (accompanied by the usual libertarian hard core) versus concerned communitarians who want to hold everyone to the lowest common denominator. The latter mindset means that social policy tends to be written by street scum. (Why does that seem fine with the bureaucrats?) posted by Eric on 08.22.07 at 09:24 AM
Comments
"A lot of these kids would do better with a Rottweiler or a Dobie" I'm sure it was not your intent, but please don't encourage the thugs to simply focus on a different breed. They would do better to find some other way to compensate for whatever it is they are lacking, and leave the dogs out of it entirely. Dobies were the "thug dog" of choice a few decades ago, and still carry the stigma. By the way, Dobies were not bred to be agressive toward humans. They were intended to be a companion dog that could provide protection from any threat, two or four legged. Their level of agressivness had to be well controlled or they would interfere with normal activities when no specific threat was present. One reason they have fallen out of favor as police dogs their tendency to back off, rather than pressing home an attack until pulled off by the handler. If you haven't already guessed I have a wonderful Dobie and I'm a bit protective of his reputation. Also, we are out and about a lot, usually with him off lead, and we meet a lot of other dogs, including Pit Bulls. I have never had any problems with a Pit Bull being agressive toward either me or my dog, and I can see why you have such a love for the breed. They really are great dogs, and the problems rest squarely with irresponsible owners. Anonymous · August 22, 2007 01:09 PM I can concur, actually about pit-bull mixes being so intensely people-oriented. Our current large dog is a boxer-pit mix; enormously strong, wilful, with a very high pain threashold, who absolutely adores all people, indiscriminantly. I never seen her behave agressively with another human; not even when my significant other (who has a key to the house) arrived at 4 AM and let himself into the house. She had never met him, and here he is, a stranger letting himself into the house... and she just sauntered up to him, wagging her tail. Not even a woof, and she is SUPPOSED to be a watch dog. Sgt. Mom · August 22, 2007 08:31 PM Thank you for mentioning pitbulls at therapy dogs, and thank you for noticing the bad media coverage. Some headlines say "pit bull attacks" but when you see the dogs there isnt a trace of pitbull in them. Pitbull is a headline, Snauser is not. As for the young thugs, you are right. They are hoping for a vicious dog and sometimes will do what they can to make it so. I have all of them to thank for my difficulty in renting because of my therapy pitbull. Brandie · August 23, 2007 03:52 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
August 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
August 2007
July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Only blacks show off their underwear?
But some of my best friends are tuna sandwiches! Confabulation of fabulism? Bussard Reactor Funded? Let's make mandatory federal ID cards constitutional the lowest common denominator keeps getting lower Merry Prankster money Victimized by dog violence? the end of violence The Big Heat Pipe In The Sky
Links
Site Credits
|
|
The difference I see between the gun issue and this is that a gun left unattended doesn't get up, dig under the fence and shoot the next door neighbor's two year old.