The latest victims of the nations canine racism, the American Pit bull / Staffordshire Terrier, continues to pay for the lethargic dog owners unwillingness or inability to properly train their dogs. No matter what breed.
The following is one of the best articles I have read surrounding "pit bulls", and a lot of the facts contained in the portion I am posting here ring very true of my own dog.
. . .Far from being considered a killing machine on legs, pit bulls seem to be an American favorite in the early half of the century — indeed, during World War I, the country itself is personified as a pit bull on army recruitment posters, and several pit bulls go on to become famous in the American military. Referring to an athlete as a pit bull is a very common sports metaphor through the 1930s, and it is meant as the highest compliment. There is also a famous racehorse in the late 1930s named Pit Bull, as well as a number of pit bull stars of early motion pictures. Frequently, pit bulls are associated with children, as in the Our Gang comedies, as well as with Buster Brown, both in short films and as the corporate mascot for a shoe company. The famous RCA Victor image of a dog and a gramophone also featured a pit bull terrier.
From the turn of the century until the early 1980s, there is exactly one dog attack story to make the national papers and mention pit bulls, but that's probably because it involved a man intentionally siccing a pack of 26 dogs on a young woman. According to a 1947 article in The Independent (St. Petersburg, Florida), "Attorneys said they believed it was the first time the state had invoked a statute which would find the owner guilty of manslaughter if it were proven that he permitted vicious animals to run free and they attacked and killed a human being." There's no mention of pit bulls as vicious and no call for a ban of the breed, just a human who is held responsible for inducing the dogs to attack. Ironically, though, it is in Florida forty years after this incident that the first breed-specific ban is enacted. In the intervening decades, "pit bull" continues to be a popular description for athletes and when the breed does turn up in newspapers, it's more often than not in a classified ad for puppies.
The only mention during the 1960s that isn't an ad is a rather amusing bit from gossip columnist Earl Wilson, who reported in his August 22, 1969 column, "Sonny and Cher, who used to scare people, have now been scared by people. 'Totally horrified' by the Sharon Tate murder case, they bought a big dog — 'a pit bull terrier' — to protect them and their little daughter Chaste [sic] at their Hollywood Home..." It is at about this time that using large dogs for personal protection becomes popular, but pit bulls are still not singled out as particularly dangerous. In 1971, a new law allows the U.S. Postal Service to bill people for injuries caused to letter carriers by their dogs, but it applies to all dogs, and the general attitude is still one of human responsibility. In a syndicated New York Times story from 1977 on dog bites, opening with the story of a seven year-old boy receiving a very minor injury from a Great Dane, author Jane E. Brody advises, "(S)imple precautions on the part of the dog owners and potential victims could prevent most of these attacks."
Change in Perception and Ban on Pit Bulls
Less than a decade later, that had all changed, and by New Year's Day 1986, over thirty communities are considering breed specific legislation and bans on pit bulls. What changed?
For one thing, despite being illegal in all fifty states, dog fighting made a comeback in the 80s, and the pit bull is the dog of choice. It is also the preferred guard dog for drug dealers and gangs, with a hugely publicized attack in 1987 in which a pit bull guarding a marijuana crop in California mauls and kills a two-and-a-half year-old boy.
By the summer of that year, every single proposed ban has become law, but not necessarily with the support of animal professionals. Kent Salazar, head of Albuquerque's animal control division, commented at the time of their proposed ban on pit bulls that he didn't think a ban on pit bulls was necessary, saying, "We have all the means to protect people with clauses about vicious dogs." He also noted that, a few years previously, Doberman pinschers were the target of such bans. His words went unheeded, and Tijeras, New Mexico, just outside of Albuquerque, passes the toughest pit bull ban of the time, allowing animal control officers to seize and destroy them on sight without compensation to the owner.
The various pit bull breed bans are decried by animal control officials as "the most concentrated legal assault on a pit bull they can recall," as well as "canine racism." The Houston Chronicle quotes unnamed officials as placing the blame for the problem squarely on humans. "(M)any of the pit bull attacks are due to a skyrocketing number of poorly bred and badly trained dogs raised by backyard breeders, who are trying to cash in on the pit bull's growing reputation as a cheap, but deadly effective guard dog, particularly in urban areas."
Nearly thirty years after the beginning of this anti-pit bull hysteria, the tide seems to be turning a little bit, but every step forward is followed by a step back. Even as Florida is attempting to overturn all breed-specific legislation, Fond du Lac, Wisconsin is considering imposing a new ban. Yet it only takes a brief look at the history of pit bulls to realize that the dogs are not the problem; the humans who misuse them are. For over a hundred years, holding the owners personally responsible was enough to prevent attacks, and the breed was perceived as very child-friendly. With outreach and education, it may be possible to restore that image and rehabilitate the pit bull's reputation, restoring an iconic American dog to its rightful place among mankind's best friends.
Read more: http://www.cesarsway.com/dogbehavior/basics/How-Did-Pit-Bulls-Get-a-Bad-Rap#ixzz2ZYQPqBCd (http://www.cesarsway.com/dogbehavior/basics/How-Did-Pit-Bulls-Get-a-Bad-Rap#ixzz2ZYQPqBCd)
These animals will lay their lives down in order to protect their owners with zero hesitation. They are among some of the brightest and most loving of breeds, and are excellent with children when properly trained and socialized.
I did not do a perfect job in socializing my own dog though; I failed him when it comes to other dogs, because I didi not bring him around any other dogs. (Mostly because the owners of those other dogs were scared to death he would kill them). But I did train him to obey the alpha male and female of his pack, and even in the presence of other animals, if he gets into the red zone either one of us can get him under control with just a word or two.
As I've said here many times before; The goal my wife and I set for our dog was to have him become an ambassador for the breed. We wanted people to leave our home with a very positive impression of the breed; and he over-delivers on a regular basis.
Once he understands that the person(s) at our door is/are welcome, he is not a threat to anyone. And if the visitor wishes to show him some attention, he will respond in kind.
Now, show up when the alpha male and female are not home, and you will be confronted by an imposing figure of a canine that will make it abundantly clear that you are not welcome here; in no uncertain terms. If you fail to heed his warnings and enter uninvited, (break in), you will leave leaking, and/or on a stretcher.
Our dog knows his role in his pack, and his every waking moment is spent doing the things he knows his alphas expect him to do. And he upholds his responsibilities without question or hesitation.
Those owners of any dog, who fail them by ignoring the responsibility incumbent to the alpha role, are the issue with this breed and every single other that has been subjected to canine racism in this nation. They should be horsewhipped.
These animals, like children, will only do what they are taught to do.