Of Pit Bulls and Morons Web Cache....

of Pit Bulls and morons....
11/10/11 6:16 PM
This is Google's cache of http://andrew-rozsa.blogspot.com/view/classic. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Nov 4, 2011 23:11:50 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more These search terms are highlighted: nanny dog not to nanny dog not question Text-only version
Classic Flipcard Magazine Mosaic Sidebar Snapshot Timeslide
Powered by
NOV
Life magazine covers

According
home of the
to SFGate the
"The Pit Bull is the only dog to have graced the cover of Life magazine three times."
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PgvmXpvTi7gJ:,+that+is+not+the+question&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari
Page 1 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Posted 20 hours ago by Andrew
Add a comment
....
What I haven't d
Comment as:
Post Comment
Search
Select profile... Preview
OCT
30
To Nanny-Dog or Not To Nanny-Dog, that is not the question

To Nanny-Dog or Not To Nanny-Dog, that is not the question
To continue the talk of the deaf....
Page 2 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Science, or scientific research, does not answer the question why. Scientific inquiry deals with probabilities. For example, if event A happens, what is the likelihood that it will be followed by event B or event X? So, if we call the Pit Bull a Nanny Dog whats the probability of someone getting bitten or killed by a Pit Bull? Conversely, if we agree that Pit Bulls are too dangerous to have ever been called Nanny Dogs, what is the probability that someone will show up at my door and want to take my dogs away and kill them? So let me set up a decision making matrix to see which way I would rather err.. The decision-making matrix will depend on the payoff.
Null hypothesis (H0) is true
Null hypothesis (H0) is false
Reject null hypothesis
Type I error False Alarm
Correct outcome Correct Rejection
Fail to reject null hypothesis
Correct outcome Hit
Type II error Miss
Correct Rejection (H0 is False and I call it False) we continue calling Pit Bulls Nanny Dogs. All Pit Bulls are loved and owned by responsible families. We make a Type II error (Miss) some people get bitten, maimed, or killed. The proposition is to mitigate the Type II error by educating the public and make them bite-proof. Which is what the experts tell us to do. The number of Pit Bull (or any dog) bites decreases. Hit (Ho is true and we fail to reject it) we state that Pit Bulls are not Nanny Dogs (because they are vicious otherwise why not call them potential Nannies?). Millions of dogs get killed, ownership is penalized, more governmental control is put in place, people learn to be helpless because somebody else will take care of them, individual responsibility
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PgvmXpvTi7gJ:,+that+is+not+the+question&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari Page 3 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
is, once again, minimized, and OTHER type of dogs will bite, maim and kill. A Type I (False Alarm) error is vastly most costly, if you care about dogs, freedom, responsibility, and are one of the hundreds of thousand of us who love Pit Bulls. My opponents aim is prove that the Pit Bull was not named a Nanny Dog (because it couldnt possibly, look at the terrible evidence we have..) thereby further demonizing an animal that doesnt deserve it. My projection of his/her desired outcome: nothing will change, except hundreds of thousands of more dogs will be killed. Cities that banned Pit Bulls have NOT seen a decrease in dog bite fatalities. I can bring statistics supportive of this statement. Their supporters: people who have been bitten by dogs, people who are afraid of their shadows and want Big Brother to protect them, politicians, media, and breeders. My aim is educate the public and let it know that the dogs are safe when handled properly and the public needs to learn some basic knowledge to protect itself against DOG bites. I said, DOG, not Pit Bull, on purpose. http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/dog-bites/biteprevention.html http://www.humanesociety.org/animals/dogs/tips/avoid_dog_bites.html http://www.akc.org/insurance/tips_dogbites.cfm http://www.animallaw.info/journals/jo_pdf/lralvol13_1_p129.pdf
The focus of Bully-haters remains heavily on the dogs conduct rather than on the owners conduct, which, to me, seems misguided. Owner conduct is easier to correct through law, education or other means, which is more likely to promote owner accountability for dogs in the future. Focusing on the dogs actions may mean it is destroyed as dangerous while the owner can still get a new dog, a new kind of dog, or an alligator and act equally irresponsibly in the future. Calling Pit Bulls Nanny Dogs seems to irk a cadre of Bully-haters to such extreme that makes me wonder not only about their agenda, but also about their mental health. In a country in which up to 300 kids are killed each year by their biological parents we worry about what a Pit Bull may or not have been called? What a costly investment of misplaced priorities, energy, time and resources this is. Just in case I have not stated my intentions clearly, the goals of this blog have always been and remain to: 1. Debunk the bad rap my favorite dog breed gets; 2. Provide (however biased) evidence that Pit Bulls have been vilified by the media ad nauseam; 3. Present evidence that close-minded people use b.s. published in the media to further their own agenda with no regard to whom it may harm; 4. Provide whatever means I can muster to show off Pit Bulls as the great pet that they are in the right hands and with proper treatment;
11/10/11 6:16 PM
5.
Remind the uneducated that the breed was bred for dog-aggression NOT humanaggression and that two are vastly different from each other; 6. Help the Pit Bull by convincing folks to a) spay or neuter their dogs; b) understand and assume responsibility of dog ownership; c) behave as they want others behave towards them; d) put unethical and immoral breeders out of business; e) stop dogfighting; f) prevent the killing of nearly 500,000 Pit Bulls every year by rescuing, fostering, training and adopting as many of them as possible; and g) stop illequipped, uneducated, mean-spirited, angry individuals from showing up at MY doorstep and take and kill my dogs simply because they look like something a politician thought of as not deserving to live So, its not about Nanny Dogs at all. Its about BSL, stupid! More about that later. Posted 4 days ago by Andrew
View comments
DubV Oct 31, 2011 08:37 PM Part 7
What I have said in the last few paragraphs dips into your framing of the null hypothesis, which I have already shown to be faulty. Failing to reject the legitimate null hypothesis, and having people go by this, simply means people stop repeating the nanny dog claim because it is not supported by the evidence. If this decision aligns with reality, then we all have a bit more truth in our lives and perhaps fewer parents are lulled into a false security of owning a large, fighting breed and leaving it with their kids. If this decision is incorrect, one thing deprived is one of several arguments that pit bull advocates use for breed image rehabilitation. This would be a incorrect by omission and would not be ideal so far as it is incorrect. Also, perhaps this would marginally lower adoption rates. If we reject the null, then pit bull advocates will go on with the nanny dog claim. If they are correct in this, then good I would be happy to realize I was wrong and for greater truth to be present in the world and maybe a few deserving nanny dogs are helped. If we reject the null and are wrong, then pit bull advocates spread an untruth which may end up endangering a certain number of people, not to mention other animals that might be attacked. As far as your other claims, including that banning pit bulls has not decreased dog bite related fatalities, those are unrelated to this discussion. Therefore, I wont reply to that at this time.
DubV Nov 2, 2011 06:45 PM Would you post a shorter reply to this than the one already sent?
Page 5 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Comment as:
Post Comment
OCT
The Nanny Dog issue - redux

My discussion opponent seems unconvinced that Pit Bulls were ever called nanny dogs. I guess that means he will not be adopting a Pit Bull sentenced to die, any time soon. Were Pit Bulls called "nanny dogs." Who knows? The thousands of pictures we see seem to support the notion that a lot of people liked them and have no problems with the dogs being around their children. We don't know what people called them. Just because it's not in the papers, doesn't mean people didn't call them "nannies." Do people call TVs nannies? I don't know, but sure as hell they use TVs/video games
29
Page 6 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
as nannies. My evidence for "nannyhood?" Thousands of vintage pictures. My friend's evidence? Sensation-seeking media. My experience? Thousands of owners I know who adore their dogs. His? Somebody got bitten by a dog she thinks it was a Pit Bull. MY dogs would OK with families with children. Would I leave them alone with my grandchild? Absolutely not. Why not? Because NO DOG should be left unsupervised with a child. I have an article about a Pomeranian killing a baby. If you are interested in the truth, do find the nearest Pit Bull owners' gathering in your area and visit them. Talk to the people. Spend some time around the dogs. I think you will be pleasantly surprised that the Pit Bull is not the ogre it is made out to be. OTOH, you can walk with me through the areas where I see clients in the evenings and weekends and you will see 12-year-olds with a Pit Bull on a rope looking for an impromptu street dog fight. Do you know what would happen if Pit Bull haters managed to kill all the Pit Bulls? We, who love these animals and commit ourselves to responsible ownership would be deprived of our companions and the misguided 'users', greedy breeders, and macho criminals would switch to Presa Canarios. I wish they did, already. L Last few DooDah Days - when our city parades its pets - tens of thousands of them - we saw a lot of people and a lot of dogs and cats. Nobody flinched at the sight of my Pit Bulls. In fact they just smiled at my T-shirt that says "Owned by a Pit Bull." Then I joined the Bama Bully Rescue booth and the dozen absolutely delightful young ladies who were working to educate the public and adopt out some of our dogs. What is the official position of the CDC and American Veterinary
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Medical Association? Educate the public in dog bite prevention! Do they advocate the use of Pit Bulls as "nannies?" Nope. But they also emphasize that one cannot ascertain "viciousness" based on breed. Certainly, not with the 79 people maimed or killed by socalled Pit Bulls that my friends friend is so fond of citing and not with ANY available scientifically documented data. Was I ever bitten by a dog? Of course I was. By a Deutscher Schferhund... I was a child and I was teasing it. You know what happens when a child teases a trained, well-cared for and balanced Pit Bull? NOTHING! It will probably lick the kid. Pit Bulls are tolerant, loyal, gentle, and loving. My dogs would rather be petted than eat. The dozens of people with Pit Bulls we walked with in the park last Friday, many of whom were children, seem to agree with me.
Posted 5 days ago by Andrew
View comments
DubV Oct 30, 2011 10:11 AM You KNOW that on the nanny dog point that you have the burden of proof and have not met it. It is plain as day. Any casual observer with a subtle enough thinking mechanism would instantly acknowledge this. So what do you do? You mention the nanny dog thing, but then make it about 100 other things that I have not mentioned in this context and were not the subject of your original post (unless you consider everything about pits relevant to everything else about pits). You throw the kitchen sink at me in an emotional rant hoping you can win overall and perhaps the logical mechanism around the nanny dog will be piled over. You again bring up what my proof is, when it is obvious that in this situation, as I have said before, it is up to you to supply the proof. You virtually admitted that pit bulls are not nanny dogs or that nanny dog is basically something that could be applied to any dog breed with a lot of old pictures near kids. So, the moniker is fake and/or seems to mean nothing.
DubV Oct 30, 2011 10:17 AM Note: If you are going to publish this comment, please publish the first as well. Several times you have published only the last if there were two. "My evidence for "nannyhood?" Thousands of vintage pictures."
11/10/11 6:16 PM
I still can't believe this. How many thousands of pictures plucked out of context, with no story could I find and arrange in a collage to support anything? I'm betting you could find thousands of vintages pictures of children being abused by their parent(s) online. What would that prove using your same logic?
Andrew
Oct 30, 2011 12:13 PM
You are absolutely right. I say let's ban parenthood, instead of punishing the creeps.
Comment as:
Post Comment
OCT
Are the "Nanny Dogs" a Myth?

My esteemed critic DubV asks: "do you still think pit bull's were ever the or a nanny dog?"
28
Here is my reply:
1. ANY point of view is supportable by simply cherry-picking supportive evidence. Notoriously, in research, it is not unusual for one to cite a hundred articles that support the findings of the research and ignore most, if not all, the ones that would contradict it. Similarly, when deposed or asked to act as an expert witness in forensic work, we have been taught not to cite references supporting our point of view, because the opposition has just as many expert witnesses who will bring to bear references that state the contrary view. Any good expert witness, and I think I am one, states his or her
11/10/11 6:16 PM
OPINION and supports it with HIS or HER findings. 2. History is truth as seen from the perspective of the writer of history. I believe that our knowledge of history of the past is nothing but a recitation of facts as ordered by the winner of war(s) or whoever is in power. 3. Beliefs are acquired through: a) learning (experience); b) what an authority tells us; c) consensus. All three can be faulty. I know you can think of examples of each. A Google search of the phrase nanny dog historical fact yields 1.5 million hits, much of it noise. However, the vast majority of hits on the top few pages will be supportive of the idea, while the minority who calls us nutters, holds the opinion that this is a myth. CKing and Craven Desires, who dedicated their My Space page to debunking the myth of the nanny dog are friends with a dozen kennels that breed pit bulls (note the quotation marks), bring NO evidence that the American Pit Bull Terrier was NOT a family dog at the turn of the century and into the 40s and 50s, and by failing to find evidence of historical fact conclude that the whole things is a myth. Its the classical Bertrands (Russells) Teapot, or argumentum ad ignorantiam indeed, the absence of proof is not proof of absence. The rant starts with a false premise, quite thoroughly contradicted by both the CDC and the American Veterinary Medical Association (the number of children killed by pit bulls). Further impugning the persons credibility, at the very top of his/her page, this person starts with an image that paraphrases Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitlers Propaganda Minister in Nazi Germany. What a perfect example of Godwins Law. That My Space post has been cut and pasted verbatim by several other bloggers. CUI BONO?
Personally, I prefer to give credence to the American Pit Bull Foundation: The American Pit Bull Terrier was not bred for human aggression or for use as a guard dog. Rather, bred for their unmatchable will, high tolerance for pain, and their athletic
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PgvmXpvTi7gJ+that+is+not+the+question&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari Page 10 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
abilities. They are good caretakers who are intelligent, loving, and alert. Combine all of these factors together, and you have the recipe for a companion animal that does well with children when properly trained. Pit Bulls make great search and rescue dogs and many serve as therapy assistance animals. The Nanny Dog story dates back to the 19th century where the Pit Bull was a popular choice as a companion animal for children based on their docile temperament. Certain sites will have you believe that the Nanny Dog story is a myth, such as the Truth about Pit Bulls blog, yet if you read such sites, you will see that these individuals are making assumptions based on comparisons of dog aggression and human aggression as if the two are related to one another. For example, one of the implied ides on the site mentioned is the thought that the Pit Bull could be the perfect family companion by day and be the throat ripping monster fighter in a ring by night. What these authors do not grasp is the fact that a scenario of this sort is not only completely plausible, but did, and does exist. Because of how Pit Bull fighting and over-breeding has evolved, coupled with the fact that people cant understand that dog aggression and human aggression are not the least bit related, most do not comprehend that the family Pit Bull often shared a bed with the kids, ate dinner with the family, saw a veterinarian on a regular basis, and when it was time, was thrown into a ring by his master. When a fight was over, rarely was a death of a dog the end result.
The other side of the Nanny Dog involves those who were companions in the wars. Many Pit Bulls/Staffordshire Terriers would accompany their masters to their posts. There are several war stories and memorandums in dedication to the breed for their courageous efforts and their therapeutic loyalty to injured soldiers.
There are still stories today involving heroic efforts for the family children that the media passes right over. Two recent cases involve a Pit Bull pulling a babys basinet through a home away from a fire, and another involves a Pit Bull alerting his owner to a strangling child. Both children were safe in the outcomes. Though bad people do bad things with dogs and tragedies result from their negligence, this breed by nature is not the culprit, they are often the reason that children are removed from harm.
Myths or beliefs, past or present, the nature of this breed emulates a loyal companion and sheppard for children when brought up in the right hands. We share our home with two Nanny Dogs. http://www.americanpitbullfoundation.com/Home.html Considering all of the above, I BELIEVE that the nanny dog moniker is well-deserved with the appropriate cautions: 1) no dog of any kind should ever be left unsupervised with a young child; 2) a dog should be treated with the respect that a family companion deserves; 3) a dog should be trained every day of his/her life; 4) a Pit Bull of any kind is
11/10/11 6:16 PM
not for everyone. Just an aside... the original "nanny dog" name was attached to an English breed of dogs, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.
Posted 1 week ago by Andrew
View comments
DubV Oct 28, 2011 07:28 PM Andrew, I know you are familiar with the concept of burden of proof. This concept is very straightforward, and I feel that anything added onto it in this simple case is superfluous. In this scenario, you are making the truth claim that some member of the pit bull breed group was formerly referred to as a nanny dog or something similar. Therefore, the way to settle this would be for someone who asserts this to provide a few references to this from the time/place for which this is claimed. That would be suitable evidence. Someone claiming that people a long time ago said something is not strong evidence at all. If it was a common thing, to refer to a pit breed as a nanny dog, then it should be possible to find some evidence of this in the historic record, something published from the time period in question or at least from a dispassionate source printed prior to pit bulls becoming increasingly controversial. What we have instead is many people simply asserting this to the point that it is now considered a fact. The groups that assert it all cross reference each other creating an echo chamber. The old pictures you showed do not support a nanny dog claim. I could find as many similar picture for any relatively common breed. Please ponder these things. Many people have asserted pit bulls as nanny dogs, but no one has provided suitable historic evidence.
DubV Oct 29, 2011 12:07 PM Wow, just saw this. I shall address all of these points, and it might be good for you to digest. " bring NO evidence that the American Pit Bull Terrier was NOT a family dog at the turn of the century and into the 40s and 50s, and by failing to find evidence of historical fact conclude that the whole things is a myth. Its the classical Bertrands (Russells) Teapot, or argumentum ad ignorantiam indeed, the absence of proof is not proof of absence." To begin. " bring NO evidence that the American Pit Bull Terrier was NOT a family dog at the turn of the century and into the 40s and 50s" No evidence that it was not.....you are asking them to prove a negative. You are shifting the burden of proof from the nanny doggers, who make a truth claim, to those who state that the evidence the nanny doggers offer is unconvincing.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PgvmXpvTi7gJ+that+is+not+the+question&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari
Page 12 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
"and by failing to find evidence of historical fact conclude that the whole things is a myth." No, because the nanny doggers fail to offer evidence for the nanny dog truth claim, they conclude that it is not reasonable to form the belief that pits were ever nanny dogs. Again, simple burden of proof and moving someone from the basic null position. (why we find someone not guilty instead of innocent, since you brought up court of law). "Its the classical Bertrands (Russells) Teapot, or argumentum ad ignorantiam " This is classic that you would bring this up because it works exactly against you, and I know this one very well. Russell was discussing belief in god. He stated that it would not be possible to disprove that a teapot is orbiting the sun (much like it is not possible to totally disprove the nanny dog myth). He went further to state that with something unfalsifiable like this, the burden of proof is one those making the truth claim (you), and that there is no reason to hold much belief in that teapot without that positive evidence. "indeed, the absence of proof is not proof of absence" Yes, put in the absence of evidence the default position is to not form a belief based upon the positive truth claim. So, again bringing this up hurts you. It comes down to you understanding who has the burden of proof, even though some people in their writings may seem as if they take on that burden despite it being unjustified. It also comes down to you understanding the difference between these two statements: 1. I do not believe that pit bulls were nanny dogs and 2. I believe that pit bulls were not nanny dogs. 1 and 2 are worlds apart philosophically.
DubV Oct 29, 2011 12:13 PM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
Andrew
Oct 29, 2011 05:33 PM
OK... let's set aside syllogisms. Pray explain the existence of the thousands of photgraphs, postcards, and family albums with children and families with Pit Bulls. On the one hand I have evidence that MANY people felt OK to have their childen's picures taken with "vicious" animals. Let's add to that the hundreds of responsible I know personally who have children and Pit Bulls and are utterly delighted with the combination. Further, I add my personal experiences with dozens of dogs that I rescued, trained, and placed in PROPER homes without a single negative incident. On the other hand you have a shrill Colleen - who was bitten by *A* dog - who raises cane and counts utterly unverifiable news reports by a media that thrives on b.s. for the sake of selling (dwindling numbers) of rags. Add to that about a dozen other smart people who resort to namecalling (pitiots, pit bull nutters), who rave about the terrible wrongs these animals cause, whilst completely ignoring official statements by experts (CDCD, AVMA) and what do you get? Hundreds of thousands of us (Google Pit Bull forums, join, and see) and two dozen of you. Sure, lets blame cars and not drunken drivers, guns and not criminals, bathtubs and not idiots
11/10/11 6:16 PM
who put their hair dryers next to them, lets blame sharks and not the cretin who wades into the Gulf with bait in his pocket, McDonalds and not the person who eats all his meals there. Lets blame the dog and not the irresponsible caretaker who leaves the child alone with the dog Yup, lets eschew individual responsibilities and find some scapegoats, instead. That may make sense in some universe, just not in mine.
DubV Oct 29, 2011 08:27 PM You changed the subject away from your claims. By your criteria of evidence, with your caveats applied, nearly every dog breed both is and is not a nanny dog breed. So, it seems of no relevance at that point.
DubV Oct 29, 2011 08:58 PM I just remembered something that you wrote: "I will use whatever argument I think will help get my personal bias/belief across." which is from your last comment here http://ingynotes.blogspot.com/2006/05/pitbull-owners-are-idiots.html This puts you at a serious rhetorical advantage, as I would never knowingly use a fallacious argument.
Comment as:
Post Comment
SEP
The REAL American Pit Bull Terrier?

I have been having an interesting, albeit unproductive, discussion with a blog reader. My
Page 14 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
opponent is, quite obviously, intelligent, rational, literate, cogent, and capable of doing research to support his/her perspective. Yet, we are so apart in our respective stances regarding Pit Bulls that we will never be able to agree on any essential point. How is this possible? It occurred to me that we may be talking about two different dogs. I am talking about the real American Pit Bull Terrier. The one that averages 50 lbs in weight and looks like this:
I think he must be talking about these monsters that are bastartizations of the breed and most of the rescue people I work with and owners of Pit Bulls I know would consider an affront to the subspecies Canis lupus familiaris and the Homo sapiens species alike.
Page 15 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 16 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
I will make sure that my new rescues are sweet, people and animal friendly, properly training, and always supervised and under my control.
Page 17 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Posted 4th September by Andrew
View comments
DubV Sep 5, 2011 01:15 PM Interesting play, and I believe you have a point. There are a few problems though. To make a generalization that is too often correct, the larger pit bull and humane community wish to make no distinctions among dogs when these two conditions both apply: 1. it involves a behavior that may have a negative component and 2. it involves a breed that has had its share of hard knocks. They got into this for emotional reasons and will not allow themselves to think things about animals that make them feel bad or might hamper their mission. This group often thinks that all a backyard creation that is a mix of bull mastiff, cane corso, staffie, and secret sauce needs is love. Unfortunately for you, most of your points will be misappropriated by them for their purposes. That is not your fault directly, but there it is. It is difficult when discussing a group phenomenon, but sometimes we must and ignore some individual variation. Also, we are in a situation where there is now no metric for breed identification. All data sets would be hampered by this difference between APBTs and their mixes. It is fine to recognize this and say "I don't know", but is confusing to someone who wants to make a proper dog breed choice. Given that responsible pit bull breeders are in the minority, it seems rational for a family with children to avoid any dog with certain characteristics (I would say large dogs altogether but that is a different discussion). If pit bulls were bred more often like other pure breed dogs, and people could easily find an APBT and know what they had in hand, the issues around the breed would be drastically reduced. As it is, the same situation will likely continue. Well bred APBTs that are fixed and well cared for will perform much like other dogs, and the newspaper will be filled with stories from dogs that likely look similar to the last few you posted.
That is why I am in favor of mandatory spay/neuter of all pit bull breeds until the problem is under control. This breed should be relatively rare and owned by aficionados. As it is, I trust no stranger with a fighting breed and will continue to avoid them and be armed when walking my dog. P.S. Don't want to integrate this in now, but what got me involved in this issue was dog-directed aggression. Unless APBTs are bred away from this and gameness, then some issues will persist. I find dog-directed aggression on its own a troubling trait.
Andrew
Sep 5, 2011 03:34 PM
There is not a single point you make with which I don't agree. Wow. We certainly have come a long way and are finishing this discussion rationally. I will have to rethink my blog and its intent. Instead of regurgitating data that impress only people
11/10/11 6:16 PM
who are already aficionados of the APBT, I think I will be better off describing my personal experiences with MY dogs. From my perspective, the APBT just happens to be a game dog. My dogs, whether part of the family or fosters, are treated with the respect ALL dogs deserve, with the knowledge, caution and commitment specifically needed for Pit Bulls and with the love and care a family pet is owed.
We, at Bama Bully Rescue, take our responsibility for selecting, training, and adopting our dogs VERY seriously. We almost never adopt out one of our dogs to somebody who is not experienced with Pit Bulls. We closely scrutinize all applicants, including visits to the prospective adopters house at times when all family members are present. We have a widespread network of similarly minded people who look out for the slightest irregularity, including assessing the possibility that some creep is cruising for potential fighters and/or bait dogs. So far we have not made any poor decisions, although changing life circumstances in families have resulted in us having to take some dogs back. All our dogs are evaluated in many dimensions and dogs are matched only to appropriate owners. We spend a lot of time educating prospective adopters, if they are considering a Pit Bull for the very first time. One of the questions we have in mind when we talk to an applicant is whether they are ready for the opprobrium of their neighbors and people in their environment. The dogs that go through our foster process are, without exception, fit for family life. I hasten to add, that means that a some of the dogs may have to homed in properly matched families. None of our dogs are ever left unsupervised or off leash outside our homes. If nobody is home, our dogs are in crates. All our dogs are spayed or neutered. I understand your apprehension about dogs breeds specifically created for fighting, but, personally, I am by far more concerned about dogs created for guarding and, almost without exception, demonstrate human aggression. Boerboel Bully Kutta Gull Dong Gull Terr Sage Kuchi (Kuchi Dog) Fila Brasileiro Dogo Argentino Tosa Inu Presa Mallorquin Ca De Bou Alangu Mastiff Dogue de Bordeaux Lottatore Brindisino Neapolitan Mastiff Bandog You are right and we concur: we need to get the number of APBTs down to the point where they are not constantly in the headlines. In this respect, I think our actions and commitment speak for themselves.
DubV Sep 5, 2011 06:00 PM Very good. I will say this, it seems that pit bull owners that are more realistic are reticent to go against the flow. I believe it is to maintain group cohesiveness and to not be a pariah within a circle one is associated. This same thing is seen in most group dynamics. I for one encourage you to continue to analyze the logic that flows from those within this bully breed circle, and call
11/10/11 6:16 PM
them out when appropriate. Getting closer to the truth is the best thing for this breed and others that interact with it.
Andrew
Sep 7, 2011 04:32 PM
You must be a sociologist.... naturally, you are correct about group dynamics. I moderate a discussion group (150 members) of Pit Bull aficionados. I guarantee you we do not hold back on jumping somebody who is not handling his/her dog properly. Some people leave in a huff, others learn. When it comes to Pit Bull ownership, there is no equivocation... to us, this is a serious and demanding commitment. For an example, I reposted one of my responses to a member who was asking for "help" in the blog: http://andrewrozsa.blogspot.com/2009/11/morons-owners-take-turn.html
DubV Sep 8, 2011 11:37 AM Reading your repost now. Interesting, I'm thinking I'll look at the work around animal consciousness, specifically how they might view time. Not sure if much has been done there. By the way, I have 2 degrees in biology and 1 in ecology.
Andrew
Sep 8, 2011 04:29 PM
Your education explains quite a bit. My degrees are in Psychobiology and Clinical Psychology and my publications are mostly in psychophysics and neurophysiology. I got tired of the "publish or perish" mentality of the 80s, so I went back to school for "seconds" ;-) My original work (as an undergraduate) was on the evolution of animal intelligence, but I switched to sensation and perception in grad school, and later specialized in pain management. I have been a clinician for 25 years. I don't know how familiar you are with the Deep (or Dark) Web... but if you are interested in animal consciousness (immensely interesting, IMHO)you can do some searches using several metasearch engines that will help you find out what kind of work has been done, so far: I would start with Google Scholar http://scholar.google.com/ Then: http://www.scirus.com/srsapp/ http://vlib.org/ http://infomine.ucr.edu/ http://tinyurl.com/5z7k2 http://www.incywincy.com/ http://www.deepwebtech.com/ and, IF you are in the academia: http://journalseek.net/ http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/biological-abstracts http://www.base-search.net/ http://www.bioone.org/ http://harvester.kit.edu/harvester/
11/10/11 6:16 PM
http://metadatabase.org/wiki/Help:Searching http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ Do let me know what you find.
DubV Sep 10, 2011 07:11 PM Thanks for the tips. I tend to use Web of Knowledge as it seems to be the most comprehensive.
Andrew
Sep 10, 2011 10:50 PM
I like Web of Knowledge. During the years I did research (1975-1985) we used its weekly hardcopy predecessor ("Current Contents"), also published by ISI. What we did, since so few of the sources were accessible via Arpanet, is develop a Unix program that would request the articles we identified as of interest to us and create a bibliographic reference. This was done in the language of the country to which the request went. Postcards were automatically generated and stamped. A lab assistant just had to tear the perforated cards and put them in the mail. Cool, eh?http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6689001 I don't think most youngsters appreciate what a wonderful thing the Internet is. I cannot count the thousands of hours I spent with Index Medicus or Biological Abstracts. What would have taken me weeks to do then, now I can do in two hours. Have fun doing the research. Maybe I can look over the draft, before you send it off ;-)
Bama Griz Oct 29, 2011 07:42 PM Andrew Totally agree on those "monsters" not being representative of our beloved working dog breed. Most of them typically can't walk half way around the block without experiencing a wheezing fit. Gary
Comment as:
Post Comment
Page 21 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
JUN
AMERICA'S NANNY DOG

Yonah Ward Grossman is an erudite and prolific poster/blogger whose observations are delivered with a fine sense of humor. I recommend his blog both for edification and a grin. http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/ Recently he posted a series of articles on Pit Bulls which I recommend to all. He graciously acquiesced to let me use some antique pix of Pit Bulls as seen through the lens of the camera in the early 1900s. That was a time when Pit Bulls where considered not only Americas dogs, but also Americas nanny dogs. As he states so eloquently, Americas Nanny Dog is the victim of a smear campaign that has turned common sense upside-down and robbed us of our historical memory. The dogs that we trusted with our childrens lives are now deemed too vicious to live among us. The dogs that in two World Wars were the symbol of the United States military itself are now ordered off its bases. The Pit Bulls havent changed at all. Only the owners have. I am posting here some of the pictures he has on his blogs and some which I have found on the Internet over the years. I find them all delightful. I hope the readers of this blog will, too. Here are the links to Yonas blogs about Pit Bulls THE CRUELEST TRICK EVER PLAYED ON A BREED OF DOG Posted on May 2, 2011 by YWGROSSMAN http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=604 FOR OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS AMERICANS KNEW PIT BULLS FOR WHAT THEY DID BEST. BABYSITTING Posted on May 4, 2011 by YWGROSSMAN http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=780 FOR OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS AMERICANS KNEW PIT BULLS FOR WHAT THEY DID BEST. BABYSITTING Posted on May 4, 2011 by YWGROSSMAN http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=676 RICH OR POOR, AMERICAN PARENTS KNEW EXACTLY WHAT PIT BULLS WERE FAMOUS FOR. BEING GREAT WITH KIDS Posted on June 2, 2011 by YWGROSSMAN http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=1103 THE MEDIA REPORTS PIT BULLS ARE THE #1 MOST AGGRESSIVE DOG BREED Posted on May 22, 2011 by YWGROSSMAN http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=954
11
Page 22 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
YOURE FACING A GERMAN SHEPHERD, A ROTTWEILER, A DOBERMAN PINSCHER, AND A PIT BULL Posted on May 18, 2011 by YWGROSSMAN http://www.ywgrossman.com/photoblog/?p=853
Enjoy the pictures.
Page 23 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 24 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 25 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 26 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 27 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 28 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 29 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 30 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 31 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 32 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 33 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 34 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 35 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 36 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 37 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 38 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 39 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 40 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 41 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 42 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 43 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 44 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 45 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 46 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 47 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 48 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 49 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 50 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 51 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 52 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 53 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 54 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 55 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 56 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 57 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 58 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 59 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 60 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 61 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Page 62 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Posted 11th June by Andrew
12
View comments
Bama Griz Jun 12, 2011 06:25 PM Andrew, great stuff as usual. Gary
TravelingDixie.com Jun 26, 2011 06:07 AM Love Love the pictures.
TravelingDixie.com Jun 26, 2011 06:08 AM Can I share these on my website?
Andrew
Aug 22, 2011 07:35 PM
I culled the pictures from all over the Web, so they are not mine. They are the World's as long as nobody objects and claims copyright. If anybody does, I will remove the "offending" picture. So, please, feel free to use the pictures as you see fit, with the previous caveat in mind.
DubV Sep 1, 2011 06:31 PM

11/10/11 6:16 PM
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16267151/Are-Pit-Bulls-Different-An-Analysis-of-the-Pit-BullTerrier-Controversy-by-Randall-Lockwood-and-Kate-Rindy I think the report here of the liabilities of the pit breeds is accurate as are the statistics. However, it seems Lockwood and Rindy don't quite want to complete the syllogism. With observational studies outside of formal and few physical sciences, scientists will often pre-emptively caveat themselves to the point where you can't imagine why they bothered in the first place. Still, I believe the implications as far as decision making are clear. Future pit bulls don't care if they are born, so let's drastically reduce the future population. It makes sense.
Andrew
Sep 1, 2011 08:35 PM
I completely agree with every word in DubV's comment. Since most reposinble rescue organizations such as ours won't even consider passing on a dog that's not altered and since we vigorously argue against breeding new Pit Bulls, we fervently hope that eventually the number of these dogs will return to a reasonable level. We also hope that using the type of strict screening procedure we do, the number of responsible and appropriate owners will so far exceed that of morons and criminals that this will become a non-issue. I am afraid, however, that at that point a new breed will emerge as the the pariah of dogdom and the media will have a brand new field day with yet another "monster." First it was the German Shepherd Dog, then the Doberman Pinscher, followed by the Rottweiler and the Pit Bull Terrier. Next....?
DubV Sep 3, 2011 01:44 PM http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2010/03/between-two-lies-lost-opportunity-for.html
Andrew
Sep 3, 2011 07:27 PM
I am pretty sure that Terrierman and I are on the same page. My "primer" is my witness: http://andrew-rozsa.blogspot.com/2009/06/andrews-primer-for-having-american-pit.html
DubV Sep 4, 2011 03:37 PM http://www.dogsbitedecatural.com/2011/01/deaths-by-vicious-dogspit-bulls-2011.html http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8341432&rss=rss-ktrk-article8341432
Andrew
Sep 4, 2011 05:06 PM
Since we seem to be exchanging links here is mine: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=572 So we will have a ping-pong match... fruitless. Googling "dog bites -pit - pitbull -pitbulls -Pitbull" I get "About 87,300,000." Time to call this one a draw.
11/10/11 6:16 PM
DubV Oct 27, 2011 06:04 PM Well, our last exchange staved me off from commenting, but I feel I must ask: do you still think pit bull's were ever the or a nanny dog? There is no utterance of this in the historic record. I challenge you to find more than 1 reference from the time period in question referring to any member of the breed group as "nanny dog" or any similar turn of phrase. It was hatched in a 1970s staffie mag and then has been echoed until it is now considered true. Further, I question what old photos of what appear to be pits with children actually prove. Please refer to these blogs that directly address the rash of nanny dog mania that occurred a while back. http://thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com/2011/06/vintage-pit-bull-photos-prove-what.html http://thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com/2010/08/nanny-dog-myth-revealed.html
Andrew
Oct 28, 2011 02:16 PM
Please see my post dated today.
Comment as:
Post Comment
OCT
I say let's ban cars!

In tonight's "Outlaw" the issue was a child who died after having been forgotten in a car. This prompted me to look up some statistics. According to Kids and Cars, a Kansas-based organization, in 2010, a record number of children - 48 - have died of hyperthermia after being left or trapped in a hot car or truck. My heart breaks at the thought of what those parents must be experiencing. According to the worthless Merritt Clifton "report," the most often cited b.s. source by selfserving entities, such as lawyers and politicians who clearly have an ax to grind, an average of
Page 65 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
17 deaths a year are attributable to dog bites. Let's suppose that the shysters (comes from the German term scheisser, meaning one who defecates) who try frighten us into suing somebody (actually ANYBODY), are correct and that "the number of fatal dog attacks in the USA has been going up." Since the response of politicians, the media, and some ill-educate mindless organizations to dog fatalities is to advocate the ban and the murder a million dogs a year, it follows that we should ban cars and/or kill car manufacturers. Sounds logical to me. P.S. I am curious... how come no car manufacturer has come up with a gizmo that would ding your head off if you locked and left your kid in the car? Did you know there is no law that says you can't leave your child in the car unattended? You get it? No law, no responsibility. See, we have to legislate common sense. Posted 1st October 2010 by Andrew
View comments
Bama Griz Oct 2, 2010 06:16 AM Stop using logic. Logic has nothing to do it! It's how we "feel" that matters.
Andrew
Oct 2, 2010 03:25 PM
Don't I know it! I was being ridiculously tongue-in-cheek to make a point.
DubV Sep 1, 2011 06:39 PM I wonder over what time frame you took that average. The annual fatality rate is climbing, so this obviously matters. Further, I was unaware that one thing being more dangerous than another made the less dangerous thing not a worry. Hmm... Also, I was unaware that only fatal dog attacks count in your calculation. I won't bring up that full ban or pit bulls are great! Is a bit of a false dichotomy and a straw man. Lastly, decision making is best when it does this: looks at each choice and then the probability of different outcomes with a net benefit attached to each (which can be highly negative, you get the point). You then select the choice with the highest expected net benefit given your estimate of probabilities and cost-benefit based upon your own sense of utility. Okay, so getting rid of something like cars will have a huge negative expected benefit. What is the expected net benefit if everyone simply selected a more peaceful dog breed? Hopefully my point is clear. This goes for people that fatuously say something like "you're more likely to be
11/10/11 6:16 PM
killed by your parents than a pit bull, so let's ban parents!" Also, none of these pit bull propaganda witticism take into account exposure extent. Obviously, the average child is exposed to cars everyday but pit bulls rarely (thank mythological deity).
Comment as:
Post Comment
SEP
The Most Dangerous Breeds?

I really like the Dog Politics Weblog. This excerpt is from an article published on it:
19
The Most Dangerous Breeds?

I'll tell you the most dangerous breeds - write these down! #1 All Time Dangerous Breed: The #1 most dangerous breed are media outlets that deliberately breed fear, spreading myths and lies about dog breeds and canine behavior through irresponsible reporting and reinforcement of undeserved and negative breed stereotypes What You Can Do About It: 1. Call up the paper, the TV station or email the website and complain about the biased dog story 2. Ask for the Editor, Sales Manager and/or Program Director 3. Tell them you won't read, watch or visit 4. Tell then you won't patronize their advertisers until they stop their biased coverage
11/10/11 6:16 PM
5. Tell them they have the opportunity to spread knowledge, not fear 6. Tell them My Dog Votes! #2 All Time Dangerous Breed: The #2 most dangerous breeds are the local and state politicians that feed on the fear created by the irresponsible media, and the public's ignorance. They are greedy for the headlines, campaign dough and do the bidding of the private sector instead of truly advocating for the public health, safety and welfare. They pass breed bans , weight or size restrictions, public space bans, and mandatory microchip laws, and other anti-dog legislation limiting the rights of responsible tax-paying citizens rather than deal with their criminal and social problems. What You Can Do About It: 1. Call or write the offending local of state elected official and complain about the breed ban or other anti-dog legislation 2. Tell them you want the ban overturned in favor of breed-neutral legislation 3. Tell them you want any other anti-dog legislation stopped or overturned 4. Tell them you will vote them out in the next election 5. Tell them you will vote out any politician that supported the ban 6. Tell them you will rally every dog owner in town against them 7. Tell them they have the opportunity to educate instead of legislate 8. Tell them My Dog Votes! #3 All Time Dangerous Breed: The #3 most dangerous breeds are the apathetic dog owners who say nothing, or do nothing because they think they cannot affect change, or fight the sytem, or it doesn't affect them directly. Or maybe they just don't care - or won't care - that is - until they come for their dog. What You Can Do About It: 1. Tell all of your friends, neighbors, relatives and associates, regardless of whether or not they own a dog about the breed ban or other anti-dog legislation 2. Tell them they must support their fellow dog owners, friends, and neighbors 3. Tell them if we don't stand together now, we all fall 4. Tell them they have the opportunity to unite the community, not divide the community 5. Tell them to do it for their dog 6. Tell them My Dog Votes! Now get off your butts and go do it. Posted 19th September 2010 by Andrew
Page 68 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Add a comment
Comment as:
Post Comment
SEP
An Afternoon With Some Bullies
Page 69 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Flash
Posted 5th September 2010 by Andrew
Add a comment
Page 70 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Comment as:
Post Comment
AUG
25
Mobile police now say dogs that attacked ponies were not pit bulls
Whaddya Know? A "news agency" actually publishes corrected information. Miracles will never cease. Of, course this one was picked up (so far) only by local media and blogs. Well, here it is:
Mobile police now say dogs that attacked ponies were not pit bulls
Published: Wednesday, August 25, 2010, 4:00 PM
by David Ferrara, Press-Register

MOBILE, Ala. -- A pack of dogs that attacked two miniature ponies owned by the Mobile Police Department were multiple mixed-breeds, not pit bulls, police said this afternoon. An officer on patrol heard yelping and found the ponies, Woggie and Little Joe, being attacked by at least six dogs at about 1:50 a.m. Tuesday morning just outside the department's barn at 1251 Virginia Street, according to police spokesman Christopher Levy. The ponies were taken to a Highland Animal Hospital in Daphne, where they later
11/10/11 6:16 PM
died, according to Sgt. Eddie Carr, who heads the department's Mounted Unit. Police caught three of the dogs, which were later euthanized, and set traps to catch the others. The responding officer originally described the dogs as pit bulls, and police initially reported the incident as a pit bull attack. However, a veterinarian who euthanized the dogs later said they were "very aggressive" mixed-breeds, according to Levy. For much of the past year, aggressive dogs have killed at least eight cats kept around the stables, Carr said. Officers who work in the Mounted Unit have tried to keep the dogs away in the past. Police believe that someone owns the dogs, and the owners could face criminal charges. Investigators were looking into tips this afternoon, Levy said. Many in the department's Mounted Unit had become attached to the ponies, which stood no taller than 28 inches, Carr said. "We considered them officers, because they became our friends," Carr said. Little Joe, a 2-year-old named for Deputy Chief Joe Kennedy, and Woggie, a 3-yearold, were purchased for a minimal price about two years ago, Carr said. They ate only about 50-pounds of feed a month, and cost little to maintain. Police had plans to use the ponies to help pull children with disabilities through a Mardi Gras parade next year, Carr added. "We took good care of them," Carr said. "They were here for the public -- the kids especially. We were proud of these two fellas."
Posted 25th August 2010 by Andrew
Add a comment
Page 72 of 73
11/10/11 6:16 PM
Comment as:
Post Comment
Page 73 of 73

Of Pit Bulls and Morons Web Cache....

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Of Pit Bulls and Morons Web Cache....

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

of Pit Bulls and morons....

Classic Flipcard Magazine Mosaic Sidebar Snapshot Timeslide

Life magazine covers