I completely agree...as I said in my post, but since you mentioned Dobermans I wanted to say that I grew up with them. My dad loved them and they were in my house all through elementary school. We never once had a problem with them.

I agree. This forces cities and towns to deal with the problem in a way that targets all problem dogs and not just dogs from one breed.

100% CORRECT JJ

A law must be passed to prohibit dog fouling in public.

Politicians respond to bad press and vow to 'do something' regardless of the actual result. An 'ill-bred' (i.e. seemingly mean dog) pit bull is something to fear which is why punks and gang-bangers want to own pit bulls. The leftist 'system' has contorted itself so much over the rights of the punks that going after the owner for pit bull attacks rarely accomplishes anything. It is therefore easier to ban the offending breed despite the breed's merits when properly trained.

Men are more responsible with dogs than woman. Look around and you will see neanderthal women walking around town with a sack of dog dung. Sorry folks but its the truth.

PK, how about training your animal to use your yard or your living room instead of public or private property...this way you can live in a mess instead of contaminating the community.

JJ: that is absolutely true. German Shepherds also have a bad rep. We live with three of them-they are well trained, obedient and safe around people and other dogs. We control them-in a strange situation we have them leashed and we are on the other end of the leash.

Walking a dog with a leash and collar - barbaric. Walking around with a bag full of dog crap - subhuman.

Hey M.Quinlan, how many gang banger's and drug dealer's do you have up here in Stoneham? And "leftist's"? Sounds like you have a serious problem with progressive minded intellectuals. And John.....Really? You call responsible women neanderthals?
Sounds like "stereotyping" of Minorities and disrespect of females to me.........Hmmm.......... I smell teabagger influences - You probably watch faux news too!.. Shame on you both!!! High 5 to the Governor...good and fair call for the pit's and other large breed dogs!

I have two german shepards and they are like big teddy bears!!!!! It's all about the owners. I'm more scared of those little yippers than any other dog! Because the owners think they are so little and cute that they won't hurt anyone. YA right! I have had more little dogs snap at my kids than big dogs!! It's all in the training!!!

I used to work at Petco years ago and a customer came in with a Yorkie and thought it was funny and said it was the dogs right to defend itself by biting people. I put my hand in the carriage to get out a bag of dog food to ring it in the register and was almost bitten. The woman laughed! She wouldn't have been laughing if the dog had bit me and I sued her for having an aggressive dog and had her little "Yorkie Poo" muzzled for life. I was always more afraid of the little dogs than the large dogs.

I dislike little dogs, I got bitten by a little dog as a child never liked them since. I have always been around big dogs, no problem. finally something right Deval is doing, muzzle is good enough. This is really an owner issue i have seen numerous unleashed dogs in medford walking with their owners or in their yards with no fence. if I get bit im suing :) no fear here. Oh and pls pick up after your dogs waste it's the law.

I have to disagree, Tina DeSelm. I also think that it's also the dog itself. The fact that pitbulls not only have a super-combative temperament, but the physical apparatus as well (Their jaws are extremely strong, and, unlike most dogs when they bite, they clamp down, don't let go, and go right for the musculature of their prey.) I've talked to several pitt-bull owners and former pit-bull owners who've either said that when their pitt-bulls die, they will not get another dog like that, or, who've gotten rid of their pitt-bulls, because they're much too difficult to work with for the above-mentioned reasons.

Any dog can snap and go bad, and inflict damage when they bite, but pitt-bulls inflict even more extensive damage.

I'm on the fence. This is better dealt with by private charities, but ensuring all animals are vaccinated, especially against rabies, is important to public health. Unfortunately we have to accept that people will fall on hard times or come into care of an animal for a variety of reasons and they may not be able to afford a few hundred bucks just to have a vet give it a few shots. The option of low cost spay/neuter and low cost vaccines would likely prevent more animals from heading to the shelter or from breeding out of control. If we can keep these animals fixed and in homes it helps keep them from becoming feral pests, breeding out of control. Still, I think this has been dealt with well by existing low cost clinics.

This reads like 'doggie welfare'.

At least chihuahuas and cocker spaniels don't inflict the kind of extensive damage that pitbulls do when they bite.

You do realize that you are critiquing "liberalism", when the loudest voices against this measure seem to be municipal liberals, right?

Sometimes it isn't a left/right disagreement - it can be city/state too.

Pancar, you hit the nail on the head! I grew up with German Shepherds that would never hurt a fly because my family had them properly trained when they were just pups.

Ignorant people are dangerous, period.

I have been bit by a "standard poodle", which for those not aware, is a large size dog, but one not known as aggressive. I was literally walking down the street and was bitten.

But let's blame the breed and not the owners.

Have you ever met a pit bull? I've seem media pictures of supposed pit bulls that have attacked people. The picture is clearly of a lab or another well loved breed. Unless you have met a pit bull you have no knowledge of them.

Obviously you have never owned a Pitbull, most loving loyal dog I know, if treated right! I have been bit by a beagle, and some other ankle bitter, not by a pitbull!

Correct, especially the people walking around with a bag of dog waste...you know something is wrong in their head.

I didn't say pit bulls are aggressive and wouldn't say they are not loyal. I said they are dangerous animals....which is a fact.. You really aren't comparing a poodle or a beagle bite to a pit bull are you?

Any dog can bite and injure.

I got my arm scratched up pretty bad by a cat. Maybe we should ban them too. That's dangerous, after all.

I was attacked by a pit bull while I was on a run. The owner said, "I cannot understand it, its never been aggressive. I love this dog and it has never once tried to attack someone. I just happened to jog past their front yard while he had it off the leash to let it do its business. I didn't even it see it before it jumped out of a hedge and took a bite out of my calf. I still have nightmares. Your dog has "never bit anyone" until the first time it does.

Oh shut up Andrew,,you are so out of the loop!

So are you saying you wouldn't have any dogs? The only known breed of dog not to be involved in a human death is actually the beagle. Go figure. Get a little dog and they have even killed children. And it's not the breed it's the owner who doesn't want to train and properly oversee their dog. Your not right. Only a poorly trained, improperly bred, poorly supervised dog will attack.

I had my own beagle bit me over a bone, where my pit bull will let me take anything out of his mouth, has never bit and it the most loving dog I have ever had, I also have a German shepard who has never bit, and a Husky who has never bit, all on the list of biting dogs, people love my dogs, they are very friendly loving dogs, because I train them to not bit, growl, etc. Stop blaming the dog, its the owner. I have children, they love my dogs, and my dog loves them.

That's just being misguided and uninformed. The original pit bull (Staffordshire Terrier) was knicked named the "Nanny Dog" becasue it was so good with children. Do some research.

Nice of you to call me and idiot Rob. We have an American Staffordshire Terrier and an American Pitbull Terrier. Not only do they love our children, the ones previously owned by my mother in law and my brother until they passed as well as several others owned by friends have never even so much as harmed a kitten. The worst mine do is lick my grandsons hand after he has had peanut butter. We teach our dogs to respect people and we teach our young and our friends and family to respect animals.

So do other dogs!

UT OH Didnt mean to say that...

So do kid!

I truley believe they put the wrong animals to "sleep."

So do people!

It's also almost impossible to guess what the actual bite rate is. There is no registry that tracks bites and when a dog bite does have the breed recorded, it's just a guess. Some groups base their stats off of media reports, but that's a flawed method. The media reports the most sensationalized story, so often they call a dog a pit bull because that's what gets the most attention. Nobody really reports on a lab biting someone unless it is an extreme case as the above. I know at least eight people who have been bitten, and none of them were bitten by pits, and none of them reported theses bites to anyone.

That's because when a dog bites the damage is usually minimal. When a pit bites you it usually sends you to the hospital with broken bones. It's a misconception that pit bulls are viscous dogs by nature but when they do attack the outcomes are often horrific.

But the Pit Bull is not alone in that. Mastiffs, the Cane Corso, German/Belgian shepherds, Dobermans, and other really large dogs meant to protect - they all have bites that can potentially be catastrophic.

------

When Brady Barr measured the bite force of various animals for a National Geographic program, a hyena again was measured at 1000 pounds of force. A lion's bite force measured 691, a shark 669, and a Rottweiler 328 pounds of force. A German shepherd came in at 238, and a pit bull's bite was measured at 235 pounds of force. As far as I can tell, there are no studies of any kind, peer-reviewed or not, showing canine bite force to measure more than the 328 pounds of force recorded by Brady Barr.

source: http://dogbitesinformationandstatistics.blogspot.com/2008/01/canine-bite-force.html

-----

Stop. yelling!

SHUT UP, MARY!

(There...now you know what it's like to be yelled at!)

David, first, please watch your language. Second, we're airing both sides of the debate. You say the people who disagree with you are "in denial," but in reading the comments above, it looks like they're simply disagreeing with you. If you have the insurance company statistics you keep referring to, it'd be great to share those with everyone.

David, I agree with Daniel, not only has no one on this comment section used the language you have. Also, why would anyone believe an insurance company? They would use any means not to pay a claim.

insurance stats are not accurate and do not include out of court settlements..witch is how the insurance company bend its own data

Alexa, every post that I've read by you in the last couple of months seems to be about dogs pooping in public and how disgusting it is. What do you want them to do, Learn how to use a toilet?

Alexa, this is not the place for your comments about dog waste. This is about banning a breed or not. It's already a law in most towns, if not the state, to curb your dog!! Meaning, pick up after it. Where do you want the dog to go the bathroom? In the toilet? I'd like to see that one.

Alexa, earlier in this thread you said that people walking around with a bag of dog waste have something wrong with thier heads. Does this mean that you don't think that the dog owners should pick up after thier dogs? I really don't understand your obsession with dog poop.

PK, how about training your animal to use your yard or your living room instead of public or private property...this way you can live in a mess instead of contaminating the community.

Richie S. I'm sorry that your community is contaminated. You must live near some very irresponsible pet owners. I've lived in several communities over the years and none of them were contaminated because of dog waste being left on sidewalks or lawns.

It IS disgusting - but what's more disgusting is when it's left there to pile up for days, weeks, months and it's on your streets and no matter what you are forced to look at it, clean it up, drive in it, walk in it, walk over it, snow covered, rain soaked, fly infested and year after year it's contaminating the same areas...

I've never owned one, but I have been bit by one. Not a lot of fun...

Sometimes the media gets it right, and you can't blame people for wanting to take risks by owning a dog that inflicts such extensive damage as a pit-bull does. Even if they're no more likely to bite than other dogs, pitbulls do inflict much more extensive damage to their victim with their bites, because, unlike most dogs who bite and then let go, pitbulls do clamp down and don't let go and shake their victim, going for the musculature, which is what causes the horrifying damage. It's also in their DNA (a cross between the regular bull-dog, which was bred as a work dog and is not to be confused with a pit-bull), and a terrier, which gives the pittbull its aggressive, combative temperament. The fact that pittbulls not only have the temperament but the physical apparatus for doing really extensive damage to their prey is what makes these dogs as dangerous as they are.

Oh, brother.

Let's make a list of everything associated with drug dealers and criminals and ban them. Ready? Let me start:

1. guns

You should generally trust statistics, assuming you know how they were collected.

The CDC statistics come with a disclaimer that they shouldn't be used to make decisions simply because they have no way of verifying any of the data they collected and it is based on essentially rumors and whispers... Check them out at the source, if you want: http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/dog-bites/dogbite-factsheet.html

"[...] It does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic. Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites. There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill."

I need to disagree with one point. Drug Dealers And Criminals No-Longer are using Pitbuls.The reason being (CNN August 2012) Criminals and Gangs are no-longer looking sell drugs, There Criminal activity now is ..Getting your refund illegally on a DEBIT CARD ( 6,8 Billion lost by IRS for Fraudulantly obtaining refunds CNN AUGUST 2012) followed by Stealing your Idenity. No Dogs Reguired. Its your low level criminals that breed for Money..$100.00 each , as Bait Dogs and for Fiighting. You will be scammed way before you ever get bit by a pitbul. FYI..Pit buls are the no.1 abused animal in the world..5 Million a YEAR are put down for NO reason or because of having been tortured. If you want to eliminate pits..all breeds will follow..when their done abusing animals they will come for you and me.

+ 1 to Michael Gualtieri

Dog breed specific laws leave out the most important part of the equation, that is the owner's responsibility properly training her dog. Some people are just not suited to own a dog. As one poster already said, there should be a requirement to take dog ownership classes. Owning a dog (or any pet) is not a trivial matter, it's a living creature, that requires proper training and nurture.

Not everybody who owns pitt-bulls are drug addicts, criminals or tough guys, but their super-combative temperament and strong jaw that inflicts extremely horrific damage when they bite is what makes these dogs the choice of such people. Yet, there are ordinary people who own pitbulls as well, and, in either case, one has to really wonder about the mentality of people who'd take it into their heads to own such a dog.

I also might add that pitbulls can be especially dangerous if they're kept in densely populated urban and/or suburban areas.

Oh, brother.

"Let's make a list of everything associated with drug dealers and criminals and ban them. Ready? Let me start:

1. ILLEAGAL guns"

Fixed it for you.

;)

Illeagal guns? Is that a cross between a gun and a beagle? Because I would totally vote to ban those.

I would probably not be pleased with a gun/beagle mix. It would be the laziest gun ever.

Also, I can't tell if a gun is legal or illegal by looking at it, so I will just go ahead and make a wild assumption based on improper facts.

Sorry, that's a myth:

Myth: Pit bulls have locking jaws. Once they bite, they can’t let go, even if they want to.

FACT: No dog of any breed has ever been found to possess a mechanism in their jaw which would allow them to “lock” their top and bottom jaw together. There is no such thing as a locking jaw!

http://happypitbull.com/basics/myths-and-facts/#strongjaw

On this topic Dr. 1. Lehr Brisbin of the University of Georgia wrote:
"The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of pit bulls show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of "locking mechanism" unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier."

http://www.dogwatch.net/myths/lock_jaw.html

Good point, NP. I agree with you 100%.

I'm sorry, I have trouble believing that's exclusive to pitbulls.

Just to prove that it's not just pit bulls. These are a few links to children who have been killed by their family dog recently. None of these dogs are Pit bulls! One is a husky, one is a lab mix, one is a chow and the other aggressive dog was a springer spaniel. Shall we ban these breeds also? Lab is the most popular dog in the country. It is also the dog most likely to bite a child. We only hear when the child or person is killed.

http://www.timesunion.com/default/article/Cops-Upstate-NY-man-fatally-shot-his-family-s-dog-3806502.php

http://www.wtae.com/DA-No-Charges-Expected-In-Boy-s-Death-From-Dog-Bite/-/9681798/12280172/-/vyeryt/-/index.html

http://www.khou.com/news/local/13-day-old-baby-killed-in-attack-by-family-dog-129221558.html

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/animal-rights/dog-killed-las-vegas-toddler-still-custody

http://www.momlogic.com/2009/03/baby_killed_by_family_dog.php

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/29/nyregion/boy-4-is-mauled-to-death-in-brooklyn.html

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Authorities-identify-newborn-killed-by-dog-2156289.php

NOT ONE PIT BULL!!!! NEED I SAY MORE!!

How were any of these dogs protecting their home?

Mr. Victor, that site is in no way a professional organization - it's a group with an agenda:

"About the founder
Colleen Lynn resides in Austin, Texas and operates Lynn Media Group. On June 17th, 2007, she was attacked for approximately 5-seconds by a leashed pit bull while jogging in her former Seattle neighborhood. She was hospitalized for two days at Harborview Medical Center after undergoing surgery to repair a severe bone fracture. Four months later, she launched DogsBite.org. "

I mean, i definitely sympathize with her and I'm sure that was an awful experience, but she started a website about dogbites that focuses on pit bulls. And it spreads myths and misinformation - F.U.D., propaganda, etc.

Michael, I linked you directly to the CDC who extensively studies things like this. Dogsbite.org is pretty obviously biased and exaggerates in a lot of areas, and "the numbers" are impossible to get because there is literally NO extensive, accurate record in the country of dog bites. That's just how it is. I honestly don't care if you think it's nonsense or not. I don't own a Pit Bull, I just think this entire thing is a ridiculous exercise in hyperbole and political pandering

I do, however, have to walk the streets with a variety of dogs, and my family and I have been at the hands of aggressive dogs of other breeds. What, exactly, does breed specific legislation do to help with these dogs? Nothing. All it does is give folks a false sense of security to people gullible enough to believe that eliminating pit bulls eliminates dog attacks.

You know what people are going to do when you ban Pit Bulls? They're going to go get a different breed, and train it just the same. You'll be back to square one, with media hype and whining over another dog breed, until people figure out how to regulate ALL dangerous dogs, and not just their flavor of the week.

Actually, I take that back. I don't sympathize with Colleen Lynn, the founder of dogsbite.org. She seems to be trying to imply that the pit bull broke her arm with the bite, which is really disingenuous. For a pit bull to break a bone when it bites, it would have to bite her entire arm off.

She was being a complete dope and jogging near a dog on a leash. Running towards a dog is like a direct challenge to them, so it's no wonder it got spooked and bit her.

Yes John, you're so right. The "responsible" men just don't bother to pick up the dung. Your post makes no sense. You're saying that that the "neanderthal" woman clean up after thier dogs and the men don't. I'm a guy but I can't side with you on your foolish coment.

PK, how about training your animal to use your yard or your living room instead of public or private property...this way you can live in a mess instead of contaminating the community.

That's a laugh and a half, John! Anybody, man or woman, who walks around with a sack of dog dung obviously has a screw or two loose upstairs.

Your first paragraph destroys your credibility.

One must also bear in mind, Jeanne Hill, that pitt-bulls have been bred exclusively for fighting. They're a cross between the regular bull-dog (which was originally bred exclusively as a work dog and is not to be confused with the pitt-bull.) and a terrier, which provides the DNA of the pitt-bull's fighting instincts.

Actually, bulldogs were bred for bull-baiting.

A terrier does not "provide the DNA" of the fighting instincts. A terrier is meant as a rodent control- it burrows in the ground looking for rodents, rabbits, badgers, etc.

Pekinese dogs may be tenacious, but they don't have the ability to inflict the extensive damage that pitbulls inflict when they bite.

While bulldogs were bred for bull-baiting, not all of them were. The regular American bulldog, more often than not, was originally bred as a work dog. Breeding for bull-baiting came later, and then some terriers do have aggression in them, and the British bulldog, which later developed a stronger, tougher jaw, was crossbred with a terrier to breed a pitbull. The Stafford Terrier is an example, as is the American PItbull Terrier.

Just like most parent say that their kids would never do that after a group of teenagers attached an elderly woman on the bus or gang raped someone.

In one website on pitbulls, it was pointed out that even leading pitbull educators have warned pitbull owners that they shouldn't trust their pitbulls NOT to fight.

It's that damn poop again! Don't put it out with your boots Ted! Don't tell me my business devil woman!

He called the $#$% "poop"!!

Wilmy, read the replies to Michael Victor above about using the dogsbite.org site as a reference.

I had just been about to post something myself about its obvious agenda, then saw others above had said it all. But I can't help but add my reaction to an item in their FAQ: "Through selective breeding, pit bulls have developed enormous jaw strength, as well as a ruinous "hold and shake" bite style, designed to inflict the maximum damage possible on their victims. " Hmm. (1) bite strength - someone here quoted tests showing that the 3 dogs tested had similar bite strengths, and I googled and found those to be generally accepted by those not trying to make a point. (2) "Hold and shake" - 30+ years ago I watched my hound (don't know her breeding, somewhere between a beagle and a foxhound) kill a woodchuck. She grabbed it by the neck and shook it until it was dead. It's not a pitbull thing.

You are about as likely to be killed by lightning as you are to be killed by a pit bull. You are also MORE likely to be killed by another person striking you with a part of their body than you are by a dog biting you, and that does not account for all the other ways another person could kill you.

The odds of dying from a person striking you in any given year are 1 in 4,513,213. The odds of a dog killing you in any given year are 1 in 10,588,692. You even have higher odds of being crushed to death by a reptile in any given year than you do being killed by a dog.

In fact, even MORE amazingly, you are actually more likely to get killed by accidentally strangling yourself in bed than you are likely to be killed by ANY of the above things.

All of this fear mongering is ridiculous. Americans are afraid of *everything*. Here's a list of your odds of being killed by a variety of things: http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_odds.htm. Let's ban everything on this list, too. In fact, don't even bother getting in your car. It will probably kill you.

So how many of these owners that got mauled are the bad owners that beat their pit bull with a hammer to "make it mean"? How many of them are the people who force the dogs to take part in illegal dogfighting? Those are all facts to be considered.

However, to that point, it's no wonder that the facts aren't presented 100%, www.dogsbite.org is a horrible source for any information. It's a biased site with an agenda against pit bulls and other large-breed dogs, which poses as an actual organization when it's really one person who got bitten once by a Pit Bull.

I'm going to once again analogize pitbulls and guns.

From a 2009 study done by the Firearm & Injury Center at UPenn (http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/ficap/resourcebook/Final%20Resource%20Book%20Updated%202009%20Section%201.pdf):

"Firearm injury in the United States has averaged 32,300 deaths annually between 1980 and 2006"

"Firearms are involved in 68% of homicides, 52% of suicides, 43% of robberies, and 21% of aggravated assaults"

"firearm injury represents a significant public health impact, accounting for 6.6% of premature death in this country"

Their sources, which mostly consist of federal organizations, are all in the article.

So, given these conclusions, all firearms should be banned.

Fair is fair, after all.

Seems like you're advocating more certifications for owning a dog than for creating a child. Bans against pit bulls, admittedly a blunt force, are found necessary because encouraging responsible ownership is repelled by selfish owners and holding selfish owners responsible for maulings is negated by completely ineffective legal 'system'. People fear their children being torn apart by vicious dogs and there are enough pit bull stories in the news, propaganda or not, to reinforce this fear. Politicians hate angry voters so banning 'vicious dogs' is a winning issue for them. There are far more voters willing to forego 'rights' to own 'vicious dogs' than there are who are willing to risk their children on the hope that the approaching pit bull's owner is 'responsible'.

I can think of some great arguments for having a parenting class also for expectant parenting. But when it comes down to it, everyone are responsible for themselves and their property. You can't expect other people to do that for you and you can't assume. So educate children on dog safety. It isn't fair to say YOU can't own a dog because I am afraid. I have severe arachnaphobia, does this mean they should outlaw the owning of tarantulas on the premise that they MIGHT get out? Sure it might be harmless, but I am afraid, so YOU can't own it.
Where does the limit come in and who sets that limit? If a person runs across my lawn and my dog goes after them and nips them... why is it my fault and my dogs fault because that person can not be controlled and kept off personal property?
Again banning is not a solution. Require fenced in yards, leashes, and registration/education for ALL dog owners.

Bad owners are to blame; the perceived damage and resulting fear are real. Appealing to man's better nature is nice but avoiding having to reconstruct a child's face is more the issue. People will vote to eliminate vicious breeds since the 'feel-good' politics of ownership classes and responsible owners is ethereal.

Irresponsible dog owners definitely don't help, but, whether or not a pitbull is any more likely to bite than most other dogs, the extensive damage that pitbulls do inflict when they bite is unquestionably real, and people's fear of these dogs are not irrational...they do have some real basis to them. Unlike pitbulls, most dogs don't have the capacity to break or crunch bones, nor do most dogs really go for the musculature and clamp down on their victims without letting go. People, both adults and children alike, have been killed or permanently maimed by pitbulls, and that's no kidding.

Meh. In a perfect world children would be leashed, muzzled, and confined to their owners' property. If banning pit bulls "eliminates your worry," that's because you've focused on one ridiculous thing to worry about. Good luck with, well.... everything else that might (and is much more statistically likely to) happen to your kids.

Pitbulls aren't meant to have as pets...period. In fact, I've known people who've decided to either not get any more pitbulls after their dog(s) die, or who are former pitbull owners who've gotten rid of their dogs because they're much tougher to train and to work with. Sometimes the media gets it right. One can't really blame people for not wanting to own a dog that presents the kind of serious risk that pitbulls do.

Which scandal would that be?

Agreed!

Yeah, my Cavalier King Charles Spaniel is a real vicious animal...scary. Jen maybe you need a muzzle.

That's very true, Fran, but unlike pitbulls, most dogs don't have the capacity to break or crush bones, or go right for the musculature when they bite, clamp down and not let go. Also, speaking of dogs turning vicious at the drop of a hat, many leading pitbull educators are warning pitbull owners: "Never trust your pitbull not to fight."

The following link might be of interest to you and everybody else on here:

http://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pit-bull-faq.php

No dog has the capacity to crush or break bones. That is a complete myth. In fact, Labrador Retrievers and Rottweilers have an even STRONGER bite than a pitbull does.

I. Lehr Brisbin, Ph.D., who is a Senior Research Scientist at the University of Georgia Savannah River Ecology Laboratory and an expert in the training, behavior, and the anatomy of bulldog breeds has said that,

“The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of [pit bulls] show that ... their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any [other] breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of ’locking mechanism’ unique to the structure of the jaw.....

(Source: American Dog Breeders Association, “Discover the American Pit Bull Terrier”).

Dr. Brisbin has also testified in a court of law under oath that,

“…pit bulls do not have locking jaws. Based on ... measurement of their skulls, the evidence demonstrated that pit bull jaw muscles and bone structure are the same as other similarly sized dogs."

The fact that many insurance companies are reluctant to insure dog owners who have pit-bulls says something right there. I don't think that owners should have their dogs taken away from them, but there should be a law that pitt-bull owners muzzle and leash their dogs in public, and to warn guests, clients, meter-readers, mailmen, etc, about the presence of pit-bulls in their households. I do think that the breeding of these pitbulls should be halted, however.

As for German Shephards, they're extremely intelligent dogs and are often used as rescue, police and firedogs, as well as for seeing-eye dogs.

mplo, german shepherds are on that list of dangerous dogs... because they are very dangerous dogs, as well. I don't see why pit bulls should be muzzled and not german shepherds?