Re: This can't be good news for the pit bull.

On Aug 23, 8:15 pm, judyaltho...@xxxxxxxxx (Judith Althouse) wrote:
I have yet to check out the poll on CNN and I really should. I am very
annoyed by the extremely flawed chart they posted. They posted 3
breeds, and the number of fatalaties they were responsible for. Next to
the chart of fatalaties, they posted the same 3 breeds and the number of
maulings they were responsible for. As I previously posted the chart
went back to 1982. I have no idea where they got the chart info from.

I was an owner of Dobes in the late 70's and early 80's and somewhere
during that time period GSD's and Chows topped the list of dogs that had
attacked humans, of course that was partially in fact due to the
popularity of those breeds at the time.

Something else that disturbs me is that for some reason a dog that has
an ounce of Pit Bull in it, though it may be mixed with heaven knows
what is called a Pit Bull which flaws the stats even more.

Be Free.....Judy

Even dogs that don't have an ounce of pit bull, but would be called
one by the uninformed observer get labeled as such. Their numbers in
the statistics are grossly increased as a result. Part of the reason
I believe the CDC threw out their study of dog bites in relation to
breeds that is the bread and butter of any BSL proponent out there.

Nick

.